WHU's View? poll result

An archive of news, events and discussion leading up to and post West Ham United's historic move from Upton Park to Stratford in 2016.

Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Locked
IronMaiden123
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:49 am

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by IronMaiden123 »

Congratulations to WHU's View for conducting the poll.
With the club refusing to find out what supporters think and spreading misinformation in the media it needed someone to stand up and be counted. My grateful thanks for doing so.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: on parole
Has liked: 917 likes
Total likes: 1919 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Doc H Ball »

WHUTerry wrote:I think this poll is deeply flawed and potentially dangerous because of how it'll be interpreted. I would be surprised if we don't see Mr Hearn all over this. In the media, there'll be no "based on the information currently available" caveat, it'll simply be " 90% of West Ham fans against moving".

How did you feel when the SAB had their confidential meeting and then Brady was quoted in the media saying 'detailed plans' had been shown to you and '100% of fans' were in support?

Couple of question: Why do you think you poll showed 10% in favour and 80% against whereas Iain Dale's showed 40% in favour and 40% against?

I would suggest that there is a difference between regularly attending fans and Dale's website posters. Different sites, different readerships etc.

Also, why no 'don't know' option, especially online? Or an option to vote 'yes if retractable seating'? I think a lot of people won't have voted 'yes' simply because they don't know what 'yes' means at the moment

We thought more people wouldn't vote and would just use the comments box. There were hundreds of comments and they have all gone to the Club and LLDC - every single one. They reflect what you say - that with a proper football stadium there would be a big swing. However, they also generally don't believe it ever will be.

We asked the Club to do a detailed questionnaire and would have done one ourselves but just getting people to fill in the leaflet we had was hard enough.
User avatar
brownout
Posts: 10299
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:26 pm
Has liked: 91 likes
Total likes: 174 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by brownout »

WHUTerry wrote:Firstly I commend anyone who steps up and takes the time to do something they believe in so well done on that front. Also I can understand the frustration that led to you doing this.
However, I think this poll is deeply flawed and potentially dangerous because of how it'll be interpreted. I would be surprised if we don't see Mr Hearn all over this. In the media, there'll be no "based on the information currently available" caveat, it'll simply be " 90% of West Ham fans against moving".

Also, a lot of people are waiting for plans. Most of the people who voted will be the more entrenched, meaning they're almost certainly anti.

Couple of question: Why do you think you poll showed 10% in favour and 80% against whereas Iain Dale's showed 40% in favour and 40% against? Also, why no 'don't know' option, especially online? Or an option to vote 'yes if retractable seating'? I think a lot of people won't have voted 'yes' simply because they don't know what 'yes' means at the moment
And why is KUMB's latest poll 60 : 20 against (with 20% don't knows)?

What is common is that no polls show a majority in favour, yet the club say things like 70% are for or 100% of those shown plans voted yes.

If the club thought they'd get a majority backing the move I'm sure they'd hold a poll of some sort.
User avatar
Pop Robson
Posts: 17083
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:12 pm
Location: Looking for the 50,000
Has liked: 34 likes
Total likes: 15 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Pop Robson »

86% against is a similar figure to the Newham Recorders poll last year that was 87% against
User avatar
Iron-worx
Posts: 5288
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: Rebuilding Lady Garrets Tower

Re: WHU'S VIEW POLL RESULT

Post by Iron-worx »

Benfleet Pete wrote:OK, based on that answer and given the current circumstances and what we know (which is not a lot, I grant you), do you suggest we all just sit around quietly waiting for the inevitable metaphorical kick in the goolies? (and if we do all keep our gobs shut and conform like good boys and girls then it will be an astronomical kick in the goolies, I can assure you).
If not, then what do you suggest? (Serious question).
A serious answer....

If somebody can see a dealbreaker in what is already known that they believe cannot be rectified by anything that might be in what currently isn't known, then it is a perfectly rational position for them to conclude No.

But - It is not a rational position for anybody to conclude Yes even if they can see no problems whatsoever in what is known because they cannot know that there isn't a dealbreaker in what currently isn't known.

The best that anybody can rationally conclude along those lines is that they can't see any problems with what is known but they have to hold fire on concluding Yes dependent on there being nothing dealbreaking in what isn't known.

So conclusions of No may be rational but conclusions of yes cannot be - It simply isn't possible to hold a poll on that basis, how can you hold a poll in which answers of No may be rational but answers of Yes cannot be ?

That's why it was of crucial importance that an option of undecided should have been included in the poll.......

So we're chasing the wrong fox, there's no point holding any polls as things stand because a poll is meaningless given the circumstances....

The right fox is to find out what presently isn't known so as fully informed decisions might be reached.
User avatar
Hammer110
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Hammer110 »

Its actually not worth debating the whether the question was loaded or not, the fact is the poll failed, not though lack of effort I must add.

Simply put insufficient people voted, as I have said all along when you have an emotive issue those with the most polarised view will make their point the strongest, consequentiality given the low "turnout" the outcome was predictable and a short 2,000 voting against is not enough to rock any boats.
paulhs1 wrote:Below is a quote received this morning from a London Assembly member;

"It appears to be a large enough sample to be statistically significant with a commendably unloaded question "
Unfortunatly, Paul either he doesn't realise its was a self selecting sample or he is talking out of his arse but then he is a politician.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: on parole
Has liked: 917 likes
Total likes: 1919 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Doc H Ball »

Hammer110 wrote:Its actually not worth debating the whether the question was loaded or not, the fact is the poll failed, not though lack of effort I must add.

Simply put insufficient people voted, as I have said all along when you have an emotive issue those with the most polarised view will make their point the strongest, consequentiality given the low "turnout" the outcome was predictable and a short 2,000 voting against is not enough to rock any boats.
Yes, I agree with that although the Club ignores the deep rooted mistrust amongst regular attendees at their peril - they remain our lifeblood not new daytrippers.

You said a number of months ago that it would take at least 5,000 and you were right - that was a minimum target to be effectual. However, I don't think that was so much fans not filling forms in but not enough of us handing them out. The majority of fans I approached completed one but we could only do so many. In retrospect we should have started much earlier.

It was a springboard for fans to have a voice if they wanted one. As you say their relative silence speaks louder than the poll, but at least it might stop the Club from misquoting again. It also demonstrated to me the absolute need for an independent accountable supporter forum.
User avatar
mywhufc
Posts: 3326
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:25 pm
Contact:

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by mywhufc »

Any chance that perhaps most don't want to go to Stratford no matter what they bloody do with it, because that's the way I see it, then again I'm no scientist or politician.
The club have backed themselves into a corner with the "seats no further away from pitch than upton park" statement because if the gov won't stump up and pay for it, and the new roof that Goes with it, what they gonna do, especially as the drawing shown to SAB apparently showed no retractable/temp seating down the side?
User avatar
brownout
Posts: 10299
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:26 pm
Has liked: 91 likes
Total likes: 174 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by brownout »

To add -

We would have started polling earlier if Karren Brady hadn't said the club would hold a poll BEFORE the decision was made and then failed to hold one.

We would have got more votes if it hadn't rained before two of the home games and one of the aways where votes were collected.

The poll isn't perfect but it confirms that on KUMB, that a large majority of fans don't want to move to Stratford, at least based on the information we currently have.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45059
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 759 likes
Total likes: 2944 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by the pink palermo »

Those that are nit picking over the precise phrasing of the question , the make up of the people that voted or even the absolute number of those that did vote are missing the point .

The overwhelming majority of those that voted were STH / regulars and the overwhelming majority of those voted "no" .

This is a clear signal to the club of the fanbases views , and for anyone to dismiss it with a wave of the hand is simply laughable .

The fans, the ones that go week in week out, don't want to move to an athletics stadium , and the clubs refusal to undertake a full ballot confirms it .

The 200 page they had previously received from the SAB gave much the same message ..........and yet the clubs Vice Chair continued to brief the National media in , and I';m being generous here, misleading manner .

I note she has gone quiet on the topic in recent weeks .
User avatar
BSB1
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:54 pm
Location: The only thing to fear, is running out of beer

Re: WHU'S VIEW POLL RESULT

Post by BSB1 »

BSB1 wrote: We're you for or against the bond scheme?
Benfleet Pete wrote:Categorically against. Why do you ask?
I ask because your previous post could have been one attributed to the Bond scheme. We had a full on rebellion against something we all thought was wrong yet we learnt that the club then got into massive debt for a new stand, had to flog our best players to pay for it and 99% of us knocked one of the best ticket benefit schemes ever at our club. Yes hindsight is a great thing but maybe if Mr Brown had given us the cold hard truth instead of the sales pitch we might have had a different outcome.

The same thing is happening here. People are saying "No" without the benefit of having all the information to hand.
Pedant
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Pedant »

the pink palermo wrote:Those that are nit picking over the precise phrasing of the question , the make up of the people that voted or even the absolute number of those that did vote are missing the point .

The overwhelming majority of those that voted were STH / regulars and the overwhelming majority of those voted "no" .

This is a clear signal to the club of the fanbases views , and for anyone to dismiss it with a wave of the hand is simply laughable .

The fans, the ones that go week in week out, don't want to move to an athletics stadium , and the clubs refusal to undertake a full ballot confirms it .

The 200 page they had previously received from the SAB gave much the same message ..........and yet the clubs Vice Chair continued to brief the National media in , and I';m being generous here, misleading manner .

I note she has gone quiet on the topic in recent weeks .
PP, you and logic real don't get along do you?
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45059
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 759 likes
Total likes: 2944 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by the pink palermo »

Pedant wrote: PP, you and logic real don't get along do you?
And you're qualified to make such a comment how ?

I've read your posts Pedant , and observe nothing but hair splitting and borderline sarcasm aimed at fans who make an effort to both attend games and undertake something positive in what they believe to be the best interest of the club .

I've noticed on another thread you claim to have been priced out of attending games - fair enough , so tell me please how you feel about the club effectively touting tickets for the play off final , and square the circle for me if you can with that behaviour and , as you seem to believe they will do, offeingr cheaper tickets at the OS .

Or is that too logical for you ?
User avatar
Rays Rock
Posts: 6419
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:10 pm
Location: Outsider
Has liked: 46 likes
Total likes: 104 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Rays Rock »

I think everybody is missing the point here,

Whenever a poll is conducted, no matter what the subject matter, the nay Sayers / those with an obvious gripe against a proposal, will always outnumber the vote.
That's not to say that questions can't be asked.
The whole point of the poll was to give the club a message. The poll was far too simplistic was this possibly engineered
I disagree with earlier posters who have said we can't ask certain questions due to confidentiality etc..
If the poll was to list a number of options about how we would like the stadium to be converted or what level of conversion would be acceptable etc etc.. Add in the Yes / No & don't know options and the club has a more useful feel for what people think.
The club can either choose to ignore this info or it may become a handy tool for contract negotiations.
This recent poll conducted only acts to fuel the media / opposition with a statistic that appears to be flawed. We all know how readily the media, Politicians and say someone like Barry Hearn turns a blind eye to using flawed information to get their point across.
Was this maybe the underlying point of this poll ? I hope not, but unfortunately it looks that way to many people including me.
User avatar
bendavids
Posts: 515
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:18 am
Location: E7
Contact:

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by bendavids »

Fair play to everybody who helped organise the poll.

If we are chosen as preferred bidder then I hope you'll be going to the same effort again when the same voters have been furnished with the relevant information to make an informed decision that has been unavailable up until this point (i.e. details of lease, conversion of the stadium, etc).
User avatar
WHUTerry
Posts: 618
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: Epping

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by WHUTerry »

Doc H Ball wrote: How did you feel when the SAB had their confidential meeting and then Brady was quoted in the media saying 'detailed plans' had been shown to you and '100% of fans' were in support?
I think I've commented elsewhere that the club should have provided clarity on that vote. What we voted for was an assumption that the ground would be favourable to the supporters. Clearly there's a lot going on which we don't know about or can't be told about because of commercial sensitivity, so I've always been prepared to wait until we hopefully win the bid, at which time details can be released prior to contracts being signed. If a vote should happen at any time, it should be then as it would be informed.
Doc H Ball wrote:I would suggest that there is a difference between regularly attending fans and Dale's website posters. Different sites, different readerships etc.
But all likely to be West Ham fans who do attend, be that frequently or infrequently, so people whose opinion matters.
Doc H Ball wrote:We thought more people wouldn't vote and would just use the comments box. There were hundreds of comments and they have all gone to the Club and LLDC - every single one. They reflect what you say - that with a proper football stadium there would be a big swing. However, they also generally don't believe it ever will be.
Not sure how having a 'Don't know' option would have dissuaded people from voting. Also, you acknowledge that there would be a big swing if the conversion is right, so why not have this as an option in the vote. You also say people had the option to comment. If you wanted to vote online, to vote 'don't know' you would have had to download a form. If you wanted to vote yes or no, you could do it on-screen.

Overall, the problem is that a lot of your opponents will simply say you provided a loaded question, which could have been avoided by having a few other options.
User avatar
Doc H Ball
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 5:29 pm
Location: on parole
Has liked: 917 likes
Total likes: 1919 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by Doc H Ball »

WHUTerry wrote: I've always been prepared to wait until we hopefully win the bid, at which time details can be released prior to contracts being signed. If a vote should happen at any time, it should be then as it would be informed.

You assume that if the bid is accepted there can then be a vote before contracts are signed. When we met Brady she said the same and we agreed to hold off any poll. Then, following the meeting, the Club sent us an e mail specifically retracting that and saying that 'the outcome will be decided' when the preferred bidder was chosen. Any ballot after the decision has been made is irrelevant and any definition of 'consultation' is that it precedes rather than follows the decision making process.

But all likely to be West Ham fans who do attend, be that frequently or infrequently, so people whose opinion matters.

Fair enough. WHTID's vote was about 40% for, 40% against and 20% unsure as I recall which is hardly a ringing endorsement. The same logic applies to the OLAS, KUMB and Newham Recorder polls all of which show heavy votes against the move.

Not sure how having a 'Don't know' option would have dissuaded people from voting. Also, you acknowledge that there would be a big swing if the conversion is right, so why not have this as an option in the vote. You also say people had the option to comment. If you wanted to vote online, to vote 'don't know' you would have had to download a form. If you wanted to vote yes or no, you could do it on-screen.

I didn't know you couldn't comment on line, I thought you could. That accounted for about 20% of the vote out of interest. There was some debate about a range of questions that could be put and we took the feedback from those who had registered on that as we felt we should. The majority, for right or wrong, wanted a straight Yes/No/Comments in the end. I repeat, we asked the Club to send out a full questionnaire and were never equipped to do a proper survey ourselves.

Overall, the problem is that a lot of your opponents will simply say you provided a loaded question, which could have been avoided by having a few other options.

Loaded question? 'Based on all available information do you believe that W.H. should move to the O.S.?' Really?

Would you describe sitting 40 people down in confidence, showing them a mock up, having a vote of hands based on 'if it looked like that would you want it?' and then reporting it as 100% of fans being in favour of a move counts as being 'loaded' or not?

I have yet to hear an explanation from the SAB as a body as to how they feel about their meeting being used by the Club. You know you are quoted in the bid as being proof of 'consultation' and of fan support for the move don't you?

Also what happened to your 'Report'? At least we've published ours...
User avatar
brownout
Posts: 10299
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:26 pm
Has liked: 91 likes
Total likes: 174 likes

Re: WHU's View? poll result

Post by brownout »

bendavids wrote:Fair play to everybody who helped organise the poll.

If we are chosen as preferred bidder then I hope you'll be going to the same effort again when the same voters have been furnished with the relevant information to make an informed decision that has been unavailable up until this point (i.e. details of lease, conversion of the stadium, etc).
We hope that the club will keep their promise and do this.
If they hadn't broken their promise to poll BEFORE the decision was made we wouldn't have held our poll.
User avatar
Iron-worx
Posts: 5288
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: Rebuilding Lady Garrets Tower

Re: WHU'S VIEW POLL RESULT

Post by Iron-worx »

BSB1 wrote:The same thing is happening here. People are saying "No" without the benefit of having all the information to hand.
Not having all the information to hand is a structural factor that means that no poll can be held on the matter currently however well it might be conducted....

It is possible to say No right now - Provided that the person saying No can see at least one totally dealbreaking factor that they are totally convinced cannot be addressed by anything amongst what isn't known....

It is not possible to say Yes right now - Because even if everything that is known is fine and dandy then there could still be something amongst what isn't known that is a dealbreaker....

How is it possible to hold a poll in which it is possible to say No, but not possible to say Yes without betraying that you couldn't have considered the matter properly ?
User avatar
Hammer110
Posts: 2537
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:56 pm
Location: Dreaming 父 父

Re: WHU'S VIEW POLL RESULT

Post by Hammer110 »

Iron-worx wrote:Not having all the information to hand is a structural factor that means that no poll can be held on the matter currently however well it might be conducted....

It is possible to say No right now - Provided that the person saying No can see at least one totally dealbreaking factor that they are totally convinced cannot be addressed by anything amongst what isn't known....

It is not possible to say Yes right now - Because even if everything that is known is fine and dandy then there could still be something amongst what isn't known that is a dealbreaker....

How is it possible to hold a poll in which it is possible to say No, but not possible to say Yes without betraying that you couldn't have considered the matter properly ?
:thup:
Locked