The Whole Game Solution – Survey Results

An interesting exercise, running my first survey. The results show not only some idea of the views of the fans, but also gave me an insight into how to write a survey.

I feel that there is a benefit in running a few surveys of this kind to pick up the opinions of my clubs’ fanbase, and I will be suggesting this at a trust meeting.

I used survey monkey to run the survey. They provided a simple, and importantly free service, although limited to ten questions. One does get rather bombarded by attempts to sell you their more professional services. At the time of writing, I have received 80 responses, 53 (66%) stated they were Cheltenham fans, 9 were from other League-1 or League-2 clubs, 6 from supporters of Premier League of Championship clubs, 7 for non-league and 5 with no specific club.

Some 66% claimed to go to more than two thirds of home games for their club, while only 22% saw less than a third. Some 20% of respondents did not answer the question on away games, while 58% of those who responded saw less than a third of away games. 22% saw over two thirds.

Survey Monkey allows the application of one filter only, and I think the most useful tool I can apply is to see how Cheltenham fans responded. For the viewing habits, the Cheltenham fans were slightly more pronounced, with 70% seeing more than two thirds of games and only 13% seeing less than a third. Again quite a few did not add away game details, but 53% of those who answered went to less than a third, while only 17% saw more than two thirds.

It was my third question where I demonstrated my inexperience with questionnaires. I wanted to know which possible changes to league structure might be acceptable, but I did not specifically specify a no change option. I think it would have been best to split this to two questions, firstly whether one thought changes to the structure were a good idea, and then which ones were acceptable. After the initial burst of answers to the questionnaire, I edited this question to specify that no response meant that no change was acceptable, and after that there was about a 33% for no reponse.

Among Cheltenham fans, 52% of those showing an option thought 20 teams in the Championship, 24 in other divisions would be acceptable, 27% would accept 22 in the lower divisions and 30% would accept the originally publicised divisions of 20. When expanded to all replies, there was a smaller difference between those who thought it acceptable to drop just the Championship to 20 teams (42%), and those who those who would go for 20 throughout the structure (39%), the 20 team championship and 22 in other divisions stayed at 27%. The numbers do not add up to 100 as multiple replies were allowed.

I then asked where new teams brought into the structure should come from. The results were overwhelming for doing this on merit alone (i.e from the National League). Only five people thought it may be acceptable to bring Celtic and Rangers on board, four thought reserve/development teams could be accepted and only three thought that franchises could be started in cities (for example in Dublin, Belfast or Edinburgh). Three of the four who would accept reserve/development fans were Cheltenham supporters, (the other had no specific affiliation). Within the promotion on merit selection, there is a preference for no rules over the demanding licenses based on ground facilities and finances.

When the option of a five division structure was suggested, and the question, should the lowest divisions in this be regionalised North and South, there was only a marginal rejection (55% to 45%). When this is limited to Cheltenham fans, it becomes more pronounced (60% against). As Gloucester City travel further on average to each away game in their regionalised division then Cheltenham do in their National one, this is understandable. Interestingly, even if not a big enough sample to be truly accurate, of the 12 responders who said they travel to more than two thirds of away games and who also answered this question, there was a positive response (7 to 5) in favour of regionalisation.

When it comes down to what to do with dates freed by reducing numbers in the divisions, the results are overwhelming for reducing mid-week matches. 70% of respondents would go with this, (Cheltenham fans – 75%). Again I allowed multiple answers, and got just 21% (Cheltenham 17%) for a shorter season and 14% (Cheltenham 13%) for a winter break

When it comes to the EFL Trophy, the fans are against it – but not very much so, 53% overall would scrap the competition. When asked how it should be formatted if it were to continue, the vast majority would go back to the straight lower division knock out formula (69%), as opposed to lower divisions but with groups (21%) or this season’s format with development teams (10%). Cheltenham opinions are slightly more pronounced, 60% would scrap the competition, while 71% would go back to knock out if it were to continue, and only 8% would keep this season’s format

Finally, the FA Cup, where there are again clear indications, 84% want the Cup to stick to weekends, and 71% think replays are an essential part of the competition. Here the Cheltenham fans are slightly less committed, at 82% and 66%. The minorities in both groups that think replays could be scrapped would do so for all rounds. There are few who that they should be scrapped from the First or Third round proper, keeping replays in the earlier rounds.

Comments are closed.