Do you prefer single or multi-vote polls?

[Olly]

I like multi as it seems sometimes that in single vote polls, people play safe and don't like to go against the flow of other voters. And next season there will be more players in contention when we're winning more games.

[vblockranger]

Single because it stops people taking the easy route and voting for 5 or 6 players. MOTM stands for MAN of the match..not MEN of the match

[MattyRangers]

Depends the question. If it's for MOTM I agree with vblock. However, if the question is something like "favourite pie fillings" then I think there are way too many delicious options to be constrained to 1 answer.

[Olly]

People also take the easy route of going for the winning goal scorer than someone who has put in a good shift. Multi covers all options and the winner is the MAN of the match decided by the most votes for him.

[vblockranger]

People also take the easy route of going for the winning goal scorer than someone who has put in a good shift. Multi covers all options and the winner is the MAN of the match decided by the most votes for him.

Yer but the individual should be voting for his MAN of the match...not MEN of the match. When all the votes are cast thats when the MAN ofthe match is determined. There could be 4 or 5 players who have had a good game but there is only one MAN of the match. One man, one vote.

[Will M]

Last poll was single, Ben Haim got the most votes. Not to mention lots of voting for Hill and Onuoha too. Would Ben Haim have won so handily if it was multi vote? I think not.

[dave58]

Last poll was single, Ben Haim got the most votes. Not to mention lots of voting for Hill and Onuoha too. Would Ben Haim have won so handily if it was multi vote? I think not.

Yes and Adel got a vote? whats all that about? he was S**t for the 20 mins he was on

[Stanley]

Yer but the individual should be voting for his MAN of the match...not MEN of the match. When all the votes are cast thats when the MAN ofthe match is determined. There could be 4 or 5 players who have had a good game but there is only one MAN of the match. One man, one vote.

Last poll was single, Ben Haim got the most votes. Not to mention lots of voting for Hill and Onuoha too. Would Ben Haim have won so handily if it was multi vote? I think not.

Fully agree. Single vote, no question about it. Glad to see the majority in agreement and it should never have changed to multi-vote in the first place (for MAN of the match). The last poll was single: http://www.wearetherangersboys.com/f...-QPR-v-Arsenal and you can see clearly who people thought were the best players with one overall winner, which you never get with a multi-vote. It makes you put more thought into who to vote for and prevents you from sitting on the fence. When several players have had a good game it can be difficult to commit to one, but that is the whole point.

Yes and Adel got a vote? whats all that about? he was S**t for the 20 mins he was on

That was Robsondinho doing it just to get a bite. You replied to that thread so would have seen it.

[MYU]

It don't really matter because you'll still get a winner.

Sometimes it's hard to vote for one player when you think two or three others should have won it too.

It's not a problem, we can make it single if that's what everyone wants.

[Stanley]

Sometimes it's hard to vote for one player when you think two or three others should have won it too.

It's supposed to be a bit hard mate As I say that's the whole point of having a vote - to make you decide. It's too easy a cop-out otherwise, and you never get a truly accurate reflection on what people think because the votes become diluted.

See my post above.

[Olly]

There have been 29 multi-polls as shown in the main page menu. Check them out. How many of those were wrong results? There are lazy people who vote in single polls who check first to see what others have mentioned in the post, or poll results, before they vote so as not to think they are the odd ones out.

That's why sometimes the single poll results look very one-sided, even when two players have had very good games. Voters can choose whatever system they like if it's going to be decided by this poll, just pointing out the pros and cons of each.

[Norths]

This question keeps me awake at night, still cant decide.

[Stanley]

There are lazy people who vote in single polls who check first to see what others have mentioned in the post, or poll results, before they vote so as not to think they are the odd ones out.

I don't see that as a valid argument. Multi-vote polls encourage more laziness if anything because it means you never have to think too hard about who you felt the overall best player was.

Also some people may always do what you describe regardless if its a single or multi poll, which is assuming many actually 'follow the crowd' like that anyway. And if they do the voting can always be kept anonymous.

[vblockranger]

I don't see that as a valid argument. Multi-vote polls encourage more laziness if anything because it means you never have to think too hard about who you felt the overall best player was.

Also some people may always do what you describe regardless if its a single or multi poll, which is assuming many actually 'follow the crowd' like that anyway. And if they do the voting can always be kept anonymous.

Exactly

[twranger]

There have been 29 multi-polls as shown in the main page menu. Check them out. How many of those were wrong results? There are lazy people who vote in single polls who check first to see what others have mentioned in the post, or poll results, before they vote so as not to think they are the odd ones out.

That's why sometimes the single poll results look very one-sided, even when two players have had very good games. Voters can choose whatever system they like if it's going to be decided by this poll, just pointing out the pros and cons of each.

That's not being lazy, that's the "sheep mentality".....!