Unsurprisingly, quite a few sports men have come out in favour of the First Past The Post voting system, the logic being that most races work on the basis of 'first past the post'.
Fair enough, but this is probably one of the worst analogies they could have chosen. In a single race, the aim is to see who's fastest, and whoever is 'first past the post' wins. I sorely doubt whether people campaigning for the Alternative Vote system have any problems with that.
But let's turn to Formula One genius Sir Frank Williams. If Formula One were truly 'first past the post' system then they would only need to have one race each year, and the car/driver combination which wins that race would the World Champion, end of.
Actually, a Formula One season is in fact far more similar to the AV system. In 2010 (for example) there were nineteen races, and points are awarded as follows: winning car/driver 25 points, second 18 points all the way down to the tenth car/driver who gets 1 point.
At the end of the season, whichever driver got the most points is the Driver's Champion and whichever team (= two cars/drivers) gets the most points is the Constructors' Champion. So in theory, a driver could become Champion without winning a single race if he managed to finish second or third in nearly every race and two other drivers shared the first places and otherwise placed badly.
---------------------------------
The Daily Mail article (see first link) also embeds the hopelessly confused No2AV video, the main bits of which are two parties forming a coalition and promptly burning their manifestos - isn't that a bit like the result we just had under FPTP? Seeing as No2AV is largely funded by the same people who fund the Conservative Party, are they not admitting how hopelessly unprincipled they are?
Rejoice! Free Propaganda!
1 minute ago
11 comments:
It's all fairly silly. I saw a banner advert saying that because Nick Griffin doesn't like AV we should have it. The barely concealed implication was there for all to see. Now I am apparently a racist.
Exactly and the F1 2008 season is perfect example; Lewis Hamilton won the driver's championship but won fewer races over the season than Felipe Massa who came second in the championship.
That No2AV video is a joke.
Except the car that came last isn't eliminated from the rest of the season.
My No leaflet just arrived and it's so riddled with inaccuracies but so is the Yes case. I've just mentioned this.
BE, I don't know why everybody's obssessed with the BNP (this goes for both sides). What the Tories are really worried about is UKIP, not the BNP.
TBF, ta. The same goes for tennis matches or football leagues to be honest.
Anon, look, F1 has their rules and electoral reform people aren't sticking their noses in, are they?
JH, I'll give it a read. Some of the arguments put forward by Yes2AV are pretty feeble as well, to be honest.
Last night's C4 "debate" between 2 sportspersons about the vote was hilarious. The guy going for "yes" was no brain surgeon but the woman going for "no" (a female boxer!) repeatedly resorted to "I don't understand numbers or anything else, I'm just an ordinary female boxer" and it became quite plain she had kjown nothing abouy it when her local MP recruited he as a legitimate face for the campaign.
FW is undoubtedly one of the most successful F1 team principals of all time, but why does this make him, or any other sportsman or celeb and expert on AV/FPTP/PR or whatever?
Defeats me.
(PS. His autobiography is an excellent read).
NC, awesome, I have posted.
L, exactly. Do politicians go round telling Bernie Ecclestone how to change the points system in F1?
MW - No, but BC goes around paying over money to political parties to get them to do things that help F1 - stays on tobacco advertising bans for example. Not that I am at all anti advertising tobacco, you undertstand.
L, that's a good point. I think in the end the politicians - from WHO downwards - imposed a severe curb on tobacco advertising for F1 teams.
And I also recall that some politicians were waffling on about "Football fans should be able to buy the club they support" and restrictions on the number of foreign players in English teams. Maybe the sports people are just getting their own back!
MW - Yeah, they are all at it. Banning this. Interfering in that. Posturing about this. Telling you the other is bad for you and you must be told to stop it. Telling an owner of private property that he can opnly sell his possessions to someione they think he should sell to - etc etc.
There is nothing to stop 'fans' of Man U say, setting up Man U 2 under their own ownership. After all, that's how Man U 1 started. But of course they'd also have to set up FA2 'cos FA1 wouldn't 'allow' them to play.
It's rotten to the core.
Post a Comment