array(2) {
[0]=>
string(815) "
select r.*,
rc.info,
t.title as threadtitle,
u.username as username,
u.anonymous as useranonymous,
`f`.`value` AS `flairvalue`,
`ft`.`name` AS `flairname`,
`ft`.`colour` AS `flaircolour`,
`ft`.`icon` AS `flairicon`
from reply as r
join thread as t on t.id = r.threadid
join replycontent as rc on rc.replyid = r.id
join user as u on u.id = r.userid
left join `flair` `f` on `f`.`userid` = `u`.`id` and `f`.`categoryid` = `t`.`categoryid`
left join `flairoption` `ft` on `ft`.`id` = `f`.`flairoptionid`
where r.businessid = :businessId
and r.threadid = :threadId
group by r.id
order by r.utcdated desc
limit 0,50
"
[1]=>
array(2) {
["businessId"]=>
int(1)
["threadId"]=>
int(2410)
}
}
We've had many ideas in the last few weeks as to what format would be better. As I understand it, the reason for starting this thread is to voice disappointment that the current format has once again been supported at the NBL Participants meeting. The participants from each club are obviously not in touch with the fans or indeed their own club members who don't agree with it.
While there is so much opposition to this current format, we should be asking the question of why it is being supported. We need to be given justification for it. These participants need to stand up and say why the current format is a good one.