How do you rate the new website out of 10?

[JOLovegrove]

Mine's not loading at all. I am on Google Chrome, does that affect it?

 

[Muhammad - I’m hard - Bruce Lee]

Clear your caches.

doesn't load at all now

 

[Napper]

Slightly better than before

7

 

[KJP]

1/10

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

It looks like a MySpace page from 2006.

 

[Dav]

I quite like it, 7/10.

I noticed that Will Hoskins doesn't have a player profile thought. Could be a sign for the future.

 

[Mackenzie]

Has ANYONE got it to work yet? Can I access Seagulls Player without having to go through that site?

 

[Giraffe]

Still not loading for me either. Total rubbish therefore.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

No doubt Palace will say they got theirs first (again) and we copied

 

[APACHE]

If I could get on it, I might give it a rating.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

Still looks like a Wolves Official site at the moment.

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

Hope it works when I want my next etop up.

 

[Lethargic]

The biggest functional problem is the number of broken links absolutely woeful and not professional did they bother testing it? Other than that its just too busy very off putting.

 

[Dave Armstrong's Hare]

Like others on here , it crashes my IE browser. I've not tried any other browser yet and don't see why I should be forced too. The testing of the site should have passed the necessary quality gates before bringing in to service. I now find that I can't get access to Seagull Player for which I am debited and if somethings not done soon, I will be unable to complete an E top up on my smart card in time for Middlesborough. I see that it's been raised on "Ask the club" but no reply as yet.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

About 6 for content...... design wise you missed off negative numbers so would be unfair to vote but minus 10 for design would give negative 4 over-all.

 

[Titus]

Loads fine on my browser. Maxthon 3.

 

[BensGrandad]

I have finally managed to get on to it and am not sure what the fuss is about as I neither like nor dislike it particularly.

 

[kevo]

I think it's a horrible mess... the headlines are ugly and don't seem to fit, although probably the worst design features are the amateur-looking sub-menus that seem to be just a bit of typed text on a plain white background - often leaving nothing but an ugly blank space.

And, as someone has already mentioned, why do opponents goals come first on the results page when we are playing away? Also having a massive picture of Wolves's ground when you enter the site is just plain wrong (yes, I realise why it's there - but it should be our stadium on that page!!)

I'm not sure why we have to have one of the generic sites anyway. Brighton is new media central - surely there must be a company in the city who could make a much better job of it than that at a reasonable price?

 

[brakespear]

Now that I can see it I quite like it

 

[clapham_gull]

Terrible.

Not a knee jerk reaction, I've spent a bit of time looking at the club sites who adopted early. Never quite got round to posting on Ask The Club.

It's shocking. The current site is far from perfect but how anyone in their right mind believes that to be an improvement is anyones guess.

Sometimes changes obviously take time to get used to, the current BBC site being a prime example. But this layout feels like a step backward. Literally like a site that existed before the current one before they sorted it out.

A telling comment above above how it resembles something on the WWW from 10 years ago.

So bad it's actually quite funny. Looks like player hasn't changed yet so at least I can put up with rubbish but just about usable functionality on my Galaxy. God knows what that will resemble when the design team get their hands on that.

Marks out ten ?

Struggle to give it a 1 when accessing it on a mobile.

Hits a month ? Think I'll avoid it like a plague !