the numbers seem to be a state secret, the explanation of how to vote, short / long numbers doesn't give the nmber itself, let alone the extensions.

numbers - though lines not open yet, nor are saying what time they'll open:

62282 then 08 for Andy use for mobiles only.

landlines, use 09015 2282 then 08 - 

Murray's surname is 8th on the list alphabetically.

broadband is giving the live programme.

lines closed - did you get through? I did.

Tweet of the night: "Current wish for 2013: Lennox Lewis to be anchor for the Oscars in light of his presentation skills at #SPOTY2012"

IMO it was never in doubt that Wiggins would win and I don't have a problem with that. His Tour de France victory probably was the stand out achievement of the year from a British sporting perspective.

As for Andy, I seriously doubt that he cares about this award.

RBBOT wrote:

---

steven wrote:

---

It's worth bearing in mind that Mark Cavendish won in 2011 with 169,152 votes and Andy's vote has gone up to about 12x what it was last year. So I don't think Andy would have any trouble winning if he won a slam in a non-Olympic year. 

---

Comparing the number of votes accross years depends on a lot more than the persons popularity:

- was the number of phone lines greater? people always can't get through.

- was the time they were open longer?

- was the audience size higher? 

---

Obviously it depends on a lot more than the person's popularity, but taking each point in turn:

- who knows, I guess they might have laid on more phone lines this year but even this year, I don't think the total number of votes was that high compared to some of the reality shows and I had no trouble getting through more than once so I would guess the number of phone lines was sufficient both years to ensure that this wasn't much of a factor

- I think it was 30 minutes last year too but I don't know for sure

- common sense and the vastly increased total number of votes compared to 2011 both suggest that the audience size was significantly higher this year, so I was making the assumption that if, say, Andy won another slam next year and there wasn't nearly as much obvious success in other sports, those who voted for Andy this year would be more likely to watch (and vote for him) again, while any loss in audience would be disproportionately skewed towards those who tuned in mainly due to the 'Olympics effect' and who are probably more likely to have voted for those in sports which have their highest profile in Olympic years

Of course, if the Olympics has had any lasting effect in increasing interest in sport (and I hope it has!), you'd expect viewing figures and total votes in 2013 to be up on 2011 even if they don't match the 2012 figures. But even so, while saying "I don't think Andy would have any trouble winning if he won a slam in a non-Olympic year" was undoubtedly a bit strong, there seems ample evidence from last night's voting figures that despite what the haters might have you believe, Andy's achievements are recognised by enough people that if he won another slam next year (especially one where the final didn't take place in the middle in the night!), he'd have a very good chance of winning unless something really spectacular happened elsewhere.

-- Edited by steven on Monday 17th of December 2012 11:17:24 AM

Great effort by Andy to knock Mo out of the top three, wasn't going to vote but in the end voted a couple of times for Andy.

Jess Ennis's vote just goes to show that personality and likeability factor is huge. Her achievement although massive still didn't warrant for me a place in the top 4 or 5. Also Adam's and Simmond's vote proves this as well together with a lack of votes for Storey.

I actuallly do believe Andy does care, after Wimby when there seemed to be a big shift in public support for him, it was widely heralded as one of the main catalysts for his Olympic and then his US open successes. It is also a very prestigious awards show with alot of history so yes on the one hand it is not a huge deal but still significant IMO.