| My ratings for yesterday.. 11:56 - Aug 7 with 3458 views | Wallingford_Boy |
Hladky - 8
Donacien - 7
Davis - 8
Burgess - 7
Woolfie - 7
Luongo - 7
Morsy - 8
Burns - 6
Chappers - 7
Broadhead - 9
Hirst - 7
If anyone cares.. |  |
| |  |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:03 - Aug 7 with 2687 views | farkenhell |
Surely Burgess (in particular) and Woolfie deserve more than 7? |  | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:05 - Aug 7 with 2667 views | FrimleyBlue |
Hladky 7
Jd 6
Davis 8
Wolfy 7
Burgess 8
Morsy 8
Luongo 7
Burns 6
Chappers 6
Broadhead 9
Hirst 8 |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:10 - Aug 7 with 2623 views | ReusersTown |
Hladky - 6.5
Donacien - 7
Davis - 8.5
Burgess - 7.5
Woolfie - 8
Luongo - 7
Morsy - 8
Burns - 5.5
Chappers - 7
Broadhead - 8
Hirst - 7.5 | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:13 - Aug 7 with 2602 views | Stenvict |
Hladky - 8
JD - 8
Woolfy - 7
Burgess - 9
Davis - 8.5
Morsy - 8
Luongo - 8
Burns - 6
Chaplin - 7
Broadhead - 7.5
Hirst - 8
Burgess my MOTM | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:16 - Aug 7 with 2585 views | Wallingford_Boy |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:03 - Aug 7 by farkenhell |
Surely Burgess (in particular) and Woolfie deserve more than 7? |
Possibly, but just thought those I gave an 8 to stood out.
Donacien was the least impressive in the back 4. | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:27 - Aug 7 with 2540 views | NeedhamChris |
Woolfie for me always gets a little underrated, as a consequence of being so assured and ahead of the game at times he 'appears' to do less.
Quality CB | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:29 - Aug 7 with 2528 views | NthQldITFC |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:03 - Aug 7 by farkenhell |
Surely Burgess (in particular) and Woolfie deserve more than 7? |
These are always so difficult, because it depends what your baseline is. I always thought 6 was the baseline average for a player at whatever level that player is playing at.
So I think our performance yesterday was on the whole good because of the context, but not great like some of our performances last season.
On that basis for me:
6 - expected, decent
7 - good
8 - really good
9 - excellent
10 - extraordinary, perfect
Hladky - 6
Donacien - 6
Davis - 7
Burgess - 8
Woolfie - 8
Luongo - 8 motm
Morsy - 7
Burns - 6
Chappers - 6
Broadhead - 8
Hirst - 7
No bad performances amongst the starters, 4 really good ones, nobody great |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:34 - Aug 7 with 2491 views | Mookamoo |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:29 - Aug 7 by NthQldITFC |
These are always so difficult, because it depends what your baseline is. I always thought 6 was the baseline average for a player at whatever level that player is playing at.
So I think our performance yesterday was on the whole good because of the context, but not great like some of our performances last season.
On that basis for me:
6 - expected, decent
7 - good
8 - really good
9 - excellent
10 - extraordinary, perfect
Hladky - 6
Donacien - 6
Davis - 7
Burgess - 8
Woolfie - 8
Luongo - 8 motm
Morsy - 7
Burns - 6
Chappers - 6
Broadhead - 8
Hirst - 7
No bad performances amongst the starters, 4 really good ones, nobody great |
What is 1 to 5 then? I need to know.
Is it:
5 - Poor
4 - Very Poor
3 - Ahhhh
2 - Never again
1 - Dead |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:37 - Aug 7 with 2474 views | NthQldITFC |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:34 - Aug 7 by Mookamoo |
What is 1 to 5 then? I need to know.
Is it:
5 - Poor
4 - Very Poor
3 - Ahhhh
2 - Never again
1 - Dead |
Summit like that.
See LoftForWords for a much better graduated scale than mine, or, for that bottom end, perhaps refer to the performances of a late 90s left back? | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:39 - Aug 7 with 2459 views | textbackup |
Cam Burgess gets a solid 8 for me |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:49 - Aug 7 with 2394 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:39 - Aug 7 by textbackup |
Cam Burgess gets a solid 8 for me |
I would have Burgess as MotM and a 9. I can't recall a mistake, his head was on everything, and took so much pressure off Hladky. Relaxed that he is going to be a great Championship Left Centre Back. |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:09 - Aug 7 with 2281 views | southnorfolkblue |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:29 - Aug 7 by NthQldITFC |
These are always so difficult, because it depends what your baseline is. I always thought 6 was the baseline average for a player at whatever level that player is playing at.
So I think our performance yesterday was on the whole good because of the context, but not great like some of our performances last season.
On that basis for me:
6 - expected, decent
7 - good
8 - really good
9 - excellent
10 - extraordinary, perfect
Hladky - 6
Donacien - 6
Davis - 7
Burgess - 8
Woolfie - 8
Luongo - 8 motm
Morsy - 7
Burns - 6
Chappers - 6
Broadhead - 8
Hirst - 7
No bad performances amongst the starters, 4 really good ones, nobody great |
That’s how I would judge the numbers too. On that basis both JD and Morsy would score higher imho. Morsy was an absolute rock and JD kept their most dangerous player relatively quiet | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:21 - Aug 7 with 2210 views | itfc_bucks |
Hladky - 7
Donacien - 7
Davis - 8
Burgess - 8
Woolfie - 7
Luongo - 6
Morsy - 7
Burns - 6
Chappers - 7
Broadhead - 9
Hirst - 8
Hladky needed time to grow into the occasion. Too many poorly distrbuted short balls. I get it's our style, but he needs to be back at the training ground just focussing on that short game. Beautiful aerial work though.
JD maybe got away with one in the first half and should probably have come off after being knocked into next week by Vac.
Woolfie got caught a few times, but got away with it.
Cam Burgess looked born to play at this level. Wouldn't have thought that two years ago when he was being used as an emergency left back at a miserable Adams Park...
Thought the midfield duo worked sporadically at best, and were utterly anonymous in the first half.
Burns was there, I saw him there...I think, but didn't create much.
Chappers, Broady and Hirst were horrible! Love it. | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:29 - Aug 7 with 2174 views | NthQldITFC |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:09 - Aug 7 by southnorfolkblue |
That’s how I would judge the numbers too. On that basis both JD and Morsy would score higher imho. Morsy was an absolute rock and JD kept their most dangerous player relatively quiet |
I'd probably agree with you on both of those, it's just that I felt you then end up with what looks like too high an overall score. But yes. | |
| |
| What about Wolfies haircut?? on 13:30 - Aug 7 with 2168 views | unstableblue |
What score does that get?
I'm 4/10 - but then I'm getting old |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:30 - Aug 7 with 2162 views | Mach_foreignBlue |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:03 - Aug 7 by farkenhell |
Surely Burgess (in particular) and Woolfie deserve more than 7? |
Burgess will have had his best ever game for Town. |  | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 13:36 - Aug 7 with 2151 views | Stewart27 |
I’m suprised Chappers has scored so low. He did his thing. Popped up when needed, was assured on the ball, created space, created himself a lovely Chappers chance in the first half (where it hit the defenders heel to go narrowly wide) and was a hair’s breadth away from a worldie in the second half. | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:02 - Aug 7 with 2102 views | Illinoisblue |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:49 - Aug 7 by LegendofthePhoenix |
I would have Burgess as MotM and a 9. I can't recall a mistake, his head was on everything, and took so much pressure off Hladky. Relaxed that he is going to be a great Championship Left Centre Back. |
Big fan of Burgess, quietly goes about his job. Rarely makes a mistake. Always reliable. |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:05 - Aug 7 with 2094 views | GeoffSentence |
Hladky 3
Donacien 2
Burgess 1
Woolfie 4
Morsy 1
Luongo 5
Chaplin 2
Broadhead 5
Burns 3
Hirst 3
If they seem a bit low and erratic, that's because I am not using a traditional scale to grade them, but the Bristol Stool Chart. |  |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:06 - Aug 7 with 2089 views | ReusersTown |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 12:16 - Aug 7 by Wallingford_Boy |
Possibly, but just thought those I gave an 8 to stood out.
Donacien was the least impressive in the back 4. |
I mean you gave Hladky an 8. | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:25 - Aug 7 with 1990 views | farkenhell |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:05 - Aug 7 by GeoffSentence |
Hladky 3
Donacien 2
Burgess 1
Woolfie 4
Morsy 1
Luongo 5
Chaplin 2
Broadhead 5
Burns 3
Hirst 3
If they seem a bit low and erratic, that's because I am not using a traditional scale to grade them, but the Bristol Stool Chart. |
On that basis, Woolfie might need to seek medical help? 4 stools in 103 minutes. Hopefully just a short-lived case of Bali-belly. | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:26 - Aug 7 with 1982 views | GeoffSentence |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:25 - Aug 7 by farkenhell |
On that basis, Woolfie might need to seek medical help? 4 stools in 103 minutes. Hopefully just a short-lived case of Bali-belly. |
On the Bristol Stool chart, 4 is a smooth sausage. | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:29 - Aug 7 with 1964 views | farkenhell |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:26 - Aug 7 by GeoffSentence |
On the Bristol Stool chart, 4 is a smooth sausage. |
In my haste to post an unfunny reply, I missed that you scored 5 stools for both Broady and Luongo. What is 5? A longer, more streamlined sausage? | | | |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:29 - Aug 7 with 1958 views | GeoffSentence |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:29 - Aug 7 by farkenhell |
In my haste to post an unfunny reply, I missed that you scored 5 stools for both Broady and Luongo. What is 5? A longer, more streamlined sausage? |
Passed easily | |
| |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:31 - Aug 7 with 1945 views | farkenhell |
| My ratings for yesterday.. on 14:29 - Aug 7 by GeoffSentence |
Passed easily |
Not applicable to Freddie or Hutchinson then!
[ducks] | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
