Griffiths: First I have seen of him. Made saves and performed as would expect - 6
Barthram: At sea. More down to formation, but looked uncomfortable. Did nothing poor - 5
Suliman: See above for first half. First I have seen him - 5. Solid second half and helped Dayton - 7.
Parslow: See above - 5 first half, 6 second half.
O' Shaughnessy: Same as Parslow, but an extra point for being visibly a better player on the ball and movent - 6 first half, 7 second half
Cranston: Our only positive player in the first half. No worse than the other defenders - 7
Pell: First half was noticeably the worst player. Caught in possession in minute one, and never looked back. Culminated in a dire attempted three yard pass which set up Carlisle for hitting the bar. Hindered by formation which saves him a point - 3. Second half, back in the middle with winger outside and four behind. Control and passing improved. Tidy finish after a good run - 7.
Hall: Unfit but still looked twice as good as Pell first half. So that means a 6.
Whitehead: Not sure what first half role was - 5. Better second half but docked points for opting not to shoot - 6.
Waters: Combined with Cranston well for best first half moments. Lively. Would like to see his booking again. If it was a poor dive, then 6. If the ref got it wrong, 7.
Wright: Lone ranger upfront. Won headers. Ran miles. Not afraid to turn and shoot - 7.
Dayton: Best player on the pitch. Will be in most games. Bonus point for being miles better than everyone else despite being unfit turns an 8 into a 9.
Lowe: Too few minutes to juddge. Brought on to replace Pell so out of position - would be hard to rate in any case.
Carlisle away ratings.
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29848
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
In this instace, for some players the transformation from one half to the next was so striking I felt it only fair to provide a score for both halves. It also allows the reader to see how formation change and half time rollocking impacts on some players. Keeping the halves separate gives a more informative picture of the pattern of the game. After all, it is a game of two halves.andgarod wrote:sorry if a player scores 5 in the first half and 7 in the second does that mean that the match rating is 6 or do you have some other way of weighting his marks
Please clarify
-
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
- Posts: 29848
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Oops, Rowe. Not Lowe. My bad.
It was the 'So Ronery' meme in the other thread which confused me :p
It was the 'So Ronery' meme in the other thread which confused me :p
so what is the match rating
1st half or 2nd half or an average
or are including a difficulty score and an excution score, because if you are saying a formation is difficult to perform but another is easy that is what you are doing
I think its more likely that GJ has kicked them up the backside
1st half or 2nd half or an average
or are including a difficulty score and an excution score, because if you are saying a formation is difficult to perform but another is easy that is what you are doing
I think its more likely that GJ has kicked them up the backside
The difference between the performance in the first half compared to the second was so striking that on this match it would make sense. The effect of the introduction of Dayton completed changed the course of the game.andgarod wrote:so what is the match rating
1st half or 2nd half or an average
or are including a difficulty score and an excution score, because if you are saying a formation is difficult to perform but another is easy that is what you are doing
I think its more likely that GJ has kicked them up the backside
For Harry Pell, I would have given him 3 for the first half, expecting him to be subbed at half-time he was so poor and 9 for the second half. So using an average it would be 6.
After the game, a Carlisle fan said that he thought our No. 7 was the best player on the pitch. Not if he had watched him in the first half.