Back From The Game - Norwich

[AthleticoSpizz]

Were the Stewards being extra fascist at the top of Y26 and who was the Orange Tool in the North Stand?

thankyouplease

you got nothing else to focus on? i.e the game

[Snowball]

And therein lies the underlying belief behind your endless analyses.

It isn't, and never will be, 'laughable' that peoples' opinions differ so much.

Of COURSE it is. It is if they give any credence to those opinions and marks.

Nothing wrong with small differences of opinion, say Howard being average, to be a bit off average,
but when some players get a SEVEN and a ZERO that is a total JOKE. If there was a measurement
system in the real world with such ludicrous results it would be binned.

0 7 7 difference, ho-ho-ho
3 7 4 difference
6 9 3
6 9 3
5 8 3
4 7 3
3 6 3
6 8 2
6 8 2
5 7 2
7 8 1
4 5 1

Sure 4 v 5 or 7 v 8, that happens, at a push I can understand the occasional 2
but SEVEN and FOUR and 5 3s when the average mark is about a 6? PLEASSE!!

[handbags_harris]

Can't really give a decent analysis of the game from my viewpoint, the fact that this morning I had no real recollection of Norwich's first two goals being a good indicator as to the state of my inebriation.

That said, having Sky+'d TFLS, this afternoon I watched the highlights. My verdict is this:

ALOL

[Kitson12]

And therein lies the underlying belief behind your endless analyses.

It isn't, and never will be, 'laughable' that peoples' opinions differ so much.

Of COURSE it is. It is if they give any credence to those opinions and marks.

Nothing wrong with small differences of opinion, say Howard being average, to be a bit off average,
but when some players get a SEVEN and a ZERO that is a total JOKE. If there was a measurement
system in the real world with such ludicrous results it would be binned.

0 7 7 difference, ho-ho-ho
3 7 4 difference
6 9 3
6 9 3
5 8 3
4 7 3
3 6 3
6 8 2
6 8 2
5 7 2
7 8 1
4 5 1

Sure 4 v 5 or 7 v 8, that happens, at a push I can understand the occasional 2
but SEVEN and FOUR and 5 3s when the average mark is about a 6? PLEASSE!!

Quite frankly the fact that anyone gave him over a 5 for his performance yesterday is completely laughable. Those that gave him the 7 and the 6s need their heads looking at.

[Snowball]

Cmonurz say it's NOT laughable, just opinion.

[Ian Royal]

Given people have different priorities for what makes a good performance and won't necessarily use the numbered ranking system in the same way as each other, there is very little wrong with getting a wide variation in the ratings given. And then of course there's personal bias and the fact that very few people can recall everything about every player's performance.

I for example will almost never give anything lower than a 5 or higher than an 8. While plenty of others might do it routinely.

[Stranded]

There's a similar conversation going on on a music forum I visit at the moment about rankings given in reviews and how an album can get a 9 in one review but elsewhere a 5/6 etc - it all depends on what the reviewer is looking for and how they are reviewing it. Is the 9 a true 9, ie top class or is it a 9 in relation to the performances of others that day. Is it in that person's opinion the best record (or performance) that they have seen in a few months.

Many, many variables can make up a score with makes these sorts of scores a bit of a laugh and a starting point for a debate and nothing more.

[Millsy]

A great rule of thumb is what my ratings are.

The general consensus amongst most people in the world is that my ratings are always spot on and therefore any deviation from my viewpoint has to be taken as a false opinion.

HTH

[papereyes]

Mills at fault for second, fed or wall at fault for third, have to see it again but free kicks as soft as that should not be going in.

I dunno - I thought it was well taken, went through the wall and bounced up awkwardly in front of A Fed. I'd put that as a striker's credit rather than a keeper's error.

[papereyes]

Christ snowball did that really need two posts? Ffs you irritating little stat obssessed mong.

Sorry my radio was on too loud. What was that?


And YES it did, one to show that opinions are so widespread it's laughable

The second to show that Long came out as highest-rated player and that deserves its own post






PS Take a pill, lovey

I like the way you didn't use a well-defined statistic measure for the variation in the results.

That's funny.

[Hoop Blah]

I watched the free kick again last night.

I'm still not sure what to make of it. Federici made a reasonable attempt at getting there, but once he got that close I just have a feeling he should do better at keeping it out.

As for the wall. I said on Saturday that wall didn't split. I'm not so sure now as I've no idea what Howards supposed to be doing there. Is he the 4th man in the wall? Or, is he supposed to be a charger in case the ball's moved?

If it's the former then you have to blame him, Hunt and Federici for not getting the 4 in the wall sorted. If it's the latter then I'd say Federici is in error because his wall wasn't right.

[papereyes]

I think the late bounce threw A Fed a fair bit.

[Royal Rother]

I like Federici but he seems to dive in an unusual way with his body / arm very stiff / strong.

It works but he sometimes looks like he's chucking an obstacle in the way of the ball rather than trying to dive and get a hand to it. Not sure he gets a natural slide dive when the ball is going to the extremes of his reach, or that he is flexible enough in his dive to react to a ball that bounces unexpectedly in front of him as in the free-kick on Saturday.

[Snowball]

Given people have different priorities for what makes a good performance and won't necessarily use the numbered ranking system in the same way as each other, there is very little wrong with getting a wide variation in the ratings given. And then of course there's personal bias and the fact that very few people can recall everything about every player's performance.

I for example will almost never give anything lower than a 5 or higher than an 8. While plenty of others might do it routinely.

So the numbers are meaningless

[Snowball]

I watched the free kick again last night.

I'm still not sure what to make of it. Federici made a reasonable attempt at getting there, but once he got that close I just have a feeling he should do better at keeping it out.

As for the wall. I said on Saturday that wall didn't split. I'm not so sure now as I've no idea what Howards supposed to be doing there. Is he the 4th man in the wall? Or, is he supposed to be a charger in case the ball's moved?

If it's the former then you have to blame him, Hunt and Federici for not getting the 4 in the wall sorted. If it's the latter then I'd say Federici is in error because his wall wasn't right.

Looked to me like Church broke away from the wall

[cmonurz]

Given people have different priorities for what makes a good performance and won't necessarily use the numbered ranking system in the same way as each other, there is very little wrong with getting a wide variation in the ratings given. And then of course there's personal bias and the fact that very few people can recall everything about every player's performance.

I for example will almost never give anything lower than a 5 or higher than an 8. While plenty of others might do it routinely.

So the numbers are meaningless

Beyond reflecting someone's personal opinions on the game, yes.

[Terminal Boardom]

From my perspective, everyone starts with a 6 and I then try and be as objective as possible. However, my dislike of Brian Howard does cloud my judgement on occasions. However, he did many more bad things in the game than good.

As for the free kick, Feds was too slow to move across his line AND Howard drifted left leaving a gaping hole. Had he kept in position, the goal may not have been scored.

[Man Friday]

I watched the free kick again last night.

I'm still not sure what to make of it. Federici made a reasonable attempt at getting there, but once he got that close I just have a feeling he should do better at keeping it out.

As for the wall. I said on Saturday that wall didn't split. I'm not so sure now as I've no idea what Howards supposed to be doing there. Is he the 4th man in the wall? Or, is he supposed to be a charger in case the ball's moved?

If it's the former then you have to blame him, Hunt and Federici for not getting the 4 in the wall sorted. If it's the latter then I'd say Federici is in error because his wall wasn't right.

Looked to me like Church broke away from the wall

Are you sure? I thought it was Khiz who broke away/ducked.

[Tilehurst End]

From my perspective, everyone starts with a 6 and I then try and be as objective as possible. However, my dislike of Brian Howard does cloud my judgement on occasions. However, he did many more bad things in the game than good.

As for the free kick, Feds was too slow to move across his line AND Howard drifted left leaving a gaping hole. Had he kept in position, the goal may not have been scored.

Not sure if it's been mentioned but it was a stupid challenge from Howard that gave the free kick away in the first place by jumping straight at the man, although I suspect at that stage he was getting frustrated with his own performance.
Shame because I thought he had one of his best games on Wednesday.

[Hoop Blah]

Looked to me like Church broke away from the wall

Are you sure? I thought it was Khiz who broke away/ducked.

Kishanishvili wasn't even in the wall, he was 5 yards behind it covering someone. The TV shot from behind the ball made it look like he was and the commentator said how he was breaking from the wall but watch it properly and you'll see he was behind it by some distance (presumably covering a run outside the wall or a man behind it).

Howard was the man on the edge of the wall, the 4th man if you like, but he was late getting there and never actually joined the wall as such. He then moved away as the kick was taken. It was either very sloppy and a few at fault for letting it happen, or he wasn't intended to be part of the wall in the first place.