Freeza 0 Posted November 25, 2007 Nice to get a neutral view that confirms we''re not over reacting or getting carried away. Although we know it''s just the beginning and we''ve still get a lot of hard work to be done.Neutral player ratings are interesting too.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article2937113.ece Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buncey 1 Posted November 25, 2007 Too be honest what annoys me is that I pay to get the times and there are barely any write ups. I could just go on the internet and read it for free. Bah rubbish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheerio 0 Posted November 25, 2007 Not sure a neutral opinion confirms anything does it? Its just an opinion Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macdougalls perm 0 Posted November 25, 2007 Yeah, that''s an interesting read - cheers for the heads up DF. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kissthebadge 0 Posted November 25, 2007 Ratings always baffle me. So according to this guy everyone on the pitch (apart from Rusty) is either a 6 or a 7. Well, what does this actually mean and how do they arrive at the figure? I assume that 7 is about average and 6 below? Does it mean they were 60/70% influential in the game? My guess is they give the standout players 8 and then the rest about 6 or 7 because they didn''t really notice them do much. However, if someone has a nightmare they get a 5. If anyone knows how it''s worked out, please enlighten me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Humphrey 13 Posted November 25, 2007 Surely average players should get a 5? In an ideal world, anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
