[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]
But don't worry mate, I ain't exactly bothered. You go for it if that's what you really think!
I am equally totally unconcerned about your opinion of my views. But, it does bother me that prats like you sometimes lower the tone of this bulletin board with personal attacks and rants that make it look like the samples of the Millwall forums we have seen posted here over the last few weeks!
Personal attacks? Jeez man, don't be so sensitive. I have amended my "offensive" post above and apologise for any offence.
However, call me sad - cos I am, but I have taken the opportunity to add up the scores given to date and the mean score for the team is actually 75.5 - which incidently is what Len Glover and Simonsen gave. My score was 83.5 (8 above mean) and yours was 64 (11.5 below mean), so I am actually closer to the general consensus than you.
In terms of the median score, which is what you were referring to, of the 22 scores to date the median is actually 75 (awarded by stonemuse and Zinedine Bagheri). My score is 8.5 above median and yours is 11 below, so again I am closer than you to the consensus.
Incidently, your 64 point score is actually 5.5 lower than the next lowest (Red Robin with 69.5) with the next lowest being 72 (dabos and Kap10). My 83.5 is the joint highest score (with Rothko) with another 5 people scoring within 5.5 of my score and a total of 10 people within 8 of my score. So, it could be argued that without your extremely low scores distorting the mean average, I am actually a lot closer to the general consensus than it first appears, albeit I have admittedly scored on the high side. But then I think they deserved high marks as I didn't see how much better anyone could be expected to perform.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes the voting for the New Eltham jury!
Edit: Red Pete has just weighed in with an 80 so .............. oh you work it out!
[cite]Posted By: Off_it[/cite]
But don't worry mate, I ain't exactly bothered. You go for it if that's what you really think!
I am equally totally unconcerned about your opinion of my views. But, it does bother me that prats like you sometimes lower the tone of this bulletin board with personal attacks and rants that make it look like the samples of the Millwall forums we have seen posted here over the last few weeks!
Personal attacks? Jeez man, don't be so sensitive. I have amended my "offensive" post above and apologise for any offence.
However, call me sad - cos I am, but I have taken the opportunity to add up the scores given to date and the mean score for the team is actually 75.5 - which incidently is what Len Glover and Simonsen gave. My score was 83.5 (8 above mean) and yours was 64 (11.5 below mean), so I am actually closer to the general consensus than you.
In terms of the median score, which is what you were referring to, of the 22 scores to date the median is actually 75 (awarded by stonemuse and Zinedine Bagheri). My score is 8.5 above median and yours is 11 below, so again I am closer than you to the consensus.
Incidently, your 64 point score is actually 5.5 lower than the next lowest (Red Robin with 69.5) with the next lowest being 72 (dabos and Kap10). My 83.5 is the joint highest score (with Rothko) with another 5 people scoring within 5.5 of my score and a total of 10 people within 8 of my score. So, it could be argued that without your extremely low scores distorting the mean average, I am actually a lot closer to the general consensus than it first appears, albeit I have admittedly scored on the high side. But then I think they deserved high marks as I didn't see how much better anyone could be expected to perform.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes the voting for the New Eltham jury!
Edit: Red Pete has just weighed in with an 80 so .............. oh you work it out!
I did write a '..quick glance...suggested my ratings MIGHT be closer to the median than yours'. I was going to work it out later but you have saved me the trouble.
If you look at previous matches where I have been to a match and rated the players you will see that generally my ratings are lower than average. I have my own scale for rating players and so long as it is consistently applied to each player and for each game that I see it will not distort the end of season total marks for each player. My ratings for yesterday's match are further away from the median than normal simply because I did not add 1 or 2 extra marks to everyones rating simply because we were playing with 9 men for most of the match as a lot of people have. It could be argued, and I think a lot of people would, that I was wrong not to add those extra marks. I chose to rate players on the same scale I used in previous matches. So long as each player was marked against that scale those marks are as valid contribution to the total end of season marks as anybody elses whether or not you agree with them. Also, if you look at the distribution of my marks across the team you will see that the outstanding performance for me was Sodje up front and the very good/excellent performances were by Shelvy, Omo, Bailey and Lera which may not be the consensus but is not far away.
I can tell you were impressed with my states there Red.
;o)
Personally I think you should add marks for playing with 9 men, because to play "well" is that much more difficult when you are constantly out gunned. As I said before though, not having a personal dig, just think 6's and 7's were a bit mean. tis the season of goodwill after all!
Elliot - 8 Omozusi -7.5 Llera -8.5 Basey -8 Shelvey - 7.5 Semedo -8 Spring -7.5 Bailey -8.5 A Sodje -8 Burton -3 only as he was sent off and probably lost us 2 points
Elliot - 7.5 (did make some good saves but distrubution wasnt soo good, suprised was not needed as much :-)
Omozusi -8 ( growing in confidence each game, very assured defending and good going forward also, also likes to get stuck in-playa is growing on me)
Llera -8 ( a good defensive display not as assured as daily usually is but also the touch and the finish was superb, even a striker would have been proud of that)
Basey -7 (good going forward & his dead ball delivery is very dangerous, but suspect defending)
Shelvey -8.5(my MOM, our main threat going forward and feel he kept hold of the ball well and very mature performance for his age....more of the same plz)
Semedo -8.5( Switched to Centre back very early and thought he was comfortable and did very well )
Spring -8( Very clever, uses the ball well and works his socks of
Bailey -8 ( worked hard but wasnt at his best going forward which he could not be faulted as had to be more disciplined)
A Sodje -7.5(for effort alone, second half improved but nothing quite worked for him then on 60mins had to come of as could not run anymore)
Burton - 4, was playing ok before the sending off. feel second yellow was a tad harsh and ref should have used a bit of common sense really
Parky- 9 ( feel he set out tactics in the only way we could and made right subs at the right time aswell, only marked down as starting line up quite a few changes alrhough most may have been enforced
Ref- 0, had no control of the game, never seen a ref so one sided. feel sodje sending off was spot on but bit harsh on deon i think maybe should have just told him to take it easy as just earnt a yellow
Sodje- 2, not impressed at all but only game i can think of where he has not had a good one and maybe the whack on the head made him a bit dazed. still hope he is back soon!
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Oh and by the way.......Red is mean ;0)
As for you Shooters, your score for Burton is so far away from his median score that you should be given a 4 match ban before being allowed to post ratings again. is that the correct emoticon?
I look forward to discussing this thread with you over 7 or 8 pints tonight in Greenwich!
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Oh and by the way.......Red is mean ;0)
As for you Shooters, your score for Burton is so far away from his median score that you should be given a 4 match ban before being allowed to post ratings again. is that the correct emoticon?
I look forward to discussing this thread with you over 7 or 8 pints tonight in Greenwich!
Agree that my score for Burton was high (see post for reason) Perhaps I just have a more generous outlook than many or you could take my score with a pinch of Polish salt, do you have any ? 7 or 8 pints sounds good to me. Olivers Bar ?
Elliot - 8 Good catching, great first half save, in the zone second half.
Omozusi - 8 Excellent throughout, heroic at times, brill for a loanee.
Llera - 8 Excellent second half and got the equaliser.
Basey - 8 Excellent, and harsh booking but showed he cares.
Shelvey - 8 Great goal, great effort second half.
Semedo - 8 Adapted, heroic.
Spring - 7.5 Really good, but second half a couple of poor decisions.
Bailey - 8.5 Very big bollocks.
A Sodje - 8 Superb second half took all the pain and bought us a chance.
Burton - 4 Sorry Deon, brill season but yesterday not the best
Mackenzie 8
Waggy 8
Dickson 8
Parkinson 9.75 IMHO his finest hour as our manager.
Crowd 9.5 Really helped second half (check Robbies reaction at the end) Deafening when we equalised....a brill Charlton moment.
Swindon 5, should have murdered us. poor management.
Swindon crowd 6 because they did a good job reminding the ref of his correct duties.
Ref 8 correct and brave decisions for the away team.
Can we please keep arguments over the scores and scoring on a separate members only thread, so as to avoid further accusations of Charlton fans being trainspotters-- PLEASE!!! :-)
[cite]Posted By: Kap10[/cite]Can we please keep arguments over the scores and scoring on a separate members only thread, so as to avoid further accusations of Charlton fans being trainspotters-- PLEASE!!! :-)
it'll be much easier if at the end of each match we have a 2 point range where each player can score in so for a great game 8-10 or an atrocious game 4-6 and then no one can be offended and we can all keep everyone happy
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]it'll be much easier if at the end of each match we have a 2 point range where each player can score in so for a great game 8-10 or an atrocious game 4-6 and then no one can be offended and we can all keep everyone happy
I just think its a shame we haven't got enough sensible people on this site go give an honest and varied opinion without going to the extreme. Not everyone will mark the same but surely its worth just thinking about your marks before you post them. Otherwise i can see the stats coming to an end because they will be no true reflection of how a game has gone.
[cite]Posted By: uncle[/cite]I just think its a shame we haven't got enough sensible people on this site go give an honest and varied opinion without going to the extreme. Not everyone will mark the same but surely its worth just thinking about your marks before you post them. Otherwise i can see the stats coming to an end because they will be no true reflection of how a game has gone.
yeah i do after everygame, i double check i am 100% backing my rating b4 just incase anyone questions then i have an arguement. also its only fair to take a little while to make sure your happy with your ratings
[cite]Posted By: uncle[/cite]I just think its a shame we haven't got enough sensible people on this site go give an honest and varied opinion without going to the extreme. Not everyone will mark the same but surely its worth just thinking about your marks before you post them. Otherwise i can see the stats coming to an end because they will be no true reflection of how a game has gone.
Ultimately though they can never be a true reflection of how the game has gone. All they can be is a reflection of peoples' opinions. I don't think it matters much if there's a wide range in scores given. Surely the number of easily pleased high markers and the number of hard to please low markers will be similar and they will cancel each other out. If we are that bothered about it, all we'd need to do is calculate the standard deviation for each players' mean score - but I'm sure that's not really necessary as there are enough people giving more sensible middle-ranking marks to get a reasonable result.
Comments
Personal attacks? Jeez man, don't be so sensitive. I have amended my "offensive" post above and apologise for any offence.
However, call me sad - cos I am, but I have taken the opportunity to add up the scores given to date and the mean score for the team is actually 75.5 - which incidently is what Len Glover and Simonsen gave. My score was 83.5 (8 above mean) and yours was 64 (11.5 below mean), so I am actually closer to the general consensus than you.
In terms of the median score, which is what you were referring to, of the 22 scores to date the median is actually 75 (awarded by stonemuse and Zinedine Bagheri). My score is 8.5 above median and yours is 11 below, so again I am closer than you to the consensus.
Incidently, your 64 point score is actually 5.5 lower than the next lowest (Red Robin with 69.5) with the next lowest being 72 (dabos and Kap10). My 83.5 is the joint highest score (with Rothko) with another 5 people scoring within 5.5 of my score and a total of 10 people within 8 of my score. So, it could be argued that without your extremely low scores distorting the mean average, I am actually a lot closer to the general consensus than it first appears, albeit I have admittedly scored on the high side. But then I think they deserved high marks as I didn't see how much better anyone could be expected to perform.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes the voting for the New Eltham jury!
Edit: Red Pete has just weighed in with an 80 so .............. oh you work it out!
Omozusi - 7.5
Llera - 8
Basey - 7.5
Shelvey - 8.5
Semedo - 9
Spring - 8
Bailey - 9
A Sodje - 7.5
Burton - 2
Omozusi -8
Llera -8
Basey -8.5
Shelvey -8
Semedo -8
Spring -7.5
Bailey -8.5
A Sodje -8
Burton -2
I did write a '..quick glance...suggested my ratings MIGHT be closer to the median than yours'. I was going to work it out later but you have saved me the trouble.
If you look at previous matches where I have been to a match and rated the players you will see that generally my ratings are lower than average. I have my own scale for rating players and so long as it is consistently applied to each player and for each game that I see it will not distort the end of season total marks for each player. My ratings for yesterday's match are further away from the median than normal simply because I did not add 1 or 2 extra marks to everyones rating simply because we were playing with 9 men for most of the match as a lot of people have. It could be argued, and I think a lot of people would, that I was wrong not to add those extra marks. I chose to rate players on the same scale I used in previous matches. So long as each player was marked against that scale those marks are as valid contribution to the total end of season marks as anybody elses whether or not you agree with them. Also, if you look at the distribution of my marks across the team you will see that the outstanding performance for me was Sodje up front and the very good/excellent performances were by Shelvy, Omo, Bailey and Lera which may not be the consensus but is not far away.
;o)
Personally I think you should add marks for playing with 9 men, because to play "well" is that much more difficult when you are constantly out gunned. As I said before though, not having a personal dig, just think 6's and 7's were a bit mean. tis the season of goodwill after all!
Omozusi -7.5
Llera -8.5
Basey -8
Shelvey - 7.5
Semedo -8
Spring -7.5
Bailey -8.5
A Sodje -8
Burton -3 only as he was sent off and probably lost us 2 points
Omozusi -8 ( growing in confidence each game, very assured defending and good going forward also, also likes to get stuck in-playa is growing on me)
Llera -8 ( a good defensive display not as assured as daily usually is but also the touch and the finish was superb, even a striker would have been proud of that)
Basey -7 (good going forward & his dead ball delivery is very dangerous, but suspect defending)
Shelvey -8.5(my MOM, our main threat going forward and feel he kept hold of the ball well and very mature performance for his age....more of the same plz)
Semedo -8.5( Switched to Centre back very early and thought he was comfortable and did very well )
Spring -8( Very clever, uses the ball well and works his socks of
Bailey -8 ( worked hard but wasnt at his best going forward which he could not be faulted as had to be more disciplined)
A Sodje -7.5(for effort alone, second half improved but nothing quite worked for him then on 60mins had to come of as could not run anymore)
Burton - 4, was playing ok before the sending off. feel second yellow was a tad harsh and ref should have used a bit of common sense really
Parky- 9 ( feel he set out tactics in the only way we could and made right subs at the right time aswell, only marked down as starting line up quite a few changes alrhough most may have been enforced
Ref- 0, had no control of the game, never seen a ref so one sided. feel sodje sending off was spot on but bit harsh on deon i think maybe should have just told him to take it easy as just earnt a yellow
Sodje- 2, not impressed at all but only game i can think of where he has not had a good one and maybe the whack on the head made him a bit dazed. still hope he is back soon!
Omozusi - 8
Llera - 8.5
Basey -8.5
Shelvey - 8.5
Semedo - 9
Spring -8.5
Bailey - 9
A Sodje - 8
Burton - 2.5
Omozusi - 7
Llera - 8
Basey - 7
Shelvey - 8
Semedo - 9
Spring - 8
Bailey - 9
A Sodje - 7
Burton - 4
As for you Shooters, your score for Burton is so far away from his median score that you should be given a 4 match ban before being allowed to post ratings again.
I look forward to discussing this thread with you over 7 or 8 pints tonight in Greenwich!
Agree that my score for Burton was high (see post for reason) Perhaps I just have a more generous outlook than many or you could take my score with a pinch of Polish salt, do you have any ? 7 or 8 pints sounds good to me. Olivers Bar ?
Omozusi - 8 Excellent throughout, heroic at times, brill for a loanee.
Llera - 8 Excellent second half and got the equaliser.
Basey - 8 Excellent, and harsh booking but showed he cares.
Shelvey - 8 Great goal, great effort second half.
Semedo - 8 Adapted, heroic.
Spring - 7.5 Really good, but second half a couple of poor decisions.
Bailey - 8.5 Very big bollocks.
A Sodje - 8 Superb second half took all the pain and bought us a chance.
Burton - 4 Sorry Deon, brill season but yesterday not the best
Mackenzie 8
Waggy 8
Dickson 8
Parkinson 9.75 IMHO his finest hour as our manager.
Crowd 9.5 Really helped second half (check Robbies reaction at the end) Deafening when we equalised....a brill Charlton moment.
Swindon 5, should have murdered us. poor management.
Swindon crowd 6 because they did a good job reminding the ref of his correct duties.
Ref 8 correct and brave decisions for the away team.
Omozusi - 8
Llera - 8
Basey - 7
Shelvey - 8
Semedo - 9
Spring - 8
Bailey - 8
A Sodje - 7
Burton - 5
Omozusi - 9
Llera - 9
Basey - 9
Shelvey - 9
Semedo - 10
Spring - 9
Bailey - 10
A Sodje - 9
Burton - 0
Wagstaff - 9
Dickson - 7
McKenzie - 7
S Sodje - 0
Parky - 10
Crowd that clapped sent off players from pitch - 0
Crowd that did not clap sent off players from pitch - 9
Refer to Red-in-SE8
Omozusi - 10
Llera - 10
Basey - 10
Shelvey - 10
Semedo - 10
Spring - 10
Bailey - 10
A Sodje - 10
Burton - -10
Wagstaff - 10
Dickson - 10
McKenzie - 10
S Sodje - -10
Parky - 10
You beat me to it by seconds!
Omozusi - 8
Llera - 8.5
Basey - 8
Shelvey - 9
Semedo - 9.5
Spring - 9
Bailey - 9
A Sodje - 9
Burton - 4
Oi, who put you in charge of the signal box?
;o)
bet technical me thinks, well for me at least
yeah i do after everygame, i double check i am 100% backing my rating b4 just incase anyone questions then i have an arguement. also its only fair to take a little while to make sure your happy with your ratings
Omozusi - 7
Llera - 6
Basey - 7
Shelvey - 8
Semedo - 9
Spring - 8
Bailey - 9
A Sodje - 8
Burton - 3
Bailey motm Semedo close behind
Mackenzie - 4
Wagstaff - 6
Dickson - 5
Omozusi - 8
Llera -8.5
Basey -8
Shelvey - 9
Semedo -8
Spring - 9
Bailey - 9
A Sodje -7
Burton - 0
S Sodje - 0
Ultimately though they can never be a true reflection of how the game has gone. All they can be is a reflection of peoples' opinions. I don't think it matters much if there's a wide range in scores given. Surely the number of easily pleased high markers and the number of hard to please low markers will be similar and they will cancel each other out. If we are that bothered about it, all we'd need to do is calculate the standard deviation for each players' mean score - but I'm sure that's not really necessary as there are enough people giving more sensible middle-ranking marks to get a reasonable result.