Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Players Marks: Nottingham Forest v Charlton

2

Comments

  • Hamer - 6 - at fault for 1st, did ok after that (and it was never a free kick - should have been ours for foul on Solly)
    Solly - 7 - got better as the game went on, left exposed too many times
    Morrison - 6 - solid
    Cort - 6 - same. Like these two as a defensive pairing
    Wiggins - 5 - lacking confidence. Had opportunities to get forward but often turned back on himself.
    Cook - 4 - Difficult assignment and struggled. Should have started with/brought Green on. At least would have given us width and the semblance of cover for Solly. Would have helped with set pieces too in absence of Stephens
    Hollands - 5 - Tried hard but didn't affect the game
    Pritchard - 4 - Very disappointing. Can't remember anything he did right, tbh.
    Jackson - 6 - Tried hard and at least when he got his yellow he was trying to kickstart some energy into the side and get things moving with an interception
    Kermorgant - 5 - Easily handled by Collins
    Wright Phillips - 5 - No service
    Haynes - 5.5 - Got into decent positions a couple of times but end product lacking

    Fuller 7 - will definitely improve us. Most exciting 5 minutes I've seen in a while
    Kerkar 6.5 - different kind of player - hope he gets a decent chance to show what he can do, as looked useful in short time.
  • Hamer - 5
    Solly - 7
    Morrison - 6
    Cort - 6
    Wiggins - 6
    Cook - 5
    Hollands - 6
    Pritchard - 5.5
    Jackson - 6
    Kermorgant - 6.5
    Wright Phillips - 6
    Haynes - 6

    Fuller - 8
    Kerkar - 7
  • Based on watching the full game on TV in the early hours:

    Hamer 5.5
    Solly 6
    Morrison 6
    Cort 6
    Wiggins 5
    Cook 4.5
    Hollands 5
    Pritchard 4
    Jackson 4
    Kermorgant 5.5
    Wright Phillips 5
    Haynes 4

    Would like to give an MOM but Forest had 10 players better than our best. Lee Camp being the only exception.
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 6.5
    Morrison 6.5
    Cort 6
    Wiggins 6.5
    Cook 5
    Hollands 6
    Pritchard 5
    Jackson 5.5
    Kermogant 6
    Wright Phillips 5.5
    Haynes 6

    Fuller looked good for the few minutes he was on for.
    Kerkar similar to Fuller comments
  • Dave85 can I ask you about your approach to marking ? How do you reconcile scoring Jackson 3 for being "shit " and Cook also 3 for being "total shit" ? Surely Cackson - pun intended- merits a higher score for not being at least "totally" shit . You don't work for that totally shit exam board who refuse to remark English GCSE results by any chance do?
  • edited September 2012
    Hamer - 6
    Solly - 7 (His best game this season)
    Morrison - 6
    Cort - 6
    Wiggins - 6.5
    Cook - 5
    Hollands - 6
    Pritchard - 6.5
    Jackson - 6
    Kermorgant- 6.5
    Wright Phillips - 6
    Haynes - 6.5
  • ashley said:

    Dave85 can I ask you about your approach to marking ? How do you reconcile scoring Jackson 3 for being "shit " and Cook also 3 for being "total shit" ? Surely Cackson - pun intended- merits a higher score for not being at least "totally" shit . You don't work for that totally shit exam board who refuse to remark English GCSE results by any chance do?


    i thought cook was about 2.8 and jackson was 3.2. i round up and down to the .5 as i thought that was the done thing. although thought se9's marking was harsh, i still agree with his summing of cook on of his performance. he disrupted everything with his incompetence in any position. jackson was slow and couldn.t get near anyone and looked like he lost total control especially after the first goal. no point in having a go at hamer he's made a mistake and he doesn't need his mates shouting at him for things already done and dusted. both got a 3. hope this answers your question. 8-)
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 7
    Morrison 5
    Cort 5
    Wiggins 5
    Cook 4
    Hollands 6
    Pritchard 5
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 6
    Wright Phillips 5
    Haynes 5
  • Did we lose?
  • looks like it
  • Sponsored links:


  • Hamer 5
    Solly 7
    Morrison 7.5
    Cort 7
    Wiggins 6.5
    Cook 5
    Hollands 6.5
    Pritchard 5.5
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 6
    Wright Phillips 6
    Haynes 6.5

    Fuller n/a
    Kerkar n/a
  • As we are giving out low marks for yesterday, what about a zero for all of our so called fans who left when the second goal went in.....
  • redbuttle said:

    As we are giving out low marks for yesterday, what about a zero for all of our so called fans who left when the second goal went in.....

    We were in the front section and I didn't notice too many leaving, where abouts were you sitting ?
  • I was in thye top section. To be honest the ones that left early wre in thye back of the bottom section, at leat a dozen walked out irtually together followed by ones and twos. Sorry but this really annoys me.
  • Sorry about that last post, I was typing without looking as you can see..Hope you got my point though.
  • edited September 2012
    Hamer 5.5. We needed a top form show from him and didn't get it todayl
    Solly 7. Good defensively, nice cross for goal - we have to find a way of getting full backs forward more often
    Morrison 7.Thought he had a good game
    Cort 7 ditto
    Wiggins 5. Needed better quality with his passing
    Cook 5. Worked hard to little effect- missed our usual midfield line up
    Hollands 5. A bit quiet
    Pritchard 5.5. Worked hard but didn't look quite himself
    Jackson 5. Improved late on when he came into the middle
    Kermorgant 6. Worked hard for little reward - didn't get the support
    Wright Phillips 6. ditto
    Haynes 5. first game for a while and it showed - will get better
  • edited September 2012
    As I process the stats every week I feel I have a right to comment on Cook's mark although I did not see the match.
    Looking at all Cook's marks his average is about 4.5 without se9addick and with his mark of 1 the average changes to 4.36, so not much difference, others have marked Cook between 3 and 5 so SE9 is only 2 less than others.

    I spend a lot of time compiling these stats and believe in the right of all members to put their own marks which at times vary by 3 or 4 marks for an individual player, but when the average is taken it shows a sensible mark that represents each player's performance and the more members that put marks the better they represent the performance

    Each set of marks is that person's belief in what they witnessed in the pitch so can we please have more marking and less criticising.
  • Waking up this morning I still think Cook's performance was so poor it warranted a 1. You may think this is harsh and I've given it thought, but we genuinely could have been 3or 4 down by halftime and Cooks presence was a hinderance - we would have been better with 10 men and it's no surprise the Powell swapped his positions and then subbed him before even an hour of the game.

    Either way as Lancashire Lad says its almost impossible for one poster to
    impact the overall score for a player.
  • It is impossible for one poster to impact an overall score if everyone else sees it for what it is, but unfortunately that is not what happens as most others either think this is stupid, I'm not bothering,.or mark up their score to balance it out.

    Wasn't there so can't fully comment, but for someone to warrant a 1 I would have expected them to be at direct fault for both goals, not string a single pass together, and get sent off leaving the rest of the team exposed and ultimately costing us the game at a point when we were not losing. None of those things occured.

    I hope @Tutt-Tutt posts his ratings still, as he is probably the one poster who more often than not appears on the money and has a clear background in producing scouting reports.

    But 1s and 10s when everyone else is marking 4-7 are just silly. When I started the statbank I would exclude outliner marks like that as I feel more often than not those posters are looking for a reaction (dont think so in this case), or taking.out on a scapegoat, but I respect LL for wanting to do it differently.

    Bottom line, please add your marks if at games and don't react to the odd outliner. If many add then it will have little impact.
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 6.5
    Morrison 6
    Cort 5.5
    Wiggins 5
    Hollands 5
    Cook 4
    Pritchard 4
    Jackson 4
    Kermorgant 5
    BWP 5
    Haynes 5.5
  • Sponsored links:


  • Hamer 5
    Solly 6.5
    Morrison 7
    Cort 8
    Wiggins 6
    Cook 5.5
    Hollands 5.5
    Pritchard 5.5
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 5.5
    Wright Phillips 5.5
    Haynes 5

    Fuller n/a Fantastic Cameo looks like he should play ahead of Yann
    Kerkar n/a


  • Wasn't there so can't fully comment, but for someone to warrant a 1 I would have expected them to be at direct fault for both goals, not string a single pass together, and get sent off leaving the rest of the team exposed and ultimately costing us the game at a point when we were not losing. None of those things occured.

    Precisely, that's how you score, but these aren't universal guidelines.

    I ask what a player contributes, if they contribute nothing at all then it's got to be a 4 or less. After that it's a question of degrees, as I said we genuinely would have been better with 10 men so I fail to see how he can obtain a positive score.
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 7
    Morrison 7.5
    Cort 6.5
    Wiggins 6
    Cook 5
    Hollands 5
    Pritchard 6
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 7
    Wright Phillips 5
    Haynes 5

    Fuller 6
    Kerkar 6
  • Hamer - 6
    Solly - 7
    Morrison - 6
    Cort - 6
    Wiggins - 6
    Cook - 4
    Hollands - 5
    Pritchard - 5
    Jackson - 5
    Kermorgant - 6
    Wright Phillips - 6
    Haynes - 5
  • Hamer - 5
    Solly - 6 : not his fault that he was left totally exposed in the first half
    Morrison - 6: did ok in trying to stem the tide
    Cort - 6: ditto
    Wiggins - 5: poor distribution by his very high standards. Like others, gave the ball away totally unnecessarily on several occasions, particularly in the first half
    Cook - 4: looked out of his depth but a very tough game to come in for ( don't write the lad off )
    Hollands - 5: totally lacked support in there
    Pritchard - 4: chasing shadows and pulled out of position
    Jackson - 4: off the pace
    Kermorgant - 5: no service ( a brilliant player in the air but his lack of pace is exposed a little in this sort of game )
    Wright Phillips - 4: barely got a touch
    Haynes - 4: ineffectual, with a poor first touch and easily brushed off the ball ( although, in fairness, he's on the way back from injury )

    Fuller changed the game when he came on, bullying everyone on the park ( including his own team mates ). It was almost as if he took the previous 80 minutes as a personal affront.
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 6
    Morrison 6
    Cort 6
    Wiggins 6
    Cook 4
    Hollands 5
    Pritchard 5
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 6
    Wright Phillips 5
    Haynes 5
  • Hamer 4
    Solly 7
    Morrison 8 MoM
    Cort 7
    Wiggins 6
    Hollands 6
    Cook 4
    Pritchard 4
    Jackson 4
    Kermorgant 7
    BWP 6
    Haynes 6

    All good fun and everyone sees a game differently and has an opinion. Some obviously mark emotionally & some give it a bit of thought. Everyone is entitled to their opinion if they paid their money and made the effort to get to the game. Especially the away trips.

    This was a difficult one as poor or average performances by some Individuals obviously affected performances by others. Solly for example was continually exposed 2v1 but stood up to it well, then got an assist on the goal. BWP worked hard & did an effective job out of position on the right wing for 40 mins. Kermorgant had to battle against both centre backs as the lone striker for 40 mins and kept at it.
    Morrison was solid & held the defence together when the midfield was being overrun in the first half. Which is why he has top marks from me. If the Cort-Morrison-Hollands triangle had collapsed in the first half, it would have been 0-5.

    Hamer got a 4, because he made a basic error on the crucial opening goal. Harsh, but keepers are judged on reliability. Pritchard, Jackson & Cook were run ragged as a group, partly due to the flawed tactical plan but also due to their failure to deal with their direct opponents. None were shocking and all tried their best, worked hard, chased around, gave 100%, but were out-played.

    As a yard-stick I normally go 10 - outstanding, 9- Excellent, 8- Very Good, 7- Good, 6- Average, 5- Below Average, 4- Poor, 3- Shocking.
  • Hamer = 6 - flapped at first goal. some decent saves otherwise
    Solly = 6.5 - Halford rose above him multiple times. passing was ok and seemed to run the full 90
    Morrison = 6 - wasnt as commanding as usual
    Cort = 6.5 - made some really nice blocks, good in the air. When solly was caught out, cort was a little slow to recognize danger in behind.
    Wiggins = 5.5 - was at fault for second goal IMO. got bullied off the ball, then didnt track his runner who scored.
    Cook = 5.5 - turnover after turnover in the first 30mins. He does have a good cross on him tho
    Hollands = 7- put himself about. only player who wanted to keep possession at times. true CDM is not his position tho he can work it ok.
    Pritchard = 5.5 - andy reid skinned pritchard 3 times. shouldnt be happening. he also had a couple half chances fall upon him and couldnt put em on target. i do love his workrate tho
    Jackson - 6 - im not sure what position he is playing at times. he should hv done better with that fk in extra time.
    Kermorgant - 6.5 - won a lot of flicks/headers to nobody to run onto. thought he would have buried that one in the 90th...
    Wright Phillips = 6 - not a good RW. i prefer him at ST w kermy. he barely touched the ball in that second half
    Haynes = 6 - how many touches hid he have? i can only remember 4 or 5 touches inside his entire 30mins....

    Fuller n/a - strong boy!
    Kerkar n/a - had a great chance to equalize on a volley from fuller, but he streched for it off balance and struck it right against the defender. looks dangerous
  • Hamer 5
    Solly 7
    Morrison 5
    Cort 5
    Wiggins 6
    Hollands 6
    Cook 4
    Pritchard 4
    Jackson 5
    Kermorgant 6
    BWP 5

    Haynes 6
  • As supporter of 40 years plus, even Francis at his worst wouldn't merit a 3. Only performance of 1, and I'd score zero was Mills Xmas cameo.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!