Ratings vs Crawley (11 Viewers)

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
Why would you start with 6 at the beginning of the match? You start with 0. And besides I didn't give a score, I just noted when he did a thing right and when he did a thing wrong.

Had no bearing at all on a rating score for the match. I just wanted to see if he did as many good things as bad things.

Sorry I thought you meant every time he did something good you increased his match rating by 1 and every time he did something bad you decreased his match rating by 1. That's why I suggested an arbitrary match rating of 6 at the beginning which would suggest average, nothing good or nothing bad.

You mean you literally were just making a tally of good things he did against bad things that he did?

Still though you agreed with Sutty that a match rating of 6 is about spot on and that was from the observations you did which concluded he did as many bad things as good things. Again if Willis only made one mistake and did a lot of good things then surely he is worth a 9 or 10 then?

For me to get a 6 you do what is expected of you in that position, none of the midfield were worth a 6 imo, they were given acres of space by the Crawley team and failed to utilise it.

stupot07 · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
Yep, agree.

P.S. You might also want to clear out your mailbox.

Thanks. Done!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

ccfc1234 · Oct 4, 2014

When we went 2-0 up I felt this would be a 4-0 win. Am still in shock to see how fast we chucked away the lead.
Allsop 6
Phillips 6 - would be on the bench atm for me
Willis 7 - Looks a really good prospect
Webster 6
Hines 6
Pugh 5 - Haynes is better going forward he would be much more suited to playing as a LB not LWB
Fleck 7 - best player on the pitch with Jackson today
OBrien 7 - a few mis placed passes, but does lots of really good things
Thomas 5 - caught in possession far too often and cant pass with accuracy, bench
Jackson 7 - our best finisher and played well
Mcquoid 6 - best game I have seen him have so far BUT has the first touch of a non league player and his shots were largely wayward and he had a few. Clever assist however.

Clarke 6 - Crowd are way too harsh on him for my liking. Great first touch, just lacks a final ball
Coulibaly 6 - We need to see more of this winger on the wing in a 4-4-2

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

stupot07 said:
Anyone would think fleck and o'brien don't pass it 5 yards.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Yeah of course they do, every player does. However that is the only thing Thomas does on a regular basis, whereas other individuals have more to their games. He is a ghost footballer.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
And that's what happens with scapegoats. You favourite players are allowed to get away with exactly the same mistakes, but when it is your scapegoat you are immediately on his back.

I defend the bloke and I'm not even his biggest fan.

He's not a scapegoat, even when we win games he's usually the worst on the pitch. Haven't met a City fan yet who thinks he's any good.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 4, 2014

Am I the only one who think Thomas, O'Brien and Fleck are way too similar to each other to play together. They all play too deep, they all play neat triangles with the occasional through ball attempt or to spread or switch the play, none of them get forward enough and they run around a lot. There like varying qualities of the same player.

I think each player should bring something different to the team. A trio of a strong tackling holding midfielder, a play maker in Fleck and the third should be an attacking midfielder with a bit of pace who can dribble and beat players.

Otis · Oct 4, 2014

LJC_CCFC said:
He's not a scapegoat, even when we win games he's usually the worst on the pitch. Haven't met a City fan yet who thinks he's any good.

You don't go out much then I take it?

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
You don't go out much then I take it?

Hence why I'm spending my Saturday night in the company of the SBT elders.

TrueSkyBlueLiam · Oct 4, 2014

Alsopp - 2 - Couldn't dp much about either goals but had nothing else to do except a few simple catches
Phillips - 7 - Was great going forward and got stuck in at the back. Such a shame he had to go off
Webster 5.5 - Still keeps letting his man slip past
Hines - 6 - Decent, nothing else to say
Willis - 7.5 - Very solid performance. Got stuck in whenever he could. Some great challenges at crucial times
Pugh - 7 - Was great in 1st half, didn't really get a touch in the 2nd
O'Brien - 6 - Had a few promising moments but his shooting was awful
Thomas - 4 - Needs dropping permanently. I was practically begging SP to bring Barton on
Fleck - 7 - Our best player going forward 1st half. Nothing to say about 2nd half
Jackson - 6 - Great finish for the goal. Tried his best to get another but somehow missed some excellent chances
McQuoid - 7 - Looked cracking 1st half but was way too selfish in the 2nd. We could have got another goal if he passed rather than shot

Subs
Clarke - 0 - Never been so annoyed at him. Just held up play when we needed to push up and lost the ball way too often
Coulibaly - 5 - Looked promising. Good pace, make an impact but came too late
Miller - 4 - Ditto

Sutty · Oct 4, 2014

I see Thomas as a facilitator. When he's playing it frees up Fleck a little bit. It allows him to get forward and use the ball higher up the pitch, rather than having to worry about the defensive side of things. It was noticeable against Preston that we were sitting incredibly deep. Thomas allows the midfield to play that little bit higher.

Is Thomas going to dominate games? No. Is he good enough in that role to help us out of this division? Probably not. Is he the best we have for that role? Yes. Do we need that type of player in the team? Most definitely.

I'm not saying he's a world beater, but we're unquestionably better off with him in the team than without him. He doesn't do a great deal himself going forward, but it's no coincidence that we had 19 shots today, as opposed to just 4 when we were without him in the PNE game.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

Sutty said:
I see Thomas as a facilitator. When he's playing it frees up Fleck a little bit. It allows him to get forward and use the ball higher up the pitch, rather than having to worry about the defensive side of things. It was noticeable against Preston that we were sitting incredibly deep. Thomas allows the midfield to play that little bit higher.

Is Thomas going to dominate games? No. Is he good enough in that role to help us out of this division? Probably not. Is he the best we have for that role? Yes. Do we need that type of player in the team? Most definitely.

I'm not saying he's a world beater, but we're unquestionably better off with him in the team than without him. He doesn't do a great deal himself going forward, but it's no coincidence that we had 19 shots today, as opposed to just 4 when we were without him in the PNE game.

Wow, just wow.

WONDERLAMPS · Oct 4, 2014

People saying thomas is good:

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 4, 2014

Sutty said:
I see Thomas as a facilitator. When he's playing it frees up Fleck a little bit. It allows him to get forward and use the ball higher up the pitch, rather than having to worry about the defensive side of things. It was noticeable against Preston that we were sitting incredibly deep. Thomas allows the midfield to play that little bit higher.

Is Thomas going to dominate games? No. Is he good enough in that role to help us out of this division? Probably not. Is he the best we have for that role? Yes. Do we need that type of player in the team? Most definitely.

I'm not saying he's a world beater, but we're unquestionably better off with him in the team than without him. He doesn't do a great deal himself going forward, but it's no coincidence that we had 19 shots today, as opposed to just 4 when we were without him in the PNE game.

It wasn't because Crawley were awful then? They gave us so much space everywhere across the pitch.

Although I kinda get your point, individually he's rubbish but the team has a better balance with him in the team compared to say someone like Swanson.

It's sorta of like Mcsheffrey in his last season, he was terrible but I always though the team had better shape and balance when he was in the team.

Bobby Gould's Jockstrap · Oct 4, 2014

conor thomas' best position

WONDERLAMPS · Oct 4, 2014

shmmeee said:
But, don't you know who he is?

Do you realise he watches lots of football? And has a blog?

You're going to feel really silly.

Rusty Trombone · Oct 4, 2014

Thomas was as good as most others today, he gave the ball away needlessly on a couple of occasions, as did others. He linked up play nicely, and always made himself available to receive a pass.

Bobby Gould's Jockstrap · Oct 4, 2014

watching conor thomas try to play football

Bobby Gould's Jockstrap · Oct 4, 2014

shmmeee said:
But, don't you know who he is?

Do you realise he watches lots of football? And has a blog?

You're going to feel really silly.

Otis · Oct 4, 2014

Bobby Gould's Jockstrap said:
conor thomas' best position

Great, well done. Give yourselves a pat on the back.

Not only do people have to say one of our own players is crap, but they have to resort to poking fun at him too.

Great way to back the players and the team you love isn't it, to make one of your own a target of ridicule.

Next stop, booing him perhaps?

WONDERLAMPS · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
Great, well done. Give yourselves a pat on the back.

Not only do people have to say one of our own players is crap, but they have to resort to poking fun at him too.

Great way to back the players and the team you love isn't it, to make one of your own a target of ridicule.

Next stop, booing him perhaps?

Otis · Oct 4, 2014

You may have noticed my extreme sarcasm.

Do feel though when he has a good game, some are most reluctant to admit it.

Today he wasn't great, but he wasn't that bad either. Mixed bag from him today, but overall he did okay and as I keep saying, I don't particularly rate the lad that highly anyway, but he fits the team better than Swanson and is a better bet than Daniels.

I noticed today someone even wanted Barton ahead of him. This the same Barton who has been frozen out by a succession of managers and who even in a Birmingham Senior Cup Match didn't even leave the smallest trace of a mark?

Finch I think maybe a better fit to the team than Thomas, but we haven't got many other options from what I can see and Finch is only just breaking through.

WONDERLAMPS · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
You may have noticed my extreme sarcasm.

Do feel though when he has a good game, some are most reluctant to admit it.

Today he wasn't great, but he wasn't that bad either. Mixed bag from him today, but overall he did okay and as I keep saying, I don't particularly rate the lad that highly anyway, but he fits the team better than Swanson and is a better bet than Daniels.

I noticed today someone even wanted Barton ahead of him. This the sam Barton who has been frozen out by a succession of managers and who even in a Birmingham Senior Cup Match didn't even leave the smallest trace of a mark?

Finch I think maybe a better fit to the team than Thomas, but we haven't got many other options from what I can see.

Not going to read that as unlike the majority of people on here, I don't love you. Unless...

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
You may have noticed my extreme sarcasm.

Do feel though when he has a good game, some are most reluctant to admit it.

Today he wasn't great, but he wasn't that bad either. Mixed bag from him today, but overall he did okay and as I keep saying, I don't particularly rate the lad that highly anyway, but he fits the team better than Swanson and is a better bet than Daniels.

I noticed today someone even wanted Barton ahead of him. This the sam Barton who has been frozen out by a succession of managers and who even in a Birmingham Senior Cup Match didn't even leave the smallest trace of a mark?

Finch I think maybe a better fit to the team than Thomas, but we haven't got many other options from what I can see.

But when Coulibaly came on and the system stayed the same we looked a hell of a lot more threatening.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

FRY-CCFC said:
Not going to read that as unlike the majority of people on here, I doubt love you. Unless...

Nick · Oct 4, 2014

LJC_CCFC said:
But when Coulibaly came on and the system stayed the same we looked a hell of a lot more threatening.

That's because when he got the ball he looked forward and direct rather than slowing it down and playing it back wards.

hill83 · Oct 4, 2014

When is your next blog update? I'll book the day off work to read it.

WONDERLAMPS · Oct 4, 2014

hill83 said:
When is you next blog update? I'll book the day off work to read it.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

hill83 said:
When is you next blog update? I'll book the day off work to read it.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Oct 4, 2014

LJC_CCFC said:
But when Coulibaly came on and the system stayed the same we looked a hell of a lot more threatening.

Agreed, which was what I was getting at earlier.

With Thomas, Fleck and O'Brien I feel they all do similar roles just varying abilities. When Coulibaly came on he instantly added another dimension to the attack because he was willing to try and dribble with the ball and take on the opposition defender rather than pass it sideways everytime an opposition came within 5 yards of them.

hill83 · Oct 4, 2014

LJC_CCFC said:
View attachment 3836

I'm having that as a bite.

Otis · Oct 4, 2014

Nick said:
That's because when he got the ball he looked forward and direct rather than slowing it down and playing it back wards.

But also very, very much down to the fact that Crawley sat back very deep and Coulibaly could then take and receive the ball much higher up the pitch.

Everyone spotted that didn't they? It was a different game by the time Coulibaly came on.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
But also very, very much down to the fact that Crawley sat back very deep and Coulibaly could then take and receive the ball much higher up the pitch.

Which they did for the vast majority of the game.

LJC_CCFC · Oct 4, 2014

hill83 said:
I'm having that as a bite.

Nick · Oct 4, 2014

Otis said:
But also very, very much down to the fact that Crawley sat back very deep and Coulibaly could then take and receive the ball much higher up the pitch.

Even when he got the ball on the half way line instead of playing it back to a defender he turned the player and ran at them.

When he got the ball he took it deeper, whereas thomas plays a one touch pass backwards which is fine when we are three up.

How many times have we seen connor Thomas taking on players by the corner flag and putting a cross in?

Otis · Oct 4, 2014

LJC_CCFC said:
Which they did for the vast majority of the game.

Disagree.

They defended for the entire game, but for the last 15 mins sat a lot, lot deeper.

Ratings vs Crawley (11 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency