Poll- SWFC v Norwich - man of the match and player ratings

[pgmetcalf]

6 hours ago, jamiejohn said:

Bannan for me was the player we all loved last year but could easily have given it to FF or Rhodes, Fox  , sasso or any of them superb performance all round 

 

Bannan did alright, messed up occasionally but the fans gave him great support to help build his confidence again. His movement with the ball is great, especially that ball for Rhode's second goal, but his movement off the ball could be better; he doesn't seem to get forward off the ball and just hangs back. Whether that's because he's been told to do I don't know. Would like to see him bring the ball from deep and one-two it

[pgmetcalf]

[splan80]

What was pleasing today was seeing the boys being able to play more positively and with tempo and movement  - having Wallace more out wide meant hunt wasn't isolated (we even saw many overlaps)  and created more space inside. Quality finishing on show too, which again is something somewhat surprising we've lacked in majority of games for me. Let's hope it's a sign of things to come! 

 

Westwood 7.5 - didn't have much to do, good distribution today. 

Hunt 8 - I'm a critic of his, but he's been isolated in many games. Today he had support and the overlapping runs occupied defenders. Primarily solid defensively and some decent crossing too. Him & Wallace wound their no 3 right up! 

Sasso 7 - back to being solid today for me. Made some good challenges on the bylines and not afraid of using the ball.

Loovens 7 - Marshalled the line well, super solid.

Fox 8 - got a great goal. He's a bonus threat at corners. Solid defensively, although a bit hit  and miss with his crosses and forward passing at times.   

Wallace 8 - his best game in ages. Not as much permanent drifting inside and playing as a winger suits him much much better. Reyt finish for the goal. 

Hutch 8- as usual his attitude is the ignition for us to get going. The first goal typifying that. 2 high stud challenges lead to his injury tho. Was worried when he got subbed for the 10 mins after. 

Bannan 8 - back to near his best today. Not as much fancy work when it's not needed. Great cross and moved the ball amazingly well. Even exploding forward at times. 

FF 9.5 - pretty much everything. Pace, trickery, class, work ethic. 2 crossing assists and a great freekick. Worried Norwich all game pulling defenders all over,  creating space for others. MoM

Winnall 7 - didn't seem at ease today on the ball/control, but worked so hard and always looked to get involved. Nearly got on the score sheet.

Rhodes 9 - he's the definition of the clinical finisher/goal getter. In the box constantly. But I was even more impressed with his work rate. Covered for FF many times, made some great blocks too.

Jones 7 - seemed to take a while to get going with a few mistakes. Will never bring what hutch does, but was solid after that.  

Macca 7 - gives us a great option from the bench (although he'd deserved a start following the Brentford game at some point). I think he'd be what Eddie Jones would describe as a finisher. Running and moving tired players around. Until he gets sent off when he sees that red mist! Haha. 

Semedo 7 - you know what you get with him. He's like a bad rash when he hassles you and loves a challenge more than being on the ball. Thought he nearly scored at the corner! 

 

Delighted with the team performance.  

 

 

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

11 hours ago, torryowl said:

so how do you mark players ?

 

I'd have average (5), ok (6), good (7), excellent (8), outstanding (9), unplayable (10).

 

6 is pretty harsh for a good performance IMO - especially a left back who has a good game defensively and scores a key goal.

[thewookieisdown]

FF for me, reasonably clearly.

 

Clearly not in MotM country but I enjoyed Westwood's display yesterday.  His game has two weaknesses: distribution; and decision making about when to risk coming for the through ball.  On both he was good yesterday. Also as always lots of conversation with the defence.  Real leadership.

[Owl in Nottingham]

13 hours ago, torryowl said:

they were very good ....I take 5 as  average , 6 as good , 7 as very good , 8 as excellent , 9 as outstanding .......i'd never give anyone a 10 ......

 

But if you never give anyone a 10 you are saying you are marking out of 9 yes?

 

So if you are marking out of 9: 

 

then a 6 out of 9 is really 6.66 out of 10 and a 4.5 out of 9 is really a 5 out of 10

 

Can you simply modify all your scores to bring them into marks out of 10 like everybody else?

[pachyderm]

14 hours ago, Holmowl said:

FF 10 super man today. At it for 96 minutes. Terrier when they had the ball, brilliant when we had it. Great corners, wonderful cross to Rhodes, and what a free kick.

 

must be true 49.9 percent of the vote... 

 

well done FF !!

[mike312]

Westwood 8 quicker distribution today kept the tempo higher.

Hunt 7 improvement on recent results, some decent crosses.

Sasso 8 excellent today, lots of interceptions.

Loovens 8 reads the game so well.

Fox 9 Good crosses positional play is very good and scored.

Wallace 9 back to his best today very difficult goal to score always a threat.

Hutchinson 9 for the time he was on. Created the first goal marshalls the middle very well

Bannan 9 perfect type of game for him, given space to pick his passes.

Fessi 9 cracking goal and all round performance.

Rhodes 9 that's why you pay the money. Never stopped always a threat.

Winnall 8 did a lot of work that went unnoticed. Always feel he's a threat.

Jones 7 grew into the game after a few early stray passes.

Semedo 7 did nothing wrong shoring the game up at 5-1.

McManaman 6 didn't really have time to get into the game.

 

Overall the performance of the season for me. Tempo was up from the start and we got our reward. A couple of early goals makes them have to come at us and we can then hit them on the break. Same again Tuesday please Carlos.

 Couple of other things. Ref was OK but missed an assault on Fessi as did the linesman. And a mention for Jerome who never stopped running and trying for a good team who look short on confidence. Uto.

[torryowl]

3 hours ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

I'd have average (5), ok (6), good (7), excellent (8), outstanding (9), unplayable (10).

 

6 is pretty harsh for a good performance IMO - especially a left back who has a good game defensively and scores a key goal.

i can understand that but to me average is they played to there normal level so 6 means they played a good game .....

 

1........shoot him

2......get rid

3 ......awful

4 .....poor

5 .....average

6 .....good

7 very good

8,.....excellent

9.....outstanding

10 ...out of this world or unplayable as you call it

that's what I go on obviously others do it differently but  whoever starts  the thread  needs to set some sort  rating system that we can use as a guideline so we are all singing from the same sheet otherwise the marks don't really mean anything except to the bloke who posts them

[pachyderm]

went online to buy a replica 3rd wallace kit... out of stock in my size. the bobbar ass away kit is on sale though... but i'm not buying it. 

9 minutes ago, mike312 said:

Wallace 9 back to his best today very difficult goal to score always a threat.

 

 

went online to buy the 3rd kit, wallace mind ya, ... out of stock in my size.

 

the bobbar ass away kit is on sale though... but i'm not buying it. 

Edited March 5, 2017 by pachyderm

[Buxtongent]

Seen a couple of mentions about Westwood's relatively slow distribution. I've noticed particularly when he's at the Kop end how many times he's gesturing to the players to get up field quicker. This is a common fault with our defenders/attackers. It also applies after we've made an attack. For instance, if  there is one major fault in FF's game it is his seeming desire to wander back onside. I noticed one occasion yesterday when Fox broke quickly, but had to select a different pass from the one to FF. Some around me grumbling about 'why didn't he pass to FF', when the simple reason was that FF was in an off side position.

However, I still think FF had an excellent game, as did the whole team. Credit to CC for finding a plan that suits us better than the 'attack on the counter'

[station road owl]

Westwood 6 didn't have much to do, few kicks still poor 

fox 8 was excellent all game, looked shakey first 5 minutes

loovens 8 never looked troubled or put a foot wrong

sasso 8 had a lot better game, some good challenges 

hunt 8 good game, didn't put a foot wrong 

Wallace 9 did what he should do, stay out on wing. His best game this season 

bannan 9 same with Wallace, his best game of season 

hutch 9 did more than any Norwich player did in 30 minute game time 

FF 10, was excellent today, didn't put a foot wrong 

Rhodes 9 won everything in air, pure quality 

winnall 8 worked his socks off, a few bad touches but works well with JR

 

jones 7 didn't really do much but did nothing wrong 

semedo 7 he's magic you know 

mcmanaman 6 10 minutes, didn't really do much 

[Swiss Toni]

Westwood 7

Hunt 8

Sasso 7

Loovens 8

Fox 9

Wallace 8

Hutchinson 8

Bannan 9

Forestieri 9

Winnall 8

Rhodes 8

Jones 7

McManaman 6

Semedo 6

 

Fox just gets it for me because he grabbed a goal too and hasn't been at the club that long.

Edited March 5, 2017 by Babushka1867

[Dutch McLovin]

15 hours ago, stanningtonowl said:

What?!?? Is this a whoosh??

Eh ? Nothing really came off for him 

[Barneynorthstandowl]

Nando but good performances all round

Amazing what happens when you stick all your chances away 

[parkfieldowl14]

Foresteri,Bannan,Rhodes.

[nilnil]

5 hours ago, torryowl said:

i can understand that but to me average is they played to there normal level so 6 means they played a good game .....

 

1........shoot him

2......get rid

3 ......awful

4 .....poor

5 .....average

6 .....good

7 very good

8,.....excellent

9.....outstanding

10 ...out of this world or unplayable as you call it

that's what I go on obviously others do it differently but  whoever starts  the thread  needs to set some sort  rating system that we can use as a guideline so we are all singing from the same sheet otherwise the marks don't really mean anything except to the bloke who posts them

Personally I go from the historic Championship Manager rating system...

1......worst ever performance

2......shocking performance

3......chuffing awful

4......a bad day at t'office

5......poor game

6......average

7......standard 'good' game

8......great game

9......all-round great performance

10....career best/perfect/faultless performance

 

Forestieri needs a 9 for me, and those who didn't necessarily contribute to a goal but still did their job well need a 7 rather than 6. Don't thnk any player was 'average' today, barring a late sub.

[torryowl]

30 minutes ago, nilnil said:

Personally I go from the historic Championship Manager rating system...

1......worst ever performance

2......shocking performance

3......chuffing awful

4......a bad day at t'office

5......poor game

6......average

7......standard 'good' game

8......great game

9......all-round great performance

10....career best/perfect/faultless performance

 

Forestieri needs a 9 for me, and those who didn't necessarily contribute to a goal but still did their job well need a 7 rather than 6. Don't thnk any player was 'average' today, barring a late sub.

if we all took that as how to mark then we'd all know whats what .....it don't matter which system we use as long as we all use the same one .

[frastheowl]

 

Westwood - 7 - Had little to do, but was noticeably much quicker releasing the ball, and his kicking was generally better than previously

 

Hunt - 7 - Aside from a lack of concentration in the second half, thought he did well. 

 

Loovens - 7 - Commanding display, kept Jerome at arms length all afternoon.

 

Sasso - 7 - Very good display. Some vital tackles, read the game well and is very comfortable on the ball.

 

Fox - 8 - A display similar to the Birmingham game. Confident, strong, always an attacking outlet. Good goal, and very strong aerially.

 

Hutchinson - 7 - Only played half an hour, but played noticeably more advanced. Didn't drop in to make a three at back, played more like a orthodox ball winner. As a result, we pressed higher, controlled the midfield and scored the first goal because of Hutchinson positivity and more advanced positioning.

 

Bannan - 9 - Absolutely superb. I was his biggest fan last season, and have been a critic of him this season. Helped by a generally more aggressive nature to our play, he picked the ball up 10-15 yards further up the field. Far less square or backwards balls, often looked for the forward pass. Ran the showed, great assist for Rhodes 2nd. Looked pure class.

 

Wallace - 7 - Great goal, worked hard and was very tidy on the ball. 

 

Forestieri - 8 - Superb display. Thrived in the free role, found himself in space, threatened from wide areas. Cracking free kick, great work for Rhodes 1st goal.

 

Winnall - 6 - Did alright, but always seemed on the fringes on the game. He's a goalscorer, and has little else to his game, but didn't really threaten too much (aside the half chance in the 2nd half). Technically seems inferior to the rest of the squad.

 

Rhodes - 8 - The type of Rhodes performance he's known for. Did alright generally, but two brilliant finishes that demonstrated his natural goalscoring talent. Superb header for the 1st, and he was never going to miss the 2nd.

 

Jones - 7 - Did an understated role in there, but did it effectively. Not as showbiz as Hutchinson in there, but defends space very well. Good reader of the game, and allowed Bannan to pull the strings.

 

Overall, it was the type of performance we all knew this squad was capable of, and it should have come long before now, and we should be seeing it more frequently. The catalyst for the performance was a positive, aggressive mentality defensively. Instead of sitting off and letting Norwich have the ball, we actively went hunting. As a result, we won the ball higher up the field, and looked devastatingly dangerous as a result. If we can dismantle a good (but obviously troubled) Norwich side like that, we really should have no fears taking on anybody else, especially at home.

[The Dukeries Owl]

39 minutes ago, nilnil said:

Personally I go from the historic Championship Manager rating system...

1......worst ever performance

2......shocking performance

3......chuffing awful

4......a bad day at t'office

5......poor game

6......average

7......standard 'good' game

8......great game

9......all-round great performance

10....career best/perfect/faultless performance

 

Forestieri needs a 9 for me, and those who didn't necessarily contribute to a goal but still did their job well need a 7 rather than 6. Don't thnk any player was 'average' today, barring a late sub.

 

I think you are assuming that everybody on this forum has wasted years of their lives playing stupid video games instead of having lives.