I forgot that I wanted to make a point specifically to LOL at this
L O L
Most ******ed shit I ever heard
Reckon he should get banned for this
It is quite easy to throw you a bone and expect you to bite it...very predictable
We could have never won anything without Gattuso, he was very important to us. I definitely loved him and agreed about his importance. I valued him a great deal.
What I tried to say is that players like Gattuso will never receive the recognition they deserve in systems like who scored where they rate goals and assists above all. Gattusos qualities were in his workload, defensive work.
Was he a great dribbler, great crosser, great shooter? Hell no. He was terrible at those but that does not make him a bad player. He made up for it by having extra heart, extra other things for example.
These underrated warriors will never get the high ratings they deserve in uneven rating systems such as who scored and the ones you use.
The disappointing thing with this forum is not that the average age is 16, but that the users that seem to be the immature ones are not the <16 year olds.
dude....a goal/assist (especially when it directly contributes to a win) should be the most heavily weighted statistic of all.
Players like Pippo Inzaghi and David Trezuget became legends by being completely invisible for 89 minutes and one moment of brilliance in one minute.
Then there were guys like zz and Dinho who often constantly lost the ball for the majority of the time and gave off that incredible assist/play that turned the match on it's head
"Brilliance" is not easily or even scientifically quantified. Stop trying to make art a science.
No no no and no, absolutely not.
You are proving my precise point.
If you think a player who goes invisible for 89 minutes and scores a goal performed well in that match then this is where we disagree. I'm not saying a player is a bad player for doing that or that he lacks class... All I'm saying is that in that specific game his specific rating would be based on what he achieved during the whole game. There are many games where great strikers play amazing but do not score, that doesn't mean they had a bad performance. How many times have you seen your beloved El Fenomeno caused havoc at the opponents defence but not score a goal... would that mean he had an awful game? No it wouldn't... but if Trezeguet misses 3 chances to score, fails to make runs, can't control passes and then shows up with a tap-in at the 90th then of course he had a bad game. How could he not have a bad game ffs? You're an engineer dude.. I would excuse others for not getting this but you studied statistics and you're supposed to understand how to analyze ffs.. but then again, there'll always be engineers who'll end up double checking people's shit and other engineers who are doing the shit that engineers and I'm thinking you fall in the former category. You will not be able to explain to me (or any engineer for that matter) as to how 'player goes invisible for a whole games and scores in the 90th minute' is a good performance over the whole game, you simply won't because it does not make sense.
So in your rating system, if Inzaghi started the game and played a full 90 minutes and scored two goals, but in the same game Sheva comes in and plays for 10 minutes and scores two goals who would get a higher rating?
And by the way, the irony in all this is if you believe in this fantastic system, then why did Bonaventura get such a high rating versus Inter? According to your system he did not get an assist because the ball rebounded from the GK back to Niang. If you want to be technical, Bonaventura achieved nothing but wasted balls so why has he been rated so highly? Because of the biased favouritism he gets every single game. He's living off his relatively impressive goals/assist record in the league and that makes him immune to bad performances...actually not just immune, but more like automatically get good ratings just because he looks like he's trying. The failed end product is never measured by you, only the successful end products and that's where you and your system are flawed.
Personally, I would count an assist for him because he did everything right (for that specific assist only) but Niang was the one who missed the first shot and needed a lucky rebound to finish the second.
And Tfat, judging from your last reply you've just run out of things to say after my detailed response. You go ahead and use your whoscored ratings, which definitely are consistent but with the wrong parameters. I did say consistency is important but don't forget that the parameters and weight you select is even more important. I'll continue using my ratings, and one day you'll begin to lean towards my system as I have opened your eyes to measuring a full performance (yes, subjectively as it must be) versus the statistics of a performance.
Some people however no matter how they try to measure certain parameters, they'll not be able to get it right because you'll need to have good understanding of both football and statistics (to a lesser extent) to be able to put in the right variables. I don't have an equation written out that I check each game but after doing it for 10+ years it comes naturally.
And no it's not vanity to claim to know what the coach requested from his players it's actually pretty simple and straight forward if you focus on the patterns of how a coach always performs with his teams and how a player always performs in his teams (a pattern that follows from their previous clubs and NTs). For ex, if Bonera continually does the same mistakes like not marking his man in corners for Milan, Villareal and Italy NT then i don't need to be a genius to figure out that he's weak at marking and it's not the coach's fault.
