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

Players Marks and the Statbank

lancashire ladlancashire lad
edited July 2022 in General Charlton
Another wonderful season in L1 is almost upon us. For over 10 years we have been collating your player marks and reporting them and other stats back to you in the form of the Statbank. In the last couple of years we have also marked the referee.
So just to remind you of the system, it goes like this:

After every 1st team game I will put up a list of players and referee and given you all a  couple of days to send in your marks to CL. All players who have completed at least 30 minutes on the pitch are on the list for marks. It is up to you how you mark them and the permissible marks are between 0.5 and 10 with halves allowed. Lifers can send in marks if they were at the match or watched it live on Charlton TV or any other steaming service.

Please do not comment on other Lifers marks on the players marks thread, but of course you can comment on the player’s performance.

I collate the marks and then publish the Statbank on CL. The number and type of stats increase as the season progresses. All 1st team matches are marked but only L1 matches count towards the end of season stats extravaganza. 

One thing that I do ask of you, please keep to the list order that I put up when doing your marks as it makes it much easier for me when inputting them, last season there was one Lifer who continually did his own order of players which is one too many.
«1

Comments

  • LeuthLeuth
    Ah, you've dropped the 'no commenting on others' marks in the marks thread' requirement! Capital
  • msomertonmsomerton
    Thank you for doing this. It is very insightful and a look forward to read in the week.
  • Dazzler21Dazzler21
    golfaddick said:
    with 5 subs now allowed I wonder whether the bar for be able to get a mark shouldn't be shortened to 20 mins. Someone like Aneke might only be getting 20 mins per game & as his goals per mins played is one of the best you might find a "game changer" is not getting marked week by week. 

    just a thought & appreciate all you do. 
    Yeah I think this is fair. 
  • lancashire ladlancashire lad
    golfaddick said:
    with 5 subs now allowed I wonder whether the bar for be able to get a mark shouldn't be shortened to 20 mins. Someone like Aneke might only be getting 20 mins per game & as his goals per mins played is one of the best you might find a "game changer" is not getting marked week by week. 

    just a thought & appreciate all you do. 
    with it is that I understand your suggestion and agree with it, my only difficulty with it is in the end of season comparisons as we won't be comparing like with like. I'll see what others say:

    TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT
    Do Lifers prefer me to use 20 or 30 minutes on the pitch as the cut off for being given a mark, of course AFKA does have a veto, I'll leave this open until Saturday morning
  • AddictedoldgitAddictedoldgit
    edited July 2022
    Thanks for your work LL, I look forward to this thread.

    edit. I agree with Golfie’s point above.
  • LonelyNorthernAddickLonelyNorthernAddick
    lancashire lad said:
    golfaddick said:
    with 5 subs now allowed I wonder whether the bar for be able to get a mark shouldn't be shortened to 20 mins. Someone like Aneke might only be getting 20 mins per game & as his goals per mins played is one of the best you might find a "game changer" is not getting marked week by week. 

    just a thought & appreciate all you do. 
    with it is that I understand your suggestion and agree with it, my only difficulty with it is in the end of season comparisons as we won't be comparing like with like. I'll see what others say:

    TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT
    Do Lifers prefer me to use 20 or 30 minutes on the pitch as the cut off for being given a mark, of course AFKA does have a veto, I'll leave this open until Saturday morning
    I vote for 20, for precisely the reason Golfie gave. 
  • bolloxbolderbolloxbolder
    edited July 2022
    I think we should use 20.

    Are we still using @Leuth to sign off everyone's scores? 
  • Sponsored links:


  • FishCostaFortuneFishCostaFortune
    bolloxbolder said:
    I think we should use 20.

    Are we still using @Leuth to sign off everyone's scores? 
    That‘s Gilbey with blanket 0’s for the season then. 
  • LincsaddickLincsaddick
    keep up the good work LL, it is MUCH appreciated by one and all
  • Essex_AlEssex_Al
    seth plum said:
    Lancashire lad, these stats you are so brilliantly diligent about really do build up to a good picture of player performance, the wisdom of crowds and all that. Thank you so much for the work you put in.

    For what it’s worth given the substitute rule change, I reckon 20 mins as a sub would be a reasonable length of time to consider.

    When marking players I try to be consistent with myself, the kind of performance that gets a 7 from me one week is the same every week regardless of the player or result.

    If anybody is interested, my thinking goes like this.

    1 Once in a decade awful performance.
    2 A non footballer performance.
    3 A liability.
    4 Poor.
    5 Below average.
    6 Average.
    7 Good.
    8 Very good (likely to be a MoM performance).
    9 Excellent.
    10 Out of this world outstandingly memorably brilliant.

    Personally think the table is very good and everyone should base their scoring on it.
  • Covered EndCovered End
    LonelyNorthernAddick said:
    lancashire lad said:
    golfaddick said:
    with 5 subs now allowed I wonder whether the bar for be able to get a mark shouldn't be shortened to 20 mins. Someone like Aneke might only be getting 20 mins per game & as his goals per mins played is one of the best you might find a "game changer" is not getting marked week by week. 

    just a thought & appreciate all you do. 
    with it is that I understand your suggestion and agree with it, my only difficulty with it is in the end of season comparisons as we won't be comparing like with like. I'll see what others say:

    TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT
    Do Lifers prefer me to use 20 or 30 minutes on the pitch as the cut off for being given a mark, of course AFKA does have a veto, I'll leave this open until Saturday morning
    I vote for 20, for precisely the reason Golfie gave. 
    Ditto, hopefully Aneke will score loads of goals coming on with 20 mins to go.
  • CafcWestCafcWest
    I'd vote for 20 too.  I think having 5 subs will change the game a lot and subs coming on for 20 mins should be acknowledged.
  • RedroboRedrobo
    Another one for 20 👍
  • Cafc43v3rCafc43v3r
    20 for me.  Not only does it allow the marking of someone, probably Aneke, completely changing the game it also allows the marking down of someone who picks up a silly second yellow after 26 minutes!

    I appreciate it would be impossible to do, so understand why you wouldn't do it, but a mark for everyone that started, unless obviously injured.  Ie subed for being toilet or sent off early.
  • stonemusestonemuse
    lancashire lad said:
    golfaddick said:
    with 5 subs now allowed I wonder whether the bar for be able to get a mark shouldn't be shortened to 20 mins. Someone like Aneke might only be getting 20 mins per game & as his goals per mins played is one of the best you might find a "game changer" is not getting marked week by week. 

    just a thought & appreciate all you do. 
    with it is that I understand your suggestion and agree with it, my only difficulty with it is in the end of season comparisons as we won't be comparing like with like. I'll see what others say:

    TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT
    Do Lifers prefer me to use 20 or 30 minutes on the pitch as the cut off for being given a mark, of course AFKA does have a veto, I'll leave this open until Saturday morning
    20 mins probably now makes more sense 
  • aliwibblealiwibble
    Just to be difficult, I'd suggest with 25, as that's just over a quarter of the match. :)
  • Sponsored links:


  • bromleyjohnbromleyjohn
    Appreciation for all the hard work you put in. I always look at these stats after every game especially the aways
  • robinofottershawrobinofottershaw
    Agree that we should move to using 20 minutes as the minimum time on pitch to warrant a mark.
  • soapboxsamsoapboxsam
    Covered End said:
    Is it acceptable this season to give your marks before the game, to save a bit of time?

    Leuth did last season with Gilbey !

    Good address and a great birdie for Golfie.

    Put me down for the 20 minute rule, anyone on the field on 70 minutes as with so many subs being used they will play to the 95 minute and that's without injuries.  So Chuks wil get on from 60 to 75 minutes depending on the state of play.
  • JonniestaJonniesta
    soapboxsam said:
    Covered End said:
    Is it acceptable this season to give your marks before the game, to save a bit of time?

    Leuth did last season with Gilbey !

    Good address and a great birdie for Golfie.

    Put me down for the 20 minute rule, anyone on the field on 70 minutes as with so many subs being used they will play to the 95 minute and that's without injuries.  So Chuks wil get on from 60 to 75 minutes depending on the state of play.
    There are always a couple over the season that score people down and put 'decent, but I don't like him'. Really annoys me! Leuth isn't one of them, incidentally. 

    20 mins works for me too. 
  • redmanredman
    I agree with the 20 minutes. 
    Other minor rule change I would suggest is re sending offs. if someone starts and gets send off he should be marked imho. 
  • cliveclive
    Is it possible to have a system where the marks given by other people are only revealed after the poster enters his/her marks, this would prevent people being influenced by other peoples opinions/marks?
  • SillybillySillybilly
    20 mins please
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!