Players Marks is back

lancashire lad

Users of this site have been recording players marks since at least 2010 and from the marks we get the post match Statbank which provides match stats which increase as the season progresses. This covers all League matches and to a lesser extent Cup games.

• After each match  a list will be put up called for example "Players Marks Wigan v Charlton (closes Sunday evening)".
• The list will contain all eligible players. An eligible player is one who has been on the pitch for at least 30 minutes which is based on the Press Association match commentary.
• Copy the list and give each player a mark between 0.5 and 10.0 in 0.5 steps.
• Your mark of each player is dependent on your view of their performance. You may also include a constructive remark on the player's performance.
• Please keep to the order of players in the list as it makes the input of everyone's marks so much easier.
• Please do not criticise another person's marking as we all have our individual assessments which should be respected.
• As well as the players there is also the ability to mark the referee, this is not done by everybody but is a useful indicator should we have the same referee again.

Last season I also included a mark for the coach/manager, I did this with the appointment of Appleton as a number of you were critical of his appointment I thought it might be useful to record a mark for him and his successor. I do not think it is necessary this season and so it will not be included.

You can provide marks if you watched the complete game, be this at the match, on TV or a steam or a recording of the match, marks will only be considered if they are submitted by the closure of the marking.

The Statbank is usually published within 36 hours of the closure of marking.

It is hoped that many of you will take part in this as it has provided a useful record of the players and the matches over the past 15 years.

seth plum

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

captainbob

Perhaps we could go back to the players' names being in lower-case letters rather than capital letters?

lancashire lad

captainbob said:

Perhaps we could go back to the players' names being in lower-case letters rather than capital letters?

Especially when there is a mark followed by a remark it is much easier to see the mark if the name is in capitals, so unless you have a specific reason I shall continue with caps.

captainbob

lancashire lad said:

captainbob said:

Perhaps we could go back to the players' names being in lower-case letters rather than capital letters?

Especially when there is a mark followed by a remark it is much easier to see the mark if the name is in capitals, so unless you have a specific reason I shall continue with caps.

Fair enough. I never had a problem with the ease of reading and do find the capital letters 'shouty' and less aesthetically pleasing.

wmcf123

seth plum said:

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

Fox- 3

Stuart_the_Red

Now, that is good news!

captainbob

wmcf123 said:

seth plum said:

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

Fox- 3

Beautifully presented, sir.

YTS1978

seth plum said:

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

That's a really good scoring system, I'm going to use that to remind myself to be consistent!

killerandflash

I can't remember giving a 10. It would have to be Mendonca at Wembley levels to get a 10.

My other internal rule, is to slightly reduce the scores for subs to take into account that they've been on the pitch for less time, and often against tired players. 

seth plum

killerandflash said:

I can't remember giving a 10. It would have to be Mendonca at Wembley levels to get a 10.

My other internal rule, is to slightly reduce the scores for subs to take into account that they've been on the pitch for less time, and often against tired players. 

I get this. There is also the culture of adding a point for a goal, or a penalty save, which I sometimes subscribe to.
For example Ahademe's goal against Portsmouth would only have got an extra .5 from me, but had he missed that chance I would've docked him 1.5-2 marks. Campbell on the other hand I would be happy to give him an extra point for his goal.

Addictedoldgit

Agree with Seth’s grading system above.
My highest mark last season was I think a 9.5; probably to Alfie.
It sometimes happens I’ll think ‘didn’t notice that player affecting the game at all - good or bad, then I usually give a 6, possibly a 5.5.

many thanks in advance @lancashire lad.

bromleyjohn

Thanks for all your hard work lancashire lad. It’s very much appreciated

Sillybilly

seth plum said:

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

Yep. That’s pretty much what I think too. It amazes me that some players who are utter chuff get 5s and 6s.  To me you start at 5 (you get that for remembering to tie your laces and put your shirt on the right way round) and then add or subtract depending on your performance.  Wonder who this years whipping boy will be?

stonemuse

seth plum said:

This is my personal rationale.

10. Once a season brilliance. (With a hope it isn’t only the once)
9. Excellent.
8. Very good. (Usually the highest mark awarded)
7. Good.
6. Average.
5. Below average.
4. Poor.
3. A liability.
2. Appallingly bad.
1. Not and never will be a footballer.

I have my own system of judgement, as does everybody else, but I try to be consistent as to what a number might mean match to match, and avoid the temptation to give a blanket mark after a bad result.

I think the cumulative judgement of all of us across the season usually turns out to be a pretty good measure.

Many thanks @lancashire lad

8/10

Bostonaddick

Realistic grading methodology on charltonlife 

1.  For a player you really like but who played poorly - use terms like “threw himself about” and “never hid” and then add 2 to the score they really deserve

2.  For the Boards whipping boy but actually played pretty well (ie perhaps Coventry in the upcoming first match) - automatically give a 4 and write words to support your confirmation bias.

3. if poster you dislike gives a player a 7, automatically give the player a 3 so you can achieve balance in the world.

4.  Ronnie Moore - See who everyone else gives a low score and then give them a 9 so you can maintain the much coveted “positive troll” status

SDAddick

Very happy for this, and thank you for all the work that goes into it LL

Just a reminder, this works best if you stay consistent to your own scoring model. Mine is probably similar to Seth's. But you all do you, it's entirely subjective!

Major

.

Brownie12

Bostonaddick said:

Realistic grading methodology on charltonlife 

1.  For a player you really like but who played poorly - use terms like “threw himself about” and “never hid” and then add 2 to the score they really deserve

2.  For the Boards whipping boy but actually played pretty well (ie perhaps Coventry in the upcoming first match) - automatically give a 4 and write words to support your confirmation bias.

3. if poster you dislike gives a player a 7, automatically give the player a 3 so you can achieve balance in the world.

4.  Ronnie Moore - See who everyone else gives a low score and then give them a 9 so you can maintain the much coveted “positive troll” status

This is the model I’m going to use. So far I’ve got Dobson marked at 14.