Shropshire Yid
Hossam Ghaly
Not one mention how Sandro grabbed the game by the balls, surged forward, won a free kick which we scored from? Must be just me then......
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Ratings Panathinaikos
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
Spursalot
Jimmy McCormick
It was good, but rather fortunate that the pan player fouled him.
The lad seems to have a decent set of legs going forwards, but he does need to get his head up a little when he does.
Shropshire Yid
Hossam Ghaly
it was more the point he made something happen i was pointing too! People rave about Bale and rightly so, I just think this lad is is the best in his position in the league right now.
Friedel 6.5 - Put in a typical Brad performance, solid.
Walker 7.5 - Again Mr Walker puts in solid performance, great set pieces, form and belief seem to be returning.
Caulker 6.5 - Didn't look his normal self some wayward passing at times.
Vertonghen 7 - Solid and assured.
Naughton 6 - Decent first 45 but his head went in the second. Extra .5 as left back is not his natural position.
Lennon 6.5 - Drifts in and out of games needs to keep up consistency.
Sandro 7 - It's Sandro what more can I say.
Carroll 6.5 - Good first half but failed to keep that going in the second.
Dempsey 7 - Assist were good, worked hard and showing a bit of form now. Still drops to the floor to often for my liking.
Defoe 6.5 - Scored but relatively quiet.
Ade 6 - Scored but sloppy in retention and work rate.
Dembele - 6 Did ok.
Siggy - 6 Did ok.
Livermore N/A Gives me hope I may still one day get a game for the 1st team. :lol:
Walker 7.5 - Again Mr Walker puts in solid performance, great set pieces, form and belief seem to be returning.
Caulker 6.5 - Didn't look his normal self some wayward passing at times.
Vertonghen 7 - Solid and assured.
Naughton 6 - Decent first 45 but his head went in the second. Extra .5 as left back is not his natural position.
Lennon 6.5 - Drifts in and out of games needs to keep up consistency.
Sandro 7 - It's Sandro what more can I say.
Carroll 6.5 - Good first half but failed to keep that going in the second.
Dempsey 7 - Assist were good, worked hard and showing a bit of form now. Still drops to the floor to often for my liking.
Defoe 6.5 - Scored but relatively quiet.
Ade 6 - Scored but sloppy in retention and work rate.
Dembele - 6 Did ok.
Siggy - 6 Did ok.
Livermore N/A Gives me hope I may still one day get a game for the 1st team. :lol:
Last edited:
It might be called something of a hockey assist (ice hockey counting two assists for the two players involved immediately prior to the goal), but in football, it's just another freekick. It could have been Lennon or Dempsey or XXXX that got fouled and won the freekick (some pundits think it's a lucky freekick, but I think it's merited), the real hard work was still the freekick delivery and header.
Just took a look, most voters have put Sandro amongst their top 5 players anyway. And if you disagree, why not also cast your own votes
Last edited:
clevelandspur
Pascal Chimbonda
Friedel 6 solid nothing to do for the goal
Walker 7.5 one of our best i thought and his set piece delivery was superb
Caulker 7 steady
Vertonghen 7 solid
Naughton 4 poor performance, all over the place
Lennon 6.5 great ball for Defoe's goal but not involved enough going forward again
Carroll 7 kept things ticking over
Sandro 7 some loose passes but overall very good
Dempsey 8.5 MOM fabulous performance linked play well set up one scored one (basically)
Defoe 7 deadly again in the final third unlucky not to get a few
Adebayor 6.5 1st half was excellent thought he drifted out of it in the 2nd
Walker 7.5 one of our best i thought and his set piece delivery was superb
Caulker 7 steady
Vertonghen 7 solid
Naughton 4 poor performance, all over the place
Lennon 6.5 great ball for Defoe's goal but not involved enough going forward again
Carroll 7 kept things ticking over
Sandro 7 some loose passes but overall very good
Dempsey 8.5 MOM fabulous performance linked play well set up one scored one (basically)
Defoe 7 deadly again in the final third unlucky not to get a few
Adebayor 6.5 1st half was excellent thought he drifted out of it in the 2nd
Pirate55
The Last Man Standing 17/18
Agree with these and largely the comments. Other points to note - Sandro must improve his passing, Lennon needs to take his man on more often, and Ade should try and head the ball.
zin
Anthony Gardner
Panathinaikos (H) 3-1
Our fourth win in a row brings our lowest average rating of 6.50 for a game won by a two goal margin since the 6.84 vs Aston Villa back in early October. The lowest rating for this game was 6.18 and the highest was 6.86, which shows that this match didn't excite many. The number of votes from TFC was abysmal with just 3 however suggestions are that as this was an 1882 event most of them were too blind drunk to recall much of the game Also as a request from Mr. Green on GG I've decided to include the whoscored.com ratings from here on. These ratings will not impact the average rating of the forums but are simply posted for further comparison and discussion.
From whoscored.com:
Our MOTM for this game was Clint Dempsey who got his third over-7 rating in 4 matches and his first over-7.5 rating of the season with 7.53 bringing him his first MOTM award of the season. Playing in his favoured position coming in from the left in this match, the only thing missing was a goal, which he was unlucky not to get when he hit the woodwork. Another player back in form after a horrible start to the season is Kyle Walker with his third over-7 rating in a row with 7.03. It's good to see that our regularly worst players this season have flipped the table around. Also it's good to see Adebayor back putting in a decent display to compare vs Lazio (A) and is amongst the goals without getting sent off this time!
Worst player of the match by far was Kyle Naughton with 4.56, playing again in his less favoured left-back role. This is the second time this season and second in the Europa league at home where Naughton has been the worst player, as was the case vs Maribor at home. This is also his third sub-5.5 rating of the season but not his worst performance of the season, that was against Arsenal (A) when he got 4.41. The only other player with a disappointing score was Brad Friedel with 5.89, back in the side for this game after being dropped for the last 5 games in favour of Hugo Lloris.
So what does the whoscored.com rating tell us with its statistical algorithms? Our ratings were pretty similar with Dempsey, Sandro, Caulker and Carroll whilst Vertonghen and Friedel were rated about half a point more. Kyle Walker was their MOTM with a whole point more than what we gave him probably due to the 4 key passes in the game, a high successful pass rate and plenty of touches. Defoe and Adebayor got higher ratings, probably due to their goals however the two players that stand out in difference are Aaron Lennon with 1.2 points more, likely due to an assist in the game and Kyle Naughton with a whopping 2.43 rating higher with 6.99 (oddly enough his rating in the previous match vs Fulham away). Naughton did have the most amount of touches in the game and his pass success was a decent 86% however it seems to me the stats don't actually look at play. Thoughts?
Our fourth win in a row brings our lowest average rating of 6.50 for a game won by a two goal margin since the 6.84 vs Aston Villa back in early October. The lowest rating for this game was 6.18 and the highest was 6.86, which shows that this match didn't excite many. The number of votes from TFC was abysmal with just 3 however suggestions are that as this was an 1882 event most of them were too blind drunk to recall much of the game
Also as a request from Mr. Green on GG I've decided to include the whoscored.com ratings from here on. These ratings will not impact the average rating of the forums but are simply posted for further comparison and discussion. From whoscored.com:
Our MOTM for this game was Clint Dempsey who got his third over-7 rating in 4 matches and his first over-7.5 rating of the season with 7.53 bringing him his first MOTM award of the season. Playing in his favoured position coming in from the left in this match, the only thing missing was a goal, which he was unlucky not to get when he hit the woodwork. Another player back in form after a horrible start to the season is Kyle Walker with his third over-7 rating in a row with 7.03. It's good to see that our regularly worst players this season have flipped the table around. Also it's good to see Adebayor back putting in a decent display to compare vs Lazio (A) and is amongst the goals without getting sent off this time!
Worst player of the match by far was Kyle Naughton with 4.56, playing again in his less favoured left-back role. This is the second time this season and second in the Europa league at home where Naughton has been the worst player, as was the case vs Maribor at home. This is also his third sub-5.5 rating of the season but not his worst performance of the season, that was against Arsenal (A) when he got 4.41. The only other player with a disappointing score was Brad Friedel with 5.89, back in the side for this game after being dropped for the last 5 games in favour of Hugo Lloris.
So what does the whoscored.com rating tell us with its statistical algorithms? Our ratings were pretty similar with Dempsey, Sandro, Caulker and Carroll whilst Vertonghen and Friedel were rated about half a point more. Kyle Walker was their MOTM with a whole point more than what we gave him probably due to the 4 key passes in the game, a high successful pass rate and plenty of touches. Defoe and Adebayor got higher ratings, probably due to their goals however the two players that stand out in difference are Aaron Lennon with 1.2 points more, likely due to an assist in the game and Kyle Naughton with a whopping 2.43 rating higher with 6.99 (oddly enough his rating in the previous match vs Fulham away). Naughton did have the most amount of touches in the game and his pass success was a decent 86% however it seems to me the stats don't actually look at play. Thoughts?
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
Brilliant analysis zin, thanks.
A few positive observations that might help explain the higher ratings from whoscored.com:
Naughton's overall performance was poor but there were moments of quality. Especially first half, when he supported our attacks down the left quite well and showed some excellent touches including one quality pull-down from a long cross when under pressure. Had he miss-timed that we would have been in serious trouble.
Another reason Walker got MotM might be he made a couple of critical goalmouth clearances second half. He's been making a welcome habit of this in recent games.
Looking back we may also have underestimated Lennon's overall contribution. Early on he skilfully beat his man to the byline then put in a superb cross that deserved much better than the corner it led to. Add that to his excellent assist second half plus his selfless tracking back throughout and it makes a difference.
A few positive observations that might help explain the higher ratings from whoscored.com:
Naughton's overall performance was poor but there were moments of quality. Especially first half, when he supported our attacks down the left quite well and showed some excellent touches including one quality pull-down from a long cross when under pressure. Had he miss-timed that we would have been in serious trouble.
Another reason Walker got MotM might be he made a couple of critical goalmouth clearances second half. He's been making a welcome habit of this in recent games.
Looking back we may also have underestimated Lennon's overall contribution. Early on he skilfully beat his man to the byline then put in a superb cross that deserved much better than the corner it led to. Add that to his excellent assist second half plus his selfless tracking back throughout and it makes a difference.
zin
Anthony Gardner
@Spur of the moment
Without having seen the game myself I can't say but what I would say is that seeing as the highest rating given by 18 people was 6.86 I find it hard to believe the whoscored.com rating of 7.20 is a good representation of the match people actually saw for themselves. Perhaps a larger sample may result in a higher average rating on the forums but that much higher? Unlikely.
Without having seen the game myself I can't say but what I would say is that seeing as the highest rating given by 18 people was 6.86 I find it hard to believe the whoscored.com rating of 7.20 is a good representation of the match people actually saw for themselves. Perhaps a larger sample may result in a higher average rating on the forums but that much higher? Unlikely.
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
zin
Ooer! Why such a strong reaction? :-k I was merely offering possible explanations.
We all know ratings are highly subjective and will inevitably vary dramatically according to the source. At one extreme you would expect much more negative bias and less informed ratings from say the opposition's forum. Ratings from other agencies such as 'neutral' websites and the newspapers will vary so dramatically as to be almost worthless. However by the same token our own fans may well see things very differently compared with other 'neutral' sites.
For example it strikes me that the neutral observer might be less negative towards Walker, whereas Spurs fans may have leftovers issues based on recent form when they were at the end of their tether with him.
I certainly feel that the average neutral supporter is likely to be far less critical than we are, and would therefore offer this as the most likely explanation for the big difference in average ratings.
Ooer! Why such a strong reaction? :-k I was merely offering possible explanations.
We all know ratings are highly subjective and will inevitably vary dramatically according to the source. At one extreme you would expect much more negative bias and less informed ratings from say the opposition's forum. Ratings from other agencies such as 'neutral' websites and the newspapers will vary so dramatically as to be almost worthless. However by the same token our own fans may well see things very differently compared with other 'neutral' sites.
For example it strikes me that the neutral observer might be less negative towards Walker, whereas Spurs fans may have leftovers issues based on recent form when they were at the end of their tether with him.
I certainly feel that the average neutral supporter is likely to be far less critical than we are, and would therefore offer this as the most likely explanation for the big difference in average ratings.
Whoscored captured defensive, attacking and passing stats separately (you can toggle them to see the details). Naughton was credited with 5 successful tackles (most of both teams), 105 touches (also most, which in turn contributed to our possession %), a respectable 3 interceptions and 1 successful throughball. Of course, there can be a neverending debate on what's the relative value of a throughball, an areal duel won etc.
http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/66...ropa-League-2012-2013-Tottenham-Panathinaikos
I guess our stats were padded by our control over the 1st half of the game, and the stats can't appreciate the relative importance of a game (eg. if we win/lose a NLD, the fan ratings would vary significantly from a league cup early round game, even if the stats are similar).
The Pana game, we only need a draw and the likelihood of us finishing as group winner is remote...the early play was slow-paced and the end results were lacking, we as the viewing spectators don't necessarily view the game in the same way as the stats collectors (rightfully, from an entertaining perspective, no one really wants to pay to watch a training session). And most of us would remember more clearly event in the second half, as it resembled more of a competitive match. May be the managers could think more in line with the stats collectors regarding a team performance, but fans value entertainment element in addition to good results.
On the other end of the spectrum, the stats rating could be misleading too, as Torres got a 10 for his performance vs. Nordsjaelland, and Hansen, the Nordsjaelland keeper, was the UCL keepr for the week at 8.8 rating!
http://www.whoscored.com/Graphics/1...ons-League-Team-of-the-Week-3-5-December-2012
My motive of asking zin to kindly include Whoscored ratings as a comparison is to have a cold hard look at how an outsider might view our team's performances, and try to see how a single turning event (such as Naughton's mistake or Sandro's goal) would massively impact our view on the overall performance.
zin
Anthony Gardner
lol, that was a strong reaction? I was simply giving my thoughts on whoscored.com's algorithm. I think it's important to remember these aren't people rating but stats gathered based upon interceptions, tackles, passes etc.. etc... I wouldn't classify whoscored.com as a neutral but as a machine with algorithms and raw data from other sources which gather the stats. A neutral observer at the same time may be a Gooner or support West Ham and just skew the results further.
I think whoscored.com is good for what is offers. To further expand the ratings I would like more Spurs forums involved.