[sheffield_fox]

Jack Hobbs claimed his second man of the match award in as many matches as once again he kept the Stockport strikers at bay with a sterling defensive performance.

It seems the defence caught the eye of the fans once again as fellow centre back Michael Morrison finished as runner up, with striker Matty Fryatt rounding off the top three.

The main disappointment of the match was captain Matt Oakley who struggled to find too many good ratings from the fans this week. Full results below:

TOTAL VOTES: 49 (better turnout than the home game in the week so thanks again people!)

Player Awards:

Man of the Match: Jack Hobbs - 7.27

Flop of the Match: Matt Oakley - 5.69

Best Defender: Jack Hobbs - 7.27
Best Midfielder: Lloyd Dyer - 6.67
Best Striker: Matty Fryatt - 6.94

Full Ratings:

1. Jack Hobbs - 7.27
2. Michael Morrison - 7.04
3. Matty Fryatt - 6.94
4. Steve Howard - 6.86
5. Kerrea Gilbert / Lloyd Dyer - 6.67
7. Aleksander Tunchev - 6.43
8. Andy King - 6.24
9. Paul Dickov - 6.18
10. Paul Henderson - 6.04
11. Max Gradel - 6.00
12. Matt Oakley - 5.69

Voter Awards:

Top Voters: NSLL / Bocadillo / Halfsy - 6.50

Most Generous Voter: 1st - act smiley / Ash Davidson - 7.17; 2nd - spirefox / MancFox - 7.08; 3rd - kieran / Joeyb / maccfox - 7.00
Harshest Voter: 1st - rio lincon - 5.42; 2nd - Jacko Walters - 5.50; 3rd - m. hunt - 5.58

Thank you again to everyone who voted.

[Ched]

Seems the Fryatt fan-boys are out in force stilll, how he got a better average rating than Howard I will never know.

[sheffield_fox]

Just a quick note to apologise for the crudeness of the forms at the moment. The full version of the site is currently in development and should hopefully have a system that will filter out the voters who try to skew the whole voting system or vote under obscene names. The people who have done either of these things have not had their votes counted.

[Joe.]

It continues...

[Thracian]

sheffield_fox, on Aug 18 2008, 07:49 PM, said:

Jack Hobbs claimed his second man of the match award in as many matches as once again he kept the Stockport strikers at bay with a sterling defensive performance.

It seems the defence caught the eye of the fans once again as fellow centre back Michael Morrison finished as runner up, with striker Matty Fryatt rounding off the top three.

The main disappointment of the match was captain Matt Oakley who struggled to find too many good ratings from the fans this week. Full results below:

TOTAL VOTES: 49 (better turnout than the home game in the week so thanks again people!)

Player Awards:

Man of the Match: Jack Hobbs - 7.27

Flop of the Match: Matt Oakley - 5.69

Best Defender: Jack Hobbs - 7.27
Best Midfielder: Lloyd Dyer - 6.67
Best Striker: Matty Fryatt - 6.94

Full Ratings:

1. Jack Hobbs - 7.27
2. Michael Morrison - 7.04
3. Matty Fryatt - 6.94
4. Steve Howard - 6.86
5. Kerrea Gilbert / Lloyd Dyer - 6.67
7. Aleksander Tunchev - 6.43
8. Andy King - 6.24
9. Paul Dickov - 6.18
10. Paul Henderson - 6.04
11. Max Gradel - 6.00
12. Matt Oakley - 5.69

Voter Awards:

Top Voters: NSLL / Bocadillo / Halfsy - 6.50

Most Generous Voter: 1st - act smiley / Ash Davidson - 7.17; 2nd - spirefox / MancFox - 7.08; 3rd - kieran / Joeyb / maccfox - 7.00
Harshest Voter: 1st - rio lincon - 5.42; 2nd - Jacko Walters - 5.50; 3rd - m. hunt - 5.58

Thank you again to everyone who voted.

A lot of things make no sense whatsoever in that lot. Dickov above Oakley, or indeed anyone, for a start because Dickov did sod all.

Tunchev made the best of a bad situation but there was no way he played well or anywhere near as well as King or Oakley.

[Joe.]

How did Max Gradel still manage an average rating of 6?!

Come on Foxestalk, sort yourselves out.

[syston_fox]

I dont think Oakley was that bad actually. Tracking back and closing down I think he did very little wrong and really helped with our second half domination. It was just in the final third that he seemed to falter and I think that's what his rating has been based on by many people.

[Thracian]

Voting Oakley Flop of the Match tests the credence of the FoxesTalk player ratings. He played 90 minutes of an away game we probably dominated for 65 minutes. He was at the heart of a team which closed down the opposition and regained possession so fast that the opposing manager commented on it after his team had been restricted to barely a single self-created chance.

Dickov comes on for the closing stages, plays on the right and contributes sweet FA that I can remember yet gets ranked above Oakley. I thought I was being kind giving Dicko 4.5 or something similar, knowing how people hate me to slaughter anyone before they'd had a chance to settle.

Mind you Kingy gets slaughtered the first time he takes free kicks but that's another subject. Perhaps we should fly Clemence in from sick bay to take em.

This post has been edited by Thracian: 18 August 2008 - 07:52 PM

[Hullfox]

syston_fox, on Aug 18 2008, 08:15 PM, said:

I dont think Oakley was that bad actually. Tracking back and closing down I think he did very little wrong and really helped with our second half domination. It was just in the final third that he seemed to falter and I think that's what his rating has been based on by many people.

I agree with you and Thrach on this.

Oakley for my money earned his place in "team of the day".

Unfortunately as well we know, there will always be those who cannot see the reality of individual performances on a match by match basis and will vote with their heart rather than their heads.

However, that's not to say that people are not allowed their opinion, it would be interesting however to see certain people's ratings across a period of time to see whether they actually favour specific players. To be fair, we would all probably be guilty of an element of bias in some way.

[Thracian]

Hullfox, on Aug 18 2008, 08:50 PM, said:

I agree with you and Thrach on this.

Oakley for my money earned his place in "team of the day".

Unfortunately as well we know, there will always be those who cannot see the reality of individual performances on a match by match basis and will vote with their heart rather than their heads.

However, that's not to say that people are not allowed their opinion, it would be interesting however to see certain people's ratings across a period of time to see whether they actually favour specific players. To be fair, we would all probably be guilty of an element of bias in some way.

Now there's a FoxesTalk collectors item!

[Hullfox]

Thracian, on Aug 18 2008, 08:47 PM, said:

Voting Oakley Flop of the Match tests the credence of the FoxesTalk player ratings. He played 90 minutes of an away game we probably dominated for 65 minutes. He was at the heart of a team which closed down the opposition and regained possession so fast that the opposing manager commented on it after his team had been restricted to barely a single self-created chance.

Dickov comes on for the closing stages, plays on the right and contributes sweet FA that I can remember yet gets ranked above Oakley. I thought I was being kind giving him 4.5 or something similar, knowing how people hate me to slaughter anyone before they'd had a chance to settle.

Mind you Kingy gets slaughtered the first time he takes free kicks but that's another subject. Perhaps we should fly Clemence in from sick bay to take em.

To be fair Thrach, I didn't think Kingy played overly well. True he did make a couple of sublime contributions but not enough for me. Problem is when you take dead ball kicks, you're in the shop window. They constitute a beginning of a passage of play and therefore are easier to remember than a run off the ball or a simple but effective pass.

I don't think that he'll be too worried about what we say though, I've a feeling that Big Nige and his team will be giving him all the right messages.

[Hullfox]

Thracian, on Aug 18 2008, 08:55 PM, said:

Now there's a FoxesTalk collectors item!

No that came earlier when you talked sense!

[Vålerenga]

Hullfox, on Aug 18 2008, 09:50 PM, said:

I agree with you and Thrach on this.

Oakley for my money earned his place in "team of the day".

Unfortunately as well we know, there will always be those who cannot see the reality of individual performances on a match by match basis and will vote with their heart rather than their heads.

However, that's not to say that people are not allowed their opinion, it would be interesting however to see certain people's ratings across a period of time to see whether they actually favour specific players. To be fair, we would all probably be guilty of an element of bias in some way.

for those who haven't seen it---

[Head Honcho]

Thracian, on Aug 18 2008, 08:47 PM, said:

Voting Oakley Flop of the Match tests the credence of the FoxesTalk player ratings. He played 90 minutes of an away game we probably dominated for 65 minutes. He was at the heart of a team which closed down the opposition and regained possession so fast that the opposing manager commented on it after his team had been restricted to barely a single self-created chance.

Dickov comes on for the closing stages, plays on the right and contributes sweet FA that I can remember yet gets ranked above Oakley. I thought I was being kind giving Dicko 4.5 or something similar, knowing how people hate me to slaughter anyone before they'd had a chance to settle.

Mind you Kingy gets slaughtered the first time he takes free kicks but that's another subject. Perhaps we should fly Clemence in from sick bay to take em.

Flop of the match and team of the day Too much for some voters methinks

[NSLL]

Thracian, on Aug 18 2008, 07:57 PM, said:

A lot of things make no sense whatsoever in that lot.

Some things do though.

Quote

Top Voters: NSLL

[Bert]

Oakley defientley wasn't the flop of the day, he wasn't brilliant but there were worse performers!

[Curious Orange]

sheffield_fox - you are ace.

[sheffield_fox]

Bertishev, on Aug 18 2008, 09:53 PM, said:

Oakley defientley wasn't the flop of the day, he wasn't brilliant but there were worse performers!

It's certainly been interesting seeing the comments and then the overall ratings. As you can see, Oakley's flop rating was pretty comfortable and there was a decent quantity of ratings to confirm it, but not one person has come on yet and agreed with it. Surely based on that, most of the people who did vote do agree with it so where are they?

[Curious Orange]

sheffield_fox, on Aug 18 2008, 09:59 PM, said:

It's certainly been interesting seeing the comments and then the overall ratings. As you can see, Oakley's flop rating was pretty comfortable and there was a decent quantity of ratings to confirm it, but not one person has come on yet and agreed with it. Surely based on that, most of the people who did vote do agree with it so where are they?

Maybe they are just a bunch of scallywags from Talkingballs?

[Bert]

sheffield_fox, on Aug 18 2008, 09:59 PM, said:

It's certainly been interesting seeing the comments and then the overall ratings. As you can see, Oakley's flop rating was pretty comfortable and there was a decent quantity of ratings to confirm it, but not one person has come on yet and agreed with it. Surely based on that, most of the people who did vote do agree with it so where are they?

I gave him a 6. Wasn't great but was better than average.

Thanks for setting this all back up again though.