Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
DB11

Match Ratings : Leicester City 3-0 Huddersfield - Results & Man of the Match

By DB11, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

DB11

DB11

Posted
Posted

Saturday 1 January 2018, 15:00
Barclays Premier League
King Power Stadium, Leicester

Leicester City 3

Riyad Mahrez 53', Islam Slimani 60', Marc Albrighton 90 +2'

Huddersfield Town 0

Total Votes: 193

 

FoxesTalk Man of the Match: Riyad Mahrez

  1. Riyad Mahrez : 8.34
  2. Islam Slimani : 8.07
  3. Marc Albrighton : 7.89
  4. (SUB) Adrien Silva : 7.59
  5. Wilfred Ndidi : 7.30
  6. Harry Maguire : 6.90
  7. Shinji Okazaki : 6.81
  8. (SUB) Aleksandar Dragović : 6.78
  9. Daniel Amartey : 6.66
  10. Matty James : 6.65
  11. Christian Fuchs : 6.48
  12. Kasper Schmeichel : 6.40
  13. Wes Morgan : 5.93
  14. (SUB) Demarai Gray : 5.87

Team Performance: 6.98 (6/26)

 

Manager Performance: 7.22 (8/26)

 

Opposition Performance: 4.04 (24/26)

 

Officials Performance (Ref: Graham Scott): 6.19 (9/27)

 

Overall Manager Confidence: 95.31% (+13.98%)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Just now, Kinowe Soorie said:

I thought Matty James had a good game considering. Obviously not.

Agree. thought he was very good.

  • Popular Post
davieG

davieG

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Not a big fan of James but he had a really good game and that Silva rating shows it's more of a popularity contest than actual ratings, not that he did anything wrong just didn't justify being rated.

  • Like 8
The Doctor

The Doctor

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, davieG said:

Not a big fan of James but he had a really good game and that Silva rating shows it's more of a popularity contest than actual ratings, not that he did anything wrong just didn't justify being rated.

Not even that tbf - if it weren't his debut after the palaver of the last four months he'd not have got that rating; it's just an result of people voting seriously, and the sort of jokers who were scoring him 14/10 in the post match thread

  • Like 1
norwichfox

norwichfox

Posted
Posted

I agree with the posters above, Matty James put in quite a resonable performance, the score is a fair one for the whole game, but maybe the marks given tend to reflect only  our second half (which would make James's a little on the low side by comparison).

  • Like 1
BoyJones

BoyJones

Posted
Posted

If somebody plays really well for the ten minutes he is on, surely he deserves recognition. Easy at 3-0 up maybe, but silva didn't put a foot wrong.

 

Also thought James' score was a reasonable reflection of his performance, didn't really bust a gut first half, outplayed and outfought first half by the opposition, but came more into the game once we scored. Personally think James is well suited to the championship, but hopefully he will now push on like Drinkwater and become an established and respected premier league performer - personally think he has his work cut out. 

biggs

biggs

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, davieG said:

Not a big fan of James but he had a really good game and that Silva rating shows it's more of a popularity contest than actual ratings, not that he did anything wrong just didn't justify being rated.

Well if he's rated on the 10 minutes of play i think the rating was fair. In those 10 minutes he was certainly noticeable for good reason

ZeGuy

ZeGuy

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Kinowe Soorie said:

I thought Matty James had a good game considering. Obviously not.

No, he actually had a good game. At least a good second half as I can't comment the first.

shen

shen

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, biggs said:

Well if he's rated on the 10 minutes of play i think the rating was fair. In those 10 minutes he was certainly noticeable for good reason

Funny how some are trying to justify that rating for a 10 minute cameo in a game that was long won and the opposition had given up. Especially as all Silva did was play a few simple neat passes and get a foot stuck in. 8 touches with little consequence.

It's not like he played an awesome through ball, had a mazy run or scored a goal y'know.

 

I'm all for the light-heartedness, but it makes the ratings less useful.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, shen said:

Funny how some are trying to justify that rating for a 10 minute cameo in a game that was long won and the opposition had given up. Especially as all Silva did was play a few simple neat passes and get a foot stuck in. 8 touches with little consequence.

It's not like he played an awesome through ball, had a mazy run or scored a goal y'know.

 

I'm all for the light-heartedness, but it makes the ratings less useful.

They can't all be Marc Albrighton.

Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

Does make a mockery of the ratings when Silva can come fourth and ahead of James.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, MattP said:

Does make a mockery of the ratings when Silva can come fourth and ahead of James.

The ratings are for fun aren't they? Let's face it 20% of those polled wanted Puel sacked last week. The poll is a reflection on the supporters not the players. We see which players the fans on here like and don't like rather than those who played well and those who didn't.

Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted

I must be missing something.

 

James scored 6.65. That means he played well doesn’t it? I think that score is fair as he was neat and tidy, but didn’t do anything fundamentally great.

 

It’s difficult with subs as they should probably be rated n/a if they only feature for a short space of time. But then what if they beat six players and score a worldy? Silva’s score is probably fair for his 10 minutes, but isn’t really directly comparable to others who featured for a longer amount of time. 

AKCJ

AKCJ

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Jobyfox said:

I must be missing something.

 

James scored 6.65. That means he played well doesn’t it? I think that score is fair as he was neat and tidy, but didn’t do anything fundamentally great.

 

It’s difficult with subs as they should probably be rated n/a if they only feature for a short space of time. But then what if they beat six players and score a worldy? Silva’s score is probably fair for his 10 minutes, but isn’t really directly comparable to others who featured for a longer amount of time. 

He got a standing ovation. James was excellent.

Jobyfox

Jobyfox

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

He got a standing ovation. James was excellent.

This is all subjective I suppose, but I must have a different definition of excellent. 

 

James played well within his limitations as a player. He moved the ball well and was neat and tidy. He's not the sort of player to break lines with surging runs forward, play defence splitting passes or take players out of the game with innovative flicks or runs. He's not a player who has dramatically high stats for tackles or interceptions over the course of a game.

 

For me that's the sort of performance that cries out excellent. James is rarely that sort of player and, for me, he wasn't against Huddersfield. He got an ovation for a good performance after a long injury absence. 

 

As I say - happy to disagree on a subjective assessment. 

  • Like 1
Redouane

Redouane

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, FIF said:

The ratings are for fun aren't they? Let's face it 20% of those polled wanted Puel sacked last week. The poll is a reflection on the supporters not the players. We see which players the fans on here like and don't like rather than those who played well and those who didn't.

Thats why Vardy gets 7+ even when he doesnt touch the ball

  • Like 1
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Redouane said:

Thats why Vardy gets 7+ even when he doesnt touch the ball

Not from you he doesn't. :P

Redouane

Redouane

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, FIF said:

Not from you he doesn't. :P

I like Vardy, but I like to be fair with my ratings. Giving a bad score reflects your opinion on the current performance rather than your overall opinion on the player.

 

In-fact, I've given ratings below 5 for Mahrez and Slimani many times.

Chico1958

Chico1958

Posted
Posted

Just a quick question........................Why don't we rate the Crowds influence on the game ?

 

Cos, from what I saw the place was banging in the second half

 

It was just a thought thats all

biggs

biggs

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, shen said:

Funny how some are trying to justify that rating for a 10 minute cameo in a game that was long won and the opposition had given up. Especially as all Silva did was play a few simple neat passes and get a foot stuck in. 8 touches with little consequence.

It's not like he played an awesome through ball, had a mazy run or scored a goal y'know.

 

I'm all for the light-heartedness, but it makes the ratings less useful.

Maybe you'd prefer a substitute category or not bother with subs at all. He's on the list so he gets rated .........some subs come on and make a complete hash of it. For the little time he was on, I as did other,s thought he showed well

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...