Stuliasz Posted 31 January 2005 Posted 31 January 2005 Hi everyone, thanks to the 37 people who voted from the two big messageboards. It is a fantastic response from you all this week, and just shows how popular the ratings feature is becoming. Also this week, every single player in the side managed to play above their average for the season which has got to be a first. In honour of this achievement by the side, I will remove the “letdown of the day†award for this week. Also, the harshest voter this week voted with an average that was a higher than the most generous voter when we played Reading at home earlier in the season. A good stat to represent the progress being made at the club I feel. Anyhow, here are the results: The 'Steve Walsh' Defender of the Match award: Alan Maybury – 7.45 The 'Muzzy Izzet' Midfielder of the Match award: Gareth Williams – 7.66 The 'Gary Lineker' Striker of the Match award: David Connolly – 7.36 The 'Steve Claridge' Most Agreed On Player award: Ian Walker The 'Micky Adams' Most Disagreed On Player award: David Connolly The 'Steve Guppy' Performance of the Day award (based on most points above average): Gareth Williams – 7.66 The 'Alan Birchenall' Most Generous Voter award: FOX MENTAL (Talking Balls) – 7.50 The ‘Uriah Rennie’ Fairest Voter award: homer (Talking Balls); King_Kyle_lcfc (FoxesTalk) – 6.86 The 'Andy from Long Eaton' Harshest Voter award: Ash (FoxesTalk) – 6.29 The 'Ade Akinbiyi' Flop of the Match award: Matt Heath – 6.27 The 'Keith Weller' Man of the Match award: Gareth Williams – 7.66 Complete results (37 votes): 1 – Gareth Williams – 7.66 2 – Alan Maybury – 7.45 3 – David Connolly – 7.36 4 – Danny Tiatto – 7.22 5 – James Scowcroft – 7.15 6 – Joey Gudjonsson – 7.06 7 – Ian Walker – 7.04 8 – Jordan Stewart – 6.97 9 – Keith Gillespie – 6.54 10 – Nikos Dabizas – 6.49 11 – Matt Heath – 6.27 Sub – Marc de Vries – 7.18 Sub – Lilian Nalis – 5.83 Sub – Dion Dublin – 5.60 Voter Lowdown Generous voters: Anish, connolly19, Craig, FOX MENTAL, Fox_4_Life, Solihullfox, Teeno, Vixen, webmaster, Wellman Fair voters: adam, Boy Genius, Cobbo, Fox Fan, Graz, homer, King_Kyle_lcfc, Mike Hunt Smells, Shum, sparky, Wilson Harsh voters: ajj, Ash, beaumontfox, DurhamFox, Durnerz, dynamite_foxes, East Anglia Fox, Jonbluefox9, Lboro fox, Lisa, Nottingham Fox, pipes, Scowy, Semper Eadem, worcesterfox, Xantha Thanks to everyone who voted this week and please please keep voting!
Scow Posted 31 January 2005 Posted 31 January 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought...
shen Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought... 61535[/snapback] reading quite a few reviews and opinions on here as well, quite a few rated him as the best out there. Give credit when it's due, even though he's been lethargic and of little use lately
Guest Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought... 61535[/snapback] reading quite a few reviews and opinions on here as well, quite a few rated him as the best out there. Give credit when it's due, even though he's been lethargic and of little use lately 61549[/snapback] Giving credit where it's due is one thing, but one decent header in 91 minutes isn't going to make me score the player any higher. As Scowy says, Scarecrow was not the 5th best player out there, however it seems a goal can do wonders for you. I hope Jordan gets one soon, as it might get people off of his back then.
adam Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought... 61535[/snapback] reading quite a few reviews and opinions on here as well, quite a few rated him as the best out there. Give credit when it's due, even though he's been lethargic and of little use lately 61549[/snapback] Giving credit where it's due is one thing, but one decent header in 91 minutes isn't going to make me score the player any higher. As Scowy says, Scarecrow was not the 5th best player out there, however it seems a goal can do wonders for you. I hope Jordan gets one soon, as it might get people off of his back then. 61558[/snapback] i thought scowcroft was definately one of our better players. he tried his heart out on sat and won everything in the air, setting a few chances up for connolly 2. Cant see how some people could give him a 5 rating!! Dont understand why everyone hates him so much on this site. Hes done well for us over the last 3 years. He even had to play out of position under Adams and did ok.
Steven Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 He even had to play out of position under Adams and did ok. 61587[/snapback] ... and that has done him no favours as well.
shen Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought... 61535[/snapback] reading quite a few reviews and opinions on here as well, quite a few rated him as the best out there. Give credit when it's due, even though he's been lethargic and of little use lately 61549[/snapback] Giving credit where it's due is one thing, but one decent header in 91 minutes isn't going to make me score the player any higher. As Scowy says, Scarecrow was not the 5th best player out there, however it seems a goal can do wonders for you. I hope Jordan gets one soon, as it might get people off of his back then. 61558[/snapback] And he made a good assist for Williams while creating a few chances for Connolly. Now I would like Jordan to get one soon too, but c'mon! Scowy had a decent game. And of course a goal counts for something, and rightly so.
Guest Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 I base my opinions of Scarecrow on his overall performance, not on the one or two little bits he gets right. At Reading they lead to goals, for which everyone remembers, but what about some of the poor passing, the unenthusiastic chases after balls. He might have won a bit more in the air, but the ball tended to bounce off of him rather than be directed at any particular player.
adam Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 I base my opinions of Scarecrow on his overall performance, not on the one or two little bits he gets right. At Reading they lead to goals, for which everyone remembers, but what about some of the poor passing, the unenthusiastic chases after balls. He might have won a bit more in the air, but the ball tended to bounce off of him rather than be directed at any particular player. 61628[/snapback] you must of been watching a different game from me! cant remember any unenthusiatic chases of balls. not from him anyway. he played well. it seems to hard for some people on here to give the fella a good write up when he played well. hes a dam sight more commited than dublin.
kenny Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 I thought he played his best game this season, although he was still not up to scratch. Amazing how his attitude changed from when he was touted as a potential signing for Norwich to a player without a club at the end of the season. IMO will we see a harder working scowcroft from now on, he needs to earn a contract somewhere, he doesnt even have a pre-contract on the table yet.
Scow Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 Scowcroft wouldn't have been so high in the rankings if it wasn't for the winning goal. He certainly wasn't our 5th best player on the day I thought... 61535[/snapback] reading quite a few reviews and opinions on here as well, quite a few rated him as the best out there. Give credit when it's due, even though he's been lethargic and of little use lately 61549[/snapback] Giving credit where it's due is one thing, but one decent header in 91 minutes isn't going to make me score the player any higher. As Scowy says, Scarecrow was not the 5th best player out there, however it seems a goal can do wonders for you. I hope Jordan gets one soon, as it might get people off of his back then. 61558[/snapback] i thought scowcroft was definately one of our better players. he tried his heart out on sat and won everything in the air, setting a few chances up for connolly 2. Cant see how some people could give him a 5 rating!! Dont understand why everyone hates him so much on this site. Hes done well for us over the last 3 years. He even had to play out of position under Adams and did ok. 61587[/snapback] He barely won anything in the air first half. He improved second half, but he's not as effective aerially as he was before. Most likely due to the fact he's not contesting headers against (usually small) full backs now...
Guest Posted 1 February 2005 Posted 1 February 2005 I base my opinions of Scarecrow on his overall performance, not on the one or two little bits he gets right. At Reading they lead to goals, for which everyone remembers, but what about some of the poor passing, the unenthusiastic chases after balls. He might have won a bit more in the air, but the ball tended to bounce off of him rather than be directed at any particular player. 61628[/snapback] you must of been watching a different game from me! cant remember any unenthusiatic chases of balls. not from him anyway. he played well. it seems to hard for some people on here to give the fella a good write up when he played well. hes a dam sight more commited than dublin. 61642[/snapback] Dublin was barely on for 5 minutes!! Yes, Scarecrow had a better 2nd half, but the whole team played well, and how much is down to that? At the end of the day, I didn't think that he was one of the better players out there on Saturday, and overall, he's underperformed this season. I'm sure Sheff_Fox will have the stats, but I bet that was my highest mark for him all season, so that says something!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.