Ultra Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 The League Ratings website has published its latest rankings of City players, based on marks awarded by supporters after each game. Understandably, the rankings are headed by keeper Marton Fulop (6.76), while striker Carl Cort languishes in 27th and last place with an average of 4.57. The top 10 are as follows: Marton Fulop: 6.76 Patrick Kisnorbo: 6.72 James Wesolowski: 6.55 Clive Clarke: 6.48 Stephen Clemence: 6.39 Bruno N'Gotty: 6.30 Iain Hume: 6.27 Gareth McAuley: 6.26 Alan Sheehan: 6.14 Matt Fryatt: 6.13 While the bottom 10 are: Paul Henderson: 5.56 Richard Stearman: 5.53 Alan Maybury: 5.50 Darren Kenton: 5.47 Levi Porter: 5.44 Eric Odhiambo: 5.33 Shaun Newton: 5.25 Radostin Kishishev: 5.22 Andy King: 5.00 Carl Cort: 4.57 I can't understand how James Chambers doesn't feature in the second list. But overall, I think the ratings are broadly accurate.
rob-blue-fox Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 if we dont sign fulop M and M need their heads testing
Ozwin Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 If we don't sign him I think there'll be hell to pay.
Thracian Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 I'm not convinced by the stats at all because they don't compare like with like, so hardly reflect a players true worth to the side. But for something commendable that should cheer the mood I rather like the figures on attendances. They show that Leicester City, despite their woeful and embarrassing League position, have had the best attendance of the season and are the third best supported overall. City's had a high attendance of 26,650 this season, beating Sheffield United 26,202, Southampton 25,054, Wolves 24,294, Norwich 24,292 and Charlton 23,151 to suggest our fan base really is potentially the best. Overall Sheffield United have averaged 25,232, Norwich 24,175 and City are third on 23,395 above Wolves on 22831. There is one other stat that interested me. I said we don't get enough bodies in the box. The evidence I read showed goals scored from close range, from inside the penalty area and from outside the area. And it was those scored from inside the box (3) where we were trailing everyone except Norwich (2) and QPR (2). Two clubs, Burnley and Charlton had 10 goals from inside the area while Barnsley, Ipswich, S****horpe, Southampton and Wolves had nine. That is a big difference in such a short time and shows dramatically how poor we are in the vital skill of getting men forward.
johnnycash Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 The League Ratings website has published its latest rankings of City players, based on marks awarded by supporters after each game.Understandably, the rankings are headed by keeper Marton Fulop (6.76), while striker Carl Cort languishes in 27th and last place with an average of 4.57. The top 10 are as follows: Marton Fulop: 6.76 Patrick Kisnorbo: 6.72 James Wesolowski: 6.55 Clive Clarke: 6.48 Stephen Clemence: 6.39 Bruno N'Gotty: 6.30 Iain Hume: 6.27 Gareth McAuley: 6.26 Alan Sheehan: 6.14 Matt Fryatt: 6.13 While the bottom 10 are: Paul Henderson: 5.56 Richard Stearman: 5.53 Alan Maybury: 5.50 Darren Kenton: 5.47 Levi Porter: 5.44 Eric Odhiambo: 5.33 Shaun Newton: 5.25 Radostin Kishishev: 5.22 Andy King: 5.00 Carl Cort: 4.57 I can't understand how James Chambers doesn't feature in the second list. But overall, I think the ratings are broadly accurate. Chambers isn't in the botton ten because even though he has played regularly out of position he hasn't been one of the worst. Give the guy a break he is one of the best Right Backs in the division, and we play him anywhere but!
Thracian Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 Chambers isn't in the botton ten because even though he has played regularly out of position he hasn't been one of the worst. Give the guy a break he is one of the best Right Backs in the division, and we play him anywhere but! As far as one of the best right backs is concerned I've not yet seen sufficient evidence of that yet. Perhaps you've seen him play elsewhere? One thing looks sure though from what I've seen so far. He's no central midfielder. And there, of course you touch on a manager's dilemma. Do you persevere with Stearman who really can play in several positions reasonably capably. Or do you go with Chambers who looks as if right back is his sole option medium term?
The Reverend Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 I'm not convinced by the stats at all because they don't compare like with like, so hardly reflect a players true worth to the side.But for something commendable that should cheer the mood I rather like the figures on attendances. They show that Leicester City, despite their woeful and embarrassing League position, have had the best attendance of the season and are the third best supported overall. City's had a high attendance of 26,650 this season, beating Sheffield United 26,202, Southampton 25,054, Wolves 24,294, Norwich 24,292 and Charlton 23,151 to suggest our fan base really is potentially the best. Overall Sheffield United have averaged 25,232, Norwich 24,175 and City are third on 23,395 above Wolves on 22831. There is one other stat that interested me. I said we don't get enough bodies in the box. The evidence I read showed goals scored from close range, from inside the penalty area and from outside the area. And it was those scored from inside the box (3) where we were trailing everyone except Norwich (2) and QPR (2). Two clubs, Burnley and Charlton had 10 goals from inside the area while Barnsley, Ipswich, S****horpe, Southampton and Wolves had nine. That is a big difference in such a short time and shows dramatically how poor we are in the vital skill of getting men forward. Perhaps becuase Porter got about 5 which was far more than he deserved?
Thracian Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 Perhaps becuase Porter got about 5 which was far more than he deserved? I gathered that Porter played pretty well at Palace but your example proves my point - he's not had much football at all. King has played once. Hardly relevent alongside the occasions, say, Clemence has played. The stats may be useful later when you can look at averages of players who have played a certain amount of time.
WetFlannel Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 Stats show something to a certain extent, but they dont show the whole side of a player
Ultra Posted 5 October 2007 Author Posted 5 October 2007 I'm not convinced by the stats at all because they don't compare like with like, so hardly reflect a players true worth to the side.But for something commendable that should cheer the mood I rather like the figures on attendances. They show that Leicester City, despite their woeful and embarrassing League position, have had the best attendance of the season and are the third best supported overall. City's had a high attendance of 26,650 this season, beating Sheffield United 26,202, Southampton 25,054, Wolves 24,294, Norwich 24,292 and Charlton 23,151 to suggest our fan base really is potentially the best. Overall Sheffield United have averaged 25,232, Norwich 24,175 and City are third on 23,395 above Wolves on 22831. There is one other stat that interested me. I said we don't get enough bodies in the box. The evidence I read showed goals scored from close range, from inside the penalty area and from outside the area. And it was those scored from inside the box (3) where we were trailing everyone except Norwich (2) and QPR (2). Two clubs, Burnley and Charlton had 10 goals from inside the area while Barnsley, Ipswich, S****horpe, Southampton and Wolves had nine. That is a big difference in such a short time and shows dramatically how poor we are in the vital skill of getting men forward. We know we have a big fanbase - the question is whether we can keep it that way. Remember that many fans counted in the attendances were ST holders who clearly hoped during the summer we'd be seeing something different from the dross of the past few seasons, only to be proved wrong. As for the goal count, the manager appears more concerned with not conceding them than scoring them. So expect more 0-0 bore draws to follow the one witnessed on Tuesday. By the way, what happened to FoxesTalk Player of the Month for September?
davieG Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 I'm not convinced by the stats at all because they don't compare like with like, so hardly reflect a players true worth to the side.But for something commendable that should cheer the mood I rather like the figures on attendances. They show that Leicester City, despite their woeful and embarrassing League position, have had the best attendance of the season and are the third best supported overall. City's had a high attendance of 26,650 this season, beating Sheffield United 26,202, Southampton 25,054, Wolves 24,294, Norwich 24,292 and Charlton 23,151 to suggest our fan base really is potentially the best. Overall Sheffield United have averaged 25,232, Norwich 24,175 and City are third on 23,395 above Wolves on 22831. There is one other stat that interested me. I said we don't get enough bodies in the box. The evidence I read showed goals scored from close range, from inside the penalty area and from outside the area. And it was those scored from inside the box (3) where we were trailing everyone except Norwich (2) and QPR (2). Two clubs, Burnley and Charlton had 10 goals from inside the area while Barnsley, Ipswich, S****horpe, Southampton and Wolves had nine. That is a big difference in such a short time and shows dramatically how poor we are in the vital skill of getting men forward. When you've scored so few goals the numbers inside/outside the box become irrelevant, as you suggest in your player ratings post it's like comparing King with Clemence. The number of goals scored over all is the only significant comparable figure and that provides a clear enough picture of our inadequacies.
davieG Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 By the way, what happened to FoxesTalk Player of the Month for September?I've been so depressed by the performances I completely forgot.
The Reverend Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 James Chambers = Mr Inconsistent. He is not a central midfielder, just ask Kisnorbo...
Thracian Posted 5 October 2007 Posted 5 October 2007 When you've scored so few goals the numbers inside/outside the box become irrelevant, as you suggest in your player ratings post it's like comparing King with Clemence. The number of goals scored over all is the only significant comparable figure and that provides a clear enough picture of our inadequacies. My point is that if we had more people who would really make the effort to get into the box we might score more goals. Teams who've scored 8/9/10 goals from that position have probably had three and four times as many players getting into the box as we have over the period. The problem of course is that you have to defend high to make it happen and we tend to defend fairly well back to contract the space which clever teams like Wolves can exploit. Nevertheless opportunities occur even for us and there was a glaring example towards the end against Wolves. Stearman delivered an excellent cross to the far post but Mattock simply hadn't committed himself to believing the ball would come over. Had he done so he might have little more than a tap in. Another ball we don't win is the secondary ball from headed clearances - which can be another way of reinforcing pressure. I've mentioned these little things before. Someone attacking the near post from corners, someone specialising in diferent free-kicks, people chancing their luck by shooting from range... Every one of those tiny components offer a few goals a season. Similarly if bodies don't get in the box you'll never score the reactionary goals that come defensive mistakes, passes hit hard and low in the area and so on. The bits add up and form the difference between a top two side and an also ran.
Geo V Posted 6 October 2007 Posted 6 October 2007 My point is that if we had more people who would really make the effort to get into the box we might score more goals. Teams who've scored 8/9/10 goals from that position have probably had three and four times as many players getting into the box as we have over the period.The problem of course is that you have to defend high to make it happen and we tend to defend fairly well back to contract the space which clever teams like Wolves can exploit. Nevertheless opportunities occur even for us and there was a glaring example towards the end against Wolves. Stearman delivered an excellent cross to the far post but Mattock simply hadn't committed himself to believing the ball would come over. Had he done so he might have little more than a tap in. Another ball we don't win is the secondary ball from headed clearances - which can be another way of reinforcing pressure. I've mentioned these little things before. Someone attacking the near post from corners, someone specialising in diferent free-kicks, people chancing their luck by shooting from range... Every one of those tiny components offer a few goals a season. Similarly if bodies don't get in the box you'll never score the reactionary goals that come defensive mistakes, passes hit hard and low in the area and so on. The bits add up and form the difference between a top two side and an also ran. Its not as simple as just expecting people to get into the box, you also need the players who have the engine to get up and down and also skillful players to actually do something when they get there. The main problem with our team at the moment is that it is forever chopping and changing (god knows how many midfield and strike combos we have had this season already) and no one is getting used to the way each otehr plays. Tactically you are right that we are defending to deep, leaving gaping holes between defence and midfield and then midfield to attack but thats because our side plays with so much fear of failure due to the unreasonable demands and expectations from some fans and the owner of the club that they are not expressing themselves fully. Even when we defend corners we bring everyone back as teh onus seems to be "we mustn't concede at any cost" without thinking about the fact that the ball will come straight back at us even if we clear it (I have lost count of the number of corners against us in most matches as it always comes back). Anyway, lets hope a settled system and pattern of play is agreed soon before it goes completely tats up.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.