Huddersfield Player Ratings -www.player-ratings.com/rate

[Corky]

Martin- 6

Gilbert- 6

Hobbs- 6.5

Tunchev- 6

Powell- 6

Adams- 7

Oakley- 6

King- 6.5

Dyer- 7

Howard- 6

Fryatt- 7

[The Reverend]

I still find the ratings of those who attended a bit strange compared to the commentary.

Kingy gets a six yet supposedly plays a part in two goals and has the parried shot from which Howard scores what some believe was a perfectly legitimate goal. He was also mentioned fairly regularly on the commentary - both for having shots and for making passes/interceptions which suggested that he was fairly constantly involved if not by any means error free.

Oakley, on the other hand, didn't get a mention at all first half and only the briefest of mentions second half. In fact I cannot remember hearing him being involved in anything of significance. Yet he gets the same mark.

I'm not for a moment saying the marks are wrong. Just asking if the commentary gave the wrong impression or whether King has simply been marked down for his miss?

The truth Thrac, is that Oakley and King were pretty poor (in my opinion). The game seemed to pass them by, and i think the reason we conceded the two goals was mainly down to them. When they upped the tempo, they were found wanting, after cruising for 70 minutes.

I want at all impressed by either.

[Fez of Mahrez]

I still find the ratings of those who attended a bit strange compared to the commentary.

Kingy gets a six yet supposedly plays a part in two goals and has the parried shot from which Howard scores what some believe was a perfectly legitimate goal. He was also mentioned fairly regularly on the commentary - both for having shots and for making passes/interceptions which suggested that he was fairly constantly involved if not by any means error free.

Oakley, on the other hand, didn't get a mention at all first half and only the briefest of mentions second half. In fact I cannot remember hearing him being involved in anything of significance. Yet he gets the same mark.

I'm not for a moment saying the marks are wrong. Just asking if the commentary gave the wrong impression or whether King has simply been marked down for his miss?

I gave King a 6 and Oakley a 5. However...

King may have played a small part in the buildup for two of the goals but if you watch the highlights, Adams plays the pass for Fryatt's first, it's Dyer's run and cross that makes the penalty and Tunchev heads on to Fryatt who finds Dyer for the third. King is nowhere to be seen in any of it. I'm not saying he didn't play some routine pass leading to the goals but people who go to the games will rate overall on the entire game, not pick out the fact a certain player was involved in the buildup to a goal - otherwise you'd have Adams getting 7s (great pass for the first goal, otherwise fairly ordinary) and Tunchev being marked up for winning a simple header for our third goal.

Oakley and King both go about their jobs quietly and efficiently but their lack of pace means they get bypassed and outfought at times. Luckily we have one of the most in-form players in the country at the moment who is winning us games that we would otherwise draw (both today and at Colchester) - and that has been the difference.

For what it's worth, I like King - but if you're going to give him more than a 6 for a game like yesterday, where we were poor on the whole and never really seized control of the middle of the park, you might as well dish out 8s and 9s every time we play well. I think the current marks are indicative of what we've come to expect this season and the high standards we've set were not met for a large part of the game.

There is a dilemma approaching throughout the team when players like Mattock, Kisnorbo, Clemence and Dickov return from injury - particularly Clemence. I really like the side at the moment, it's well-balanced, the defence usually looks fairly solid and we look dangerous going forward. I hope Pearson keeps faith with the current lot though because they have earnt their places and I still associate Mattock, Kisnorbo and Clemence with the misfiring team of last season.

[Daggers]

I still associate Mattock, Kisnorbo and Clemence with the misfiring team of last season.

Cheers for all of that mate.

I have a problem with Clemence, and I fully admit that it is one, in that I only remember what he did on the park against Cov at home when he destroyed their midfield and embarked on rampaging run after rampaging run.

I'd love to see that Clemence back in the side, one high on confidence in his ability and those around him.

I've pushed the memories of him standing around quietly like a prune right out of my mind.

Oh yes.

[Thracian]

I gave King a 6 and Oakley a 5. However...

King may have played a small part in the buildup for two of the goals but if you watch the highlights, Adams plays the pass for Fryatt's first, it's Dyer's run and cross that makes the penalty and Tunchev heads on to Fryatt who finds Dyer for the third. King is nowhere to be seen in any of it. I'm not saying he didn't play some routine pass leading to the goals but people who go to the games will rate overall on the entire game, not pick out the fact a certain player was involved in the buildup to a goal - otherwise you'd have Adams getting 7s (great pass for the first goal, otherwise fairly ordinary) and Tunchev being marked up for winning a simple header for our third goal.

Oakley and King both go about their jobs quietly and efficiently but their lack of pace means they get bypassed and outfought at times. Luckily we have one of the most in-form players in the country at the moment who is winning us games that we would otherwise draw (both today and at Colchester) - and that has been the difference.

For what it's worth, I like King - but if you're going to give him more than a 6 for a game like yesterday, where we were poor on the whole and never really seized control of the middle of the park, you might as well dish out 8s and 9s every time we play well. I think the current marks are indicative of what we've come to expect this season and the high standards we've set were not met for a large part of the game.

There is a dilemma approaching throughout the team when players like Mattock, Kisnorbo, Clemence and Dickov return from injury - particularly Clemence. I really like the side at the moment, it's well-balanced, the defence usually looks fairly solid and we look dangerous going forward. I hope Pearson keeps faith with the current lot though because they have earnt their places and I still associate Mattock, Kisnorbo and Clemence with the misfiring team of last season.

I'm not in a position to give King any sort of mark. I asked the question in the hope of prompting exactly the sort of detailed answer you've been kind enough to give. I'm also perfectly happy with the answer because it has provided me with a fuller picture on the subject raised than the commentary offered.

[Fez of Mahrez]

I'm not in a position to give King any sort of mark. I asked the question in the hope of prompting exactly the sort of detailed answer you've been kind enough to give. I'm also perfectly happy with the answer because it has provided me with a fuller picture on the subject raised than the commentary offered.

[Simi]

Martin 6

Gilbert 6

Tunchev 7

Hobbs 7

Powell 6

Adams 6

Oakley 5

King 6

Dyer 7

Fryatt 7

Howard 7

Yup.

[Koke]

Sixes all around, and sevens for Dyer and Fryatt.

[Collymore]

What makes these ratings so interesting is how so many can see a game in so many different ways!!! I cannot understand how anybody can give Gilbert or Hobbs a low mark on yesterday's performance and as for King as already mentioned he seems to be a player who does so much for the team without being spectacular.

Sometimes you have to notice what is being done off the ball as well as what is on it. Same with Oakley it seems that some people have rigid opinions of his contributions but for me there wasn't a bad performance yesterday - some drifted in and out at times but otherwise a good performance.

Yeah exactly

[Ric Flair]

Martin 7 - Made a couple of crucial saves and his handling was superb. Kicking was improved as well. Looked to release the ball to Gilbert and Powell quickly as well.

Gilbert 6.5 - Attacked well and did his job. Sometimes goes missing though and leaves it wide open on the counter attack.

Tunchev 6 - Although, generally untroubled in terms of being done by the attackers. His clearances from headers were poor. At times he had time to chose where to clear, but he just gave it straight back to Huddersfiled and it led to panic in the 2nd half. Still showed glimpses of his class though and if this is his bad performances then we'll not go too far wrong.

Hobbs 7 - Solid

Powell 6 - First slightly shaky game for us in my opinion. Looked a bit knackered, but that's to be expected given he's played about 4 full matches in 2 weeks.

Adams 6.5 - Did some things well, including his assist for Fryatt's opener. The first 5-10 mins of the first half he looked quality, but then went quiet for patches. Would like to see him use his superb first touch better to get an advance on the defence and take players on. Set pieces were dog muck again.

King 7 - Barely put a foot wrong when called upon. Our central midfield don't seem to be in the thick of it that much because we look to use our wingers as much as possible or go long to Howard, therefore meaning King and Oakley only come in to it occasionally. As neither are the physical sort it often looks like they go missing. I'm starting to think otherwise and although Oakley was fairly poor, King was far more efficient and tried to attack as much as possible. Great stinging shot for Howard's goal that should have stood.

Oakley 5.5 - Hard to give him a higher mark, purely because the few times he did get involved he didn't do a lot. Some sloppy passing as well. Still much improved generally on last season.

Dyer 7 - Not as explosive as his two previous games of last week, but he's still a huge threat. Won us the penalty and then his lob wedge in injury time was supreme and not at all fortuitious. He is fastly becoming a god.

Fryatt 7.5 - 2 goals, an assist. What more do you want? Oh yes, some fans want him to score from every chance he gets or creates for himself, which would mean he'd score 85 goals this season. I forgot there are some strikers out there in professional football that achieve this.

Howard 6 - I feel for Howard, that's about 6 goals he's had disallowed now and more than half of them absolutely should have stood. He also missed a great chance (I think it was him after about a minute) his hold up play wasn't as good as previous games, but he never stopped battling and the goals will come for him i'm sure.

Subs:

Gradel 6 - Should have been brought on earlier, looked like he'd have had a field day against their left back. He went pale when Gradel got the ball and he literally tried to smash him to pieces. Glad to see the maestro back in action.

[Bert]

Martin 7 - Made a couple of crucial saves and his handling was superb. Kicking was improved as well. Looked to release the ball to Gilbert and Powell quickly as well.

Gilbert 6.5 - Attacked well and did his job. Sometimes goes missing though and leaves it wide open on the counter attack.

Tunchev 6 - Although, generally untroubled in terms of being done by the attackers. His clearances from headers were poor. At times he had time to chose where to clear, but he just gave it straight back to Huddersfiled and it led to panic in the 2nd half. Still showed glimpses of his class though and if this is his bad performances then we'll not go too far wrong.

Hobbs 7 - Solid

Powell 6 - First slightly shaky game for us in my opinion. Looked a bit knackered, but that's to be expected given he's played about 4 full matches in 2 weeks.

Adams 6.5 - Did some things well, including his assist for Fryatt's opener. The first 5-10 mins of the first half he looked quality, but then went quiet for patches. Would like to see him use his superb first touch better to get an advance on the defence and take players on. Set pieces were dog muck again.

King 7 - Barely put a foot wrong when called upon. Our central midfield don't seem to be in the thick of it that much because we look to use our wingers as much as possible or go long to Howard, therefore meaning King and Oakley only come in to it occasionally. As neither are the physical sort it often looks like they go missing. I'm starting to think otherwise and although Oakley was fairly poor, King was far more efficient and tried to attack as much as possible. Great stinging shot for Howard's goal that should have stood.

Oakley 5.5 - Hard to give him a higher mark, purely because the few times he did get involved he didn't do a lot. Some sloppy passing as well. Still much improved generally on last season.

Dyer 7 - Not as explosive as his two previous games of last week, but he's still a huge threat. Won us the penalty and then his lob wedge in injury time was supreme and not at all fortuitious. He is fastly becoming a god.

Fryatt 7.5 - 2 goals, an assist. What more do you want? Oh yes, some fans want him to score from every chance he gets or creates for himself, which would mean he'd score 85 goals this season. I forgot there are some strikers out there in professional football that achieve this.

Howard 6 - I feel for Howard, that's about 6 goals he's had disallowed now and more than half of them absolutely should have stood. He also missed a great chance (I think it was him after about a minute) his hold up play wasn't as good as previous games, but he never stopped battling and the goals will come for him i'm sure.

Subs:

Gradel 6 - Should have been brought on earlier, looked like he'd have had a field day against their left back. He went pale when Gradel got the ball and he literally tried to smash him to pieces. Glad to see the maestro back in action.

[Raj]

Is it just me or is there alot of love amongst(most) posters?

I love love.

Love love me do..........

[Ric Flair]

It is starting to piddle me off a bit. 9 goals in about 11 starts or whatever it is, is an insane scoring rate. Irrespective of the amount of chances he get's. He get's those chances often down to the hard work he endlessly puts in, as Pearson has recently stated.

[Raj]

Anyone who at the moment, hammers Fryatt needs shooting.

I personally hammer Howard(the fat tub of shite...but thats my problem!!!) <_<

[Bert]

It is starting to piddle me off a bit. 9 goals in about 11 starts or whatever it is, is an insane scoring rate. Irrespective of the amount of chances he get's. He get's those chances often down to the hard work he endlessly puts in, as Pearson has recently stated.

It does me a bit too, the only thing that annoys me about him, is how long he holds onto the ball for when he has a better option available.

You best watch out though, one more rating of 7.5 and the Fryatt police will be on to you soon.

Anyone who at the moment, hammers Fryatt needs shooting.

I personally hammer Howard(the fat tub of shite...but thats my problem!!!) <_<

So you openly admit, that you hammer a fat tub of shite?

[Raj]

So you openly admit, that you hammer a fat tub of shite?

erm......i didnt mean it "that way"

[Cobbo]

Vote here - www.player-ratings.com/rate

Results will be posted up Monday evening, and hopefully a "super-pack" of results that I haven't yet posted will go up tomorrow.

Get voting and discussing!

Well where are they dammit!

<_<

[davieG]

You lot know fook all!

FL Team of the Week

Each week the Official Football League website will bring you the Teams of the Week. Produced by the Press Association, the Teams of the Week feature the eleven top performing players from each division from this weekend's matches.

[Collymore]

You lot know fook all!

FL Team of the Week

what a joke! very lazy

[Ric Flair]

You lot know fook all!

FL Team of the Week

How they can keep choosing Oakley each week is beyond me. He's had a few good games, but it's the games where he's crap that they often pick him! Crazy.

[SamL]

You lot know fook all!

FL Team of the Week

Personally, I thought Oakley was pretty average against Huddersfield. He wasn't the worst player by all means, but he wasn't the best either. He did what he had to do without being spectacular.

Other midfielders in the division must have played crap if Oakley can have an average game but still get in the team of the week.