|
|
Post by hudsondays on Aug 17, 2015 15:51:11 GMT
Found a copy of the Mail on Sunday which made Spurs match as lead story. But the ratings made me spit. Look at this:Tottenham: Lloris 7, Walker 6.5, Alderweirdie 6, Vertonghen 6.5, Davies 7, Dier 7.5, Mason 7 (Bentaleb 6), Chadli 7, Dembele 8, Kane 7.5 (Lamela 6).
Stoke: Butland 7, Johnson 5, Cameron 6, Muniesa 6, Pieters 6, Whelan 5.5, Van Ginkel 6 (Ireland 6), Walters 6.5 (!), Afellay 6, Arnie 6.5, Diouf 6.5.
According to that, pretty well every Spurs player was better than every Stoke player.
But er, wasn't the result 2.2, and Spurs lucky to hang on for a draw? Or was there another match with two teams in an alternative universe?
|
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Aug 17, 2015 15:53:30 GMT
Found a copy of the Mail on Sunday which made Spurs match as lead story. But the ratings made me spit. Look at this:Tottenham: Lloris 7, Walker 6.5, Alderweirdie 6, Vertonghen 6.5, Davies 7, Dier 7.5, Mason 7 (Bentaleb 6), Chadli 7, Dembele 8, Kane 7.5 (Lamela 6). Stoke: Butland 7, Johnson 5, Cameron 6, Muniesa 6, Pieters 6, Whelan 5.5, Van Ginkel 6 (Ireland 6), Walters 6.5 (!), Afellay 6, Arnie 6.5, Diouf 6.5. According to that, pretty well every Spurs player was better than every Stoke player. But er, wasn't the result 2.2, and Spurs lucky to hang on for a draw? Or was there another match with two teams in an alternative universe? Maybe the reporter went home at half time? |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Aug 17, 2015 15:55:26 GMT
Pretty normal that is.
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 17, 2015 15:55:54 GMT
Why is that bad?
It says to me that spurs need to up their game just to draw with us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Aug 17, 2015 16:00:18 GMT
Weird isn't it, I can't see Joselou on there either. Most people would accept that bringing Ireland on turned the match but he gets no more points than the player he replaced. And Walters score of 6.5, must be a point for each completed pass! I wouldn't allow yourself to get wound up over these kind of marks, life's too short, I think most reporters seek recourse to a pin and a blind fold to get them done  To be brutally honest I sometimes wonder if they do the same thing with the player scores in the Oatcake Fanzine  |
|
|
|
Post by hartzchoco on Aug 17, 2015 16:26:37 GMT
We're Stoke. This is nothing out of the ordinary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2015 16:34:49 GMT
We were outplayed for the most of it
|
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 17, 2015 16:38:22 GMT
I agree with it give or take, they controlled the game for the most part, bit kind on Kane mind, without him they crumbled but he didn't have a particularly great game, Ireland seems a bit low too.
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Aug 17, 2015 16:45:21 GMT
We were outplayed for the most of it But the score was 2-2, so someone on their team should have been marked down right? |
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Aug 17, 2015 16:53:05 GMT
When did the Mail ever print the truth? |
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 17, 2015 16:58:08 GMT
We were outplayed for the most of it But the score was 2-2, so someone on their team should have been marked down right? The two subs have low marks, makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Aug 17, 2015 17:04:18 GMT
But the score was 2-2, so someone on their team should have been marked down right? The two subs have low marks, makes sense. Ah |
|
|
|
Post by StokeAz on Aug 17, 2015 17:04:40 GMT
We were outplayed for the most of it But the score was 2-2, so someone on their team should have been marked down right? we were 2-0 up against west ham and messed up last season and we played them off the park for the most part... So because they drew they should get similar ratings? |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 17, 2015 17:05:25 GMT
We need to accept that not only is the media biased towards those which will generate more revenue, they are also incompetent.
In today's Daily Mail, page 75 report on the match says "Alderweireld had a home debut to forget, needlessly tripping, substitute Joselu". Reporter Jack Gaughan must have been watching a different match.
|
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Aug 17, 2015 17:06:22 GMT
But the score was 2-2, so someone on their team should have been marked down right? we were 2-0 up against west ham and messed up last season and we played them off the park for the most part... So because they drew they should get similar ratings? No but some of ours should have been marked down accordingly.... |
|
|
|
Post by StokeAz on Aug 17, 2015 17:15:09 GMT
we were 2-0 up against west ham and messed up last season and we played them off the park for the most part... So because they drew they should get similar ratings? No but some of ours should have been marked down accordingly.... at half time a good proportion of people came on here bemoaning our "dreadful" performance and that we will struggle without the players lost... That soon changed, "what a performance" because of 2 goals within minutes of eachother!!! |
|
|
|
Post by ryanbox360 on Aug 17, 2015 18:12:26 GMT
Let's be honest, we were absolutely dreadful in the first half!
I don't have a problem with those ratings personally, they're just ratings in a newspaper after all.
We all know they were lucky to get the point in the end!
|
|
|
|
Post by ryanbox360 on Aug 17, 2015 18:13:34 GMT
And, I must add, they're a London club.
You know London, the centre of the universe! There's nothing but wasteland, famine and war outside of the M25 you know!
|
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Aug 17, 2015 18:21:23 GMT
More than the ratings, what the media reporting of the game has confirmed, as usual, is that we are always the second character in someone else's story. It's all been about how Spurs threw it away, and the problems at Spurs, and the pressure on Poccetino, and their shortage of strikers, rather than how we turned the game around. Twas ever thus. London journo's writing about a major London club against some provincial side from oop north.
|
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 17, 2015 18:31:00 GMT
More than the ratings, what the media reporting of the game has confirmed, as usual, is that we are always the second character in someone else's story. It's all been about how Spurs threw it away, and the problems at Spurs, and the pressure on Poccetino, and their shortage of strikers, rather than how we turned the game around. Twas ever thus. London journo's writing about a major London club against some provincial side from oop north. That'll always be the case when a bigger club loses out to a smaller one, its always the same, when Man U did poorly against pretty much everyone it was how bad they were not how well everyone else did. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Aug 17, 2015 20:15:07 GMT
We we're outplayed in the first half.
Second half we dominated the ball,the goals we're not scored out of the blue.
A Spurs win would have been unjust.
It must be hard to mark 22 players but how anyone could fail to see that Ireland was superb is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Aug 17, 2015 21:25:07 GMT
London newspaper favours London club shocker. |
|
|
|
Post by BuzzB on Aug 17, 2015 21:55:56 GMT
We we're outplayed in the first half. Second half we dominated the ball,the goals we're not scored out of the blue. A Spurs win would have been unjust. It must be hard to mark 22 players but how anyone could fail to see that Ireland was superb is beyond me. This, Game of two halves. Not our fault their manager thinks one striker can carry them for a season, he wasn't injured either, over used more like, exhibition games straight after last season followed by the U21's then playing in a tournament in the week leading up to the new season. The lad needs a break. Anyway, thats their problem. I'm rambling........... |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 17, 2015 22:00:10 GMT
I don't know if it's the case with the Premier League reports but aren't the ratings in newspapers something that the apprentice does?
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 17, 2015 22:04:37 GMT
More than the ratings, what the media reporting of the game has confirmed, as usual, is that we are always the second character in someone else's story. It's all been about how Spurs threw it away, and the problems at Spurs, and the pressure on Poccetino, and their shortage of strikers, rather than how we turned the game around. Twas ever thus. London journo's writing about a major London club against some provincial side from oop north. Must be reading different reviews because I've seen mainly positive reports for us. We played poorly in the main and showed.character to get a result. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Aug 17, 2015 22:06:05 GMT
Marks out of 10 are pretty silly. Some people put daft amount of emphasis on them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Aug 18, 2015 6:57:25 GMT
More than the ratings, what the media reporting of the game has confirmed, as usual, is that we are always the second character in someone else's story. It's all been about how Spurs threw it away, and the problems at Spurs, and the pressure on Poccetino, and their shortage of strikers, rather than how we turned the game around. Twas ever thus. London journo's writing about a major London club against some provincial side from oop north. Must be reading different reviews because I've seen mainly positive reports for us. We played poorly in the main and showed.character to get a result. Fvourable, yes. We get some credit. but the emphasis has been largely about Spurs than us. |
|
