Leeds v Middlesbro' - MAN OF THE MATCH

[1964white]

99 Peacock-Farrell
94 Berardi
51 Phillips
43 Klich
41 Harrison
22 Douglas
18 Roofe
06 Ayling
04 Cooper
03 Jannson

[The Subhuman]

MOT - MOTM

Klich - 236
Roofe - 225
Berardi - 184
Peacock-Farrell - 154
Saiz - 125
Phillips - 127
Cooper - 94
Hernandez - 75
Shackleton - 68
Douglas - 67
Ayling - 61
Alioski - 42
Harrison - 41
Jansson - 37
Baker - 10
Bamford - 7



after game 6

[1964white]

MOT - MOTM

Klich - 236
Roofe - 225
Berardi - 184
Peacock-Farrell - 154
Saiz - 125
Phillips - 127
Cooper - 94
Hernandez - 75
Shackleton - 68
Douglas - 67
Ayling - 61
Alioski - 42
Harrison - 41
Jansson - 37
Baker - 10
Bamford - 7

after game 6

Thanks Faaip

[Dalton]

Not sure how Saiz has more points than Pablo
and from what i have seen Cooper has been an oxygen thief but never mind

may be fans are happy he is still on the pitch

[The Subhuman]

TBH neither do I ...Pablo should be top 3 along with Roofe and Klich but it's how this shakes out

A lot of the problem is we're allowed 6 votes but some only put forward 1/2/3 names ...so he's probably missing out on some of the under scoring as is Roofe tbf. Not a lot we can do about that

[The Subhuman]

Actually I may go back and re-score if you give one name only gets a point, 3 names 3,2,1 points etc

[1964white]

Not sure how Saiz has more points than Pablo
and from what i have seen Cooper has been an oxygen thief but never mind

may be fans are happy he is still on the pitch

Saiz has been well overscored, not enough end product imo!

[1964white]

TBH neither do I ...Pablo should be top 3 along with Roofe and Klich but it's how this shakes out

A lot of the problem is we're allowed 6 votes but some only put forward 1/2/3 names ...so he's probably missing out on some of the under scoring as is Roofe tbf. Not a lot we can do about that

Aye that is a problem mate.

I suggest we change the scoring format for those who don't vote for six players

So if our players vote for :

5 - the scoring becomes 5,4,3,2,1
4 - the scoring becomes 4,3,2,1
3 - the scoring becomes 3,2,1
2 - the scoring becomes 2,1.
1 - the scoring becomes 1.

[gessa]

Personally I think 6 is too many, 3 is plenty.


Tbh if it is Motm then there should only be one.

[The Subhuman]

Personally I think 6 is too many, 3 is plenty.


Tbh if it is Motm then there should only be one.

Yes but again there's a corruption if you have just 1...

[1964white]

Yes but again there's a corruption if you have just 1...

What do you think of my revised scoring idea Faaip?

[The Subhuman]

It's what I'm using as I re-evaluate all the MOTM thread ...not making a massive difference right now though. I've done Stoke and Derby

[1964white]

It's what I'm using as I re-evaluate all the MOTM thread ...not making a massive difference right now though. I've done Stoke and Derby

Good man

[Haighy]

Personally I think 6 is too many, 3 is plenty.


Tbh if it is Motm then there should only be one.

agree gessa. 3 is plenty.

[gessa]

Aye that is a problem mate.

I suggest we change the scoring format for those who don't vote for six players

So if our players vote for :

5 - the scoring becomes 5,4,3,2,1
4 - the scoring becomes 4,3,2,1
3 - the scoring becomes 3,2,1
2 - the scoring becomes 2,1.
1 - the scoring becomes 1.

I think the problem with that is, If a voter thinks only 3 players deserve a vote because they are the only ones deserving, then that penalises their nominees. If a player gets 6 points for being the top of a list, then that should stand whether it's 1 or 6 that have been voted for.