Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Predict the scores...if you can!

- LUFC Match Predictions
- Predict Six
- FA Cup Predictions

Plenty to choose from - dip in and have a go - all MOT members welcome. Just for fun.
User avatar
pjm2019
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 1065
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2021 5:12 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by pjm2019 »

faaip wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 9:04 am I start with a baseline 6, that's my not done much right, not done much wrong score. Then the good and bad gets factored.

I think you are giving ratings for effort not for how many goals we score, did we over power the other team, clean sheet, MOTM etc

Based upon the LOSS away we did not meet any of the above.


a 6/10 baseline is starting at above average ?
User avatar
Leeds1000
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 6:11 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by Leeds1000 »

pjm2019 wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:19 am Maybe BUT WE LOST
Its still possible for players to play well in a losing team. You must have played in a match that despite your team losing you feel like you have had a good game personally? Similarly its possible to play absolutely terrible and scrape a win.

Altho our results are similar Chelski have far better individual players so we were always going to be a struggle. I'm surprised anybody thought any different tbh. Similarly i think we have better players than Southampton and we scraped bye with a scuffed shot. We haven't won many games as you know so are you suggesting with give marks of 3's across the board everytime we lose a game? I went for 3-1 to Leeds because of the hope rather than expectation.
User avatar
The Subhuman
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 57981
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:03 am
Location: God's own county

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by The Subhuman »

pjm2019 wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:23 am I think you are giving ratings for effort not for how many goals we score, did we over power the other team, clean sheet, MOTM etc

Based upon the LOSS away we did not meet any of the above.


a 6/10 baseline is starting at above average ?

6 is baseline average...but you can play well and lose you know, one or two players can have outstanding games in a big defeat. Your rating the team, you should be rating individual performance... It's what's asked for.
"Any artistic decision which is based on whether or not you're going to make money isn't an artistic decision, it's a business decision"
User avatar
1964white
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 130682
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:46 am
Twitter: @1964white

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by 1964white »

Any more ratings?
User avatar
1964white
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 130682
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:46 am
Twitter: @1964white

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by 1964white »

Defensively we were excellent, our failings were up top apart from Summerville & late flurry from Gnonto. Sam Greenwood gave us more creativity when on the ball.

7 Meslier
7 Ayling
9 Koch
9 Wober
8 Firpo
8 Adams
6 McKennie
5 Aaronson
4 Harrison
9 Summerville
4 Rutter
subs
7 Gnonto
7 Greenwood
4 Joseph
User avatar
The Subhuman
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 57981
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:03 am
Location: God's own county

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by The Subhuman »

If Gracia wanted a good look at the whole Gnonto or Harrison debate it should have been well and truly answered. I rate Jack but Wilfrid is just better atm. Gnonto could play the 10 and maybe should have done for Aaronson

I think our back 7 picks itself (Roca or Adams as the DMF is the one main question, love Adams dynamism but Roca seems better suited for the KP role) it's just the injuries and fluctuations of selection issues causing a few problems in the front 4. When fit one would assume (left to right)

Gnonto - Rodrigo - Sinisterra and Summerville all start with Harrison - Bamford - Aaronson - Rutter as direct back ups atm.

I'd like to see that for a few games but with Rodri out and Bamford struggling for form because of fitness I think I'd start Joseph
"Any artistic decision which is based on whether or not you're going to make money isn't an artistic decision, it's a business decision"
User avatar
pjm2019
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 1065
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2021 5:12 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by pjm2019 »

1964white wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 8:35 am Defensively we were excellent, our failings were up top apart from Summerville & late flurry from Gnonto. Sam Greenwood gave us more creativity when on the ball.

7 Meslier
7 Ayling
9 Koch
9 Wober
8 Firpo
8 Adams
6 McKennie
5 Aaronson
4 Harrison
9 Summerville
4 Rutter
subs
7 Gnonto
7 Greenwood
4 Joseph
9 ???? for Summerville, how many goals did he score, how many assists did he perform
User avatar
pjm2019
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 1065
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2021 5:12 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by pjm2019 »

reading the replies to my comments i must be almost alone in ratings for the players and when i see rating of 9 for forward players that have not scored or provided and assists it makes me laugh.

Lets get real
User avatar
1964white
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 130682
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:46 am
Twitter: @1964white

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by 1964white »

pjm2019 wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 10:10 am 9 ???? for Summerville, how many goals did he score, how many assists did he perform
Crysencio did so many things right, more or less playing on his own in an attacking sense, so much so the Chelsea defenders targeted Summerville as they knew he was our dangerous forward.

Good
5 dribbles
5 runs with the ball (so good, Crysencio was crudely fouled four times)
2 decent passes
1 tackle

Bad
2 lost possession
User avatar
JoeDenver
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 2271
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2023 10:58 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by JoeDenver »

Meslier 7
Ayling 6.5 (was a 6, but the sprint at the end to win the corner added a .5 for redemption)
Koch 7
Wober 7
Firpo 7
Adams 6 (tempted to drop to 5.5, but keeping it at 6, maybe because of that shot of his)
McKennie 7 (our best offensive threat outside of Summerville)
Aaronson 6.5 (solid first half, but faded in second)
Harrison 4 (this is getting old)
Summerville 8
Rutter 6 (likely offered more than Paddy, but still young and getting acclimated…he’s “thinking” a lot out there and so doesn’t look natural yet)
Joseph 6
Gnonto 6 (I think he’s being figured out by defenders to some degree, but I think he’s also being experimented with as a strike partner up front…saw some glimpses of that)
Greenwood 6.5 (extra .5 for his free kicks)
Fly Fishing, Skiing, and The Damned United
User avatar
Leeds1000
Site Contributor
Site Contributor
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 6:11 pm

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by Leeds1000 »

faaip wrote: Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:48 am If Gracia wanted a good look at the whole Gnonto or Harrison debate it should have been well and truly answered. I rate Jack but Wilfrid is just better atm. Gnonto could play the 10 and maybe should have done for Aaronson

I think our back 7 picks itself (Roca or Adams as the DMF is the one main question, love Adams dynamism but Roca seems better suited for the KP role) it's just the injuries and fluctuations of selection issues causing a few problems in the front 4. When fit one would assume (left to right)

Gnonto - Rodrigo - Sinisterra and Summerville all start with Harrison - Bamford - Aaronson - Rutter as direct back ups atm.

I'd like to see that for a few games but with Rodri out and Bamford struggling for form because of fitness I think I'd start Joseph
I think Javi is maybe protecting Gnonto personally, keeping him fresh and on point. It would be interesting to see him play 10 i'm not sure he will be creative enough but until you try and all that.
User avatar
1964white
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 130682
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:46 am
Twitter: @1964white

Re: Chelsea v Leeds - Player ratings

Post by 1964white »

Top 3

:gold: Summerville
:silver: = Koch
:silver: = Wober
Post Reply