1st time to see MoM not being the highest rated

Right wingback, played full game + 4 assists made, rating - 9.4

versus

"Left wing striker", played 10 mins, took 3 shots, scored 3 goals, rating 9.5

I've never seen anything like this before, it's kind of weird, isn't it?

If the guy had been rated at least 9.5 I wouldn't even care to make a thread, anyway, here he is, the underrated hero:

No.. just need a rating system that actually works.

No.. just need a rating system that actually works.

Please state why you think it's broken.

You can't give a bloke MoM if he's only on the field 8 mins even if his performance is 'perfection'.

You can't give a bloke MoM if he's only on the field 8 mins even if his performance is 'perfection'.

This. And especially given that he isn't match winer, though he did bagged a hat-trick.

He's more like "Man of the 8 minutes he was on the field". Still impressive though

Well aside form SI themselves saying it needs some work, lets see...

It's primarily based on goals... team scores and everyone's rating increases regardless of their role (or lack of a role) in the goal. Team concedes and they all drop. I've seem plenty of times where a player, say a center back, has a rating of 6.0.. terrible game for him, yet his team scores and he had nothing to do with the goal at all but still his rating magically jumps to 6.8/9... ok so what happened that suddenly made his prior performance better.

With this in mind I had a defender with 6.0 at one point and decided to look at the stats to see what he was screwing up before proceeding with the match... well I look and he'd won all his headers and tackles, had an interception, but was 50% on his passing, not great but put that to trying poor long balls. Does that really mean a poor performance of 6.0?

Center midfielders have predominately average or higher ratings even when you're team gets completely dominated and the ball is consistently given away at midfield. Wingers will get 6.0/2 ratings regular enough, but I can't remember the last time I saw center midfielder get something that low. But strikers and defenders commonly get those or lower, especially the games you are completely dominated. You can lose 2-0 (like I just did), and your strikers and defenders will all have 6.0 or lower ratings but the midfielders all have between 6.5 and 6.9.

The system they have makes no sense, it's not strictly based on the performance of a player (at least not by any stats we can look at so something completely arbitrary), and as I said goals increase or drop ratings of all players regardless if they had any hand at all in the play or not.

Edit:

Now that's more like it. Just stating that's something is flawed without explaining it counts for nothing.

Heh, fair enough, just felt lazy and have talked about this stuff in other threads. Half expected some fanboy argument in return though, lol... nice to be civilized at times.

Now that's more like it. Just stating that's something is flawed without explaining it counts for nothing.

The rating system is awful.

I reckon they should just to assistant manager comments during the game. So a number, or maybe a letter or something to differentiate. This would just essentialyl just be telling you what sort of form they are on. It would get more accuarate as the game goes on. A bit like the current motivation words of advice you get. But one for how well they are playing.

Then at the end of the game, give them a rating based on the 90 minutes. As a newspaper might.

Doesn't the op state that the 90 min full back gets mom despite getting a 0.1 rating below the hat trick sub? Never seen it happen before though.

thats a definate Fm first for me, never seen that before, i like it.

thats a definate Fm first for me, never seen that before, i like it.

I think and I could be wrong it's because he hasn't played more than 15 minutes of the game, because if you sub a player on in the 74th minute, the rating they get will count on their avg rat in their column....but on the other hand if you sub them on in the 75:01 or later he will not receive whatever rating he gets.

That's the only reason I can think of.

You can't give a bloke MoM if he's only on the field 8 mins even if his performance is 'perfection'.

I agree, just wanted to express my surprisement at the rating.

The defender deserved the MoM, no doubts, he contributed more to the game, made lots of accurate passes, the right side of the pitch was all his in this match, it was nearly a perfect game for him, yet he wasn't given the highest mark.

Really seems that goals are the key factor for assessing players' level of play, which is a topic for another thread (which I guess has already been discussed).