Sreddy Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I find it frustrating and unrealistic that so many times by half time and leading 1-0, all players get 6.9 in rating, except the player who have scoret. He gets about 0,4 more. When you have a rating from 1 to 10, it seems redicilous that the ratings always are in the little area between 5 and 9, and almost always around 7 if it is not a extremely special match. I understand that the .0 ratings was added as it was always 6 or 7 before. Now you have a little more, but I still find it stupid that the ratings arent spread more. It would add more "character" to the players in stead of the almost communistic equal ratings. In a real match more people are playing awful while others are great. But looking isolated at the ratings does not reflect that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AjaxNo1 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 In a 1-0 performance its not unrealistic for most players on the team to have a 6-7 rating, ie your playing average, that almost what all the papers tend to give players when rating Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmf1488 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 Cant say in all my teams I have managed so far, that I have encountered any unrealistic problems with rating system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazza10 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 The problem i have with the ratings is for example my winger dribbles two players on his wing and delivers a perfect cross for the striker to tap in... The winger gets a 0.1 rating and the striker gets a 0.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBKalle Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 My main gripe about the rating system is the fact it shifts the concept of "adequate" by a whole point... In the game you would consider a 6.5 performance a mediocre one, with 7.0 being more or less the passing grade. However in most 0-10 scales the threshold for pass is 6.0. Also it should NOT award ratings above 8.0 unless the performance was truly stellar, and scoring 2 close-range goals is hardly 8.5 material IMO, not even if it's the World Cup final. Basically a reasonably poor-good performance should range from 5.0 to 7.0, with anything below or above being reserved for truly deserving (or undeserving ) players. That way the difference between a player with an average rating of 6.80 and another with 6.40 would TRULY mean something, while with the current ratings I really struggle to separate "reliable" from "plain unremarkable" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirajzl Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 One thing is certain, during half-time or post-match, players always accept criticism if they have a rating below 7.0. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.