Okay, the scores are in and so here are the updated player ratings for the Kildare match, based on a simple average of the marks provided by everyone who responded:
- Robbie Hennelly: 7
- Kevin Keane: 5
- Ger Cafferkey: 6
- Colm Boyle: 6
- Lee Keegan: 6
- Shane McHale: 6
- Brendan Harrison: 5
- Tom Parsons: Not on long enough to be rated
- Aidan O’Shea: 5
- Cathal Carolan: 6
- Keith Higgins: 5
- Adam Gallagher: 7
- Kevin McLoughlin: 6
- Andy Moran: 7
- Darren Coen: 6
- Jason Gibbons: 8
- Brian Gallagher: 7
- David Drake: 7
- Diarmuid O’Connor: 7
- Enda Varley: Not on long enough to be rated
- Alan Freeman: Not on long enough to be rated
- Michael Conroy: Not on long enough to be rated.
On this basis, Jason Gibbons is the undisputed MOTM from our team, which tallies pretty well with the non-numerical post-match analysis. Indeed, I think the figures as a whole are pretty consistent with what everyone has been saying in the post-match comments about how individual players performed on the day.
As regards the whole issue of whether or not this is a worthwhile activity, I have – as I said earlier on – an open mind on the issue. While I’m not convinced by some of the arguments put forward by those who are opposed to this initiative – would players really find a numerical scoring system on a fans’ website unfair and hurtful? How can the numerical scoring of a player’s performance be criticised as being subjective, given that the same criticism could equally be levelled at assessments of players put forward using words? – I’m not wedded to it either and I’m more than happy to go along with what the majority wants.
If it’s a Yay, then I’ll certainly also look into Surveymonkey as an option – though I think public voting may have some merit in this instance, given that it’s far easier to be unfair and hurtful when nobody else is looking – while if it’s a Nay then we’ll simply forget about the whole thing.
It’s in your hands, people:
Do you want a players' rating feature on the site?
- Yes (55%, 113 Votes)
- No (45%, 92 Votes)
Total Voters: 205
Loading ...
Yeah Gibbons was my top rated, no issues there!
Go on then WJ, the Mayor says yes to the player rating 😉
Btw, regarding the CP season ticket, did anyone get a letter from HQ about a “ticket office error” on January 27th?
Love your work on the site willie joe, and I respect that you have decided to go with a poll to decide on whether to continue this initiative. Personally I would be opposed to it. I feel it swings too close to individual criticism if a player gets consistently bad rating after a poor performance. Also I think a lot of people tend to rate players based on preconceived opinions of a players ability rather than what actually happened in a game.
For example 2 of the more criticised players on the mayo team are Enda Varley and Kevin Keane, rightly or wrongly (wrongly in my book). Varley came on for 10 mins and was getting ratings of 3, 4, etc, while parsons went off after 10 mins and wasn’t on long enough to be rated! Likewise Keane seemed to be our lowest rated back but from what I heard on Midwest commentary (live overseas so can only listen online) he was no worse than any other member of our defence. I can’t help feeling that both of these guys were rated by some people based on their previous performances in mayo jerseys than what happened on the field yesterday.
Therein lies the problem with these ratings. I’m sure your own ratings were very balanced and fair but Some people will never give certain players a high rating no matter how well they play because they played poorly in big games previously. Ditto they will never give their favourite players a poor rating either even if they have a stinker. That’s just not fair. You simply can’t rely on anonymous internet posters to be fair and balanced all the time. Even if the quality of the contributors on this site is generally very good. Imagine if some of the riff-raff that appeared on this forum in the weeks after the AI final got their ratings in?! It would be a farce.
That’s my opinion anyway.
I got one of those letters.Im assuming you are referring to the letter where the GAA had our data available to other account holders for a spell.I followed that up with an email to them querying with them that given news like that is often best served with something to soften the blow.I was chancing my arm of coarse.But the response i had got was that it was human error and it was for a small amount of time and the GAA wont be offering anything in the way of compensation:)
personally willie joe i would prefer if we gave our top three players after every game and from this we produced the MOTM and 2 honourable mentions rather than the whole scoring system e.g if you score the whole team then you leave it open to too much bickering
That’s actually a good idea Roger.Maybe a more positive way of doing it.
Yeah, I got one also.
Yep got one too. Quite thorough of them to inform us. Thought of doing the same mayomaningalway but never got around to it.
I like that idea too Roger. While I wouldn’t put much store in it, I have no major objection to the rating system – we all hold opinions on a player’s performance at any given time and I don’t think any of it is personal – it’s all part of the enjoyment of the game.
However I think the objections here are a sign of the esteem in which this group of players is held in the county, which is kinda nice to see.
Great argument Mac and well presented. I like the idea of a MOTM award and, as was mentioned previously, a potential supporters Player of the Year award but, the red flag you wave in your argument above is true. You give the perfect example of the 10mins played by both Varley and Parsons. To be perfectly honest, my gut reaction to O’Connor coming on was far more enthusiastic than when Varley came on and, although I like to think of myself as unbiased and fair in assessing players and performances, I would be quicker to upgrade O’Connors performance than Varleys because of O’Connor youth, inexperience and the stage of his footballing career. For example, if O’Connor kicked 2 wides I would encourage him and will him on, if Varley kicked 2 wides my reaction would not be the same. Where I might give O’Connor 7 for showing for the ball and attempting the shots, I might give Varley 5 for missing them. See what I mean?? Maybe that’s only me, I don’t know.
I can see the arguments for and against a poll. At the end of the day, these lads are all bursting their balls and committing a huge amount of their lives to try to win an All Ireland for their county. They don’t go out with the intention of playing poorly. And even when they do underperform there may be underlying circumstances that we don’t know about, fitness, fatigue, injury, woman trouble, work trouble etc. etc.
Maybe the poll would work for those of us that are level headed and realistic and fair but if some of the “toolboxes” that were on here after the All Ireland had their say in the poll well the numbers would be fairly skewed. Roger Millas suggestion below is another alternative. For all my talk I am voting Yes.
Well put Anne Marie. Even though I voted Yes it was with some caution. Whilst it is fair to criticise performances, at the end of the day, they are wearing the boots and we are in the stand. They deserve our support more so than our criticism.
Sorry now but Keane was poor. Left far too much room for his man to operate and was beaten loads of time. The Mayo backs were also shown up in that they were unable to deal with the high ball, again. I am sure these backs will improve. Tough with the lack of training and having to cope with this ridiculous black card. These gobsh.. need to leave the game alone. I do not want football being diluted into a non contact game. In the long run any lessening of the physicality will destroy the game. If the kids want non physical contact sports there is heaps out there – tennis, swimming, golf, etc.I dont want our game. The promoters of these changes chickened out. Their real job was to define the tackle and they avoided this.
Anyone in Galway going to Omagh on Sunday that might have a spare seat? I will share petrol/diesel costs 🙂
That’s not only you with respect to the Varley/O’Connor comparison. However when you look at it in more depth your argument does stand up to scrutiny.
Enda Varey has been part of the setup now for over 3/4 years. He knows (or at least has more experience) on what it takes to operate at this level. Diarmuid O’Connor does not. You have to take this into account when deciding your opinion on how the player plays on the day.
Same with the likes of Ger Cafferkey, Kevin Keane or Shane Mchale and Lee Keegan. You have to take into account the experience of the different players and use this when making your assessment.
I’m with you on that one Roger – it would also avoid the class dud kinda thing…
I much prefer this idea as I’m sure the general consensus would see the best 3 performers from any given game being selected , I think the player rating system would fall foul to parish loyalties….
yeah I agree Anne-Marie…I’m considering a response too but in the meantime, applaud the transparency.
Agree wholeheartedly with Mac’s left… but would have to say that ratings ; in words or numbers, in excess becomes cheap and irrelevant. In my humble opinion there is far to much analysis and too little passion in Mayo football -don’t really care what passes in other counties- so I’ll chip in with a mainly positive vibe if and when I’m feeling it and leave analysis to fitter folk.
Yep, I got one too. Not overly concerned as amount of information involved seemed minor enough – I hope!!!
Yes, not unlike the Three Stars in the National Hockey League but it’s a great idea!
I am not in favour of the individual ratings for the reasons expanded on above. Top three performers and MOTM for each game a much better proposition and a supporters POTY even better. Much more positive.
Right on rodge!