Jump to content

pirlo to 94 !!!!


ydkel

Recommended Posts

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

This is what happens when votes on SW are counted towards rating changes on SM. I shudder to think what daft ratings players will have in 6 months time' date=' could very much be the end of SM

At this rate Emile Heskey could be a 90 rated player again, before SM worked out people were taking the pi**[/quote']

just so you know, SM user votes on SW are NOT counted towards ratings...they collect the votes to gauge what people think, not to decide what the rating should be. SW/SM decide.

he most definitely should be 94. One of the best CM's in the world. A legendary player, brilliant Euros, Serie A champion, one of the first names on the team sheet for club and country...still bossing it at 33.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

can't believe some people are arguing Pirlo is not worth his rating.

That's not what we're arguing' date=' at least not me. I think the consensus counterpoint is the manner in which player rating changes are determined.

He is widely regarded as one of the best midfielders in football and as such deserves to have a high rating in the game - his age should have nothing to do with it! And he shouldn't have dropped before anyway....

Nobody was saying that age directly affects rating. My point was that Pirlo was twice reduced by 1 because of a slight dip in playing time, and at the time, consensus here was that he was past it. I disagreed then, and i disagree with the raise now. If he goes up 2 by consensus, there are a lot of other players who have been unfairly reduced in rating, but have been in very, very similar circumstances.

Well done SM/soccerwiki for sorting this out - even if it took you long enough to do it :P

All i can do is warn you' date=' that you are in support of a very bad idea.

Once again, i am not criticizing Pirlo's 94, i am criticizing the process by which he was initially dropped and then raised. There are too many fickle aspects to the rating system, most of which start with SoccerWiki. Raises should not be a popularity contest, they should be OBJECTIVELY DETERMINED by a SYSTEM of performance criteria.

[b']Players who have had stellar International tournaments and received no love[/b]: Craig Forrest, Hakan Balta, Colin Kazim-Richards, Lukasz Podolski, Semih Senturk, Hamit Altintop, Jakub Blaszczkowski, Mario Gomez, Gokhan Inler. I could go on for days, but off the top of my head, that list should at least have you reconsider this whole "Rise by Euro" point of your argument.

The other point--Juventus' success--is similarly flawed. All Chelsea's Champion's League victory did was slow the downward spiral of their older players. Did Lampard rise? Drogba? Terry? Cech?

My point is, once again, less about what the actual rating is, much, much more about the process itself. There is a deplorable hypocrisy, fickleness to the whole thing, and it's getting pretty difficult to turn the other cheek.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Andrea Pirlo rating to 94

http://forum.soccermanager.com/showthread.php?t=134781

Hey' date=' while you're at it, why not give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice all over it?

[url']http://forum.soccermanager.com/showthread.php?t=134781[/url]

Dear God dude, pull your neck in.. It's not the end of the world that someone didn't see you thread and started there own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Pirlo is the key of Juve's 49 match streak & Italy's road to Euro finals. He should have been 95. Same goes for Falcao too. Hope we get Falcao to 95.

This highlights the problem for me. It might be tongue and cheek but If Falcao rises above 93 in the next review' date=' it just shows the floor in this new rating system. It should be +1 and if by the end of the season, he's performing to the same high level, it could merit another +1

Do people not remember what it took for Mario Gomez to get 93, with people pulling out their hair with disbelief at him being overlooked time and time again. I heard rumors Gomez was on the brink of invading the SM offices demanding answers.

SM use to make players work hard for an increase in ratings, prove their not a 1 season wonder, more so if they were 90+ players. It's like Bonucci rising from 89 to 91. I know he's a good defender but if that a base line then he'll be 92 by the end of the season.

;2367853']just so you know, SM user votes on SW are NOT counted towards ratings...they collect the votes to gauge what people think, not to decide what the rating should be. SW/SM decide.

he most definitely should be 94. One of the best CM's in the world. A legendary player, brilliant Euros, Serie A champion, one of the first names on the team sheet for club and country...still bossing it at 33.

Only time will see if i'm wrong on that count and if thats the case i'll admit that. At the moment I personally feel there will be alot more random player increases which people will question on the forum only making people think that the voting system used on SW has to much influence.

As I've seen De Sciglio rise to 85 so will be watching to see how much Ben Davies rises in the Premiership review and if he merits the same big increase as De Sciglio.

That's not what we're arguing' date=' at least not me. I think the consensus counterpoint is the manner in which player rating changes are determined.

My point is, once again, less about what the actual rating is, much, much more about the process itself. There is a deplorable hypocrisy, fickleness to the whole thing, and it's getting pretty difficult to turn the other cheek.[/quote']

Totally agree with the good dr on this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

The process for his rating change is not fickle, he is regarded by SM (aswell as others) as at least a 94 in quality player. who is also playing well for this 94 & is winning things & helped italy to euro final, along with his juve exploits

it's not fickle how SM have decided to give his his 94 back, he gets based on everthing that count towards ratings on SM.#

as for terry lampard cech even after their euro success i wouldn't have increased any of them..

as for pogba, he's not played many minutes but i don't see an issue with his 85, he's not a weaker player than 85 & at these low rating levels, talent its-self will go a longer way than the higher rating level, example pirlo not being 95+ this change.

quiet simply both players got the rating which imo they merit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Riferimento: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Many criticize the decision to increase to 94 Pirlo spite of 33 years,but I remind everyone that in 2009,Giggs is increased to 93 and was 36 years old...Pirlo is one of the best midfielders in the world, and 94 is right :D:D

and Milan sold him free because they thought it was over...ridiculous :D:D:D:D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Once again' date=' i am not criticizing Pirlo's 94, i am criticizing the process by which he was initially dropped and then raised. There are too many fickle aspects to the rating system, most of which start with SoccerWiki. Raises should not be a popularity contest, they should be OBJECTIVELY DETERMINED by a SYSTEM of performance criteria.[/quote']

Although i believe that Pirlo deserves that 94, i 100% agree with this comment. SM has already a serious lack of consistency (not only about ratings, but in many other parts) and i hope this doesn't get worse with the involvement of SW!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Although i believe that Pirlo deserves that 94' date=' i 100% agree with this comment. SM has already a serious lack of consistency (not only about ratings, but in many other parts) and i hope this doesn't get worse with the involvement of SW![/quote']

The process hasn't changed, SM wiki is just the SM community wanting a "say" in ratings (pretty genourous on SM's part) just like we have here on the forum, SM Wiki just gives it a statistic in the form of votes.

The process that pirlo got his rating from what's exactly is the issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

The process hasn't changed....

Yeah' date=' no, it has changed. It has changed several times.

...SM wiki is just the SM community wanting a "say" in ratings (pretty genourous on SM's part)

We should, by this logic, also get a say on what names the elements have. Why not take a poll to see what helium should be called? Why not ask the baptists what they think about government?

Not everyone is entitled to an opinion that matters, most of all, those with vested interest in the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

what are you talking about? nothing has changed, what exactly has changed?

vested interests? like the vested interests the forum members have had since ever...

noting has changed, SM still give a rating, they still listen to those who play the game as they always have as they know the community watch alot of football in real life, you can only do so much with statistics espcially in leagues that SM* don't watch.. irish league swedish league japanese league etc etc etc SM rely on the community to lead the way to determine a players rating in addition to a statistic a player has acquired.

The bigger the community, the more say they have the better as SM then have more knowledge to give a realistic player rating

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

What makes me laugh more than anything on this forum is how serious people take such little things that doesn't really affect anything in real life. I think Pirlo should be 94 but i really cant believe the fuss made by people who disagree.

I thought the end of the world didn't happen but judging on the reactions to Pirlo getting 94 i think i might be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Discussing something, debating something, does not guarantee that someone is emotionally invested in the subject. These are just words, words i am trying to use to convey an idea. Ideas don't require emotional instability to exist.

what are you talking about? nothing has changed' date=' what exactly has changed?[/quote']

Find any 6 of my last 100 posts, if you want an answer to this question. We are currently in a sort of bull market, after several years of the opposite (bear). 5 years ago, there was a dearth of very highly-rated players. Since their decline, none have replaced them. We could squabble about whether the Serie A's internal corruption problems and UEFA ranking yo-yoing affected it. We could squabble about any of the variables, but the fact of the matter is that we have spent many, many years watching 97-94-rated players sink, without being replaced.

I think one of the strongest points i can make is Iker Casillas being more highly-rated BEFORE Spain won everything three times, rather than after. Objectively, the only thing that can explain that is a variation in the criteria used to determine rating.

So yes, again, the system has changed a lot of times. The match engine has also changed several times. And if your fey concept of democracy, or proportional representation, whatever that was when you said that "more members means more voices" is somehow a counterpoint to my argument, i am at a loss to understand it.

If 50,000 imbeciles "vote" on SoccerWiki for an extra +1 to a player they all have, should votes be discounted if their voice has a vested interest in the player rising? Doesn't that sound more like corruption, than it does the voice of the people?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Discussing something' date=' debating something, does not guarantee that someone is emotionally invested in the subject. These are just words, words i am trying to use to convey an idea. Ideas don't require emotional instability to exist.

Find any 6 of my last 100 posts, if you want an answer to this question. We are currently in a sort of bull market, after several years of the opposite (bear). 5 years ago, there was a dearth of very highly-rated players. Since their decline, none have replaced them. We could squabble about whether the Serie A's internal corruption problems and UEFA ranking yo-yoing affected it. We could squabble about any of the variables, but the fact of the matter is that we have spent many, many years watching 97-94-rated players sink, without being replaced.

I think one of the strongest points i can make is Iker Casillas being more highly-rated BEFORE Spain won everything three times, rather than after. Objectively, the only thing that can explain that is a variation in the criteria used to determine rating.

So yes, again, the system has changed a lot of times. The match engine has also changed several times. And if your fey concept of democracy, or proportional representation, whatever that was when you said that "more members means more voices" is somehow a counterpoint to my argument, i am at a loss to understand it.

If 50,000 imbeciles "vote" on SoccerWiki for an extra +1 to a player they all have, should votes be discounted if their voice has a vested interest in the player rising? Doesn't that sound more like corruption, than it does the voice of the people?[/quote']

Sw is dangerous. Its great for the sensible people on here to use an example jmh who can update obscure player etc aswell its when it gets into big risers for talent I.e pogba or opinionated personal views on top players like pirlo, not to mention the biases of everyone who rates them for sm futures, that the user rating system can become farcical. Its a great idea for people to chip in ONLY IF everyone can be unbiased and vote by warrant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

I think one of the strongest points i can make is Iker Casillas being more highly-rated BEFORE Spain won everything three times' date=' rather than after. Objectively, the only thing that can explain that is a variation in the criteria used to determine rating.

[/quote']

trophies arent everything. his performances may have actually been better before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: pirlo to 94 !!!!

Find any 6 of my last 100 posts' date=' if you want an answer to this question. We are currently in a sort of bull market, after several years of the opposite (bear). 5 years ago, there was a dearth of very highly-rated players. Since their decline, none have replaced them. We could squabble about whether the Serie A's internal corruption problems and UEFA ranking yo-yoing affected it. We could squabble about any of the variables, but the fact of the matter is that we have spent many, many years watching 97-94-rated players sink, without being replaced. [/quote']

how many 94+ was their 5 years ago? how many now? you said there was more so have you got figures.. & anyway if a player is only rated 93 then to get 94 he must first be a 94 standard. ie likly at a big team winning domestically and in europe and scoring or assisting and doing something at international level

anyway get them figures for me, btw id say a fair percentage of the players that are 94+ on SM's database wern't 94+ 5 years ago, but are now.. and besides this is going to go up alot in future years, at least 92/93+ as there is so many emerging young talents coming onto the scene, SM don't have a requirement besides that says there must be X number of 94+ anyway..

I think one of the strongest points i can make is Iker Casillas being more highly-rated BEFORE Spain won everything three times' date=' rather than after. Objectively, the only thing that can explain that is a variation in the criteria used to determine rating. [/quote']

Id start to consider the possiblilty that 96 is a cap for a gk then ;) maybe he might get 97 if he won world player of the year or something

So yes' date=' again, the system has changed a lot of times. The match engine has also changed several times. And if your fey concept of democracy, or proportional representation, whatever that was when you said that "more members means more voices" is somehow a counterpoint to my argument, i am at a loss to understand it. [/quote']

m no again, the system has not changed.. but ya the match engine has changed lots of times & will again many times, as will a huge number of other features, this issue is not about what SM are or are not changing in the game, so don't bring it up, stay to the point..

im using that to counter your argument because it's a fact, INFACT in the past a smaller community, when SM was much smaller in participants had their say on the forum & what they said probably had a bigger influence on SM giving ratings to players than the forum and wiki combined these days. .. the forum is not special, SM like to give as many people as possible playing the game a say, the only thing that has changed is the numbers involved.. this is good for SM ;) & like i said previously the last say is with SM, they give the rating to a player.. not the community.

If 50' date='000 imbeciles "vote" on SoccerWiki for an extra +1 to a player they all have, should votes be discounted if their voice has a vested interest in the player rising? Doesn't that sound more like corruption, than it does the voice of the people?[/quote']

ya and if 50 not 50,000 forum members decided to do the same thing, it would be the same situation if not worse, if 50,000 vote ronaldo or rooney up 1.. SM will still base ronaldos/rooneys rating on what they think he shoud have based on the same criteria thats always been there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...