Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Spam

Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

up_green_arrow.pngdown_red_arrow.png

Gareth Bale, Samir Nasri, Hernanes, these names, and many more, when mentioned on the forum will tend to be regarded as players whose current rating doesn't reflect their form and level of performance. With countless threads expressing displeasure at a particular players' change (or lack thereof) being made every day, I've decided to make this thread for people to air their opinions or voice their concerns about players' ratings. If you feel a certain player has been left underrated after the Premier League has been reviewed, or perhaps someone has unfairly dropped after the Bundesliga changes; - here's the place to discuss it:

1) If a player's rating doesn't accurately reflect his performance level

2) If a player is unfairly dropped or given a 'Non Rise'

3) What the player's rating should be in your opinion

By the way guys, How SM Rate Players should be taken into consideration, if you're unaware of their exact criteria for ratings, then it's well worth a read! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Good idea for a thread.

Personally the biggest shock (and mistake) of the recent changes is Malouda.

Awesome last season, league winner, awesome this season (average in the last handful of games, as with all other Chelsea players). Yes, France have been shocking but I personally feel that's pretty irrelevant.

I actually feel there was a greater case of a +2 than him staying. Very very very suprised.

How can Giggs be 93 if Malouda if 92? I'm saying this as someone who has both in his squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Mesut Ozil - 93? What for? He should have stayed 91 or only raised to 92. I watched almost every game of Madrid and Samir Nasri has been playing much better for Arsenal. Why has Nasri not been raised to 93?

Biased towards spanish teams is what I first think. Aguero 94? equal to Carlos Tevez? Jesus Navas 92? Compared to Nani 91? Why did Nani not get pushed to 92 during his excellent form for Man Utd last season and alot of the matches this season? Navas has not been better than Nani.

List goes on. Douglas Costa is still 86 but Neymar is 88? Costa has been amazing for Shaktar. So many players that are too high or too low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Good idea for a thread.

Awesome last season' date=' league winner, awesome this season (average in the last handful of games, as with all other Chelsea players). Yes, France have been shocking but I personally feel that's pretty irrelevant.

I actually feel there was a greater case of a +2 than him staying. Very very very suprised.

How can Giggs be 93 if Malouda if 92? I'm saying this as someone who has both in his squad.[/quote']

I agree with that. Any player can have bad or average matches for their national side but be superb consistently for the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

i think scholes and giggs should have switched ratings. scholes has been outstanding when available. how can he be 1 lower than giggs now.

Giggs rose 6 months or so ago SM are reluctant to rise and drop immediately after, whilst Giggs was also injured. If things continue as they are I can see him dropping again (unfortunately) along with Carrick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Mesut Ozil - 93? What for? He should have stayed 91 or only raised to 92. I watched almost every game of Madrid and Samir Nasri has been playing much better for Arsenal. Why has Nasri not been raised to 93?

Biased towards spanish teams is what I first think. Aguero 94? equal to Carlos Tevez? Jesus Navas 92? Compared to Nani 91? Why did Nani not get pushed to 92 during his excellent form for Man Utd last season and alot of the matches this season? Navas has not been better than Nani.

List goes on. Douglas Costa is still 86 but Neymar is 88? Costa has been amazing for Shaktar. So many players that are too high or too low.

I think this forum will full of complaining people if it happen ..LoL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Fantastic idea for a thread :) Thought I'd try and add a bit a structure to what could become a load of posts moaning (though they should ideally all be in one place :P)...

I think SM have given too much credence to the World Cup. The club form of players like Nasri and Malouda definitely warrants a 93 rating, especially when you consider some of the other 93 rated players on the game. So why didn't they get rises? They themselves are playing well enough, Malouda since January and whilst Nasri has only really stepped up this season, the increased number of rating changes should allow form to play a bigger part in what makes up the rating. Their clubs are doing well enough, both safely in the top 4 and progressed in the Champions League; easily enough for players of Nasri and Malouda's stature to rise.

Then it must be down to international performances. Both fall down here with Nasri not making the French cut and whilst Malouda did get in the squad, the less said about France's performances the better. Should 7 games (or in these guys' cases, 3 and 0 games) really have the influence to hold these players back or even rise players another rating such as Coentrao and Muller? I personally would much prefer international performances to sway a possible drop/rise rather than having the credence to jump a whole level that it seems months of good performances at club level doesn't. Ah well, if they keep it up they'll rise next time... no excuse really though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

SM need to start reading these threads to see what people think about their rating review. Having to wait another 3/4 months for players like Nasri/Malouda to rise is a joke. Only needs them to get a injury lay off leading up to next changes and same will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Raines

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Fantastic idea for a thread :) Thought I'd try and add a bit a structure to what could become a load of posts moaning (though they should ideally all be in one place :P)...

I think SM have given too much credence to the World Cup.

One thing I can see happening already: loads of people coming in moaning about how Busquets is rubbish and shouldn't have rose at all. :P

I agree that SM are putting too much emphasis on the world cup. It's not even 10 games long but it seems to have given an extra +1 to quite a few players. I think Muller to 91 was a bit much and I've got him in one of my teams. It shouldn't hold back a player's ratings either. I don't see how it's fair to rate players on it too much e.g. +2 for player X as 'he has been great in the league all season' and +1 because 'he had a good W'C so +3 overall. Then for another player to say the same thing for league performances +2, but the say 'well he didn't play in the WC because his national team isn't very good' +2 overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

One thing I can see happening already: loads of people coming in moaning about how Busquets is rubbish and shouldn't have rose at all. :P

I agree that SM are putting too much emphasis on the world cup. It's not even 10 games long but it seems to have given an extra +1 to quite a few players. I think Muller to 91 was a bit much and I've got him in one of my teams. It shouldn't hold back a player's ratings either. I don't see how it's fair to rate players on it too much e.g. +2 for player X as 'he has been great in the league all season' and +1 because 'he had a good W'C so +3 overall. Then for another player to say the same thing for league performances +2' date=' but the say 'well he didn't play in the WC because his national team isn't very good' +2 overall.[/quote']

I agree to an extent. World Cup is just 7 games but it is regarded as the best football competition in the world (personally i prefer champions league). Muller's performances at world cup were exceptional, as were ozil's, forlan, iniesta and they should be taken into account when ratings reviews are done. What I cant understand at the moment is messi's rating. Ronaldinho was 99 at the peak of his career and imo Messi is a better player now than Ronnie was. The only difference I see is Ronaldinho won the world cup. Messi shouldnt have to win it to become 99.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Good idea for a thread.

Personally the biggest shock (and mistake) of the recent changes is Malouda.

Awesome last season' date=' league winner, awesome this season (average in the last handful of games, as with all other Chelsea players). Yes, France have been shocking but I personally feel that's pretty irrelevant.

I actually feel there was a greater case of a +2 than him staying. Very very very suprised.

How can Giggs be 93 if Malouda if 92? I'm saying this as someone who has both in his squad.[/quote']

Malouda went off the boil after September, and Chelsea aren't great shakes at the moment, although IMO the odds were still in Malouda's favour for a rise. Without a doubt SM will adress this if his form picks up alongside his clubs'. As irrelevant as people may deem internationals, as we've seen in the cases of Muller, Coentrao, Busquets and Ozil, SoccerManager hold internationals in very high regard, the World Cup especially - his recent barren patch aside, France's torrid WC campaign may have held him back somewhat too. Giggs' 93 is intact because he's bene out with a long term injury i think, I could be wrong on that one though, so correct me if I'm wrong. :o:D

Mesut Ozil - 93? What for? He should have stayed 91 or only raised to 92. I watched almost every game of Madrid and Samir Nasri has been playing much better for Arsenal. Why has Nasri not been raised to 93?

Biased towards spanish teams is what I first think. Aguero 94? equal to Carlos Tevez? Jesus Navas 92? Compared to Nani 91? Why did Nani not get pushed to 92 during his excellent form for Man Utd last season and alot of the matches this season? Navas has not been better than Nani.

List goes on. Douglas Costa is still 86 but Neymar is 88? Costa has been amazing for Shaktar. So many players that are too high or too low.

Ozil's done a bangup job for Madrid' date=' he mightn't have contributed the goals of Ronaldo but he's been a phenomenal team player for them, and if all goes well on all fronts for Madrid with ozil keeping his form - there'll be a strong case for him rising to 94 at the end of the season. His World Cup, which as I said, SM hold in high regard, was extraordinary, and earned him a rise basically before the 'real' season had begun!

Nasri's lack of international minutes under Domenech would've counted against him, not to mention that he was a few months back from a broken leg around the last changes and wasn't performing great (pegged as a borderline dropper for some) before 10/11 meant that he didn't rise. As a biased Arsenal fan I think he's been playing at the standard of a 95 for much of this season though, and would cheekily accept two +1s for Nasri in the upcoming PL changes! :P

Interesting point in regards to the whole Spain/England thing, although last season Navas certainly deserved his 92 (he was unreal against Real Madrid in the match I did see) and he recieved rave reviews about his performances. This season he hasn't set the world alight, and maybe SM will adjust his rating accordingly next time, I'm almost certain that if Nani keeps playing like he is atm he'll get 92. ;)

Costa will get a further rise, and Neymar too, but if you put them on the same pitch together I think the homebased player would be better. Never rated Douglas as a world class talent, he's far too left footed for my liking. :o

i think scholes and giggs should have switched ratings. scholes has been outstanding when available. how can he be 1 lower than giggs now.

Agreed. Scholes has been fantastic, although I think Giggsy's been out injured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Casillas I hope gets his 96 as he is in the best gk in the world, he should get +1 on all other gk's.

Nasri could do a busquets? (+2) but doubt it, 93 has to be a cert next time! then a 94 if he keeps it up!

Malouda should of got a 93.

and Michael Carrick, where was his drop? ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Can't see why people are complaining about Maouda's rating to be honest. He got his rise to 92 for his form at the back end of last season. His good start to the season might have got him another rise but Cheksea's and his poor form in over the last month plus the World cup means he deservedly did not rise. 92 is just about the right rating for now imo.

Nasri will get 93 next time but SM were right in not giving it this time seeing as he was quite simply put average for 2 years.

Mystified why Sturridge did not rise. Been playing a lot and is a lot better than Kalou imo whos shocking at the best of times. Can see him being a future England international despite moving to Chelsea.

Also shocked by Ferdinands drop. Why? Been pretty good since coming back from injury and can't see any reason why he dropped.

Won't go too much into this but a 95 for Rooney and Torres is shocking considering Ribery is still a 95!! Rooney and Torres weren't fully fit but what's Ribery excuse for pumping aimless balls down the middle for Bayern and France. Surely the most overrated player?

oh and I am a United fan (Scholes is my idol) and Scholes has done nothing to rise at all. Had a good start but tailed off massively since then. Giggs has been injured a couple of times but has lost his place now to a resurgent Ji Sung park.

On the whole apart from giving too much importance to the world cup SM have got it just about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Said this is lots of other threads, Why are SM taking the WC more important than the Champions League (Everyone knows the Champions League is much more competive).

Also cant understand why 7 games at a WC warrants a player who would usually get a +1, get a +2 or more. (Muller has a great WC, average since then and gets a +3? lol. 90 was the obvious thing).

Ribery staying at 95. When has he ever played like a 95 rated player? 3 ratings above Malouda? Giggs doesn't play much and hes ahead of Malouda.

Some of their ratings have been really good, but some are just stupid tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Raings are the reason i wont pay to play this game

NASRI 92 - NO change

BUSQUETS 93 - UP 2

PEDRO 92 - UP 2

OZIL 93 -UP 2

Any simpleton can see its a farce at times.

I don't understand your point, are you forgetting the world cup!?

Nasri will rise... but not until the end of the season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Couple of points:

1. I see this thread as just one more to the list of threads complaining about ratings.

2. I don't actually see the problem with people making their own threads. So someone who maybe wasn't around the first time a player got discussed cannot discuss now, because you have forbidden it? This is a forum. Look up the meaning of it.

3. I personally don't actually like to sift through 100's of pages to get to a particular topic. I've never understood this concept of bunging everything into one thread. Hell, lets just have one huge thread and put everything in it!

4. If the WC had such an impact, as a lot of you claim, then why did Forlan not rise? He won the Golden Ball afterall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

I don't understand your point?

The World Cup was 7 games. :o

Then i'm sure you forgot about the qualification matches held over the span of two year,just for a spot in the 2010 FIFA World Cup.Which comprise of 204 out of the 208 FIFA national teams.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Official Player Ratings Discussion Thread

Then i'm sure you forgot about the qualification matches held over the span of two year' date='just for a spot in the 2010 FIFA World Cup.Which comprise of 204 out of the 208 FIFA national teams.;)[/quote']

LOL. SM rate those qualifies when they do the leagues, they dont take them into considerating in the WC, the qualifiers are done ages ago.

Dougie is right, its 7 games and SM are giving out huge ratings for nothing. And lets be honest, it was a pretty awful WC compared to previous ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...