| Willock 22:35 - Dec 31 with 9847 views | Myke |
I am concerned about his recent form - ie the last three games. Well actually, more concerned about his loss in confidence than his loss in form. Anybody can lose form, hit that period when nothing you do comes off and even the simplest of passes go astray. It happened to me many times over the years - admittedly from a pretty low bar anyway - and all you can do is grit your teeth, train harder and play through it.
But,starting with the Stoke game (so it hasn't been post - Covid outbreak as some have suggested ) Willock has suddenly not only become anonymous but also unwilling to accept possession, or try to make things happen as only he can. Clive said in his BC report that Willock was 'starved' of the ball, once he was asked to fill in as an auxiliary LWB, when Wallace was removed. I actually don't agree with this; there were several occasions when the ball was passed to him ( usually by Barbet) and all he did was pass it straight back to him again as if he couldn't get rid of it fast enough, often putting Barbet (or whoever) under pressure, forcing them to turn around and use Dieng. It is so completely different than the Willock who was weaving his way through the Derby defence with the ball stuck to his foot, only days (in Stoke's case) earlier.
I have also seen it said that he is only a shadow of the player we know without Chair. Two comments on this; firstly Chair played in the Stoke game and half the Bournemouth game, when Willock was completely ineffective and secondly, if is true then we are in deep trouble with Chair off to the African Cup.
He has had such a fantastic 2021 and he is so vital to our promotion aspirations, that I am very concerned as I said, not so much the loss of form - that is only temporary - but this sudden (apparent) loss of confidence. Let's hope he has a blinder against Brum to prove me totally wrong. |  | | |  |
| Willock on 22:39 - Jan 3 with 2490 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Willock on 22:25 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
Found the ratings very difficult this week.
Basically, I thought we were poor, against an abysmal opponent, and so I basically had a lot of ours on 5-6 with Willock up to a 7 because of the goals, Adomah maybe likewise, and Dunne because I thought he was great. But then I liked Dickie carrying the ball out again, I liked Barbet, I thought Field was decent, so I started to nudge them up towards 7, but then you have to give Willock and Dunne an 8, which I didn't think either of them were, and nor was the performance deserving of an 8. Then I looked at the west london sport ratings and it was all 7s or 8s, which usually I'd associate with the sort of away performance like Hull or Boro, and this was a million miles away.
So in the end I fcked it up I think. |
Jesus Clive, how hard can it be?
;) |  |
| |
| Willock on 22:40 - Jan 3 with 2481 views | Northernr |
| Willock on 22:39 - Jan 3 by Antti_Heinola |
Jesus Clive, how hard can it be?
;) |
You have no idea how much of my Sunday is spent walking around parks in N20/N12 talking myself in and out of whether QPR's left back the previous day is a 6 or a 7. |  | | |
| Willock on 23:06 - Jan 3 with 2395 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Willock on 22:40 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
You have no idea how much of my Sunday is spent walking around parks in N20/N12 talking myself in and out of whether QPR's left back the previous day is a 6 or a 7. |
Now I feel guilty I rarely look at your ratings... | |
| |
| Willock on 23:15 - Jan 3 with 2379 views | LythamR |
| Willock on 22:34 - Jan 3 by BrianMcCarthy |
I don't think you did.
I only had a slight quibble (I really am going to check if I've made that one up) on one of them.
You had it down as 6.5 performance overall. That's probably about right. |
The only one i would argue with would be Wallace who i think was worth a 7 he ready stopped a lot of birminghams work down his flank and absolutely busted a gut in the build up for the first goal |  | | |
| Willock on 23:24 - Jan 3 with 2367 views | GloryHunter |
| Willock on 22:40 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
You have no idea how much of my Sunday is spent walking around parks in N20/N12 talking myself in and out of whether QPR's left back the previous day is a 6 or a 7. |
You've got to give it how you see it, Clive. All player ratings are subjective, and your views are just as valid as anyone else's. More valid than most IMO, since you have watched every minute of every game since 1992. |  | | |
| Willock on 23:45 - Jan 3 with 2330 views | Northernr |
| Willock on 23:15 - Jan 3 by LythamR |
The only one i would argue with would be Wallace who i think was worth a 7 he ready stopped a lot of birminghams work down his flank and absolutely busted a gut in the build up for the first goal |
So, I probably agree with you. But I personally thought Dickie, and definitely Barbet, were better than Wallace. And Adomah was the same as Wallace but scored. So if I shift Wallace to a 7, then in my mind I've got to be considering Adomah, Dickie, Barbet for an 8. And then Dunne was a level above all of them, and Willock started well, set up the first, scored a brilliant second. And now for moving Wallace to 7 I've suddenly got Dickie, Barbet, Adomah on an 8, Willock and Dunne on a 9, Field and Amos probably up to a 7 by those standards, and then you've got a team on 7/8/9 when really, generally speaking, I thought we were crap. | | | |
| Willock on 00:11 - Jan 4 with 2278 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Willock on 23:45 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
So, I probably agree with you. But I personally thought Dickie, and definitely Barbet, were better than Wallace. And Adomah was the same as Wallace but scored. So if I shift Wallace to a 7, then in my mind I've got to be considering Adomah, Dickie, Barbet for an 8. And then Dunne was a level above all of them, and Willock started well, set up the first, scored a brilliant second. And now for moving Wallace to 7 I've suddenly got Dickie, Barbet, Adomah on an 8, Willock and Dunne on a 9, Field and Amos probably up to a 7 by those standards, and then you've got a team on 7/8/9 when really, generally speaking, I thought we were crap. |
If you're having these scoring issues after every match then perhaps your using the wrong system? Scoring out of ten doesn't offer enough flexibility. Considering that players rarely get a 4 or a 9 you've only actually got 4 scores to play with, for the whole team (5-8)!
Have you thought about awarding half marks? So for yesterday it sounds like this would be a more accurate summation.
Dieng 6.5; Adomah 7, Dickie 7, Dunne 7.5, Barbet 7, Wallace 6.5; Field 6, Amos 6, Willock 8; Dykes 5 (Austin 85, -), Gray 5 (Johansen 63, 6) |  |
| |
| Willock on 00:41 - Jan 4 with 2223 views | Northernr |
| Willock on 00:11 - Jan 4 by CliveWilsonSaid |
If you're having these scoring issues after every match then perhaps your using the wrong system? Scoring out of ten doesn't offer enough flexibility. Considering that players rarely get a 4 or a 9 you've only actually got 4 scores to play with, for the whole team (5-8)!
Have you thought about awarding half marks? So for yesterday it sounds like this would be a more accurate summation.
Dieng 6.5; Adomah 7, Dickie 7, Dunne 7.5, Barbet 7, Wallace 6.5; Field 6, Amos 6, Willock 8; Dykes 5 (Austin 85, -), Gray 5 (Johansen 63, 6) |
Yehhhhhhhhhhhh that's what I need in my life  | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Willock on 03:43 - Jan 4 with 2061 views | eastside_r |
| Willock on 00:41 - Jan 4 by Northernr |
Yehhhhhhhhhhhh that's what I need in my life |
Actually, this team is so good and for a QPR team quite unique - the scores should go up to 11. |  | | |
| Willock on 08:57 - Jan 4 with 1894 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Willock on 03:43 - Jan 4 by eastside_r |
Actually, this team is so good and for a QPR team quite unique - the scores should go up to 11. |
I was actually going to suggest that too. This one goes to 11!
Who ever said that scores have to be out of 10 anyway? If half marks aren't your thing how about marking out of 20? Which is the same thing really just dressed up differently.
So for Birmingham it would be this. Which is a bit more accurate I think you'll agree. Overall just above par. Our better players were good but room for improvement. Our poorer performances were bang average. Could be a lot better. Could be a lot worse.
Dieng 13; Adomah 14, Dickie 14, Dunne 15, Barbet 14, Wallace 13; Field 12, Amos 12, Willock 16; Dykes 10 (Austin 85, -), Gray 10 (Johansen 63, 12)
I don't know. I come on here to help and all I get is ridicule 🤷ðŸ¼â€â™‚ï¸ | |
| |
| Willock on 09:43 - Jan 4 with 1807 views | RBlock |
Ratings controversy aside, decent interview in The Athletic with Willock this morning. Not too QPR focused, but worth a read if you've got a subscription - https://theathletic.com/304825 |  | | |
| Willock on 10:46 - Jan 4 with 1685 views | PinnerPaul |
| Willock on 22:34 - Jan 3 by BrianMcCarthy |
I don't think you did.
I only had a slight quibble (I really am going to check if I've made that one up) on one of them.
You had it down as 6.5 performance overall. That's probably about right. |
You didn't! 
Dictionary
quibble
[ˈkwɪb(ə)l]
NOUN
a slight objection or criticism about a trivial matter | | | |
| Willock on 10:47 - Jan 4 with 1681 views | PinnerPaul |
| Willock on 22:40 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
You have no idea how much of my Sunday is spent walking around parks in N20/N12 talking myself in and out of whether QPR's left back the previous day is a 6 or a 7. |
and that's before you get to the referee.......................    | | | |
| Willock on 11:07 - Jan 4 with 1652 views | Phildo |
| Willock on 10:47 - Jan 4 by PinnerPaul |
and that's before you get to the referee....................... |
The answer surely is to go all Brian Clough on it and give a non playing sub a 10 but a hattrick scorer a 2 |  | | |
| Willock on 11:16 - Jan 4 with 1621 views | TheChef |
| Willock on 23:06 - Jan 3 by Antti_Heinola |
Now I feel guilty I rarely look at your ratings... |
Ha I don't really either! But it seems some people do look very closely! |  |
| |
| Willock on 11:52 - Jan 4 with 1569 views | LythamR |
| Willock on 23:45 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
So, I probably agree with you. But I personally thought Dickie, and definitely Barbet, were better than Wallace. And Adomah was the same as Wallace but scored. So if I shift Wallace to a 7, then in my mind I've got to be considering Adomah, Dickie, Barbet for an 8. And then Dunne was a level above all of them, and Willock started well, set up the first, scored a brilliant second. And now for moving Wallace to 7 I've suddenly got Dickie, Barbet, Adomah on an 8, Willock and Dunne on a 9, Field and Amos probably up to a 7 by those standards, and then you've got a team on 7/8/9 when really, generally speaking, I thought we were crap. |
Good points well made | | | |
| Willock on 11:57 - Jan 4 with 1546 views | gazza1 |
The highest should have been Willock (Mainly for his brilliant goal), Dunn (for his quality work at the back for 90 minutes - may have edged it for me). Worst should have been Gray & Dykes (Not very goal either of them). The rest on some sort of even keel, which is basically what you have marked them as. [Post edited 4 Jan 2022 11:58]
| | | |
| Willock on 16:54 - Jan 4 with 1390 views | TW_R |
| Willock on 00:41 - Jan 4 by Northernr |
Yehhhhhhhhhhhh that's what I need in my life |
What about giving each player a score every minute, then you can average it out over the 90 mins (+ stoppage time of course) |  | | |
| Willock on 12:02 - Jan 5 with 1170 views | GloryHunter |
| Willock on 23:45 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
So, I probably agree with you. But I personally thought Dickie, and definitely Barbet, were better than Wallace. And Adomah was the same as Wallace but scored. So if I shift Wallace to a 7, then in my mind I've got to be considering Adomah, Dickie, Barbet for an 8. And then Dunne was a level above all of them, and Willock started well, set up the first, scored a brilliant second. And now for moving Wallace to 7 I've suddenly got Dickie, Barbet, Adomah on an 8, Willock and Dunne on a 9, Field and Amos probably up to a 7 by those standards, and then you've got a team on 7/8/9 when really, generally speaking, I thought we were crap. |
Is it not also a fact that some players play brilliantly, but the overall team performance is poor? I should know, my walking football team lets me down every week. | | | |
| Willock on 12:49 - Jan 5 with 1068 views | WatfordR |
| Willock on 08:57 - Jan 4 by CliveWilsonSaid |
I was actually going to suggest that too. This one goes to 11!
Who ever said that scores have to be out of 10 anyway? If half marks aren't your thing how about marking out of 20? Which is the same thing really just dressed up differently.
So for Birmingham it would be this. Which is a bit more accurate I think you'll agree. Overall just above par. Our better players were good but room for improvement. Our poorer performances were bang average. Could be a lot better. Could be a lot worse.
Dieng 13; Adomah 14, Dickie 14, Dunne 15, Barbet 14, Wallace 13; Field 12, Amos 12, Willock 16; Dykes 10 (Austin 85, -), Gray 10 (Johansen 63, 12)
I don't know. I come on here to help and all I get is ridicule 🤷ðŸ¼â€â™‚ï¸ |
I think there's a case for marking out of 20 and including half marks personally. |  | | |
| Willock on 13:12 - Jan 5 with 1009 views | Superhoop83 |
| Willock on 22:40 - Jan 3 by Northernr |
You have no idea how much of my Sunday is spent walking around parks in N20/N12 talking myself in and out of whether QPR's left back the previous day is a 6 or a 7. |
Why not just follow these rules used by the tabloids?
1. Give each player on the winning side 6, 7 or 8. Dish out a 9 for hat-tricks and Cristiano Ronaldo.
2. Give each player on the losing side 5, 6 or 7. Dish out a lower score for early red cards.
3. In the event of a draw give most of them 6 and a few of them 7. Throw in the odd 5 or 8 based on the 3 minutes of highlights you watched on the Sky Sports app. [Post edited 5 Jan 2022 17:03]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
