Imho the ones by France Football are a lot better. For some extreme and contentious grades they also give explanation and reasoning. I.e. why is it that Isco gets an 8, why a 3 for Messi etc.
Whoscored rates players beyond the decimals. They did a great job last WC. Just checking, it seems that they gave CR7 credits for his dive though.
It is just on their website https://www.francefootball.fr/news/Coupe-du-monde-les-notes-de-portugal-espagne/911758
KDB has those games and phases within games where he looks a decidedly average footballer and he can be very sloppy. Eden Hazard is what they say a 'natural' talent. Within one minute of seeing him it's obvious he can play football.
De Bruyne has been more consistently brilliant than Hazard last season ... only a goal spree saw Mo Salah take the best player award I'll never forget Hazard going MISSING for nearly the whole season a year or so back
I will continue with the Times ones but France Football on Poland - Senegal Les notes de la Pologne Szczesny 4 Piszczek 5 Cionek 3 Pazdan 4 Rybus 4 Blasczykowski 4 (remplacé par Bedinak à la 46e, 3) Krychowiak 3 Zielinski 3 Grosicki 5 Milik 4 Lewandowski 4 Les notes du Sénégal K. N'Diaye 6 Wagué 5 Sané 7 Koulibaly 5 Sabaly 6 Sarr 7 Gueye 6 A.Ndiaye 5 Mané 5 Diouf 5 Niang 7
Colombia - Japan Ospina 4 Arias 3 D. Sanchez 2 C Sanchez 0 Murillo 4 Mojica 5 Lerma 4 Cuadrado, remplacé par Barrios à la 31e 6 Quintero 6 Izquierdo 4 Falcao 5 Kawashima 4 Sakai 5 Yoshida 6 Shoji 5 Nagatomo 5 Hasebe 4 Haraguchi 5 Shibasaki 7 Kagawa 6 Inui 5 Osako 6
FF on England - Tunisia Hassen, remplacé par Ben Mustapha à la 15e 6 Bronn 5 S. Ben Youssef 5 Meriah 4 Maaloul 4 Skhiri 5 Sassi 6 Badri 4 F. Ben Youssef 5 Khazri 4 Slit 6 Pickford 5 Walker 5 Stones 6 Maguire 7 Trippier 6 Lingard 6 Henderson 6 Alli 7 Young 6 Sterling 4 Kane 7
FF on Belgium - Panama Courtois 7 Alderweireld 5 Boyata 5 Vertonghen 5 Meunier 6 Witsel 5 De Bruyne 5 Carrasco 4 Mertens 6 E. Hazard 7 Lukaku 6 Penedo 5 Murillo 6 R. Torres 6 Escobar 5 Davis 5 Gomez 5 J.L Rodriguez 5 Cooper 5 Godoy 4 Barcenas 6 Perez 5
FF on Sweden - South Korea Les notes de la Suède Olsen 5 Lustig 6 Jansson 5 Grandqvist 7 Augustinsson 5 Claesson 7 Larsson 5 Ekdal 6 Forsberg 4 Toivonen 6 Berg 4 Les notes de la Corée du Sud Cho 7 Lee Y. 4 Kim Y. 6 Jang 5 Park (non noté), remplacé par Kim M. (28e) 3 Kim S. 4 Koo 5 Ki 5 Lee J. 6 Son 6 Hwang 6
The probability of teams going into the top- or bottom-half of the #WorldCup knockout stage. Teams in opposing halves cannot meet until the finalDecent chance that pre-tournament favourites #Bra, #Ger, #Fra, #Arg, along with one of #Eng or #Bel, will be on the same side of draw pic.twitter.com/KkQKfKZrnv— Laurie Shaw (@EightyFivePoint) June 24, 2018 This is interesting. Some of the teams in the later groups might prefer to go for a 2nd place (not that this is commonly done, in the majority of cases they don't want to do the counter intuitive thing).
This is fantastic stuff, likening every World Cup team to a club based on quality of the squad. This afternoon's match between South Korea and Germany is actually the equivalent of Derby County taking on Bayern Munich. #KORGER #KOR #GERhttps://t.co/R9vpBDAIxu pic.twitter.com/nsrBwgYTgP— Simon Gleave (@SimonGleave) June 27, 2018
Sweden won against France in their qualification group (lost 2-1 the away game), eliminated Netherlands (did not win either game though), eliminated Italy (won at home, draw away) and now also indirectly sent Germany home. They also won 3-0 against Mexico that is a top 15 team in both the FIFA ranking and Elo ranking. Well done. Nice country (not necessarily nice football).
There were two lengthy VAR stoppages in there. 6 subs plus 2 second half goals means a minimum of 4 minutes. Add VAR in and it starts to make more sense at least.
Yes that is right. The first VAR took 1:45 and Neuer his inverted goalkeeper move took 1 minute. In that light the 7 minutes of the Sweden match (the 2nd longest added time this tournament) was more extreme, or just as extreme. Repeated instances of 10+ minutes added time will not look pretty and elegant. The next logical step is the introduction of actual playing time. There are already plans for that. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sport...te-on-radical-60-minute-game-clock/102990272/ In that article I also see FIFA introduced some leeway for adding more minutes when deemed appropriate. The Confederations Cup is the dress rehearsal for the World Cup in these matters. "FIFA showed its determination to increasing playing time and fairness by reminding Confederations Cup referees to enforce existing rules on timewasting. Referees in Russia also must monitor stoppages — including goal celebrations — more strictly by adding more additional time. Marco van Basten, the former Netherlands and AC Milan great now leading FIFA's technical department, said on Thursday that referees typically add only one minute to the first half and three minutes to the second half. Still, those were exactly the amounts of stoppage time added to the Russia-New Zealand game by referee Wilmar Roldan of Colombia." That it will eventually move into that direction was predicted by him 15 years ago: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/marco-van-basten-wants-new-rules.18597/ http://www.hardgras.nl/uit-het-blad/marco-van-basten-schrijft-nieuwe-spelregels/ Logically actual playing time is the next step and the KNVB is one of the organizations that already wants to experiment with it (like they did in 2012-2013 with the VAR). https://www.ad.nl/sport/victorie-van-de-videoref-begon-in-de-zeister-bossen~a1b5498a/
The factor of the base camp (and the process going on for who gets first pick) is often underestimated, with Brazil getting the most desired place this time round: https://www.thesun.co.uk/world-cup-2018/6549785/germany-world-cup-low/ From ESPN: As ever in defeat, other issues will become the subject of the inquest, from the FA's handling of the Recep Tayyip Erdogan affair to the choice of Vatutinki as a base camp. It is no secret that Low wanted to be in Sochi instead, but some of the underlying financial considerations of the contentious choice have yet to see the light of day.
Only saw it later but 'funny' circumstance is here that the video referee to kick them out and oversee both goals was Dutch (Danny Makkelie). This is not just a wry coincidence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_assistant_referee#History https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...going-dutch-with-var/articleshow/64716820.cms https://www.newsweek.co.uk/total-refereeing-how-var-was-born-raised-dutch-football-535236 http://www.wired.co.uk/article/var-football-world-cup The referee on the field was an American, who were also one of the first to jump on the train (strangely, not the English FA, since the 2010 Lampard incident has been a significant symbol in this). But of course, also here a push to erase the role in the development of the sport from the narrative. In the words of the FA director (also happens to be an alderman for the social-liberals or progressive liberals): Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler Of course, at the KNVB they would have preferred to have seen that their own arbiter had whistled in San Siro last night. And that he maybe made a good, crucial decision after fast switching with a Dutch video assistant, as Bjorn Kuipers did earlier this season with Italy - France, the first ever international match to use video refereeing. But Gijs de Jong also knows how it works politically. Now that more and more signals are turning green at the top of the international football board, those "stubborn pioneers" [sic] from the Netherlands do not have to collect all credits on their own. And so FIFA gave it to two Portuguese leaders last night. But in the control room of San Siro, Danny Makkelie did watch over their shoulders as video supervisor. [...] "Football is more attractive with video arbitrage. The chance that players are guilty of feigning and violations is smaller because they know that everything can be repeated. It makes the game faster, better and fairer. The Netherlands has certainly done well in that the KNVB has taken the initiative in forming the international lobby. You notice that other mainstream countries sometimes find it enough, how this has rolled along. In the beginning, FIFA and IFAB communicated that the KNVB had played a pioneering role, but that is gradually being written out. If you want to do good tests with video arbitration, you should actually work with our referees, because they are practiced with the material and will do it right. That does not happen so far. Apparently it is politically too sensitive within UEFA and FIFA. There are still people abroad who think that the Netherlands has pushed through the video arbitrage. We are a small country and will never be the biggest and the strongest. But even though the big chiefs in the world of football did not appreciate video arbitrage, we with our association bounced against it nicely. That gives my work substance." https://www.ad.nl/sport/victorie-van-de-videoref-begon-in-de-zeister-bossen~a1b5498a/ https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-o...videoarbitrage-toch-wel-ziet-zitten~bb6ba220/