Marks out of ten malarky

Tim Robbins

Instead of marks out of ten for players would it not make sense to give marks out of ten for each part of the game:

* Restarts
* Lineouts
* Scrum
* Breakdown
* Catch / Pass
* Decision Making
* Defense
* Kicking
* ...


The skills in Rugby are usually more to do with how you work together rather than on your own.

Thoughts...

I don't know why it has to be one or the other. The game yesterday was absolutely replete with individual mistakes from Irish players.

El_Duderino 09

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Instead of marks out of ten for players would it not make sense to give marks out of ten for each part of the game:

* Restarts
* Lineouts
* Scrum
* Breakdown
* Catch / Pass
* Decision Making
* Defense
* Kicking
* ...


The skills in Rugby are usually more to do with how you work together rather than on your own.

Thoughts...

Well, yeah. But it would take forensic analysis of the match to reach such a score. So it would cost hours and hours of paid time. So, they summit up in a pithy score and a couple of lines of commentary.

The coaching team will do that analysis because it’s their job. It’s not really a journalist’s job to be that detailed.

thomond2006

This is the third thread on a similar subject recently and the answer hasn't changed. Journalists have to pump out content that is simple and quick. What you are looking for isn't for the mass market and isn't possible to publish within minutes of the final whistle.

Former Former Former

It would just give people ten times more reason to be outraged, which is what a lot of people want, so it would probably be a huge success.

But no, an awful idea.

dregin

Is there ANYTHING to be said for another thread?

Lost Ormond

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Instead of marks out of ten for players would it not make sense to give marks out of ten for each part of the game:

* Restarts
* Lineouts
* Scrum
* Breakdown
* Catch / Pass
* Decision Making
* Defense
* Kicking
* ...


The skills in Rugby are usually more to do with how you work together rather than on your own.

Thoughts...

Why do you just start these threads and rarely contribute to many other discussions on the game itself?

Majority of people watching games and i mean the overwhelming majority dont care and have zero interest in that kind of stats especially getting marks out of 10.

sydthebeat

poor thread

1/10

jacothelad

dregin wrote: »

Is there ANYTHING to be said for another thread?

Is there anything to be said for another mess?........:D:D:D

.ak

England
Haircuts: 3/10

Tim Robbins

Lost Ormond wrote: »

Why do you just start these threads and rarely contribute to many other discussions on the game itself?

Majority of people watching games and i mean the overwhelming majority dont care and have zero interest in that kind of stats especially getting marks out of 10.

Back in the day, it was the Irish Times on a Monday that gave the best analysis of a match on Saturday. So thinking same again. For Monday's paper we get a decent analysis of the game. Wouldn't expect it on Sunday.

They go to game take notes, they watch it again once or twice Saturday evening or Sunday. Is it for the mass market? No. Estimated readership out of 5 million people, probably max 10,000. But think you could get another 5,000 abroad.

What do you reckon?

Why don't we do it on boards? Instead of the negativity - we take different parts of the game, and take it turns and someone then puts it together. We could rotate it so it doesn't become over burdening.

So for next match how about this? I can do the ref, anyone else what to take another aspect?

.ak

I’ll do haircuts.

Tim Robbins

.ak wrote: »

I’ll do haircuts.

Ha ha! anyone else?

Lost Ormond

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Back in the day, it was the Irish Times on a Monday that gave the best analysis of a match on Saturday. So thinking same again. For Monday's paper we get a decent analysis of the game. Wouldn't expect it on Sunday.

They go to game take notes, they watch it again once or twice Saturday evening or Sunday. Is it for the mass market? No. Estimated readership out of 5 million people, probably max 10,000. But think you could get another 5,000 abroad.

What do you reckon?

Why don't we do it on boards? Instead of the negativity - we take different parts of the game, and take it turns and someone then puts it together. We could rotate it so it doesn't become over burdening.

So for next match how about this? I can do the ref, anyone else what to take another aspect?

You've done posts about the ref before and im not sure how necessary they are as you read far too much into small things that are irrelevant/inconsequential to their actual game.
Most who read the reviews etc dont want or need that kind of coverage..
The best coverage of games often is 2 days after as the writers have had time to digest the game. most likely rewatched parts or all of the game again and unlike match reports are not on the whistle jobs.
The negativity here isnt that bad most of the time.

Happy4all

.ak wrote: »

England
Haircuts: 3/10

seems a bit generous.

Tim Robbins

Lost Ormond wrote: »

You've done posts about the ref before and im not sure how necessary they are as you read far too much into small things that are irrelevant/inconsequential to their actual game.
Most who read the reviews etc dont want or need that kind of coverage..
The best coverage of games often is 2 days after as the writers have had time to digest the game. most likely rewatched parts or all of the game again and unlike match reports are not on the whistle jobs.
The negativity here isnt that bad most of the time.

Apologies if they are not up to standard.