Elite_pie

Interesting discussion to be had on the subject of exactly what means what regarding match ratings. If you make the scale 0-10 then that gives 11 possible ratings, so it could be argued that 5.5 is the mid point. To be honest, my ratings conform to the Sunday paper ratings I grew up with in the 70s, when a zero rating wasn't an option. I always try and keep it rational, so my ratings are usually between 4 and 8, which gives a bit of leeway for an exceptionally good or bad performance. I love these ratings threads for two reasons - firstly it gives me an idea if people saw the game as I saw it, and more importantly it gives those who couldn't attend a general idea of how the players performed. On that basis, the more ratings offered the clearer the picture becomes. There is no right or wrong answer on this because we all have different opinions, so have a go!

I think your mean of 5 is a bit mean, so here are my ratings with a mean of 6: Slocombe 6 - the only reason he gets an average mark is because he had very little to do, apart from a bit of catching practice! Brindley 7.5 - not only solid defensively, but a world class strike for the opener. Rawlinson 8* - really committed performance. To say he outshone Turner says all that needs saying. Turner 7.5 - what we have come to expect, wins far more challenges than he loses. Bakayogo 7.5 - best game I've seen him play. Sound at both ends on the left, fortunately his injury seems minor. Shields 7 - decent going forward and played his part defensively. Rose 6.5 - better in the challenge than when on the ball, but had a decent game. Doyle 7.5 - gave the back four great protection, always available for a pass, showed what an asset he can be. Enzio 6.5 - most of his best work was done defensively, still caused them a few problems going forward. Wootton 7 - did exactly what a target man should do, and has a fair bit of skill for a big man. Dennis 7 - missed a sitter but scored a goal from nothing. Always looked lively. Kelly-Evans 6.5 - probably more at home on the right, but a good option to bring on from the bench. Booty 6 - did his job when he came on. Thomas 6 - no real involvement but helped us see out the last few minutes. A really good, committed performance against a decent team. The fact they were only good up to the final third is more down to our defensive shape than their failings. We actually looked like a team that is hard to beat. I'm still not quite ready to join the Ardley fan club, but he can be given nothing but credit for the last few games. Keep it going Neal and please make me apologise at the end of the season.

Consider me goaded! I'm amazed so many prefer Jorge Grant over Ryan Yates. Grant was good up until Christmas but a waste of a shirt after it. Yates is twice the player Grant will ever be.

We were reasonable with 11 men, and superb with 10 men. When Doyle saw red I expected the rest of the game would see us penned in our own half desperately booting it anywhere and trying to cling on for the point. It was just the opposite, we restricted Halifax to one half chance and created far better ones ourselves. We were so comfortable we could easily have won by two or three. Full marks to Ardley today, the formation we played with 10 men was spot on. For the first time this season we had a genuine shape and a pattern of play. Wootton did a great job up front on his own, and O'Brien controlled the midfield. For me, those two should share the MOM award. Halifax didn't know how to cope with it, because playing it around didn't work for them and playing long didn't work either. I was surprised how easily we kept them at bay, I don't think Slocombe had anything to do in the second half. We now have to make sure this isn't yet another false dawn because if they were second in the league on merit, we don't have a lot to fear.

For anyone looking at the scoreline and thinking that we outclassed Chorley, think again. For 30 minutes we were absolutely clueless, we were being completely played off the park by a team of part-timers and should have been at least two goals down. Then, with our first meaningful attack O'Brien had the awareness to set up Tyson (who's only contribution until then had been to tackle himself in their box) finished well. The rest of the half was uneventful, but we were very lucky to go in at half time on level terms. Even in the second half we didn't create a lot, but three of the goals were real quality strikes from outside the box, the sort we are lucky to see 3 times in 3 months, let alone 3 times in 20 odd minutes. The plus point is that this result should have given confidence a big boost, especially with all the strikers getting on the scoresheet. We now have to make sure this is a turning point, because the table is such that two wins may well see us in the playoff places, while two defeats will see us close to the drop zone. One final thing, it was good to see the Chorley players get generous applause from the main stand on leaving the pitch, because they were far better than the scoreline suggests.

You know how the Leave campaign said that we shouldn't be forced to live under horrible EU laws, and we should 'take control of our own destiny' and live under UK laws, here's an example of one of those horrible EU laws in action. My youngest daughter and her boyfriend paid £760 each to go on an all-inclusive holiday to Mexico in June. They loved every minute, but on the last day their incoming flight was forced to turn back to Manchester causing a six hour delay for their return. The hotel they were in allowed them to keep their all-inclusive wristbands for an extra six hours, so basically they got an extended holiday. When they got home I told her to look into claiming delay compensation even though they didn't really suffer. This morning she got a letter telling her that under EU laws they were entitled to 600 euros (£540) each in compensation. She has just finished her first year at uni training to be a nurse (£9,000 per annum course fees under the Tories), so the money is very welcome. If we had left on 29th March as planned, they probably wouldn't have got a penny!

Great work as always on this thread Piethagoram, as a fervent remainer I love reading it. Have a look at this, because this is the sad reality of what the grand phrase "taking control of our own destiny" has ultimately amounted to: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49021081

If either play at Meadow Lane in black and white stripes I'd give it a go. Although "Come on you sausages" would take a bit of getting used to.

If Notts County ceased to exist, the only other club I could ever contemplate supporting would be AFC Notts County.

Simple and cheap solution to this - just bring back the old Home Ales sponsored 'Ivor Thirst' scoreboard that used to be situated on the uncovered terraces on the Kop. For any youngsters, this was the way we were updated on other game in the olden days. You had to buy the match programme, in which a number of relevant games were listed in A - Z format. At half time the blokes in there put up numbers below the letters to give half time scores at the nominated fixtures elsewhere. The Forest (away) game was always included and the tantalising wait for a 1, 2 or 3 to go up first followed by a zero second was always met by a huge cheer when the home team were in front. The internet is a great invention, but sometimes the old ways were much more exciting.

I will be renewing without a second thought.

Michael. Who is Micheal?

Firstly, I only rated 5 of the 13 players above a 6, which hardly qualifies as "most". The reason we didn't get enough shots on target and win is because the midfield and forwards didn't play that well. Out of the six of them I only marked Hemmings above a 6 because I thought he did a decent job as a lone striker with very little support. There are no right or wrong answers on topics like these, they are designed to give those unable to attend a general idea of who played well and who didn't. By all means disagree with my ratings, but it would be more helpful if you offered your own.

Scholfield 6 - kicking not the best, did make one good save from a deflected shot. Tootle 6 - still not the Tootle of last season, but did ok. Stubbs 7 - didn't do much wrong, looks a good player in the making. Duffy 7* - I know Duffy has his critics, but his reading of the game makes him our best option in central defence. Milson 7 - looked solid, he has made the left back position his own. Enzio 5.5 - can't fault him for effort, but we struggled to get him involved in the game and he missed by far our best chance. Rose 6 - did a decent job in stopping them build attacks. Alles 4.5 - had the first touch of an elephant and still can't beat a man. Vaughan 5 - I though passing was supposed to be his plus point? He struggled to do even the simple stuff. Doyle 6 - always made himself available for a pass, but his set pieces were poor. Hemmings 6.5 - did as much as could be expected as he was often left isolated up front. Mackail-Smith 5 - I was hoping he would be brought on, but not his best day. Patching 6.5 - some good moments in the short time he was on. A dull game which neither side did enough to win. I suppose we are a point closer to Yeovil, but we have to be far more creative if we want to stay up. The most disappointing thing is that in the last 20 minutes we struggled to get out of our own half.

I generally agree with the ratings, we were poor all over the pitch. I don't know if we approached the game thinking we are suddenly a good side, but there seemed an air of arrogance and complacency about it all, starting with the decision to rest Stead and CMS. Newport wanted it more than we did and got what they deserved. The man of the match award had to be the easiest of the season, but those awarding it still managed to get it wrong. When Hemmings was announced it was met with a mixture of boos, puzzled expressions and laughter. Jim O'Brien was the real winner by a mile. Not everything he did came off, but he was the only one willing to try things and the only one who really looked like he was up for it.