Inter - Spezia (20 Dec 20) [2-1]

[varmin]

Look at the bright side, at least it seems we are not melting down in December as last year(s).

Based on our performance last two games, the meltdown is coming soon.

 

[ElDuccio]

Just one more win against Verona. Get it in whatever half-assed, improbable way possible, then send them all to hibernate for 2 weeks.

the next game is already the week after

 

[Nothing]

Only 1 point behind Milan, not too bad.

Anytime below Milan is bad tbh

 

[eduzee]

3 points is all that matters. this side has not any identity. only individual brillance mixed with some kind of grinta.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Bro ther as a diffrence between save energy mode and being garbage, we was pure garbage in first half and not more need to be said, just hope we never see shit show like this again..

Bro, who cares if we're garbage in the first half if we score the needed goals in the second half?

I rather see these garbage wins than the gung-ho football where we leaked goals left, right and center and lost points. But each to their own.

 

[Universe]

Bro, who cares if we're garbage in the first half if we score the needed goals in the second half?

I rather see these garbage wins than the gung-ho football where we leaked goals left, right and center and lost points. But each to their own.

Cum on bro. There is a big, big middle ground between garbage and gung-ho.

 

[Batman]

Bro, who cares if we're garbage in the first half if we score the needed goals in the second half?

I rather see these garbage wins than the gung-ho football where we leaked goals left, right and center and lost points. But each to their own.

Three points is the most important thing, I agree.

However, people are rightfully upset about how we have been in the first half (to me it’s the whole match, not just first half) because with these kind of performances, we cant be sure if three points are guaranteed.

Secondly, do you actually enjoy watching your beloved teams fucking up simple passes, or circulating the ball in our own third because we couldnt unlock Spezia’s loose formation?

 

[FairyTailed]

Voting will close in about 12 hours!

You can go to this thread to vote for our players in the Player Ratings: http://forzainterforums.com/showthre...98#post1967198

Alternatively, go directly from this link: http://bit.ly/3aGnEOf

Last game's results: http://forzainterforums.com/showthre...ay-12-Serie-A)

 

[qb4ever_2k]

Three points is the most important thing, I agree.

However, people are rightfully upset about how we have been in the first half (to me it’s the whole match, not just first half) because with these kind of performances, we cant be sure if three points are guaranteed.

Secondly, do you actually enjoy watching your beloved teams fucking up simple passes, or circulating the ball in our own third because we couldnt unlock Spezia’s loose formation?

The game was horrible, I felt like vomitting after it ends. But pragmatically speaking, it was a good game. We got everything we needed, 3 points, saved energy, no injuries, no suspensions, etc...

It was a horribly boring match but the result was never in doubt, Spezia were so weak to ever pose a threat to us. Maybe we could use an early goal there but in the end, comfortable 3 points and onto the next game.

 

[Goldenboyv88]

We've seen one of the worst game in the last years yesterday. Fortunately we won the match, but it has been so annoying seeing Inter playing so bad....

I think that of course our players are really really tired... We are playing with no rest from the last season and we are playing always with the same players on the field because Conte doesn't know what turn over means.

I hope that the Christmas stop will help us to recove all the energies in order to afford the second phase of the season with a new spirit. Come on Inter!

 

[FairyTailed]

http://bit.ly/3aGnEOf

Last chance to vote!

 

[FairyTailed]

You can find the Results of our Player Ratings here: http://forzainterforums.com/showthr...a-(Matchday-13-Serie-A)&p=1967414#post1967414

Or check the quote below.

A new column has been added in the overall season doc displaying player consistency.

For those who don't care about the technical explanation, please skip to the start of the images!

If the formula looks Chinese to you, please allow me to explain the proces of it below. Keep in mind that what concerns consistency, the close to 0, the better. The higher, the worse.

To calculate consistency, we look at the standard deviation of a player's performances. The higher this number, the more inconsistency between their matchday averages. That kind of speaks for itself. However, there's already an issue with this narrowed formula. A player who continiously gets 4/10, will be labeled as consistent - regardless of how donkey ass they are. Likewise the opposite is true - a player (mostly strikers) who get some amazing games with many goals, with a lot of normal games on the side, will look rather inconsistent, despite them being one of the best players of the team based on their average. We want to think of consistency in terms of helpfulness to the team. So we make a correction by adjusting the standard deviation with the subtraction of "a player's personal season average and the total season average (of all players)". This is so that players overperforming relative to the team, will benefit from additional consistency points, whereas players who are terrible will see their score plummet (upwards that is), even if they're consistently bad. On top of this, 2 more adjustments are made. First and foremost, the same completely arbitrary "total games played by Inter, divided by 3 and rounded up" is used, just like we do for having player's total average count towards the season list. Simply because we don't want low number players to influence the outcome of our entire season too drastically. This means that currently a player like Kolarov who would be terribly inconsistent, is not on the list. I'm putting this up for debate, but a caesura is imperative. Secondly and lastly, we've also put a hard cap of the total team average on 6. This means that if the total team average is lower, like right now (5,84), the formula will apply 6,00 when subtracting from a player's individual average, and not 5,84. That is because we see a 6,00 as the absolute average game. If the total team average is higher than that, good. That means we are doing good and the team is competitive and it feels absolutely essential to be weighted against the strength of the team. But when a team's performance dips below 6, we're starting to fish for players that are looking consistent relative to the underperforming team. While in absolute terms, even they might not be performing that well.

I hope all of this makes sense and if you have any additional question, opinions, ... about this, please let me know. I'm watching Brehme and Ethor. :datass:


- - - - - -

- - - Additions - - -

The submissions for this game can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l213kicQaKDqnLcjGwyyLxizccg1z5bUJVasUCXHt68/edit?usp=sharing

Overall Season Doc:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1u6kI-Pjc7Am-LwpUUxa9-t-5a9tbeGQeveWdZJWzbyE/edit?usp=sharing

- - - END - - -

Hope everyone enjoyed participating and I hope you like the result.

Feel free to discuss below.

 

[Ethor]

Like it, two things
1) the rankings have half points( ex.2 and 2.5). That makes on my count 19 possible . Would not the absolute average be really 5.5 instead of 6?
2) Like the corrections for games played, though minutes played would be more useful for this squad, coach and maybe this Covid-19 year. Thats minor though.

EXCELLENT WORK!

 

[varmin]

For the people who constantly shitting on Marotta.
MoTM awards so far:
Barella (x5), Lukaku, Hakimi (x3), Sanchez (x2), Vidal, Darmian (x1) - total: 15
Brozovic, Lautaro, Handanovic, Skriniar (x1) - total: 4

 

[FairyTailed]

Like it, two things
1) the rankings have half points( ex.2 and 2.5). That makes on my count 19 possible . Would not the absolute average be really 5.5 instead of 6?
2) Like the corrections for games played, though minutes played would be more useful for this squad, coach and maybe this Covid-19 year. Thats minor though.

EXCELLENT WORK!

First of all: thank you!

Before explaining, I want to mention again I'm totally up for changing and will listen to/accept any ideas.

Again, there is actually an explanation for the 5,5 and 6 problem.

From when I started doing this up until now, the vast majority have seen 6/10 as a completely average game. It's also generally seen as the "Italian starting point" as used by many Italian football newspapers (Gazzetta, Corriere, ...).

Starting from this would mean the logical thing would be to limit the voting from [2;10], because 6 would be the middle.

However that would look like a really weird scale, so that made me choose for [0:10]. However, back at the start, I was not using half votes (2+ years ago) and not using the drop down menu. I was using a linear scale which only allowed 10 (natural) numbers. Since [0;10] has 11 numbers, I had to drop one and that became the [1;10] we know today. I never revisited that problem after changing to half votes and a drop down menu.

This is more of a practical problem right now. If voters deem a 6 to be the average, would it even be worth to consider adding 0 and 0,5 as options? In 99% of the cases, these options will only be voted on by trolls and people have never complained about not being able to pick below a 1. Having 0 and 0,5 would lower the average even more, towards 5. And nor 5,5 nor 5,0 are likely to ever happen as team average. That would only happen if we expect to end top 3 and are in the bottom half of the table or worse. So to suit practicallity with reality, the best option would be to use [2;10] with half votes. But we have the problem again that it looks really weird to start at 2.

I don't mind changing this but I'd like to hear the opinion of a couple of people.

What concerns minutes played: I really want to use this. I really, really do. However, up until now I haven't found a good solution. Having to do it manually for each player after each game increases workload. Now frankly it is not that hard, as I list the minutes or substitution of each player anyway and I could simply judge the game as 90 min without ET, or remember the total ET myself. However, I cba to go and claim the number of minutes played for each player in the 18 games played so far. So this would be the something I can add starting a new season.

However... the easiest solution would be if I could create a formula in Spreadsheet that allows me to pull the data from somewhere. Then I don't have to input the effort and it works automatically. Then again, it makes the ratings susceptible to someone else's site's uptime and their update frequency.

If you know a good solution, please let me know. I'd prefer to use minutes played as well!

 

[Ethor]

Heck, I didn't know 6 was average for Italian media! So, then your analysis is correct and I was wrong. This also means my past rankings were wrong as well. Sorry about that too! This may mean depending sample size, in the future that a slight movement upwards in the rankings may be to my previous incompetence.

 

[FairyTailed]

Heck, I didn't know 6 was average for Italian media! So, then your analysis is correct and I was wrong. This also means my past rankings were wrong as well. Sorry about that too! This may mean depending sample size, in the future that a slight movement upwards in the rankings may be to my previous incompetence.

Lol, don't be so hard on yourself! It has nothing to do with incompetence. It's just a general matter of opinion and yours doesn't have to agree with it. If an average for you is a 5 (for example), then so be it.

I try to get most people in line by adding this image to each voting form:

But a lot of people just don't see it

 

[Ethor]

Missed the Cagliari game so my excuse is I didn't see it! Thanks for your kind words.

 

[GenDire]

Great to see people being nice to each other on this forum for a change

 

[FairyTailed]

Great to see people being nice to each other on this forum for a change

I wrote in my initial comment that 6 was the middle of [0;8] and [1;9] which is just absolutely dumb and untrue, but no one called me out for it.

It's indeed a change to see people being nice :hopeful:.

The results being better will also have to do with that!

- - - Updated - - -

Missed the Cagliari game so my excuse is I didn't see it! Thanks for your kind words.

It's there for every game

But again, no problem. Literally 90% of people miss out on it and I would to if I hadn't made this. And that's okay - I also don't want to force people too much into a certain behaviour, because than I am skewing the results