Goal of the Season 2020-2021

[Snowball]

But HOW pointless?

[Snowflake Royal]

I can see quite a few decimal points.

[SouthDownsRoyal]

This thread is pointless.

Decimalpointless?

[Simmops]

This thread is pointless.

Decimalpointless?

It makes me look clever. That's how oxf*rd stupid it is.

[Snowball]

This thread is pointless.

Decimalpointless?

It makes me look clever. That's how oxf*rd stupid it is.

Nothing is that stupid

[Snowball]

A running Top Ten is a VG idea

Just because Nobbers decided to chew the thread up
doesn't change that fact.

[JR]

We overcomplicated this with ratings.

Keep it simple - a top 5 based on pure ranking and then can debate each week if there are any new entries.

[Snowball]

We overcomplicated this with ratings.

Keep it simple - a top 5 based on pure ranking and then can debate each week if there are any new entries.

I don’t understand. So you have a top five or ten. Then you get a new “good goal”

How does wandering argument decide that we take one of the 5/10 out and bring in this newer better goal?

Doesn’t it have to be a score like 8.9 average from , say twenty people who rate the goal?

Or do you have a poll every time on whether to add a goal to the list?

And if it IS a poll, we drop the lowest-rated goal, but who decided that the goal (ATM, say, or was Meite’s scrambled header v Barnsley) should be bottom?

===========

IMO it’s simple.

We start with the first ten goals

All those interested mark them out of ten

That gives you a ranked top ten

Eg

8.6 Ejaria Derby
8.4 Olise Barnsley
8.2 Joao Colchester

Then, any time RDG score a good goal, anyone can put it forward.

All those who wanna play score the goal out of ten (aware what the highest average is already). So, for simplicity, you are voting and you see or remember that Ejaria got a few 9s, lots of 8.5s and 8s and a 7. This new goal blew your mind so you say 9.

Most say 9 or thereabouts, maybe there’s a mad 0 and a dumb 6. Who cares? We just take the average.

The new goal is 9.1 and that Meite 6.5 gets chopped

Once the ten is there, it’s really easy to do

=======

But trying to pick an order from comments alone is almost impossible and leaves the list open to bias

Or you have to keep having polls

[JR]

Once more this is greatly over complicating it.

You can't apply a quantitative lense here and have a successful long lasting thread.

It's got to be focussed on qualitative discussion. Those interested have a debate on the merits of a new goal and whether they think it makes the top 5. Based on that debate you take a call as to whether and where the goal enters.

No running averages, medians, complex analysis etc - purely based on good old fans debate

[Snowflake Royal]

I didn't think I'd really need to, but can I just qualify that I was taking the piss?

[Snowball]

Once more this is greatly over complicating it.

You can't apply a quantitative lense here and have a successful long lasting thread.

It's got to be focussed on qualitative discussion. Those interested have a debate on the merits of a new goal and whether they think it makes the top 5. Based on that debate you take a call as to whether and where the goal enters.

No running averages, medians, complex analysis etc - purely based on good old fans debate

Of course it's a qualitative discussion.

But how do you move the top five around?

When you have a top five or ten, and a week's qualitative discussion about a goal at Cardiff, how do you decide to drop one goal from the list and put a goal INTO the list at No1, or 3 or 8 or 10?

How do you convert the current ten to a new ten?

Without a score it means every time there is a new "possible top ten goal" everyone has to select a new top ten!


If I'm wrong, please explain.



Whereas, if you have your qualitative discussion (great, I agree completely) you ALSO say, "Well if Ejaria's goal is an 8, I rate Olise's goal higher than 8 (or lower depending on opinion). Then we simply score Olise's goal as the average of all the scores posted for it.

It's so easy, so clear, and avoids the problem of attempting to compare and contrast subjective, wooly opinions

[JR]

Once more this is greatly over complicating it.

You can't apply a quantitative lense here and have a successful long lasting thread.

It's got to be focussed on qualitative discussion. Those interested have a debate on the merits of a new goal and whether they think it makes the top 5. Based on that debate you take a call as to whether and where the goal enters.

No running averages, medians, complex analysis etc - purely based on good old fans debate

Of course it's a qualitative discussion.

But how do you move the top five around?

When you have a top five or ten, and a week's qualitative discussion about a goal at Cardiff, how do you decide to drop one goal from the list and put a goal INTO the list at No1, or 3 or 8 or 10?

How do you convert the current ten to a new ten?

Without a score it means every time there is a new "possible top ten goal" everyone has to select a new top ten!


If I'm wrong, please explain.



Whereas, if you have your qualitative discussion (great, I agree completely) you ALSO say, "Well if Ejaria's goal is an 8, I rate Olise's goal higher than 8 (or lower depending on opinion). Then we simply score Olise's goal as the average of all the scores posted for it.

It's so easy, so clear, and avoids the problem of attempting to compare and contrast subjective, wooly opinions

It’s simple - let’s say Ejaria scores with a mazy dribble in the second half.

I would say that I think that goes in top 5 and would put in number 3. Other people may then agree or disagree. You then use your judgement to insert (or not) at the place in the top 5 that there appears to be most consesus on.

[Snowball]

Once more this is greatly over complicating it.

You can't apply a quantitative lense here and have a successful long lasting thread.

It's got to be focussed on qualitative discussion. Those interested have a debate on the merits of a new goal and whether they think it makes the top 5. Based on that debate you take a call as to whether and where the goal enters.

No running averages, medians, complex analysis etc - purely based on good old fans debate

Of course it's a qualitative discussion.

But how do you move the top five around?

When you have a top five or ten, and a week's qualitative discussion about a goal at Cardiff, how do you decide to drop one goal from the list and put a goal INTO the list at No1, or 3 or 8 or 10?

How do you convert the current ten to a new ten?

Without a score it means every time there is a new "possible top ten goal" everyone has to select a new top ten!


If I'm wrong, please explain.



Whereas, if you have your qualitative discussion (great, I agree completely) you ALSO say, "Well if Ejaria's goal is an 8, I rate Olise's goal higher than 8 (or lower depending on opinion). Then we simply score Olise's goal as the average of all the scores posted for it.

It's so easy, so clear, and avoids the problem of attempting to compare and contrast subjective, wooly opinions

It’s simple - let’s say Ejaria scores with a mazy dribble in the second half.

I would say that I think that goes in top 5 and would put in number 3. Other people may then agree or disagree. You then use your judgement to insert (or not) at the place in the top 5 that there appears to be most consesus on.

That makes it "my judgement" whereas people scoring a goal makes it fair and democratic and (overall) objective



Anyway, forget it.

[Simmops]

How do you give a goal a decimal place though. What is the difference between a 6.2 and a 6.8

It makes no oxf*rd sense

[SouthDownsRoyal]

How do you give a goal a decimal place though. What is the difference between a 6.2 and a 6.8

It makes no oxf*rd sense

0.6

[Snowball]

MY VIEW

1. Ejaria's Goal for 0-2 at Derby. (A good 8+ for me)

Team move, brilliant hold-up play, great shot from a narrow angle


3. Morrison at Cardiff. (7.5)

Olise's perfect cross and fantastic header. Clear coaching for the CBs



2. Olise's half-volley v Barnsley, his first league goal. (7.4)

Thought the keeper was at fault, taking the edge of the goal


4. Joao's turn and shot at Cardiff (7.3)

Prefer this goal to Joao's turn and goal v Colchester. We had four men breaking,
Laurent drove forward hard, slipped the ball to Joao, who again did very well


5. Joao's great turn in the six yard box versus Colchester (7.2)

Well-executed but against lower class opposition


6. Joao's sneaky near-post goal at Derby after block by Moore (7.1)

Nice goal, training routine, but not as special or memorable as the top five, for me.

7. Joao's equalising header after an excellent Araruna cross (v Colchester) (7)
"Standard" decent-striker's header but a peach of a cross.

8. Joao's cool goal after being put through by an excellent Olise through-ball. (7)

Through ball quality, finish ultra-cool, but opposition mediocre


9. Meite's scrambled header, first goal against Barnsley (6)

Meite so often in the right place, but a scrappy goal. Won't be top 20.



We are spoiled! 8 of those 9 have been excellent goals

[Snowball]

How do you give a goal a decimal place though. What is the difference between a 6.2 and a 6.8

It makes no oxf*rd sense

7.7 out of ten = 77 out of a 100


I understand this is very high-level rocket-science

[Simmops]

How do you give a goal a decimal place though. What is the difference between a 6.2 and a 6.8

It makes no oxf*rd sense

7.7 out of ten = 77 out of a 100


I understand this is very high-level rocket-science

77 what out of 100 what? I have a PhD. Don't try demean me. I'm clevever then you.

[Snowball]

How do you give a goal a decimal place though. What is the difference between a 6.2 and a 6.8

It makes no oxf*rd sense

7.7 out of ten = 77 out of a 100


I understand this is very high-level rocket-science

77 what out of 100 what? I have a PhD. Don't try demean me. I'm clevever then you.

I know. You even invent words.

[Simmops]

Jaoao goal was an 9.2 for me.

Great strength and vision