You can sort of see where it’s going, but not really. As MT says, if a player is in a winning side then he’s more than likely to have a + score, although not always, which is tricky bit. While this system measures players’ effectiveness in their time on the ground, what do the stats really tell, if anything, and who are they supposed to be meaningful to?
I only had a brief look in the paper yesterday and it seemed that some of the best players at various clubs were rated at the bottom of their team’s list (if that makes sense). Not sure if I’m reading it right but, effectively, it seems that the better players, who generally spend the most time on the ground and are dominant players, can be penalised just by being out there when the team's losing. Wonder if they realise that they would actually do their score a whole lot more good if they sat the odd quarter out, especially the losing quarters. And if the team’s having a bad trot, maybe they could fake a hammy or something every now and then. I don’t think I get it.
