Actual ratings vs What you think they should be

Ed wrote:

Jelavić7|EFC wrote:

Funny how the press can affect a players rating in a fucking football game, press say he's shite, lets drop his rating.

but he is shite a few half decent games doesnt mean he should be an 82

This thread is only for people with half a footballing brain, thanks.

Jelavić7|EFC wrote:

Ed wrote:but he is shite a few half decent games doesnt mean he should be an 82

This thread is only for delusional liverpool supporters, thanks.

fixed.

Ed wrote:

Jelavić7|EFC wrote:

This thread is only for delusional liverpool supporters, thanks.

fixed.

Not one single west brom player would even have a sniff of getting on the Liverpool bench therefore please don't bring your jealousy in here.

Jelavić7|EFC wrote:

Ed wrote:fixed.

Not one single west brom player would even have a sniff of getting on the Liverpool bench therefore please don't bring your jealousy in here.

why bring west brom into the equation? They have nothing to do with this.

The point is there is no way that carroll should be upgraded after 2/3 good performances, when every other game this season he has been woeful.

West Brom > Rangers.

West Brom's ratings are pretty low considering their place in the table.

i think the west brom ratings are about right tbh

a few such as mulumbu and morrison should be changed though, and jerome thomas should be lower than 73

Maybe, but you look at how well you're doing....and then you see teams like Wolves and Bolton are 4 stars

Lux wrote:West Brom > Rangers.

West Brom's ratings are pretty low considering their place in the table.

Money.

Jelavić7|EFC wrote:

Lux wrote:West Brom > Rangers.

West Brom's ratings are pretty low considering their place in the table.

Money.

Which doesn't matter in terms of ratings.