When England beat Croatia 4-2 in their opening World Cup match, the players were showered with numbers — not just on the scoreboard, but in the form of ratings out of 10. From Harry Kane's 8/10 to Jordan Pickford's 5/10, these scores appear in newspapers and websites after every game, instantly sparking debate among fans. But what exactly are player ratings, who decides them, and how much should you trust them?
Player ratings are a staple of British football coverage. After each match, journalists — often chief football writers or dedicated reporters — assign each player a mark, usually out of 10, based on their performance. The scale is roughly: 10 is a world-class display, 8-9 is excellent, 7 is very good, 6 is solid, 5 is average or below par, 4 is poor, and anything lower is a disaster. In the Croatia match, ratings varied. BBC Sport's Alex Howell gave Kane an 8, Jude Bellingham a 7, and three players — Jordan Pickford, John Stones and Ezri Konsa — 5s. Across town, the Mirror's John Cross was harsher: Pickford, Stones and Konsa each got a 5, but he also gave Reece James a 5 and called Stones 'miles off it'.
“How football journalists assign ratings out of 10, why they vary, and what they mean for players and fans.”
The tradition of player ratings dates back decades in British football journalism. Newspapers like the Daily Mail, The Sun and The Guardian have long published ratings after matches, and they've become a fan favourite — and a source of controversy. Ratings are inherently subjective: each journalist watches the game, notes key moments, and forms an opinion. There are no official criteria, though most consider goals, assists, defensive contributions, passing accuracy, work rate and positioning. But two reporters can watch the same 90 minutes and see very different performances. In Dallas, Alex Howell praised Noni Madueke as 'England's most dangerous attacker' with a 7, while John Cross gave him a 6 and noted 'wasted a few crossing opportunities'. Bellingham got a 7 from Howell but a 9 from Cross, who called his display 'some performance'. These differences aren't bugs — they're a feature of the format, reflecting the journalist's perspective and the paper's editorial line.
For UK readers, player ratings matter because they shape the national conversation about the team. They're shared on social media, discussed in pubs and used to argue for or against a player's inclusion. Managers like Thomas Tuchel may dismiss them, but players are aware — some read them, some don't. The ratings also have commercial value: they drive clicks, comments and engagement on news websites. And they can influence public perception over time: a string of 5s can damage a player's reputation, while consistent 8s can build a star. But they remain just one person's view, taken moments after the final whistle.
Q: Why do different journalists give different ratings? A: Ratings are subjective. Each journalist has their own criteria — some emphasise goals and assists, others focus on defensive work or passing. They also watch from different angles and may be influenced by the paper's style or their own biases. That's why you'll see a player get a 5 from one source and a 7 from another for the same match.
Q: What does a 5/10 really mean? A: A 5 is generally considered an average or below-average performance — the player did nothing terrible but also nothing impressive. In the Croatia game, Jordan Pickford scored 5s for 'some wayward clearances' and a mistake on the first goal. It suggests the journalist felt he was not at his best but not a disaster.
Q: Do footballers care about their ratings? A: It varies. Some players say they ignore them completely, while others admit they take note. Former England striker Gary Lineker has said players do read them, especially early in their careers. However, most focus on the team result and feedback from coaches rather than newspaper marks.
What happens next: Every England match for the rest of the World Cup will produce a new set of ratings. Journalists from the BBC, Mirror, Standard and other outlets will publish their scores, and fans will argue over who deserved what. The debate is as much a part of the tournament as the football itself.