I totally agree with you. Why should players that get points anyway get MORE points?

Ozil VASTLY outplayed Sagna, simple as

Accepted - but a defender whose team conceded 2 goals shouldn't get 3 BAPs unless possibly when he scores a goal

First off - great grav. Been a while since I've seen ol' Tommy anywhere.

As far as BAPS...I am usually just confused by the EA/BPS distinction. Why have EA at all if it has no bearing on the outcome of the actual scores?

A defender who concedes two goals and loses the game gets BPS. Seems wrong at the very core.

Seconded. The last BPS led to way too many ties (I think there was a Stoke game where the entire backline got 3), and the one before that favoured scorers way too much.

This one best reflects what you see on the pitch.

Nice post Gargamel. The BAPs system seems to be good in that it doesn't only take attacking returns into account.

Agreed!

It's a difficult thing to get right. But it's been very fair this season. MUCH less debate than previous seasons.

Sagna did not deserve 3 bps after letting in 2 goals. The system has been good, but in this instance it wasn't right

I think it works fine too. I dabble in a few games where the scoring is more based on underlying stats e.g. direct points for interceptions, recoveries, etc. and Sagna was scoring well throughout the match so it wasn't surprising to see him in the bonus in FPL.

The idea that he shouldn't get bonus simply because he conceded goals is a nonsense, the bonus is for his individual performance.

I have a simple solution for this, that I've previously mentioned.

All players in a winning team should get a set a mourn of bps added (as in to their total bps score)

This would be considered a valid addition due to their efforts contributing to a win.

It would then remove a lot of those bonuses for players on losing by sides, yet still not restrict it too much if someone was immense yet lost.

I do however think the current bonus is the best so far and is at least transparent.

I have to agree with you here in that it's the best system so far and a vast vast improvement on the last one.
To read comments that suggest because a defender is on the losing team that concedes 2 goals he shouldn't be awarded bonus points is missing the point by the same margin that Zamora did from 18 yards out.
A team loses 2-1 means that the defenders don't deserve credit or implies that they didn't play well - get a grip!
If Mangala wasn' on the park then Sagna might have picked up a clean sheet bonus, maybe - maybe not.

Just for the record, in an International boys tournemant final (u15's I think) my wee Scottish team were beaten 5-3 by a West Bromich team yet I won the MotM award (subtle brag). 🙂

In GW10, Vardy scored the only goal for Leicester in a 1-0 win; his goal earned them 2 points. Simpson did nothing of note, but got 31 bps and Vardy got 28.

yep, not even sure ozil's pass was meant for walcott, and if it was it was a bad pass that forced walcott into cutting back and doing what he did. agree this bonus system seems to be the best one yet, no one factor is over-powering like blocks were in the past or accurate sideways passing for centre backs, or just being charlie adam.

good post
form way I watched the game, the last half hour all I seen was sagna involved in attack and getting back to recover.

Both of Arsenal's goals came from the side of the pitch that Sagna is supposed to be defending, lets not ignore that.

Judging from the comments made below its just as well there is not a man in the stands element, everything is so subjective. A bit of variation in the 0-0 draws would be good, no one likes seeing every defender get bonus, but I think they did a good job in it so far this year.

Now just to involve holding midfielders a more - just kidding!