I've never looked at the formula for match ratings before. Is it pretty standard across all sites?
Yes, most of them use the same stats from Opta. As much as I can see goals, assists, blocks, saves and key-passes are most important to them when they rate players. I've seen examples where a striker was crap during a match, then scored two scrappy goals and got a high rating. It's like robots rate players. I don't like it.
Nothing better than to watch the game and combine that with stats that matter. For example, when we remove sideway and backward passes from the stats then we only have forward passes left. And when you compare forward passes map between Mike Van der Hoorn and Joe Rodon (see the thread Mike Van der Hoorn is an animal) then you can see how much better Mike is than Rodon. Rodon plays a safe game, vast majority of his forward passes are medium length diagonal passes to Bidwell and Roberts. Nothing risky. Mike, on the other hand, has a great range of forward passing, he is our most creative defender. I have a feeling that the stats sites don't rate this properly: