What The ????? SC Scores

[Master Blaster]

its a complete bullshower format, 3300 is a perfect example

numbers pulled from arse, no live scores proves its corrupt

wtf is this bs " oh he kicked winning goal or nice tackle last seconds lets give him 80 points "

absolute bullshower format run by clowns

[Cool9]

mmm ... interesting post.  >:( >:( >:( >:(

So AFL games are rigged because you can only score 4 premiership points? How corrupt.

Why not give teams more premiership points if they win by playing a possession-heavy attacking style rather than strong defensive game? Oh.... I know why... because then it wouldn't be a level playing field

[IHATEBRUCEMCAVANEY]

This sc vs dt debate reminds me of circle work :D....At the end of the day its a personal choice...

[Prospector_1]

Yup, so its a great talking point!

[tony73]

So I'm still confused
3 quarter time Kosinski 29pts end of game 19pts ??? (i didn't see any clangers or free's against)

3 quarter time Montagna 91pts end of game 157pts ???

I am convinced of the 3300 points allocated per game and that points are removed from players to be given to another who had an influence on winning the game ie Montagna's goal, last quarter 20-25 pts while Kozi was the victim of losing those points out of having minimal influence last quarter

[nas]

Wonder if you had kossie?

But yes it is mind blogging how they do the scores. called robbing Peter to pay Paul

[tony73]

Na Naste I dont have Kozi, my obsssion with this game (first year SC) has me keeping a keen eye on the scoring as a whole.  ;D

So much so the laptop is open during every game.

Where can you get Q by Q stats because I would love to see Montagna's exact stats for the last quarter?  I just did not see 66 SC pts in that quarter. What I did see was a few touches off the wing but not many hardball gets or contested possesions. Am I wrong?

I also have Gddard and was extremely pleased with 129pts but I did not see that either!!! I won't complain with that one though, thats biast ;D

[Don Cottagers]

Other factors that score points include spoils and kickins. Don’t know, but I wouldn’t be surprised if things like bounces and effective shepherds also got points. The thing that I don't understand is even if you think that the game is rigged we all know the players that score well! Why not just pick them up and enjoy it being rigged in your favour (if you do believe that there is rigging involved...)?? Personally, I love that the truly effective and damaging players get the most points, with the exception of key defenders and maybe taggers, the scores usually reflect the dominance of the players pretty well

[tony73]

All true Don and as I have said in a previous post its fantasy, all fun, I agree with the damaging players scoring big but I didn't see that with Montagna and Goddard tonight. I will take the points though!

An obsessive thing this SC thing ;D

[hibbo]

So I'm still confused
3 quarter time Kosinski 29pts end of game 19pts ??? (i didn't see any clangers or free's against)

3 quarter time Montagna 91pts end of game 157pts ???

I am convinced of the 3300 points allocated per game and that points are removed from players to be given to another who had an influence on winning the game ie Montagna's goal, last quarter 20-25 pts while Kozi was the victim of losing those points out of having minimal influence last quarter

What u have to understand is the quarter by quarter sc points are just a guide. The Saints vs Blues game was won in the last quarter in that's when Montagna dominated and Kossie did nothing.

But Herald Sun/Champion data make sure the points are around 3300 by the end of the game, so major score differences (even taking points away from people) occur. If it's a close game, then expect some big point changes from 3 quarter time, becuase it will be the last quarter when the game is there to be won...

[tony73]

http://www.superroach.net/

The Roach has posted a very interesting story on scoring. Explains a lot about what we have thrashed out here!

Includes article from champion data

[chris]

The fluctuating differences between DT and SC scores is starting to p!ss me off. On the weekend to win one of my SC  games I needed Skippy to score about 30 points more than Grimes in the Ess v Melb game. At the end of the game I saw the DT scores Skippy had 95 and Grimes had 55 and thought gee the SC scores shouldn't have a significantly different gap only to see in SC Skippy had 80 and Grimes 72 which lost me the game  ???

[tony73]

LOL Chris, I have them both! and was happy Grimes scraped 72, I dont think he got a touch in the second half!

???

[ossie85]

Not sure what people's problems are here.... that updated quarter scores aren't accurate? Surely you want the updated quarter scores for the excitement of it, yet are disappointed when another level of excitement is added to the game due to the uncertainty?

And the 3300 scaled idea is fantastic! Provides COMPARIBILITY across time.

In DT, you can have a player score 100 and be the 15th highest scorer of the game and the next week someone could score 100 and be the highest scorer in the game. How are you meant to compare performances?

In SC, someone gets 100 you can compare that with a score of 100 the next week.