What The! Dusty?

[upthemaidens]

ok so martin has 20 poss. and a goal,, but only gets 44 sc pts. :o    now i didnt see the game, but  What The!!!
  im speechless,,, im without speech....

and dont get me started on dempsey's score...i did see that game and thought he played alright,, 48pts
  did he get points deducted for that play-on at the end of the game or something?

[Slashers]

Agree, don't have Dempsey, but should have got more. Also with those numbers, perhaps Martin was stiffed, but as we all know, it's not all about the numbers with SC.
SC is frustrating, but this week, so is football as a whole!!

[The Bomber]

The scoring is very tight. Unless a team mate marks the ball, it is an ineffective kick. I think it is rubbish because players kick to the line, or to a contest intentionally and only when a player marks you get full points???

Watching the game Dusty hacked a lot. Even when he had time he was rushing himself and blazing away for no reason. Yes it was wet and getting the ball forward is the way to go, but seriously was more of a hack than Swan...

IDK about Dempsey though...Harsh to take points off for playing on just before the siren...

[ubeaut]

Saw the game and as usual he did SFA. Hardly had an influence. Surprised he got that many (20) hardly noticed him. Was tempted to get Martin and avoid a donut but I didn't want him for the rest of season so I luckily stayed away. Don't know what's wrong with him. Must be an Attitude/confidence thing cos he's a gun,Cotchin and Lids getting most of the attention and Tigers playing well - WHY IS HE NOT DOMINATING?

Think his clangers had a bit to do with the 44 he got.

I'm more shocked at Pavs score. Watching the game I thought 120 no worries. He had a big influence. I mean he kicked half their score! If that's not having an influence I don't know what is. Clangers or no clangers he should get more than 99. Doesn't leave much hope for the future if he kicks 6 from 17 disposals, 6 marks and 2 tackles and doesn't even break the tonne!

[The Bomber]

I'm more shocked at Pavs score. Watching the game I thought 120 no worries. He had a big influence. I mean he kicked half their score! If that's not having an influence I don't know what is. Clangers or no clangers he should get more than 99. Doesn't leave much hope for the future if he kicks 6 from 17 disposals, 6 marks and 2 tackles and doesn't even break the tonne!

Didn't realise Pav scored so low. I agree totally...

[roo boys!]

Yeah Pav certainly ripped off. Won them the game almost single handedly, that's having an influence on the game IMO!

Unfortunately I have both Dusty and Pav, not really complaining about Pav's game, but like ubeat said it doesn't leave much hope for the future, it's hard to pull out a performance like that every week! And if that doesn't get him a ton, I wonder what will happen when he has a down one...

But I suppose that's what we love about SC isn't it?

[Torress]

The scoring is very tight. Unless a team mate marks the ball, it is an ineffective kick. I think it is rubbish because players kick to the line, or to a contest intentionally and only when a player marks you get full points???

Watching the game Dusty hacked a lot. Even when he had time he was rushing himself and blazing away for no reason. Yes it was wet and getting the ball forward is the way to go, but seriously was more of a hack than Swan...

IDK about Dempsey though...Harsh to take points off for playing on just before the siren...

not the case mate - doesn't have to be marked to be effective. i read an article before the season kicked off and it was from a guy from champimon data, he might of been interviewed, and he was relating to cyril rioli last year when he got a monster off 10 touches or something. i can't find the article thin it was on tooserious. if the bloke who drops a sitter of a mark, the guy who kicked it to him shouldn't get penalised! i think if the ball is kicked, its not marked - if that ball is in a situation where its considered a 50/50 contest then that kick i think wouldn't be effective. if the ball is kicked and not marked but it clearly favours the bloke who is recieving it would be classified as effective.
dam i wanna find this artcle now!

[The Bomber]

The scoring is very tight. Unless a team mate marks the ball, it is an ineffective kick. I think it is rubbish because players kick to the line, or to a contest intentionally and only when a player marks you get full points???

Watching the game Dusty hacked a lot. Even when he had time he was rushing himself and blazing away for no reason. Yes it was wet and getting the ball forward is the way to go, but seriously was more of a hack than Swan...

IDK about Dempsey though...Harsh to take points off for playing on just before the siren...

not the case mate - doesn't have to be marked to be effective. i read an article before the season kicked off and it was from a guy from champimon data, he might of been interviewed, and he was relating to cyril rioli last year when he got a monster off 10 touches or something. i can't find the article thin it was on tooserious. if the bloke who drops a sitter of a mark, the guy who kicked it to him shouldn't get penalised! i think if the ball is kicked, its not marked - if that ball is in a situation where its considered a 50/50 contest then that kick i think wouldn't be effective. if the ball is kicked and not marked but it clearly favours the bloke who is recieving it would be classified as effective.
dam i wanna find this artcle now!

I sometimes watch the live SC scores on field view and see how they score (and compare to the game on tv). Unless the marking player is given a clanger (for a failed mark), the kick is only effective if marked by your player. Even a long 50/50 kick to down the line from defence is ineffective unless your player marks it. Frustrating as hell...

Just what I have noticed about live scoring. It would be better if it was judged like you have said above, but I haven't noticed it like that...

[upthemaidens]

ok look ive never been one to bring up SC scores and such,
   but c'mon (now i dont have this player) Brad Ebert 23 pos. 10 tackles(thats right 10 tackles) and only scores 52 pts...
seriously how can that be?,, he was one of ports better players.. things that make me go mmmmmmm :o

[Spite]

ok look ive never been one to bring up SC scores and such,
   but c'mon (now i dont have this player) Brad Ebert 23 pos. 10 tackles(thats right 10 tackles) and only scores 52 pts...
seriously how can that be?,, he was one of ports better players.. things that make me go mmmmmmm :o

nah mistake on FF, meant to be 104 or 102 or something on the SC site :P

[The Bomber]

ok look ive never been one to bring up SC scores and such,
   but c'mon (now i dont have this player) Brad Ebert 23 pos. 10 tackles(thats right 10 tackles) and only scores 52 pts...
seriously how can that be?,, he was one of ports better players.. things that make me go mmmmmmm :o

Wrong Eberts score. Remember on FF there are 2 B. Eberts. The 52 is Brett Eberts score. Brad's Ebert score is 108 (from HS website)

[poolboybob]

i think the SC scorers had a bye week.

[pyronerd]

The scoring is very tight. Unless a team mate marks the ball, it is an ineffective kick. I think it is rubbish because players kick to the line, or to a contest intentionally and only when a player marks you get full points???

Watching the game Dusty hacked a lot. Even when he had time he was rushing himself and blazing away for no reason. Yes it was wet and getting the ball forward is the way to go, but seriously was more of a hack than Swan...

IDK about Dempsey though...Harsh to take points off for playing on just before the siren...

not the case mate - doesn't have to be marked to be effective. i read an article before the season kicked off and it was from a guy from champimon data, he might of been interviewed, and he was relating to cyril rioli last year when he got a monster off 10 touches or something. i can't find the article thin it was on tooserious. if the bloke who drops a sitter of a mark, the guy who kicked it to him shouldn't get penalised! i think if the ball is kicked, its not marked - if that ball is in a situation where its considered a 50/50 contest then that kick i think wouldn't be effective. if the ball is kicked and not marked but it clearly favours the bloke who is recieving it would be classified as effective.
dam i wanna find this artcle now!

this is how it is supposed to work, if the kick travels over 40m to a 50/50 contest, or is kicked to a free players no matter what distance, then the kicker gets points, is how I understand it is meant to work

[upthemaidens]

oh ok, thats good then,,  yeah there was no way he could get 52,,but then again...

[THE BIG 3]

Saw both games def thought dsmpsey was unlucky to score that, he was pretty good. Dusty was very average though, no cont pos and turned it over a lot esp 2nd half. Also heard that champ data have only a certain amount of points to give each game and its weighted front half of games thats why Pendles went from 75 to 95 after he got subbed might have something to do with Denpseys score