If we are to be honest, the scoring across the whole weekend felt somewhat anomalous. So anomalous, in fact, that it led many to question whether the scoring system had been changed – something which SuperCoach HQ has flat-out denied. Questions of causation aside, the distribution of scores within teams in round 1 seemed a lot more even than usual. This reminded me of the excellent work Allsaints did earlier in the year applying the idea of the Gini coefficient to the distribution of SuperCoach points within teams – I think it’s fair to say that this week, teams were going for a Scandinavian theme. It will be interesting to see over the coming weeks whether this was a one-off, or if it’s a sign of things to come. With that out of the way, here are some individual scores which might have raised a few eyebrows on the weekend…
With similar disposal counts (31 – 30) and metres gained (685 – 600), some have been wondering where the near 50-point spread between Coniglio (154) and Whitfield (105) came from. Coniglio did have an extra couple of clearances, but also lower disposal efficiency (55 percent to 70), along with 5 clangers compared to 2. Looking at their stats a bit more closely, however, I suspect that the difference is mostly due to Coniglio kicking 3 goals to Whitfield’s 0, and also laying 7 tackles to 2.
24 disposals, 4 clearances, and 430 metres gained sounds like a pretty handy debut for an 18 year old, but clearly, Sam Walsh (68 points) is going to have to do a lot more than that to impress Champion Data. 54 percent DE and 6 clangers is probably what let him down, along with only having had 8 contested possessions and 1 tackle. He certainly wasn’t the only Carlton player to rack up a high disposal count and score like this: Walsh, Setterfield, Dow, Cuningham, and Petrevski-Seton collectively had over 25 percent of Carlton’s disposals, but under 20 percent of the team’s total SuperCoach points. Upon reflection, I think this might have more to do with Richmond than anything else: the Tigers play a high-pressure brand of football that forces disposal efficiency down and clanger counts up. Keep an eye on this over the next few weeks – if this trend continues, we might have to start planning for ‘The Richmond Effect’ when our players are facing them.
Of all the weekend’s anomalous scores, Tom Liberatore’s must surely take the cake: 28 disposals (13 contested) at 61 percent DE, 594 metres gained, 8 clearances, 8 inside 50s, and 9 score involvements for just 75 points. Surely his 4 clangers can’t have hurt his score that badly?
Our final scoring anomaly for the week goes to Steve Hocking. Nine new rules, all designed to turn the game into a goal-fest, and we ended up with the lowest-scoring opening round in 50 years. There were only three 100+ scores on the weekend, all of which occured in blowouts. It’s almost as if the style in which the game is played, and the resulting level of scoring, is driven by the coaches rather than the Laws of the Game Committee! Speaking of which, in a scoring anomaly rivalling that of Tom Liberatore, the highest score this week (141) was posted by Fremantle. Who is this new coach of theirs, and what has he done with Ross Lyon!?
Continuing on from the last paragraph, I’ll finish up by paraphrasing a long-dead economist: the curious task of these low-scoring games is to demonstrate to the AFL how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.
Were there any scores from the weekend that seemed off to you? Let us know in the comments below.
Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom