Scoring Anomalies – Round 7

Written by The Salamander on May 9 2019

Dane questioned in his excellent round review how Trent Dumont (139) and Shaun Higgins (95) ended up on such different scores from such similar stats, so I decided I’d take a look. Dumont: 38 disposals (12 contested, 79 percent DE, 338 metres gained), 5 tackles, 1 clearance, 1 clanger, 5 score involvements. Higgins: 37 disposals (9 contested, 73 percent DE, 437 metres gained), 0 tackles, 3 clearances, 4 clangers, and 11 score involvements. Higgins was probably let down by his lack of tackles and the couple of extra clangers, but overall, the spread does seem a tad excessive. It’s not the first time this year he’s had a disposal count in the high 30s and failed to crack the ton, which would be concerning for the handful of people who have him.

Higgins wasn’t the only ball-magnet to not get any love from Champion Data on the weekend, with Matt Crouch racking up 39 touches (13 contested, 59 percent DE, 342 metres gained) for just 97 points. The 59 percent DE probably didn’t help, but he did only have 2 clangers, so you’d think he’d at least get to triple figures.

Shane Mumford’s score of 89 was not anomalous in the usual sense – it’s easy enough to see where it came from – but his owners won’t have been pleased with his 9 (!) frees-against bringing down what would have otherwise been an excellent score. Mumford, on the other hand, probably won’t be pleased that he missed out on the all-time free-against record by 4.

In the same match, Toby Greene and Jeremy Finlayson each kicked 2 goals for 72 points. Statistically, that’s where the similarities end. Greene had 19 disposals (7 contested, 79 percent DE, 273 metres gained), 5 marks, 1 tackle, 7 score involvements, and 2 clearances, whilst Finlayson had 8 touches (5 contested, 75 percent DE, 187 metres gained), 4 marks, 1 tackle, 5 score involvements, and no clearances. He may not be the most well-liked player going around, but surely Toby deserved a few more points?

This comes with the standard disclaimers about comparing scores across different matches, but compare the pair:
Dayne Zorko: 29 disposals (17 contested, 66 percent DE, 762 metres gained, 7 clangers), 11 tackles, 11 clearances, 11 inside 50s, 3 marks, and a goal for 128 points.
Andrew Gaff: 35 disposals (10 contested, 71 percent DE, 467 metres gained, 2 clangers), 3 clearances, 6 tackles, 10 marks, and no goals for 154.
Again, I know they were different matches, but surely these two scores can’t both be right?

Finally, I know I wasn’t the only person who noticed Gawn’s (127) mysterious jump of 23 points post-match on Saturday. I think we know who CD had as captain on the weekend!



Were there any scores that seemed off to you last round? Let us know in the comments below.

7
1


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

26 thoughts on “Scoring Anomalies – Round 7”

  1. Sal,

    I’m only bringing up Jack Darling bc I’m a bitter former owner… but looking at two score lines from different weeks for him during the season brings up more questions than answers. I know all games a different, but it’s tough to justify the disparity in scoring when both games were won by WCE.

    Round 2 v GWS
    90 SC Points

    12 disposals (7 contested), 75% DE, 10 kicks, 6 marks, 3 tackles, 4 goals, 1 behind, 8 score involvements, 0 clearances, 5 clangers, 2 I50, 2/5 frees

    Round 4 v Freo
    90 SC Points

    13 disposals (11 contested), 53% DE, 9 kicks, 2 marks, 4 tackles, 3 goals, 2 behinds, 6 score involvements, 1 clearance, 1 clanger, 2 I50, 2/0 frees

    Round 7 v GC
    132 SC Points

    11 disposals (8 contested), 45% DE, 9 kicks, 4 marks, 5 tackles, 4 goals, 2 behinds, 9 score involvements, 1 clearance, 0 clangers, 1 I50, 1/0 frees

    He may have remained in my side if he’d hit his ceiling earlier in the year.

    Just a bit salty.

    6

    0
    1. This is exactly the reason I often like their supposed anomalies. JD contributed in those games earlier in the year where he scored OK, but was by no means best on the park. On the weekend when the game was there he was the difference and his score reflected it (along with the other couple – gaff, yeo).

      1

      0
  2. Guess who CD just brought into the side!! I wonder if it’s like an umpires interpretation where you have different people scoring different games?

    7

    1
    1. of course it is
      umps & CD scorers are only human ,
      like the rest of us , they have their likes & dislikes

      4

      0
  3. Great stuff Sal. Great points asthecrowflies- that seems very strange. I’d be salty too!
    Maybe CD bought Darling in this week at his low price?!

    I watched the Brisbane game and Zorko settled things in the Lions’ favour with a fantastic run around the contest and reverse snap. While the game wasn’t quite on the line, you could still deem it a matchwinning sealer. Gaff appears a darling of CD to me, Zorko, not so much any more. But he was outstanding for 4 quarters.

    8

    1
    1. traded out crouch early
      because i thought he was underscoring & not gett’n full pts
      kept libba because he was over scoring for his efforts
      gotta go with how the players are scored & not what the players do
      that’s why we all have lloyd & gawn

      2

      0
    1. i’m over danger ,
      play’n like a show pony this year ,
      prancing around the fwd line with his chest out for the cameras
      the guy should be on a soap opera with dusty & wingard

      3

      2
  4. Just shows how open to interpretation everything in AFL is. What constitutes a tackle? A clearance? A goal assist (I’ve seen knock ons and toe pokes not paid)? Even the umpires struggle with a simple HTB. It should be more black and white, no based on the person collecting the stats on the day.
    Once I saw a passage of play where a player did a massive sprint and slide to touch the ball on the goal line, then the opposing teams kick out was OOTF. Both players received 0 points… I don’t understand the stupid and flawed system

    2

    2
    1. Did they receive 0 points though the scoring isnt instantaneous, sometimes things arnt updated till the next break/end of quarter, I’d be surprised if the blokes diving goals saving touch wasn’t a 1%ers & the OOTF would be a clanger,

      3

      0
      1. I’m aware it’s not instantaneous. But when you’ve refreshed multiple times over a 5-10 minutes, and other players’ scores are being updated for later occurring instances, then it’s pretty safe to assume they haven’t awarded anything

        0

        0
  5. The scoring froze in the Melb game with about 5 mins to go, hence the jump in points for Gawn and others at the end of the game.

    7

    0
    1. And other. What others?! Clarry had as much if not more impact in the last 5 mins and his score went backwards!!

      3

      3
      1. interesting note on Clarry
        i had him last year , not this year
        but have watched him regularly over the journey
        last year he didn’t really leave the midfield area in general play
        was pretty much a possession from the gawn tap & then a handball or long kick after that
        he would wait in the middle & lock it into the fwd line or be used as a link up through the guts out of defense
        this year he seems to be covering more ground & getting to more rucks @ either end
        maybe somehow this is a contributing factor to his lower scoring

        1

        2
        1. Lower efficiency for sure, he’s having 2 more clanger a game, & his usually elite handballing is off at the moment.

          6

          0
      2. Oliver didn’t touch the ball in the last 5 minutes Gawn had a contested intercept mark, effective long contested kick & hit out to advantage.

        Oliver only touched the ball once in the the last 10 minutes & it was a clearance but ineffective, did have a good knock on to advantage in lead up to Melbourne’s last goal.

        I also own both .

        4

        0
    2. He jumped a lot more than others, though. I didn’t see the game, but I saw plenty of those who had questioning it.

      0

      0
  6. I posted this in another thread earlier in the week but seems more apt here

    The way Crouch plays he needs to have solid a DE% because he has a bad kick to HB ratio, is often kicking short/sideways, he’s often getting the 2nd disposals from a contest to which despite being in difficult traffic is classed as uncontested.

    Oliver averaged 6.7 tackles last season down to 4.8 this season, averaged 3.96 clangers last season up to 5.8 this season.

    9

    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *