Analysis SuperCoach Scoring Explained, Observations & Complaints On Scoring

[Bontempele]

Can't argue with that!

The most interesting stat there for me is the hitout to advantage. Appears as if the area of the ground makes a difference. So a HTA in the defensive 50 is worth more than one in the middle of the ground. Will start monitoring the live scores.

Was at a crucial stage of the game from memory, so that would be why it's slightly higher than the usual 4 points.

Anyone got any idea why a "knock on" gets you a point? I understand why an "effective knock on" or "contested knock on" would, but how is a basic tap (the implication being an ineffective one) helping your side??

Also, it's interesting they say -3 for Bontempelli's frees against. His first two clearly didn't register as -3, because he was on +3 after them (thanks to +4 for a HBG and +1 for a handball receive). Perhaps they took more away as the game went on?

 

[Philzsay]

Don't forget there are also the "3300 point muliplier" and "State of the game" multiplier, described a few pages back which each individual play also has applied to them, so that table would be the sum of each sector after these and any other multipliers we don't know about are applied.

 

[Zoku Pops]

Was at a crucial stage of the game from memory, so that would be why it's slightly higher than the usual 4 points.

Anyone got any idea why a "knock on" gets you a point? I understand why an "effective knock on" or "contested knock on" would, but how is a basic tap (the implication being an ineffective one) helping your side??

Also, it's interesting they say -3 for Bontempelli's frees against. His first two clearly didn't register as -3, because he was on +3 after them (thanks to +4 for a HBG and +1 for a handball receive). Perhaps they took more away as the game went on?

True, although it's under a 'Defensive' category which is the intriguing part.

 

[Pearcey47]

I'm not sure why people are going on so much about the difference in the amount of SC points between Bont and JPK (not just on here but on social media as well). There was only 15 points difference in AF/RDT scoring and if you take away the frees against (-3) it was only 3 points difference. Certainly not surprising there was so little difference between their SC scores. A lot of people purely look at possessions, which doesn't tell the whole story (as the Champion Data table shows).

 

[Erich1036]

View attachment 2970

KICKS

Ineffective: 0
Backwards and effective: 1
Long (40+ metres) to a contest: 2
Short and effective: 3
Long to advantage (effective): 5
Clanger (unforced error): -3

NOTE: A kick to a contest less than 40 metres in distance is deemed ineffective.

HANDBALLS

Ineffective: 0
Effective: 1

MARKS

From teammate, uncontested: 1
From teammate, contested: 3
From teammate, contested inside 50: 4
From teammate, on lead: 3
From opposition, uncontested: 3
From opposition, contested: 6

FREE KICKS

Free for: 3 (counts as a contested possession)
Free against, in a contested situation: -1
Free against, in an uncontested situation: -3
Give away a 50 meter penalty: -5

HITOUTS

To advantage: 5
To disadvantage (sharked by opposition): -1
Gather from ruck contest: 2

TACKLES: 3

GOAL: 6* (can vary dramatically depending on closeness of the match)

HANDBALL RECEIVE: 1

HARD OR LOOSE BALL GET: 3

SPOIL, SHEPHERD OR SMOTHER: 1

SPOIL GAINING POSSESSION: 3

SCORE ASSIST: 3

CONTESTED KNOCK ON TO ADVANTAGE: 4

BOUNCE: 1

Just wanted to show that my observations/predictions were pretty close to spot on, which finally proves I actually have some idea on what I'm talking about on this stuff! Going to go through and edit some stuff given on what the table shows and hopefully come back with a table that can be treated close to gospel

Side note: one stat I haven't looked out for - dropped marks? I'm going to watch closely this weekend. Anyone seen anything so far this season? Maybe Ryder owners?

 

[Bontempele]

True, although it's under a 'Defensive' category which is the intriguing part.

No it's not, they put their headings in the wrong place! It's under hitouts, but for some reason they put headings beneath the lists!

 

[Bomber18]

Side note: one stat I haven't looked out for - dropped marks? I'm going to watch closely this weekend. Anyone seen anything so far this season? Maybe Ryder owners?

Myers dropped two uncontested marks against GWS. Both got awarded as clangers

 

[Kumamoto Ken]

Just wanted to show that my observations/predictions were pretty close to spot on, which finally proves I actually have some idea on what I'm talking about on this stuff! Going to go through and edit some stuff given on what the table shows and hopefully come back with a table that can be treated close to gospel

Side note: one stat I haven't looked out for - dropped marks? I'm going to watch closely this weekend. Anyone seen anything so far this season? Maybe Ryder owners?

Sorry, I'm too busy cursing at the floor or ceiling to note the impact on live scores each time he drops one.
As a bonus, my kids are developing really impressive vocabularies!

 

[jobeywatto]

Myers dropped two uncontested marks against GWS. Both got awarded as clangers

Hannebery got judged as dropping a mark in the first quarter last night (which was a bit harsh - Caleb Daniel put enough pressure on I thought) and was awarded a clanger and -2.

It depends on what happens after you drop the mark though I think. Last week Grundy dropped an uncontested mark, fumbled the possession on the ground and it went over the line for a throw in, got given a clanger. One of my other players meanwhile (I can't remember who, might've been Selwood) dropped an uncontested mark and had enough time to pick up the ball uncontested and get a clean disposal away, didn't get given a clanger.

You also get given clangers for dropping/fumbling handball receives. One of my players (again, might've been Selwood) dropped a handball receive which resulted in an opposition player picking up a contested possession and he was awarded a clanger for it.

 

[Bomber18]

Hannebery got judged as dropping a mark in the first quarter last night (which was a bit harsh - Caleb Daniel put enough pressure on I thought) and was awarded a clanger and -2.

It depends on what happens after you drop the mark though I think. Last week Grundy dropped an uncontested mark, fumbled the possession on the ground and it went over the line for a throw in, got given a clanger. One of my other players meanwhile (I can't remember who, might've been Selwood) dropped an uncontested mark and had enough time to pick up the ball uncontested and get a clean possession away, didn't get given a clanger.

Yes Grundy did that heaps last week in the first half!!

 

[Erich1036]

It depends on what happens after you drop the mark though I think. Last week Grundy dropped an uncontested mark, fumbled the possession on the ground and it went over the line for a throw in, got given a clanger. One of my other players meanwhile (I can't remember who, might've been Selwood) dropped an uncontested mark and had enough time to pick up the ball uncontested and get a clean possession away, didn't get given a clanger.

That's some good insight, thanks mate. Might look as if it depends on what happens as a result of the dropped mark. Will keep an eye out.

 

[Lost In The Sky]

That was invaluable getting that information from Champion Data... Very rarely do we get an official insight into what makes up the score of a player. Cheers bomberboy.

 

[kakarot]

Last few pages

 

[Rowsus]

Just wanted to show that my observations/predictions were pretty close to spot on, which finally proves I actually have some idea on what I'm talking about on this stuff! Going to go through and edit some stuff given on what the table shows and hopefully come back with a table that can be treated close to gospel

Side note: one stat I haven't looked out for - dropped marks? I'm going to watch closely this weekend. Anyone seen anything so far this season? Maybe Ryder owners?

Nice work, Erich. You and Bontempele (formerly FootyRulz I think) are the only ones I have ever seen disect players scores accurately on here, and everyone else is largely guessing!


As to Ryder! I sure as heck noticed it last week! Without his dropped marks, some of which were sitters, he would have probably gone close to 100+. This includes factoring in the resulting disposal he would have made, had he not dropped the mark.

 

[PC]

Good word that - 'clanger'

 

[Darkie]

Possible stupid question: what is the 3,300 point multiplier (particularly given the numbers listed are a long way from 1)?

Only 3300 points are allocated each game. The multiplier brings the raw points up or down to 3300. For example, if the sum of the raw points is 6600 the multiplier would be 0.50. If the sum of the raw points is 1635 then the multiplier would be 2.0.

You probably already are aware that in each game the sum of all 44 players SC scores adds to 3,300 give or take a couple of points. However if one totals all of the pure points that players are rewarded for each action they are involved in it will often be miles off the 3,300 figure. So in the Roughead game above the total for Swans and Hawks players must have come to around 5,500. Hence the '3300 point multiplier' in this case was 0.60

What is interesting is that the algorithm is constantly guessing throughout the game what the final total points will likely be, hence the '3300 multplier' factor is being shown immediately and constantly adjusting. This likely explains the reasoning why in Bontempele and Erich's observations, in their great knowledge of the scoring system, say that most of the points allocated for an individual act are a bit less than what the starting point allocation in the tables earlier in this thread that CD have stated. As the algorithm probably starts around the 0.7 figure.

Further its is one of many explanations in the wide variance between players scores in different games. Let's assume in the very rare instance that Player A in game A has the exact same number and type of acts in a game as Player B in game B. So exactly the same number of hard ball gets, effective and ineffective long & short kicks and handballs, tackles, 1%ers and all of the others measures that CD don't even tell us about. So both have and identical raw score of 200. Players A's '3300 multiplier' is 0.5 meaning that he scores 100. Player B's '3300 multiplier' is 0.70 meaning he scores 140.

That's a massive 40 point difference for identical statistical performances!! The only difference being the number of pure SC points the other 43 players in both games achieved. Then if one was to factor in the 'state of the game' multiplier, so say the majority of Player B's points occurred when the game was on the line, whereas Player A had a lot of his points come in junk time; that 40 point difference would blow out to be even larger!

Yet we punters like to look at just a few key stats and wonder why the scores are so different, when we are barely even scratching the surface.

A belated thank you for these explanations, gents (I've been travelling and missed reading these). Your explanations make sense.

It's interesting that they think of it as two separate multipliers - if I am thinking about it correctly, the way I've always conceptualised it would mean that there's only one multiplier required, being the product of the two.

 

[Erich1036]

Side note: one stat I haven't looked out for - dropped marks? I'm going to watch closely this weekend. Anyone seen anything so far this season? Maybe Ryder owners?

Cam McCarthy just dropped a sitter in front of a goal and lost 3 points.

 

[jobeywatto]

Cam McCarthy just dropped a sitter in front of a goal and lost 3 points.

Stef dropped a mark and got awarded a clanger too.

I thought he might avoid a clanger because he was able to easily pick the ball up and get a handball away. However, it turned from (what I assume would have been) an uncontested mark into a contested possession which is probably why he got a clanger for it despite the fact he wasn't under much pressure. Looks like you need the possession to be counted as uncontested after a dropped mark to avoid getting a clanger for it.

 

[KLo30]

Champion Data explains the meaning of 12 AFL stats

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...s/news-story/fec6e07372d94c646dc3d91f893fbb3f

 

[Krak]

Morning Guys
May be a stupid question but if you have a player on your bench with the E on him who doesnt play. Does his score of zero become your lowest emergency score?
Cheers
Krak