A few weeks ago, I was lucky to get the opportunity to ask Karl Jackson, one of the statisticians at Champion Data a few questions about some of the finer points of this game that we all love.
So tune in over the break for a little glimpse behind the CD Curtains…
We all know that a game-winning goal kicked at the death of a close game is worth a premium, but how does the weighting work in other situations? For instance, in a blowout (Think Ess v GC), do the actions from the first quarter receive a premium? What about a game that is tight until half time that blows out in the third?
KJ: The weighting is applied to everything that happens within a game. To put it basically, the more likely it is that the result of the match is going to change, the higher the weighting is. This works in both ways – as time goes on in tight games, a player’s actions become more important because the game is up for grabs, but as time goes on in blowout games, events are weighted down because the game is moving closer and closer to “junk timeâ€.
We follow along with the quarter time scores posted on the HUN and know well about the 3300 rule, but why is it that it appears that 1/3 of the 3300 seems to be allocated at the quarter time break?
KJ: There’s no hard and fast rule about how many points to allocate at the end of the first quarter. There is so long left in the game that it would be folly to guess how it will be played out. From half time onwards we’ve got a better idea of how the game has/will be played out so that’s when the standardised scores are used.
If a handball or kick is received on the bounce by a teammate, is it still effective?
KJ: If the teammate was put under unnecessary pressure because of the disposal dropping short it will be called ineffective, but if it hasn’t put him under pressure it will still be called effective.
What about a dropped mark? Does the kicker still get an effective stat? Or is it completely dependent on the receiver not messing up?
KJ: The actions of the receiver don’t impact the decision on whether a disposal was effective. If the disposal player did everything he could to lay it on a platter for the receiver it will be effective even if it’s a blatant error at the other end.
Is a player who’s kicking in from an opposition behind awarded points for that kick? or only when it’s effective and long?
KJ: Kick-ins are judged the same as any other kick. Effective kick-ins get a positive score (though not as high as a general play kick) and clanger kick-ins get a negative score. As with general play kicks, the most valuable outcome for a player is kicking long and finding an uncontested teammate.
We noticed in the off-season that a group of new stats were created, are these changes applicable this year and how exactly does a mark on the lead work?
KJ: Nearly every year there are new stats recorded, but not all make their way into the rankings formula. Marks on lead have been around for a few years. They are graded higher than a standard uncontested mark but lower than a contested mark.
How many people do you guys have monitoring each game? And how do you determine the outcome of a contentious decision?
KJ: In total there are 10 people working on every game but not all of those have an impact on the standard stats capture. There is a core team of four that are involved in that process – one main caller (based at the ground), one keyboarder (entering the data live as it happens), one back-up caller (watching a clean vision feed stripped of advertisements) and an at-ground support role (assisting with free kicks and off-ball incidents). The main caller and the back-up caller are the two with the most influence and in the event of a contentious decision it will be reviewed at the quarter break. As a result you may see the efficiency, disposal count, tackle count, etc, etc vary from the end of quarter to the start of the next.
The other six we have working on games are capturing other information that doesn’t affect fantasy, such as interchange moves, player match-ups, pressure on opposition disposals and high detail information about every kick and the location of every possession.
Now, as a particular case study – it’s been asked, what exactly did Rioli do in round 9 to secure 100 points? 13 touches at a 77% efficiency rating including a goal and two goal assists in a 56 point win seems a little much, particularly when you have someone like Hodge, who scored 99 points off 10 more touches and 2 goals. Is there anything you can say that could shed some light on this example?
KJ: As for Rioli v Hodge – Rioli’s goal and two assists all came in the third quarter, which is when Hawthorn ran away with the game. With the margin at 18 points with four minutes to go in the third quarter, Cyril made a tackle, won the free kick and kicked the goal – a 30 second block that saw him get 19 points. Hawthorn went on to kick another four unanswered goals after Rioli’s goal so that was when the game was most in the balance. Luke Hodge had six touches in the first 15 minutes of the third, but just 50% were effective. When Hawthorn were on their streak of five goals in a row, Hodge only had one touch and that was after they’d stretched the lead to 42 points, so he missed out on getting bumped up.
On a side note, I’ll just highlight the fact that you can’t compare the outputs of players in different games and expect their rankings to follow suit. Because of the 3300 point rule, a 25 disposal game in a tight, low-possession game could be worth the same as a 40 disposal game in a free-flowing contest. Likewise, a 10 goal game in a high scoring contest may be less valuable than a four goal return in a low scoring game. It avoids any bias towards a particular game style or weather conditions.
The other example that’s being asked about is Goddard from round 10- injured in the first quarter and yet his quarter-by-quarter scores went: 56 SuperCoach at qtr time 44 at half time and 51 at 3 qtr time and finally 57 at full time- I’m assuming it weighting his first quarter efforts so highly because the game blew out so far in the 1st, but an official word would be most appreciated!
KJ: The quarter time updates on the Herald Sun website take into account the 3300 point rule, but because of the fluctuations that happen within the game, they’re always going to change. As the game blows out more and more, the first quarter gets pumped up because of the reduced value of actions later in the game. In a stock standard game you’d expect 25% of the ranking points to come from each quarter, but as an example, in that Fremantle v St Kilda game in Round 10, 39% of the points were won in the first quarter. This is what helped Goddard maintain his score. If it was tight all the way to the siren, his score would have dropped as the game went on.
So there you go, some solid answers for some of the questions that we’ve been wondering about, I’m hoping that it sheds a little light not only on what makes this game a joy, but also on those seemingly annoying quirks that we wonder about.
And as for the question of why Goddard scored so well earlier in the year despite what looked like poor form- it’s because when he did get into the game, it was when the game was still there to be won. (And not the gag response of- because they had him locked in as their perma-captain early.)
Posted in 
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
17
mouseman – question 4
Hot debate. What do you think?
3 
5
Beat me to it Lysp.
Great read Walesy, now I can speak with more authority to my mates watching a game about what is going to score well in SC.
Can we make this a regular segment?
Like or Dislike:
3 
4
I know Karl will be reading this so I guess it’s up to him!! Personally, I think it would be great, but the biggest problem that I have it that it’ll degrade into a case of people complaining about their players getting bad scores, or their league opponents getting good scores!
Still, if there are enough good questions that were missed…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Sorry guys, I was referring to that point in the write up.
walsey – maybe you could arrange field trips for TS members to go see the game being called live by the CD guys :-)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
4 
0
great job walesy!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Walesy, any chance you followed up “…clean vision feed stripped of advertisements..”, with the question, “will you take Pinkbatts’ first-born in exchange for how and where we can GET THIS!!!?????” If not, oppurtunity missed my friend.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
9 
0
Very interesting stuff mate, sheds a lot of light when you couple this with the article put up in the preseason.
To quote; ‘Because of the 3300 point rule, a 25 disposal game in a tight, low-possession game could be worth the same as a 40 disposal game in a free-flowing contest.’
What i want to know is how Boyd can get 160 with 39 possies in a losing team (that if we’re honest, was not a close game) and Mitchell can only muster up 90ish off 38 possies in a team that lost by less than a kick in an excruciatingly tight match?
The same applies to Wellingham with 37 possies and only just cracked the ton. Especially considering that Wellingham was easily BOG, and Mitchell was Hawthorn’s BOG (maybe Shiels but…) and kept the Hawks in the game and after a terrible first quarter. Mitchell had a better efficiency rate than Wellingham and Boyd, and they all had around the same number of marks, clearances and contested possessions.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
PinkBatts I saw that and thought “I WANT”
Where do the CD guys recruit from? I’m sure there would be some here who would be interested in these roles…though of course the would invalidate any prizes from the SC comp.
Never mind
On the 3300 rule, the only thing I think needs to be looked at are “junk points” or the reverse.
In this I’m saying that in some games between top teams, the 3300 rule is a massive cap on the top scorers, classic example being Saturday night where we saw very low scores from games that would have previously scored highly, Enright for one, even though he had reasonably average DE, got lots of hard ball and played well, but went unrewarded. Similarly Podsiadly got “scaled out of the game” though at the end his 6 goals still mattered just as much.
And there are games say North v Gold Coast where players do well and get 150-180 because of so many underperforming GC players.
It’s this factor that makes me say that last years 100 is this years 110; last year’s $500k is this year’s $450.
It will be the same next year y’all with the GWS entry.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Mitchell’s scores are always low for some reason compared to his stats and the stats of others.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
could be wrong but mitchell had 9 clangers not sure about wellingham but definately hurt mitchell
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I would like to know how the points get allocated with the advantage rule.
If someone gets a free kick, and another player picks the ball up and plays on.( I guess its the same for a down the ground free after disposal). Are the points split up? Does the first player get points for a contested possession when technically they don’t have a possession???
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14 
1
Joshy, think you will find that heaps of players in StK v WB got very average scores (i.e. did very little)
Think players like Dahlhaus, Simpkin, Wood, Baker, Djerkkura, Gilbert, etc.
Therefore Boyd’s score was ramped up.
In the Geelong v Hawthorn almost everyone made a contribution.
Therefore we had almost no scaling up of Selwood’s strong last term (efficiency regardless) or of Johnson’s last two goals, of Enright/Mitchell/Shiels/Podsiadly.
It’s the 3300 rule that’s supposed to weed out inconsistency, but unfortunately in big matches where the points need to be more reflective of the effort of the players given the big match status, it just doesn’t happen.
It’s most relevant when choosing captains. My new mantra is never choose a captain playing in a big match. Choose one where one of the teams at least is weak.
Thing is even that can backfire because if your captain doesn’t do well in the first term, generally they get scaled out of the game via the “junk time” rule.
You’d still back Buddy this week though.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Joshy- it revolves around what else has happened in the game. In the Boyd game for example, he collected 39 disposals and 20 contested possessions- the next closest to that was Clint Jones on 29 touches, so already that’s 25% more touches than the next best. A lot of this work was done in the first quarter, when the game was still anyones.
Wellingham picked up a lot of his touches in the 3rd (and 2nd) quarters, one the game was already dusted. He also registered 9 clangers.
Meanwhile, Mitchell was punished pretty harshly for his final quarter efforts against the Cats- his 28DT was rewarded with just 2SC. I’m assuming there were a couple of clangers in there when the game was there to be won- but can’t quite remember!
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
2 
17
Awesome info Walsey, always good to have a bit of clarification in regards to the 3300 rule and what makes an effective stat, still would like to know why stevie j didnt score higher on the weekend 2 goals in the last qtr and won them the match?? I think the worst thing we can have as a sc player is an even game where there are avg scores across the 2 teams, i reckon a game thats won by about 5-6goals would allow the top prems from each team more scoring power, nothing to back that up but just at thought!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
with the 3300 rule. if you side is winning well and has alot of good players i guess you can only get max 5 to 6 players with 100+ from a side. I have always notices the looser has always got somebody with 100SC points regardless of the defeat.
I guess GAJ will always get alot of points for GCS as he still racks up the possies when they get thumped.
It makes alot of sense
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Lethal – the bad thing is where there are strong performances by the players who are probably 15-22 on the list. This dampens the score of the champs.
It almost invariably happens in big matches where teams rotate more heavily, but more likely because the big matches involve teams that are up the top of the ladder, and they are there because of their strong depth of players.
Something just because of circumstances, teams like Port and GC don’t really have at the moment.
Doesn’t really explain Judd’s non scoring effort against Port two weeks back, but every theory has it’s flaws.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Awesome read. Thanks
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Brilliant work as always Walesy. The opposition kick-in interested me the most, great to know that you get points/lose points for them.
Makes it a bit confusing though when looking at stats for that player though, wondering if anyone can confirm/deny this – I remember reading something a while back about kick-ins not counting as a kick stats-wise for that player.
But that would explain Chris Newman’s score at quarter time for example. Stats showed he had one kick for the quarter and not much else (no tackles, marks, etc.) but got 19pts for the quarter. And watching the game he had a few kick-ins in the first quarter.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Love your work walesy.
My favorite article of the year.
Very helpful.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Great read, good insight into the mystique that is SC scoring!. Would be good to re-post this next Feb so we can all refresh on how SC scores work.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Amazing stuff, very useful.
On a side note, there was a job advertised for Champion Data (on seek I believe) not long ago. Requirements include being a master at statistics and all the software to record it. Unfortunately they werent hiring on people’s knowledge of how important a play was… because I would have been a shoo-in.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
you didn’t ask if any of the caller’s are allowed SC teams during the year…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Very insightful. Seems those long left-footers out of the back half are the ones we want. Those able to see the games can observe who teams always handball to when coming out of def.
Ben always argued (unsuccessfully) that Judd (“my mate” of you know who) was better than Swan. His argument was based on Judd getting his own ball and Swannie hanging off the pack for the soft receive. Would be interesting to hear how CD weight these two types, as they both obviously score well.
As I suspected, in the end the system comes down to humans and humans, even umpires, are prone to error. In DT it is pretty much raw stats with no consideration of efficiency. WYSIWYG, thus we have the imperfections like the Bowden brothers. SC is much more realistic, taking into account critical moments in a game. The only imperfection is that it relies on human judgement.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
1
this is very interesting.
great to finally be told officially about kickins!
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Not really Anthak. What about that little chip to themselves?
The chip is counted as a kick? Effective of course because they get it again, and kick it again?
Or is it just ignored?
I don’t think we did get an answer on that one.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
ahhh true… but from the answer provided. they will prob get points for both disposals, although not much for the little chip to themselves. If they kick long and accurately that would a high scorer, but if they chip to themselves and then kick long and accurate, that would be best… just a prusumption though…
you are right… they didnt really explain it properly did they.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@lezyeoh
CD employees are allowed SC, they just can’t win any cash prizes. Would imagine it would be the same for the players, for obvious reasons.
@TiB
Re: Swan vs Judd. It basically depends on whether Swan’s handball receive is contested (he has a guy hanging off him when he get’s it) or uncontested (he’s out the back of pack with no one on him as you say). I think there’s a common misconception that Swan doesn’t get CP, when the split is probably 50/50.
What separates the two, and is often overlooked, is that it’s Swan’s MO to kick long to a contest (whereas I’m not even sure that Chris can kick >40m). How often, pre-injury, would you see Swan get the ball in the centre square and hurriedly snap it onto his boot into the 50, to Cloke or Dawes in contested marking situation. That’s 8 points (4 for the CP/4 for the EK) every time, as long as someone from Collingwood gives a contest in the 50.
And they invariably do because Swan is disciplined enough to kick it to the right spots and Collingwood are disciplined enough to make everything a contest.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
1
Karl explain to me please pretty please, Goddard being 133 sc points at half time in the grand final replay
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
Living the life Walesy! Great article.
Going back to the Rioli sequence: ‘Cyril made a tackle, won the free kick and kicked the goal – a 30 second block that saw him get 19 points’.
Normal DT scoring: 4 + 1 + 3 + 6 = 14 points.
Is your understanding that everything got scaled up almost 50%, or was it that 1) Frees gained from tackles get more than 4+1, and 2) A long range kick for goal (long kicks score more than short)?
It was telling that Karl mentioned that the highest scoring kicks are long kicks to unmarked players.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Sam Mitchell gets so many uncontested possessions from kick-ins and then pops 12metre passes out, which is why i never take him in SC cos 35possessions equals 90 with him.
New CD info re: kickins is interesting, id always held off on players who wld take the kickins cos i thought they’d get no points for it, and also risk a clanger…not now it seems…yet it still doesnt seem so clear…
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
@meataxe
Regarding Rioli’s 19 SC points, I think it’s more than likely that the 19 is without scaling anyway (notice I said ‘more than likely’ as I’m not 100% sure).
4(tackle) + 4(FK/CP) + 4(Effective Kick) +7(goal)=19
Now I’m unsure as to whether goals are worth 6 or 7, but I’m guessing 7.
Effective long kick (>40) to advantage are worth 5-7 (that ought to give me enough leeway, though I think it’s 7). But you have to remember that even if it’s long to a contest and that players side doesn’t retain possession, it is still classed as an effective kick (4).
Unless of course, it’s a long kick for a behind, in which case you only get the one point for the behind and nothing for the kick (this includes rushed behinds within say 5-10 meters).
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
A mate of mine has a gig with CD doing stats for VFL and U18 games.
He doesn’t have a Masters in Statistics – I asked him how he got the gig and he said it was as simple as sending them his resume, then they gave him a call, the rest is history.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
This is a good read, hopefully there you guys can go round again once the season is over.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
It’s Great to put this up here, so whenever we’re unsure of something on TV just remember this, awesome Walesy.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@hornsy
Goals are worth 9 im pretty sure, never trust me though, i thought whatever EMG you pick first, but its lower scorer
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Thanks for the info ExPrez
Hornsy – completely correct with Swan.
I have seen him time and again win a contested ball just backward of centre, brush off a tackler, run 10 metres, and pump 60 metres long to the hot spot 30 out right in front.
Would also think there’s some value in the “inside 50″ and maybe one for a bounce if he’s quick enough to take one.
The injury he’s got to his quads has effected his “off the line” sprint, so therefore his possessions have had to be either much more uncontested, or much more contested.
I for one am happy most people have traded him from their sides. I reckon he will go smashing it through rounds 17 and onwards.
In regards Judd, he’s an interesting case. Remember we are seeing Judd Mark II, who has become a more contested ball machine. Judd Mark I was clearly the better skilled player, with those jet accelerators pushing him clear of any tackler. Judd Mark I given the time and space also was able to hit targets for goal better.
Judd Mark II is an arguably more inspirational leader, but maybe even though Cousins was regarded as the “spiritual leader” of the WCE (more like the dealer), Judd still has the title of Premiership Captain, and well deserved.
I have them both in my team, and reckon they will both average 120+ for the rest of the year.
And I must say it’s a massive game from Judd (or maybe Franklin) or a collectively brilliant team performance from Geelong (or dare I say it injuries to even more key personnel) I think separating the Pies from a dream of back-to-back for the first time in 70 years.
Judd is that good, he could prove the difference in a prelim.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
@Hornsy,
Think you’re spot on with your take on long kicks. I think “long kick” is defined as being >35m. Anyway, the key why Drummond was so good with so few possessions is that he was always able to hit his teammates for marks with his long kicks (as well as shorter kicks too, obviously).
@Lucas,
Do you think Judd will even average more than Murphy? I’m sceptical about Judd averaging 120+ in the remaining games of the season, he has played well enough so far that he should at least be averaging this already (he averaged 119 last season, and he has been at least on par with last season). Possessions in 2011 up on 2010.
Where’s the 10% improvement in scoring going to come from?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Judd will play better. I just feel it.
In some matches I feel Judd has drifted in and out of games. Let’s separate 3 votes from work rate all the match.
E.g. Richmond. Should get 3 votes cause he turned the game, but did stuff all in big patches of that match.
Quite a few games like St Kilda did Judd do enough to get his side close to the line, but not much in big slabs of the game.
I can see Judd starting to perform more completely and thus get that 10% from 110 to 120.
That and seeing his dream of lifting a club to a flag so close, that will lift the man higher.
I reckon Murphy might come under more attention which could lift the crippling squeeze on Judd as well. But it’s a tough balance for opposing coaches.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@meataxe
It’s >40m. I’m 98% sure of that.
And that’s a Hornsy 98%. Not a Schwarz 98%.
As for the battle between Judd and Murphy, this is how I see it. If Carlton play in more close matches than blow-outs/comfortable wins this season, Judd takes the honours. If it’s the other way round, then Murphy FTW.
Because as it stands Murphy is accumulating better over 4 qtrs, while Judd is playing better “clutch” qtrs when the team really needs it.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Re. Judd/Murphy, think Hornsy has hit the nail on the head. When Carlton are comfortable, Judd seems to get a lot of bench time in short bursts, while Murph keeps running. If the game is tight, think they are forced to give Judd more TOG. Thus, should the remaining games be a test for Carlton, Lucas may get his wish, assuming more TOG means more points (that missing 10%).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What about the unsung heroes? Players with shutdown roles.
Holding Buddy to one goal, stopping Judd or annoying Daisy till he snaps? Can’t help but feel these players are not fairly rewarded, both in the real life and fantasy versions of the game.
Am I off the mark? Admittedly I don’t know the exact breakdown of the points system of CD, but this is the feeling I get..
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Lovely work Walesy (and Karl),thank you.
I’m with Owen, no longer need to yell abuse if some spud grasses my players’ pass.
So does that mean if a game is within 1 or 2 points at every change then each quarter will be evenly weighted? Logic says yes but I’m thinking no as it should also mean the first goal was just as important as the last, which is unlikely.
Also, how would a game with a team having a 10 goal lead at 1/4 time, then being level at half time be weighted? Especially if the end result was only 1 point. Were these game definining quarters or does the last one get higher weighting?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Great read Walesy.
I was disappointed, though not surprised, to learn that pressure on opposition disposals “doesn’t effect fantasy” scoring.
Collingwood’s game style is based on pressure which is being adopted by the clubs considered to be improving.
The game has evolved to the point where a player’s actions without the ball are as important as how they earn it and what they do with it.
The stats are reported in the Herald Sun and so should be incorporated into SC scoring to ensure that an important part of player performance and effort is duly recognised.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I tend to agree PieRaider, but if you get 1 point for every pressure act, than some players get around 30 a game, which could mean players like Jordie McKenzie & Mitch Robinson suddnely become premiums averaging 110-120ppg, rather than 80-90. And some already premium players like Judd, Ablett, Dal Santo, Boyd etc etc etc now average 140-160 rather than 105-125, would make SC a whole new game and a little more complicated, and say SC users (first timers) log onto SC for the first time and they see llayers like J.McKenzie + M.Robinson averaging over 110ppg and they think “somebody told me 100 was a good average, although they may not realise that 130ppg would then be “premium” style, and the par score would rocket up higher, which personally i wouldn’t like because I like the par score of over 2200 and under 2100 or 2000 a shocker. I dont like the dream team scoring as I think its too low and I think higher SC scores would ruin the game….maybe instead of pressure acts they could give points for effective pressure acts, that actually result in your team intercepting the ball, because there are plenty of pressure acts that aren’t totally effective and the opposition could end up kicking a goal
I.E, a player carrelling the opposition towards the boundary without actually tackling/bumping and say the player with the ball could then handball over the top e.g result in goal. That’s a pressure act but is it effective? No.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Not to mention the 3300 or so points to be spread out amongst players…….wouldn’t work with extra points, they could raise the points allowed or each match, but again i think it’s fine the way it is……
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Don’t forget Sainter, the 3300 rule would still be in effect, so it wouldn’t be *everybody* who is getting an increase in points here- the players involved in pressure acts would have their score increase- but then everyone would be rounded down to back under the 3300.
So while some players go up because of it, plenty of others would go down and if they ever did introduce off the ball pressure acts into the score, it would completely change the game for a year.
That said, there’s plenty of things a player does on the football field that is beneficial for the team, but not necessarily for themselves, consider the forward who leads, then leads again to create space for another to lead into. His act should be rewarded as what he did was an integral part of taking that grab inside the 50 arc, but scoring that is very difficult- same as the guy who blocks for his mate at the center bounce, the guy who is blocked for gets the points, whereas it’s the work of both players that enabled the possession to be won.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Sainter, I like the effective pressure act concept and agree with Walesy about the 3300 rule keeping it in proportion.
I prefer Supercoach to Dreamteam because effectiveness of disposals are accounted for.
Walesy, It would be ideal if decoy leads, centre bounce and marking contest blocks could all be effectively recorded more accurately reflect a player’s true contribution to the game but more resources would be required by Champion Data.
They’re already recording the pressure acts and would only need Sainter’s effectiveness ranking and guys like Lenny, Sidebottom, Kelly, Cassisi, Ablett (yes, even GAJ) and Ward amongst others would be rewarded compared to those with lower defensive skills or effort.
It’s a lot harder to run when you know you’re not going to get it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Don’t forget Prestigiacomo PieRaider, he was the ultimate shut down player doing the team thing. Tragic he missed GF1.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0