Ladders & Statistics - Round 13

[johntheclaret]

Why cook at all when Scott does such a great job. Just settle for a take away

[Go Legs]

Why cook at all when Scott does such a great job. Just settle for a take away

But you of all people would know the best way to enjoy claret is with a big juicy steak cooked on a gas BBQ and
I have yet to have a good steak takeaway!

Speaking off claret, I feel the sun has gone over the yardarm and I am in need of a good cleansing flush of red.

Cheers,

[bulldog2004]

I tried the formula, but found it didn't work until I used Team for (points) divide by team for Plus Team against) then percentage button

For the sake of accuracy Bulldog 2004, Norwood 1111 points divide by 1111 + 782 (1892) by percentage is 58.72

1893 leggie

[Go Legs]

I tried the formula, but found it didn't work until I used Team for (points) divide by team for Plus Team against) then percentage button

For the sake of accuracy Bulldog 2004, Norwood 1111 points divide by 1111 + 782 (1892) by percentage is 58.72

1893 leggie

Correct, me bad

[bulldogproud2]

Hi Scott,

Firstly, you do an incredible job! Thanks for all the hard work.
The reason I query your percentage for Norwood is that it differs from the official statistics on the SANFL website. They have Norwood's points against as 780, not 782. I have added all the Points Against according to the SANFL website and it does indeed add up to 780. The discrepancy is from the Norwood versus South game. On the SANFL website, they have South's score as 10-6 66 whereas on yours you have 10-8 68. Anyone able to verify the correct score?
Sorry if I am being a pain.
Cheers

[saintal]

Hi Scott,

Firstly, you do an incredible job! Thanks for all the hard work.
The reason I query your percentage for Norwood is that it differs from the official statistics on the SANFL website. They have Norwood's points against as 780, not 782. I have added all the Points Against according to the SANFL website and it does indeed add up to 780. The discrepancy is from the Norwood versus South game. On the SANFL website, they have South's score as 10-6 66 whereas on yours you have 10-8 68. Anyone able to verify the correct score?
Sorry if I am being a pain.
Cheers

10.8 I reckon. This is what SAFC.com has it as. Also I noticed on the sanfl site that South were 9.6 at 3/4. I'm 99% certain Cockshell kicked a point in the final term, as I remember the leg's fans getting stuck into him. So it would be at least 10.7...

[bulldogproud2]

Hi Scott,

Firstly, you do an incredible job! Thanks for all the hard work.
The reason I query your percentage for Norwood is that it differs from the official statistics on the SANFL website. They have Norwood's points against as 780, not 782. I have added all the Points Against according to the SANFL website and it does indeed add up to 780. The discrepancy is from the Norwood versus South game. On the SANFL website, they have South's score as 10-6 66 whereas on yours you have 10-8 68. Anyone able to verify the correct score?
Sorry if I am being a pain.
Cheers

10.8 I reckon. This is what SAFC.com has it as. Also I noticed on the sanfl site that South were 9.6 at 3/4. I'm 99% certain Cockshell kicked a point in the final term, as I remember the leg's fans getting stuck into him. So it would be at least 10.7...

Just shows even more how great a job Scott does - even better than the official SANFL stats. Well done, Scott!
Now, how do we get the SANFL to adjust their statistics?

[scott]

I noticed the Sunday Mail and then The Advertiser had this discrepancy too so did some digging and found that game to be the cause of the problem. Then again the paper also credited W/WT with an extra 10 points for but no other team had an additional 10 points against so there's also an imbalance with their table.

Earlier in the season the SANFL results site had Central District scoring (off the top of my head) 16.6.102 against Sturt in Round 6. The actual score was 16.7.103 and was reflected in their Champion Data live scores module. I understand the clubs are the ones who update the SportingPulse website and the SANFL then adjusts any discrepancies weeks later or whenever it's brought to their attention. All in all it's an unusual system for this particular level of football. These results have to be 100% accurate every week.

[baggy8]

Scott, all you have to do is to make sure of your facts (by checking all media possible and Champion Data) and give the SANFL a ring. That's what I did a few weeks ago to get the Centrals score changed and again today to get the South score changed.