SA Footy

I thought I would put this in here, since this is related to current scoring trends. The averages relate to individual teams, except for the Average Scoring Shots, which is both teams combined per game:
Key notes:
1996 - current time on method introduced
2006 only - time on also added for ball ups
2016 - current out of bounds method introduced

Geez, who were the teams who broke the 200 point barrier in 02 & 07?

Moe wrote:Geez, who were the teams who broke the 200 point barrier in 02 & 07?

Team singular - Central 36.9 vs South 4.6 in 2002 and this 2007 match viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8647

spell_check wrote:

Moe wrote:Geez, who were the teams who broke the 200 point barrier in 02 & 07?

Team singular - Central 36.9 vs South 4.6 in 2002 and this 2007 match viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8647

Glad I asked.

Geez woodwt was an angry dude

Fans like goals and exciting games. Sanfl has to change its style to encourage fans to turn up and watch. All the averages are trending downwards. Addressing this will go someway to addressing falling attendances

I remember high scoring games in the 60's Sturt and 70's Glenelg and Norwood with attacking and skills of the highest priority.
We all loved it with more or less games played I am no sure.
I can't remember split rounds and byes in that era.
These were the days.

One thing to take out of the table is that in terms of scoring shots, 2011 is the highest of the period from 2010 onwards. Every year of the previous 10 years (2000-2009) was higher than that.

ok spelly what was westies points for in 1983
and has any team come close to breaking it since

3494 in 1983; Sturt got 3513 in the same year, but over two extra games. For averages per game they rank 2nd and 5th (Glenelg in 1975 is the record - 3185/21 = 151.67)

No one has averaged 100 points per game in an entire season since Sturt in 2008 - 100.65 per game

Interesting stats.

What happened in 1996 to have the goals per game drop that far and then continue for the next 4-5 years?

Increase with attacking coaches such as Phillips, Jarman, Fuller etc. through mid 2000’s.

Back down again with Andrew Phillips game style, then Bassett, Godden etc kept the theme of low scoring carrying through to what we see today.

Would be interesting to see the comparative AFL stats. I’m guessing the SANFL would’ve outscored AFL games during mid 2000’s but since Geelong era of high pace/risk the trends have been opposite.

The SANFL clubs are about 3 - 5 years behind the AFL game style , have been for a long time. How it is played now the SANFL teams are not skilled enough and dont play on grounds as the AFL teams do which makes a huge difference. That is why I enjoyed watching North play yesterday , maybe they are a bit more up to speed with the current style of game ? Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Michael wrote:The SANFL clubs are about 3 - 5 years behind the AFL game style , have been for a long time. How it is played now the SANFL teams are not skilled enough and dont play on grounds as the AFL teams do which makes a huge difference. That is why I enjoyed watching North play yesterday , maybe they are a bit more up to speed with the current style of game ? Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Personally I don’t want the SANFL to try and play an AFL style.

Not sure its your choice . Thats how it is .

Michael wrote:Not sure its your choice . Thats how it is .

Never said it was my choice and I know how it is.

Aerie wrote:Interesting stats.

What happened in 1996 to have the goals per game drop that far and then continue for the next 4-5 years?

Increase with attacking coaches such as Phillips, Jarman, Fuller etc. through mid 2000’s.

Back down again with Andrew Phillips game style, then Bassett, Godden etc kept the theme of low scoring carrying through to what we see today.

Would be interesting to see the comparative AFL stats. I’m guessing the SANFL would’ve outscored AFL games during mid 2000’s but since Geelong era of high pace/risk the trends have been opposite.

The SANFL went from the old 25 minutes plus time on only for goals and behinds to the current 20 minute rule; the AFL did for the 1994 season. The trend after 1993 was down anyway, so that had a bit to do with the fall from 1995-96, too. Both the AFL and SANFL increased scoring in 2000 substantially - could be due to the earlier start to that season(?) Coinciding with me compiling scores at that time, I was looking at scoring trends and thought that was the case back then.

Interestingly, when both the AFL and SANFL adopted the added time on for ball ups in 2006, the AFL went down in points (fractionally up for scoring shots); the SANFL went up. The SANFL I think were concerned with the late finishes in 2006, and went back to not adding time on for ball ups, subsequently, the SANFL has never got near the AFL scoring again. Might I add, the field umpires don't bounce the ball around the grounds now like they did back then, so I think that rule should be looked at being brought back in again.

Michael wrote: maybe they are a bit more up to speed with the current style of game ? Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Have you seen this weeks round of scores in the AFL? Just one 100 point score out of the 7 matches so far.

spell_check wrote:

Michael wrote: maybe they are a bit more up to speed with the current style of game ? Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Have you seen this weeks round of scores in the AFL? Just one 100 point score out of the 7 matches so far.

Interesting fact Spelly.
So the AFL have all the talent and much better playing surfaces, you’d think both advantages would promote high scoring games. The few AFL games I’ve watched have been as boring as batshit, with most of the game being keepy ball and passing across the HB lines.

Sanfl clubs trying to emulate this just end up turning it over as they don’t have the ‘skills’ to play keepy ball. Sadly it doesn’t make for a very high scoring game or a very attractive spectacle likely to bring in new fans or former fans for that matter.

Another fact: the two lowest scoring games in the sanfl this season involve both AFL Reserves teams.

Michael wrote: Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Maybe, but not sure its a better game when there is little defence, I prefer games where goals are at a premium and each one is very important.

Dutchy wrote:

Michael wrote: Quick and attacking . Much better spectacle.

Maybe, but not sure its a better game when there is little defence, I prefer games where goals are at a premium and each one is very important.

maybe you should follow soccer