Lowest score

[topcat10]

In view of the fact that Port Adelaide ( both of them???) celabrated 140 years yesterday and the Power scored their lowest ever AFL score what is the lowest score recorded for the OTHER Port Adelaide. I found a game in 1909 when they kicked about 25 points total at Alberton against Norwood and won the game-Nwd didn't kick a goal 0.05 I believe. Would this be their lowest?

[Pseudo]

In view of the fact that Port Adelaide ( both of them???) celabrated 140 years yesterday and the Power scored their lowest ever AFL score what is the lowest score recorded for the OTHER Port Adelaide. I found a game in 1909 when they kicked about 25 points total at Alberton against Norwood and won the game-Nwd didn't kick a goal 0.05 I believe. Would this be their lowest?

Try 1.4 versus 0.5

[topcat10]

In view of the fact that Port Adelaide ( both of them???) celabrated 140 years yesterday and the Power scored their lowest ever AFL score what is the lowest score recorded for the OTHER Port Adelaide. I found a game in 1909 when they kicked about 25 points total at Alberton against Norwood and won the game-Nwd didn't kick a goal 0.05 I believe. Would this be their lowest?

Try 1.4 versus 0.5

Thanks Pseudo-so that is Port Adelaide's lowest ever score? or is it the score from West Lakes yesterday-I get so confused over this schizophrenic football club

[prowling panther]

don't get confused TC10, doesn't matter which one holds the lowest record, as long as they both belong to Port Adelaide, whether it be magpies or Power, who really cares.

[topcat10]

don't get confused TC10, doesn't matter which one holds the lowest record, as long as they both belong to Port Adelaide, whether it be magpies or Power, who really cares.

[spell_check]

Scoring records do start from 1907 officially by the SANFL. I would prefer them to start from 1899, because this is the year when electorate football became compulsory and not in 1897 when it was first introduced.

The 1.4 (10) match: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=20096 is the lowest score for Port from 1907 onwards. However, taking 1897-1906 into account, the lowest score is actually this one:

Round 1 1900
North 0.1 3.6 4.9 6.10 (46)
Port 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 (7)
Alberton

The lowest five scores for Port are:
1.1 (7) vs North 6.10 (46) Rd 1 1900
1.2 (8) vs Norwood 4.10 (34) Rd 9 1900
1.4 (10) vs South 16.7 (103) Finals Section 1 match 1899
1.4 (10) vs Norwood 0.5 (5) Rd 3 1909 - lowest winning score
1.5 (11) vs Torrens 2.4 (16) Rd 2 1900 - lowest winning score Port have conceded

Taking the 1897-1906 scores into account, the 15 points scored for the match is still the lowest match aggregate on record.
The number of scoring shots for the match is equal 2nd:

Round 2 1898 (7 scoring shots)
Port 0.0 1.2 1.2 2.3 (15)
North 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 (12)
Alberton

Final 1919 (10 scoring shots)
North 1.0 1.0 2.2 2.3 (15)
Torrens 1.1 1.3 2.3 2.3 (15)
Adelaide, 10000

[topcat10]

The lowest five scores for Port are:
1.1 (7) vs North 6.10 (46) Rd 1 1900
1.2 (8) vs Norwood 4.10 (34) Rd 9 1900
1.4 (10) vs South 16.7 (103) Finals Section 1 match 1899
1.4 (10) vs Norwood 0.5 (5) Rd 3 1909 - lowest winning score
1.5 (11) vs Torrens 2.4 (16) Rd 2 1900 - lowest winning score Port have conceded

This is my favorite part.

Thanks Spelly

[Squawk]

I'll raise you all...

Port are celebrating 140 years. The SANFL started in 1877.

My source for this one is none other than M Rucci, who in last Friday's Advertiser on page 41, stated the following:

Club Founded: April 1870
First game: 0-0 v Young Australians at Buck's Flat, Glanville.

I found that scoreline amusing enough to stick in the memory bank, amazing how quickly I got the chance to pull it out!

[Adelaide Hawk]

The SANFL began in 1907, but the SAFA began in 1877.

I recall Port celebrated their centenary year in 1970. As a lad I never quite understood it as the SAFA didn't start until 1877, but I guess if the club was in existance in 1870 and playing some form of competetive football in 1870, then so be it.

I just smirk a little at Port Adelaide's consistent efforts to ram the 1870 bit down opposition's throats in the AFL. So far as most are concerned they been in the AFL since 1997, and the 1870 thing is totally redundant.

[topcat10]

I'll raise you all...

Port are celebrating 140 years. The SANFL started in 1877.

My source for this one is none other than M Rucci, who in last Friday's Advertiser on page 41, stated the following:

Club Founded: April 1870
First game: 0-0 v Young Australians at Buck's Flat, Glanville.

I found that scoreline amusing enough to stick in the memory bank, amazing how quickly I got the chance to pull it out!

PLEASE tell me it wasn't a draw

[Adelaide Hawk]

I'll raise you all...

Port are celebrating 140 years. The SANFL started in 1877.

My source for this one is none other than M Rucci, who in last Friday's Advertiser on page 41, stated the following:

Club Founded: April 1870
First game: 0-0 v Young Australians at Buck's Flat, Glanville.

I found that scoreline amusing enough to stick in the memory bank, amazing how quickly I got the chance to pull it out!

PLEASE tell me it wasn't a draw

Maybe they hadn't invented goal posts back then

[Squawk]

I'll raise you all...

Port are celebrating 140 years. The SANFL started in 1877.

My source for this one is none other than M Rucci, who in last Friday's Advertiser on page 41, stated the following:

Club Founded: April 1870
First game: 0-0 v Young Australians at Buck's Flat, Glanville.

I found that scoreline amusing enough to stick in the memory bank, amazing how quickly I got the chance to pull it out!

PLEASE tell me it wasn't a draw

It's a fair question. No score was given for Young Australians so either the score wasn't published or as AH suggested, it was goals only so a "nil-nil" result.

[Footy Chick]

Maybe they hadn't invented goal posts back then

That's not as stupid as it sounds because I did read somewhere that the first footy games DID'NT have goal posts

[spell_check]

One thing that intrigues me is why behind posts were introduced, when behinds didn't count? They were recorded as we know, but what was the reason to incorporate something if it did not matter?

Also, how did they come about the number six to award it to a goal? Why not 5 or 4?

[spell_check]

I think I have found an answer to my first two questions:

http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/5921398

It's probably the recording of behinds were an afterthought to the rule brought in. The rule at the time was very similar to a goal kick in soccer. But in the case of the team who was defending those goals kicking it over that area, the ball was thrown back in.