Round 12 discussion

[Keg on legs]

Just found this. Might be of interest to some of you

 

[pincrusher]

Just found this. Might be of interest to some of you

View attachment 379704

Nope. No interest. The same one that's already been posted five times on this page!!

 

[Keg on legs]

Nope. No interest. The same one that's already been posted five times on this page!!

Really? I didn't realise

 

[Daniel McL]

BREAKING NEWS!

 

[The Lemon]

You realise that there’s no way you’ll get 18 warm bodies on the park in Round 13 — unless you try something ... zany.

WARM BODIES M8

 

[ldamico]

Interesting.

CD, is there a stat that can explain why Bont is a piss weak front runner that hasn't scored a ton in over a month?

 

[The_Steadier]

You are correct regarding contested possession scoring

Which begs the question, if you take a contested possession then get caught holding the ball is it basically score neutral?

I don't think so, because it would be an ineffective contested possie.
Im assuming an ineffective contested possie is only worth like a point or maybe nothing?

An effective contested possie that isn't a kick or handball... like a tap to a teammate; probably only worth a couple of points at most.

But they definitely could add up to a useful amount over the course of a game

Edit: ah yes just seen the spreadsheet- the 'hardball gets' and 'looseball gets' can add up to a useful amount over the course of a game.

Mystery solved people, next lets debunk cropcircles

 

[The Lemon]

Who decides what a tap on is?

That is where the fraud lies

 

[Dark Sharks]

Anybody have a table showing the breakdown of JPK and Bonts touches?

I could really use one.

 

[The_Steadier]

Who decides what a tap on is?

That is where the fraud lies

Almost everything is subjective in football except for the scores.

Why stop at questioning what is a tap?
What is a tackle?
What is contested?


CD have multiple watchers deciding these subjective things, like how boxing or olympic diving have multiple judges.
This does a decent job of cancelling out the individual bias factor.

 

[The Lemon]

Almost everything is subjective in football except for the scores.

Why stop at questioning what is a tap?
What is a tackle?
What is contested?


CD have multiple watchers deciding these subjective things, like how boxing or olympic diving have multiple judges.
This does a decent job of cancelling out the individual bias factor.

I still think The Nerd is taking liberties with these little, high scoring nuances.

 

[Daniel McL]

Anybody have a table showing the breakdown of JPK and Bonts touches?

I could really use one.

Don't say I never did anything for ya.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Not sure is posted yet.View attachment 379699

While disagreeing with the scoring it's good that CD are being transparent.

My take having watched 90% of the game.

Possession scoring feels about right to me. JPK clearly got a lot more of the ball.

Disposal scoring way out of proportion with game influence. Regardless of the scoring system, JPK should be getting more points for his 15 effective handballs given how many of them started Swans possession chains from clearances and contested situations. If Bont only had 1 kick clanger I was clearly watching a different game. He absolutely butchered it by foot. In contrast I can't recall JPK butchering so many kicks. The overall disposal difference should be way more in Kennedy's favour. 6 points difference is just wrong. Should be more like 26.

Knock ons looks ok. Bont did do a few that seemed to advantage his team.

Scoreboard. Bont should lose points for missing from point blank range. The scoring system is stuffed in this situation. His score assist was pretty basic - kick out the back which wasn't that well directed (but it was there). Kennedy goal a bit underscored I think. Kennedy should be a few more points up for this stat.

Frees. Bont might actually be hard done by here. At least two of his frees were a bit marginal. I hate the way this is scored too. Do you lose points for a professional fk that stops a likely turnover goal to the oppo for example.

Defensive is wrong. I'm sure because Bont is tall and stands out he's getting tackle credits he doesn't deserve. And the weighting for tackles (as someone else mentioned) is all wrong - the points awarded to Bont here don't reflect his very minor influence on the game. It also s%$#s me that in a contested situation, JPK will often get to a ball that looks like it's heading the Bullies way and manage to tie it up for another stoppage. Bont arrives a fraction later to tackle him. Result is 3 points Bont, 0 JPK when JPK has actually done more to benefit his team. So the problem here is the scoring system.

Summary - Bonts game is favoured strongly by the scoring system. JPK dominated but his strengths go somewhat unrewarded. Plus some possible small amount of pro Bont bias in the subjective components (i.e what's a clanger) but it's probably pretty small.

Makes me a bit more educated about how the system works but still not happy with the result.

 

[Biggie]

On JPK, 37 touches and a goal as VC, I was like this seeing his score

 

[The_Steadier]

Still doesn't explain how Bont was on 10 points at a time where all he had was two tackles and 2 FA

Live scoring is only ballpark figures.
Because unlike dreamteam, SC scoring takes into account the game situation and applies weighting to scores accordingly.

For example a contested mark like leo barrys one in the GF scores more than if he had taken that exact same mark in the 1st quarter.
Or if he took it at the same exact time in the 4th quarter, but the swans were 100 points ahead.

Often you can't know how important something like a contested mark etc is to the game situation as soon as it happens.
You need to look back and decide later how important it was.

 

[SC fish]

Ainsworth being named now dosesn't suit me - would have been good last week.

Not sure whether it's worth a trade Powell-Pepper to Ainsworth to make some $$?

 

[TheOz]

Still doesn't explain how Bont was on 10 points at a time where all he had was two tackles and 2 FA

Obviously he was caught holding the ball in a specific, high scoring "zone".

 

[delinquent05]

JJ killed me, hope that game costs him $$$$ for his next contract.

Lucky I have 19 playing so it shouldn't count.

3/335 with his score being droped.


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[Here2tellyouwhy]

While disagreeing with the scoring it's good that CD are being transparent.

My take having watched 90% of the game.

Possession scoring feels about right to me. JPK clearly got a lot more of the ball.

Disposal scoring way out of proportion with game influence. Regardless of the scoring system, JPK should be getting more points for his 15 effective handballs given how many of them started Swans possession chains from clearances and contested situations. If Bont only had 1 kick clanger I was clearly watching a different game. He absolutely butchered it by foot. In contrast I can't recall JPK butchering so many kicks. The overall disposal difference should be way more in Kennedy's favour. 6 points difference is just wrong. Should be more like 26.

Knock ons looks ok. Bont did do a few that seemed to advantage his team.

Scoreboard. Bont should lose points for missing from point blank range. The scoring system is stuffed in this situation. His score assist was pretty basic - kick out the back which wasn't that well directed (but it was there). Kennedy goal a bit underscored I think. Kennedy should be a few more points up for this stat.

Frees. Bont might actually be hard done by here. At least two of his frees were a bit marginal. I hate the way this is scored too. Do you lose points for a professional fk that stops a likely turnover goal to the oppo for example.

Defensive is wrong. I'm sure because Bont is tall and stands out he's getting tackle credits he doesn't deserve. And the weighting for tackles (as someone else mentioned) is all wrong - the points awarded to Bont here don't reflect his very minor influence on the game. It also s%$#s me that in a contested situation, JPK will often get to a ball that looks like it's heading the Bullies way and manage to tie it up for another stoppage. Bont arrives a fraction later to tackle him. Result is 3 points Bont, 0 JPK when JPK has actually done more to benefit his team. So the problem here is the scoring system.

Summary - Bonts game is favoured strongly by the scoring system. JPK dominated but his strengths go somewhat unrewarded. Plus some possible small amount of pro Bont bias in the subjective components (i.e what's a clanger) but it's probably pretty small.

Makes me a bit more educated about how the system works but still not happy with the result.

tl;dr
KOTD

 

[TheOz]

tl;dr
KOTD

Do you reckon Champion_Data prefers Bont's right or left nut? Which "zone" of his scrotum is the higher scoring one?

 

[toxic]

Hey guys, did anyone see on Twitter that CD gave an absolute serve to toxic because he asked them a serious question?

Really?

Where

 

[toxic]

Thanks for the breakdown, this is only the end result of asking for a transparent "live" example video being made available.

Champion_Data what would be ideal would be a live running score over a player, in this instance, Bont, showing what scores are given and not given.
I note his clanger count of 1 as a reference point for discussion.
At the moment despite all the tweets and "tables" being offered there is still a massive amount of confusion across every forum of discussion that exists for Supercoach scoring.

Rather than offer another table to the masses, which shows nothing about context, perhaps another aporoach mite be in order.

Happy to discuss further

 

[Dark Sharks]

Really?

Where

Right here

 

[toxic]

Right here

Thats just a BS table that has no context.

Bont...1 CLANGER...REALLY

I thought cd had a go at me personally.

I'll tweet them ...how the fk do i do that

 

[G Mus]

Ffs Ainsworth