- Thread starter
- #3,301
I agree, there needs to be a cut-off with some stats as some records will never be broken. The question is, when is a logical cut-off?
Stats questions
- Thread starter red+black
- Start date
- Tagged users None
1990
SJ
Premium Platinum
Why does there need to be a cut off for records?
That's what records are. They are records.
That's what records are. They are records.
SJ
Premium Platinum
I've never heard it referred to as a "stat" in the modern game.
I think, maybe if the stats were more configurable, so you could custom search to eliminate the outliers, like super low scores pre 1930s. Thereby selecting a date range.
Footy is always evolving, we've seen a lot of changes just in the last 25 years. But trying to get results for lowest round scores is extremely hard if you want to do it between 1990 and 2014. I can't see how to get those results because it only shows the prehistoric games.
SJ
Premium Platinum
Why try to get something that doesn't exist? Just say "lowest since...".
SJ
Premium Platinum
Exactly.
Carlton just broke a record that has stood from 1899 and Brisbane has just broken one first set in 1897.
West Coast this round equaled one first set in 1901.
To think that the records of the League can be divided at some point is to put it kindly, uninformed.
Ample evidence is here after every round: http://www.users.on.net/~rogersresults/Rogers_Results/home.htm
Fremantle's score of 1.7-13 in 2009 was the lowest since Richmond's 0-8-8 in 1961 which except for Fitzroy's 1.0-6 in 1953 was the lowest since 1915. There hadn't been a goalless score since 1921 and Richmond's score remains the last. Since 1961 there have been eight single goal scores besides Fremantle's, with occurrences including "modern" ones in 1989 (two) and 1991.
All the above scores were considered anomalies but how anomalous would be lost if there was some arbitrary cut off point in the records and we would all be that much dumber.
If you are 12 then current times are "modern" if you are 90 then the 1930s may be the beginning of the "modern" era. There is a rough division around 1919 in scoring but scores and results from 1897 can still be referenced and compared.
Average scoring shots after four rounds in 2014 haven't been as low since 1967 and average scoring shots 1932 to 1950 were higher in each season than any from 1951 to 1967. Making cut-off points would lose historical perspective. (Average scoring shots were also higher in 1928 than so far in 2014.)
For those interested in such things we are extremely fortunate to have the records of one continuous competition with 118 years of scores and results under the same method of scoring. Each round brings new surprises with such a wealth of data. Cutting it up with some arbitrary "modern" boundary is to be resisted at every turn.
You say this, but I opened your website, and on the front page were about a dozen statistics saying "its highest score since x", or some such.
No-one is saying that "Fremantle's 13 points against Adelaide is a record low score in the AFL" should become a true statement, what has been suggested (and what I agree with) is that, for the purposes of statistical analysis, it'd be useful to have tables for the records, and then tables alongside them for 1990-present, giving us a glympse of whether the stats are "normal" compared to more recent seasons. Yes, this date is going to be completely arbitrary and some people might not agree, but since you clearly have no qualms against listing statistics containing "since arbitrary date" on your website, that's not the issue.
In an ideal world we'd have the record tables for all time, and then the ability to select any range of years (e.g., 1990-present, 1897-1916, or even 1979-1985&1989-1995) and see the "records" for those periods. I don't see how this could at all constitute "cutting it up", rather than simply providing a more easily obtainable reference point for statistics many users are interested in.
It is rather difficult to see what point you are trying to make.
For a start you seem to be asking for a perspective on records so as to gauge current performance yet don't want to know what was happening before an arbitrary date such as 1990. I can assure you that essentially the same game was being played in 1989 and back from there.
A reference to the last higher score or biggest win etc is not referring to an "arbitrary date", there is no discretion in saying that West Coast's goalless last three quarters were the first by any team since 2006 nor that it was the first time that Geelong had kept an opponent goalless in the last three quarters since 1956. These are simply facts that give a perspective on the frequency of such scoring events. Arbitrary means something that is based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system. To say that it was the first time that Geelong had kept an opponent goalless in the last three quarters since 1990 would be arbitrary and lose perspective.
As for the request for "an ideal world" of comparative tables , you might like to start looking here:
Top 100 Highest Scores
or here:
History of the Highest Score
and here:
Performance - Eras 1897-1925: 1926-1954: 1955-1983: 1984-2012
http://www.users.on.net/~rogersresults/Rogers_Results/Performance_Eras/performance_eras.htm
Yeah, not sure of the issue.
I'd much rather hear the whole history of a record instead of choosing some date in history that we say constitutes the 'modern' era.
Doing that created the situation in the 80s where people thought that Dermie's 8 goals in the 1985 Grand Final were a record, when in fact they weren't.
I'd much rather hear the whole history of a record instead of choosing some date in history that we say constitutes the 'modern' era.
Doing that created the situation in the 80s where people thought that Dermie's 8 goals in the 1985 Grand Final were a record, when in fact they weren't.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 7,585
- 8,270
- AFL Club
- GWS
I reckon today's lineup would go close to our youngest ever. I'd love to know what today's teams average age was vs the crows... Anyone a gun on this kind of data?
21.66, ranked 19th youngest from 49 games.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 7,585
- 8,270
- AFL Club
- GWS
You're a gun. Thankyou. Can I bother you with a few more questions?
1. Is. That our 19th youngest... Or the afl's?
2. What do you mean 'from 49 games'?
3. Do you know what adelaides avg age was today?
1. Is. That our 19th youngest... Or the afl's?
2. What do you mean 'from 49 games'?
3. Do you know what adelaides avg age was today?
19th youngest GWS team from 49 games, 111th youngest VFL/AFL team.
Adelaide's was 24.68.
Brisbane's team on Thursday night was its 12th youngest from 622 games.
Last edited:
- Jan 17, 2013
- 7,585
- 8,270
- AFL Club
- GWS
Interesting. What was brisbanes teams avg age?
23.37
GWS is clearly a special case, with 32 of their teams averaging under 22. The most recent clubs to do this before GWS were Fitzroy 1996 (once), North 1990 (twice), Essendon 1977-78 (8 times) and Carlton 1974 (once). Between 1959-72 there were 222 such teams. Every club fielded at least one in the period 1956-77.
Last edited:
SJ
Premium Platinum
How many top of the table clashes have Geelong played in 2007-2014?
