Six points, Why?

[Tommo]

The West Australian has a series of questions that people send in on various topics. One such question is "Why is a Goal worth six points in Australian Football?". Most of the questions get answered with in a day but this one has been there for about four. I would answer the quest my self but I am unsure of the origin of awarding six points for a goal. Does anyone know why six points for a goal?

 

[nut]

Originally posted by Tommo
The West Australian has a series of questions that people send in on various topics. One such question is "Why is a Goal worth six points in Australian Football?". Most of the questions get answered with in a day but this one has been there for about four. I would answer the quest my self but I am unsure of the origin of awarding six points for a goal. Does anyone know why six points for a goal?

Same reason why there is a six in cricket.

 

[Khan]

The six and four in cricket are there to put a cap onto the number of runs you can score by hitting a boundry.


When the boundry was just a line not a fence then a player caould theoretically hit the ball into the thickets and the ball not be found for a while. If this was the case then the batsmen could possibly run 10 plus. If the ground you were playing at had no thicket or undergrowth or just a few patches then you were at a disadvantage if you missed hitting these areas.

The six was included to encourage big hitting and the chance for a wicket by hitting in the air.

This has nothing to do with six points for a goal in footy


Lets Roar in 2004


Khan

 

[stefoid]

because kicking a point is worth the minimum (1 pt), but kicking a goal is heaps better - 6 times better?

 

[rfctigerarmy]

because thats just the rules..?

Why do we kick the ball and not throw it? Cause thats the rules...

..cmon guys.

 

[MightyFighting]

Originally posted by rfctigerarmy
because thats just the rules..?

Why do we kick the ball and not throw it? Cause thats the rules...

..cmon guys.

That's right. I doubt that there's some deep and meaningful reason why the number 6 was chosen.

Perhaps it's the sacred number to the goddess Minronia... No wait, I just made her up. Probably not, then.

 

[TigerCraig]

Don't know why 6, but originally behinds were worth 0, and only used to tie break when goals were level.

I guess once they decided to start giving a point for a behind they figured that a goal was 6 times as good.

 

[Port01]

A touchdown in the US is also worth 6 points.

I'd assume it comes from some kind of rugby or gaelic variant.

 

[Cyclops]

The origianl form of aussie Rules didn't have points, the first to score 2 goals won (I suppose it made calculating percentage easier). So the 6 points vs 1 point came in later, maybe borrowed from rugby.

 

[MightyFighting]

Originally posted by Cyclops
So the 6 points vs 1 point came in later, maybe borrowed from rugby.

That's quite clever, seeing as they don't have anything of the sort in rugby.

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by MightyFighting
That's quite clever, seeing as they don't have anything of the sort in rugby.

To clutch at straws, it's twice as much as a penalty kick.

Anyway my phillosophy, like me, is simple, and that is all great things come in a six:

Goals, beer and women!!

 

[dogsbody]

pre-decimalisation. If the game had started after 1967, it would have been 5 points.

 

[Fred]

Given that the game was developed by cricketers, the 6 points probably followed on from the 6 in cricket.

 

[dj21]

Originally posted by MightyFighting
That's quite clever, seeing as they don't have anything of the sort in rugby.

Originally a try wasn't worth any points but gave you a free shot on goal. Maybe at some stage goals became worth six points. There has been a lot of changes in the way rugby is scored so it's not entirely unthinkable. But i'm just theorising, I can't be bothered looking it up.

 

[dodgey]

Originally posted by Fred
Given that the game was developed by cricketers, the 6 points probably followed on from the 6 in cricket.

This would be the best answer as with kicking a Goal, the ball has to go over the Line/fence, and I know although Not on the full, back in those days with the place kick being one of the most prevalent, the ball invariably travelled over the Line/Fence on the Full just like the ball does in Cricket.



I just wonder how long it's going to be before ING start putting signs up behind the Goals

 

[Pessimistic]

Originally posted by dj21
Originally a try wasn't worth any points but gave you a free shot on goal. Maybe at some stage goals became worth six points. There has been a lot of changes in the way rugby is scored so it's not entirely unthinkable. But i'm just theorising, I can't be bothered looking it up.

Johnny Wilkinson detractors should be told that - similarly a dead ball in soccer becomes a corner kick.

 

[Captain Blood]

Originally posted by dodgey

I just wonder how long it's going to be before ING start putting signs up behind the Goals

Wasn't it proposed last year down at Shell Stadium to put the big Target logo behind the goals as a "target". I believe that the Cats were targeting Target (the chain store) as a sponsor. Didn't the AFL knock it back?

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Fred
Given that the game was developed by cricketers, the 6 points probably followed on from the 6 in cricket.

Except that when it was developed it just had goals. I like rfctigerarmy's "just because".

If we can solve this one can we work out why a win is four points?

 

[dj21]

Originally posted by MarkT
If we can solve this one can we work out why a win is four points?

It's a conspiracy against odd numbers.

 

[benny's buddy]

Originally posted by Captain Blood
Wasn't it proposed last year down at Shell Stadium to put the big Target logo behind the goals as a "target". I believe that the Cats were targeting Target (the chain store) as a sponsor. Didn't the AFL knock it back?

they did have them up for a while, i think a season.

im not sure whether they were taken down cos the AFL blocked them, probably because no one was ever gonna hit them.

 

[Ted]

OK, enough speculation, here is the real reason:

When the game first started a goal was a goal, there were no behinds and thus no need to award multiple points for a goal.

As the game developed and tactics became more advanced, some of the teams began to use a strategy known as "flooding", whereby they would push a large number of players into the opponent's forward line to congest the play and make it harder to score. As the use of flooding spread, football became less and less attractive, with fans and journalists alike calling for a way to stop its negative influence on the game.

In response the rules committee of the time issued a verdict that for each goal scored, one point would be awarded for every opposition player standing within 50 yards of the goal line. This area was marked out with the original 50 yard line.

The new rule worked, with flooding disappearing as a strategy until the emergence of Eade more than a century later. To remove the need for a player count after each goal, and with the evolution of set positions for players, it was decided to reward each goal with a fixed total of one point for each of the six defenders. This also allowed for the intoduction of the behind, set at one point.

Simple.

 

[Fred]

Are you seriously telling me that GT didn't invent flooding?

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Fred
Are you seriously telling me that GT didn't invent flooding?

I thought it was Noah bloke back in the VFL days.

 

[pav_is_god]

Originally posted by MarkT
I thought it was Noah bloke back in the VFL days.

Splash! Splash! Two elephants just fell overboard.

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by MarkT
I thought it was Noah bloke back in the VFL days.

Mirvac thought they'd uncovered remnants the Ark out at Waverley, until they realised t'was merely the staduim.