CD Scaling

[Bully]

This is becoming so arbitrary that I'm fast losing interest, lost 30 points on the GWS game for no apparent reason. Toby Greene loses a truckload for a 3 goal 20 possession game. Whitfield lost 9 points from when he was concussed. Guys like Langford gained 12 points whilst nursing a torn hamstring. This kind of nonsense has been taken to a new level this year. 

[RaisyDaisy]

This is becoming so arbitrary that I'm fast losing interest, lost 30 points on the GWS game for no apparent reason. Toby Greene loses a truckload for a 3 goal 20 possession game. Whitfield lost 9 points from when he was concussed. Guys like Langford gained 12 points whilst nursing a torn hamstring. This kind of nonsense has been taken to a new level this year.

Pretty surprised to see a seasoned coach like yourself questioning this

Nothing has changed

In an extremely tight game like todays GWS GC match, points are at a premium when the game is in the balance, and considering the likes of Toby and Whitfield did nothing in the clutch, their lack of influence sees them scale back

Langford on the other hand was massive in the first half of the game, when the game was still on. The second half was a blowout, so he's score naturally scaled higher and ticked over as what he did in the first half had much more weight then anything done in the second half

"Influence" plays a massive part in SC scoring, and that's something you can only witness, not see on a stats page

[Bully]

This is becoming so arbitrary that I'm fast losing interest, lost 30 points on the GWS game for no apparent reason. Toby Greene loses a truckload for a 3 goal 20 possession game. Whitfield lost 9 points from when he was concussed. Guys like Langford gained 12 points whilst nursing a torn hamstring. This kind of nonsense has been taken to a new level this year.

Pretty surprised to see a seasoned coach like yourself questioning this

Nothing has changed

In an extremely tight game like todays GWS GC match, points are at a premium when the game is in the balance, and considering the likes of Toby and Whitfield did nothing in the clutch, their lack of influence sees them scale back

Langford on the other hand was massive in the first half of the game, when the game was still on. The second half was a blowout, so he's score naturally scaled higher and ticked over as what he did in the first half had much more weight then anything done in the second half

"Influence" plays a massive part in SC scoring, and that's something you can only witness, not see on a stats page

Certain players cop a raw deal, I generally try to avoid them, Brad Crouch is one who frequently gets shafted. Greene played a top game today and should have been rewarded, instead of being bumped he lost a swag. No rhyme nor reason. Anyhow my season has been derailed & I'm starting to think about life post SC.

[RaisyDaisy]

Crouch has poor DE, that's why he doesn't score as well consistently

99% of the time the CD scoring is spot on

Take a breather mate, you've had a great year and you'll be back again next year :)

[Bully]

Crouch has poor DE, that's why he doesn't score as well consistently

99% of the time the CD scoring is spot on

Take a breather mate, you've had a great year and you'll be back again next year :)

You're right, need to take a step back & not get too invested but it still frustrates a bit.

[Ringo]

CD scaling has always been an issue over the years with the allocation of points to reach the 3300 game allocation.

It is a very subjective allocation regarding influence on the game and a number of other factors which seem exclusive to CD.  We all get frustrated at times with it but always come back knowing the vagaries within the system and be part of the banter each year.

And SC is the most popular of the fantasy games as well.

[Peter]

And it is subjective. If you were there you may scale
differently. Take the good with the bad. Six to go and you
are still thereabouts

[Mat0369]

There are phantom calls in the scoring every year unfortunately. I am starting to notice it a little bit more this year. I think it's a combination of the live scoring being slow and then guys at CD being a bit too liberal with their interpretations one way or another.

I also think their needs to be a change to the effective kick interpretation and we will see alterations to how kickouts are scored.

[Holz]

certainly see that the formula is changing. You bang in long 55m to a pack and that gets you huge points, have seen the rise in metres gained as a big thing. Thats why all these defenders are exploding. JZ and Hall are tow of the top non mids in the comp and their influence just isnt there.


The point about Brad being bad at disposals with his 67% yet Hall is on 73% and Hall is buffed by getting effective disposals from kicking it in. Which means actually around the ground Crouch is a more effecitve user of the ball even though Crouch is doing it in packs and with players all around him yet hall is a trash user in the open space.
Hall commits more turnovers which is supposedly really bad for SC.


Both get around 26 touches (Crouch actually abit more)
Crouch 43% contested, Hall 19% and we were told SC is supposed to reward contested ball winning.
Crouch elite tackles with 5.9 and Hall 2.5
Crouch obviously wins a lot more clearances

All that for 96 average v 109 average (uninjured)

So really Hall is getting points for uncontested marks and bombing it long, not that efficiently (outside of kick ins) as he has more turnovers. The elite tackling, high contested possession winning doesnt seem to matter.

[PowerBug]

Maybe Champion Data have just realised that kicking a ball long to a pack and getting a stoppage 55m down the field is actually a really good way to score goals and that's why the metres gained on the kick is scored higher.

The league is very stoppage oriented now, so being someone who kicks long a lot and simply gets their team closer to goal even if the kick is to a contest is good for their impact on the game, and thus their SC score