Goal Accuracy

Remove this Banner Ad


For exactly the same reason that when you take 5 shots at goal you only have to kick 4 to be an 80 per cent shooter whereas if you have 500 shots on goal you have to hit 400 of them to do it.

All it takes is one hit or miss either way in a small sample size to make a big impact on your percentage. The bigger your sample size, the smaller the impact a miss or a goal has.

If you have kicked 2 from 4, your last kick going through makes you a 60 per cent kicker: not bad
If it misses, you are a 40 per cent kicker. Ie. rubbish.
 
Cleansweep17 interesting about Hawkins and Kennedy vs Riewoldt. I always figured he was a dead eye. Had a lot more "no score" shots than the others. So he had a tendency to spray it a bit more.

I believe the OP said kicks that didn’t make the distance count as no score. Considering Jack doesn’t play as deep as Kennedy or Hawkins have, I’m not surprised.

I’m more surprised Kennedys is that low. From my eye test he was the most accurate I’ve seen play the game.

And this is a prime example of why we don’t use eye tests. Vickery was a better kick and he was right under my nose the entire time.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

And now we get to some players who's accuracy......wasn't so good.. in fact it was terrible. Sorry Pies and Bulldogs fans.......Travis Cloke...

See screenshots...

Travis Cloke: 256 Games
Shots on Goal: 996
Goals: 452
Behinds: 369
No Score: 175
Goal Accuracy: 45.3%

https://afltables.com/afl/stats/players/T/Travis_Cloke.html

...umm.....45.3%......that isn't good.....its quite bad actually = a goal every 2.2 shots...

I think I did this a while ago.

Lethal and GAJ are like in the 30s and Dusty in the 40s.

I know they aren’t key forwards but these guys are generally regarded as elite players with elite kicking skills. Maybe for mid/fwds it is good? Idk
 

If you kick 9.0 then kick 1 behind your accuracy drops from 100% to 90%. If you kicked 90.9 then kicked 1 behind your accuracy drops from 90.1% to 90%.
You're saying it's easier for a player to get a higher accuracy % if he has fewer shots, while ignoring the fact that missing shots would be far more damaging to their accuracy than a player who has lots of shots. You're also saying a player with a lot of shots accuracy will be lower, even though missing a shot is less detrimental to their overall %.
 
I think I did this a while ago.

Lethal and GAJ are like in the 30s and Dusty in the 40s.

I know they aren’t key forwards but these guys are generally regarded as elite players with elite kicking skills. Maybe for mid/fwds it is good? Idk

Leigh Matthews kicked 915.724, that's not an accurate measure of his accuracy because it doesn't show his total shots on goal - it only shows goals/behinds, it doesn't show missed shots - out on full, out of bounds, didn't make distance etc. So really we can't use the goals/behinds ratio anymore - it's redundant in terms of determining Accuracy because for a lot of players thst aren't on the AFL app, it Wong dhow their total shots on goal.

You've mentioned a few midfield/forward players - Ablett Jnr and Martin, here's there goal accuracy plus a few other midfield/forward players - Dangerfield and Petracca.

Gary Ablett Jnr (according to AFL app)
Shots On Goal: 878
Goals: 445
Behind: 337
No Score: 96
Goal Accuracy: 50.6%

Dustin Martin (according to AFL app)
Shots On Goal: 673
Goals: 332
Behind: 226
No Score: 115
Goal Accuracy: 49.3%

Christian Petracca (according to AFL app)
Shots On Goal: 444
Goals: 175
Behind: 160
No Score: 109
Goal Accuracy: 39.4%

Patrick Dangerfield (according to AFL app)
Shots On Goal: 728
Goals: 329
Behind: 258
No Score: 141
Goal Accuracy: 45.2%
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top