Sports Scoring

[PeteC]

I've often thought about this and don't know why some things are the way they are.

For example, Baseball, football (soccer) and basketball are pretty straight forward. 1 point for a run or goal in the first two, and 2 or 3 points depending upon distance for basketball with 1 point foul shot scoring. The 3 pointer is an add on rule and not from the original rules.

Rugby and the NFL gets more complicated and would like to know why they came up with the formulas they use. Is it mathematical in some way? Rugby 5+2 and 3 for a penalty. NFL 6+1 and 3 for a field goal, there are no penalties. Extra point could be 2 instead of 1 if it is a running/passing play instead of a goal kick, but that is an add-on rule and not from the original rules. No doubt once again that NFL football initially took its rules from Rugby.

Cricket I have no idea and won't even go there.

Anyway, it's interesting to think about and chat about. Pete

Edit: I forgot the drop goal in Rugby for 3 points. Matches up with the NFL field goal.The NFL also has a drop kick worth 3 points but you never see it attempted. There has been one successful drop kick in the NFL since sometime in the 1940's!

[Dannie Boy]

I've often thought about this and don't know why some things are the way they are.

For example, Baseball, football (soccer) and basketball are pretty straight forward. 1 point for a run or goal in the first two, and 2 or 3 points depending upon distance for basketball with 1 point foul shot scoring. The 3 pointer is an add on rule and not from the original rules.

Rugby and the NFL gets more complicated and would like to know why they came up with the formulas they use. Is it mathematical in some way? Rugby 5+2 and 3 for a penalty. NFL 6+1 and 3 for a field goal, there are no penalties. Extra point could be 2 instead of 1 if it is a running/passing play instead of a goal kick, but that is an add-on rule and not from the original rules. No doubt once again that NFL football initially took its rules from Rugby.

Cricket I have no idea and won't even go there. h

Anyway, it's interesting to think about and chat about. Pete

Edit: I forgot the drop goal in Rugby for 3 points. Matches up with the NFL field goal.....

Cricket is really quite easy with regards basic scoring - get the ball over the boundary and it’s 4 runs, cross the boundary without the ball touching the outfield and it’s 6 runs. Any other score is based on how many times the two batsman cross each other and get to their crease - although it’s possible to score more, normally the most the two batsman will run is 3 runs, but it the fielder throws the ball at the wicket, misses and nobody stops it, the batsman can keep running. It gets a bit more complicated when you start to include wides, byes and leg byes, so I’ll leave it for there at the moment.

[PeteC]

Cricket is a good example then IMO. Why 4 and 6 instead of 1 and 2 or 2-3, 3-5 etc. It must be because of possible combinations with other scoring to result in a win, and what statistically may happen to make it all fair and to reward higher skill and difficulty with higher points. Math and probability had to be involved in their initial thinking way back when. Pete

[Dannie Boy]

Cricket is a good example then IMO. Why 4 and 6 instead of 1 and 2 or 2-3, 3-5 etc. It must be because of possible combinations with other scoring to result in a win, and what statistically may happen to make it all fair and to reward higher skill and difficulty with higher points. Math and probability had to be involved in their initial thinking way back when. Pete

I’ve not researched the history of how the scoring was devised, but having played a bit myself, two reasonably fit batsman should be able to run three runs if the ball is hit close to the boundary and not direct to where a fielder is placed, so I guess that getting it over the boundary justifies it being given as 4 runs. On the basis that to get it over the boundary without it touching the ground requires a bit more skill, timing, strength (but not necessarily in that order) justifies the extra 2 runs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arcadianagain]

Back in the day in rugby a try was 3 points, then so many international matches were won 3 nil, 6 3 etc. Teams would just work the touchline and it became very boring, adding the extra points for a try made things more exciting. Rugby League works on a different system.

[barrys]

Back in the day in rugby a try was 3 points, then so many international matches were won 3 nil, 6 3 etc. Teams would just work the touchline and it became very boring, adding the extra points for a try made things more exciting. Rugby League works on a different system.

Yes, those changes certainly have made for more attacking rugby. What I can't understand, though, is awarding 3 points for a penalty kick and the same number of points for a drop goal. The latter requires a lot more skill and should surely be worth an extra point.