Perception of the SCG

**Mr Magoo** · 14th July 2011, 11:21 AM

Im suprised theres not a rule of the game that says it must be played on a certain sized ground or at least within a size range.

**Untamed Snark** · 14th July 2011, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by Mr Magoo

Im suprised theres not a rule of the game that says it must be played on a certain sized ground or at least within a size range.

There is, it just changes from stadium to stadium

**BSA5** · 14th July 2011, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by ScottH

Works for Collingwood.

Yes, but their standards are very low.

**R-1** · 14th July 2011, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Teasdale77

This got me curious as to how the grounds measured up by area. Unfortunately, the grounds aren't the same shaped ellipses with some having squarish pockets, so it isn't possible to calculate without an aerial view in perfect perspective.

Also, the measurements given appear to be the size of the ground to the fence in some cases (Subiaco) and the size of the field of play in others (AAMI measures the fence boundary as a much, much bigger 177m x 145m according to wiki).

Still, here are the numbers for comparision using a standard geometrical ellipse*

MCG is 160m long and 141m wide = 70,874 square metres

Aurora: +10m length, -1m width = 74,770
MCG = 70,874
AAMI: +5m length, -8m width = 68,942
Gabba: -4m length, -3m width = 67,632
Subiaco: +15m length, -19m width = 67,073
SCG: -8.5m length, -5m width = 66,871
Etihad: -0.5m length, -12.2m width = 64,540
Skilled: +10m length, -26m width = 61,418

I suspect the SCG's deep pockets make it bigger than the 3 grounds above it but honestly I think I wasted my time due to skewed source numbers and irregularly shaped grounds. SCG still looks bloody small to me

* In geometry, an ellipse is a regular oval shape, traced by a point moving in a plane so that the sum of its distances from two other points (the foci) is constant, or resulting when a cone is cut by an oblique plane that does not intersect the base (get that up ya!)

Skilled has one wing narrower than the other.

AAMI has really deep pockets.

Subiaco, I think, has different sized pockets.

That's about all I know.

**Wardy** · 14th July 2011, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by Cheer Squad

It's not the size that counts, it's how it's being used.

We push out wide at the SCG all the time, instead of going straight up and down.

Are you describing a footy ground or whats going on in the bedroom?

(sorry mods I couldn't resist!)

**Cheer Squad** · 14th July 2011, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by Wardy

Are you describing a footy ground or whats going on in the bedroom?

(sorry mods I couldn't resist!)

**Mr Magoo** · 15th July 2011, 03:23 PM

Collingwood have shown that it doesnt matter if you do it in a circular fashion , as long as it ends up going through the middle at the scoring end.

**Doctor** · 15th July 2011, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Cheer Squad

Pushing out wide means there's not much penetration up forward. That's why we've been having trouble scoring.

It's also because on the odd occasions we do penetrate, we're not guiding it in correctly.

**neilfws** · 15th July 2011, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by Mr Magoo

Im suprised theres not a rule of the game that says it must be played on a certain sized ground or at least within a size range.

Is that not Rule 3.2(a) - "The Playing Surface shall be: (i) oval in shape; (ii) between 135 metres and 185 metres in length; and (iii) between 110 metres and 155 metres in width" ?