Judging by past numbers, viewers can expect a high scoring Blues’ outfit to turn up at Etihad Stadium.
In six matches at Etihad in 2014, Carlton has averaged almost 109 points per game while conceding 83. By comparison, 10 games at other venues have seen the Blues score just 75 points per game while conceding 103. That’s a nine goal differential.
| Carlton, 2014 | Average points for | Average points against |
| Etihad Stadium | 109 | 83 |
| Other venues | 75 | 103 |
| Differential | +34 | -20 |
When playing at Etihad Stadium, Carlton’s main avenue to scoring is Lachlan Henderson. Although the former Lion has spent time both forward and back in recent outings against North, the emergence of Sam Rowe has allowed him to settle forward for the majority of 2014.
Henderson has played all six of the Blues’ games at the venue this season, and has contributed almost five goals more than any of his team-mates. A look at the scoreboard impact chart illustrates his importance.
Scoreboard impact = scoring shots + scoring assists
| Player | Total scoreboard impact at Etihad |
| Lachlan Henderson | 115 points |
| Chris Yarran | 88 |
| Bryce Gibbs | 74 |
A quick glance over many of Carlton’s key statistics reveals similarities between Etihad Stadium and other venues. The long and short kicking splits are almost identical, the play on percentage from marks is similar and the total disposal count doesn’t give anything away.
So if all the statistics are similar regardless of venue, what allows Carlton to score almost six more goals a game at Etihad? The answer lies in one area - accuracy.
To make the point as simple as possible to digest, the easiest comparison is to games at the MCG. The Blues have played seven games at the venue, compared to six at Etihad.
| Carlton in 2014 | Shots at goal | Scoring accuracy | Shot at goal accuracy |
| At Etihad Stadium | 171 | 65.3% | 57.3% |
| At MCG | 173 | 52.9% | 42.2% |
| Differential | -2 | +12.4% | +15.1% |
A look at where the scoring shots have come from at each ground allows the revelation to be explored further. Each scoring shot is divided into three categories.
1: Corridor. This is essentially straight in front of goal, or with only a very slight angle.
2: Angle. From a slight angle to just inside the boundary line, these shots are tougher, but still very much makeable.
3: Acute. Usually set shots, these are often when players have to remove chairs, photographers and security from the boundary line to have the correct line to goal.
Carlton has had more scoring shots from the corridor at Etihad and converted at a higher rate from an angle.
Another point to consider is because Etihad is a narrower ground than the MCG, shots from an angle are generally easier to convert. It’s commonplace to see sides get lost in the extra spaces at the MCG, taking the long route to goal.
| Carlton's conversion | Corridor (total) | Angle (total) | Acute (total) |
| At Etihad Stadium | 69.2% (74.33) | 57.5% (23.17) | 33.3% (1.2) |
| At MCG | 64.5% (60.33) | 28.6% (12.30) | 33.3% (1.2) |
So although Carlton’s 2014 standings may read five wins, 11 losses and a ladder position of 14th, the Etihad Stadium numbers reveal an extremely capable outfit able to match almost any side.
