What team has oldham played most

[Scott Sinfield 6]

I'd guess Rochdale or Leigh

[RL does what Sky says 1,137]

From the early years of RL until the late 1960s the league incorporated the Lancashire and Yorkshire Championships with teams playing all those from their own county as well as just a few from the opposite - hence the end of season play-off as every team hadn't played everyone else.

Therefore it seems likely that Oldham's most frequent opponents would be one from Lancashire as they had faced each other every season and also played in the Lancashire Cup competition.

An interesting question .... but the answer might take many weeks (months, years ???) to first of all go through the full list of matches in the "Complete History of Oldham RLFC 1876 - 1997" and followed by the rest since then.

[Dave Naylor 2,152]

Interesting.

We've played Hornets 333 times according to my database, but that will include friendlies and Law Cup games.

We've played Wigan 246 times, again, that will include friendlies.

I'll find the answer.

[Tangle 144]

When has there ever been a friendly between them

[The Art of Hand and Foot 740]

On the Swinton forum, Mark has us down as their most played team with 251.

[clifford 960]

I'd go for the pests, including law cup fixtures, no friendlies with them

[Mark 44]

16 hours ago, The Art of Hand and Foot said:

On the Swinton forum, Mark has us down as their most played team with 251.

That doesn’t include friendlies, only official matches 

[Dave Naylor 2,152]

Sorry for being a bit slow with this.  I decided to make these kind of stats available on the new Heritage Trust website.  (They're not on show yet).

Anyway, the answer is Rochdale, by a county mile.

Rochdale: 

 

• 254 Competitive games
• 333 Total games
• 79 Friendlies (including Law/Infirmaries Cup)
• 168 Oldham competitive wins
• 74 Rochdale competitive wins
• 10 Draws
• 2 abandoned games.

The next highest is Wigan on 239 competitive and 248 in total.

[Scott Sinfield 6]

3 hours ago, Dave Naylor said:

Sorry for being a bit slow with this.  I decided to make these kind of stats available on the new Heritage Trust website.  (They're not on show yet).

Anyway, the answer is Rochdale, by a county mile.

Rochdale: 

 

• 254 Competitive games
• 333 Total games
• 79 Friendlies (including Law/Infirmaries Cup)
• 168 Oldham competitive wins
• 74 Rochdale competitive wins
• 10 Draws
• 2 abandoned games.

The next highest is Wigan on 239 competitive and 248 in total.

Was Mark wrong about Swinton

[Dave Naylor 2,152]

15 hours ago, Scott Sinfield said:

Was Mark wrong about Swinton

The figures I have are from the new opposition clubs page on the ORL Heritage Trust site.  Every game ever played by Oldham is in the site's database and those against Swinton are produced here:

https://orl-heritagetrust.org.uk/opposition-clubs/?wdt_search=swinton

 

[RL does what Sky says 1,137]

On 14/12/2019 at 16:18, Dave Naylor said:

Sorry for being a bit slow with this.  I decided to make these kind of stats available on the new Heritage Trust website.  (They're not on show yet).

Anyway, the answer is Rochdale, by a county mile.

Rochdale: 

 

• 254 Competitive games
• 333 Total games
• 79 Friendlies (including Law/Infirmaries Cup)
• 168 Oldham competitive wins
• 74 Rochdale competitive wins
• 10 Draws
• 2 abandoned games.

The next highest is Wigan on 239 competitive and 248 in total.

Excellent work, as always.

Just a question ... might it be possible (or is it and I haven't realised) to look up matches played on a particular date rather than wait for that date to come around each year ?

[Dave Naylor 2,152]

4 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Excellent work, as always.

Just a question ... might it be possible (or is it and I haven't realised) to look up matches played on a particular date rather than wait for that date to come around each year ?

Initial reaction.  Hmmmm.

I understand the desire for that kind of search query.  I'll work out how to achieve that.

[RL does what Sky says 1,137]

9 minutes ago, Dave Naylor said:

Initial reaction.  Hmmmm.

I understand the desire for that kind of search query.  I'll work out how to achieve that.

Thanks ... but don't go to too much trouble. It was only a thought.