[GH-ISSUE #141] [WhoScored] Scrapping does not include second #30

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-02 15:55:10 +03:00 by kerem · 2 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-02 15:55:10 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @BenSarfatiDS on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/probberechts/soccerdata/issues/141

Hello,

Thanks for the package, it is really useful and well coded. And thanks for the quick fix (regarding missing is_goal or is_card columns).

I have one question regarding the available columns in the returned dataframe:

Is there any reason the 'second' column is not kept ?
The information is available in json_data but then not included in the final dataframe. Regarding the last commit you made, it could be added in the COLS_EVENTS list, in line 42 :

"#" Integer indicating the second of the event, ignoring stoppage time
"second": -1,

There are maybe reasons for this to be omit from the returned dataframe, but if not, I guess it could be useful for different use cases.

Thanks again,
Ben

Originally created by @BenSarfatiDS on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/probberechts/soccerdata/issues/141 Hello, Thanks for the package, it is really useful and well coded. And thanks for the quick fix (regarding missing is_goal or is_card columns). I have one question regarding the available columns in the returned dataframe: **Is there any reason the 'second' column is not kept ?** The information is available in json_data but then not included in the final dataframe. Regarding the last commit you made, it could be added in the COLS_EVENTS list, in [line 42 ](https://github.com/probberechts/soccerdata/blob/cbde3791f21504366e5ca472798d059508fce129/soccerdata/whoscored.py#L42) : "#" Integer indicating the second of the event, ignoring stoppage time "second": -1, There are maybe reasons for this to be omit from the returned dataframe, but if not, I guess it could be useful for different use cases. Thanks again, Ben

kerem closed this issue

2026-03-02 15:55:10 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-03-02 15:55:11 +03:00

Author

Owner

@probberechts commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023):

No, there is no particular reason for ignoring it. I think I just overlooked it. I'll add it now.

@probberechts commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023): No, there is no particular reason for ignoring it. I think I just overlooked it. I'll add it now.

kerem commented

2026-03-02 15:55:11 +03:00

Author

Owner

@BenSarfatiDS commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023):

Thank you for the quick answer

@BenSarfatiDS commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2023): Thank you for the quick answer

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-02 15:56:58 +03:00

[PR #30] [MERGED] Update actions/setup-python action to v3.1.1 #228