I’ve had a lot of reviews where the submitter has created separate submissions for each goal, scoreboard, player dugout, cricket pitch that all form a single oval. For example -38.037401, 145.328083 has three ovals used for AFL and cricket, with each goal post and cricket pitch as separate features as well as two of the ovals having a spot for the oval as a whole. In this case I would assume the Percy Trewin goal North/South and cricket pitch spots are duplicates of the oval itself (same for the Percy Childs oval and soccer fields 1/2/3) but based on how many spots exist here that doesn’t appear to be the consensus.
I saw in a search this had been mentioned back in 2024 but didn’t get much activity Multiple Wayspots One Location
Somewhat related is this recent topic on submitting individual pieces of playground equipment What is with all the people nominating multiple POIs in playgrounds?
Other examples include Casey Fields at -38.122504, 145.311762. In this case there’s duplicate spots for the netball courts as well as some of the individual hoops having dedicated spots, as well as the ovals having a dedicated spot and separate spots for goals/dugouts.
The Booring Reserve area at -38.151931, 145.288358 was the main area I saw while reviewing. At the time I was reviewing there were no spots for each oval as a whole so it wasn’t possible to mark the goals as a duplicate.
The cricket fields look wrong. It should generally be just one waypoint for each field of play. Like a baseball complex with 4 fields can have 4 waypoints but a single baseball fields can’t have a waypoint for home base, the score board, and the dugout.
I hear you. i have seen multiple nominations where a sports field is used for different sports. Same field. Cricket in summer. Then AFL or League or Football in winter. One end are AFL sticks. Other end are the League sticks and so on. Or the all weather pitches. Tennis/Netball/Basketball. Same court. Three nominations. I wish we could select a category type for Multi-sport Playing Fields or Multi-sport Court,. Thanks for sharing 
Please note that the category has no meaning to any player of any Niantic game. It is just there in the Pogo nomination process but has thankfully been removed from the wayfarer web submit.
I’m not really thinking about the categories, it seems reasonable to tag a spot for an oval as both a cricket pitch and football field even if the sports are seasonal. Thanks for your post though, the related topics turned up a thread you started late last year on the same topic Multiple nominations for one sport field which points out something I missed when first reading the sports field criteria.
Sports Fields mentions that spots shouldn’t be placed where they would interfere with play, and that there should be one spot for a distinct field that encompasses multiple play points. So each AFL goal on an oval should be considered part of the oval as a whole, and the cricket pitch is both part of the oval but also would interfere with play.
Not sure it’s worth reporting any that have been approved but at least I can be more confident in my decisions while reviewing even if that doesn’t align with the majority 
Oh, I just got this to review where their naming convention seems to indicate they are submitting both separately.
Hmm… I don’t know if it is best to reject since the goals are not eligible separately, or to accept as a proxy for the field if the other goal isn’t in already. I would definitely mark the second goal as duplicate.
I decided to accept with an IDK in accuracy on the title and description. It is the field that is the eligible wayspot, not the goal.
