a m ole Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Bournemouth can consider themselves unlucky to have no points from their last two games. Lack of cutting edge is going to be their downfall, I feel. Or corrupt refereeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 shocking, what a biased referring performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villarocker Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 (edited) Three of the big 5 favoured by dodgy reffing decisions this weekend. Man United should have conceded a blatant penalty against Villa but the ref didn't give it. Coquelin should have been given a red card by the ref but instead he let him off with a final warning which saw him subbed and Arsenal keep 11 players on the pitch. Bournemouth had a valid goal disallowed and, even worse, were not awarded an off-side decision for Liverpool's goal. Typical "corrupt" refereeing decisions that go in the way of the "big hitters" in the Premier League. The day will come, akin to the Lance Armstrong admissions, when a former ref, player, manager or owner, will expose the truth about corruption in the Premier League. Edited August 17, 2015 by villarocker 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Fernandinho could have been sent off as well cue a Mourinho conspiracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 How come liverpool still get these refereeing decisions Anyone would think they are still a top side who get these kind of decisions meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 Three of the big 5 favoured by dodgy reffing decisions this weekend. Man United should have conceded a blatant penalty against Villa but the ref didn't give it. Coquelin should have been given a red card by the ref but instead he let him off with a final warning which saw him subbed and Arsenal keep 11 players on the pitch. Bournemouth had a valid goal disallowed and, even worse, were not awarded an off-side decision for Liverpool's goal. Typical "corrupt" refereeing decisions that go in the way of the "big hitters" in the Premier League. The day will come, akin to the Lance Armstrong admissions, when a former ref, player, manager or owner, will expose the truth about corruption in the Premier League. Agreed, I eagerly await for the day that the lid is lifted off the so called 'best league in the world'. I think people would have to be very naiive to not suspect that match fixing, bribes and the use of performance enhancing drugs aren't relatively common practices in the premier league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 What do people mean by corrupt referees? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 17, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 17, 2015 They're not corrupt but they are subconsciously biased towards the big teams. It's a phenomenon that is far from unique to soccer. Clickings Statistical models show referees are homers – by popular acclamation Research indicates officials unwittingly favour home teams and are particularly swayed by large crowds Let us first say this about referees: they have evolved into marvellous species, worthy of an Attenborough voiceover, with lungs as deep as a blacksmith's bellows and the 4D-vision of a teacher on a school outing. Even in the hyper-accelerated, scheming-cheating thrash of modern football – where these sheriffs with headsets make roughly 600 decisions every match – they get an enormous amount right. Yet the following is also true: they are unwittingly and incontrovertibly biased towards home teams – especially those with larger crowds. Advertisement "The evidence is overwhelming," says professor Alan Nevill, a specialist in biostatistics at Wolverhampton University. "And it is across a range of sports including football." We can all cite oven-fresh examples from the past week. That bite and a shin-rake missed at Anfield. An offside goal and buttocky bodycheck ignored in Munich. A phantom penalty in Basel. Another offside goal waved through at the Emirates. In isolation these events tell us little. But by probing the issue from multiple angles, using large data sets and advanced statistical techniques, a pattern emerges. Referees subconsciously favour home teams. A decade ago, Nevill led a study in which 40 qualified referees were asked to judge 47 incidents from a 1998-99 match between Liverpool v Leicester; half watched with crowd noise, the control group in silence. The results were surprising: those viewing the footage with crowd noise awarded significantly fewer fouls (15.5%) against the home team compared with those watching in silence. Advertisement In the NBA, fewer fouls are given against star players at home, while when Bundesliga matches are played in stadiums with running tracks the bias referees usually show the home team halves. Another paper – The 12th Man? Refereeing bias in English and German soccer – shows that home teams receive fewer yellow and red cards, even when accounting for them being disproportionately the favoured team and disproportionately ahead during games. One of the authors, Dr Babatunde Buraimo – a senior lecturer in sports economics at the University of Central Lancashire – talks me through the "sophisticated statistical model" involving "minute-by-minute bivariate probit analysis". It is impressive stuff, although you don't need a maths degree to know the likely consequences of being reduced to 10 men by a home-town decision. Forthcoming research also suggests that referees favour home teams by adding more injury time in addition to the amount the fourth official holds up – when a match is closer and when any additional time would favour the home team. You might think improved referee training could change this. But Nevill's latest article, in the Psychology of Sport and Exercise last month, suggests it is not that simple. It is true that home advantage has declined in England and Scotland – something Nevill says is due to a "systematic improvement" in referees' decision-making accuracy because of better training and monitoring. There is, however, a caveat. The steepest decline in home advantage is to be found in the lower leagues and shallowest in the Premier League. "I think it's the first scientific proof that it's the crowd having the influence," Nevill says. "Referees' objective capabilities are still not immune to the unconscious influence of the crowd." Psychologists call this influence conformity. And you can see how it happens. If 70,000 fans scream for a decision it can reinforce the referee's first impression of an incident. Or it can make them subconsciously decide to get the crowd off their backs by giving them what they want. It has long been mooted that home advantage is partly down to playing in a familiar stadium, or the adverse effects of travelling. Maybe for an NFL team playing across the other side of America. But in the Premier League? Another myth we cling to – that shouting until your tonsils are red-raw can somehow inspire your team – also has little to back it up. One example cited by Tobias Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim, the authors of Scorecasting, is that in 624 NHL shootouts between 2005-09 – when you might expect the home crowd to be more vociferous and therefore more inspiring – the home team won 304 (49.4%) times and the away team 316 (50.6%). When looking at reasons for home advantage we first direct our attention to the man in the middle. We assume that whatever the terraces spit at referees runs off, like water off Gore-Tex. Research suggests otherwise. So what should be done? One view is to just lump it. As David Forrest, professor of economics at Salford University, points out. "Statisticians think justice is everything. But randomness and noise create uncertainty of outcome, which is one of the appeals of sport." On the other end of the scale, video evidence – while not to everyone's taste – can help. When the instant-replay challenge was introduced to the NFL in 1999 it led to a 29.4% drop in home advantage. In football the effect could be even greater: because the game is low scoring, one decision – a penalty, red card or offside goal – is more likely to affect the result. Whatever your view, doesn't this issue deserve a little more attention? As it is, any discussion of referee bias rarely goes beyond weary laments involving Manchester United and the lack of away penalties at Old Trafford – something, incidentally, that silicon chips are yet to show has any statistical significance. There is another article that says the above about bigger (and more familiar) sides v smaller sides. I'll root it out when I'm not on Tapatalk (PITA to properly reproduce articles with links etc) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I really hope Bournemouth stay up. They were robbed tonight by the ref but if the continue to play the way they did tonight and in the first half against us they should be ok. Ritchie is a big player for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 I dont think they are corrupt and its a very difficult job but unfortunately a lot of them arent up to the task I think foreign officials could be the way forward as while maybe not better an Italian or Spanish ref arent going to be easily swayed by Liverpool or UNited same way an English ref probably wouldnt be as biased to Barcelona or Madrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted August 17, 2015 Share Posted August 17, 2015 When I say corrupt I'm being facetious, but they do seem influenced in one way or another and it is very frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Oh look a "wanna-be" big team lucked their way out against a plucky little team. First time that's happened for sure. Football is going to the dogs. It NEEDS a review system, like the cricket, nothing to do with the ref's on the pitch, but the decision is made upstairs and given via the screens. It's costing teams unfathomable amounts of money, all these stupid incorrect decisions. Reading BOF's article above, if there is that much statistical evidence of ANY bias whilst ref'ing, take the big decisions away from them, because evidently they can't call them correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Just heard Rodgers saying he was told they are looking to give the advantage to the attacking side in such incidents and was glad the goal was given lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Just heard Rodgers saying he was told they are looking to give the advantage to the attacking side in such incidents and was glad the goal was given lol Rodgers is such an odious prick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrinityRoadSteps Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Just heard Rodgers saying he was told they are looking to give the advantage to the attacking side in such incidents and was glad the goal was given lol Lets wait to see if an offside goal is allowed against Liverpool and see if he still feels the same Might be waiting a long time for that but you never know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted August 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted August 18, 2015 (edited) I think refereeing should just be from inside a control room with 3-5 people viewing the game at different camera angles. Then just stick a bouncer on the pitch to break up fights. Edited August 18, 2015 by PieFacE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gharperr Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 (edited) You definitely need a referee on the pitch to make majority of decisions. Things are too hard to see with camera angles in real time. (couldnt tell if you wanted that ref gone or to stay in your post hehe). Youre going to need some pretty dam good camera men to be able to follow the ball so closely when zoomed in all the time to see the really close decisions Edited August 18, 2015 by gharperr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Boli Bolingoli-Mbombo, what a name that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 18, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 18, 2015 I love that name. Does he have an Irish grandfather? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanBalaban Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Ref properly laying into Janujaz. Great to see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts