• Current Donation Goals

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sleeping Dave

Media and referees: Tracking decisions and post-game reactions towards the top 5

Recommended Posts

So... After popular request I've now started the thread where I will track calls during games.

I have decided to focus on yellow cards, red cards, penalties and major chances (and goals). The major chances thing isn't something that is related to the referee or anything like that, just thought it would be cool to have it on record to see at the end of the season.

At the end of each game I will also post the media reactions from the Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, the BBC and Sky Sports. Others are free to post in here but please only post if you want to draw attention to a video/gif of a described situation, post said video/gif or highlight a situation I have missed or an article that is relevant.

Mods: Is it possible to give me admin rights for this thread?

Zoowra, Blue Rod and others have agreed to keep track of the same for Liverpool, Arsenal, Man U and Man C. Their work will also be posted in this thread with the same format as I have started with here.

Game Day #1

Arsenal-Chelsea 1-0

FA Community Shield, Wembley Stadium, 2/8/2015

Chelsea: Courtois; Ivanovic, Cahill, Terry (82 Moses), Azpilicueta (69 Zouma); Matic, Ramires (54 Oscar); Willian, Fabregas, Hazard; Remy (46 Falcao)

Arsenal: Cech; Bellerin, Koscielny, Mertesacker, Monreal; Coquelin, Cazorla; Ramsey, Ozil (Gibbs), Oxlade-Chamberlain (77 Arteta); Walcott (66 Giroud)

Referee: Anthony Taylor

Ass. Referees: Gary Beswick, John Brooks

Fourth official: Roger East

Situations:

9' Penalty shout: Fabregas is blocked in the penalty box (Mertesacker)

Ref: No penalty

Verdict: Correct decision

18' Foul: Fabregas is clattered (Coquelin)

Ref: Free-kick

Verdict: Clear yellow card

24' Penalty shout: Ivanovic challenges Walcott in the penalty box

Ref: No penalty

Verdict: Correct decision

24' GOAL: Oxlade-Chamberlain scores (assist Coquelin)

36' Chance: Ramires free header (assisted by Remy). Ramires heads it well wide

61' Chance: Hazard blazes over in a 1-on-1 with Cech (assist Fabregas)

65' Foul: Azpilicueta pulls back an Arsenal attacker

Ref: Yellow card

Verdict: Correct decision

67' Foul: Coquelin fouls Hazard

Ref: Yellow card

Verdict: Correct decision

69' Chance: Oscar free-kick. Cech saves.

Final score: Arsenal-Chelsea 1-0

Verdict: Fair result without any controversy. Wenger snubbed a Mourinho handshake twice (once after the game and the second after the cermony). Media does not seem to put the blame with Wenger but merely just reflect on that it happened. No one is condemning the Arsenal manager for his behaviour.

Media reactions:

BBC: Arsene Wenger "overcoming a big hurdle"

Sky Sports: Arsene Wenger denies José Mourinhi claims after Wembley win"

Daily Mail: New season, same old enemies: Mourinho and Wenger ERUPT following fresh handshake spat as Chelsea boss hurls his losers medal into crowd after rivals Arsenal draw first blood at Wembley

Daily Mirror: Arsene Wenger hits back at José Mourinho over post Community Shield 'philosophy' jibe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we can moan too much about the result because both our goals had a serious element of luck about them, however the sending off for Courtois was harsh. The player was going wide and Cahill was covering so not an obvious goal scoring opportunity IMO. I hear our appeal has been turned down. No surprise there.

Replay showed the tackle was bang on the line so it was a pen, but how sure could that lino have been? If he has such super vision and judgement he will no doubt duplicate that quality many times this season. He certainly couldn't have been the lino or ref in a Chelsea game last season when a keeper picked up the ball 3 yards outside the area and got away with it.

The little decisions didn't go our way either. Costa looked clearly fouled in very promising positions three times and got nothing. Either he's a diver or that is refs perception of him.

I'd give ref a generous 5/10 because the sending off was pivotal .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Replay showed the tackle was bang on the line so it was a pen, but how sure could that lino have been? If he has such super vision and judgement he will no doubt duplicate that quality many times this season. He certainly couldn't have been the lino or ref in a Chelsea game last season when a keeper picked up the ball 3 yards outside the area and got away with it.

The right way to do this would be on a probabilistic basis*.

I reckon their penalty would be given 5 times out of 10 given how hard it was to see.

The Red card would be given 3 times out of 10 as many referees interpret the ball going that far sideways as meaning there was no chance on goal.

And our penalty would have been given say 1 time out of 10.

So that means 0.5+0.1=0.6 of a penalty against us wrongly

and 0.7 of a Red card given against us wrongly

* There is no point using a TV re-trial basis. If for example a ref fails to see an event there is no way it can be given whatever the TV sees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Swansea (H) last Saturday - Sky and BBC reaction to the Costa penalty appeal and the Courtois incident.

Costa - BBC SKY

Courtois - BBC SKY

The foul on Costa by Williams didn't get a close up replay (as far as I know). Funny how Sky can find a million camera angles and close ups when they want to.

City had a penalty shout against West Brom (push on Silva - second half). From one angle it it looked like a foul, from another it looked like he went down pretty easily. Sky commentators were very quick to defend Silva though (Something along the lines of 'Why would he go down if he wasn't fouled').

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record, I've opted against posting in this thread. I will keep records for myself as the season progresses but there were some complaints towards my method because I wanted to compare how the same ref acted in very similar situations when other teams were involved - such as how Oliver dealt with the Gomis situation (red card and penalty) vs. how he dealt with Costa vs. Burnley on the first day of last season (no penalty, yellow for Costa).

As this is very time-consuming I've opted against wasting my time just to get grief from a selected few who at all cost does not want such an analysis to be made and who seem desperate for the theory that says we don't get calls as easily as other teams do to be false. There were also the usual accusations on top.

I welcome anyone else to pick it up from where I left though. But in all honesty, I don't think this will be as comprehensive as I had first hoped. It also seems the ones who were most eager for other teams to be included haven't kept their end of the bargain either. So there also that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zoowraa   

^ give it a rest.....what is up with you at present. Gone from being a top poster to just wrapping yourself up in being a smart arse. Then when your struggling on a subject, your very quick to 'lets just drop it'

The reason it fell apart is because in the very first game you blew it apart by being completley biased with knee jerk reactions, you then had to back track on. You basically jumped the gun massively and showed you were not gonna call it fair, ironic as you accused others of jumping the gun recently!

As for comparing the ref in this incident. Why would you want to compare the ref when he gave two totally different decisions in this scenario. If he made the same call but with different consequences then fair enough. But he didn't, did he?

He called one right and one wrong, nothing to compare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ give it a rest.....what is up with you at present. Gone from being a top poster to just wrapping yourself up in being a smart arse. Then when your struggling on a subject, your very quick to 'lets just drop it'

The reason it fell apart is because in the very first game you blew it apart by being completley biased with knee jerk reactions, you then had to back track on. You basically jumped the gun massively and showed you were not gonna call it fair, ironic as you accused others of jumping the gun recently!

As for comparing the ref in this incident. Why would you want to compare the ref when he gave two totally different decisions in this scenario. If he made the same call but with different consequences then fair enough. But he didn't, did he?

He called one right and one wrong, nothing to compare.

First of all, why do you even reply? I really don't understand it. You have already clearly demonstrated you have no idea what this thread was about, why don’t you just leave it? This was not a post to open up a debate - it was merely informational.

I'm merely informing the ones who may have had an interest in the thread why I have decided to not do it. After all, I had talked about it quite a lot and since there have been others who have posted in the thread since I thought I should tell them why I'm not posting as promised.

Secondly, the reason it fell apart had nothing to do with what I did but everything with how others behaved. You and Pete in particular. I'm not spending hours every week on this for you and others being unable to differ between usable information and opinion. It was like having a discussion with a bunch of teenage girls. “But Dave, it loses credibility”. “Oh Dave, you have already decided the outcome.” "Oh Dave I feel you want this to be true".

I was there to provide depth to the analysis and offered anyone to come to his or her own conclusions. You and Pete was up in arms because I provided this extra depth. No one ever said you had to pay attention to it but I must say I'm dumbstruck how anyone can think that more examples and added angles to a referee's performances by adding how he has acted in similar situations when we were involved would have weakened the analysis. Quite the contrary really, it would have made it stronger because it would have highlighted patterns in a referees decision-making. I'm absolutely at loss how anyone can see that as bad. But apparently you do. Go figure.

The reason why I wanted to compare Gomis vs. Costa is because they are almost exactly the same situations where we on both accounts got the worst possible outcome. Both decisions regarding Costa were wrong. At least one of the two for Gomis was wrong as well. Why is that hard to understand? To top it all off, it was even the same ref!!! Can it be more relevant?

You didn't want a serious analysis of this and that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned. Be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zoowraa   

Comedy gold really. You make a post clearly referring to me and others. You pretty much admit that in your follow up post, then you wonder why I'm replying to it.

Your only interested in debating things with people who are on side with you or people you can get the better of. It's become pretty obvious.

Me and Pete were not behaving like teenage girls, we were just not prepared to let you get away with nonsense. Anyone is free to read what me and Pete said and I would be shocked if anyone felt we were behaving like teenage girls as you so nicely put it. I literally made one/two posts saying why I was dropping out, if that is teenage girl behaviour then just wow!

All Pete did was question you and you resulted to blocking him. All I did was question you and got a similar response without being blocked.

You remind me of the head of some sort of cult. Only interested in being questioned by your deciples . As soon as you are questioned by non believers, you quickly lose your head and revert to 'lets drop it' or bizarrely blocking someone who merely questioned you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comedy gold really. You make a post clearly referring to me and others. You pretty much admit that in your follow up post, then you wonder why I'm replying to it.

Your only interested in debating things with people who are on side with you or people you can get the better of. It's become pretty obvious.

Me and Pete were not behaving like teenage girls, we were just not prepared to let you get away with nonsense. Anyone is free to read what me and Pete said and I would be shocked if anyone felt we were behaving like teenage girls as you so nicely put it. I literally made one/two posts saying why I was dropping out, if that is teenage girl behaviour then just wow!

All Pete did was question you and you resulted to blocking him. All I did was question you and got a similar response without being blocked.

You remind me of the head of some sort of cult. Only interested in being questioned by your deciples . As soon as you are questioned by non believers, you quickly lose your head and revert to 'lets drop it' or bizarrely blocking someone who merely questioned you.

Nice way of avoiding your complete lack of understanding of what this thread was supposed to be about.

You still don get it. Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.