I don't think it quite works like this Lockman. I don't think you considered my points at all.the_lock_man wrote:I could see that you might have a point if the same referee was officiating for the same team every week. Clearly they do not. That first referee's bias is balanced by the next referee's bias against your next opponent.dickinson wrote:Your first point is a bit childish Lockman, thought better of you.the_lock_man wrote:Presumably because there's an establishment conspiracy against Portsmouth FC?dickinson wrote:That old chestnut, I thought it was just Manure supporters who just said that. Lockman you are deluding yourself if you think that decisions even themselves out.the_lock_man wrote:I personally feel that we all have to accept that mistakes will happen, and that they will even themselves out over the course of a season.
Working on the basis that there isn't, (because, ya know, why would there be?) then you have to assume that a referee making a mistake is a random thing. Random things don't follow patterns, that's why they're called random. Patterns don't even out over time. Random things do. There's a whole load of statistical theories that show that to be the case.
As to your second point, in a previous life I was a professional mathematician, I understand probability, sample size, skew and bias. I would suggest to you that bias does have an influence in football. The sample size is important. For example, for your assumption top be correct then Sir Alex Ferguson did not influence any decision the referee has made, that crucial decisions were not made even though 60,000 home fans were beying for a decision to be made in their favour. That certain teams never bully a referee in making a decision more than another,referees are always consistent ( for this to have merit there would need to be a wider range than just 46 matches, greater accuracy can be obtained with a larger sample size), I could go on. These influences -given only 46 matches- must develop a pronounced skew over the course of a season, it is unthinkable to consider otherwise. There is a link below which you may find of interest in evaluating the human errors made by referees., I believe human errors/influences do indeed create an imbalance in bias over a season.
Although the link below is also biased in favour of Arsenal, hardly surprising.
http://untold-arsenal.com/archives/33028]
However, I am in agreement with utter disgust as to our disrespectful treatment of referees. Coughie used to defend referees and ensure that his teams demonstrated respect for their decisions. I wish today's managers would learn from the 'master'.
I particularly dislike pundits who can only form an opinion given a slo-mo replay. A ref has to make a judgement in real time. Pundits should put their cards on the table and be more honest about how they saw the decision in real time IMO. They tend not to.
Referees have my respect but human nature creates statistical imbalance. by the way I agree with the comment about Kevin Friend. What's his problem with us??