I think I’ve read that on Salah, he was also similarly an outlier in Serie A. It could simply be that his playing style does not lend itself to getting fouls called on him, just because he tends to stay strong and battle through the challenges.
We can see for ourselves that he can’t battle through the challenges he’s being put through in the PL
Sorry
I don’t agree with that reasoning.
Fouls are fouls.
He is constantly dragged, wrestled and kicked. Way more than Grealish.
And look who gets the free kicks?
To say that he remains strong suggests that Grealish, who acts like a twat is better at getting fouls noted.
True, perhaps but its simply wrong.
1 Like
I’m not justifying it. I’m trying to find explanations for it.
It could simply that they referee based on outcome rather than action, so it doesn’t really matter whether or not he gets kicked or pulled or whatever, as long as he doesn’t go down like a fanny the way Grealish does, he won’t get the foul.
It could also be that they’re just racist, or that they’re biased against Roma and Liverpool, or many other things.
1 Like
Even though Salah doesn’t go down like a fanny, he still gets accused of going down like a fanny. Gods knows what it would be like if he did.
Grealish gets the calls because he is English, and he obviously doesn’t go down like a fanny because English lads don’t do that. Salah can have three lads dangling off his neck, but we all know foreigners cheat.
3 Likes
The comments from other fans is not a counter to the argument, it’s an illustration that most fanbases think they don’t get a fair rub of the green in some way, shape or form. And more importantly, that they don’t see the bias’ for their clubs or against others that fans of those teams do.
The point is, everyone has their blinkers on to some degree and you know what, that’s to be expected. Take Brighton for example. Do I think refs are biased against them or in favour of top six clubs despite the overwhelming number of high profile errors that have gone against them this season? No, I don’t. I think they’ve been on the rough end of some poor refereeing decisions. But Brighton fans will look at the myriad of glaring errors in the Spurs game along with all the other decisions that have gone against them and they’ll start to think there’s something more to it because why does it keep happening to them, especially in big games.
Now you can point at that data if you wish. I highlighted some issues I’d have with it, chief among them being they show some data correlations but not causation. For example, spending more time attacking doesn’t automatically mean you get fouled in the box more and therefore deserve more penalties. The data may show a correlation between the two but using that to illustrate a bias against us because we’re not seeing the same number of penalties as other teams is not sound.
There is also the issue of confirmation bias. Would it be surprising if the data pulled together by a prominent LFC author and presented on his LFC website is likely to have a high degree of confirmation bias? If you go looking for numbers to support your theory you can probably find something that looks to back up your opinion.
The refs can not be biased against everyone but everyone seems to think they are. Explaining that away as “well other fans think refs are biased against them but really we’re the only ones they are biased against” isn’t exactly a robust argument.
I’ll ask you this, tell me what makes our disenchanted supporters that think there’s a bias against LFC different from the disenchanted fans of other clubs you suggest im lumping you in with who think there is a bias against their team?
What other decisions? The spurs one everyone saw.
For clarity.
Not all refs are biased against Liverpool.
But some definitely are.
Its been pointed out time after time, supported with big decisions that have gone against us.
Season effecting decisions.
Brighton received harsh treatment vs Spurs. Agreed.
Did it lose them the league?
No.
Did Kompany assaulting Salah cost Liverpool?
Yes. 100%.
Do you think Mo Salah is treated on an even keel with Kane or Grealish?
We are heading back to the TIA thread that only ended up with annoyance and a certain amount of insult.
You disagree with me and I accept that, but applying the voice of other supporters isn’t helping the argument.
Because other groups claim something, that doesn’t mean that Liverpool supporters are wrong?
Well they’ve had three apologies from the PGMOL this season alone. And that’s just the games where they’ve admitted the refs got things wrong.
And as if to prove my point about us all having our blinkers on, I take it you’ve already forgotten the red card Fabinho should have had against them?
Now that’s just the very obvious stuff. I’m sure if you went on a Brighton forum or did some digging you’d find plenty more decisions that have gone their way that they could well think shows there’s an agenda against them or for the big six.
Have those decisions caused…I don’t know…a material impact in losing the league by a point…twice in close succession?
1 Like
Aside from Tierney, who? Because
Could decisions this season have cost them a place in Europe? Yes. But because that isn’t a league title that means what, it’s not bias it’s just poor refereeing?
No, it doesn’t. But it also doesn’t make Liverpool fans right. I’ll ask again, what makes you right that there is a bias against us and fans of every other team claiming the same wrong?
1 Like
That’s immaterial to the discussion being had.
How so?
1 Like
Because the decisions didn’t cost Brighton a league title means what exactly?
That they were just genuine mistakes? That any claim of bias from Brighton fans are less valid than our fans? That because we finished second it proves refs have it in for us? If it had cost them a place in Europe then that would be different?
1 Like
Claim of bias can only be made if there is a list of previous grievances which we definitely have with Tierney and the ref from the Villa match.
Brighton haven’t been around long enough to establish any such history. @Mascot has already listed the number of previous unfair decisions against us. Why is your take on those?
1 Like
@rab
Coote
Taylor
Kavanagh
Atkinson
Webb
And add Brooks
Theres six more refs with agendas against us.
All with form.
@jaffod has given loads of instances where these people have shafted us over the years.
Its not just Tierney.
All with serious decisions that have cost the club.
And I am not diminishing Brightons case by the way.
I just wonder what makes their case so vital on a Liverpool forum?
You seek methods of proving equity by quoting other clubs?
I cannot prove the agenda some refs have against Liverpool, but I have theorised before as to constituent causes.
You are taking a sceptical viewpoint, and there’s a lot of merit to that. Some will go down full conspiracy mode, and that is of course completely off putting.
However, many discussions on this site have had a measured view of any bias/ perceived bias against us, allied with statistical studies (of course some from fan sites with the caveat of bias themselves) and other independent news articles (such as interviews from former refs about how sometimes they get swayed by particular behaviour).
Or even current refs, such as the “best of the best” Michael Oliver discussing why he didn’t send off Prickford on VVD: “What I was surprised about looking at it afterwards was that nothing was expected on-field in terms of a red card. None of the players were asking for that”
You’ve dismissed a lot of these, with the attitude of always looking for a plausible explanation of why the decision has been made. Again, that’s all well and good.
But I would argue that you are missing the bigger picture. I’m sure in the 1970s there would be some saying there is no bias against non-whites in the workplace in the UK, and point to plausible reasons for not getting the promotion such as qualifications, effort, being good with customers, teamplayer, etc.
Now many of those reasons will probably be completely true, and the promotion was purely based on merit. But when the statistics then point to a bias in the promotion (taking into account all the variables such as low percentage of non-whites etc), then something is going on.
And that something needs to be openly discussed, and looked into, rather than a dismissive “it happens to everyone as well”
2 Likes
This is in your wheel house, but this sort of data set is prone to errors of interpretation due to the law of small numbers - when outcomes are rare the addition of one additional event have an outsized influence on the data. This is simply way too small a data set to say anything about.
It makes Tompkins referring to it as “big data” incredibly funny, but also very predictible.
I think we also have a bit of a perfect storm of factors related to Mo that sets us up to get bad treatment, similar to what @redalways has described. Mo is a player who, unusually for a player with his pace, relishes physical contact often to the point that he often uses it help beat a marker. We know he loves running into space towards goal, but he’s just as good playing in a tight space because of how good he is backing into defenders and then using his strength, agility and acceleration to spin then and blow away from them. The problem with that is refs are shit at fairly judging upper body physical contact. When you have a player like Mahrez who plays football like it’s touch rugby, any contact on him is rare. It’s easy to see, it is exceptional and so refs are quicky to respond. Regarding Mo though, refs give defenders much more leeway to hold a forward who has initiated contact with them. They then see the grappling and say “50-50”. If they are forced to make a call they tend to make the “safe one” and give it against the forward. It is just a huge blind spot of the way refs see the game that unfairly treats one Mo’s most effective traits and results in him getting only a fraction of the fouls given that he should.
Factor in that he is not only our biggest attacking weapon but the player most likely to have the ball at his feet in the opposition box and I think that goes a long way to explaining a lower than expected number of pens. Throw in things like racial bias against “foreigners who dont play fair like the english”, the very early reputation Mo got for diving and it compounds further.
3 Likes
I merely wanted to show that in general we are mid to high in the penalties ladder and never anywhere near down the bottom. I realise saying that doesn’t negate your point about small sample sets and how one or two penalties can drastically change the whole view, but I am just concerned there is a belief we somehow get less penalties than anyone else when in fact over the last 5 years we are on or above the median:
22/23: equal with median
21/22: +3 above median
20/21: equal with median
19/20: +1 above median
18/19: +2 above median
And don’t judge my use of ‘penalty count above median’ 
Now we need to compare those numbers with our touches in the opposition penalty area, again compared to the median.
I would do it, but I lost interest in this thread ages ago.
1 Like