Study shows we should be third....

[stevenurse]

I know and I was furious it was given too but the nature of the loss and even the nature of the goal is worse than the award of it. A free kick (legitimately given or not) should not beat a keeper of a top 3 side without it being something special. The fact we once again never looked like scoring still irritates the fuck out of me considering our recent past of high scoring games (admittedly this doesn't always translate to decent results).

I'd like to point out, and I know this is the wrong place but chelsea have played a blinder with the signing of that coutois fella. Could be their keeper for the next 15 years and already looks quality

 

[nightgoat]

The major problem with this study and that website that analyses bad decisions (there was a whole thread in General Football on that) is that they assume all penalties awarded would be converted. Yet this season has the lowest ever penalty conversion rate in Premier League history.

 

[OmarsComing]

http://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/ind...cials-didnt-make-mistakes.85806/#post-2746187

 

[bigturnip]

It kind of debunks the myth that big teams get all the big decisions, it actually shows the complete opposite.

 

[StartingPrice]

It's all a load of bollocks though isn't it? We can't just assume that if a wrongly disallowed goal had actually been given that the rest of the game would unfold in exactly the same way.

Basic chaos theory puts pay to that. For instance if Adebayor's disallowed goal against Stoke had counted, how do we know whether or not Stoke would rally and get another goal. Maybe the game would have become even more aggressive, leading to one or two of our players getting injured, and perhaps another sending off. All of which would have a knock on effect for the next few games, and consequently the rest of the season.

It's not, really, though. It shows the lie of those who have claimed we haven't had the rough edge of decisions this season, unlike in most seasons.

The fact is, that this club, even when we don't have memorably ludicrous decisions going against us, we do seem to suffer the rough edge of decisions, season upon season.

I understand, fully, the point you are making about Chaos theory, but you are just putting a negative attachment to that - thinks could have been unpredictably changed, as you say, but unpredictably in our favour - we could be going into the final game of the season challenging for the title.

Yes, as others have said, ultimately, we have done this to ourselves. But, as Ionman says, the governing bodies have really let the game down, as the game has moved on so much and then have persistently refused to consider anything other than the officiating systemt as it was 100 years ago - but, the sad truth is, our club has been consistently on the rough edge of that for tears, including so many patently bizarre decisions that it can easily add credence to a claim that money is changing hands. And the lack of scrutiny and accountability is obscene. /rant

 

[Spurger King]

@SP

There's two different arguments there though. I'm not talking about whether or not we've had more bad decisions against us than most, or whether this implies some sort of conspiracy or bad luck. In fact that's got nothing to do with what I was saying at all. When I said it was bollocks I should have said that the suggestion we would be sitting pretty in 3rd had those decisions not gone against us was pure speculation. If we're using the stats to measure how badly treated this club may or may not have been by the officials - well that's something different.

I don't think I was putting a particularly negative attachment to the chaos theory point. I used the example of injuries or a sending off, but it could just as easily be something else. There are all sorts of permutations that could have had considerable knock on effects on other games (not just ours - what if a Stoke player ended up getting sent off and replaced in the next game by someone who scores against one of our rivals, etc...).

It could also be argued that the sense of injustice over certain decisions may have had a positive effect on several of our players that was carried into future games, whereas had that injustice not occured that effect may never have materialised. Maybe drawing or winning away to Stoke could have led to a feeling of complacency in the team. Maybe not. If you go back in time to earlier in the season and change even one or two decisions, the ramifications could end up being wildly different to how things actually turned out, so as far as I'm concerned those decisions offer no real indication of where we would currently be at all.

 

[Ionman34]

@SP

There's two different arguments there though. I'm not talking about whether or not we've had more bad decisions against us than most, or whether this implies some sort of conspiracy or bad luck. In fact that's got nothing to do with what I was saying at all. When I said it was bollocks I should have said that the suggestion we would be sitting pretty in 3rd had those decisions not gone against us was pure speculation. If we're using the stats to measure how badly treated this club may or may not have been by the officials - well that's something different.

I don't think I was putting a particularly negative attachment to the chaos theory point. I used the example of injuries or a sending off, but it could just as easily be something else. There are all sorts of permutations that could have had considerable knock on effects on other games (not just ours - what if a Stoke player ended up getting sent off and replaced in the next game by someone who scores against one of our rivals, etc...).

It could also be argued that the sense of injustice over certain decisions may have had a positive effect on several of our players that was carried into future games, whereas had that injustice not occured that effect may never have materialised. Maybe drawing or winning away to Stoke could have led to a feeling of complacency in the team. Maybe not. If you go back in time to earlier in the season and change even one or two decisions, the ramifications could end up being wildly different to how things actually turned out, so as far as I'm concerned those decisions offer no real indication of where we would currently be at all.

You are correct Spurger but it's not really about that is it? The fact of the matter is that we do not know how the season SHOULD HAVE ended up because of the inordinately high amount of game changing bad decisions.

Whilst I accept that there will be some that, whatever the degree of technological policing, will get past the officiates, technology will render them extremely few and far between, thereby returning a far more level playing field and a truer reflection of the endeavours of each of the teams.

It might not reduce our blood pressure, but it'll go a long way to not raising it any further than our own teams can push it!

 

[talkshowhost86]

I understand, fully, the point you are making about Chaos theory, but you are just putting a negative attachment to that - thinks could have been unpredictably changed, as you say, but unpredictably in our favour - we could be going into the final game of the season challenging for the title.

Coulda woulda shoulda.

I get your point SP but the point is it's all about 'could' rather than 'should'. We can sit here and moan about decisions until the cows come home, and after the games we will continue to do that I'm sure.

But even without considering SK's point that it's not as cut and dry as 'if we'd got that penalty we'd have won' or 'if we'd not had a bit of luck we'd have lost', the difference for this season is only 6 points (if you take that table at face value...which I think is dangerous).

How many points have we lost due to our own incompetence? Or through the other team simply being better than us? A lot more that's for certain.

To me it always seems very small time and pedantic to be whinging about decisions going against you. Part of football is dealing with those decisions and going on to win anyway. Yes if it was costing us 20 points a season it would be different, but in the greater scheme of things it's small patatas my friend. We have bigger issues to think about and I hope our club as a whole doesn't take on the victim approach of the bindippers who claim to have referees, the woodwork, black people, Jesus and Alex Ferguson against them.

 

[StartingPrice]

@SP

There's two different arguments there though. I'm not talking about whether or not we've had more bad decisions against us than most, or whether this implies some sort of conspiracy or bad luck. In fact that's got nothing to do with what I was saying at all. When I said it was bollocks I should have said that the suggestion we would be sitting pretty in 3rd had those decisions not gone against us was pure speculation. If we're using the stats to measure how badly treated this club may or may not have been by the officials - well that's something different.

I don't think I was putting a particularly negative attachment to the chaos theory point. I used the example of injuries or a sending off, but it could just as easily be something else. There are all sorts of permutations that could have had considerable knock on effects on other games (not just ours - what if a Stoke player ended up getting sent off and replaced in the next game by someone who scores against one of our rivals, etc...).

It could also be argued that the sense of injustice over certain decisions may have had a positive effect on several of our players that was carried into future games, whereas had that injustice not occured that effect may never have materialised. Maybe drawing or winning away to Stoke could have led to a feeling of complacency in the team. Maybe not. If you go back in time to earlier in the season and change even one or two decisions, the ramifications could end up being wildly different to how things actually turned out, so as far as I'm concerned those decisions offer no real indication of where we would currently be at all.

I did kinda cover the idea that Chaos Theory is just that.
Otherwise, you are right, there are two sperate arguments, though I can't help thinking Ionman is right - Chaos Theory is an nteresting theory, but, just like Evolution Theory and National Socialism, once you start applying these things carte blanche in an unintelligent way you are in trouble (generically, of course). In this case, yes, the whole time timeline would have been changed; but we can also say that if the governing bodies had accepted that the game had changed a long time ago and adapted, including adapting new technologies, then I think it is safe to say that in this new timeline we would, in a general sense, more than likely benefit.
We don't know it, but I think it is fair enough to hypothesise it.

Coulda woulda shoulda.

I get your point SP but the point is it's all about 'could' rather than 'should'. We can sit here and moan about decisions until the cows come home, and after the games we will continue to do that I'm sure.

But even without considering SK's point that it's not as cut and dry as 'if we'd got that penalty we'd have won' or 'if we'd not had a bit of luck we'd have lost', the difference for this season is only 6 points (if you take that table at face value...which I think is dangerous).

How many points have we lost due to our own incompetence? Or through the other team simply being better than us? A lot more that's for certain.

To me it always seems very small time and pedantic to be whinging about decisions going against you. Part of football is dealing with those decisions and going on to win anyway. Yes if it was costing us 20 points a season it would be different, but in the greater scheme of things it's small patatas my friend. We have bigger issues to think about and I hope our club as a whole doesn't take on the victim approach of the bindippers who claim to have referees, the woodwork, black people, Jesus and Alex Ferguson against them.

In these debates in the past, I have agreed with most of what you say. Ultimately, our collapse is at our door, etc. But what gets me is not the erroneous decisions referees have made against us (as well as for us) that we, at least, due to simple human error, it is the whole series of incredible and bizarre decisions made against us, almost exlusively against Sky 4 clubs, where no rational explanation can be made. There should have been accountability for that, and there was none.

That is something different to, say, the Bindippers whinging about hitting the post, being outted for racism, etc. Hell, EUFA even made an extra regulation to let them into the CL when there was no legally binding reason to, other than that it would be nice to let the CL winners back into the competition even though it was specifically a competition for teams finishing in stupulated league positions and they had finished outside them.

 

[tototoner]

Fulham have only had 2 bad decisions against them all season, that's worrying.

Jol was a very unlucky manager with us

 

[StartingPrice]

Jol was a very unlucky manager with us

We are cursed

 

[shakus]

Wish I got paid to watch over 200 hrs of football, analyse to death 674 key decisions, then make hypothetical assumptions

 

[hybridsoldier]

I am glad they did this study because IMO all this "these things even themselves out" etc is utter bollocks.

Decisions are one thing but the timing of them can massively affect games and the course of a teams season. We only have to look at the Balotelli stamp on Parker at the Etihad. A red card there and they are clinging on for a draw and maybe don't go and win the game. That wasn't the turning point in our season (Arsenal game was) but no doubt it was a very important moment that played a part in our loss of confidence.

 

[Cavehillspur]

If my aunty had balls...and all that nonsense, but is a little frustrating to find out this weekend should be a great deal more relaxing...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-survey-highlights-Premier-League-errors.html

Stoke have gotten away with fuckin murder this season, not just that game against us but other games on top of that. Athough I must admit I found their Wenger impersonation one of the highlights of the season

 

[900triumph]

I did kinda cover the idea that Chaos Theory is just that.
Otherwise, you are right, there are two sperate arguments, though I can't help thinking Ionman is right - Chaos Theory is an nteresting theory, but, just like Evolution Theory and National Socialism, once you start applying these things carte blanche in an unintelligent way you are in trouble (generically, of course). In this case, yes, the whole time timeline would have been changed; but we can also say that if the governing bodies had accepted that the game had changed a long time ago and adapted, including adapting new technologies, then I think it is safe to say that in this new timeline we would, in a general sense, more than likely benefit.
We don't know it, but I think it is fair enough to hypothesise it.



In these debates in the past, I have agreed with most of what you say. Ultimately, our collapse is at our door, etc. But what gets me is not the erroneous decisions referees have made against us (as well as for us) that we, at least, due to simple human error, it is the whole series of incredible and bizarre decisions made against us, almost exlusively against Sky 4 clubs, where no rational explanation can be made. There should have been accountability for that, and there was none.

That is something different to, say, the Bindippers whinging about hitting the post, being outted for racism, etc. Hell, EUFA even made an extra regulation to let them into the CL when there was no legally binding reason to, other than that it would be nice to let the CL winners back into the competition even though it was specifically a competition for teams finishing in stupulated league positions and they had finished outside them.

Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Organisms do evolve, some quickly enough for the "theory" to have been scientifically proven decades ago.

 

[shelfmonkey]

It also proves the argument that Anusal are routinely luckier than us, although we've always known that!!

 

[LeSoupeKitchen]

Its crap anyway- they dont include the away to man city game in their analysis- seems to only cover moments leading to a goal. Surely would have got at least a draw?

 

[brasil_spur]

Actually shows that Liverpool have suffered quite badly actually.

As for Stoke, sheesh, serious points gained.

For us? 3pts clear, but still with a last day match to not lose and it shows for us it has be relatively even!

Err, Liverpool have only lost out on 3 points according to this, whereas we are 6 points down, Newcastle are the big winners as they are 7 points up.

 

[StartingPrice]

Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact. Organisms do evolve, some quickly enough for the "theory" to have been scientifically proven decades ago.

1) It is called Evolution Theory because it is a theory. Organisms do evolve quickly enough for instances of evolution to be observed. There is also a large fossil record from which we can infer the process of evolution at work over a longer period of time.
2) I wasn't trying to make any point viz. Evolution Theory.
3) Neither was I indicating any general disagreement with the factuality of the theory.
4) Sadly, you feel like you constantly feel the need to.
5) I have had a debate on this back in the day, on SC, perhaps you could just find that and read my response, rather than troubling me over you need.
6) Perhaps you could alter the wording a little so my post doesn't offend your sensibilities - it doesn't alter the meaning of the post at all, which was about football.

 

[Riandor]

Err, Liverpool have only lost out on 3 points according to this, whereas we are 6 points down, Newcastle are the big winners as they are 7 points up.

Table shows 5 decisions went for them and 14 against...
Points wise the margin might not be as big, but in terms of decisions that poor.