Man Utd get favoured decisions?? think again

Lux wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:It is irrelevant if you have no evidence to support it happening other than "Well it could have done". I could get killed by a meteorite crashing through my roof in 3 hours and 53 minutes, I assume it won't happen because it probably won't.

Can you explain why we should assume things that probably wouldn't have happened would actually have happened?

Sensationalist. When the score is 0-0 QPR getting at least a point is clearly a probability that should be considered. A meteorite killing you at a specific time is not. If you cannot see the difference then you're deluded.

My assumptions are based on demonstrable facts and evidence.

Same as above really. If a team is drawing with you there are no facts or evidence to categorically (to the extent that all other possibilities are not worth considering) suggest that Man Utd will win.

ViVaRooney wrote:for me this was more about decisions go against us more then they go for us.. instead of "we would be top if these decisions didnt go against us"

because everyone is always here saying we get majority of the decisions when this proves we dont

Vaguely, you have brought up a good point. There are lots of ways to come up with these conclusions, most (including this) are not perfect....but it's something. Enough to argue that Man Utd do not get unfair treatment in comparison to other teams.

I considered those possibilities and found they were less likely than the actual outcome, as any rational observer would.

And ViVa has brought up a good point, not vaguely, categorically, this proves that Manchester United do not get particularly good treatment from the referees, it categorically proves that there is no conspiracy to keep Manchester United at the top of English football.

Alan wrote:I think we could go through this season after season and find decisions for and against teams. I remember a lot of these decisions go for and against City and United this season.

That is exactly what has been done.

Did they check all the offside decisions aswell.:sleep:There would have probably been loads, but i remember United getting two goals at home to Chelsea that were offside, And i remember City getting beat from Sunderland with a goal that should have never stood.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:I considered those possibilities and found they were less likely than the actual outcome, as any rational observer would.

The actual outcome is a result of an incorrect decision. You cannot compare the probability of that outcome with an outcome where that incorrect decision was given correctly as the game completely changes.

In the example of QPR...there is no goal and no red card, if the correct decision was given then there would be no goal or red card....so the actual circumstances and outcome are no longer possible.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
And ViVa has brought up a good point, not vaguely, categorically, this proves that Manchester United do not get particularly good treatment from the referees, it categorically proves that there is no conspiracy to keep Manchester United at the top of English football.

Even if it was categorical, which it in no way is....you cannot just read a vague article and ignorantly assume that the study is completely reliable, thorough, unbiased, without error etc.

But what I will say is that there is not likely a conspiracy, I doubt many thought that. It's more likely, if anything, that refs simply cannot handle the pressure that Man Utd, especially at home, would put on them. That's not a conspiracy, it's just human incompetence.

Lux wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:I considered those possibilities and found they were less likely than the actual outcome, as any rational observer would.

The actual outcome is a result of an incorrect decision. You cannot compare the probability of that outcome with an outcome where that incorrect decision was given correctly as the game completely changes.

In the example of QPR...there is no goal and no red card, if the correct decision was given then there would be no goal or red card....so the actual circumstances and outcome are no longer possible.

I'm aware of that, we are talking about a hypothetical scenario in which the red card and goal never occurred, for our analysis, we must take the most likely outcome as fact.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
And ViVa has brought up a good point, not vaguely, categorically, this proves that Manchester United do not get particularly good treatment from the referees, it categorically proves that there is no conspiracy to keep Manchester United at the top of English football.

Even if it was categorical, which it in no way is....you cannot just read a vague article and ignorantly assume that the study is completely reliable, thorough, unbiased, without error etc.

But what I will say is that there is not likely a conspiracy, I doubt many thought that. It's more likely, if anything, that refs simply cannot handle the pressure that Man Utd, especially at home, would put on them. That's not a conspiracy, it's just human incompetence.

The study is backed up by a similar study on this website

http://www.debatabledecisions.com/

Which has detailed explanations for all decisions, given by a panel of 5 unbiased observers. Their conclusion, that United have been fucked by the officials this season, is similar to that of the report featured above.

If Man Utd influence referees by putting pressure on them, why have we suffered from more wrongful decisions than we have benefited from? It does not make any sense.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:I'm aware of that, we are talking about a hypothetical scenario in which the red card and goal never occurred, for our analysis, we must take the most likely outcome as fact.

I do not agree, I think that is bollocks. Taking the most likely outcome as fact is not going to produce realistic results. If you go on this "likely probability" then all the top teams would have far more points. Is that realistic? No...because the most likely outcome happening every time is not the most likely outcome.

The study is backed up by a similar study on this website

http://www.debatabledecisions.com/
got a
Which has detailed explanations for all decisions, given by a panel of 5 unbiased observers. Their conclusion, that United have been fucked by the officials this season, is similar to that of the report featured above.

If Man Utd influence referees by putting pressure on them, why have we suffered from more wrongful decisions than we have benefited from? It does not make any sense.

I'm not necessarily saying that they do, though if anything it would be more likely than a conspiracy.

That said though...I have seen many football matches in person where the ref has clearly got a preference for a team....why that is I do not know.

Jordi wrote:There was that Van Nistelrooy goal against us in 03/04 at Old Trafford which cost us a point.

Pedro Mendes' goal that wasn't comes to mind. Would've won that game and won at Old Trafford.

Lux wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:I'm aware of that, we are talking about a hypothetical scenario in which the red card and goal never occurred, for our analysis, we must take the most likely outcome as fact.

I do not agree, I think that is bollocks. Taking the most likely outcome as fact is not going to produce realistic results. If you go on this "likely probability" then all the top teams would have far more points. Is that realistic? No...because the most likely outcome happening every time is not the most likely outcome.

Are there any other games where this red card situation applies? I think for this single match against the notoriously shit QPR we can assume the most likely outcome is a United win.

The study is backed up by a similar study on this website

http://www.debatabledecisions.com/
got a
Which has detailed explanations for all decisions, given by a panel of 5 unbiased observers. Their conclusion, that United have been fucked by the officials this season, is similar to that of the report featured above.

If Man Utd influence referees by putting pressure on them, why have we suffered from more wrongful decisions than we have benefited from? It does not make any sense.

I'm not necessarily saying that they do, though if anything it would be more likely than a conspiracy.

That said though...I have seen many football matches in person where the ref has clearly got a preference for a team....why that is I do not know.

Well it's not likely at all because it's already proven that United aren't getting any help from the referees.

Perhaps you were mistaken while viewing these matches. Chickens given food at random intervals often believe there is some kind of pattern between the place they are standing in and the deposition of food into their cages - an entirely neutral referee is bound to make several incorrect decisions in a game, and it would be unusual if the decisions happened to balance themselves out evenly, perhaps you are the chicken seeing a pattern of bias when in reality it is simply random chance.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Are there any other games where this red card situation applies? I think for this single match against the notoriously shit QPR we can assume the most likely outcome is a United win.

Obviously other teams have had players sent off incorrectly..then gone on to draw or lose. Rodwell's red card comes to mind. There are lots of similar things, like Alan said...offsides, fouls, freekicks....this study is not thorough enough. Even if it covered every incorrect decision, you cannot turn those corrected decisions into results....because anything could happen. The most likely i.e. better team always wins, is a bullshit way of working it out.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
Well it's not likely at all because it's already proven that United aren't getting any help from the referees.

Perhaps you were mistaken while viewing these matches. Chickens given food at random intervals often believe there is some kind of pattern between the place they are standing in and the deposition of food into their cages - an entirely neutral referee is bound to make several incorrect decisions in a game, and it would be unusual if the decisions happened to balance themselves out evenly, perhaps you are the chicken seeing a pattern of bias when in reality it is simply random chance.

Save the "proven", it's not.

Perhaps I am mistaken..but the from my experience it's usually bigger teams who appear to get the decisions. Rarely do I see us play smaller/similar teams and be let down by constant terrible decisions. Had a few bad seasons of refs (this one has actually been pretty good), but when we were in the Premier League there were a lot of games where the ref was giving the decisions to the other teams, decisions that were completely wrong. Maybe biased...maybe just unlucky...but after what I've seen I remain sceptical....and would never accept "it all balances out" or "you're just unlucky".

Probably not a conspiracy...but there is something in it. No way is there no dodgy refs who crumble under pressure, usually from bigger teams. Nothing to do with an improbability of decisions evening themselves out...if that were the case then over the whole season there wouldn't be a very noticeable difference between injustice for each team.

Jordi wrote:There was that Van Nistelrooy goal against us in 03/04 at Old Trafford which cost us a point.

And the season after he scored the goal to send you down.

Lux wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Are there any other games where this red card situation applies? I think for this single match against the notoriously shit QPR we can assume the most likely outcome is a United win.

Obviously other teams have had players sent off incorrectly..then gone on to draw or lose. Rodwell's red card comes to mind. There are lots of similar things, like Alan said...offsides, fouls, freekicks....this study is not thorough enough. Even if it covered every incorrect decision, you cannot turn those corrected decisions into results....because anything could happen. The most likely i.e. better team always wins, is a bullshit way of working it out.

When has this happened to United, other than the Queens Park Rangers match?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:
Well it's not likely at all because it's already proven that United aren't getting any help from the referees.

Perhaps you were mistaken while viewing these matches. Chickens given food at random intervals often believe there is some kind of pattern between the place they are standing in and the deposition of food into their cages - an entirely neutral referee is bound to make several incorrect decisions in a game, and it would be unusual if the decisions happened to balance themselves out evenly, perhaps you are the chicken seeing a pattern of bias when in reality it is simply random chance.

Save the "proven", it's not.

Perhaps I am mistaken..but the from my experience it's usually bigger teams who appear to get the decisions. Rarely do I see us play smaller/similar teams and be let down by constant terrible decisions. Had a few bad seasons of refs (this one has actually been pretty good), but when we were in the Premier League there were a lot of games where the ref was giving the decisions to the other teams, decisions that were completely wrong. Maybe biased...maybe just unlucky...but after what I've seen I remain sceptical....and would never accept "it all balances out" or "you're just unlucky".

Probably not a conspiracy...but there is something in it. No way is there no dodgy refs who crumble under pressure, usually from bigger teams. Nothing to do with an improbability of decisions evening themselves out...if that were the case then over the whole season there wouldn't be a very noticeable difference between injustice for each team.

It is proven, only an idiot would argue otherwise.

I'm sure I've explained this before, but the reason bigger teams looks as though they receive more decisions is that they're more likely to take advantage of the decisions they do get, so their wins get more attention, there's also the fact they're bigger teams, so they get more attention anyway. If Bolton play Blackburn and get a dodgy penalty and lose 2-1, 90% of people in the country won't even know about it, United get a penalty against QPR because of Young cheating and go on to win, half of Europe has their say, there is 5 minutes devoted to it on match of the day, Ferguson's comments on it are publicised on the news, and so on.

The chicken won't accept that it's just random either. And I'm not saying the decisions even themselves out, they don't, the sample size is nowhere near large enough. Maybe if the season was 100,000 games long instead of 380 they would even themselves out.

Manchester United get favoured by the referees. That's a FACT!

inb4rrthrowsahissyfit

George wrote:Manchester United get favoured by the referees. That's a FACT!

How on earth is it a fact?

Just read through that article, Fulham Association.

George wrote:Manchester United get favoured by the referees. That's a FACT!

Some people really need to learn what a fact is.

Kuled wrote:

George wrote:Manchester United get favoured by the referees. That's a FACT!

Some people really need to learn what a fact is.

Christ, I was joking. Do any of you guys remember the Rafa Benítez rant?
All of the 'big' sides get favoured by referees. I think.

I wasn't sure

George wrote:

Kuled wrote:Some people really need to learn what a fact is.

Christ, I was joking. Do any of you guys remember the Rafa Benítez rant?
All of the 'big' sides get favoured by referees. I think.

Wrong sir, wrong. The two biggest clubs in England were the two teams who got hindered by referees the most this season.

What about previous seasons? I think it'd be interesting to see the same statistics from the last few years too.

Can we get Weather on the case?

Did they analyse every dodgy throw in and niggly tackles in the middle of the park, cause every single decision changes the course of the game. That is a fact and therefore shouldnt be ignored.

Jordi wrote:What about previous seasons? I think it'd be interesting to see the same statistics from the last few years too.

Can we get Weather on the case?

Jordi we do this every year, and every year it is revealed that Manchester United does not get any preferential treatment, and that the big sides usually get less decisions in their favour than the smaller sides.

my favorite call this season was when Balotelli stomped Scott Parker, got no card, then scored the winning goal.

Or Mata's brilliant "goal" in that FA cup match