• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

Conspiracy? Bias? Dumb luck? Why do LFC get shit decisions?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
572
Didn't you reply to one of my posts with a "whatever" rather than either answering it properly or just ignoring it?
Why would I argue with my teenage son who was just trying to wind me up? You even said Liverpool wasn't any more biased against than any other city. Even the other guys on your side of the argument didn't stoop that far.
Why did it take so long for an LFC manager to get a knighthood? That's a better question to ask.
 


sms1986

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
2,007
Why would I argue with my teenage son who was just trying to wind me up? You even said Liverpool wasn't any more biased against than any other city. Even the other guys on your side of the argument didn't stoop that far.
Why did it take so long for an LFC manager to get a knighthood? That's a better question to ask.
I'm not trying to wind you or anyone else up, no matter how much you post saying so.

So you know what I'm asking, then. Why did it take so long for a LFC manager to get a knighthood?
 

Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
572
You first say that he could have refused or not wanted one - I never said that he definitely didn't want a knighthood, just that he might not have wanted one - but in the next sentence you assume that he wasn't offered one. What I see when googling is some of our fans wanting him to be knighted for obvious reasons, but I can't find anything that says he specifically wanted a knighthood. He might have been perfectly content with an OBE.
What are you talking about. I'm asking you to reach a likely conclusion based on the circumstantial evidence. What is the mostly likely reason why Paisley did not receive a knighthood in your opinion based on the circumstantial evidence that he recieved an OBE and there were campaigns to award him one posthumously?
 

Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
572
I'm not trying to wind you or anyone else up, no matter how much you post saying so.

So you know what I'm asking, then. Why did it take so long for a LFC manager to get a knighthood?
You didn't ask that question I did. You don't even know what you are discussing now.
Do you really believe Liverpool the city isn't biased against more than other cities?
 

sms1986

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
2,007
What are you talking about. I'm asking you to reach a likely conclusion based on the circumstantial evidence. What is the mostly likely reason why Paisley did not receive a knighthood in your opinion based on the circumstantial evidence that he recieved an OBE and there were campaigns to award him one posthumously?
The most likely reason was he was not offered a knighthood. The reasons are not known - he died just 13 years later and didn't really do much after he was given the OBE, so it's possible that if he had lived longer he might have been knighted.
 



sms1986

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
2,007
You didn't ask that question I did. You don't even know what you are discussing now.
Do you really believe Liverpool the city isn't biased against more than other cities?
Did I say I asked that question?

They might be, they might not be. Of course people from Liverpool are going to feel strongly about any bias they receive, but so will people from other places.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
@sms1986 seriously you're refusing to accept bias against LFC is a reason that no manager other than Kenny has been knighted and it took about 20 years longer than it should have with him but asking others to explain why this happened? If you don't think it's a case of anti LFC bias maybe do us all a favour and YOU explain it?
 



sms1986

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
2,007
@sms1986 seriously you're refusing to accept bias against LFC is a reason that no manager other than Kenny has been knighted and it took about 20 years longer than it should have with him but asking others to explain why this happened? If you don't think it's a case of anti LFC bias maybe do us all a favour and YOU explain it?
We've just won an important game and this is your priority?

I don't know the reason why no Liverpool manager until Dalglish has been knighted and I don't think you do either. You can say it's anti-LFC bias if you want, it is a possibility, I just don't think it's the only possibility.
 

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
855
We've just won an important game and this is your priority?

I don't know the reason why no Liverpool manager until Dalglish has been knighted and I don't think you do either. You can say it's anti-LFC bias if you want, it is a possibility, I just don't think it's the only possibility.
What are the other possibilities?
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
We've just won an important game and this is your priority?

I don't know the reason why no Liverpool manager until Dalglish has been knighted and I don't think you do either. You can say it's anti-LFC bias if you want, it is a possibility, I just don't think it's the only possibility.
Name one. You always demand more and more evidence of others on here. Name at least one other reason why some of the most successful managers in the British game haven't been honoured.
 

sms1986

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
2,007
What are the other possibilities?
That maybe they just weren't given one? Maybe some of them refused?

Paisley had an OBE, do people who receive those generally get a knighthood afterwards?
 



Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
855
So it has to be bias? There's no possible way it could be anything else?
No.
Its bias. Plain and simple. 3 Man Utd knighthoods, one Liverpool for Kenny Dalglish years after when he should have received one, and only following years of canvassing. You are just baiting, looking for a reaction. There is simply no cause to argue this, other than to wind people up.
 

Prolix

Long Time Nemesis™
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
2,982
[...]
Specifically how does it affect their decisions?

Notice: I'm not saying "it does not affect their decisions". I'm saying I want to know which types of decisions you're saying it influences (and how). Penalties, free kicks, fouls, cards (red vs. yellow etc.), what? I just want to understand what we're describing taking place in concrete terms.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Ok @Prolix I'll do my best with a couple of examples on how unconscious bias COULD effect us for real. Please note that these are made up examples.

1st Referee knows he has Liverpool game coming up. Referee who just officiated Liverpool's last game talks to the group (this is a thing officials do after games, see the BBC article I posted) about how he wasn't sure on the penalty he gave for Salah and hopes he hasn't been conned. As a good official you try to tune out media as much as possible but you notice stories on your phone about "Salah diving controversy" as you open Google, as you skip past Sky Sports News the headline was "Klopp defends Salah, claims forward doesnt dive" and your neighbour tries to strike up conversation about how hes heard your next game is Liverpool and how you going to cope with that "diver" Salah. Game starts you're adamant you will officiate fairly. You see Salah go down 3 times in and around the box. You can't be 100% sure there is definite contact from the defenders but think there could have been, at the back of your mind you're trying not to concentrate consciously on what you already know but your unconscious bias effects your decision making and you give one free-kick and waive away two penalties. In reality all 3 were fouls and so was the one in the last game.

2nd Ref has tried not to pay attention to news on run up to game but saw an article about the stupid excuses Klopp has used instead of admitting he got things wrong. You also saw another one after an unconvincing, hard fought, Liverpool win where you noticed the headline was "Klopp claims great performance" you didn't read it but it seems Klopp was lying to cover for his team struggling there too. In the game you're unsure on a big decision and having to make a judgement call, you see Klopp animated on the sidelines you sigh and mutter "typical" and call against Liverpool because if Klopp the 'bullshit artist' is working that hard to convince then it is probably not in Liverpool's favour.

3rd Linesman trying not to pay attention to the news but can't help but notice the big talking point seems to be Milner receiving a ball in the run up to a Liverpool goal when he was offside. You're not sure but doesn't look like you've seen that linesman trusted with another big game since. You know officials who make big, high profile, mistakes can lose the games for the prem and even lose potential European and international games and you're hoping to get called for the next big game. Although you try and make your decisions in the next Liverpool game fairly you edge on the side of caution because there's no story if you waive in the build up for something that was marginally onside. Better to do that if any element of doubt than to get it wrong and have it as the next big talking point.

These are oversimplification examples to try and make a point.

In reality bias is created over a lot longer time and is a lot more subtle. The people who are influenced by it may be conscious or unconscious of the bias that enters their decision making. Unconscious bias is a real thing all humans are subject to.

Your brain operates on incomplete data from what you've observed, it uses what you already know or believe from similar past experiences or prior knowledge to form assumptions to complete that data.

All human brains do this when making decisions not just in football, full stop. Deciding if food looks nice to eat, if another person you haven't seen closely yet sexually attracts You, if a piece of art shows the artist is talented, if a road is safe to cross. It's just what the brain does.

If a city and people have been demonized in society and popular culture since the early 80s and a club from that area is subtly given a rough end of the stick in a big chunk of the most accessible sports media then the potential for those stereotypes and negative portrayals to factor into the unconscious bias of officials that impact on us is massive. Practically guaranteed.

Sorry for the long post.
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
In an attempt to show media bias in all its subtlety I was just checking BBC (neutral, not Murdoch owned) on my phone and decided to compare to Sky (non neutral in my opinion and under Murdoch).

What you can read on the BBC mobile site without clicking is the first two stories and another further down being;


Salah scores brilliant late solo goal to send Liverpool top

'A special moment' - Salah breaks Torres record with landmark Liverpool goal

Salah reaches 50 PL goals for Liverpool: Watch five of his best

What you can read on the Sky mobile site without clicking is the first stories about us being;

Salah sends Liverpool top in late show
Mo Salah ended his goal drought as Liverpool returned to the top of the Premier League with another late show in a 3-1 win at Southampton.

Carra: Klopp's subs were key

Salah strikes, Henderson shines

Now can anybody really claim the way those Sky ones are written is the same as the way the BBC one's are written?
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,632
This thread has been interesting in parts, but we now see new lows being stooped to which in my view are downright disrespectful to the memory of Bob Paisley.
No-one knows the cold hard facts, but seeing it actually suggested that perhaps Bob was offered a knighthood and refused it, is reaching levels of debate last witnessed in the days of Howling Fan Todd.

This is most definitely a wind up now.
 

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
855
This thread has been interesting in parts, but we now see new lows being stooped to which in my view are downright disrespectful to the memory of Bob Paisley.
No-one knows the cold hard facts, but seeing it actually suggested that perhaps Bob was offered a knighthood and refused it, is reaching levels of debate last witnessed in the days of Howling Fan Todd.

This is most definitely a wind up now.
To be honest I am annoyed with myself for bringing the Knighthood agenda into the debate. I apologise for doing so, but I need to contextualise how this developed....

I was responding to @Hope in your heart and his comments on Ferguson. I have never understood the chasm between the popular respect (outside our fanbase) for Ferguson and Bob Paisley. And the idea that it doesnt matter simply doesnt wash. It is a subject that I am deeply emotive about. The awarding of a knighthood to Kenny Dalglish is correct, but in many respects is years too late and is scant compensation for how Bob Paisley, and others at the club were disregarded.
So, by raising this, or adding it to the debate I afforded @sms1986 the opportunity to sidetrack my argument. My view is that he was painting himself into a corner and now found another angle to bait with.
He has gone from winding people up in other threads (conspiracy theorists) to agreeing that bias exists (for all clubs) to agreeing with the vast majority of the original claims.
And yesterdays questions on Bob Paisley were just designed, again in my opinion to force adverse reaction from certain posters.
I have no idea why he responded in the manner that he did. He had very little information or knowledge, insofar as he googled "facts" whilst debating.
Maybe some people should pick up a book on the men upon whose shoulders this club stands, and understand the history before making crass comments.
 

Alex

since 2004
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
2,748
I've mentioned it earlier in the thread.
Notice how the ref allowed the other team to barge into our players when they receive the ball. 50/50 balls were all theirs because our players had to back off or risk injury.
 

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
855
I've mentioned it earlier in the thread.
Notice how the ref allowed the other team to barge into our players when they receive the ball. 50/50 balls were all theirs because our players had to back off or risk injury.
Couple of obvious ones, Matip fouled by Long on a consistent basis. Matip should have clattered him but thats beside the point.
I was interested to see that VAR would not have overturned the Keita goal, and was interested in the fact that at 1-1 we were denied another stonewall penalty.
The same incident in other prem matches would have been a penalty perhaps.
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Couple of obvious ones, Matip fouled by Long on a consistent basis. Matip should have clattered him but thats beside the point.
I was interested to see that VAR would not have overturned the Keita goal, and was interested in the fact that at 1-1 we were denied another stonewall penalty.
The same incident in other prem matches would have been a penalty perhaps.
I actually don't understand how there's any debate at all. You foul a player after not making the ball it's a free kick or penalty.

Doesn't matter what else is happening with the ball. Keita may have over run it, the keeper may collect it.

Keita bearing down on him could put him off and he could spill it, pull out or make a hash out of it. Keita then could have had a chance at an open goal with a loose ball. Can't predict what would have happened if Keita hadn't been fouled. And it's not in the rules to try as far as I know.

Did the defender get a touch on the ball? No.

Did the defender get a touch on the player? Yes.

Foul.

Was it in the area? Yes.

Penalty. Simple.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,820
In an attempt to show media bias in all its subtlety I was just checking BBC (neutral, not Murdoch owned) on my phone and decided to compare to Sky (non neutral in my opinion and under Murdoch).

What you can read on the BBC mobile site without clicking is the first two stories and another further down being;


Salah scores brilliant late solo goal to send Liverpool top

'A special moment' - Salah breaks Torres record with landmark Liverpool goal

Salah reaches 50 PL goals for Liverpool: Watch five of his best

What you can read on the Sky mobile site without clicking is the first stories about us being;

Salah sends Liverpool top in late show
Mo Salah ended his goal drought as Liverpool returned to the top of the Premier League with another late show in a 3-1 win at Southampton.

Carra: Klopp's subs were key

Salah strikes, Henderson shines

Now can anybody really claim the way those Sky ones are written is the same as the way the BBC one's are written?
I don’t see the problem?
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,820
It really was the most blatant penalty, a stonewaller. I didn’t recognise the ref, but I do remember thinking, as Naby broke into the box, if he gets cut down this lad isn’t giving it. Sometimes you just know. He was doing that hero hand waving stance even as Naby was falling.

I think it has got to the point where even if Refs are 90% sure, they still don’t give. The shit they get for not giving something that was, is a fraction of the shit they get for giving one that wasn’t. Cowards.
 

jaffod

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
2,708
To be honest I am annoyed with myself for bringing the Knighthood agenda into the debate. I apologise for doing so, but I need to contextualise how this developed....

I was responding to @Hope in your heart and his comments on Ferguson. I have never understood the chasm between the popular respect (outside our fanbase) for Ferguson and Bob Paisley. And the idea that it doesnt matter simply doesnt wash. It is a subject that I am deeply emotive about. The awarding of a knighthood to Kenny Dalglish is correct, but in many respects is years too late and is scant compensation for how Bob Paisley, and others at the club were disregarded.
So, by raising this, or adding it to the debate I afforded @sms1986 the opportunity to sidetrack my argument. My view is that he was painting himself into a corner and now found another angle to bait with.
He has gone from winding people up in other threads (conspiracy theorists) to agreeing that bias exists (for all clubs) to agreeing with the vast majority of the original claims.
And yesterdays questions on Bob Paisley were just designed, again in my opinion to force adverse reaction from certain posters.
I have no idea why he responded in the manner that he did. He had very little information or knowledge, insofar as he googled "facts" whilst debating.
Maybe some people should pick up a book on the men upon whose shoulders this club stands, and understand the history before making crass comments.
He made a completely false statement about Heysel a few weeks back and when pulled on it admitted he "didn't know a lot" about it. He's going to need a bigger spade soon.
 

jaffod

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
2,708
It really was the most blatant penalty, a stonewaller. I didn’t recognise the ref, but I do remember thinking, as Naby broke into the box, if he gets cut down this lad isn’t giving it. Sometimes you just know. He was doing that hero hand waving stance even as Naby was falling.

I think it has got to the point where even if Refs are 90% sure, they still don’t give. The shit they get for not giving something that was, is a fraction of the shit they get for giving one that wasn’t. Cowards.
He had big enough balls to over-rule his linesman on a clearly offside goal a few weeks back.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.