• 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.

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
Bit dramatic. Is it the time of the month?
Yeah. Where’s my banning stick.

By nuance and detail, I mean the opinions in here are not black and white. There isn’t a load of people who believe we’re the victims of a vast conspiracy, and a load who think everything is fine. There is a whole range of opinion between those two. No debate is served by polarising the participants, and the way you throw labels around isn’t helpful at all. The end result is people getting angry at each other.
 
Last edited:


Spitfire

Resident Realist
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
2,307
If we finish on 97 points, but 2nd in the league, I'll be fucking fizzing when thinking about the Harry Maguire and Vincent Kompany incidents alone.
That's not even taking into account the comedy show of refereeing in the City v Watford game for example.
The Maguire and Kompany examples alone is a potential swing of 5 points.

What staggers me most is the nonchalance shown by many of our own fans towards it.
Is that nonchalance towards the decision (Man City) , I think that was fairly well vilified in the post match thread. Or nonchalance to say there wasn't bias directly targeting Liverpool?

A basic Google Search shows about the one thing that can be backed up with some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects. That would suggest if bias was at play it was more likely due to that than directly against us to not send him off. we were just the victim of that associated bias in this case.....

As a side note, would you not equally be fizzing about any poor decision or missed chance made by any of our team that could of led to a goal and two extra points in any of the games we dropped points - which would have been enough to win the league?
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
If we finish on 97 points, but 2nd in the league, I'll be fucking fizzing when thinking about the Harry Maguire and Vincent Kompany incidents alone.
That's not even taking into account the comedy show of refereeing in the City v Watford game for example.
The Maguire and Kompany examples alone is a potential swing of 5 points.

What staggers me most is the nonchalance shown by many of our own fans towards it.
A lot of people earlier in the thread argued against media bias and said things like "unless an employee comes out and admits it we will never know"! Fast forward a few weeks and two employees at two of the worst media culprits (Sky Sports and Talksport) have now called it live on air. Yet again though, as I said about the hiring of ex LFC players being made fun of being impartial, neither were taken seriously as they should have been. Both show hosts tried to deflect and laugh it off (almost like there's an understanding at those organisations that those kind of things should be turned into a joke) in a forced and awkward way. Yet Neville, who was suggesting United not try so hard to beat City (something that should have been laughed at) was afforded respect and understanding. I'm glad Saunders stuck to his guns on "why would people dislike Liverpool" over and over because there wasn't a reasonable answer. And Carragher was brave using a joke to challenge Sky's coverage live on air. "We'll never hear the end of it" seems to be the forgive all mantra. But they think they'll never hear the end of City winning the quad? City who may yet face all kinds of punishments for financial doping and squad recruitment rule violations over how they've built this squad?
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Is that nonchalance towards the decision (Man City) , I think that was fairly well vilified in the post match thread. Or nonchalance to say there wasn't bias directly targeting Liverpool?

A basic Google Search shows about the one thing that can be backed up with some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects. That would suggest if bias was at play it was more likely due to that than directly against us to not send him off. we were just the victim of that associated bias in this case.....

As a side note, would you not equally be fizzing about any poor decision or missed chance made by any of our team that could of led to a goal and two extra points in any of the games we dropped points - which would have been enough to win the league?
We want to win fairly. If we are good enough or not good enough that's fair we deserve it or we don't. All we ask for is a level playing field. Some of us don't believe we get that.
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,597
A basic Google Search shows about the one thing that can be backed up with some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects. That would suggest if bias was at play it was more likely due to that than directly against us to not send him off. we were just the victim of that associated bias in this case.....
So how does that logic work with the Maguire example?

As a side note, would you not equally be fizzing about any poor decision or missed chance made by any of our team that could of led to a goal and two extra points in any of the games we dropped points - which would have been enough to win the league?
Yep. Absolutely raging that they only amassed 97 points.
They really should be more clinical :rolleyes:
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Or he’s just saying what he thinks as a pundit/trying to be controversial.

He player with Ole for years. I’m sure there are more effective ways to plant seeds. Like phoning him.

Jesus Christ.
Do you not see the problem with what you just said? This was Neville putting it as diplomatically as possible for a TV audience. How do you think he has put it to a friend? Or do you not think he would have at all?
 

Spitfire

Resident Realist
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
2,307
So how does that logic work with the Maguire example?



Yep. Absolutely raging that they only amassed 97 points.
They really should be more clinical :rolleyes:
For Maguire it doesn't - so then I guess we have to judge ourselves which we believe to be more likely was there some sort of bias - directly against Liverpool or otherwise or did the ref not see it clearly or did he just bottle it......
 

cynicaloldgit

Offside by an armpit
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
4,941
A basic Google Search shows about the one thing that can be backed up with some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects.
For Maguire it doesn't - so then I guess we have to judge ourselves which we believe to be more likely was there some sort of bias - directly against Liverpool or otherwise or did the ref not see it clearly or did he just bottle it......
So bias is proven to exist in favour of home teams (especially the “bigger” teams) but a clear penalty for us at home against a “smaller” team wasn’t given?

This thread has been going on for forty pages now; anyone who still doesn’t believe that there is a conspiracy against us has either been brainwashed by the media’s “these things even themselves out” drivel or is so naive that they still believe in Santa Claus.
 

Spitfire

Resident Realist
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
2,307
I think one thing that's missing in this thread is discussions about how bias COULD have been created and developed to hamper other teams.

Earlier in the thread I've covered why I believe a unique level of bias exists against Liverpool and LFC (in many many many posts).

For those that believe there is equal bias for others could you provide reasons?

In a situation when you have no concrete proof you need to try and make a decision based on the most likely outcome based on the balance of probability.

The unique situations that could have created both conscious and unconscious bias in the minds of decision makers against LFC and the people of Liverpool are extensive. It provides a reason as to how.

There is then a motive established by that for, unintentional, unfair decision making.

I'm still waiting for reasons why anyone else thinks the same, or even anywhere near the same, level of negative feeling can exist against any other club?
Two of the articles I provided touch on it, one is written by someone from another clubs fan site, and another references that bias and seeks to disprove that as part of a wider attempt to prove no specific bias exists........

But just to add to that and the comments around a very set of specific incidences being specific bias against LFC then the below article addresses a number of bad decisions against other clubs - would then not each of those clubs fans have reason to feel there is specific bias against them......


https://www.goal.com/en/lists/the-most-controversial-premier-league-referee-decisions-in/1mammyowlqnu31ty95v6sxyrmd#t7v8lb4kjy7t1qr8sd3jw51e2

Within this article we were both mentioned as a benficiary and a victim.........
 

Spitfire

Resident Realist
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
2,307
So bias is proven to exist in favour of home teams (especially the “bigger” teams) but a clear penalty for us at home against a “smaller” team wasn’t given?

This thread has been going on for forty pages now; anyone who still doesn’t believe that there is a conspiracy against us has either been brainwashed by the media’s “these things even themselves out” drivel or is so naive that they still believe in Santa Claus.
No it actually just makes a previous post of yours relevant; this is all an exercise in futlity because as long as people aren't prepared to look at data in an ojective way bias can/will exist............

This has been an interesting exercise for me to step into the minds of some of the people on here these days.........
For those that believe bias exists - I hope we beat those cheating bastards;
For those that don't, lets hope we don't end up on the end of too many unlucky/bad calls.

I might tap out here or at least lessen the amount of posts in this thread, as we could still be doing this up to and beyond when we do the double and all stop giving a shit because we will all be so drunk with delirium:)
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Two of the articles I provided touch on it, one is written by someone from another clubs fan site, and another references that bias and seeks to disprove that as part of a wider attempt to prove no specific bias exists........

But just to add to that and the comments around a very set of specific incidences being specific bias against LFC then the below article addresses a number of bad decisions against other clubs - would then not each of those clubs fans have reason to feel there is specific bias against them......


https://www.goal.com/en/lists/the-most-controversial-premier-league-referee-decisions-in/1mammyowlqnu31ty95v6sxyrmd#t7v8lb4kjy7t1qr8sd3jw51e2

Within this article we were both mentioned as a benficiary and a victim.........
So now we are back to the all or nothing, black and white comments again? All fans say it so all must be wrong? We've had some incorrect decisions go our way before so we can't be the victims of an irregular slant against us? Ted Bundy was evil but he was still nice to some people. The Antartic is cold but still has days of glorious sunshine. I'm fat and ugly but my fiancee still finds me attractive. This is a complex issue it can't be all or nothing. Those articles discussed bias existing they really didn't put forward the multiple, strong, reasons as to how bias against an area, people and club could have been created and developed. None of the articles you originally posted went over how many incorrect decisions were made for and against clubs, which is what needs to be discussed if bias is proven to have a tangible effect. People making correct decisions shouldn't be an issue. For instance, the time added on stats compared to a league average. They didn't explore how much time should have been awarded, whether the right amount was awarded, whether more or less than what was awarded was played and who that benefited. Just s table saying "above or below average" could be used to determine anything. Especially as we don't know who conducted the research, how they conducted it and if the information in it is even accurate.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
I don't know how anyone in the UK can believe anything other than there being a bias against LFC.
And yet, they do.

Go on Blue Moon and there are pages and pages about how UEFA and the Premier League are trying to screw them. United fans think the referees screw them, and so on.

I don’t understand this, but they see bias.

My own opinion is that Liverpool get a shitter deal out of the refs than most (like the Anfield penalties thing, which is absurd) and there are many possible reasons for that. But it is nowhere near the extent people make out. We’ve been the beneficiaries of refereeing errors this year, as well as the victims (which isn’t to say it evens out at all).

The most egregious example of a refereeing error against us was the Kompany non sending off. It’s easy to think of it as the referee actively choosing to favour City. But I see it as the referee just not wanting to make a game changing decision - they do this up and down the country every week.

I have some sympathy for referees on this. As with the Kompany tackle, if a referee does nothing the narrative largely moves on. Nobody is talking about the Kompany tackle, even as a title exuding moment. But if the referee sends him, and it turns out to be a mistake, or even correct but harsh, then everyone is talking about it forever. The referee has decided the title etc etc.

If you want to see an example of how referees can really fuck a team, you can look at our opponents on Sunday. God, the decisions Cardiff have had to deal with begar belief. It makes me think that the refs have decided it would be better for everyone if Warnock was sent straight back down again.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
Do you not see the problem with what you just said? This was Neville putting it as diplomatically as possible for a TV audience. How do you think he has put it to a friend? Or do you not think he would have at all?
I think a few of you need to go for a walk in the sunshine and clear your heads.
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,597
For Maguire it doesn't - so then I guess we have to judge ourselves which we believe to be more likely was there some sort of bias - directly against Liverpool or otherwise or did the ref not see it clearly or did he just bottle it......
This is indicative of the type of response the bloke who has since disappeared came out with in every post he responded to.
It has to be some reason, any reason, but not possibly biased behaviour.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
This is indicative of the type of response the bloke who has since disappeared came out with in every post he responded to.
It has to be some reason, any reason, but not possibly biased behaviour.
See my above post. Referees bottle big decisions all the time. They are incredibly reluctant to actually make big decisions, and would prefer to ignore sendings off, penalty shoots etc. because they shit they would get for giving one of those incorrectly far exceeds any shit they’d get for not giving one incorrectly.

They do this with all teams. We feel it more than most because we’re a front foot team, usually on the attack.
 



Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,597
If you want to see an example of how referees can really fuck a team, you can look at our opponents on Sunday. God, the decisions Cardiff have had to deal with begar belief. It makes me think that the refs have decided it would be better for everyone if Warnock was sent straight back down again.
I would agree with that possible logic, as would many people.
Yet many of those people would also disregard any possibility it can be happening to us.

Some even suggest going for a walk in the sunshine might change our views.
 

cynicaloldgit

Offside by an armpit
Ad-free Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
4,941
I have some sympathy for referees on this. As with the Kompany tackle, if a referee does nothing the narrative largely moves on. Nobody is talking about the Kompany tackle, even as a title exuding moment. But if the referee sends him, and it turns out to be a mistake, or even correct but harsh, then everyone is talking about it forever. The referee has decided the title etc etc.
Let’s say that the Kompany decision was pure ineptitude and not the result of bias. Then let’s reverse it and say that it’s Virgil making that tackle on a City player.

Does anyone actually believe that we wouldn’t still have the media bleating about how “Liverpool got away with one” there? Sky still would be in meltdown mode.
 

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
818
@Spitfire
Read, and reread your response.
I dont think, aside from the thread title that anyone is contemplating conspiracy. The only place I think conspiracy may exist is the dampening down of evidence convicting City of breach of FFP.

I have stated my position that bias exists, against Liverpool, have given rationale as why it might exist and have seen notable contribution to support this view from other posters. I gave read and reread statements from Rafa and Kenny, honourable men, regarding decisions they have witnessed.
Maybe none of this convinces you. But it certainly underpins my position.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
Let’s say that the Kompany decision was pure ineptitude and not the result of bias. Then let’s reverse it and say that it’s Virgil making that tackle on a City player.

Does anyone actually believe that we wouldn’t still have the media bleating about how “Liverpool got away with one” there? Sky still would be in meltdown mode.
They were still showing that Milner offside about 3/4 days later I noticed. Maybe longer than that.
 



Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,597
Let’s say that the Kompany decision was pure ineptitude and not the result of bias. Then let’s reverse it and say that it’s Virgil making that tackle on a City player.

Does anyone actually believe that we wouldn’t still have the media bleating about how “Liverpool got away with one” there? Sky still would be in meltdown mode.
When I highlighted the Kompany (we were playing away) and Maguire (we were playing at home) examples, the responses I received were as follows.........

Kompany wasn't sent off because "some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects"

Maguire wasn't sent off because "did the ref not see it clearly or did he just bottle it"

Having your cake and eating it spring to mind.
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
Let’s say that the Kompany decision was pure ineptitude and not the result of bias. Then let’s reverse it and say that it’s Virgil making that tackle on a City player.

Does anyone actually believe that we wouldn’t still have the media bleating about how “Liverpool got away with one” there? Sky still would be in meltdown mode.
I don’t think so.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
Even on MOTD they were going on about Salah needing to cut out the diving even though Keown was making the point he'd been kicked and the previous occasion where there was condemnation of him for diving (thus being the beginning of building him a reputation as a diver) they also accepted he'd been fouled.

When even the pundits are acknowledging he's been fouled and yet still maintaining it adds to his growing reputation as a diver (a reputation that's purely of their own invention and which grows only by reason of their own continued false assertions) what fucking hope do we have?
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
And yet, they do.

Go on Blue Moon and there are pages and pages about how UEFA and the Premier League are trying to screw them. United fans think the referees screw them, and so on.

I don’t understand this, but they see bias.

My own opinion is that Liverpool get a shitter deal out of the refs than most (like the Anfield penalties thing, which is absurd) and there are many possible reasons for that. But it is nowhere near the extent people make out. We’ve been the beneficiaries of refereeing errors this year, as well as the victims (which isn’t to say it evens out at all).

The most egregious example of a refereeing error against us was the Kompany non sending off. It’s easy to think of it as the referee actively choosing to favour City. But I see it as the referee just not wanting to make a game changing decision - they do this up and down the country every week.

I have some sympathy for referees on this. As with the Kompany tackle, if a referee does nothing the narrative largely moves on. Nobody is talking about the Kompany tackle, even as a title exuding moment. But if the referee sends him, and it turns out to be a mistake, or even correct but harsh, then everyone is talking about it forever. The referee has decided the title etc etc.

If you want to see an example of how referees can really fuck a team, you can look at our opponents on Sunday. God, the decisions Cardiff have had to deal with begar belief. It makes me think that the refs have decided it would be better for everyone if Warnock was sent straight back down again.
No they are complaining their side isn't liked/treated fairly. Those same fans would almost certainly, and probably gleefully, state we are the most hated side and area in England. You need to understand how bias COULD be created, which many of us have tried to put out there in our posts. Bias, conscious and unconscious, is created by your environment. Referees and other authority figures exist in this world where much of the media seems unfairly slanted against us. Where LFC and their fans were demonized by the authorities and media for decades in slurs that became so common place many accepted them as truth. Where we had all the English clubs banned from Europe. Where seemingly every neutral in the country would prefer City to win than us. To say this can't have an effect on human beings making split second decisions is both incredibly naive and ignorant of how the human brain functions and makes decisions.
 



Spitfire

Resident Realist
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
2,307
When I highlighted the Kompany (we were playing away) and Maguire (we were playing at home) examples, the responses I received were as follows.........

Kompany wasn't sent off because "some clear statistical evidence to suggest a bias does occur is calls For the home team Vs the away team due to pressure and other associated effects"

Maguire wasn't sent off because "did the ref not see it clearly or did he just bottle it"

Having your cake and eating it spring to mind.
You've selectively quoted that which changes the context of that post completely.....
 

Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,683
No they are complaining their side isn't liked/treated fairly. Those same fans would almost certainly, and probably gleefully, state we are the most hated side and area in England.
No, they are saying they are biased against. I was on blue moon last night and there is a constant complaint that the don’t get the decisions, and we do.

I don’t know if you are talking to me about bias, but I don’t disagree with all your points. I just think it’s a stretch to suggest that referee with a split second to make a decision is going to be thinking about the social context of the 1980s before he puts his whistle to his lips. There are are many more plausible and less fanciful explanations for a referee bottling one.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,923
No, they are saying they are biased against. I was on blue moon last night and there is a constant complaint that the don’t get the decisions, and we do.

I don’t know if you are talking to me about bias, but I don’t disagree with all your points. I just think it’s a stretch to suggest that referee with a split second to make a decision is going to be thinking about the social context of the 1980s before he puts his whistle to his lips. There are are many more plausible and less fanciful explanations for a referee bottling one.
But isn't the point that in some instances the prejudice/bias against LFC/Liverpool has become ingrained through years/decades of unconscious conditioning, particularly through the media.

There's no need for it to be calculated, the exercise of bias is inherent.
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,597
You've selectively quoted that which changes the context of that post completely.....
It doesn't really.
I quoted the whole posts further up the thread and the responses were similar.

You basically said Kompany wasn't sent off because stats showed bias towards the home side, yet when something almost identical happened when we were the home side you suggested the ref didn't see it properly.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,523
No, they are saying they are biased against. I was on blue moon last night and there is a constant complaint that the don’t get the decisions, and we do.

I don’t know if you are talking to me about bias, but I don’t disagree with all your points. I just think it’s a stretch to suggest that referee with a split second to make a decision is going to be thinking about the social context of the 1980s before he puts his whistle to his lips. There are are many more plausible and less fanciful explanations for a referee bottling one.
It's an unknown percentage of their fans who may or may not have any reasoning or evidence to back up their viewpoints which is why it's so frustrating their opinions are constantly used against opinions of posters in here trying to provide reasons and evidence. They are also using the word bias but, at a stretch, discussing conscious bias but more likely outright impartiality. They think referees are literally walking onto the pitch trying to make bad calls about them. That is not what some of us are trying to reasonably put forward on here. Conscious and unconscious bias are things you know or believe in the back of your mind. Salah being a diver would be one "truth" created by the media, Klopp using bullshit reasons for things is another I've shown Talk sport trying to create. The human brain uses what it already knows to fill in the blanks when it makes decisions. That's why conscious and unconscious bias are so difficult to both prove and combat. You see a man dressed in tatty, scruffy gear and instantly assume he's poor or even homeless and act a certain way. It could be incorrect but your brain only has incomplete data to go on so will draw on past experience of what people who look like that usually are. Film from the 80s Trading Places highlights a lot of that without going into detail. Nobody is saying the referees are thinking these things before making split second decisions. We are saying they are products of their environment, a particularly anti LFC environment. This is creating conscious and unconscious bias in the minds of decision makers.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.