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

[Mascot88]

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.

Possibly.

It might be that when the ref decides Kompany slaloming into Salah’s knee at full speed, with his studs up and both feet off the ground isn’t a red, he’s unconsciously allowing thirty years of media drip drip about liverpool’s economic ‘self pity’ to influence his decision.

Equally he could be reluctant to ‘spoil’ a showcase televised game and expose himself to criticism. Or he could be remembering he lives in greater Manchester and doesn’t want his car keying. Or he could just be shit at his job.

 

[Anfield rd Dreamer]

Possibly.

..... he’s unconsciously allowing thirty years of media drip drip about liverpool’s economic ‘self pity’ to influence his decision.....

Straw manning? Is anybody saying that? If you are thinking I am then you definitely aren't understanding what I'm saying.

 

[Spitfire]

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.

No I didn't I said its up to the individual to judge on whether they believe it to be bias of some description, or a re error or just plain bottling it. I didn't state that I thought that's what he did.......

This really reinforces that rational debate acknowledging variables that may not suit a narrative we like is all but impossible in this thread.

We as LFC fans are no different to those we are trying to label..........

 

[Dane]

No I didn't I said its up to the individual to judge on whether they believe it to be bias of some description, or a re error or just plain bottling it. I didn't state that I thought that's what he did.......

This really reinforces that rational debate acknowledging variables that may not suit a narrative we like is all but impossible in this thread.

We as LFC fans are no different to those we are trying to label..........

So you're not really offering an opinion then are you?

You're just citing a random Google search, and suggesting what people might think to the contrary of the point, which some people seem so eager to disprove.

 

[lfc.eddie]

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.

In this scenario you don’t need hypothetical, just take Ashley Young during Ferguson’s time and Kane now against Salah and Suarez. Tyne former two would go down with an ant tripping them and never being labelled a diver by most media and pundits. Salah’s pen has always been labelled soft while Suarez is a diver. Then you have John Terry making racist remark to Rio’s brother and caught on camera, after the incident not a mention by anyone, other than Liverpool fans, calling him a racist while Suarez negrito scandal being reminded till today.

 

[epsomred]

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.

So let’s be absolutely clear, you are saying there is a conspiracy against. Not subconscious bias or media influence but an actual conspiracy. Is that right ?

 

[Dane]

Well while on the subject of Suarez.
Media darling Ferguson has his say on 2 separate racism examples.
No way was he not at that time influential in how the media reported and the authorities dealt with it.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/16996567

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/nov/02/sir-alex-ferguson-mark-clattenburg-innocent

Why did the authorities change the handshake protocol for that game?

 

[Rambler]

In this scenario you don’t need hypothetical, just take Ashley Young during Ferguson’s time and Kane now against Salah and Suarez. Tyne former two would go down with an ant tripping them and never being labelled a diver by most media and pundits. Salah’s pen has always been labelled soft while Suarez is a diver. Then you have John Terry making racist remark to Rio’s brother and caught on camera, after the incident not a mention by anyone, other than Liverpool fans, calling him a racist while Suarez negrito scandal being reminded till today.

Young was condemned all over the media at the time including by Ferguson himself who dropped him because of it. You can still google the comments. I remember the furore very well. Just one reference https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2488393/Alex-Ferguson-told-Ashley-Young-diving-tolerated.html

John Terry was banned for four matches and fined £220,000 for racially abusing QPR defender Anton Ferdinand.

Talk about selective memory

 

[Dane]

So let’s be absolutely clear, you are saying there is a conspiracy against. Not subconscious bias or media influence but an actual conspiracy. Is that right ?

You've been waiting quite some time to pounce on this opportunity haven't you?

 

[Mascot88]

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.

The ‘evidence’ provided in here is not in any way robust enough to be a conversation stopper.

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.

I think you are vastly overreaching by suggesting the media are unconsciously or consciously trying to create negative stories or narratives about LFC, because of prejudice. Maybe a little, but not to the extent suggested here. There are obviously some journalists who don’t like the club, and some that do. But on the whole the media is led by the reaction of its audience.

Why are the media spending their time between games wringing whatever stories they can out of incidents in games and what Klopp says in his press conferences?

It’s because there is a constant demand for content and copy, conversation and controversy in order to fuel 24/7 rolling coverage. There was a time when people got by happily reading a short match report in the paper, and that was it between games. There is not that much football to fuel the need for constant news. So no wonder the media spin this stuff out.

We’re not the only club to have players labelled divers, and Klopp isn’t the only boss to have reams of copy spun out of an innocuous comment in a press conference. Why do we seem to get it more than others? Well, have you seen us? If I see another transparent click bait article rage shared by a Liverpool fan I’ll scream. It’s like when Katie Hopkins was employed by the Mail - the only people interested in her opinions were progressives and liberals outraged by her latest homophobic/racist diatribes.

There is also the fact that we are a draw at the minute. We’re top of the league. We’ve a huge fan base. Football365 have a mediawatch column which is always an entertaining read, and one of the their running things is SEO optimisation. Get ‘Liverpool’ ‘ManUtd’ ‘transfer’ in a url and you can watch the ad revenue roll in.

If we’re think that Liverpool get negative press, then we need to be aware how much of that negative press we drive by reading, sharing or reacting to it.

Besides, read most other top six fans, and Liverpool are ‘media darlings’. Now I think that’s clearly bullshit, but it’s interesting that perception exists. We all go into blinkered mode when our own team is discussed. We think everyone is against us, and focus on the negative to confirm our suspicions and ignore anything positive.

With the Salah diving thing Liverpool fans looked at the coverage on match of the day, saw Danny Murphy argue it was a dive, Martin Keown argue it wasn’t, and concluded from that the BBC has an agenda against Liverpool, to which I can only say, what the fuck? It’s an absolute classic example of people applying their own bias to these situations.

I had a look at F365 and thought it would be interested to look at their top twenty stories for evidence of this anti LFC bias.

1. Mailbox. Largely negative towards Utd following CL game
2. Article praising Moussa Sissoko
3. Bald player eleven
4. Opinion piece on Barca v Utd (scathing towards Utd)
5. Gossip column (Liverpool linked to Brandt)
6. Article on Neville criticising Pogba
7. Article on Rolandinho tipping Spurs for CL
8. Article remembering the Le Saux/Batty fight
9. Article on Neville saying LFC will be a sterner year for Barca than Utd.
10. Klopp and Milner presser report (focussing on are LFC the best team in the world comments from Porto boss)
11. 20 frozen out players (Randall, Woodburn and Oxlade-Chamberlain discussed)
12. Solskjaer making Barca CL favourites
13. Mailbox praising Liverpool, contrast to Utd being without a strategy.
14. Warnock slagging off pundit
15. Ajax’s best players and where they’ll end up (Liverpool linked to De Ligt, Neres and Dolberg)
16. Match Report on Barca/Utd
17. Match report on Brighton/Cardiff
18. Match report on Juve/Ajax
19. Midweek preview (Henderson praised, pressure on Solskjaer)
20. Paul Scoles charged with misconduct.

Obviously this is a snapshot in time, and coverage is dominated by the Utd/Barca game, so you can’t read too much into this. But in general for the last few month across the more serious media I’ve seen nothing but praise for LFC, with most of the more negative stuff (largely focussed on other fans not wanting Liverpool to win) confined to the click bait/revenue led hack sites.

I just struggle to see a tangible media bias against LFC.

 

[Mascot88]

Straw manning? Is anybody saying that?

Yes.

And if you aren’t talking about the ‘self pity city’ stuff, then you can substitute it for a bias of your own choosing, and the point still stands.

 

[cynicaloldgit]

You've been waiting quite some time to pounce on this opportunity haven't you?

Nah- it’s just that he’s a bit slow. I’ve made my views very clear throughout this thread.

 

[lfc.eddie]

Young was condemned all over the media at the time including by Ferguson himself who dropped him because of it. You can still google the comments. I remember the furore very well. Just one reference https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2488393/Alex-Ferguson-told-Ashley-Young-diving-tolerated.html

John Terry was banned for four matches and fined £220,000 for racially abusing QPR defender Anton Ferdinand.

Talk about selective memory

Mentioned in the media of late? Don’t remember Terry’s incident being reminded like the one Suarez faced. Can’t recall in any of the pundits keep reminding us Young is a diver. You brought out the timeline where the incident happened. Post event all forgotten. While negrito incident still being reminded each time Suarez came back to England to play against premier league team.

 

[Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend]

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.

Used to it. Put to sleep by Sky etc.

 

[Mascot88]

Mentioned in the media of late? Don’t remember Terry’s incident being reminded like the one Suarez faced. Can’t recall in any of the pundits keep reminding us Young is a diver. You brought out the timeline where the incident happened. Post event all forgotten. While negrito incident still being reminded each time Suarez came back to England to play against premier league team.

Young did have a reputation as a diver. As Rambler said, it got so bad that Ferguson dropped him and publically bollocked him. Plenty of players have. The diving tag followed Andy Johnson round his whole career.

And I think you have to be careful with the comparison of Suarez to Terry as an example of bias against the club. It was absolutely, unequivocally double standards, with Suarez getting a harsher sentence for a lesser crime than Terry - Por que, negrito v fuck off you rubber lipped black cunt (allegedly).

A couple of things make this difficult to directly compare. Firstly Suarez admitted to what he’d said, naively assuming that the FA would have the nuance to understand the cultural background to the phrase. He wasn’t helped by Comolli weighing in with all the tact and subtlety with which he’d have perused an average mid-table midfielder with good crossing stats.

John Terry insisted his innocence and stood firm over his version of events, which was that he hadn’t used racist language, some of his best friends are blacks, and he hasn’t got a racist bone in his body apart from the one between his ears. The FA had to rely on imperfect evidence like lip reading to reach a judgement.

More importantly, the Suarez/Terry comparison revealed more about institutional racism within the game rather than bias towards LFC. At heart, we had a foreign lad who already had a reputation for being a bastard (biting, hair pulling and spitting) versus England’s brave John Terry, hard but fair, and with the spirit of Albion running through his veins. Suarez got the most he could get and Terry got the very least. One rule for our lads and another for those dastardly foreigners coming over here and being better than us a football has a long history.

I often think of Gerrard in this case. In high spirits after thumping Newcastle, Stevie got into an altercation with a DJ who refused to play a Phil Collins song. There are mixed accounts of what happened, and in the end Gerrard got off with ABH, despite security footage showing Stevie clearly landing blows on the lad. Objectively this is worse that saying a naughty word in a football pitch, but it’s never clung to Gerrard like the racism thing did to Suarez. It was a story for a few weeks and then everyone moved on. We can’t claim an anti-LFC bias in this case.

The simple fact is, as far as I can see, there is a latent racism in the game, and society at large, that visits a harsher judgement on foreign players for lesser crimes than it does for ‘native’ lads.

 

[Lowton_Red]

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.

If it is a case of ineptitude, then Anthony Taylor is remarkably consistent in his inept handling of shiteh - e.g. Kyle Walker not being sent off for head-butting Brighton's Alireza Jahanbakhsh.

 

[Anfield rd Dreamer]

How this thread must make me look even though I'm convinced what I'm saying is the truth;

 

[Limiescouse]

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.

Right, Nev would not use that as a platform to suggest things to Ole.

He would absolutely use it as a trial balloon though, to start preemptively justifying decisions the Utd fans might not like if they saw them made without having had a couple of weeks of being convinced it is the right thing to do. That is a powerful tool to be able to exert if the goal is to maintain harmony and faith in the decision maker.

 

[Limiescouse]

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.

Bias exerts itself subconsciously.

I have absolutely no doubt that a big part of why Kompany got away with his tackle was because he is Kompany and people respect him, rightly so. Likewise with Virgil and the tackle he got away with on Mertens in the group stage. When you spend years conducting yourself in the right manner you are more likely to get the benefit of doubt, and so I have no doubt that had it been Ramos who made either of those challenges the ref would have immediately thought "oooooh, what a c***, and ran over and sent him off." Ideally each decision would be made on its own merit, but I think we all have to acknowledge that the human side of this cannot be eliminated. At the degree that you have the choice of acting in a way that earns you such benefit of the doubt or not acting that way, to a degree I accept it.

I haven't been involved in this discussion much, but FWIW, I think your overarching hypothesis is a pretty good one - we are powerful enough that we provide a good platform for refs to demonstrate their "independence", but not quite powerful enough that there is much blow back for hurting us. One of the most damaging things that can happen to an independent arbiter is that they feel the need to appear impartial. Once that occurs, the need to demonstrate the impartiality becomes more important than actually being impartial (see main stream news giving fringe opinions credence because it is the other side of the argument). We provide the perfect platform for such demonstrations, even if they occur at the expense of actual impartiality.

 

[CymruRed]

You could say that about any other thread though really couldn´t you? Jordan Henderson, he´s crap can´t pass forward vs he´s great he´s doing what he´s been asked to do for example.

No not really,this thread is all about what if's,maybe's,no nailed on facts that can be proved (like i said,unless people in power actually come out and drop alot of people in the shit,no arguement or debate in here can be settled).What you're saying about Henderson can be debated with an outcome,you can see what he's doing on the pitch,you can check stats,you can take into account what the manager is asking him to do when he's on the field,all these things can be examined and proved to be 100% factual,conspiracies can't.

 

[epsomred]

How this thread must make me look even though I'm convinced what I'm saying is the truth;

Yes it does

 

[Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend]

No I didn't I said its up to the individual to judge on whether they believe it to be bias of some description, or a re error or just plain bottling it. I didn't state that I thought that's what he did.......

This really reinforces that rational debate acknowledging variables that may not suit a narrative we like is all but impossible in this thread.

We as LFC fans are no different to those we are trying to label..........

Well we´re all grown ups so we don´t really need you to tell us that we´re free to make our own minds up. Thanks though.

 

[Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend]

No not really,this thread is all about what if's,maybe's,no nailed on facts that can be proved (like i said,unless people in power actually come out and drop alot of people in the shit,no arguement or debate in here can be settled).What you're saying about Henderson can be debated with an outcome,you can see what he's doing on the pitch,you can check stats,you can take into account what the manager is asking him to do when he's on the field,all these things can be examined and proved to be 100% factual,conspiracies can't.

Ok so what is the opinion that everyone has come to 100%?

 

[Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend]

Yes it does

That comment says more about you than ARD. SMH (I love smh, thanks Dane I never knew this before).

 

[Kenny Dalglish LFC Legend]

Young did have a reputation as a diver. As Rambler said, it got so bad that Ferguson dropped him and publically bollocked him. Plenty of players have. The diving tag followed Andy Johnson round his whole career.

And I think you have to be careful with the comparison of Suarez to Terry as an example of bias against the club. It was absolutely, unequivocally double standards, with Suarez getting a harsher sentence for a lesser crime than Terry - Por que, negrito v fuck off you rubber lipped black cunt (allegedly).

A couple of things make this difficult to directly compare. Firstly Suarez admitted to what he’d said, naively assuming that the FA would have the nuance to understand the cultural background to the phrase. He wasn’t helped by Comolli weighing in with all the tact and subtlety with which he’d have perused an average mid-table midfielder with good crossing stats.

John Terry insisted his innocence and stood firm over his version of events, which was that he hadn’t used racist language, some of his best friends are blacks, and he hasn’t got a racist bone in his body apart from the one between his ears. The FA had to rely on imperfect evidence like lip reading to reach a judgement.

More importantly, the Suarez/Terry comparison revealed more about institutional racism within the game rather than bias towards LFC. At heart, we had a foreign lad who already had a reputation for being a bastard (biting, hair pulling and spitting) versus England’s brave John Terry, hard but fair, and with the spirit of Albion running through his veins. Suarez got the most he could get and Terry got the very least. One rule for our lads and another for those dastardly foreigners coming over here and being better than us a football has a long history.

I often think of Gerrard in this case. In high spirits after thumping Newcastle, Stevie got into an altercation with a DJ who refused to play a Phil Collins song. There are mixed accounts of what happened, and in the end Gerrard got off with ABH, despite security footage showing Stevie clearly landing blows on the lad. Objectively this is worse that saying a naughty word in a football pitch, but it’s never clung to Gerrard like the racism thing did to Suarez. It was a story for a few weeks and then everyone moved on. We can’t claim an anti-LFC bias in this case.

The simple fact is, as far as I can see, there is a latent racism in the game, and society at large, that visits a harsher judgement on foreign players for lesser crimes than it does for ‘native’ lads.

Did you see those powder puff punches, there´s no way he could have got GBH (hehehehe) I´m surprised he got ABH. He should have got off scott free because the humilliation would have been punishment enough.

 

[Spitfire]

Well we´re all grown ups so we don´t really need you to tell us that we´re free to make our own minds up. Thanks though.

Putting it frankly you are far from grown ups - that would suggest an ability to have rational discussion, and even acknowledging thoughts that deviate from your own and that evidence may exist to support it. That's been pretty clearly proven to not be the case in this thread - once again context for that post was being misquoted to suit a previous posters needs to try and prove a point.........

I'm sure if the press did the same to Klopp it would be emblazoned across here as another clear example of a targeted bias against Liverpool........

Anyway I'm done - best of luck...........

 

[SBYM]

The ‘evidence’ provided in here is not in any way robust enough to be a conversation stopper.

Bingo. The problem with this discussion in a nutshell. Much of the evidence relied upon in this thread would be laughed out of any serious intellectual debate re bias/prejudices.

 

[Dane]

Bingo. The problem with this discussion in a nutshell. Much of the evidence relied upon in this thread would be laughed out of any serious intellectual discussion re bias/prejudices.

That's as maybe.
But some of it is eye opening, yet is still arbitrarily dismissed by some, who appear to show an abject show of lethargy towards any notion of it being possible.

 

[SBYM]

And I don't quite get the horror of Gary fucking Neville exhibiting a clear bias towards the team he played 400 games for, the team that just happens to be our most hated rival.

If you aren't considering the source whenever you're watching/reading something you're doing it wrong.

Edit; I actually hope Ole is getting ideas from pundits. Would suggest he hasn't the first fucking clue what to do, and I think we can all agree how much fun that will be...

 

[SBYM]

That's as maybe.
But some of it is eye opening, yet is still arbitrarily dismissed by some, who appear to show an abject show of lethargy towards any notion of it being possible.

Anything is possible, and besides, I don't really see asking for intellectual rigor or rational debate lethargic.