'Honest' mistakes 24/25

Given how much we dominate most of those games there is no way you can have an enormous disparity like that over that long a time period without there being bias involved.

 

Rumours circulating that Beatons asked to be removed from the fixture


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Aye way to make other refs feel pressure if they do take the game.

 

Can't see it.

 

Regardless of what most of us think of the guy, it is a ridiculous decision by the league to put him in this position. Any 50/50 decision he has to make will either be perceived as being biased against Celtic or being influenced by pressure put on him by Celtic.

 

Where you seeing this?

 

Twitter which is why I’ve said rumours


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Raging he never got to play on the var box this weekend..

 

https://celticbynumberscom.ipage.com/patterns-of-assistance-the-crawford-allan-coincidences/

Sent from my 21121210G using Tapatalk

 

Sorry for the late reply, mate. Been on holiday for a few days.

I don't think you can say that "the ref clearly didn't see the foul". 'Clear and Obvious' is dependent on what the referee saw. If the referee said to the fourth official something like 'I've seen contact and a coming together but it's not enough for me' then VAR cannot change it because there isn't a clear and obvious error to what the referee has seen on the pitch.

Andy Halliday spoke about this on Open Goal a couple of months ago when McAusland got a penalty after clearly diving. It was checked by VAR and they allowed the penalty to stand all because the referee had said that he had seen minimal contact but it was enough for him. Now, it was clearly a dive but there was contact. Very minimal contact but contact nonetheless. So, VAR can't change the decision on the pitch because there's nothing clear and obvious from what the referee has seen. Was it a penalty? No. Should it have been changed? Yes. However, with the rules around VAR and the 'clear and obvious' tag being used to change what the referee has seen, it can't be overruled.

I think it's a penalty, as most others do. I'm just not jumping the gun, accusing the refs of pure conspiracy theories, when we don't know what the audio is between the referee and the VAR. Until we, as fans, have access to that, people will continue to drum up this sort of stuff.

I want an end to VAR anyway. So, maybe I'm the wrong person to be commenting on a decision like this. I'd wipe the whole thing tomorrow and move forward with goal line technology and maybe offsides.

 

Nah hes got a ticket and wants to watch from the stands.

 

See the one problem with the Andy Halliday description for me is, that clear and obvious error description, it seems to be used when it suits, much like the shirt pull pens they got to keep them in it against Hearts and Aberdeen back in November.

Just some examples

1. Iwata’s handball isn’t a clear and obvious error, an accidental unsighted handball coming off contact from a team mate and opponent. The ref missing that, isn’t a clear and obvious error.

2. The ref missing Lewis Mayo of Kilmarnock catching Haksabanovic’s ankle is a clear and obvious error.

3. St Johnstone defenders arm stops a goal, it’s close and hits him around the elbow but it stops a goal. Is a clear and obvious error.

4. Goldson going over the ball on Bernardo at last derby when clearing the ball then pretending to be injured is something the ref never seen in real time, not referred. They shout about a second booking Bernardo didn’t make a challenge.

5. Theo Bair high foot on scales with forward momentum, no referral. Yang high foot no forward momentum is referred is the baffling one for me. If one is a clear and obvious error for a red the other has to be too.

6. Goldson saves shot at goal in 2-2 game hands are above and wide of his head, Beaton can be seen voicing I never seen it. So he has admitted he missed it, not sent to look. Now that is a clear and obvious error, he has admitted he didn’t see the handball.

You can go on and on, but the clear and obvious definition just feels like another cop out to me to explain inconsistent and strange decision.

 

Just read the study. It's decent enough but missing analysis of some important variables. For instance, I think possession in opponent's penalty area may be published by state some sites, and you really need to look at that if you want to rule out that as a variable. Otherwise they can just argue that they spend more time in their opponents' box than us so that's why they get more penalties. If they are still a statistical outlier when that is factored in, then there is basically zero defence on their behalf.

 

Wonder why

 

That alone speaks volumes about our referees and should be noted by our board - that's if they can get up off their fat tory arses and actually do something for the club for once instead of sitting meekly at the back of the bus

 

‘Snubbed’

Like it’s a surprising thing that our refs would be looked at by an independent body deciding who the best refs they could choose for a big tournament, and would be dismissed as an option. Snubbed ffs. Failed to show they’re a reliable option is what it is.


And that’s not always been the case, we’ve had refs in the CL, * Willie Collum was going to get burst off Puyol in one I can remember watching, gob smacked at how * a ref he was. And apparently we’ve fell from even that standard.

Oddly enough even with how * they are, I think we might be actually outperforming Premiership refs this season, with the biggest budget in the world for officials, full time. And we generally just copy what happens down there, standard is * awful all round in the UK. It’s eye opening when you watch the Bundesliga and CL. Not perfect, but so much better.

 

ACSOM’s podcast about the stats behind this, compared to world football in general is very compelling.

I’ve always said subconscious bias, not outright going out to cheat, and still would stand by that but subconscious would also be more marginal than it is…

 

I don't think it can be uncoscious/subconscious at all and must be deliberate. If you and I are aware that we would favour Celtic in a 50/50 decision then it is a conscious decision when we do so on the field, we have a preconceived idea of how we will behave so therefore I would say it's concsious bias. One of the refs family members asked for them to give the vermin a penalty in a particular game and lo and behold it happened. Can't say that is uncoscious/subconscious.

If you actively know you will make decisions based on bias then it is delliberate surely?