According to this analysis of VAR decisions for the 22/23 season, Liverpool were the joint second beneficiaries of VAR decisions, while City were bottom.
According to this analysis of VAR decisions for the 22/23 season, Liverpool were the joint second beneficiaries of VAR decisions, while City were bottom.
According to this analysis of VAR decisions for the 22/23 season, Liverpool were the joint second beneficiaries of VAR decisions, while City were bottom.
So why do #LFC fans believe there is a conspiracy against them? Where does that belief stem from?
You're viewing a single thread.
@hallenbeck @football Doesn't this data show that referee are in fact giving too many incorrect decisions against Liverpool and only with VAR are they being corrected?
I don't think that many Liverpool fans think there's a conspiracy against them but there are unconscious biases at play and Paul Tompkins work shows that very clearly.And yeah, the data shows refs are making incorrect decisions and Liverpool are benefiting from VAR overturning those decisions. It doesn't really paint a picture of Liverpool being particularly hard-done-by.
@hallenbeck And I would modify your statement. Liverpool are not "benefiting" from VAR. They are having mistakes be corrected only when there's nowhere to hide. It still points to us being hard done by by the officials on field.
@Jonnojohnson @hallenbeck @football agree wholeheartedly
@Peppermintfresh @hallenbeck @football perfect example again right now. Defender hauls down attacker in the box for a penalty. No yellow card. No one will notice or care but it's an obvious mistake
@Peppermintfresh @hallenbeck @football Actually it should've been red. Even worse. I thought it was no double jeapordy but he made no attempt to pay the ball so should be red.
I’ve read the shorter version now and parts of the longer version. I’m not a football data guy, but I worked in informatics for over 12 years so I am comfortable with data. His case is compelling but he’s stretching a bit to claim he’s proved it. That’s dangerous language than can be (and is) being taken to be “truth” (and in many cases as something that it’s not, eg bias against Liverpool in all cases or outright corruption). He is right that the data is objective, but he is using it to make a point about Liverpool among only 4 teams and that in itself is not objective. Anyone that’s worked around data long enough knows it’s possible to spin partisan narratives using objective data. I’m not saying he’s wrong, it’s really, really good stuff, but it’s not proof.
But regardless he has shown there is something there that should definitely be investigating further. I’d like to see the analysis extended to Spurs and Arsenal in the first instance and, to be honest, you can’t exclude any team in light off how competitive the Premier League is now.
What I don’t understand is why, if the analysis is considered so incontrovertible, why is Liverpool not picking this up and running with it rather than putting out reactionary statements? In any investigation, a smoking gun should be leapt on, surely? If I were Liverpool, I’d be all over this.
Would be interested in seeing Paul Tompkins work - can you point to a link?
@hallenbeck This is his shortest version but it links to much deeper versions with more context: https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/highlights-refs-vars-and-proving
@hallenbeck Before anyone thinks it's just cherry picking it does highlight in certain rare cases where certain referees are more likely to give incorrect decisions in Liverpool's favor (mainly Mancunian referees at Anfield). The main problem is with the less experienced referees (which there are more of).