This type of data is tricky to deal with in that it is variable in time and there are a number of potential significant confounding relationships, but a simple analysis definitely points in the direction of significant bias. For example, we can compare the average number of points earned per game for games with and without Dean over the last three seasons. If there was no bias we'd expect these two values to be pretty similar. Plugging in the observed results we see a highly significant difference (2.03 without vs 0.533 with). Obviously this is not definitive but I believe you've posted links before to sources that did more sophisticated analyses with larger data sets that showed similar conclusions.
he hasn't even posted anything to assess definitive with. at least i went through this season's us+dean. there's not a damn thing to see. we plain sucked. it was claimed dean's decisions have been assessed by other "pros"....so, if other "pros" have found a noticeable bias, have they reported/complained about this to the FA, the Referee's Association, UEFA, and the UEFA Referee's Committee? why do i suspect this has never happened?
Agree completely. This is only headline data, so once you discover this significant difference, you then have to drill down to try and explain it. What ought to trouble an Arsenal fan the most is why Dean gets so many Arsenal games. He has Arsenal more than any other ref in recent years. Given he has the biggest sample size - we would expect him to be reverting to the mean. Even Howard Webb has nothing like this kind of data
As Stoppre16 correctly points out - we went through it in detail with Billy. You can't expect me to argue the case all over again given I already know you won't accept any of the data. But search is your friend.
lol.. I saw Mancini's sacking coming. He bought shitty players last close season. And van Persie's signing more or less made the difference for United. Mancini can blame the board, but maybe they wanted him out all along so stifled him, who knows? lol..
this is where you came in. this is NOT conclusive proof of bent refs. it proves absolutely nothing at all. wasn't it only a year or 2 ago he was supposed to be biased for spurs? oh look. your table suggests he isn't! i've went through a full 33% of those dean+arsenal matches and NOTHING suggests a bias, and to make matters easier for everyone i didn't pick and choose bits here and there. i took every single match he has reffed us this season. if you want, feel free to do the previous 10 arsenal matches and come back with your examples of obvious bias because there is NOTHING to be seen in the last 5. i asked you to show where this bias was. you haven't done so yet. so until you do i am calling BS re: arsenal+dean=negative bias
This is a media talking point rather than accurate IMO. When not a single adverse decision is given against you for the season - that is pretty massive advantage.
Or you are just too lazy to refer to the previous discussions. Nothing I post will convince you - as you are not seeking to engage in a discussion about it. So its best we don't bother - saves your time & mine.
it's your responsibility to back up a random post in another thread, not mine. you might convince me, but you haven't tried to. yes, your post was a complete waste of time. i agree.
What's interesting to me is to discuss the implications of or explanations for the data - such as stoppre's well thought out response. Convincing anyone about anything is not really my bag.
lamb, why do u push people for arguements all the time? u did the same with anti the other week it's obvious the decisions tilt toward united, look at their red card/penalty free (before the league was clinched) season and the constant injury time past 5 mins and dodgy pens over the years hopefully it changes now gollum is ikn charge
Depends on what you mean by adverse decisions. A goal two yards inside the line ruled out, or a clear goal ruled out for offside at your main rivals aren't adverse decisions? As we discussed before, if you take every decision in every game into account as the debatable decisions website claim to do, then Arsenal are actually having the biggest positive "tilt" this season.
True - I haven't looked at those - although I believe Utd have also benefited in that department I agree Arsenal are getting a late season tilt - just like last year. My guess is that its a broadcaster tilt - otherwise there would have been not much reason to tune in to the run in at all. I have absolutely no evidence basis for that however. If you want to make a bet - I would wager Utd won't have nearly so much tilt next season. I think fergus spent a lot of his political capital on this one - given he was supposed to get out a year ago. I've never looked too closely at them as I think they have a flawed methodology in that they don't review every decision in the game - only the ones shown on MOTD? But maybe they have improved it since they started out....
Pffft, we've been screwed by the refs more than anyone this season. There's no conspiracy - refs are just shit and have some minor biases; but all humans do. As for United - the better you are, the more you generally get decisions, and nothing in their games this season has been particularly egregious that I recall, other than perhaps that awful, awful second yellow on Torres for diving (the one that Jonny Evans thought was justified ).
Nice, is arguing against the dodgy correlation-causation argument and yet he's the one who doesn't understand statistics?