- Details of the current and recent series are on the home page
- Six seasons of fouls and cards…. and possible referee bias
By Mike Fowler
So, in the previous article, we saw an apparent bias against Arsenal, where even in the season where they committed the fewest fouls they still picked up the second-highest number of red cards.
But I also looked to see if there was an evident regional bias in how clubs were treated. So, given the traditional ‘Big 6’ includes three London teams (Arsenal Chelsea and the team from Middlesex) and three from the northwest (Liverpool and the two Manchester clubs) I thought I’d look at them as a group. I discovered two distinct things.
| TRADITIONAL ‘BIG SIX’ | Fouls | Yellows | Red | FPY | FPR | |
| 1 | Tottenham | 2,543 | 435 | 14 | 5.8 | 182 |
| 2 | Chelsea | 2,508 | 453 | 13 | 5.5 | 193 |
| 3 | Manchester United | 2,501 | 455 | 9 | 5.5 | 278 |
| 4 | Liverpool | 2,390 | 315 | 11 | 7.6 | 217 |
| 5 | Arsenal | 2,299 | 371 | 22 | 6.2 | 105 |
| 6 | Manchester City | 1,957 | 301 | 12 | 6.5 | 163 |
| Average | 2,366 | 388 | 13.5 | 6.2 | 189.5 | |
| Average for: | Fouls | Yellows | Reds | FPY | FPR | |
| 3 London Big 6 | 2,450 | 420 | 16 | 5.9 | 160 | |
| 3 NW Big 6 | 2,283 | 357 | 11 | 6.4 | 219 | |
| Average ‘Big 5’ | 2,380 | 392 | 11.8 | 6.1 | 207 | |
| Arsenal | 2,299 | 371 | 22 | 6.2 | 105 | |
One thing that stood out was that the NW clubs could, on average, commit 219 fouls before receiving a red card whilst the London clubs could only commit an average of 160. So NW clubs are allowed to commit 53% more fouls before a red is brandished.
Ah, but perhaps the London teams are dirtier? Well, on average, the three London clubs did commit (according to refs) more fouls and do get more yellow cards too. In fact, they commit 7% more fouls, got 16% more yellow cards and, as we have seen, got 53% more reds. Strange!
The second thing that stood out, though, which could actually account for the regional bias, is that when we look beyond the regional bias and just look at the Big 6 without that, we find that Arsenal committed the second fewest number of fouls over the six seasons (2,299), only Man City commit fewer (1,957). Tottenham, Chelsea and Man U all committed over 2,500 and Liverpool 2,390. So how did that affect things?
Interestingly, when we compare Arsenal to the other ‘Big 5’, we find that Arsenal committed 2,299 fouls whilst the average for the other five was higher at 2,380. Those five committed 3.5% more fouls than Arsenal and, accordingly, received slightly more yellow cards (5.7%). But, and it’s a big BUT, despite committing fewer fouls, Arsenal received almost twice as many red cards! Despite committing, on average, more fouls than Arsenal, and receiving more yellow cards than Arsenal, the other five received an average of 11.8 red cards compared to the 22 Arsenal received.
If you want to make even more stark comparisons, Liverpool committed 2,390 fouls for 11 red cards, and Man U committed 2,502 fouls for just 9 red cards. What this means is Man U are allowed to commit 278 fouls before being shown a red; Liverpool 217; whilst Arsenal can commit just 105 fouls. It does look like there is a regional bias against the ‘Big’ London clubs, but what seems most obvious is that whilst the NW clubs benefit in that, the real bias is most obviously against just one club.
So, going back to the overall comparison between the 13 clubs that were present for the whole six seasons we have examined. On average, the other 12 clubs committed 184 fouls per red; the other ‘Big 5’ committed 207 per red; the NW Big 3’ committed 219 per red. Whilst Arsenal, one of the three teams that committed the fewest fouls in the Premier League, are shown a red for every 105 fouls.
The second most harshly treated club for red cards is Wolverhampton, yet even they can commit 154 fouls per red, which is roughly 50% more than Arsenal…and Wolves are the team which committed the most fouls over the six seasons at 2,611.
In conclusion, supporters of clubs outside the ‘Big 6’ often argue that referees cut those six more slack than the rest and this is actually borne out by the numbers. As a group, the ‘Big 6’ do get fewer yellows and fewer reds and are allowed to commit more fouls before doing so. But the real fact is, it’s actually only five of the ‘Big 6’ because, according to the data, Arsenal are treated more harshly than ALL other teams in the league…or were over the last six seasons. Let’s see how this season pans out. It may change….I wouldn’t advise holding your breath, though.
Was it ever in doubt!? Of course there’s a regional bias. Northerners dislike Southerners, and in particular those from London. The referees need to be refereed and by an independent organisation.
Jacko, yes I would ageree with you – but the point here is that we now have the figures to back this up, and we need to consider what arguments could be put by those who refuse to believe this (which basically means the whole media) to refute arguments that either a) Arsenal actually are a ditry team or b) you’re just whinging. So no there was no doubt, but having the fitgures is always helpful.
I have a simply brilliant and logical idea. That’s the very reason this is unlikely to be adopted by Arteta as he likes complicated tactics.
Anyways, my idea is that instead of playing Gyokeres in the center and Martinelli in the left, Arteta should play Gyokeres in the left wing and Havertz as the center forward. I will explain my reasons below.
Havertz is not clinical in the box, but very good at holding the ball and laying it out to others and dropping back to create space for others. I heard that Gyokeres likes to move from left to center of the box. So the above approach plays to both players strength. Against long ball teams, Havertz wins the ball in the air against opposition CBs and lays it off to Gyokeres who has moved in to the space in the box now vacated by Havertz, with Lewis Skelly taking up the space on the left flank vacated by Gyokeres.
I think this would create lots of chances on the left flank which would be as unpredictable as the right flank trio of Saka, Ben White and Odegard.
If Arteta adopts this, I’m sure it would be a big success.
Sam, you’re not alone. The Athletic also came up with this idea a few days ago (and for more or less the same reasons), but had Calafiori running the line instead of Lewis-Skelly.
Sam, correction. It was ex Arsenal midfielder David Hillier on Highbury Squad podcast, which was quoted on Just Arsenal blog. Sorry ’bout that.
Tony,
As AFC supporters we’re not surprised the facts back up our contention that the club is treated harshly by the PGMOL, especially compared to the other big clubs. Let’s also remember the stats you’ve uncovered re the (perceived) reasons for cards given to Arsenal. AFC lead the table in fouls for “other” reasons, getting twice as many as Liverpool or Tots. “Other”, unspecified, unexplained yellow cards. What’s going on? It’s a license to affect the way a player defends, the side defends, the match, the table, and the career and livelihood of our players. The PGMOL is largely funded by the Premier League. Therefore, AFC are actually paying to be treated like this! Surely if Liverpool or the Manchester clubs were treated this way there would be a hue and cry and the PGMOL would be called to account. Can or have AFC taken up this issue with the refs’ organisation? Has anything been said publicly?
Sam
What has any of what you say got to do with ‘Regional Bias’, which is what the article is about?
Unless you are suggesting we should change our tactics in order to avoid such bias?
Seems to me you’ve just used this as an opportunity to:
a) Have a dig at Arteta: “That’s the very reason this is unlikely to be adopted by Arteta as he likes complicated tactics.” The obvious inference being he just does ‘complicated ‘for ‘comlicated’s’ sake.
and
b) Tell us how much better we would be if only you were in charge with your simple and obvious tactics that Arteta just cant see.
Really?
This incredible research done by Mike should have you spitting feathers about how we are refereed. It is an absolute travesty, not only in itsself but in the fact that the media completely and utterly ignore it. That is the bigger shame in this. But how can we moan about that when even supporters like yourself basically completely ignore it as well, and instead have a sly dig at Artetas tactics.
FFS man, we are being screwed by the officials week in, week out, and all you can do is tell us how you’re a better coach than Arteta.
Gooner72, People say that PGMOL are answerable to no one and can’t be held to account, but you’d think that the Premier League, along with the FA & English Football League in providing their funding would insist on answers and higher standards. Isn’t this why they got rid of the previous organisation?
@ Jacko
I agree. The very least the Premier League should be doing is approving, or indeed appointing, the head of the PGMO and setting standards and targets by which the PGMO should be judged. and why not publish those standards and how well the PGMO perform at the end of each season with penalties for under performance….like any normal workplace? Instead we see one of the most biased referees getting the top job every time there’s a replacement and they never seem to be held to account.
Every club has the right to be refereed to the same standard as every other club and the biases and regional differences I have demonstrated should be removed from the game.