By Tony Attwood
- What happens if Manchester City win its appeal against the guilty verdict?
- Why are these journalists so often, so anti-Arsenal?
Now Michael Oliver is a curious referee. He oversaw the second highest number of PL games of any PGMO referee last season, and managed to see more fouls per game (22.93) than any other referee in the league! He either is a foul-fanatic, or has much better eyesight that all his colleagues. But either way there he is – at the top of the list for spotting fouls that other referees cannot see. It is quite a remarkable ability.
And yet, very curiously, despite this multiplicity of fouls that he observed last season, he awarded fewer penalties than any other referee – in fact less than a quarter of the number of penalties that referee Attwell awarded. And he also managed to hand out fewer yellow cards than any other referee – in fact just 66% of the cards than Oliver has waved per game.
Now of course it could be that each and every manager instructs his team before each Attwell game: “Lay off the tackling as much as you can – except where you have no other choice.”
Of course I know that some people respond by saying “players don’t adjust to the referee, they just play their game,” and obviously that is up to you to judge. But I would point out that just because TV and radio commentators hardly ever comment on the way different referees react, that does not really give us any information, except that the authorities (such as PGMO) have issued the instruction to broadcaster to, “lay off discussing the ref”.
And the reason for that is simple: they have a shortage of refs, which is why some refs over see the same team, over and over and over and over again in a season. If PGMO could get enough refs (or were willing to pay them a bit more) then they could adopt the notion of no team having the same ref more than twice in a season – which would reduce the chances of referee bias in matches. But no, some refs oversee the same team five times in a campaign, occasionally even more, and that is just opening the door for people to be suspicious about bias or corruption, even if there is none.
So what are we to make of this referee: he sees the most fouls, but gives the fewest penalties and the lowest number of yellow cards?
Well, when we come to look at the actual results of games he oversees, he seems to be watching totally different games from other referees! Below are the figures for our referee this weekend and two other leading referees, with the figures taken through the whole of last season, where each referee oversaw at least 22 league games.
And one may ask in looking at the figures below, how can it be that one referee sees three times aa many home wins as another – unless the matches are being carefully picked to get the result someone in PGMO wants? Maybe there is an explanation, but it is just that at the moment I can’t think of one.
As for away wins, one referee oversaw two and a half times as many away wins as another in the course of last season. No one even starts to discuss the efficacy of that because it is so obviously a dangerous course to go down. Even if there were no suspicion of referee bias, you wouldn’t want to organise refereeing that way!
Highest percentages for each category (home win, away win, draw) are in black bold, lowest in red bold.
| Referee | Games | Home win | Away win | Draw |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Oliver | 29 | 37.9% | 37.9% | 24.1% |
| Peter Bankes | 22 | 68.2% | 18.2% | 13.6% |
| Jarred Gillett | 22 | 22.7% | 45.5% | 31.8% |
| Difference | 45.5% | 27.3% | 18.2% |
And remember these are figures for referees, not for clubs. So if your team is is playing at home and in a match with Peter Bankes as referee, then past figures suggest your team has three times as much chance as winning, than if Jarred Gillett was referee. But if your side is playing away, Gillett very much is your man to have in the middle.
So the reason this is so utterly worrying, is simple: any and every club with any sense at all will be aware of these figures, and the previous results of the opposition’s matches and will adjust their style and approach in relation to the game. Just as any semi-decent manager will advise the players as to this referee’s penchant for the use of cards (which of course we don’t go into here, but have done in other analyses).
All of this will influence how the team plays, but worse, it opens up the possibility of clubs attempting to influence which referee they are going to get, because the referees are so different in the way they oversee each game. Home teams will surely do anything and everything to get Bankes as the referee since he oversees so many more home wins than his colleagues. But if the club is hoping to get an away win, then they will be pushing for Gillet as the referee, seeing that even if they can’t get the victory they crave, then there is almost an 80% chance that they will pick up at least a draw.
These figures show you just how weird and whacky the whole issue of refereeing has become in the Premier League, with the issue of who you have as the referee quite possibly having as much influence on the game as how well each club plays! And again that can’t be right.
We can only hope that Arsenal have a whole team of specialist referee watchers working with the club, so that as soon as the name of the referee is announced, who plays and the way the team plays is affected accordingly Thus if the club does go one goal up, but is playing on front of a referee who is known for overseeing draws, that should induce the team to keep the ball in midfield, take no risks, do nothing reckless in their own penalty area, and hold only that one goal lead rather than push on to extra goals.#
Again that is not how it should be, but it is how it is.
