Ref Review 2012/13: Stoke. Three totally unbiased refs!

By Walter Broeckx

This article is part of the series of the Referee Review 2013. You can find links to earlier articles on the bottom of this article.

__________________________

After having dealt with the different teams and after having examined all the Premier League refs (leading to the best ref of the season according to the views of our referee reviewers) we now will bring you something that will be an easy manual to see who is good or bad for each individual team.

We will of course bring you this in order so that from now on if you see that your team is playing and there is a certain ref assigned you can see in a blink of an eye if this ref has a bad or a good history with your team. At least in the season 2012/2013.  And if all goes well we will even try to add the bias from the season before in to each article. And that way you can see if there are any possible situations that return from one year to the next.

And we do this because it might well be that some referee performances are a one off. But if a ref has the same bias against a team it might show something more. For if a ref has a big bias in favour of a team it also is saying something about that ref.

A little word of explanation about the graphics below.  The ultimate referee performance would be that the bias score (which is based on the wrong decisions) of around zero. Alas you will find very few of those scores in the total series. So the zero line will be the middle line of each graphic.

If a ref has positive bias score for the team involved you will see a name (of the ref) and a green line and a number.   That is the bias number for that ref.

On the other hand if the ref had a negative bias you will once again see a name but then with a red line and a number. The negative bias score for that ref.

The longer the lines, the higher the number and the higher the bias that ref produces.  Short lines are better and would be nicer for us all, if only the world worked that way. I also included a little table in the graphic just with the names and with a red or green label. This is for any readers who want to have a quick look at the names as sometimes the numbers can get in the way.

Next in our series is Stoke

Stoke bias per ref

We have covered 11 different refs in the games we reviewed when Stoke were on the field last season.

And amazingly there were three refs with a zero bias score in those games. That was the case with Lee Probert, Jonathon Moss and Howard Webb. Well done for those refs and Stoke is the luckiest team as they have the most refs with a zero bias score.

And only two refs with a negative bias score against Stoke. Taylor had a small negative bias.  The negative bias score from Marinner is a lot higher. Or should I say lower?

Refs with a small positive bias were Friend and Clattenburg. Those numbers are still a bit acceptable.  But the positive bias from Atkinson, Oliver, Foy and Mason is way too high.

So now let us see if we can find a pattern if we look at the numbers from last season.

EPL vs PGMOL - Incorrect calls Breakdown by Referee - StokeCity (Weighted) 2011/2012

The season before we had seven refs in the Stoke games we reviewed. And two of them had a negative bias. But it seems they weren’t sent back or at least not in games we could review. So we cannot jump to conclusions about the negative refs.

So let us turn our attention to the positive refs.

Clattenburg and Webb had a positive bias in that season and a zero bias in the last season. So surely not really bad for Stoke.

And the refs with a big positive bias in the season 2011/2012 weren’t sent over in games we could review. So again we cannot look in to the numbers and compare them.

Sorry for this so we cannot really look for patterns.

And in the absence of this I will only point at the fact that in both seasons they seemed to have a lot of refs with a positive bias in general.

This entry was posted in Referee Reviews, Stoke City. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *