And on it goes. Last week, a regular contributor to this debate, Barry Bwana, produced some statistics on Chelsea and penalties that I thought were so interesting, they merited a break-out article. You can read that here. Also on the subject of refereeing standards and justice, the weekend brought another set of travesties, with the wrong man sent off at Old Trafford and a tackle that sliced a man’s leg open going unpunished. I proposed a ‘WTF’ rule, to use video technology to overturn moments when anyone watching is open-mouthed or just cursing in amazement at the mistake. That article can be found here. Mostly, though, we’re talking Chelsea, and that man – again. You can’t say he’s not box office. Buckle up and off we go.
In Manchester City’s first 12 games they were denied eight crystal clear penalties – it was beyond belief – and the penalties against them were scandalous. I think someone at the Football Association then said this is a joke guys and told them not to be so biased against the best team in England. We have had a few since, but they are still very rare and always need to be certain. Thekudos, Nottingham.
‘Everyone thinks they have the prettiest wife at home.’ Arsene Wenger, 2002. Although some of these guys may have had a claim to it.
There are seven teams who have had fewer penalties than Chelsea. Do referees really hate Aston Villa? They haven’t had a penalty yet. Andrew Gordon, Canada.
You weren’t to know this when you posted last week, Andrew, but Villa – playing a more attacking game under Tim Sherwood – got a penalty to beat West Bromwich Albion on Tuesday. You see there is a correlation between getting in the box, committing defenders, being fouled and winning penalties. That is why Chelsea’s numbers are so unusual.
It all dates back to John Obi Mikel’s claim of racism against Mark Clattenburg. The referees have decided to take the law into their own hands and as they are not held accountable, can do as they please. Freddief, London.
I don’t think referees are doing that, Freddie, although I think the Mikel incident was toxic. Chelsea were in an impossible position. The accusation seemed hard to believe, yet they had to support their player. To turn around to Mikel and tell him, without further investigation, that he had probably misheard would have been humiliating for the player, and shown an absence of concern about race issues. Equally, the experience for Clattenburg must have been ghastly. Yet, at that moment when the complaint was made, Chelsea had to be seen to back their player even if it meant impugning Clattenburg’s reputation until due process was completed. Maybe that did make Chelsea unpopular with referees, but I don’t see what other choice they had.
Bless them, it must be hard if you can go out and buy Diego Costa and Cesc Fabregas in the summer. I feel for them. Mrbrownstone, Croydon.
What has that got to do with anything? I mean, seriously?
Probably subconsciously all the Jose Mourinho moaning has created a siege mentality within the Premier League referees, so they go out with an agenda to not be swayed by pressure. This then creates bias against Chelsea. Bobhopes80, Rome.
It’s one explanation, certainly. The irony being that Mourinho believes Chelsea thrive by creating a siege mentality when, as you say, the referees could be experiencing identical emotions as a result of his talk of campaigns against his club; maybe without even realising it.
All this proves is that Premier referees are more clued up when it comes to Chelsea and their use of the dark arts. Why do you think they are so hesitant when asked to award Chelsea penalties? It’s because they’ve been conned that many times over the years, particularly under Mourinho, that they now want to be absolutely certain. You reap what you sow. Phil, Liverpool.
Chelsea have no more cheats than exist within other clubs. Including, Phil, dare I say it, yours.
John Obi Mikel (right) accused referee Mark Clattenburg (centre) of racism back in October 2012
Good timing. Your article will motivate the referee to be extra helpful to Chelsea in the Capital One Cup final on Sunday. Just what a West Ham United fan would want. Bert Simpkins, London.
Yes, they have always felt an affinity with Chelsea at Upton Park. That was why the atmosphere there on Wednesday night was so welcoming. How very perceptive of you.
In half of Chelsea’s games all they play is defensive football. If only Mourinho used an attacking style of play maybe they would have more penalties. Mflyin, Bangalore.
At the time those statistics were printed, Chelsea were joint top scorers in the Premier League. They are not a defensive team. They are simply good at defending, when required, as was shown against Tottenham and West Ham this week.
This is simply explained by the fact that Premier League referees have been coached on how to spot diving. Reeces Dad, United Kingdom.
It proves nothing except referees in the Champions League are still being conned by diving Chelsea players. The Premier League can see through them. Gerry, SE London.
Who dived for the Burnley handball? Graham, Thailand.
Exactly. And Premier League referees can’t spot dives, because on at least two occasions this season Chelsea players have been booked for simulation having been fouled.
One factor: Diego Costa. A hated player. Referees get back at him subconsciously by deciding it’s not really a penalty. Mourinho has made it worse with his theatrical diatribes. Referees will now be determined not to be influenced by him. Leigh Vernier, Riyadh.
I agree that Costa doesn’t do himself, or Chelsea, any favours with his confrontational behaviour sometimes; but there have been many other players equally abrasive. Did Manchester United fail to win penalties because of Roy Keane? I remember people were more concerned that he was influencing referees to favour United.
So what? How do statistics prove that the players didn’t dive? Naresh Kondru, Hyderabad.
They don’t: but Costa didn’t dive against Burnley, and Fabregas didn’t against Southampton, and nobody dived for the Michael Kightly handball either. All penalties, not given. So while statistics do not prove anything per se, coupled with what we know they make interesting reading.
Cesc Fabregas reacts in disbelief as his penalty appeal is turned down against Southampton in December
If the game gets so sanitised then what are we going to talk about afterwards? We have to be very careful or we might as well not have a referee and just a guy watching a TV monitor. Games would be as long as NFL and just as boring. Mind you, maybe that’s what Sky would like, think of all the commercial breaks and the extra money they could make. Up the Clarets 2014, Burnley.
Oh come on, mate, you’re smarter than that. This is the Michel Platini argument – referee errors make the game interesting and give us something to discuss. If that was the case why not factor a massive cock-up into every game to hold everyone’s attention? And so what if we ended up with a guy watching a TV monitor. As long as he called the game right, where would be the problem? I do share your suspicion, however, when TV companies demand expanding the use of video replays, knowing the commercial benefit to them. It isn’t just TV companies, though, is it? Everyone is asking for change in varying forms now. Even an old Luddite like me.
Memo: new angle for a beer commercial. ‘If Carlsberg made media manipulators they would probably be…’ Brunlea, Granada.
…getting a lot more penalties than Jose Mourinho? I agree.
Mr Samuel, I laugh out loud at your attempt to get in the head of this weekend’s cup final referee. I know you, as a West Ham fan would hate to see Tottenham Hotspur win it. I can read you like a book. Stephen, London.
It must be one of those Janet and John ones then, Stephen, about 1a I’d reckon, considering the level of reasoning. Why would I care who won out of Tottenham and Chelsea? Also, writing with the benefit of having seen the game, don’t flatter yourself that Chelsea needed my help.
Stupid article. I don’t want to rain on Chelsea’s parade, but these numbers and statistics prove nothing – especially if you follow football and know the brand they play. You are likely to get fewer penalty appeals if you park the bus and play at the back – and referees are also far less likely to give you penalties when your players fall and act at every turn, especially Costa, with his well-known dirty play. It’s quite obvious Mr Martin has not progressed beyond a high school level stats class. If he did, to conclude what he has based on two unrelated variables would have seemed as ridiculous to him, as it does to us. P33d33, Washington DC.
You might want to check in at school more often yourself P, judging by your understanding of a game you profess to know and follow. You haven’t a clue about Chelsea’s play – they were top scorers in the Premier League and Champions League when these numbers appeared – and write as if only their players transgress. And speaking of writing, before touting your fine intellect, may I point out that nobody who professes to have made it through high school should need that much grammatical correction in a post of little more than 100 words. Still, always happy to help.
The abrasive nature of Diego Costa (second left) has divided opinion since he signed for Chelsea last summer
This is the only way to close the gap between Manchester City and Chelsea, so that the chase for the title will run to the last match in May. These referees are just taking orders from the top, from people who want to make this league more competitive and interesting. Anthony Wong, Kuala Lumpur.
So who gives that order, Anthony? The chief executive of the Premier League, Richard Scudamore, presumably, to the chief of the referees, Mike Riley. Suppose Riley says no. What if he then goes to the media and exposes Scudamore? Why would an executive of a hugely successful sports business risk that? People continue to watch the Premier League in vast numbers, as proven by the most recent television deal. They have watched leagues won as a procession, leagues won with the last kick. They continue to watch. Why would Scudamore need to stop Chelsea now? And Riley – let’s say he agreed to such a nefarious plot. He has then got to gather all the match officials, linesmen too, and conspire to fix games. And if one of them refuses and blows the whistle? It is preposterous, Anthony. Utterly preposterous. There is no conspiracy.
How at this stage of the season have Chelsea got so many Champions League penalties? In a single season over the entire campaign, only Barcelona in 2011-12 have got six. I think there is a conspiracy within UEFA to favour Chelsea. What do you think, Martin? Young Man Rumble, Nottingham.
As I said, I don’t believe in conspiracies.
I love how so many articles start with, ‘there is no conspiracy, but…’ I have never known one side to suffer so badly. If it had happened to a club in Italy someone would be taken to court. The Rock Says, Oxford.
Yes, but that’s why Italian football went up the spout. Anyway, more of what The Rock says can be found below.
So Chelsea get a penalty every 1.8 games in the Champions League which, if applied to the Premier League, would mean that they would get 21 penalties a season, which is a huge number? So do Chelsea fans think that UEFA favour them or do they only want to highlight statistics that go against them? Iglooeaters, Manchester.
I make that spot on. I’ve been keeping count and there are 18 we could have been given. Bluto, London.
There’s your answer, Iggy. Now I think that figure rather high and, let’s be fair, there is probably a degree of partisan thinking on both sides. So let’s meet in the middle with a penalty every three to four games, which is where Manchester City are, in both competitions. What makes no sense is the disparity. If we ran those statistics as an eight team league, with each club represented twice – for Premier League penalties and Champions League penalties – Chelsea would be top and bottom. That doesn’t seem right.
Add the two tallies together and Chelsea have played 33 games, winning six penalties, while Liverpool have played 32 games and won five 5 penalties. Yet only one team, or should that be manager, is whinging. Phil, Worthing.
Yes, but Liverpool’s return is consistent over both competitions, Chelsea’s isn’t.
If I remember clearly, in one match this season Chelsea had three different players dive to try to fool the referee into giving free-kicks or penalties. Against Burnley they were hard done by, but before that they were getting correct decisions. Mourinho just wants to put that added pressure on referees. London Boy, London.
Name the players, name the match, name the incidents, and we could try to look at that accusation. Unless you want to be specific, however, it’s not a credible point. If it was against Hull City, I’d say Willian and Gary Cahill dived, Costa was booked for diving when he was fouled.
This is cock of the highest poppy. When Manchester City, Arsenal or Liverpool players feel that they have suffered some sort of officiating error, do they immediately, consistently and aggressively surround the official? As long as Chelsea continue this practice, you’ll probably find most neutral fans will treat Mourinho’s claims with the same contempt he reserves for referees. Gnhall, Gravesend.
Right, so when Joe Hart went head-to-head with referee Michael Oliver in the Manchester derby, that wasn’t aggressive? They all do it, I’m afraid. No team is worse than any other.
Manchester City goalkeeper Joe Hart confronts referee Michael Oliver during the Manchester derby
Quiz time. Which Premier League team has finished in the following positions in the penalty awards table over the last four years: second, first, ninth and second, with eight, five, seven and 11 penalties given in their favour. And even this year, they’re in 13th place, only two shy of third. Yes, it’s Chelsea. Poor old, hard done by Chelsea. Kind of puts the pathetic whining coming out of Stamford Bridge into perspective. Johnny B, Exeter.
I look at it another way. Presuming these are league statistics, it means that Chelsea average 7.75 penalties in the Premier League each season and currently have been awarded just two with over two thirds of the campaign gone, despite being the best team and scoring the second highest number of goals. That is a statistical anomaly of some significance.
Let’s see where all the Premier League teams are in a table of penalties awarded. I think Swansea City have had one all season. SM50, Swansea.
Yes, but the point of the piece was a comparison with European competition, specifically the Champions League. That was where the anomaly appeared. Every other club had comparable numbers or found penalties harder to come by in Europe, where defensive standards were higher. Chelsea were the exception.
Mourinho complains about referees at every club that employs him. I live in Spain and the main topic of discussion when he was manager of Real Madrid was how terrible the officials were towards Madrid in comparison to Barcelona. At Inter Milan it was the same story – week after week, his post-match interviews live on television contained accusations of referee bias. Yet when Inter played Barcelona in the Champions League semi-final in 2010 and Diego Milito scored a goal in the San Siro that was a cricket pitch offside, he said zilch. When Bojan Krkic had a perfectly legal goal disallowed in the return leg in the Nou Camp, zilch again. The truth of the matter is Carlo Ancelotti won the Champions League with Madrid in his first season – something Mourinho couldn’t do in three seasons with all his resources and players. LV1969, La Coruna.
Yes, but I can’t remember too many from Barcelona admitting the travesty that took place at Stamford Bridge in 2009, either. That’s football, I’m afraid. Just like the marginal real time calls you talk about involving Milito and Krkic. Milito looked a distance offside when he scored, but it is a much closer call when the ball is played and certainly not the 22 yards of a cricket pitch, even allowing for euphemism; it also looks like handball in the build-up to Krkic’s goal. Yes, with replays and freeze frame technology, both decisions may have favoured Inter, but I don’t see either as being worthy of Mourinho fronting up before a camera. And, no, Mourinho didn’t win the Champions League with Madrid’s resources and stellar squad – he did do it with Porto and Inter Milan, however, with less money and lesser players.
Inter’s Diego Milito celebrates as Barcelona appeal for offside during the 2010 Champions League semi-final
Pity the statistics don’t show the certain penalties City were denied: three against Manchester United, two against Hull and one at Southampton for starters. Jimbo, United Kingdom.
I was at the United and Southampton games, Jim, and I agree – three short against United and the booking of Sergio Aguero for diving at St Mary’s was as bad a decision as I have seen all season. All I would say is that these incidents did not affect the results – although no-one was to know that at the time – as City won both games. The key ones that have gone against Chelsea have often cost points.
The Premier League should allocate a total number of penalties to be given each season and then auction them to the highest bidder – that would ensure that smaller teams cannot get away with drawing at places like Stamford Bridge and the Etihad. Marco63, Manchester.
Don’t talk wet. This isn’t about upstarts or privilege, but basic fairness.
To compare two different competitions is nonsense. Take a look at Premier League penalties since it started and you’ll find Liverpool 77, Chelsea 73, Arsenal 70, Manchester United 69 and Manchester City 67. Chelsea are not hard done by. Statistics don’t lie. Robowen, Australia.
Your statistics don’t lie, you mean. Mine you called nonsense, if you recall. Then again, one might say your statistic would be of more relevance if Mourinho was complaining of unfair treatment in 1997. As he’s talking about this season, I’ll stick with the most recent data, thanks.
What about Manchester United? One penalty in 26 games. Dave, Dumbarton.
How selective is that? Why not show the penalty statistics of all Premier League teams instead of just those who have had more penalties than Chelsea. Saj, Manchester.
Where are the Manchester United statistics? Pals 2112, Malta.
What rubbish. Funny how this writer didn’t put Manchester United because it would show they have a bigger case than Chelsea. I hate one sided views. MartinF, Glasgow.
Oh dear. How to explain this? The comparison was with the teams in the Champions League, because that shows up whether there is a difference in treatment at home and in Europe. I’m breaking this to you gently, but that doesn’t include Manchester United. I know you all think it should. I know you feel it is your divine right to be involved. But it isn’t. Even if we expanded the figures to include all the English teams in Europe, adding Tottenham Hotspur, Everton and Hull City, there would still be no place for Manchester United because you didn’t even make the Europa League this season. I know whenever the phrase ‘elite club’ is bandied about you scan the page for your name but, right now, you are elite only in terms of size and capital. This was about elite football. So you’re not in there. Sorry.
Louis van Gaal’s Manchester United side are not in European competition this season
When you see the official EA player rating on their website it all becomes very clear. Bojan Boksic, Serbia.
No, that’s a computer game, this is real life. And you might need to get out a bit more.
And Gary Cahill’s two handballs at Anfield which went unpunished? Jaberwocky, Kirkdale.
…were discussed in last week’s debate, yes.
Why did you just survey the top teams? For a fair comparison you should have all 20 clubs to see the real picture. That wouldn’t suit you or Chelsea though, would it? Fedup, Burnley.
No, it wouldn’t suit the comparison with another competition in which the decisions were not made by English referees. That was the point of the article. It seemed pretty clear to most here.
The team who earns the most free-kicks, who has the most goals and points, who has the highest goal scorer and assist creator in addition to a player who has both the most dribbles and free-kicks earned in the final third. Yes, that team should clearly be bottom of the table for penalties awarded. People need to realise that Martin Samuel is raising a point for discussion, not sponsoring Mourinho’s claims of an agenda. You can criticise the figures because of the sample size but it is a complete analysis of Premier League teams in the Champions League. It is certainly worth looking into because it suggests a huge statistical discrepancy. BarryBwana, Canada.
Ladies and gentlemen, meet Barry. It was Barry who provided the statistics – we then cross-checked them, of course – that were the basis for the original article. So thanks Barry, I hope you saw your credit in the newspaper and online. Barry, you may have guessed, is a Chelsea fan. I’m not. I don’t think there is a conspiracy either. I do believe, however, that the point he makes is a valid one. It is an anomaly that a team that is shown to be attack-minded is not winning more penalties. If Eden Hazard is fouled more than any other player in the final third, surely that ratio would be repeated in other areas of the field, for instance.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m sure it was Martin Samuel who said not long ago: ‘A fool uses statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post; for support rather than illumination.’ These numbers prove nothing, really. You need to assess each incident on merit. HarryTheManc, Manchester.
You’re wrong. It was Andrew Lang and the correct quote is, ‘An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – for support rather than for illumination.’ Lang was a poet, novelist, critic and a collector of folk tales and fairy stories. He’d fit in well here.
Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho complained of a ‘campaign’ against his side earlier in the season
If everyone had identical players, played identical styles and faced identical teams these statistics would mean something. It doesn’t need Steven Hawkins to realise that. So stop whining. I can’t believe a top manager is complaining about the amount of penalties he gets. David Firth, United Kingdom.
No, it’s not as if it affects his livelihood, is it? As for this Steven Hawkins chap – do you mean the one who went to Pine Forest High School and lives in Prattville, Alabama; or the one who studied hotel and restaurant business management at the Arts Institute of Pittsburgh? Maybe you mean the chief executive of Amnesty International, or the chair of Exercise Science at California Lutheran University. Because it can’t be the world’s most famous physicist, Stephen Hawking – because every idiot knows his name…
Is there an organised campaign? No. Is there a lingering resentment against nouveau riche Chelsea from the big section of the media that are traditionally Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester United supporters? Yes. The world’s largest companies and political parties pay billions to influence our opinions through advertising, and it works. So I find it incredible that anyone can believe that the media and particularly Sky’s cherry picking of incidents involving Chelsea run on a loop can’t subliminally affect the judgement of referees. The Daily Mail also have their fair share of blame: trying to invent a Branislav Ivanovic bite on an Everton player was a new low for them. Luckily we have Martin Samuel who isn’t allied to any of the old money clubs. Drumboe, Copenhagen.
But he is allied to the Mail and, to a far lesser extent, to Sky and the other media organisations so knows what a lot of old rubbish this is. There is no campaign. Simply, Chelsea are news. When a Chelsea player, and certainly a very important one, looks to have deliberately stepped on an opponent and the referee has missed it, this will be highlighted. When Ivanovic, a victim of biting two seasons ago, appears from a certain angle to have bitten an opponent, a question will be asked. It goes with the territory of being a famous club. Manchester United have had this for years. You either want to be one of those very clubs that live in the spotlight or you don’t; but you can’t have it both ways.
Since I was a boy, after the game I would argue that the referee missed this he or he shouldn’t have done that. Each game, every decision was open to scrutiny. But that debate should be for the fans. When you allow managers, pundits and ex-referees to openly question and undermine, you are creating a very uncomfortable position for the officials. Dave2kaf, Frodsham.
Yes, but the same point applies. The referees are now part of a huge industry with blanket, and very costly, coverage. With that comes scrutiny. We can’t expect managers, ex-players and former referees to be gagged. Within reason, there is a freedom of speech issue.
‘It makes no sense that the team that has won most Premier League matches, has the best goal difference and ties with Manchester City for the most goals scored, is not picking up as many fouls in the penalty area.’ Wow, why is this guy a journalist? He should be a scientist. Zeliscar, Ljubljana.
No, mate. There’s only one Scientist.
And this data proves what exactly? Costa just isn’t Didier Drogba and he loses most battles in the box where Drogba was unstoppable, caused chaos and had to be fouled. Ozil, London.
Are you sure, because I swear I saw Costa leave Arsenal’s defence for dead on October 5 last year to score Chelsea’s second goal in a 2-0 win. He had been quite quiet until that point, granted, but he still set up Hazard for what should have been his second of the game and his goal was his ninth in seven Premier League matches. This is his first season in English football, too. He currently has 17 in 20 Premier League appearances, compared to Drogba’s 10 in 26 in his first campaign. Apart from that, a well-reasoned argument I found.
Thank you a zillion times, Martin Samuel. Zivayim, Botswana.
Yes, that’s all well and good, but couldn’t you make it payable to cash?
Perhaps the older referees are getting tired as the season goes on, and a slower physical recovery is taking its toll? Do they need to be three months on then months off? Smiley, London.
Interesting point. The Professional Game Match Officials Board always claim referees are fitter than ever; but then they would, wouldn’t they?
I used to referee, at a low level admittedly, and I must say Mourinho’s complaining hurts Chelsea’s cause more than anything. If, for example, I was refereeing a Sunday league game in the local park, and a manager shouted I was giving nothing to his team, when there was a close decision to make a minute later, the natural human reaction was to say inwardly, ‘If I give them this, everyone will think it’s because I heard the complaint.’ That’s not cheating on the referee’s part – just how most people would react. Britabroad, Toronto.
Apologies in advance for the apparent harshness of this comment, but that’s probably why you never progressed beyond the Sunday leagues. Professional referees have to rise above the catcalls and make every decision on merit. I can remember watching Alan Smith, then with Leeds United, playing against Tottenham Hotspur at White Hart Lane in 1999. The press box there is very low down, behind the dugouts and you could hear Smith giving the linesman the most fearful abuse all game. Then, with three minutes to go, Mauricio Taricco appeared to stamp on his shin off the ball. Smith retaliated, catching him lightly in the chest with his head, and Taricco fell in supposed agony. The referee looked to the linesman and… red card for Smith. I can remember thinking then it was plainly payback for what had gone on. There were mitigating circumstances and he could have saved Smith – but why the hell would he want to? So I accept that officials have human impulses, but that doesn’t make it right.
What a meaningless article. I would appreciate if you gave the statistic of clear penalties that should have been awarded to these teams but were not. LFC2005, United States.
Yes, but that would be subjective. What I think is a clear penalty isn’t necessarily clear to another person.
Chelsea winger Eden Hazard is taken out by Stoke defender Phil Bardsley in December
The same discrepancies occurred when Mourinho and Arsene Wenger declared some years ago that Andy Johnson dived a lot. Although he was hacked down in the box every week, Everton never got a penalty. Ian, Liverpool.
Actually, Everton did get a penalty – that was why Mourinho accused Johnson of diving in 2006. He later apologised and said the referee, Mark Halsey, had called the decision right. And here’s Wenger on Johnson from 2007. ‘Andy Johnson is a good player, with the timing of his runs, the quality of his runs, his team ethic is fantastic and he never gives up. I did consider him at one stage when he was at Crystal Palace, but the price stopped it happening. There was a big fight and you know then that the fee is never below £12m or £13m. When you are buying a second striker that is a lot, but I completely understand Everton paying what they did, because he is their main striker.’ A terrible condemnation, I’m sure you’ll agree.
‘Who would be behind it and what would be the purpose?’ You seem to have forgotten about the episode which resulted in referee Clattenburg being investigated. Referees won’t have forgotten it and will remember it whenever there is an opportunity for revenge. And they get away with it because people say ‘who would be behind it and what would be the purpose?’ instead of revealing the real goings on. Sir Cecil, San Francisco.
Which are? Or do you have no proof of conspiratorial goings on whatsoever, rather than fevered imaginings, shot through with partisan prejudice?
You know that margarine sales have increased at the same rate as divorce right? But what does it all mean, Martin? Thegreatdictator, Ipswich.
It means you should lay off the disco biscuits, that’s what it means, mate.
What are you talking about? The logic that Chelsea should have more penalties because other teams get them is nonsense. Each game is different and you can play an entire 90 minutes without being fouled in the penalty box, so a ratio of number of games per penalty is irrelevant and flawed. You should count the number of fouls in the box for all four teams and see how many penalties are then given. Then subtract the number of dives for which Chelsea got a penalty – Ramires comes to mind. Then see what you come up with. GnUS, Boston.
Right, we should see how many fouls in the box result in penalties. As a foul in the box is a penalty, I reckon that will work out as 100 per cent in all cases. Then we should factor in some incidents from last season, like the Ramires dive against West Bromwich Albion. How very scientific. You weren’t in charge in Florida that time, were you?
Ramires dives to win a controversial penalty against West Brom at Stamford Bridge last season
And how many penalties have Manchester United had in the same period? I think the lack of decisions may have cost us more points than Chelsea this season but we’re not making excuses. Adder, Manchester.
I think a lack of decisions may have saved you from getting humped 4-0 at Manchester City mate, but the game’s all about opinions.
Is it possible that the referees, having been bullied for years by Sir Alex Ferguson, have subconsciously decided to make a stand against intimidation? Certainly, no one complains or appeals more than Mourinho and his assistants – and it isn’t working. Maybe he would be better adopting the Manuel Pellegrini approach. Take a few bad decisions graciously and it’s amazing how many penalties you get. Ericlo, Manchester.
I’m not sure that matters, Eric. As previously stated on here, they lost out three times against United and once against Southampton. And that’s just the ones I recall off the top of my head.
I never cease to be amazed by the incompetence of reporters when they get hold of spurious statistics. This is a classic example of how to spend your work time doodling on the back of a fag packet. Manchester City find it hard to win penalties by a variation of 0.2? I find myself wondering if this is 0.2 of a referee. Citrilla, Macclesfield.
No, it was 0.2 of a game. Everyone else worked that out. Maybe you should wonder less and think more.
How about Aguero getting booked at Southampton, denying him a blatant penalty? (1) How about City missing couple of penalties against United? (2) How about Burnley’s offside goal at the Etihad Stadium which ended up 2-2? (3) Have you forgotten the blatant dive of Cahill and how, if the referee had shown him a second yellow for simulation, Chelsea would have been playing with 10 men for an entire half against Hull. (4) What about Cahill’s unpunished leg-breaking challenge against Alexis Sanchez? (5) These are off the top of my head and I think all teams get decisions for and against. Instead of looking for non-existing conspiracies, you should be asking why the Premier League’s refereeing quality is deteriorating. (6) You have time for that ridiculous ‘Hands off in the box’ campaign (7) but no time to start a campaign so that the Premier League introduces video technology to assist referees. (8) Captain Sparrow, United Kingdom.
I added the numbers to make the responses easier to follow. So, here goes: (1) Wrote about that in the match report on the day and mentioned it in this debate. (2) See (1). (3) Wasn’t at the match but, yes, George Boyd’s goal was offside. It was Burnley’s second that killed you though. (4) Discussed in the debate column last week. (5) It was a nasty foul but I didn’t see it quite as you did. I notice you don’t mention the aftermath, though, in which Wenger confronted and pushed Mourinho in Chelsea’s technical area and could easily have been sent to the stands. (6) Regular readers of the column will notice that deteriorating refereeing standards make a frequent appearance. (7) I wasn’t part of that campaign. I have my own views on the subject which, again, are well known through my column. (8) That was the subject of last Monday’s column and there is no point starting a campaign that cannot be won; all I can do is make an opinion known.
Arsene Wenger (left) confronts and shoves Jose Mourinho during Chelsea’s 2-0 win in October
Or maybe English referees know Chelsea have diving, cheating players and therefore don’t fall for their antics. Hazard is the worst. He is the most fouled player simply because he goes to ground more than the other players. Stephen, United Kingdom.
Rubbish. Hazard gets kicked more than any player since Cristiano Ronaldo and I don’t think he dives at all.
First they write against us then they start correcting themselves. Are you guys going through puberty? Truecfc, Mumbai.
This isn’t a correction, and previous pieces by other writers are not against Chelsea. We are different people, with different opinions. There is no agenda, either way.
Wow, so the Mail is now taking items from the comment section and passing it off as their own work? Alex, Cardiff.
Hardly. As stated the original statistics were posted as a comment by a regular reader and contributor to the debate, Barry Bwana from Canada. He wanted to know why these numbers were not more widely known. Initially, I included his comment in the debate, with the reply that I would make sure they reached a wider audience. But I found them so interesting I thought they deserved a separate piece. So I pulled them from the debate, we cross-checked them with Opta – a couple of the numbers were slightly different – updated them after last week’s Arsenal game and published the piece. Wishing to give Barry his due, he was credited in the newspaper and later online. As the piece that accompanied the statistics was my commentary it had my name on it. I would do the same to any material worth developing from the debate. Not much chance of that happening with yours, though, is there Alex?
What interested me was why they stopped at just goal-line technology. Yes, it has made the game better, but when England played Ukraine in the 2012 European Championship, Ukraine scored a goal that was over the line but was ruled out. No argument there. However, in the build-up they were clearly offside. Had goal-line technology existed that day, the goal would have stood but the offside could not have been given retrospectively. How is that fair? You either go the whole hog, or don’t bother. Human error, or a near perfect review system. Not a bit of this and a bit of that. By the way, I’m seeing Faithless in the summer. Spin that tune. The Facehead, Newquay.
I can see what you mean about the inconsistency of having part-technology but the only way I see it working is to stick to the broad brushstrokes. What is over the line? Has the referee sent off the wrong man? To involve a fifth official in the minutiae creates a whole raft of issues, not least about when the game is stopped and how it is restarted. Now I don’t usually do requests, and I’m not a big fan of Faithless. But seeing as you’re a regular and all, I think Rollo Armstrong had something to do with this which I remember liking back in, what I think was known as, the day.
The problem is Mourinho is under pressure to win the league. Typically he resorts to trying to influence referees in the hope one will crumble and give a soft penalty. I can’t remember when Manchester United last had a penalty in the league, but I haven’t heard Louis van Gaal complain. Sponti, Ireland.
This post was sent before Saturday’s penalty against Sunderland – but you do seem to be overlooking the match at Cambridge United, for instance, when Van Gaal claimed everything was against his side, from the pitch to the referee, and was warned by the FA about his future conduct. Selective memory strikes again.
Mourinho’s obsession with this could prove costly for Chelsea. Between 1967 and 1974 Leeds United had, without doubt, the best squad in England and probably Europe. Due to the paranoia of Don Revie they probably won less than half the trophies they should have. It wasn’t until the players were let off the leash in 1974 that they were able to show their greatness. Kenny, Hebburn.
I hate to tell you this, Kenny, but between 1967 and 1974, Leeds won two league titles, the FA Cup, League Cup and two Inter-Cities Fairs Cups. In the 10 years after 1974, they won nothing.
Simply, the sample sizes are not large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions and it is absurd to conclude there is a conspiracy. Clusters of penalties, or a lack of them, occurring over a period of time, happen regularly among teams and can be attributed to chance and random variation. One should conclude that refereeing errors are the cause of Chelsea not getting as many penalties as they normally do, unless you uncover some Football Association dossiers directing referees to cheat. RSteven08, Dublin.
Yes, and they were indeed my conclusions. Not a conspiracy, but refereeing errors suggesting Chelsea are getting a raw deal. If I had made it sound more pompous perhaps you would have understood.
Most decisions around fouls are subjective. Take Wayne Rooney against Preston North End, the referee said penalty, Preston manager Simon Grayson said penalty, a lot of fans said no. Would a few more looks at a replay get the right call every time? CMT, London.
Most importantly, we are told the referee, Phil Dowd, said no on seeing the replay. So there is potential for great confusion. Was it a WTF moment, though? I don’t think so – meaning it would be left to the on pitch referee.
Wayne Rooney jumps over Preston goalkeeper Thorsten Stuckmann’s leg, winning a penalty last month
I’m all for video technology, but the real problem would be the classification. Managers and players would be claiming foul ‘A’ was not a foul and lead to a corner which lead to the penalty which lead to the goal – so it would only really work if a clear standard was set. NickNUFC, Newcastle.
That’s why I would propose a WTF rule – to be used only in the case of utter travesties, not marginals or matters of opinion.
The other advantage is that a fifth official would be away from the players and managers, meaning that he wouldn’t be affected by their behaviour, or even by a noisy crowd. Steviejay99, Colchester.
Yes. You don’t hear so much about homer TMOs in rugby union.
Martin Samuel: spoken like a typical writer who has never played the game, when it was a man’s game. Norman Hunter, Nobby Stiles, Ron Harris – we loved them. Now they have turned the game into divers in orange ballet shoes, kicking a plastic ball. CoreEnglish, Birmingham.
I notice you didn’t love World Cup winner Nobby Stiles enough to spell his name right. Don’t worry, I changed it. Your secret’s safe with me.
I was in America last September and watching an NFL game with a friend. There was a close call and even with all the cameras and extra referees this decision was still being debated days later on the sports channels. It held the play up for some considerable time and I fear our beautiful game would be slowed down, too. The continuous flow of Liverpool versus Manchester City meant Vincent Kompany could not prevent Jordan Henderson’s goal. How many goals are scored when the players are suffering from fatigue after 30 minutes of high intensity play? A stoppage of 30 seconds might not seem much but it gives professional athletes time to recover their heart rate.Syzaghi, Manchester.
Interesting point. Again, I am in favour of technology only for matters of absolute clarity, not instances when a debate could be raging days later. Wes Brown’s red card is the best recent example.
And you all thought Mourinho was tripping about referees, but I will sip my cup of tea. Chelsea4life, Birmingham.
Yeah, I’d be careful with that if I were you. Some anti-Chelsea conspirator has probably poisoned it.
Wes Brown (right) can’t believe it as he is sent off by referee Roger East at Old Trafford last weekend
It’s the slippery slope effect that worries me. Video technology in live play could improve decision making but over reliance on it could fundamentally change the nature of the sport. Your plan seems reasonable enough but would it end there? I doubt it. I do however think that all incidents, whether seen by the referee or not, should be open to scrutiny by a disciplinary panel with the power to overturn or impose red and yellow cards and increase bans significantly if the referee has missed examples of deliberate cheating or violent play. The question shouldn’t be did the referee see it; but did the referee see it properly and subsequently make the right call? Bill, Barnsley.
I share your fear concerning the reach of the first reform, and your enthusiasm for the second, Bill.
Not that two wrongs make a right but in the game between Stoke City and Hull, Stephen Ireland was the perpetrator of an earlier unnoticed over-the-top foul and may have been a recipient of summary justice. Live by the sword? Obsessionat, Channel Islands.
And in the days when they used to live by the sword the result was an awful lot of dead people. Retaliation isn’t the answer to poor performances by officials, using video technology to correct the worst of the wrong decisions is. Pat57, Exeter.
Yes, I’m sure some Arsenal fans think Stoke have got what they deserve, too. Yet it’s a poor substitute for real justice, handing out arbitrary injuries based on referees failing to spot serious fouls.
The foul on Ireland was a complete accident. They are professional athletes in their prime and can handle a little flesh wound. They get enough money for God’s sake. MstrOfVUniverse, Dubai.
Equating earnings to a 15-stitch gash is probably the most stupid comment I’ve ever read on here and, believe me, there’s been some competition.
Are there any Premier League referees from south of Birmingham? No. How many times has the League been won by clubs south of Birmingham in its 128 year history? Nineteen. How many clubs south of Birmingham have won the league? Three: Arsenal, Tottenham and Chelsea. Who runs the FA? David Gill and Greg Dyke who were both on the board of Manchester United, plus Mike Riley from Leeds. It’s all a little obvious that Chelsea are a serious threat to the status quo and must be suppressed at all costs. The Premier League is run and won only by northern clubs. Neil575, Billericay.
Depends what you regard as south of Birmingham, Neil. I’m pretty sure Portsmouth is and Ipswich, too, making the number of southern teams that have been champions five and the number of times 21 (Arsenal 13, Chelsea 4, Tottenham 2, Portsmouth 2, Ipswich Town 1). I was genuinely surprised to note, however, that of the Premier League referees with double figures to their names this season, only one – Roger East from Wiltshire – could be said to originate from south of the Midlands. I am not for one second advancing some gobbledegook northern conspiracy, but it does seem strange. Anyway, for all those southerners feeling hard done by, there is always this. Until next time.