I outlined a framework to assess the impact of Honest Mistakes in the SPFL..
I showed the impact on Expected Points gained / lost due to Honest Mistakes to the October International Break.
Today, we cover the games from Week 9 – 16th October 2021.
Reminder
I am indebted to the Yorkshire Whistler for providing expert judgement of these key potentially game changing moments and providing an unbiased assessment of the correct decision.
I do not always agree with his conclusions mainly because a) I am biased; b) I do not know the Laws of the Game intimately as he does; and c) I do not have experience of refereeing football matches.
You may also relate to those constraints. Be honest!
As described in the framework, where an in-game decision is deemed incorrect, there is an Expected Points impact for the “wronged” team and this is indicated.
I’ll keep a running tally.
Here we go.
16/10/21 Motherwell vs Celtic
Incident 1
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Willie Collum |
| Game | Motherwell v Celtic | Game Minute | 17th |
| Incident | In the build up to Celtic’s opening goal, Kyogo challenges for the ball in the Celtic half |
| Outcome | No foul |
| Evidence | https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010tx1/sportscene-sportscene-saturday-202122-16102021
At 31m 37sec |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Difficult to be clear on this one with only the one piece of footage and no instant replay available.
On first viewing, I expected a foul to be given against Kyogo. He challenges for the ball by stepping across the Motherwell player and uses his leading left foot and it’s debatable if he contacts the ball at all as the Motherwell player is knocked off balance. However, having replayed the footage at least a dozen times, there is a case to say that Kyogo gets the slightest of touches and the Motherwell player goes to ground very easily. Verdict: Correct decision. No conclusive footage to overrule the initial no foul call. |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 2
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Chris Fordyce |
| Game | Motherwell v Celtic | Game Minute | 55th |
| Incident | Mugabe challenge on Turnbull |
| Outcome | No foul |
| Evidence | https://twitter.com/PaisleySteelman/status/1449834210261352451?s=20 |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Mugabe commits to a sliding tackle challenge on Turnbull. Again, have watched this tackle multiple times over. At normal speed Mugabe seems to win the ball first and the contact with Turnbull is afterwards. In slow motion the challenge appears to be more of a lunge.
On reflection, I am comfortable with the in-game decision. A traditional hard, committed tackle coming in from a low trajectory and winning the ball first. I don’t believe this challenge endangered the players safety. Verdict: Correct decision |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 3
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Chris Fordyce |
| Game | Motherwell v Celtic | Game Minute | 68th |
| Incident | Bolingoli appears to handle the ball in the box |
| Outcome | No foul |
| Evidence | https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010tx1/sportscene-sportscene-saturday-202122-16102021
At 36min 21 sec |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | As the Motherwell forward flicks the ball, the ball appears to catch Bolingoli on his left arm. All five Motherwell players in camera shot all instantly spin round and appeal for the penalty decision.
On replay I would agree that the ball hits Bolingoli raised arm and the referee’s decision should now be:
For me, Bolingoli is caught slightly unawares by the bounce of the ball and raises his arm instinctively but I would say this is NOT part of his natural movement. I believe the referee is partially unsighted by both the Motherwell forward and covering Celtic defender and if he has seen the contact, he would have awarded the penalty for handball. I have also reviewed the Motherwell number 9’s contribution in the build up to this passage of play, looking for a potential handball prior to Bolingoli’s. From the camera angles presented, as the Motherwell forward chests the ball with his arms extended, the ball bounces off his chest and I don’t believe there is any contact with the left arm before the ball then contacts Bolingoli. A different camera angle might justify reassessing this judgement, but I don’t see any deviation in the spin or movement of the ball once leaving his chest to suggest the left arm contacts the ball. For me, no handball offence committed by the Motherwell forward. Verdict: Incorrect decision. Penalty kick should have been awarded. |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
Celtic +0.27 xPts
Explainer: A goal for Motherwell at 0-2 at home in the 68th minute is worth 0.35 xPts. However, as the result of this decision would have been a penalty, and the chances of scoring a penalty are always 77%, the xPts gets reduced accordingly (i.e. 0.35 x 0.77). |
16/10/21 The Rangers vs Heart of Midlothian
Incident 1
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Don Robertson |
| Game | TRFC v Hearts | Game Minute |
| Incident | Balogun challenges Boyce in The Rangers box |
| Outcome | No foul |
| Evidence | https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010tx1/sportscene-sportscene-saturday-202122-16102021
At 3min 50sec |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | As the ball is played over the top to Boyce, Balogun gets his body between the man and ball and slightly leans into Boyce which allows his team mate to clear the ball.
For me, this is simply shrewd defending, Balogun is using his own body weight and position to make it difficult for Boyce to reach ball. There is minimal upper body contact, no push and no foul committed. Verdict: Correct decision. |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 2
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Don Robertson |
| Game | TRFC v Hearts | Game Minute | 35th |
| Incident | Aribo challenge on Cochrane(?) |
| Outcome | Foul and YC to Aribo |
| Evidence | https://twitter.com/mstewart_23/status/1449468450427052032?s=20 |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Aribo goes to challenge Hearts player for what appears to a 50/50 contest and catches Hearts player rather than win ball.
Got sympathy here for the referee as it happens very quickly. He has an unobstructed view for the challenge, but if anything, he might be a little too close to the action when making the decision. When replayed in slow motion, Aribo leg is extended with studs showing, his foot goes over the top of the moving ball without any contact and catches the Hearts player on the shin. Whilst I’m confident Aribo is attempting to win the ball, the height of the extended foot with studs showing, falls into the territory of “ excessive force that endangers opponents safety”.. Verdict: Incorrect decision. Foul correct but Aribo should have been sent off rather than cautioned. |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
The Rangers +0.86 xPts |
Incident 3
| Date | 16/10/21 | Referee | Don Robertson |
| Game | TRFC v Hearts | Game Minute | 86th |
| Incident | Bacuna and Kingsley altercation on the touchline |
| Outcome | YC to Bacuna and Kingsley |
| Evidence | https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010tx1/sportscene-sportscene-saturday-202122-16102021
At 10min 15sec |
| Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | As ball leaves field of play for a throw in, slight coming together results in Kingsley pushing Bacuna in back, Bacuna and Kingsley then both raise an arm and push each other in lower neck area before being separated.
I feel referee got this spot on, it’s unsporting behaviour and referee shows a caution as such. Whenever arms are raised, a referee should be sense checking for the following violent conduct/ sending off criteria: “a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible” I don’t believe the conduct of either player falls into the above remit. Verdict: Correct decision |
| Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.
As always, I personally didn’t agree on all counts but I bow to, and accept neutral, expert opinion on these matters.
Of the 6 incidents in the 2 matches, the referees seem to have got 4 out of 6 correct.
But the two incorrect decisions benefitted what used to be called the “Old Firm”. It’s a conspiracy, I tell ye!
Expected Points Table
These two wrong decisions impact the ongoing Expected Points totals thus:
At the moment, based on xPts, Celtic have 1.13 less points than expected due to Honest Mistakes and The Rangers have 2.1 more points than expected.
With only 4 points separating them in the league, that 3.23 xPts difference is looking important this early.
As always, a long way to go, and I expect parity by seasons end.
Will keep an eye on this. Is it on the level ?, hope so. Unlike a lot of my fellow Celtic fans I do not believe the Scottish refs are corrupt and favour the bluenoses. In my opinion watching pro football for about 40 years, you have a ref and what used to be called two linesmen, lately a 4rth official, and here is the rub, 22 cheating bastards, called players, who have no moral compass and are programmed to cheat, and yes our club is no different to any other, they are to a man cheating bastards, excuse my choice of words but it is how I feel, I will always support and follow my club Celtic, but it is getting harder, have zero respect for most of these players who would not give most fans a nod in the desert, overpaid cheats who in my opinion in a lot of cases hate the fans, yep the people that fund their way of living. How many would play for the minimum wage ?, which they should be doing, after all it’s for the love of the game eh ?. We talk about Walfrid and rightly so, ask yourself what would he say about the present Celtic ?, mate he would be disgusted and would want it disbanded, along with all the other clubs throughout the world. And to think our young worship these degenerates. Sorry for the rant, quite interesting work you are doing, but be true mate, and honest.
As a former referee myself a would agree with the Yorkshire referee’s outcome and to be honest a know most of the referee’s and how the come through the grades, and sometimes infact some of the time its not down to ability its who you know in the referee family. Most of the guys a know are rangers fans and when you referee their games can you be impartial ? A will leave that up to you to decide
Thanks for responding. I cannot see how referees are not immune from the same biases the rest of us have. Not refereeing games of your team or main rivals should be a minimum basic control.
I am an sfa qualified referee and a Celtic fan. I generally agree with the Yorkshire ref on this. The Aribo one is the interesting one as unlike a lot of fouls, it looks worse in slow motion than at full speed. I can see the arguments for a red and it could be argued either way for a long time on replay, but at full speed it looks like a yellow at worst.
I also don’t think most refs are cheats. To be Frank, I just don’t think they can think fast enough to shoehorn in a predetermined outcome. As other Martin rightly says, they’re dealing with 22 cheats. Look at them blatantly knock the ball out then scream for a throw in/corner to them! It’s hard enough to deal with that never mind make game influencing decisions to a pre prepared plan.
Maybe a bit of player honesty would help…
Thanks for responding and hoping to hear more of your perspective as this series carries on.
I will apply a very simple test – if it is incompetence then it will be random and impact all teams equally – think Willie Collum.
Otherwise, what is the explanation?
I agree players should be better behaved but this is common at all high level sport between hyper competitive alpha males, sadly.
A fair test that should be met over the course of the season from a maths perspective. Picking the “higher ranked” referees for the Celtic/The Rangers games may skew the figure by narrowing a variable, but it will be interesting to see how it pans out. I’ll follow the series.
And yes, Collum is just a bit rubbish rather than anything else.
Comedy gold. ???
In England no referee with a soft spot would be anywhere near their games or ours for that matter.
And for good reason.
What a special bunch.
How can there possibly be any finger pointing at refs when (since rangers came back into the top flight), Celtic have had more penalties that any other team, Celtic have had less red and yellow cards than any other team and Celtic have had more penalties in old firm games than rangers.
Add to that the farce that is the compliance officer. Since the introduction of said officer, rangers have been summoned 14 times, more than all the other team in all the league out together and how many times have Celtic I hear you ask?
0000000000. Yip
So for a so called corrupt organisation to be for Rangers and anti Celtic, well all I can say is I’d hate to see them against rangers then lol.
Isn’t it strange how you never heard any moaning when Celtic were rampant for all those years.
Get a grip.
Richy – thanks for replying
Unfortunately you fall into any number of traps
Firstly, I am not “finger pointing”. Each major call is independently assessed. Sometimes the ref gets it right, sometimes not.
Penalties are quite rare events, statistically. The question isn’t “how many did you get/not get” but “how many were correctly awarded/missed”. It is the latter question we seek to answer.
The Compliance Officer: the reason TRFC have been summoned so many times is the due to incidents being “missed” during the game. What that means is TRFC did not get punished in the game the incident took place and the other team did not benefit. It means they potentially miss a player in a future game which can be planned for, and with a much bigger squad than 99% of the league, an adequate replacement can be made. Effectively side stepping any real punishment (that sounds familiar!).
There is no suggestion in any of this of being “for” or “anti” anyone. This is an exercise in assessing refereeing decisions. The reasons a ref may get something wrong are many and varied. The Yorkshire Whistler often provides excellent expert context as to the WHY. But we ALL have biases. Including referees. Based on culture, environment, up bringing etc.
Apart from that – spot on!