"Lee Mason. Oh Dear"

[dom]

Sorry for the long post (may have been better as a blog?)

One of the difficulties for me is the distinct lack of transparency with refereeing. They are 'governed' by PGMO Ltd and the figurehead is Mike Riley. They are described thus the Premier League official website:

The organisation that manages the professional officials is PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials Ltd). PGMO consists of a select group who officiate in all Premier League and some Football League matches as well as a national list who officiate in Football League matches.
PGMO monitors, trains and develops all of its officials and also appoints officials to matches.
The development of referees at grassroots and amateur level falls under the remit of the Football Association.

The site goes further to explain how refs are selected:

The appointment of match officials for matches is traditionally announced each Monday with 19 referees available to officiate 10 Premier League matches and six selected Football League matches. The appointments are made by the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMOB). When making the appointments, a number of factors are taken into account including:
- The current form of the official
- The referee’s position in the merit table
- Overall experience
- How often they have refereed the Clubs involved
- Proximity to the ground or city in which they were born or live
- The team the referee supports
- International appointments (For example if referees have UEFA matches on Thursdays they will only be available for matches on Sundays or Mondays)

A cursory google leads us to find the Directors of PGMO are:

Andrew Godfrey Williamson
Michael Foster
Jonathan Patrick Bracebridge Hall
Peter James Heard

We can see they are involved in/have been involved in the following companies:

ANNE FOSTER LIMITED
ARCHDALE PROPERTIES LIMITED
BADMINTON INVESTMENT LIMITED
CCSL NEWCO LIMITED
CHURSTON HEARD LIMITED
COLCHESTER UNITED FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED
ENGLAND 2007 LIMITED
ENGLAND RUGBY LIMITED
FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION LIMITED
FOOTBALL LEAGUE LIMITED(THE)
FOOTBALLERS FURTHER EDUCATION AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING SOCIETY LIMITED
KICK IT OUT
LEAGUE FOOTBALL EDUCATION
LFE SPORTS DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
NATIONAL FOOTBALL CENTRE LIMITED
NO. 22 ELVASTON PLACE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION LIMITED
PUTTING RUGBY FIRST LIMITED
RUGBY CARE LIMITED
RUGBY REFLINK LIMITED
RUGBY WORLD NATIONS CUP LIMITED
RUGBY WORLD NATIONS TOURNAMENT LIMITED
RUSHPLAN (COLCHESTER) LIMITED
SPORTS LINK (UK) LIMITED
THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION PREMIER LEAGUE LIMITED
THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION PREMIER LEAGUE MEDICAL CARE SCHEME LIMITED
THE FOOTBALL FOUNDATION
THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE (COMMUNITY) LIMITED
THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE TRUST LIMITED
THE FOOTBALL STADIA IMPROVEMENT FUND LIMITED
TWICKENHAM EXPERIENCE LTD
WEMBLEY NATIONAL STADIUM LIMITED
WORLD-WIDE SOCCER LIMITED

PGMO Ltd publish accounts as you would expect and a couple of headline items from those include:

£0.16m Cash at Bank
£0.20m Net Worth
£3.30m Total Current Liabilities
£3.30m Total Current Assets
£7.00m Turnover
£2.60m Salaries

Interesting amounts of money involved if you ask me considering we're talking of referees!

You can also find (here - <a class="postlink" href="http://www.isrscork.com/newsisr4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.isrscork.com/newsisr4.htm</a> ) a copy of the 2007/2008 Directives given to Elite Referees by PGMO (worth a read).

Bizarrely, what you CANNOT find is who are the members of the panel/board who select referees?

Or the referees' merit table.

They don't even have a functional website.

This lack of info/transparency only contributes to accusations of foul play and conspiracy in my opinion. How can a body of people be trusted when they 'are not allowed' to talk to the press afterwards to explain decisions, when they are seemingly 'not allowed' to admit mistakes, when they are seemingly backed to the hilt - sorry to use Mason again, but the Derry red card?

Whilst there is no transparency, and judging by their accounts they are a 'for profit' organisation, these accusations will not subside.

A simple model for them going forward ought to be:

- not for profit organisation
- salaried employees earning the going rate for whatever positions are deemed as required run the organisation
- each league club pays a % each season to cover costs of running that organisation
- fully published list of referees
- fully published methodology of selection of referees
- fully published list of any members of a panel or board involved in the selection of referees for any match
- environment where a referee is allowed to admit mistakes without fear and is helped to learn from that mistake
- commission to review any instance of perceived bias (as in what the OPs statistical analysis seems to point to)
- continued investment in grass roots referees

etc

I know that is probably idealism gone mad, but it is bloody frustrating information that should be in the public domain is kept hidden.

Blimey. Good post. Interesting

This should be set straight to the press and then, a little later, to the FA / Prem so that the latter don't have time to get their lies in order

BTW, excellent post and research work, you lot...

 

[cleavers]

Good debate as this is, none of it alters the fact we still played shite in the three games he's reffed so far, and frankly didn't much look like scoring. I don't believe that was down to Mason, just poor tactics and/or poor team selections.

Mason is a shit referee, and has been shit for plenty of other clubs as well as ours, if he's really a secret rag, then find some proof, and go to Riley / FA with it.

Currently their are 6 or 7 very shit referees, and about 4 more who are at best average, no matter who they ref, Riley should be aware of this, because Dermot Gallagher points it out most weeks on Monday on Sky.

There is no consistency, not between games, and often not even in games, and that's the biggest issue for me, until there is, then we will continue to complain, as will all the other clubs, even united.

Interestingly though, in the eyes of the neutral, they do seem to get the better of the decisions, and I'm going on the reaction of other clubs fans here, not just ours. Fans of Everton, Liverpool, Newcastle, Arsenal, Chelsea, Villa, Leeds, Stoke, Birmingham, Forest, people who I work with, all say the same about united getting the best of it. United fans will call them ABU of course, but we can't all be wrong.

 

[dom]

Good debate as this is, none of it alters the fact we still played shite in the three games he's reffed so far, and frankly didn't much look like scoring. I don't believe that was down to Mason, just poor tactics and/or poor team selections.

Mason is a shit referee, and has been shit for plenty of other clubs as well as ours, if he's really a secret rag, then find some proof, and go to Riley / FA with it.

Currently their are 6 or 7 very shit referees, and about 4 more who are at best average, no matter who they ref, Riley should be aware of this, because Dermot Gallagher points it out most weeks on Monday on Sky.

There is no consistency, not between games, and often not even in games, and that's the biggest issue for me, until there is, then we will continue to complain, as will all the other clubs, even united.

Interestingly though, in the eyes of the neutral, they do seem to get the better of the decisions, and I'm going on the reaction of other clubs fans here, not just ours. Fans of Everton, Liverpool, Newcastle, Arsenal, Chelsea, Villa, Leeds, Stoke, Birmingham, Forest, people who I work with, all say the same about united getting the best of it. United fans will call them ABU of course, but we can't all be wrong.

Someone posted the 5-1 1989 derby highlights on You Tube tonight

a couple of things struck me:

a) the players were not mobbing the ref over every key decision

b) "Sir" alky was not dancing a jig on the touchline/ harassing officials/ moaning about the ref on tv afterwards

In other words it still resembled a football match that most of us older fans would recognise......

Things have clearly changed...

 

[Balti]

Re:

If it was not bent vinnie would never have walked, that said it all to me, it was the most bent decision that has happened for years, also the movement of Walton abroad makes me even more suspicious, Riley should have been sacked after the two penalty decisions at Trafford in the last two games, the game is at an all time low morally, murdochs tv has a lot to answer for.

this and the FA's selective biased actions are morally bankrupt

 

[cleavers]

In other words it still resembled a football match that most of us older fans would recognise......

Things have clearly changed...

I don't disagree dom, the general standard of refereeing at the top level has nosedived.

I work with a lad who referees at non league level on Saturday, and pub level on a Sunday, and much of it dismays him, and as he says it undermines his efforts at both levels, considering they now get paid very large sums at the top level, something is wrong, but the suggestion that Mason somehow makes us lose games we don't score in, and play shite in, is I'm afraid the wrong conclusion, even if Chris doesn't make that link directly in his piece, it is rather inferred.

 

[Anonymous]

Who pays for the PL ref's?

Unsurprisingly not in the public domain.

I want to make clear, I know nothing of accounting and the figures below may be perfectly legitimate and my understanding so poor it means sod all:

Wages/Salaries
2007 £1.70m
2008 £1.98m
2009 £2.16m
2010 £2.21m
2011 £2.68m

Cost of Sales
2007 £5.50m
2008 £5.82m
2009 £6.28m
2010 £6.39m
2011 £6.78m

What the fuck are they buying and selling? And who is getting paid what? I thought we were talking about appointing referees to football matches?

 

[dom]

In other words it still resembled a football match that most of us older fans would recognise......

Things have clearly changed...

I don't disagree dom, the general standard of refereeing at the top level has nosedived.

I work with a lad who referees at non league level on Saturday, and pub level on a Sunday, and much of it dismays him, and as he says it undermines his efforts at both levels, considering they now get paid very large sums at the top level, something is wrong, but the suggestion that Mason somehow makes us lose games we don't score in, and play shite in, is I'm afraid the wrong conclusion, even if Chris doesn't make that link directly in his piece, it is rather inferred.

Cleavers... some fairpoints , you raise

and much as Iintictively agree with Cris on his general theme and onthe perniciouseffect of the Prem / Sky influence on football, chris' definition of statistical significance must be flawed (as many, even sympathetically- minded blues tried to point out to him)

On the other hand, his failure to meet statistiscal threshold of stat significance , does not mean that there is no bias, just that he didn't assemble enough numerical data to be credibly analysed for SS at p=0.05 or p =0.001

On the other hand, your point about how the general culture of cheating at the top level (diving, disssembling,harassing: media collusion : ooh it's just 'scholsey'" ) infects the culture of football at all levels in this country are spot on, IMO

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

Good debate as this is, none of it alters the fact we still played shite in the three games he's reffed so far, and frankly didn't much look like scoring. I don't believe that was down to Mason, just poor tactics and/or poor team selections.

Mason is a shit referee, and has been shit for plenty of other clubs as well as ours, if he's really a secret rag, then find some proof, and go to Riley / FA with it.

Currently their are 6 or 7 very shit referees, and about 4 more who are at best average, no matter who they ref, Riley should be aware of this, because Dermot Gallagher points it out most weeks on Monday on Sky.

There is no consistency, not between games, and often not even in games, and that's the biggest issue for me, until there is, then we will continue to complain, as will all the other clubs, even united.

Interestingly though, in the eyes of the neutral, they do seem to get the better of the decisions, and I'm going on the reaction of other clubs fans here, not just ours. Fans of Everton, Liverpool, Newcastle, Arsenal, Chelsea, Villa, Leeds, Stoke, Birmingham, Forest, people who I work with, all say the same about united getting the best of it. United fans will call them ABU of course, but we can't all be wrong.

We did score a legitimate goal at WBA to be ruled offside, but I agree we weren't at our best in the games listed.

 

[s&mcityfans]

If we play a similar game plan as we did Norwich, We will win quite Nicely
The Ref will Not determine our Win
Yes , The Refs Tend to be A bit crap these Days......

 

[Chris in London]

In other words it still resembled a football match that most of us older fans would recognise......

Things have clearly changed...

I don't disagree dom, the general standard of refereeing at the top level has nosedived.

I work with a lad who referees at non league level on Saturday, and pub level on a Sunday, and much of it dismays him, and as he says it undermines his efforts at both levels, considering they now get paid very large sums at the top level, something is wrong, but the suggestion that Mason somehow makes us lose games we don't score in, and play shite in, is I'm afraid the wrong conclusion, even if Chris doesn't make that link directly in his piece, it is rather inferred.

Cleavers... some fairpoints , you raise

and much as Iintictively agree with Cris on his general theme and onthe perniciouseffect of the Prem / Sky influence on football, chris' definition of statistical significance must be flawed (as many, even sympathetically- minded blues tried to point out to him)

On the other hand, his failure to meet statistiscal threshold of stat significance , does not mean that there is no bias, just that he didn't assemble enough numerical data to be credibly analysed for SS at p=0.05 or p =0.001

On the other hand, your point about how the general culture of cheating at the top level (diving, disssembling,harassing: media collusion : ooh it's just 'scholsey'" ) infects the culture of football at all levels in this country are spot on, IMO

Can I be absolutely clear on what the blog and my posts in this thread were intended to show?

The stats in the blog do NOT prove that Mason is biased against City, is a rag or anything else. Stats alone can never prove anything. They can demonstrate a link or connection between two things, or a general trend, and where they do it is often worth exploring in more detail the reasons for the link, but of themselves they prove nothing.

Some people have disputed that the three games he has refereed so far is enough to demonstrate a trend. I disagree, because the trend is demonstrated by the 37 games he did not referee, not the three he did. Those three games are anomalies compared to the mainstream of how we have performed, and the common factor in those particular games is Mason. The least that anyone can say is that the stats are consistent with the theory that We do badly whenever Mason is in charge, even if they don't in themselves establish that. I think that the statistical evidence gives cause for concern. If others aren't bothered by it, thats up to them. I understand entirely why some are more concerned with our tactics and selections than who the referee is, but I can't understand why anybody would reject out of hand the possibility that the identity of the ref has a big influence on the outcome of the game. Unless they've never seen a city game with Peter Walton in charge.

Of course, the less data you have to work with, the more cautious you should be about reaching any conclusions from the data alone, but to say that three games cannot be enough to suggest a link is, sorry, but just plain wrong. If your wife falls off a balcony on your honeymoon, that is very sad. If your second wife also falls off a balcony on honeymoon, that suggests a trend. How cautious you have to be before making the link depends entirely on the context of the analysis.

Statistically, there is a clear link this season between us doing badly and Mason being in charge. A number of different data points confirm this: the results of the games, cards and penalties awarded, goals scored etc. It does not automatically follow that Mason is the reason for us doing badly, but that is certainly one is the possibilities. It may just be a coincidence that of the half dozen times or so that we have been really poor this season, he happens to have been the man in charge each time - our old friend Mr Walton being in charge on another occasion. But as Clare Danes said in Homeland, "I don't believe in coincidences".

I entirely respect the view of those who say the link isn't clear enough after three games with him in charge. We will know more on Sunday night, and I really hope Mr Mason bucks the trend. Or we do, whichever way you want to look at it. but insofar as the games he has reffed before are any guide to the way he will ref on Sunday, the trend is worrying.

Only this.

Ps Dom - you appear to have three hands. I am officially "outing" you as a closet Stokie.

;-)