Referees’ Performances | 2024/2025

[SebastianBlue]

Only 20% of Ipswich's fouls resulted in a booking, compared to 50% of City's fouls.

To put it another way, we were booked for every 2 fouls called, whilst Ipswich were booked every 5 fouls called.

What makes it worse, is that Grealish was actually booked for being fouled in Ipswich’s box, which should have been a foul and a yellow for Ipswich (and a penalty for us). And Delap’s various fouls without booking adds insult to literal injury (in the case of his knee to Kova’s hip/thigh).

And that, of course, does not include the incidents where no foul was called or where multiple fouls were committed in a discrete sequence, with only one actual foul being recorded. I am sure we had a few, but I would wager Ipswich had quite a few more (I can think of a few just on Haaland alone right now, including the pull back in the box which should have been at least a foul and a penalty, if not a yellow or even a red, given the position and situation for the foul, which might be the reason the VAR didn’t want to have the referee take a look).

Could the referee have given a penalty against us? Absolutely, but that is 2-1 unawarded penalties favouring Ipswich, with many, many fouls (and many more not even given) for Ipswich with very few bookings (one of the three actually came in the 95th minute, otherwise it would have been a booking for every 7 fouls).

I am not sure how anyone can argue that Ipswich weren’t shown leniency in the game, for whatever reason.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I see Dale Johnson, the ESPN VAR "expert" has gone full conspiracy theorist about our game :

"Each of these incidents have their merits for a spot kick, yet both went in favour of the bigger club."

 

[SebastianBlue]

I see Dale Johnson, the ESPN VAR "expert" has gone full conspiracy theorist about our game :

"Each of these incidents have their merits for a spot kick, yet both went in favour of the bigger club."

I saw that, too, and noted he decided not to discuss the Haaland pullback in the box or Grealish getting booked for being fouled in the box, as well. All were reviewed by VAR, and only the Savinho penalty was deemed worth a review at the monitor. So that would be 2-1 in favour of Ipswich in my opinion. Had no idea they were now such a “big” club.

I was tempted to share it in the VAR thread but decided I just didn’t have the energy to debate the officials’ performance in both threads today.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I saw that, too, and noted he decided not to discuss the Haaland pullback in the box or Grealish getting booked for being fouled in the box, as well. All were reviewed by VAR, and only the Savinho penalty was deemed worth a review at the monitor. So that would be 4-1 in favour of Ipswich in my opinion.

I was tempted to share it in the VAR thread but decided I just didn’t have the energy to debate the officials’ performance in both threads today.

It was an extraordinary thing for Johnson to put in writing because he usually makes sure his opinions tie into what he is told by PGMOL (which miraculously is normally also supported by the "independent" review panel. If that is the message he is getting from PGMOL, it is more than a little disconcerting

 

[SebastianBlue]

It was an extraordinary thing for Johnson to put in writing because he usually makes sure his opinions tie into what he is told by PGMOL (which miraculously is normally also supported by the "independent" review panel. If that is the message he is getting from PGMOL, it is more than a little disconcerting

It’s also extraordinary given it is a subtle rebuke of the referee and VAR, which he normally defends to the hilt. It gives the impression that the comment was sanctioned, as you said, and PGMOL is perfectly happy with hanging both out-to-dry (even if the comment is nonsensical if you actually watched the match).

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

To put it another way, we were booked for every 2 fouls called, whilst Ipswich were booked every 5 fouls called.

What makes it worse, is that Grealish was actually booked for being fouled in Ipswich’s box, which should have been a foul and a yellow for Ipswich (and a penalty for us). And Delap’s various fouls without booking adds insult to literal injury (in the case of his knee to Kova’s hip/thigh).

And that, of course, does not include the incidents where no foul was called or where multiple fouls were committed in a discrete sequence, with only one actual foul being recorded. I am sure we had a few, but I would wager Ipswich had quite a few more (I can think of a few just on Haaland alone right now, including the pull back in the box which should have been at least a foul and a penalty, if not a yellow or even a red, given the position and situation for the foul, which might be the reason the VAR didn’t want to have the referee take a look).

Could the referee have given a penalty against us? Absolutely, but that is 2-1 unawarded penalties favouring Ipswich, with many, many fouls (and many more not even given) for Ipswich with very few bookings (one of the three actually came in the 95th minute, otherwise it would have been a booking for every 7 fouls).

I am not sure how anyone can argue that Ipswich weren’t shown leniency in the game, for whatever reason.

I had their 3rd booking (El-Hamadi) down as the 83rd minute. I could be wrong though.

Even so, late bookings when there have been numerous worthy fouls all game is nothing more than stat padding. Chelsea got away with loads last week, but ony Caicedo was booked in the 89th minute.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I had their 3rd booking (El-Hamadi) down as the 83rd minute. I could be wrong though.

Even so, late bookings when there have been numerous worthy fouls all game is nothing more than stat padding. Chelsea got away with loads last week, but ony Caicedo was booked in the 89th minute.

Indeed.

And both ESPN and the official PL app have Al-Hamadi’s yellow in the 94th minute so you should update your spreadsheet! ;-)

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Indeed.

And both ESPN and the official PL app have Al-Hamadi’s yellow in the 94th minute so you should update your spreadsheet! ;-)

I shall amend accordingly ;-)

 

[Stephen230]

I don’t see how any statistics judging what percentage of decisions are correct, can be anything other than one person’s opinion.

Virtually every contact between two players leads to a subjective decision by a referee whether he’s seen enough for a foul or not. In fact there doesn’t even have to be any contact for a foul.

So I can’t take seriously any stats judging how many decisions are right or wrong.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I don’t see how any statistics judging what percentage of decisions are correct, can be anything other than one person’s opinion.

Virtually every contact between two players leads to a subjective decision by a referee whether he’s seen enough for a foul or not. In fact there doesn’t even have to be any contact for a foul.

So I can’t take seriously any stats judging how many decisions are right or wrong.

And certainly not claims that indicate that the PL referees have the most accurate decision making in the history of human civilisation (that are then somehow improved with the introduction of VAR).