Bloomberg article about ref bias

Submitted by MgerBlerg on

I found this article interesting:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-01/do-college-football-…

I just skimmed it since I'm at work but they did some research on frequency of penalties based on certain bias factors and found that programs more likely to make the playoff tend to benefit to some extent, potentially due to conflicts of interest between the refs wanting to please their employer, i.e., the conference, and the conference making more money by teams making the playoff.

One topic this article doesn't talk about is the corrupt assignment of officials specifically to this year's M-OSU game (two were known OSU fans, one previously banned from reffing the 2006 game for fear of bias).  If enough of us email them, I'm curious if they would consider a follow-up article to give the issue more publicity.  I'm not trying to perpetuate the discussion on this issue to complain about our loss.  I'm trying to (1) increase Michigan's likelihood of making the playoffs this year and (2) decrease the likelihood of reffing bias in the future, especially since we more than usual are on the short end of it.

mkelleycpa

December 1st, 2016 at 11:26 AM ^

I called Jim Delany yesterday.  He won't take calls from the public, so I was put through to his secretary, Barbara.  She must have left for the day, so I left her a voice mail message.  It will be interesting to see if anything comes of this.  I just want them to know that we know and we are not okay with it.

Go Blue!

True Blue Grit

December 1st, 2016 at 1:06 PM ^

If you go to the Big Ten website, there's no contact us page or any direct contact links for any of the staff members or anything asking for feedback .  If you click on Jim Delany, all you get is a big shameless bio piece on him.  Their website collectively sends the message like you see on some truck bumper stickers:  "Don't like my driving <officiating>?  Call 1-800-EATSHIT".  

SD Larry

December 1st, 2016 at 11:11 AM ^

Plus one cuz I can't do more.  Might  even be even better than your avatar, which is saying something.  Hope this gets sent into league if hasn't been already.  Will definitely be sharing with my friends.  

samsoccer7

December 1st, 2016 at 11:28 AM ^

In reference to the pat on the butt on Weber, I see this picture and GIF a lot.  But if you remember Weber was pushed out of bounds and the fans and Weber were clamoring for a late hit penalty.  Weber clearly says something as he's walking back to the sideline so it's possible the ref was just saying "hey I'm not gonna call that but go get 'em" kinda thing.  I think the refs sucked and we paid the price but I'm not sure this specific play and incident should be at the forefront of the argument.

Edit: I was responding to the still image of the video.  The video itself is shocking honestly.

M-Dog

December 1st, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^

Exactly.  

That's what I want from the CFP committee . . . "jury nullification."

I want them to say:  "The ref's didn't (wouldn't) get it right, but we can.  If Ohio State is #2 then so is Michigan.  #2A and #2B.  Michigan should go to the CFP.  Period."

 

 

 

Kevin13

December 1st, 2016 at 12:32 PM ^

and just the tip of the iceberg. I lost count of the number of illegal procedure calls against OSU not called as well as holding.  The officiating was some of the most home town bias I have ever seen.

mGrowOld

December 1st, 2016 at 11:00 AM ^

"Protected flagships in the Big Ten did especially well with officials, the research shows. Ohio State, the conference’s most competitive flagship team in the years Brymer studied, was 14 percent less likely to be dinged for a discretionary foul than, say, Purdue, a non-flagship team with little chance of contending for a national title. The Buckeyes fared even better with refs in 2014, when it made the first-ever formal playoff and won the national championship on Jan. 12, 2015."

Everyone Murders

December 1st, 2016 at 11:23 AM ^

OSU was flagged that season for a grand total of two offensive holding penalties.  ALL SEASON.  Evidence, of course, that OSU plays extra fair!

(I do wonder, though, what the overall penalty stats say about Michigan.  We're certainly a flagship of the Big Ten - it's just whether we are a "protected flagship".)

UMAmaizinBlue

December 1st, 2016 at 11:53 AM ^

Still commit penalties, especially when playing another great team. The problem with this whole thing is that we assumed your point was always correct because of the players and scheme and discipline. Now we suspect it's because of ref bias.

SaigonBlue

December 1st, 2016 at 12:39 PM ^

Ohio State actually went TWO YEARS, yes, TWO YEARS (October 2013 to October 2015) without a offensive holding call in BIG TEN play.

In other words, in the 2014 season they had ZERO holds called against them in B1G games.

Really? F$%king unbelievable.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/10/17/9562415/ohio-state-holding-big-ten-game-first-time-since-2013

P.S.: CAUTION, very ugly video embedded in that link above.

I Love Lamp

December 1st, 2016 at 2:07 PM ^

Every time the Detroit Lions have a good play, you expect to see a flag because it's just the Lions, not the big, bad Patriots who do everything right because they're successful so they found a way to do it within the rules or some crap.

PapabearBlue

December 1st, 2016 at 11:01 AM ^

Fire all the refs, hire competent ones, pay well, make it a job worth having instead of a part time job.

I know someone somewhere showed that compensation has little to do with quality of work, and I agree with this to an extent. But raising the bar for entering the activity will and making it a competitive career will raise that bar.

Officiating has been embarassingly bad and something that has been SUSPICIOUSLY left in the dust for many years. We can land a robot car on mars but we cant invent a football that can tell you whether or not it got a first down/touchdown?

I mean, why do we even have league refs? It's college football, just get a damn college football reffing committee. They ref all college games. There isnt B1G refs, or SEC refs. Then do backgrounds, no biased reffing, no homestate reffing. Do background checks. Do it all.

This is an extremely and outrageously profitiable industry to be ignoring such a weak link.

Prince Lover

December 1st, 2016 at 11:17 AM ^

Wouldn't you then have the same thing only on a bigger scale?
Which teams would the ncaa want in the playoffs, Louisville, a smaller school without national appeal, or Texas, with its huge following? One team would make them more money in the big time money game.
(Just used those two schools for an example, no reason behind it.)
I like the idea, and it does seem weird to have each conference with their own officials and own tendencies. Look at B1G teams in the tourney without their own refs letting them bang away on each other. But who knows where the perfect answer lies.....

The Fan in Fargo

December 1st, 2016 at 11:37 AM ^

I agree. I mean, why not have full time refs that can hone in and get good at it. They can do football games on Saturdays or whenver needed and whatever other sports they are trained in for during the week days. Nothing against old men and I respect my elders but comeon. Get some young guys in there that can actually see with 20/20 vision and that can run up and down the field with these young guys. Same thing on the basketball court. 60 year olds with lack of oxygen to the brain fucking up game after game. Makes me so damn annoyed. These sports are full of these old 50 to 60 year olds that have been yelled at for years, can barely stand up straight and have big wide asses on them bigger than a washing machine. Why are them guys even out there? Because they know the rules and have experience? Give me a fucking break. Change the system. This is stupid and bullshit. It'll make the sport better and not piss people off. More fun for everyone means more fans. Everyone wants to see fair and good offciating. We don't have that.

Coach Carr Camp

December 1st, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^

There is a book called Scorecasting which takes a Freakonomics type approach to analyzing sports - i.e. do hotstreaks really exist? What about momentum? etc. One of the major points the books makes is that across all sports the home team clearly has an advantage if you look at historical winning percentages, but if you analyze actual performance, people perform just as well on the road and they do at home. They ultimately showed that the entire home vs away phenomenon is actually due to ref bias, not player performance. I would not be suprised if this held true to some extent in a Big name school vs Small name school - i.e. the ref is subconsciously bias to think that the historical power is less likely to make a mistake.  

Ihatebux

December 1st, 2016 at 11:52 AM ^

Totally agree.  I'm not sure the refs meant to be bias (although I wouldn't be surprised).  I do think they were very aware of the crowd reaction if the final play was reversed (i.e. they may not have made it home alive).   If the game was in A2, they would have been more apt to make some of those calls.

llandson

December 1st, 2016 at 11:56 AM ^

I firmly believe that the homefield advantage is largely, or all, due to referee bias. Referees feel the energy in the stadium around them, and this can affect the way they see things. If you don't believe bias can affect your vision, go take a poll of OSU fans and Michigan fans, and ask whether Barrett made the first down. 

There is no doubt in my mind that the referees of The Game believe in their hearts that they called that game fair. The problem, at least for me, is that they allowed whatever biases they had to create an imbalance in the full set of close calls. The penalty yards differential is key, because it filters out the subjective eye test.

After the Shawn Crable late hit, I have always assumed we were playing against the refs when in Columbus. I had no idea how bad it could get, until I saw that damn man spot that damn ball across that damn 15-yard line. 

M-Dog

December 1st, 2016 at 1:47 PM ^

SI did an extensive and comprehensive study of this a number of years back, from the other direction:  Why does homefield advantage exist?  (And it does exist.)

The result of their study, which ruled out numerous causes, was what you stated above:  Referee bias (or in some cases, referee intimidation).  

It's the ref's that cause home field advantage. 

They get into the buzz of the home crowd or are intimidated by it.  They are human.  It's damn exciting to cause 100,000 people that are 10 yards away from you to roar to Richter scale levels.  It's a head rush, just like it is for the athletes.  Conversely, it's very uncomfortable to piss off 100,000 people that are 10 yards away from you.  Most people don't like to piss off even one person in a room.

Even if they try to be detached and professional, it does not completely work out that way.