The Premier League Is Never Even.

“These things all even out over the course of a season.”

How often do we hear that? Each time there is a controversial or weak decision that the majority adjudge to be a little harsh. The most recent examples include Chelsea being awarded a late penalty, to steal a point and to take 2 points away from the ever improving West Brom; Wes Brown being sent off for a good tackle, Wayne Rooney showing his petulant side, again; and Kevin Mirallas surviving a studs-on-knee challenge on Luis Suarez.

How can any commentator say that “These things all even out over the course of a season.” though? What proof, what quantifiable proof is there that poor decisions are compensated for, later in the season? I doubt that each week we have Chis Foy, Martin Atkinson, Michael Oliver et al getting together, reviewing decisions, checking the upcoming schedule to decide in which games they collectively will ‘make up’ for poor decisions.

But what if they did? What if they give West Brom a soft penalty during a 5-1 drubbing by Arsenal? Does that make up for it? Does the compensation mean that the penalty that was given against them is now awarded to them? Or are their opponents denied an undeniable penalty to make up for it? Will Sunderland be allowed to replay their game with all 11 men? Can Liverpool play the rest of the Merseyside derby from the point of that tackle, at 2-1 up? Or was the failed sending off justified for the missed (during the game) bite by Suarez on Ivanovic last season? Will Wayne Rooney be sent off during warm ups for too many keep-ups?

How do you define the compensation an aggrieved team should get?

You can’t. Buddha said, “This is because that is; this is not because that is not; this is born because that is born; this dies because that dies.” He did not become a Premier League referee and say “This red card is because of that red card”.

The intangibles to be gained from West Brom beating Chelsea are close to impossible to list. Momentum is a key one – West Brom will feel robbed of all three points, of the win. And the momentum this can build for a team is enormous. West Brom are not a bottom side anymore, a relegation candidate, Steve Clarke has gotten them to be a progressing above mid-table side. Still a scalp of perennial title challengers Chelsea is a big coup for them.

The two extra points would not have moved them up the table. They currently sit 10^th, 3 points behind Newcastle, who they have just lost to. Before that they played Aston Villa, who were below the Baggies on goal difference. Maybe, buoyed by a win over Chelsea, rather than wound up by the injustice, they would have won more than 1 point from those two games?

Sunderland too are embroiled in turmoil. With Gus Poyet looking to steady the ship at the Stadium of Light, a sending off, which was not warranted will do them no good, and it didn’t, as they lost 2-0 to Stoke. Sure, it will take the FA Panel about 30 seconds to review and overturn the decision, but that doesn’t give Sunderland the 1 or 3 points and the momentum they could have gained from that match.

What if Liverpool’s form stumbles and they start to drop points in their forthcoming games because Everton took a point, picked up because they had all 11 men on the pitch?

Now you may say that they are professionals, and that they should be taking the performance into the next game, taking each game as it comes and not thinking about the points or the decisions. But have you ever deliberately tried to forget something? Try not to think about a purple penguin. Just try not to think about them. Hard, isn’t it?

West Brom, on average, go 11 games between penalties, and, in their first 11 games this Premier League season they had…..1 penalty. On average Chelsea wait just 6 games between penalties in the Premier League, over the last 10 years. Before that weekend they had played 10 games with 2 penalties. The first was at 0-0 against Hull – a possible game changer at that point – so the odds were they would be due to get another one soon. (Although the stats would suggest it ought to have been against West Ham, their next opponents, so no wonder West Brom feel hard done by!)

But let’s have a look closer at the penalty they were given – against Liverpool. It was a soft penalty that they were given – soft, but it was a penalty. However, how much did it matter? Luis Suarez already had netted a hat-trick by that point, and Liverpool were dominating. The point during the game in which the penalty was awarded made it inconsequential. 66 minutes played, and 3 goals down, it was not a game changing goal.

Game changing goals are ones like Hazard’s converted penalty, or the foul by Charlie Adam on Mulumbu in the 0-0 draw at Stoke. The difference between the penalties they have been given, the one against and the one not given, is the magnitude and the impact. The penalty for them means nothing, bar a notch on Morrison’s goal scoring chart. Hazard’s converted spot kick denied them two points, and the officials not spotting the foul against Stoke lost them 2 points as well. I doubt that they will need those points for escaping relegation this season, as the bottom of the Premier League is so dire, it would take a different level of turgidness in order to seep through to the bottom of that pile! However, come the end of the season, those points could mean the difference between Europa League spot or just another season for them. The points gained or not may mean the difference between Champions League and Europa League qualification for Liverpool, (Or even Man Utd on current form) and relegation or survival for Sunderland.

Perhaps if they are losing 2-1 to Chelsea in the return fixture, and have an equally dubious penalty awarded in order to snatch a point, then you could suggest that Chelsea got their just deserts, and West Brom got a measure of revenge. But in when you look at a team’s momentum, and their points tally, all you have done is deny both teams a point and a win. It will have also disrupted their goal difference. (Albeit by a slim margin, but a slim goal differences can be all it takes – just ask Arsenal and Liverpool fans!)

The home team has won 63% of all penalties in the last 10 years, and Chelsea have a difference of +16 when it comes to penalties awarded at home. The Blues have received 67 penalties in the last 10 years! The stats are starting to mount up against West Brom. Last season alone, Chelsea had 11 penalties, coming in a close second with 7 were…West Brom, strangely enough.

Chelsea have had a total of 36 penalties in the last 4 seasons alone. That means an average of 9 a season – that means their average rate of penalties given works out at one every 4 games! In the same period of the Premier League, West Brom have been awarded 15 penalties.

You simply cannot say that things even out over a season. They don’t. Even if you suggest it is down to luck, like the flipping of a coin, you cannot guarantee that one time you flip a tail the next time it will be heads. Even flipping it 100 times, will not give you 50 heads and 50 tails. It just does not work that way. Although maybe if the same ref were to do the reverse fixture – that may play a part in it. Even more so if that referee has been known to award more penalties. Last season Andre Marriner gave out 7 penalties – joint 2^nd highest of all the refs. However when the discrepancy between top and bottom are 8 penalties (1 given by Anthony Taylor, 9 given by Jonathon Moss) It begs the question of why the gap?

West Brom have received an apology from the head of the referees Mike Riley. The apology is just ludicrous. The party line for a poor performance by a referee, is for them to miss a round or two of Premier League games. Kevin Friend, for his dismissal of Wes Brown was not be seen in the next two rounds of Premier League games. However Andre Marriner was there in charge of Fulham vs Swansea. Will Mike Riley send his apologies to Sunderland? Given an apology was issued to West Brom, yet Andre Marriner is not missing any rounds of Premier League games, I feel Sunderland ought to be receiving an apology and a basket of fruit from Mike Riley at the very least.

After the incident, West Brom asked that video replays are used. For an incident which is adjudge by most to be harsh, but not totally clear cut like Rooney’s kick. It is unclear and clumsy challenges which lead me to think that video replays are never going to happen. In order to determine exactly when the attacking player starts going to ground, if it is or is not before any, even seemingly incidental contact, is going to require replays that slow the game down. You have to look at the attacking player, try to adjudge where he is going, does he have balance, if not was it foul play that caused that? Where is he going? Does he have control of the ball…the list goes on. With the delay it would cause, that is never going to be allowed.

West Brom will probably face disappointment in their appeals.

The other option would be to then allow the game to continue whilst the incident is reviewed. Then to bring the game and the time of the game back to when the penalty should have awarded. Both options will just result in controversy, and the slowing down of the game.

Replays are used well in rugby, cricket, American Football and hockey. But they are different sports. Some of which are slow (cricket, American Football) and used to breaks in the game (hockey). The use of technology to determine if the ball crosses the line in football is a good move. But there we have clear black and white the ball is or is not over the line. It’s not as though we could use a snick-o-meter to determine contact in the penalty area – it is just a quite ridiculous ask by West Brom. They may as well suggest that extra time is played with two footballs.

However had Gus Poyet or Malky Mackay come out and said that, given the clear cut nature of those two decisions, it could have been a good argument for the use of video replays in the game. And we would have been talking about Wayne Rooney acting like a petulant child and how that could damage Man Utd/England’s chances, rather than things that could have been.

West Brom, Cardiff, Sunderland and Liverpool all deserve to feel hard done by with the decisions, and stats show that these choices will go towards the big boys more often than not. Until West Brom, Cardiff Sunderland and Liverpool become a big clubs, it is just the way the cookie crumbles.

Now, have you forgotten about those Purple Penguins yet?