Lack of Penalty Decisions

[barney999]

Any think that the lack of penalties awarded to us has something to do with Nige managing us, refs holding it against us as they know what he is like in regards to complaining running them down?

[Banjo Red]

13 minutes ago, barney999 said:

Any think that the lack of penalties awarded to us has something to do with Nige managing us, refs holding it against us as they know what he is like in regards to complaining running them down?

Looks that way.

[luke_bristol]

It’s getting stupid now. Another apology letter isn’t enough.

[Bris Red]

20 minutes ago, barney999 said:

Any think that the lack of penalties awarded to us has something to do with Nige managing us, refs holding it against us as they know what he is like in regards to complaining running them down?

Really wouldn’t surprise me

[BCFCGav]

Stonewaller on Atkinson. I thought ‘well he CAN’T not give that ’.

He can.

[firstdivision]

20 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Stonewaller on Atkinson. I thought ‘well he CAN’T not give that ’.

He can.

Yes. It was just a penalty. Simple. I thought it as it happened and the replays confirmed it. 

[Northern Red]

For what it's worth Nige had no complaints over the red card but was furious about Freeman staying on and Atkinson not getting a penalty.

[TV Tom]

It’s beyond ridiculous now especially when you consider some of the truly woeful decisions that have gone against us, in my opinion in our first four league games we should have already had two penalties, a penalty against us that shouldn’t of been and at least one, possibly two opposition players sent off

[tin]

I actually thought the ref was having a good game until the sending off. No question Sykes had to go, but Freeman should’ve seen red too. It didn’t look a pen on Atkinson to me, but I was miles away from it in the old Block B of the Dolman! 

[Lew-T]

9 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

For what it's worth Nige had no complaints over the red card but was furious about Freeman staying on and Atkinson not getting a penalty.

Was it Freeman that flattened Sykes?

[Northern Red]

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

Was it Freeman that flattened Sykes?

Yep.

[cellist]

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

Was it Freeman that flattened Sykes?

Yes. Started the whole melee really. You can normally tell when a tackle goes in if it's bad because there is a huge reaction from the opposition players but there didn't really seem to be until Freeman kicked it all off

[GrahamC]

10 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

For what it's worth Nige had no complaints over the red card but was furious about Freeman staying on and Atkinson not getting a penalty.

He was right on all of those, the ref lost control just before the sending off, the Luton 11 was repeatedly wrestling & fouling off the ball & he did nothing.

He allowed him to foul Sykes who lost it & went in two footed but how Freeman gets a yellow for barging him to the ground I have no idea.

[RedRock]

It was a blatant penalty for me.

I think we need to be more vocal/visual in appealing them though. Put the pressure on refs.

[Super]

I do think Atkinson threw himself to the floor. Can see why it wasn't given.

[BCFCGav]

I’ll bang on this drum forever. CIES looked at penalty frequency across the biggest ~630 teams in Europe. We came comfortably bottom, and since this report about 5 months ago, we’ve had 0. Something isn’t right, the EFL need to stop protecting these disgraceful refs and ask them the bloody question. 

 

[mozo]

5 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

I’ll bang on this drum forever. CIES looked at penalty frequency across the biggest ~630 teams in Europe. We came comfortably bottom, and since this report about 5 months ago, we’ve had 0. Something isn’t right, the EFL need to stop protecting these disgraceful refs and ask them the bloody question. 

 

That's mental!

I do think VAR would have ruled in our favour countless times.

[BCFCGav]

1 minute ago, mozo said:

That's mental!

I do think VAR would have ruled in our favour countless times.

https://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp364/en/
 

Link to prove I’m not spouting rubbish. Yea I agree, I’m pro-VAR because of this nonsense.

[mozo]

5 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

https://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp364/en/
 

Link to prove I’m not spouting rubbish. Yea I agree, I’m pro-VAR because of this nonsense.

Thank you, I hadn't seen this

[Midlands Robin]

18 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

https://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp364/en/
 

Link to prove I’m not spouting rubbish. Yea I agree, I’m pro-VAR because of this nonsense.

It also stands out that the majority of the clubs in the Championship are at the bottom end of that list. It seems on average that Championship match Ref's are the most reluctant to award penalties in Europe. It's very bizarre.

[Dr Balls]

17 minutes ago, Midlands Robin said:

It also stands out that the majority of the clubs in the Championship are at the bottom end of that list. It seems on average that Championship match Ref's are the most reluctant to award penalties in Europe. It's very bizarre.

Maybe it’s because Championship referees are not much cop compared to the rest of the European leagues included. They either give ones that aren’t or miss ones that are, or some do both with amazing frequency!

To have just 1 penalty awarded for every 91 scoring chances is beyond ridiculous. And you only have to go 20 places up the table out of roughly 600 teams in Europe to find the team that gets awarded penalties twice as often as us based on minutes played. Only 4 penalties awarded in 2.5 seasons would suggest something more than random chance is going on. No wonder Pearson is complaining about officiating standards…

[Midlands Robin]

I agree, statistics like that show it's way more than just chance.

[Davefevs]

Tonight’s penalty for Atkinson, was about as easy a decision as you can get.  No excuses.

I thought Sykes was in trouble for his, but I’ve seen them not given as red.  But it was just into the red card “zone” for me, so I’m not gonna be hypocritical.

[kiwicolin]

Considering we have only had 7 penalties in 4 seasons,  and Blackpool had 8 last season, alone , definitely  

[Ian M]

14 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

https://www.football-observatory.com/IMG/sites/b5wp/2021/wp364/en/
 

Link to prove I’m not spouting rubbish. Yea I agree, I’m pro-VAR because of this nonsense.

That table is outdated. We have played 25 Championship fixtures since then without a penalty. We have moved from one penalty ever 1834 minutes to one every 2115 minutes as a result.

Our last penalty was 33.5 matches ago (3015 minutes) when Chris Martin scored on the stroke of half time in our 3-2 defeat at Coventry.

[Bristol Oil Services]

Perhaps not a surprise over the period from LJ stuttering then struggling up until well into Nige's time during which we would not infrequently have two or three attempts on goal, sometimes fewer, little possession in general, next to none in the opposition third,  were dreadful to watch, and presumably spent little time in the opposition box in possession of the ball?

But seeing as we were 7th, was it?, top scorers last season, you think some of that must've changed.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Believe it to be 1 in 85 games now in the League.

Put in a different way, 1st November 2020 to most recent game- 16th August 2022 v Luton, 1 penalty in the League.

No, apologies- got that stat wrong as I surely have...1 in 85 is crazy! Just checked and it's 1 in 87!!

Edited August 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Believe it to be 1 in 85 games now in the League.

Put in a different way, 1st November 2020 to most recent game- 16th August 2022 v Luton, 1 penalty in the League.

No, apologies- got that stat wrong as I surely have...1 in 85 is crazy! Just checked and it's 1 in 87!!

Have we had an ordinary or expected number of incidents that could (or should) reasonably have been given as a penalty in that same period? Does the data show that at all? It's kind of important if we're checking to see whether we are getting our fair share.

@Ian M same question.

Edited August 17, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[Ian M]

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

Have we had an ordinary or expected number of incidents that could (or should) reasonably have been given as a penalty in that same period? Does the data show that at all? It's kind of important if we're checking to see whether we are getting our fair share.

The average Championship side in the last 4 seasons, receives 5.27 penalties per 46 games. In 87 games that is 9.97 penalties.

 

[ExiledAjax]

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

The average Championship side in the last 4 seasons, receives 5.27 penalties per 46 games. In 87 games that is 9.97 penalties.

Yes.

But over the past four seasons have we attacked and entered the box at the rate of an average Championship side?

[GrahamC]

10 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Have we had an ordinary or expected number of incidents that could (or should) reasonably have been given as a penalty in that same period? Does the data show that at all? It's kind of important if we're checking to see whether we are getting our fair share.

@Ian M same question.

To partially answer the question I detailed them for last season;

So, just from memory, Scott was brought down in the box at home v Stoke & Forest.

Coventry away (the game we actually got the penalty!), Martin was taken out by their keeper in the first few minutes.

Dasilva was brought down at Fulham when the score was 2-2 in the 6-2 defeat.

Semenyo had a good shout & HNM did too at Preston.

I’m sure there are others that someone else can recall.

This season Atkinson both at Hull & last night were stonewall, Conway looked to have a case at Wigan.

I accept there have been spells latterly under Holden & Pearson’s time after in that same season when we were offensively weak, but not all of the last 4 years & certainly not since Semenyo got back in the side.

Edited August 17, 2022 by GrahamC

[Super]

1 minute ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes.

But over the past four seasons have we attacked and entered the box at the rate of an average Championship side?

I'm guessing no as we struggled to have an effort on goal in some games.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

I detailed them last season;

So, just from memory, Scott was brought down in the box at home v Stoke & Forest.

Coventry away (the game we actually got the penalty!), Martin was taken out by their keeper in the first few minutes.

Dasilva was brought down at Fulham when the score was 2-2 in the 6-2 defeat.

Semenyo had a good shout & HNM did too at Preston.

I’m sure there are others that someone else can recall.

This season Atkinson both at Hull & last night were stonewall, Conway looked to have a case at Wigan.

Bournemouth away rings a bell too- or was that a bad one against, back in April?

Although on the flip side, some of the top sides in the division last season relative to their dominance didn't get as many as expected probably.,

Edited August 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Ian M]

4 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes.

But over the past four seasons have we attacked and entered the box at the rate of an average Championship side?

If you check out the link from higher up the page of 31 European leagues from 17/18 season until 10/01/2022 (the point the list was published) you can sort by minutes per penalty or "big chances" per penalty which I guess would satisfy the question of attacking intent?

We are bottom of both. From 600 teams. And by a considerable margin at that.

We have played a further 25 Championship matches without a penalty since that data was published.

This is the bottom 10 sorted by big chances per penalty.

[GrahamC]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Bournemouth away rings a bell too- or was that a bad one against, back in April?

Although on the flip side, some of the top sides last season relative to their dominance didn't get as many as expected probably.,

Yep, clear foul by Lloyd Kelly on Chris Martin.

There are so many I had forgotten some.

[Ian M]

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

If you check out the link from higher up the page of 31 European leagues from 17/18 season until 10/01/2022 (the point the list was published) you can sort by minutes per penalty or "big chances" per penalty which I guess would satisfy the question of attacking intent?

We are bottom of both. From 600 teams. And by a considerable margin at that.

We have played a further 25 Championship matches without a penalty since that data was published.

This is the bottom 10 sorted by big chances per penalty.

We need 33 more big chances than 591st place Birmingham to get a penalty.

The same 33 big chance margin covers the top 572 teams in that list of 600 

[ExiledAjax]

9 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

I detailed them last season;

So, just from memory, Scott was brought down in the box at home v Stoke & Forest.

Coventry away (the game we actually got the penalty!), Martin was taken out by their keeper in the first few minutes.

Dasilva was brought down at Fulham when the score was 2-2 in the 6-2 defeat.

Semenyo had a good shout & HNM did too at Preston.

I’m sure there are others that someone else can recall.

This season Atkinson both at Hull & last night were stonewall, Conway looked to have a case at Wigan.

Right..but other teams will also have a number of claims denied. If we are going to use the fixed number of penalties awarded on a ratio basis to games played to prove that we are unjustly receiving no penalties, then it needs to be set in the context of potential claims. I'm sure every club could come up with a list of stonewall penalties they were denied.

What's every club's ratio of claims to awards?

9 minutes ago, Super said:

I'm guessing no as we struggled to have an effort on goal in some games.

Exactly. For the entirety of the 2020/21 season we averaged fewer than 8 shots per game, and fewer than 3 shots on target. That was the season where we broke the record for having the fewest number of shots of any Championship team on record. That leads me to believe, although I cannot be certain, that we have not attacked at the rate of an average Championship team over the past 4 seasons.

In fact at no point over the past four seasons have we averaged more than 11 shots per game. We've been shit at attacking, so you'd expect us to get relatively few penalties.

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

If you check out the link from higher up the page of 31 European leagues from 17/18 season until 10/01/2022 (the point the list was published) you can sort by minutes per penalty or "big chances" per penalty which I guess would satisfy the question of attacking intent?

We are bottom of both. From 600 teams. And by a considerable margin at that.

We have played a further 25 Championship matches without a penalty since that data was published.

This is the bottom 10 sorted by big chances per penalty.

Ok. That is useful. No definition of what a "big chance" is but yeh that seems to suggest that even adjusted for attacking intent (as it were) we've been given few penalties. Which we know is true anyway.

Interesting as well to note that the Championship generally has the lowest number of penalties awarded per game.

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

We need 33 more big chances than 591st place Birmingham to get a penalty.

The same 33 big chance margin covers the top 572 teams in that list of 600 

Small number bias? When dealing with tiny figures a difference of 1 will cause a huge change. For example if a team that creates 100 chances and gets 1 penalty then gets awarded just 1 extra penalty. Well they shoot up the table of "penalties per chance". They go from 1 per 100 chances to 1 per 50.

That 1 penalty has a much smaller effect in a team that creates 100 chances and gets 4 penalties. For them an extra penalty takes them from 1 penalty for every 25 chances to 1 for every 20. A much smaller improvement in the "penalty per chance" table, but exactly the same improvement in the raw number of penalties awarded.

Look, in general I know that we've had very few penalties awarded. That's indisputable. However, we have to be careful when using stats to prove something beyond bad luck.

[Ian M]

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

 

Small number bias? When dealing with tiny figures a difference of 1 will cause a huge change. For example if a team that creates 100 chances and gets 1 penalty then gets awarded just 1 extra penalty. Well they shoot up the table of "penalties per chance". They go from 1 per 100 chances to 1 per 50.

That 1 penalty has a much smaller effect in a team that creates 100 chances and gets 4 penalties. For them an extra penalty takes them from 1 penalty for every 25 chances to 1 for every 20. A much smaller improvement in the "penalty per chance" table, but exactly the same improvement in the raw number of penalties awarded.

Look, in general I know that we've had very few penalties awarded. That's indisputable. However, we have to be careful when using stats to prove something beyond bad luck.

Yeah I figured that when I worked out we need just 3 penalties to put us level with 2nd bottom on the list minutes wise. I imagine it would be similar chances wise. But I am looking forward to things evening themselves out over the next 4 seasons 

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Yeah I figured that when I worked out we need just 3 penalties to put us level with 2nd bottom on the list minutes wise. I imagine it would be similar chances wise. But I am looking forward to things evening themselves out over the next 4 seasons 

Yeh. A penalty every game. It's going to be dreamy.

Personally I think we should be given a credit for those two non-awarded penalties against Hull. Pearson can then at any time deploy the "penalty credit", in any game, and we immediately get a penalty.

Alternatively we start the home fixture v Hull 2-0 up.

Edited August 17, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[Mr Popodopolous]

Law of averages, plus the undoubted improvement last season post Semenyo return should yield a better return than we have had.

I agree that you're not going to et all of those that were turned down- but to get none of the turned down claims over 21 and a half months??

When we were in our handful of shots combined with less possession phase totally get it, but and I'm not fully sold on any we've had turned down this season fwiw but last season a good few were- then the other side of the coin how many against in that period.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Ian M]

5 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh. A penalty every game. It's going to be dreamy.

Personally I think we should be given a credit for those two non-awarded penalties against Hull. Pearson can then at any time deploy the "penalty credit", in any game, and we immediately get a penalty.

Alternatively we start the home fixture v Hull 2-0 up.

Like the Monopoly get out of jail free card, I like it! 

Can we get some cards for "opponent should have been sent off" and at any moment play that card against our opponents?

[TV Tom]

Oxford got four in one game last season!!!!!

[Ian M]

6 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Law of averages, plus the undoubted improvement last season post Semenyo return should yield a better return than we have had.

I agree that you're not going to et all of those that were turned down- but to get none of the turned down claims over 21 and a half months??

When we were in our handful of shots combined with less possession phase totally get it, but and I'm not fully sold on any we've had turned down this season fwiw but last season a good few were- then the other side of the coin how many against in that period.

Last season our feeling mistreated by refs was compounded by not only being awarded the least but conceding the most as well 

[hertsexile]

Have we forgotten this Challenge on Scott. 
Pearson fined for comments about park standard Referee! 

[ExiledAjax]

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Like the Monopoly get out of jail free card, I like it! 

Can we get some cards for "opponent should have been sent off" and at any moment play that card against our opponents?

Yes. Yes that as well. Has to be a player in the same position though. Can't turn a left back red into a goalie red.

[Ian M]

2 minutes ago, harrys said:

Oxford got four in one game last season!!!!!

How long since we got 4 @Mr Popodopolous

1 minute ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes. Yes that as well. Has to be a player in the same position though. Can't turn a left back red into a goalie red.

Should make it fair and say the same minute too.

[kiwicolin]

And now we get an apology from the authorities that the Hull City penalty, wasn't, and we should of had two in the game.  A bit late now

Edited August 17, 2022 by kiwicolin

[luke_bristol]

One thing that seems to have gone unnoticed - if the authorities are satisfied it wasn’t a penalty, shouldn’t their player be serving a three game ban for “successfully deceiving the referee”, or whatever the term is?

[BUTOR]

Why us though? There are smaller teams in the league who referees would feel less pressured to award penalties to, why are Bristol City the outlier that they are? 

[AshtonRobin21]

Off the top of my head, the only penalties I can remember us having in recent years are:

- Martin v Coventry

- Wells v Norwich

- Diedhiou v QPR

Other than that, I don't recall any others. 

[BCFC101]

 

Same stat as the table linked earlier but with more data, running up to and including yesterday

Truly astounding

[luke_bristol]

22 minutes ago, BCFC101 said:

 

Same stat as the table linked earlier but with more data, running up to and including yesterday

Truly astounding

How many standard deviations away from the average are we? That should be sent to the club, and CC’ed to the EFL and PGMOL.

[JoeAman08]

2 hours ago, AshtonRobin21 said:

Off the top of my head, the only penalties I can remember us having in recent years are:

- Martin v Coventry

- Wells v Norwich

- Diedhiou v QPR

Other than that, I don't recall any others. 

I was going to ask how many penalties have we had since NP was appointed? I can remember the one last season. Any in the 10-12 games in the season he took over? 

[Wanderingred]

It’s daft to think that there’s some kind of conspiracy against BCFC and NP and that referees are deliberately trying to not give us penalties. Why us? And why Pearson? There are far more controversial clubs/managers out there.

It sounds like something Joey Barton or one of the blue few would come up with. “The refereeing association are all teds funded by pantsdown to stop the ascent of the mighty gas” or some nonsense. 
 

I agree that it’s simply down to us having very little attacking threat in the last few years. At the back end of 2020-21, we went several games without even mustering an attempt on goal. So naturally we weren’t going to get awarded any penalties. We’re slowly improving so hopefully they will come.

[Bristol Oil Services]

11 hours ago, Ian M said:

If you check out the link from higher up the page of 31 European leagues from 17/18 season until 10/01/2022 (the point the list was published) you can sort by minutes per penalty or "big chances" per penalty which I guess would satisfy the question of attacking intent?

We are bottom of both. From 600 teams. And by a considerable margin at that.

We have played a further 25 Championship matches without a penalty since that data was published.

This is the bottom 10 sorted by big chances per penalty.

If people will put these sort of things together, then someone has to be bottom. 

[GrahamC]

8 hours ago, AshtonRobin21 said:

Off the top of my head, the only penalties I can remember us having in recent years are:

- Martin v Coventry

- Wells v Norwich

- Diedhiou v QPR

Other than that, I don't recall any others. 

Diedhiou missed one at Swansea.

[downendcity]

While we might have had fewest penalties awarded and the most conceded, we are top of the table in apology letters from the referees association!

[exAtyeoMax]

3 minutes ago, downendcity said:

While we might have had fewest penalties awarded and the most conceded, we are top of the table in apology letters from the referees association!

Last week I was trying to think of a gag about that…

”we’re the only club still signed up to paper statements instead of on pitch decisions” or something like that. I’m sure @Major Isewater can come up with something!

[ollywhyte]

10 hours ago, BCFC101 said:

 

Same stat as the table linked earlier but with more data, running up to and including yesterday

Truly astounding

Get that over to Talksport

[spudski]

Same guy has done a graph showing all 92 clubs.

It's truly astounding.

 

[mozo]

I'm sorry but that's not an anomaly, there's got to be more to it. 

It would be interesting to see how our penalty appeals stack up against other clubs. Probably the same.

[cityal]

I wonder how many standard deviations we are off of the mean for this data.

It feels like this is in the sort of territory of flipping two coins and having BOTH land on the edge.

[ExiledAjax]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

I'm sorry but that's not an anomaly, there's got to be more to it. 

It would be interesting to see how our penalty appeals stack up against other clubs. Probably the same.

Yeh. These graphs are ok, but they assume that every team has the same number of claims per minute.

We know that for a significant portion of the period measured we've been absolute dogshit at attacking. It's only in the last 50 or so games that we've been better going forward, and even that is essentially an improvement from "non-existent" to "average".

These graphs are nice headlines that will do well on Twitter and tell people what they already believe. But they're shallow.

What about the previous 87 matches?

What about on a seasonal basis?

Do they consider which referees we've had, which referees other teams have had, and their personal frequency of giving penalties?

So far we've got a hypothesis, and some data that shows it merits investigation, but it's no more than that atm.

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by ExiledAjax

[mozo]

7 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh. These graphs are ok, but they assume that every team has the same number of claims per minute.

We know that for a significant portion of the period measured we've been absolute dogshit at attacking. It's only in the last 50 or so games that we've been better going forward, and even that is essentially an improvement from "non-existent" to "average".

These graphs are nice headlines that will do well on Twitter and tell people what they already believe. But they're shallow.

What about the previous 87 matches?

What about on a seasonal basis?

Do they consider which referees we've had, which referees other teams have had, and their personal frequency of giving penalties?

So far we've got a hypothesis, and some data that shows it merits investigation, but it's no more than that atm.

 

You're absolutely right to want to see more data than just this very limited surface headline data.

What I would say is, these figures support what City fans have seen with their own eyes and have been saying for ages.

It is undeniable that there have been many penalty appeals, certainly in the past 12 months.

But there won't be data on appeals, and certainly not 'quality' of appeal.

[Redandproud]

Ok, the club has received an apology letter regarding the Hull City game,stating it was not a penalty to them,we should have had 2penalties, ok, then replay the game ,strip Hull City of the 3pts, different referee, or still strip them of all 3pts , and give 1pt to each team, but they won't, incompetent referee again, bring VAR to the Championship, 

[ExiledAjax]

3 minutes ago, mozo said:

What I would say is, these figures support what City fans have seen with their own eyes and have been saying for ages.

It is undeniable that there have been many penalty appeals, certainly in the past 12 months.

But there won't be data on appeals, and certainly not 'quality' of appeal.

I agree the figures and graphs support the facts. What they don't do is explain the reasons for those facts. 

You're right that such data is probably either not collected, or not available to your average statistician.

I'm also btw not denying that we've had some rotten decisions. I was sat right in front of Scott's claim against Forest last autumn. It was a certain penalty. Certain.

[downendcity]

17 minutes ago, mozo said:

You're absolutely right to want to see more data than just this very limited surface headline data.

What I would say is, these figures support what City fans have seen with their own eyes and have been saying for ages.

It is undeniable that there have been many penalty appeals, certainly in the past 12 months.

But there won't be data on appeals, and certainly not 'quality' of appeal.

I think we'd all agree that for a few seasons the lack of penalty decisions probably reflects our poor attacking threat and that we too rarely threatened the opposition penalty area.

However, what we all see is the number of very "soft" penalties awarded to other team ( both playing against us and more widely, on telly) as compared to the reasonably clear penalty shouts we have regularly turned down. Already this season compare the Hull penalty that was given with the foul on Atkinson on Tuesday that wasn't. 

As is often commented upon on a wider basis, but perhaps this is a consequence of us being too "nice" a team, that we don't get into referees faces , as do other teams, to appeal vociferously when one of ours is fouled in the penalty area. 

[BCFC101]

46 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yeh. These graphs are ok, but they assume that every team has the same number of claims per minute.

We know that for a significant portion of the period measured we've been absolute dogshit at attacking. It's only in the last 50 or so games that we've been better going forward, and even that is essentially an improvement from "non-existent" to "average".

These graphs are nice headlines that will do well on Twitter and tell people what they already believe. But they're shallow.

What about the previous 87 matches?

What about on a seasonal basis?

Do they consider which referees we've had, which referees other teams have had, and their personal frequency of giving penalties?

So far we've got a hypothesis, and some data that shows it merits investigation, but it's no more than that atm.

 

I absolutely agree with most of your points across this thread, all things that will have certainly contributed to why the statistic looks like it does, and your reasoning is probably the closest to the real reason for why we're seeing this. There definitely isn't a conspiracy against us, because why would there be, and the likelihood is that it's just chance, bad luck, whatever you want to call it, which happens to be at an extreme end of the scale over the last couple of years.

And even then I can't help myself but question a couple of things

We know that for a significant portion of the period measured we've been absolute dogshit at attacking. It's only in the last 50 or so games that we've been better going forward, and even that is essentially an improvement from "non-existent" to "average".

The latest 2 graphs shown here by myself and spudski are measuring the most recent 87 matches we've played, starting from our game v Huddersfield on 3rd November 2020, up to and including Luton game on Tuesday. Within that data set we have the whole of the 21/22 season, just over 50% of the contributing data, where we had the best attack out of all teams outside the top 6 in the Championship (based on goals scored alone, I do of course appreciate that having the best attack is subjective and there are more factors). So for me the 'poor in attack' argument struggles to hold up for this data set. 

What about the previous 87 matches?

The link posted by BCFCGav on the 1st page covers a data set which includes 101 matches before the latest 2 graphs posted this morning. Unfortunately (in the case of this point) there are 62 matches which overlap both data sets so we're not able to make an exact comparison in the way that you're after. I think we can attribute more weight to the 'poor in attack' argument for that data set, although it does stand out to me that the headline statistic actually gets even worse during the 'slightly better than poor in attack' period as opposed to that first set..

The main reason these graphs are popping up is just the magnitude of the anomaly being shown. When 90 other teams are shown to be in a relatively flat line at the bottom, it'd be hard to ignore even the Port Vale anomaly which will almost certainly have an explanation, let alone the Bristol City dot which is up in the heavens compared to the other 90 dots.

Edited August 18, 2022 by BCFC101

[BilboBaggins05]

I think people aren’t realising just how far away we are from everyone else in these graphs. This is an average of 0.5 penalties per season compared to an average of 7 per season. 
 

An anomaly doesn’t begin to describe being multiple standard deviations away from the average 

[WarksRobin]

would be interesting to compare number of penalties per box entry over the same period