NCAA football, 2013-14

[Berkut]

But how would this supposed bias express itself?

If it isn't overt in the manner of "I saw X, I am going to say I saw Y because that is better for my conference" then what are you talking about?

I've been on the field, I've had coaches and fans accuse me of bias, and the thing is, what is funny is how completely ludicrous it is from a practical standpoint. I could not even imagine HOW I would go about being biased without it being blindingly obvious.

If there is bias that matters, it has to be expressed in some fashion, there has to be some mechanism for it to express itself. What is that mechanism?

Do you think any of the officials in this game were watching that play and saw the ball get touched early, and just decide "Fuck it, I am going to pretend I didn't see that..."?

"Was that a hold, or was that not a hold, it is close. What to do?"

I heard on the Mark Richt radio show allude to it not being right an official was assigned to his game after making a controversial call against UGA in an earlier game. It can't be good for an official's future to have conference schools on the warpath against you. If there is a close call, and you are an SEC official, and the game is UGA - Clemson, do you think that would cause some officials to lean in one direction?

I've read studies that the entire home field in football may be due to referee bias in favor of home teams. Here is an article of one study on referee bias (there many others, this is just one from google):

http://deadspin.com/5407674/study-college-basketball-refs-suck-too

What a terrible article.

The probability of a foul being called on the visiting team was 7 percent higher than on the home team.

Does not prove bias, there are plenty of reasons this is likely the case:

1. If there is a home court advantage, and of course there is, then it stands to reason that the home team plays better, and hence fouls less.
2. The way scheduling works in college basketball, the better teams play a LOT more home games, so why would it come as any surprise that the home team gets fewer foul calls? Of course they do. The better way to measure this would be to measure only conference games where the teams being measured play home and away, so you can compare the same teams over time in different environments, but even then #1 is going to play a part.

* When the home team is leading, the probability of the next foul being called on them is about 6.3 percentage points higher than when the home team is trailing.

What a fucking bullshit stat. What is the same comparison with the visiting team? You can't just look at one team and decide there is bias without looking at the other.

* The larger the foul differential between two teams, the greater the likelihood that the next call will be made against the team with fewer fouls. For example, when a home team has three or more fouls than the visiting team, the probability that the next foul call is made against the visiting team is more than 60 percent. When the foul differential is as high as five, then that probability rises to 69 percent. The researchers also observed this trend when they looked at neutral-court games.

Again, same thing. This betrays a willfull attempt to mislead the reader by taking a stat in general, then applying it to only one particular case, and pretending like it only applies to that case.

What is really being said here is that when teams are leading, it is slightly likelier that the next foul will go against them. That is almost certainly true overall, but is true for both the home and visitors, of course, and says absolutely nothing about bias, much less about how you are convinced conference officials favor their conference over the other based on...absolutely no evidence at all.

I like how they throw in the bit about neutral court games, which is funny since it completely disproves the assertion that this has something to do with home and away.

[Berkut]

But how would this supposed bias express itself?

If it isn't overt in the manner of "I saw X, I am going to say I saw Y because that is better for my conference" then what are you talking about?

I've been on the field, I've had coaches and fans accuse me of bias, and the thing is, what is funny is how completely ludicrous it is from a practical standpoint. I could not even imagine HOW I would go about being biased without it being blindingly obvious.

If there is bias that matters, it has to be expressed in some fashion, there has to be some mechanism for it to express itself. What is that mechanism?

Do you think any of the officials in this game were watching that play and saw the ball get touched early, and just decide "Fuck it, I am going to pretend I didn't see that..."?

"Was that a hold, or was that not a hold, it is close. What to do?"

But we are not talking about a hold or not hold - we are talking about your claim that the Pac-10 officials decided to give Oregon the ball, and the replay official decided to not see the touching. That isn't a marginal, could go either way call, that is a blatant screw up that can only be explained by

A. The crew just plain not seeing it in real time and fucking it up, or
B. A conscious decision to actively screw Oklahoma.

[jimmy olsen]

What a fucking travesty, anyone who voted Ohio st. ahead of Auburn that isn't literally an alumni of the school should be dragged out into the street and shot.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24311008/week-7-of-bcs-standings-released-auburn-behind-ohio-state

THE TOP 16

1. Florida State (.995): The Seminoles' smallest margin of victory during the regular season was 14 points, 48-34 at Boston College in September. The runner-up? The 27-point margin between the 'Noles and then-undefeated Miami.

2. Ohio State (.950): Yes, Ohio State's schedule-strength is ranked 61st by Jeff Sagarin, and Auburn's is 26th. But should it come to the other potential SEC comparison, Missouri's is only 41st.

3. Auburn (.923): Of course, if Auburn's really a team of destiny, the Buckeyes will make it a moot point by losing to Michigan State, right?

4. Alabama (.854): With Missouri's win over Texas A&M, surely, surely, Alabama's national title reign is over. Even if an Ohio State loss opens up one BCS Championship slot, an SEC title must push the Tigers past the Crimson Tide in the polls, and Mizzou already owns an advantage in the computer rankings. And as for the other slot, you'd need FSU to lose to Duke. It wasn't the case the past two years, but in 2013 a single loss will rule the Tide out.

5. Missouri (.843): Gary Pinkel must be slightly bummed that Gus Malzahn will deprive him of consensus national Coach of the Year honors, and vice versa.

6. Oklahoma State (.763): The Cowboys really, really wish the playoff had come a year sooner; with just the one loss and a potential Big 12 championship under their belt, they'd have stood a solid shot of making the four-team field.

7. Stanford (.707): Speaking of inexplicable losses, how close to the BCS championship mix would the Cardinal be without losses to teams with a combined 11 losses of their own?

8. South Carolina (.704): Three years running, the Gamecocks have lost the SEC East to a team they beat in the regular season, but that's what happens when you lose to 2011 Auburn and 2013 Tennessee (and get the short end of the 2012 scheduling stick).

9. Baylor (.662): Hard to argue the Bears' apparent great leap forward on defense was entirely legitimate after letting Clint Chelf rip them apart and then giving up 38 points to TCU, the Frogs' season-high against BCS competition.

10. Michigan State (.653): Ohio State's rushing attack vs. Michigan State's rushing defense -- the former ranked No. 1 in the country in yards per-carry, the latter No. 1 in yards per-carry allowed -- is the very definition of "irresistible force, immovable object."

11. Arizona State (.583): The last time the Sun Devils beat Arizona as badly as they did Saturday, they wound up in the Rose Bowl. Will that be coincidence or not?

12. Oregon (.532): Rumors of an Alabama-Oregon Orange Bowl are sweeter than the fruit for which it's named.

13. Clemson (.520): Tigers are undefeated against everyone other than Florida State or South Carolina the past two seasons, but 0-4 vs. the 'Noles and Gamecocks.

14. Northern Illinois (.481): Fresno State's loss makes it official: beat Bowling Green in the MAC title game, and the Huskies will make it two BCS bowls in two years.

15. LSU (.421): Tigers' loss to Ole Miss looks like it's cost them a BCS berth of their own.

16. UCF (.386): While the Knights are in the top 16, their place in the BCS standings doesn't matter nearly as much to them as beating SMU next week.

[Valmy]

What a fucking travesty, anyone who voted Ohio st. ahead of Auburn that isn't literally an alumni of the school should be dragged out into the street and shot.

Fuck you Tim.

[MadBurgerMaker]

What a fucking travesty, anyone who voted Ohio st. ahead of Auburn that isn't literally an alumni of the school should be dragged out into the street and shot.

Guess they shouldn't have lost to LSU.

Don't be an idiot.

[jimmy olsen]

What a fucking travesty, anyone who voted Ohio st. ahead of Auburn that isn't literally an alumni of the school should be dragged out into the street and shot.

Fuck you Tim.

The Big Ten is crap compared to the SEC.

[CountDeMoney]

What a fucking travesty, anyone who voted Ohio st. ahead of Auburn that isn't literally an alumni of the school should be dragged out into the street and shot.

Guess they shouldn't have lost to LSU.

Don't be an idiot.

No kidding; and LSU and South Carolina shouldn't have lost their gimmes, either.  But that's life in the big conference.

[MadBurgerMaker]

The Big Ten is crap compared to the SEC.

It's still the Big Ten, dude.  We aren't talking about some team from the WAC here.

[alfred russel]

But we are not talking about a hold or not hold - we are talking about your claim that the Pac-10 officials decided to give Oregon the ball, and the replay official decided to not see the touching. That isn't a marginal, could go either way call, that is a blatant screw up that can only be explained by

A. The crew just plain not seeing it in real time and fucking it up, or
B. A conscious decision to actively screw Oklahoma.

It doesn't have to be so clear cut. The crowd and Oregon reacted as though they had the ball. An Oklahoma dude actually had the ball, but sometime after the play was over. The official has to make something of a guess regarding what happened. I've never said there was a conscious decision to screw Oklahoma...I'm just saying that when a Pac 12 ref has to make a call like that, it is more likely to go in the Pac 12 teams favor.

[CountDeMoney]

The Big Ten is crap compared to the SEC.

It's still the Big Ten, dude.  We aren't talking about some team from the WAC here.

First he defiles my Irish with Timmay Taint, and then he does the same to the SEC.  I have to put a hit out on him before he does something to Ray Rice or the Orioles bullpen.

[lustindarkness]

Anyone here believe Ohio State could win against Auburn?

[Berkut]

But we are not talking about a hold or not hold - we are talking about your claim that the Pac-10 officials decided to give Oregon the ball, and the replay official decided to not see the touching. That isn't a marginal, could go either way call, that is a blatant screw up that can only be explained by

A. The crew just plain not seeing it in real time and fucking it up, or
B. A conscious decision to actively screw Oklahoma.

It doesn't have to be so clear cut. The crowd and Oregon reacted as though they had the ball. An Oklahoma dude actually had the ball, but sometime after the play was over. The official has to make something of a guess regarding what happened. I've never said there was a conscious decision to screw Oklahoma...I'm just saying that when a Pac 12 ref has to make a call like that, it is more likely to go in the Pac 12 teams favor.

And I am saying you don't know what you are talking about.

It always come down to something like this when this is brought up - some kind of double secret super impossible to actually evidence "gut feeling". Which is just laughable to anyone who has actually been in that position, making those kinds of calls under pressure. It just doesn't work that way.

You aren't sitting there thinking like that, like "Man, I could go either way...might as well help out the conference...". It just doesn't work like that.

Honestly, most of the time I am making a bang -bang call, the best I can manage is to keep the damn colors straight in my head, much less which team is which, who I am supposed to "want" to win, and what would be the best way to make that happen.

Mostly what I care about is trying to get it right, and knowing that I get it wrong enough even when I am trying to get it right that it would be stunningly stupid to actually make a decision counter to what I at least THINK is right. The percentages simply are not there.

And the idea that all seven of them on that crew all subconsciously decided to screw Oklahoma in the exact same manner?

It just doesn't make any sense when you think about it rationally.

The ONLY thing you have as an official at that level is your integrity and commitment to trying to be scrupulously fair. The moment you lose that, your career is done, with any conference. You really think the Pac-12 director of officials is going to reward an official for showing bias towards the conference? There is no amount of money to be gained by the conference from winning any particular game that could outweigh the damage done by a credible accusation of bias in officiating.

[CountDeMoney]

Anyone here believe Ohio State could win against Auburn?

Things happen in 3s for a team like Auburn.  The Georgia Deflection, the Saban Brain Freeze...so there's one more left for the SS-Waffel Haus. 

So no, I don't think Ohio State can stop that running game.  Or Destiny.

[Valmy]

If the SEC is so great why is a putrid run of the mill bunch of chumps like Gary Pinkel's Columbia Kittens playing for the title?  If Missouri wins I will never let you SEC punks hear the end of it.  Only second rate conferences let second rate teams win them.

Come on Auburn, don't fail me.

[MadBurgerMaker]

If the SEC is so great why is a putrid run of the mill bunch of chumps like Gary Pinkel's Columbia Kittens playing for the title?  If Missouri wins I will never let you SEC punks hear the end of it.  Only second rate conferences let second rate teams win them.

Oh c'mon man!  They won 13 Big XII championships in all sports! 







I mean...Iowa State won more, but they just got that 14th last year!