[PopTart]

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:49 pm  

Willzay wrote:

So 6 wins from the last 30 then unless I’m reading it wrong. And it covers Agar’s, Webster’s, Smith’s and Chester’s tenures. So different coaching staff, different playing personnel.

And over that time, we lost a large proportion of the games.
Just people trying to make a conspiracy out of nothing.

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:57 pm  

Challenge Cup
Taken from RFL site

WAKEFIELD TRINITY V BRADFORD BULLS
Friday 13th March
The Mobile Rocket Stadium | KO : 19:45

M Com P. Crashley
Time Keeper D. Mitchel

Seems like RFL not bothering with match officials this week.

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:16 pm  

Sacred Cow wrote:

He really didn't, he's officiated in 44 of our games since 2009 and his stats are comparable with other referres and directly and the win/loss ratio directly correlates to our form on the field and ultimate finishing position. You are starting to make yourself look daft with this now.

I reckon then that from the reaction from the crowd last Friday, and at Cas ,at some of Child's decisions, that there must be about 2000 supporters as daft as I am. Sacred. You stick with your thoughts and I'll stick with mine. I presume that you believe that the waving for another six tackles after the ball rebound, and the penalty on the half-time hooter, must either be the correct decision or an error. If they were the latter then one should ask whether he is fit to referee Super League rugby matches.

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:01 pm  

PopTart wrote:

And over that time, we lost a large proportion of the games.
Just people trying to make a conspiracy out of nothing.

Not 5 out of every 6 though eh? We can skirt around the issue as much as you like but the guy doesn't like us. IMHO the bloke has a vendetta against us.

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:59 pm  

Redscat wrote:

I reckon then that from the reaction from the crowd last Friday, and at Cas ,at some of Child's decisions, that there must be about 2000 supporters as daft as I am. Sacred. You stick with your thoughts and I'll stick with mine. I presume that you believe that the waving for another six tackles after the ball rebound, and the penalty on the half-time hooter, must either be the correct decision or an error. If they were the latter then one should ask whether he is fit to referee Super League rugby matches.

There is a very big difference between making an error(s) and deliberately favouring one side, which is what you and some others are suggesting. Yes he probably got some things wrong, no it wasn't done deliberatlely.

Re: Match officials : Tue Mar 10, 2020 9:36 pm  

[quote="Sacred Cow"]There is a very big difference between making an error(s) and deliberately favouring one side, which is what you and some others are suggesting. Yes he probably got some things wrong, no it wasn't done deliberatlely.[/quote

Yes, but his "errors" seem to be usually to our detriment, not the oppositions. Let's call it stalemate and agree to differ eh,Sacred.

Re: Match officials : Wed Mar 11, 2020 2:56 am  

Redscat wrote: Yes, but his "errors" seem to be usually to our detriment, not the oppositions. Let's call it stalemate and agree to differ eh,Sacred. Humans are remarkably susceptible to confirmation bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias This is why the scientific method was developed so that cognitive biases can be reduced as far as possible. You make an observation, form a hypothesis, seek to prove that hypothesis and then publish your findings and methods so that others can analyse your data and repeat your experiments/observations. This is then peer reviewed and any discrepancies can be found. Only when it becomes the general consensus of the scientific community is it then accepted as a valid theory. We have a rota for going out to the field to collect data. My turn is Tuesday. It seems that whenever I go, it rains. After checking the weather data I confirmed that it had rained on 5 out of the last 6 Tuesday afternoons. The next week it also rained on Tuesday. (Although it was just 10 minutes of light drizzle just before I left). What can I extrapolate from this? It nearly always rains on a Tuesday? It rains more often on a Tuesday? There is a conspiracy against me by the rain gods to make it rain when I'm out in the field? By looking more closely and dispassionately at the data I find that it actually rained every Friday for the last 6 weeks and looking at the annual picture, rainfall is equally likely on every day of the week. So, back to the refs. If you see that James Child is the ref and you 'know' he is a bad ref with a grudge against Wakefield you will be looking out for every perceived error he makes which disadvantages Wakefield. You probably won't notice the errors he makes in their favour. So, what can we do? If we studied a Wakefield game/games reffed by James Child and went through every decision or non-decision minute-by-minute, preferably by multiple independent people, then compared results, maybe we could start to make a judgement. Pick a game, let's do it Or, we could rely on the stats available. Wakefield versus Castleford 2010 - 2020 All Referees: Played 30 Won 7 Lost 23 Win Rate: 23.3% James Child: Played 9 Won 2 Lost 7 Win Rate: 22.2% You could say that we've only won 6 out of the last 30 games with James Child in charge (20%), but that is cherry picking data and we're back to cognitive bias. It doesn't take into account which teams we were playing or the relative form/injuries of the two teams at the time. I could also say that from the beginning of Super League until 2010 we won 86% of all our games reffed by James Child (this is true). If one ref only reffed us against top 4 sides would his record show that he was biased against us? Show me some evidence

Redscat wrote: Yes, but his "errors" seem to be usually to our detriment, not the oppositions. Let's call it stalemate and agree to differ eh,Sacred. Humans are remarkably susceptible to confirmation bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias This is why the scientific method was developed so that cognitive biases can be reduced as far as possible. You make an observation, form a hypothesis, seek to prove that hypothesis and then publish your findings and methods so that others can analyse your data and repeat your experiments/observations. This is then peer reviewed and any discrepancies can be found. Only when it becomes the general consensus of the scientific community is it then accepted as a valid theory. We have a rota for going out to the field to collect data. My turn is Tuesday. It seems that whenever I go, it rains. After checking the weather data I confirmed that it had rained on 5 out of the last 6 Tuesday afternoons. The next week it also rained on Tuesday. (Although it was just 10 minutes of light drizzle just before I left). What can I extrapolate from this? It nearly always rains on a Tuesday? It rains more often on a Tuesday? There is a conspiracy against me by the rain gods to make it rain when I'm out in the field? By looking more closely and dispassionately at the data I find that it actually rained every Friday for the last 6 weeks and looking at the annual picture, rainfall is equally likely on every day of the week. So, back to the refs. If you see that James Child is the ref and you 'know' he is a bad ref with a grudge against Wakefield you will be looking out for every perceived error he makes which disadvantages Wakefield. You probably won't notice the errors he makes in their favour. So, what can we do? If we studied a Wakefield game/games reffed by James Child and went through every decision or non-decision minute-by-minute, preferably by multiple independent people, then compared results, maybe we could start to make a judgement. Pick a game, let's do it Or, we could rely on the stats available. Wakefield versus Castleford 2010 - 2020 All Referees: Played 30 Won 7 Lost 23 Win Rate: 23.3% James Child: Played 9 Won 2 Lost 7 Win Rate: 22.2% You could say that we've only won 6 out of the last 30 games with James Child in charge (20%), but that is cherry picking data and we're back to cognitive bias. It doesn't take into account which teams we were playing or the relative form/injuries of the two teams at the time. I could also say that from the beginning of Super League until 2010 we won 86% of all our games reffed by James Child (this is true). If one ref only reffed us against top 4 sides would his record show that he was biased against us? Show me some evidence

Re: Match officials : Wed Mar 11, 2020 3:29 am  

Willzay wrote:

So 6 wins from the last 30 then unless I’m reading it wrong. And it covers Agar’s, Webster’s, Smith’s and Chester’s tenures. So different coaching staff, different playing personnel.

That indeed covers the period from 2013 - present, most of which we were absolutely dire.

If you split it up (cherry-picking? )

Wakefield matches officiated by James Child:

2009-12
Played 14
Won 8
Lost 6
Win Rate: 57.1%

2013-16
Played 16
Won 1
Lost 15
Win Rate: 6.3%

2017-19
Played 12
Won 5
Lost 7
Win Rate: 41.7%

Guess what, we were really rubbish between 2013 and 2016 - coincidence?

In my cherry-picking I chose to ignore 2020 = 0%

Re: Match officials : Wed Mar 11, 2020 6:44 am  

wotsupcas wrote:

Not 5 out of every 6 though eh? We can skirt around the issue as much as you like but the guy doesn't like us. IMHO the bloke has a vendetta against us.

Whilst respecting your right to have an opinion, do you have any evidence to support that opinion?

24 out of 30 = 4 out of 5, (not 5 out of 6)

Our actual form was, at times, worse than this.
2015 league season: Played 23 won 3 Lost 20 (i.e. 6 out of 7)

If you're randomly selecting from form like that, you can work out the probabilities.
3 green balls twenty red balls in a bag?

Re: Match officials : Wed Mar 11, 2020 7:00 am  

coco the fullback wrote:

Whilst respecting your right to have an opinion, do you have any evidence to support that opinion?

24 out of 30 = 4 out of 5, (not 5 out of 6)

Our actual form was, at times, worse than this.
2015 league season: Played 23 won 3 Lost 20 (i.e. 6 out of 7)

If you're randomly selecting from form like that, you can work out the probabilities.
3 green balls twenty red balls in a bag?

So using your evidence then we really need to have James child refereeing is every week ? I ve taken a more representative data segment interviewing 50 of my rugby watching mates, this was done over a short period of time across a number of clubs , guess what 90 percent agreed he was crap !