The Economics of Sport
  • Sports Economics
  • About
  • Workshop
  • Media
  • Selected Publications
  • Book Reviews
  • A Primer on Gaelic Games
  • Upcoming Events
  • Education
  • Resources & Links
  • Data

Technology and Understanding Referee Bias

2/10/2021

 
By John Considine
Picture
There is a recent paper in the Journal of Business Economics that further illustrates the benefits of technology in understanding referee bias.  I will focus almost entirely on the methods used by Ulrike Holder, Thomas Ehrmann, and Arne Konig.  (I will return to other elements of the paper in a later post.)

A decade ago, Tobias Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim published Scorecasting.  It included the analysis of 1.15 million baseball pitches that umpires called as either balls or strikes.  Technology allowed Moskowitz and Wertheim to identify umpire error.  The error rate was 14%.  However, that error rate changed systematically with some non-rule factors.  These systematic changes are classed as a bias.  For example, the player behind in the count got more favourable calls.  Technology allowed Moskowitz and Wertheim to identify umpire errors directly.  The Holder et al (2021) paper is a step in this direction for soccer.

The beauty of the Journal of Business Economics paper is that it uses VAR technology to focus on referee error directly.  It uses four successive seasons of data (two pre-VAR and two post-VAR) from the German Bundesliga and Italian Serie A.  Impressively, the authors also "validated all VAR decisions by examining video recordings via youtube.de of the respective situations".  I want to highlight one of their findings.  Home teams were awarded more penalty kicks than away teams but the "introduction of VAR did not change this distribution, and the VAR system intervened with comparable frequency for both the home and away teams".  In other words, there was no referee bias in the errors.

For a variety of reasons, not all of the literature seeks to identify the referee bias directly.  Much of the literature on referee bias attempts to identify the bias by purely statistical methods.  The biggest difficult is separating referee behaviour from player behaviour.  One prominent paper from 2012 compares the rate at which the referee decides the ball must be turned over (“mainly traveling violations and offensive fouls”) with the rate of turnover by players (“mainly bad passes and lost balls”).  Tens of thousands of observations are then used to establish the statistical significance of the relationship between these turnovers and other variables, e.g. home team.  The authors of this paper understand the limits of this approach.

It is encouraging that more papers like Holder, Ehrmann and Konig are starting to appear in the literature.  Technology is facilitating a better approach to understanding referee bias.


Comments are closed.

    Archives

    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013

    About

    This website was founded in July 2013.

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    American Football
    Athletics
    Baseball
    Basketball
    Behavioural Economics
    Boxing
    Broadcasting
    Competitive Balance
    Cricket
    Cycling
    Darts
    David Butler
    Declan Jordan
    Drugs
    Ed Valentine
    Epl
    Esports
    Expenditure
    F1
    Fifa World Cup
    Finances
    Funding
    Gaa
    Gaelic Games
    Gambling
    Game Theory
    Gary Burns
    Geography
    Golf
    Greyhound Racing
    Guest Posts
    Horse Racing
    Impact Studies
    John Considine
    John Eakins
    League Of Ireland
    Location
    Media
    Mls
    Mma
    Olympics
    Participation
    Paul O'Sullivan
    Premier League
    Regulation
    Research
    Robbie Butler
    Rugby
    Simpsonomics
    Snooker
    Soccer
    Spatial Analysis
    Sporting Bodies
    Stephen Brosnan
    Swimming
    Taxation
    Teaching
    Technology
    Tennis
    Transfers
    Uefa
    Ufc
    World Cup
    Wwe

Related

The website is not formally affiliated to any institution and all of the entries represent the personal views and opinions of an individual contributor. The website operates on a not-for-profit basis. For this reason we decline all advertisement opportunities. 

Contact

To contact us email sportseconomics2013@gmail.com or find us on Twitter @SportEcon.