Proof that refs are calling the games one sided

seabowl · Oct 31, 2016

Mods forgive me in that I know there are a few topics on refs/conspiracy but I think the seriousness of this deserves its own thread.

In 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle have been called for the fewest penalties in the league again when only playing Seattle. This year so far these same opponents are ranking 29th out of 32 teams in having the fewest penalties being called against them when playing Seattle. Pretty close to last.

Do you have any idea what the odds are of this happening is? Just take 2014 &2015 and it's almost impossible. Now add that opponents are agiain almost last and it shows there is a major flaw in the "integrity" of the refs. I'm not saying they are doing this on purpose but they are clearly only looking for calls against Seattle.

If you want to see for yourself it's on the site Team Rankings. This blows my mind.

BTW here are the odds for the 2015 and 2015 last place ranking:

...a 1 in 64 chance of picking the right one.
(Mathematically, 1 in 64 is represented by the numerical fraction 1/64 or 0.015625.)

Edit: 1 in 32 chance and again another 1 in 32 chance. About 1000-1 chance of happening.

HawkerD · Oct 31, 2016

seabowl":15t2ld49 said:
Mods forgive me in that I know there are a few topics on refs/conspiracy but I think the seriousness of this deserves its own thread.

In 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle have been called for the fewest penalties in the league again when only playing Seattle. This year so far these same opponents are ranking 29th out of 32 teams in having the fewest penalties being called against them when playing Seattle. Pretty close to last.

Do you have any idea what the odds are of this happening is? Just take 2014 &2015 and it's almost impossible. Now add that opponents are agiain almost last and it shows there is a major flaw in the "integrity" of the refs. I'm not saying they are doing this on purpose but they are clearly only looking for calls against Seattle.

If you want to see for yourself it's on the site Team Rankings. This blows my mind.

BTW here are the odds for the 2015 and 2015 last place ranking:

...a 1 in 64 chance of picking the right one.
(Mathematically, 1 in 64 is represented by the numerical fraction 1/64 or 0.015625.)

1/64 if pretty far from impossible. However if remember my statistics the odds of finishing 32nd two years in a row (if the odds of finishing in any position are all equal which they are not) it would be 1 in 32*32 which is about a thousand to one. Still not really close to impossible.

HawkGA · Oct 31, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYX-NSZMqt0

[youtube]uYX-NSZMqt0[/youtube]

Attyla the Hawk · Oct 31, 2016

It is certainly strange.

I do recall doing an analysis of the 2014 season with regards to the penalty disparity. I don't have the results immediately on hand, but I recall that Seattle did lead the league in penalties that season. Our opponents receiving the fewest.

When I excluded procedure penalties (offsides/false starts/motion/alignment) from the list, Seattle barely had more penalties than the opponents (I think it was 6 more on the season).

Further, when I excluded avoidable personal fouls (unsportsmanlike conduct and unnecessary roughness), Seattle actually had fewer penalties than their opponents (by a small margin -- like 3 fewer on the year).

Where I found the greatest disparity, and likely the source of the anecdotal truth that we are penalized at an unjust rate -- was third down conversions as a result of penalty. Opponents had something on the order of 5 times as many third down conversions than we did over the course of the year.

I attributed that to a couple causes:

1. Seattle generally plays tight defense. We semi cheat a lot. We play on the edge and are constantly in danger of getting flags. Not a bad thing. But you play with fire all the time and you'll get singed every once in awhile.

2. Seattle doesn't account for the natural tendency of referees to call fouls in these situations. Particularly if refs have been swallowing whistles on prior plays and finally see throwing a flag as necessary in order to be truly fair. Is it justified? No. But it's also human nature. If you feel you've been letting someone marginally get away with something over time you're going to compensate for that. Seattle, IMO, should recognize this and understand they should play different on third down.

3. Penalties are most often called on defensive players. But it takes offensive skill players to put defenders under duress to force them to commit fouls. Seattle didn't have a lot of players capable of inducing defenders to foul. And further, Wilson was not the kind of QB to get a lot of penalties because he rarely targets players that are tightly covered. He also airmailed balls way out of bounds regularly instead of trying to force balls to receivers who had to make a contested play. Most defenders didn't need to commit contact/holding to stick with our guys man to man. So Seattle didn't benefit from the rulebook's bias toward offensive bail out calls due to talent or our generally risk averse nature.

4. Seattle ran the ball at a very high rate. We also featured the #1 defense. For most teams, the game with the fewest number of snaps WAS the Seattle matchup. This certainly would be a factor just from a number of opportunities standpoint. And if we account for the number of passing attempts (most likely plays to draw fouls) they defended against us -- I would not be surprised if it was something in the neighborhood of 15-20% fewer attempts than the next fewest pass attempts. Making it even less likely to draw fouls.

Ultimately in 2014 -- outside of what I'd consider bonehead penalties -- Seattle was virtually dead even in terms of penalties flagged. We played considerably more sloppy (false starts and offsides) and also suffered a great disparity in bail out third down conversions.

While it's unlikely to happen twice. I think the reasons that I felt influenced that disparity somewhat persisted in 2015. Although we had better offensive skill players and threw the ball more -- it could easily have been offset with the general inexperience/incompetence on the OL. I didn't review 2015 so I can't be sure.

253hawk · Oct 31, 2016

HawkerD":9cn6o2gu said:
1/64 if pretty far from impossible. However if remember my statistics the odds of finishing 32nd two years in a row (if the odds of finishing in any position are all equal which they are not) it would be 1 in 32*32 which is about a thousand to one. Still not really close to impossible.

How about the odds for three years straight? We're #2 I think right now, so it's looking possible (even though it should be mathematically improbable as hell).

ivotuk · Oct 31, 2016

What's this tell you? It tells me that Referees love camera time.

Four of those were against Seattle’s defense on third down, awarding the Saints an automatic first down in each instance.

http://sports.mynorthwest.com/207997/se ... to-saints/

I have a question, if referees enjoy being on TV (during the referee strike, one referee groused about the "scabs getting to be on camera") would that make them more conducive to throwing flags? And if so, who do they throw them against with the least kickback?

Just some thoughts

Hawk-Lock · Oct 31, 2016

That's strange, but if you seriously think the NFL is rigging games against us, then you're crazy.

Lords of Scythia · Oct 31, 2016

Attyla the Hawk":2asl2ffg said:
It is certainly strange.

I do recall doing an analysis of the 2014 season with regards to the penalty disparity. I don't have the results immediately on hand, but I recall that Seattle did lead the league in penalties that season. Our opponents receiving the fewest.

When I excluded procedure penalties (offsides/false starts/motion/alignment) from the list, Seattle barely had more penalties than the opponents (I think it was 6 more on the season).

Further, when I excluded avoidable personal fouls (unsportsmanlike conduct and unnecessary roughness), Seattle actually had fewer penalties than their opponents (by a small margin -- like 3 fewer on the year).

Where I found the greatest disparity, and likely the source of the anecdotal truth that we are penalized at an unjust rate -- was third down conversions as a result of penalty. Opponents had something on the order of 5 times as many third down conversions than we did over the course of the year.

I attributed that to a couple causes:

1. Seattle generally plays tight defense. We semi cheat a lot. We play on the edge and are constantly in danger of getting flags. Not a bad thing. But you play with fire all the time and you'll get singed every once in awhile.

2. Seattle doesn't account for the natural tendency of referees to call fouls in these situations. Particularly if refs have been swallowing whistles on prior plays and finally see throwing a flag as necessary in order to be truly fair. Is it justified? No. But it's also human nature. If you feel you've been letting someone marginally get away with something over time you're going to compensate for that. Seattle, IMO, should recognize this and understand they should play different on third down.

3. Penalties are most often called on defensive players. But it takes offensive skill players to put defenders under duress to force them to commit fouls. Seattle didn't have a lot of players capable of inducing defenders to foul. And further, Wilson was not the kind of QB to get a lot of penalties because he rarely targets players that are tightly covered. He also airmailed balls way out of bounds regularly instead of trying to force balls to receivers who had to make a contested play. Most defenders didn't need to commit contact/holding to stick with our guys man to man. So Seattle didn't benefit from the rulebook's bias toward offensive bail out calls due to talent or our generally risk averse nature.

4. Seattle ran the ball at a very high rate. We also featured the #1 defense. For most teams, the game with the fewest number of snaps WAS the Seattle matchup. This certainly would be a factor just from a number of opportunities standpoint. And if we account for the number of passing attempts (most likely plays to draw fouls) they defended against us -- I would not be surprised if it was something in the neighborhood of 15-20% fewer attempts than the next fewest pass attempts. Making it even less likely to draw fouls.

Ultimately in 2014 -- outside of what I'd consider bonehead penalties -- Seattle was virtually dead even in terms of penalties flagged. We played considerably more sloppy (false starts and offsides) and also suffered a great disparity in bail out third down conversions.

While it's unlikely to happen twice. I think the reasons that I felt influenced that disparity somewhat persisted in 2015. Although we had better offensive skill players and threw the ball more -- it could easily have been offset with the general inexperience/incompetence on the OL. I didn't review 2015 so I can't be sure.

Is this what PC was talking about when he said they didn't scout the refs right?

Hawkpower · Oct 31, 2016

Hawk-Lock":1klb9nwo said:
That's strange, but if you seriously think the NFL is rigging games against us, then you're crazy.

I'm sure there is a much more plausible explanation for a near mathematical impossibility.

bmorepunk · Oct 31, 2016

HawkerD":3tny11yh said:
seabowl":3tny11yh said:

Mods forgive me in that I know there are a few topics on refs/conspiracy but I think the seriousness of this deserves its own thread.

In 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle have been called for the fewest penalties in the league again when only playing Seattle. This year so far these same opponents are ranking 29th out of 32 teams in having the fewest penalties being called against them when playing Seattle. Pretty close to last.

Do you have any idea what the odds are of this happening is? Just take 2014 &2015 and it's almost impossible. Now add that opponents are agiain almost last and it shows there is a major flaw in the "integrity" of the refs. I'm not saying they are doing this on purpose but they are clearly only looking for calls against Seattle.

If you want to see for yourself it's on the site Team Rankings. This blows my mind.

BTW here are the odds for the 2015 and 2015 last place ranking:

...a 1 in 64 chance of picking the right one.
(Mathematically, 1 in 64 is represented by the numerical fraction 1/64 or 0.015625.)

Click to expand...

1/64 if pretty far from impossible. However if remember my statistics the odds of finishing 32nd two years in a row (if the odds of finishing in any position are all equal which they are not) it would be 1 in 32*32 which is about a thousand to one. Still not really close to impossible.

This is not a random process, and the probability of a team ranking in any particular place is not even.

The coaching and players are not the same between teams. This team has Bennett risking offsides constantly to get a jump off snaps, an offensive line that is chronically lacking experience, and a coach who wants his defensive backs to push the limits against receivers off the line. It's not surprising that this team is one of the most penalized. There are other teams are penalty allergic, but Carroll will often take the risk for potential upside.

This team might get unfairly penalized, but I don't watch enough of all the other teams to really know.

I do know that assuming that every team has the same exact probability of getting the same ranking is absolutely wrong. It's not a random process.

KiwiHawk · Oct 31, 2016

Penalties aren't about math. There isn't an even chance that any given team will have a penalty on any given play.

Let's say Team A believes in playing penalty-free and stresses it to their players. A long pass happens and the defender doesn't commit any interference. The receiver catches the ball and runs for a few yards before being tackled.

Let's say Team B believes in limiting the number of yards allowed over committing penalties. A long pass happens. The defender weighs the benefit of the penalty against the catch-and-run, and determines the spot-foul penalty gives up the fewest yards, so he mugs the receiver and prevents the catch, drawing the flag in the process.

Team B will always have more penalties than Team A, because Team B isn't concerned with the number of penalties vs the number of yards conceded.

seabowl · Oct 31, 2016

Ok let me clarify my OP.

In both 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle were called for the fewest penalties during that 2 year stretch. The odds are 1/32 and again 1/32. That means it's around 1000-1 chance that it happens.

1000-1!!!!
Almost impossible!!!!

This year our opponents when playing us are ranked I believe 29h which is almost again the least called for penalties when playing us.

My theory is that refs are so concerned with watching Seattle players to see if they are committing penalties that they are ignoring the opponents and if they are committing penalties most of the time.

In this case the numbers are factual and the NFL cannot makeup an excuse as to why this is happening. They must find a way to call the games fair for both teams.

Rog it's your move my man.

cymatica · Oct 31, 2016

Team B will always have more penalties than Team A, because Team B isn't concerned with the number of penalties vs the number of yards conceded.

This doesnt explain why every team playing the seahawks gets called for less penalties than their average almost every game. It seems very much like the refs seem to focus much more on what penalties the seahawks commit. Cant really argue against 3 years of this despairity

seabowl · Oct 31, 2016

cymatica":apfnjaw8 said:
Team B will always have more penalties than Team A, because Team B isn't concerned with the number of penalties vs the number of yards conceded.

Click to expand...

This doesnt explain why every team playing the seahawks gets called for less penalties than their average almost every game. It seems very much like the refs seem to focus much more on what penalties the seahawks commit. Cant really argue against 3 years of this despairity

Exactly.

What people who don't understand the point being made is thiat this has NOTHING to do with the actions of the Hawks. It's all about their opponents actions and what the refs are not calling.

scutterhawk · Oct 31, 2016

seabowl":3t9cp5fl said:
Ok let me clarify my OP.

In both 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle were called for the fewest penalties during that 2 year stretch. The odds are 1/32 and again 1/32. That means it's around 1000-1 chance that it happens.

1000-1!!!!
Almost impossible!!!!

This year our opponents when playing us are ranked I believe 27th which is almost again the least called for penalties when playing us.

My theory is that refs are so concerned with watching Seattle players to see if they are committing penalties that they are ignoring the opponents and if they are committing penalties most of the time.

In this case the numbers are factual and the NFL cannot makeup an excuse as to why this is happening. They must find a way to call the games fair for both teams.

Rog it's your move my man.

Also to note...The teams that are NOT being penalized when playing us, are getting penalized up the whazzoo in games before AND after playing us.

Hell, the Saints were the MOST penalized this year, BEFORE they played the Seahawks...Go figure that one.

lukerguy · Oct 31, 2016

If you were to take a 32 sided dice and roll it once, the chances would be 1/32.

If you were to take a 32 sided dice and role the same number (Seahawks) twice in a row, you'd get 32*32 not 32*2.

1/1024 is the probability of the same certain number (Seahawks) being pulled twice in a row out of 32 other teams.

lukerguy · Oct 31, 2016

Hawk-Lock":38u4096q said:
That's strange, but if you seriously think the NFL is rigging games against us, then you're crazy.

They're not rigging games but I believe refs are looking for calls. The Shead call on 3rd down is a great example. He had textbook defense and somehow was flagged. This cost the Seahawks 3 points, and quite possibly the game. How can you call PI on a play where there is PERFECT defense- TEXTBOOK? Answer: You have to be looking for them...

seabowl · Oct 31, 2016

lukerguy":4rl1gyls said:
If you were to take a 32 sided dice and roll it once, the chances would be 1/32.

If you were to take a 32 sided dice and role the same number (Seahawks) twice in a row, you'd get 32*32 not 32*2.

1/1024 is the probability of the same certain number (Seahawks) being pulled twice in a row out of 32 other teams.

Yes yes and yes. If the Hawks aren't bringing this evidence to the league then they should.

bmorepunk · Oct 31, 2016

seabowl":2ia9vw2h said:
Ok let me clarify my OP.

In both 2014 and 2015 opponents when playing Seattle were called for the fewest penalties during that 2 year stretch. The odds are 1/32 and again 1/32. That means it's around 1000-1 chance that it happens.

1000-1!!!!
Almost impossible!!!!

This year our opponents when playing us are ranked I believe 29h which is almost again the least called for penalties when playing us.

My theory is that refs are so concerned with watching Seattle players to see if they are committing penalties that they are ignoring the opponents and if they are committing penalties most of the time.

In this case the numbers are factual and the NFL cannot makeup an excuse as to why this is happening. They must find a way to call the games fair for both teams.

Rog it's your move my man.

Your entire premise is that football games, particularly the penalties called in them, would ideally be a random process without the theoretical "one sided" calls by the referees. This is incorrect. Football games are not random processes. Properly officiated calls are not random processes. There would not be an even chance that every team had the same probability of finishing with every ranking.

bmorepunk · Oct 31, 2016

lukerguy":213az5eq said:
If you were to take a 32 sided dice and roll it once, the chances would be 1/32.

If you were to take a 32 sided dice and role the same number (Seahawks) twice in a row, you'd get 32*32 not 32*2.

1/1024 is the probability of the same certain number (Seahawks) being pulled twice in a row out of 32 other teams.

A football game and the officiating within it (when called "fairly") are not random processes like rolling a perfect die. It's more like rolling a 32 sided die made out of a material that doesn't usually hold its shape and is inconsistently weighted.

Proof that refs are calling the games one sided

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads