You see ABU's by there nature have to beleive in the myth and will make up percentages to prove it so...

I think the article in the telegraph carries more belivable data than the rantings of a couple of abus in this thread

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Look I see what you are getting at but if you cant provide any kind of statistical evidence your argument is kind of pointless.
--------------------------
but wait! I am not saying that United get more favourable decisions, I'm simply saying that to judge it, you'd have to weigh up incorrect decisions in the penalty box given for and against, not the number of penalty decisions given!

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Then what is your argument?

The point of the Telegraph article was only to dispel the myth that teams never getting penalties at Old Trafford, they do, in fact they have had 7 in the last 110.

You seem to be twisting this myth into something else to suit your argument. As a United fan I have heard it countless times about never getting penalties so I'm pretty sure I know exactly what the myth is.

I'm simply saying that to judge it, you'd have to weigh up incorrect decisions in the penalty box given for and against, not the number of penalty decisions given!

....................

The thread is about penalty decisions given TOOR. Pay attention to the word 'given'.

Anything else was not given, be it correct or incorrect, and is irrelevant.

There are probably ameoba on the moon of Titan that understand this by now.

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 30 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Then what is your argument?

The point of the Telegraph article was only to dispel the myth that teams never getting penalties at Old Trafford, they do, in fact they have had 7 in the last 110.

You seem to be twisting this myth into something else to suit your argument. As a United fan I have heard it countless times about never getting penalties so I'm pretty sure I know exactly what the myth is.
--------------------------------------
I've expressed my argument throughout the article. I've stated that to determine whether debatable penalty decisions going for United are a myth, you'd have to take into account how many were correct and how many incorrect, not how many were and weren't given.

That's all.

The Telegraph need to brush up on their stats.

The obvious error in the article aside (the last paragraph saying Chelsea have conceded 5 penalties at home whereas the table stats 6), United have actually conceded 8 penalties since August 2006, not 9 which the article claims.

And have to ask, why August 2006?

And have to ask, why August 2006?

.............

August being the start of the season.

06-07
07-08
08-09
09-10
10-11

I assume it is over a five year period.

You're right, they really should have researched and got information on penalties conceded over the past 1000 years, 10 years proves nothing.

I mean 5.

I've stated that to determine whether debatable penalty decisions going for United are a myth

..............

You and the Rangers idiot are the only two harping on about debateable decisions.

The rest of us are on about penalty decisions GIVEN at OT.

I assume it is over a five year period.

-------------------

They have included penalties awarded this season, so the "stat" is compiled over a period longer than 5 years.

So that's not the reason.

TOOR
I will forever remember this guy as the guy who says it's ok to call a black person a 'negro' in public.

So that's not the reason.

.............

What do you think is?

I have no idea, that's why I'm asking. It seems an arbitrary figure to choose.

Why not since the start of the Premier League? Or since the turn of the century? Equally as arbitrary perhaps, but then any stat which is compiled over a longer period of time will naturally produce more conclusive results.

Either way, it would help if the Telegraph actually produced accurate stats in the first place.

comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 0 seconds ago

I have no idea, that's why I'm asking. It seems an arbitrary figure to choose.

...............

Looks like five years and this season to me.

Yes that's the period of time. I think that's already been established. The question is - why that period of time?

comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 4 minutes ago

Yes that's the period of time. I think that's already been established. The question is - why that period of time?

.............................

The only person who can answer that is the guy who wrote the article for the Telegraph.

id love to know how many penalties frank lampard has scored in his career....

Well, that's another myth that's been statistically argued against. It's a shame as I kind of enjoyed the delusion that at Old Trafford nobody gets penalties, and the referees are bribed! I'm a little surprised that Chelsea concede the less penalties at home.

I wonder what the next myth will be?

I wonder what the next myth will be?

..................

Fergie eats babies?

but to say that such-and-such team gives away 0.16 pens per game means very little on the whole

....................

Actually it means they give away 0.16 penalties per game.

________________

I wish Fulham had been given that penalty last night. I had a bet on United winning 1 - 0.16.

Going a little further back:

2005-06 - United conceded no penalties at home
2004-05 - conceded one
2003-04 - conceded one
2002-03 - conceded none
2001-02 - conceded none
2000-01 - conceded none

Compared to other teams, during the same period (since 2000-01):

(Only for teams who have spent 5 seasons or more in the PL since 2000-01)

Newcastle have conceded 20 at home
Blackburn - 20
West Ham - 19
Spurs - 18
Arsenal - 17
City - 16
Villa - 16
Fulham - 16
Portsmouth - 15
Wigan - 15
Everton - 14
Bolton - 14
Sunderland - 14
Liverpool - 13
Chelsea - 12
United - 10
Birmingham - 9

I don't have any figures to go further back than that. If anyone else feels inclined (or bored enough) to do so, be my guest!!!!

So, pretty much where anyone with any fiootball knowledge would think it would be.

Ignore Birmingham, that is an anomilie.

You have Us, Liverppool and Chelsea with the fewest, which is the teams along with Arsenal, who have finished in the highest places on average over ten years.

Although Arsenal seem to be the exception, the conclusion is fairly consistent - the better teams get awarded the fewest penalties against them. The reasons for that being obvious. Arsenal's stat is of course put into more perspective when they have a much worse defensive record than Chelsea, United, and Liverpool over this period. (Chelsea the best, having conceded 316 goals, then United (339), Liverpool (366), and then Arsenal conceding 397).

(Birmingham - you're right to say we should ignore them, considering they've spent much less time in the prem over this time.)

This doesn't indicate any bias - at least in my opinion. For a start, over a period that takes in 12 seasons (including this season), the difference between all the teams (Birmingham notwithstanding) is 10 penalties from the most conceded at home to the fewest. That difference isn't enough (again in my opinion) to conclude that any team has either been harshly treated or indeed favoured.

I do question the author of the Telegraph though. (That's not to question United in anyway for the record.) Why he only went as far back as 2006, especially when had he gone further back he wouldn't have been able to come to the conclusion that he did - going back one further season would have altered his comment that Fulham are less likely to concede a penalty at home than United.

In fact, the fact that he got his figures wrong with the data he did provide - that's pretty much inexcusable.