‎Do referee officials always have a fair advantage?

[AmoreJaz]

‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?

According to the rules, referees must clearly act professionally towards everyone regardless of their status, but in practice this can be different. We have seen so many examples where referees are being unfair on the field because of the favorite team, some of them even try to defeat the favorite team to benefit the other favorite team. The referee bribery case has happened before, so I won't demand too much that all referees' performance is completely clean and professional.

In La Liga, we all know that several teams have begun to protest against refereeing decisions that they consider unfair. Real Madrid and Barcelona are sometimes also victims, but both are also often teams that benefit from referees. Referees are human too, so when they lose their morale because of money, it's not surprising.

As there are some biases with human referees, the reason why there is VAR (a technology-assisted referee) to confirm what's really going on inside the field without the bias from the physical referee himself. This is for me quite useful because without human intervention, the cameras can really see what's actually going on, if in case people have doubts about the decision. They can always review the video footages.

[ZeroVinsonN]

I think any good referee would try hard enough to ensure that they are as fair as possible in whatever game they officiate over, as long as they can help it then the match should be fair to both teams involved, a subconscious bias is out of our control especially when the referee themselves believe that they are being fair and in the truest sense of the word they actually are but if somehow at the end of the day the games seems to have favoured one team over the other then that's just the course of the game as long as the referee did their best to make sure the game was equally fair to both sides.

[Russlenat]

If they really want to rig a game, they can. Some people think it always needs players or the team itself, but honestly the ones who can do it quietly are the referees. Of course, that usually comes from whoever is above them, most likely the league.

With the way refs control the calls, it becomes less obvious. That’s why I believe outcomes can be influenced, especially through point shaving, like affecting the spread or the totals rather than outright wins or losses.

[Mindyspace]

I think that point makes sense. Even with VAR and technology, the final decision is still made by a human, and unconscious bias does exist pressure from the fans, the weight of the jersey, the moment in the game… all of that can influence things. I don't think it's something planned or intentional, but small decisions end up favoring big teams or favorites.

It's good to talk about this, I think it's interesting.

[xenomorfo]

That's a fact!! Refereeing is made to be objective but the truth is that human psychology can not be removed from the game even with the aid of VAR so decisions can still be influenced by personal bias, the heavy pressure from the fans and the reputation of certain teams and players as well but that does not still means referees are corrupt in any way, but it clearly proves that fairness is not that much of a guarantee. The only thing we can hope for is improvement in technologies that are being used and accountability to reduce those biases as much as possible.

My goodness, how many things there are to learn. Today I learned this thing called arbitrage which I didn't know before. Truly, people invent everything to make some money. But explain something to me, does it have any risks or is it with very few risks?

[terrific]

They're not always correc and that's why they have other counterparts to have a second and even third opinion if the call is rightful.
That's why these officiating referees sometimes admit that they're not right but in most cases, they know what to do.
And the calls, penalties or whichever they call it in an official game, they have the right to check in every part where they think is a foul or so.
It cannot be gone that they could be favoring a team or a player based on the point of view of a fan.

[Cryptmuster]

 
‎I have thought about this from top to bottom and I still come to a biased conclusion based on football and other major league tournaments I have seen live and how a particular team just seems to be spotless and the other one is the scapegoat, maybe due to less star players or because they are not as big or popular as the former.
‎
‎Refereeing as an officiate duty is supposed to be objective even with the initiative of VAR/relay technology to make it more efficient and accurate as possible, but we can't rule out the human psychology and systemic factors that can create a perceived advantage.
‎It is strictly forbidden for a referee to consciously favor any team as it could mean the end of the career of such a referee found wanting, still, a well documented scientific researched phenomenon, doesn't rule out the subconscious bias which can interfere in a referee's decision and create the perceived advantage I am talking about.
‎
‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

Despite all modern technologies, including VAR, referees still make a lot of mistakes. And I think this bias, when referees are more favorable toward the favorites, will always remain. There are very few referees who truly officiate matches without taking the star status of players into account.
I don’t know, maybe the human factor plays a role herem and when making a decision, even during a VAR review, referees are under pressure from the fans, all of this also matters.

[Anayochukwu]

I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

Referees are supposed to officiate without being biased, and any referee who has a connection with any playing team should not be the one officiating to remove the temptation of favouring one particular team over the other.

In just the concluded At AFCON, the Ghanaian referee who officiated the finals between Morocco and Senegal was said to have taken a bribe from the host nation (Morocco) because of how things were obviously going on the field; it was pretty obvious that he was against Senegal players.

Humans are sentimental in nature and more likely to abuse power when opportunity are given to them, is hard to see a fair justification from a referee not that there are no good ones out there, referees are vulnerable to having their own interest which they might want to protect at all cost, even when there are suspicious observations what other means can you back up your claims of a referee taken bribe? You see when you can't beat a system you are left with no choice than to accept or conform to the system

That's just the truth because humans are unpredictable especially the referees, they can decide to blow what they like and favor the side they are supporting without nobody questioning them, unless the VAR are involved in the game if everything is possible for the referees do. So I think the best way is just to accept any outcome because immediately the match is ended everything is over and there's nothing you can do about it because that's human being for you.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I have said this thing not only once but a few times here, I have mentioned it that some referee are being partial which means biased and always standing in favour of just one team during some match, but when I brought it up, some persons thought I was just joking but this is not the first time this thought is coming up, people that watch football always can tell, I'm not referring to the referee in other sports games but specifically in football, the referees were Partial in some games.

[Smartprofit]

I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

Referees are supposed to officiate without being biased, and any referee who has a connection with any playing team should not be the one officiating to remove the temptation of favouring one particular team over the other.

In just the concluded At AFCON, the Ghanaian referee who officiated the finals between Morocco and Senegal was said to have taken a bribe from the host nation (Morocco) because of how things were obviously going on the field; it was pretty obvious that he was against Senegal players.

I don't think the referee in this match was actually bribed by the Moroccan football team. At least, there's no direct evidence of this. 🙋 Perhaps there was no bribe.

However, the fact is that this referee made very strange decisions in favor of the Moroccan team. And this fact is undeniable. We don't know for sure whether this referee was bribed or not. Perhaps he simply had a negative attitude toward the Senegalese team for some reason. The fact is, he first disallowed a goal against Morocco and then awarded a penalty. These events led to a scandal, during which the entire Senegalese team (including the coach) left the field and went to the locker room. ⛹️

The unfairness of this referee's decisions was indirectly confirmed by the actions of Moroccan Brahim Diaz, who deliberately missed the Senegalese goal.

[qwertyup23]

<..snip..>
‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?

There have been reports in the past where the referee can affect the whole outcome of the game.

To give you an actual example, the Lakers and Celtics were battling each other.¹ In the last 4 seconds of the game and quarter, Lakers had possession of the ball and Lebron drove to the basket and he was FOULED. Unfortunately, however, the referee failed to call on what it seemed an obvious foul and they ultimately lost that match.

When it comes to tight tournaments and competition, the slightest advantage means the outlier in deciding who would win the match. This is exactly the reason on why referee officials are hold to a high degree of scrutiny and regulation. One obvious mistake could cost them not only with penalties but their position and tenure on the sport as well.


1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9yjtFFXuB4

[Hispo]

 
‎I have thought about this from top to bottom and I still come to a biased conclusion based on football and other major league tournaments I have seen live and how a particular team just seems to be spotless and the other one is the scapegoat, maybe due to less star players or because they are not as big or popular as the former.
‎
‎Refereeing as an officiate duty is supposed to be objective even with the initiative of VAR/relay technology to make it more efficient and accurate as possible, but we can't rule out the human psychology and systemic factors that can create a perceived advantage.
‎It is strictly forbidden for a referee to consciously favor any team as it could mean the end of the career of such a referee found wanting, still, a well documented scientific researched phenomenon, doesn't rule out the subconscious bias which can interfere in a referee's decision and create the perceived advantage I am talking about.
‎
‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

I mean... There will be always some minimum bias in the mind of referees, the important thing is keeping such level of bias to a minimum, so it does not affect the choices an actions of the referee.

Referees are paid and hired according to their level of fairness and their minimum bias, and a professional referee won't risk their career because they would rather an specific team to win other the other.

If people gave so much importance to the bias of referees, then betting on football would not be as fun and entertaining as it is.

[bhadz]

‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

This is common thinking in our local league with the sport of basketball. Fans are calling it as a cooking show whenever the referees are calling not based on what it should be. They're giving favoritism and sometimes, the fans are right with it. Can't blame those fans that are calling out the referees when they should do their part and chose not to do it. And so, they're accused by being paid by the team they are favoring.

[|MINER|]

‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?

I have actually felt that many times the referee has given one team an extra favor, like when a player from the opposing team fouls, the referee doesn't give them a yellow card or any punishment for the foul. But at the same time, I also think that from our emotional point of view, maybe we think that way, but in reality, maybe the referee gives the right decision and the tie is over?
Moreover, by favoring a team, the referee will not get any extra benefits. He will get his fee anyway. And if he gets extra benefits, then we can bring it under the category of one kind of match fixing, which if proven, then the referee will definitely be found guilty and his punishment may be up to jail.

[hyudien]

The truth is that we will not always see referees who are always fair, whether in small or large championships, there will be matches with biased referees, who sometimes seem to favor one team (favoritism) but when we bet on a team that is more favored by the referee, we will usually be happy, otherwise other bettors will curse because their team is treated unfairly, even though it is clear that the referee is also a human being, who is not free from making mistakes, until it is not proven that the referee is fixing the match, whether the team loses or wins, we still have to accept the final result. Luckily there is now VAR, which is more able to make the match look fairer.

[hedgeh0g]

‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

This is common thinking in our local league with the sport of basketball. Fans are calling it as a cooking show whenever the referees are calling not based on what it should be. They're giving favoritism and sometimes, the fans are right with it. Can't blame those fans that are calling out the referees when they should do their part and chose not to do it. And so, they're accused by being paid by the team they are favoring.

I admit it could be a coincidence and only appear that way, but in reality, it won't be. Many fans may not be expert enough to spot every moment on the field, but generally speaking, referees can have an advantage and take advantage of it. They might hide it, because if it's discovered, they could be kicked out and never referee again. That's a huge risk for them, and they could lose their reputation forever. It's hard for me to imagine what they'll be able to do with their lives if they're branded as unprofessionals.

[bhadz]

‎I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

This is common thinking in our local league with the sport of basketball. Fans are calling it as a cooking show whenever the referees are calling not based on what it should be. They're giving favoritism and sometimes, the fans are right with it. Can't blame those fans that are calling out the referees when they should do their part and chose not to do it. And so, they're accused by being paid by the team they are favoring.

I admit it could be a coincidence and only appear that way, but in reality, it won't be. Many fans may not be expert enough to spot every moment on the field, but generally speaking, referees can have an advantage and take advantage of it. They might hide it, because if it's discovered, they could be kicked out and never referee again. That's a huge risk for them, and they could lose their reputation forever. It's hard for me to imagine what they'll be able to do with their lives if they're branded as unprofessionals.

Yes, not all fans are experts in spotting those calls that have to be in favor of the team they're supporting. But not all fans are naive enough not to notice some fair calls that they should have done. Well, everything is televised now and recorded and that's why if a few calls won't be that fair, they will be called out and that's going to put their refereeing career into jeopardy. That's why for most of them, the best choice is just to do their job and if they have some slips, they'll have to review it and admit that they haven't called some of the plays fairly.

[dunfida]

I wanted to know if you have ever seen it the same way that indeed, referee officials have a fair advantage in any game or tournament which of course always favor their favorite team to win or you have a better opinion on the matter?
‎

Referees are supposed to officiate without being biased, and any referee who has a connection with any playing team should not be the one officiating to remove the temptation of favouring one particular team over the other.

In just the concluded At AFCON, the Ghanaian referee who officiated the finals between Morocco and Senegal was said to have taken a bribe from the host nation (Morocco) because of how things were obviously going on the field; it was pretty obvious that he was against Senegal players.

As a referree then you shoudlnt really be that biased even if we do say that  you do want for your liked team to win up the game on which you are that making up some bad calls or decisions but somewhat having these kind of behavior could be that spot out immeditately on which if its proven or if those calls becomes that too obvious then for sure there would be that a corresponding violation on which it will be that affecting out his referree career. We do know on how it do sucks when we do able to see referrees do make out some bad decisions or calls on which it would definitely affect the game overall outcome and results. We do know that each calls could be that somewhat crucial on which if it would be that trying out to become bias then that what makes the game that sucks specially if you do see your team is losing and with those calls made out on which are obviously not just that right.

Somewhat there are some instances that even if it do looks  that odd but still those were valid calls. If the masses do notice up something then it would be that creating up an issue.

[Muba20]

Referees have a different attitude towards big teams. As you said, sometimes referees do not behave in a biased manner, but it is seen that it happens automatically. Sometimes referees can get into arguments if they catch big teams making mistakes, which is why their attitude towards them is somewhat lenient. And such biased behavior will never be identified. Moreover, if a referee behaves in a biased manner during the game, it is not always visible. The referee may have such biased behavior, but if it is unusual behavior, it will never be acceptable.

[BABY SHOES]

Referees are supposed to officiate without being biased, and any referee who has a connection with any playing team should not be the one officiating to remove the temptation of favouring one particular team over the other.

The referee must be independent and not take sides with anyone, with the referee taking sides with the other team then it is detrimental to the opposing club.

In just the concluded At AFCON, the Ghanaian referee who officiated the finals between Morocco and Senegal was said to have taken a bribe from the host nation (Morocco) because of how things were obviously going on the field; it was pretty obvious that he was against Senegal players.

Is there an article where this Ghanaian referee took a bribe? Is this just speculation by many people?
I know the foul in the penalty box for Morocco was controversial and the referee had seen VAR, the decision was still objective it's just that many people think it shouldn't be a foul... although in the end Senegal was still lucky because Diaz failed to score with a penalty.