The Ref Stop

Empty Sin Bins

Big Cat

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
My CFA are adamant dissent is down 50% in leagues running with Sin Bins
In one League (which had 350 C2s 2016/17), not one player was sent to the Bin twice in the same game (2017/18)
I understand the pilot will be mandatory from 2019/20
Is it the real deal?
Will the top of the tree learn bottom up, or will the sponsors balk at the idea of having their assets sent to the naughty corner?
By the way, the FA have only used it for C2 but the principal extends to other cautions at the Federation's discretion
 
The Ref Stop
I tried to remain open minded on sin bin despite some concerns about whether it would have any impact at all on dissent never mind the logistical concerns. However I have been through the data from my county trial and as you point out, it's compelling. Dissent is down overall by a lot and there are very very few double sin bins. Also the referees survey who took part say that the logistics really aren't that complicated and their initial concerns about how to manage turned out to be unfounded. TBH it has to be acknowledged that this looks like a solid idea.

I don't think this should or would ever make it to the top of the game - let them have VAR and we'll have sin bins.
 
Statistics are mostly about how you present them and impressions you want to put on the intended audience. If I told you 40% of all sick leaves happen on Fridays and Mondays the first impression it gives is that it has to do with the weekend in between and getting a long weekend. But when you think about it, Mondays and Fridays form a combined 40% of all working days anyway.

In addition stats can be manipulated to sell and idea. Kind of like the World Cup VAR accuracy stats. In the case of stats in the OP, they are in fact not the stats for dissent, they are the stats for cases where dissent was punished (and was recorded). So is dissent reduced or is it just being punished less? We would only get a true comparison if we have stats for cases where dissent goes unpunished as well.

I very much doubt Sin Bin reduces dissent as much as the stats show it. While I think dissent reduction is a factor in the impressive stats and that is good for the game, I also think the biggest factor is referees not punishing dissent as much as they used to so they won't have to sin bin a player as not to 'ruin the game' which I don't think is good for the game.

IMO it will take several years before we can possibly know if sin bin will have an overall positive impact on the game.
 
one said:
Statistics are mostly about how you present them and impressions you want to put on the intended audience. If I told you 40% of all sick leaves happen on Fridays and Mondays the first impression it gives is that it has to do with the weekend in between and getting a long weekend. But when you think about it, Mondays and Fridays form a combined 40% of all working days anyway.

In addition stats can be manipulated to sell and idea. Kind of like the World Cup VAR accuracy stats. In the case of stats in the OP, they are in fact not the stats for dissent, they are the stats for cases where dissent was punished (and was recorded). So is dissent reduced or is it just being punished less? We would only get a true comparison if we have stats for cases where dissent goes unpunished as well.

I very much doubt Sin Bin reduces dissent as much as the stats show it. While I think dissent reduction is a factor in the impressive stats and that is good for the game, I also think the biggest factor is referees not punishing dissent as much as they used to so they won't have to sin bin a player as not to 'ruin the game' which I don't think is good for the game.

IMO it will take several years before we can possibly know if sin bin will have an overall positive impact on the game.
Click to expand...
Ordinarily I'd agree and am openly skeptical about stats published by football's governing bodies. The VAR stat was patronizing and an insult to intelligence. However, in the case of the Herts Senior County League, it was used as a pilot specifically because the league had depressing figures when it came to 'recorded dissent'. Keep in mind that a Sin Binned player is still recorded as a C2 via WGS, but it doesn't incur a fine. I think the 50% reduction is an uncomplicated statistic which ought to be taken at face value. Even if some referees get shy with the idea of temporarily dismissing a player, I can't see that accounting for anything like a 50% reduction
Phil Sharpe is my RDO and the feedback he's getting from refs in these leagues is all positive. I'd have no reason to doubt this. I must admit, I wasn't keen on the idea, but the figures are bending my opinion
 
one said:
I very much doubt Sin Bin reduces dissent as much as the stats show it. While I think dissent reduction is a factor in the impressive stats and that is good for the game, I also think the biggest factor is referees not punishing dissent as much as they used to so they won't have to sin bin a player as not to 'ruin the game' which I don't think is good for the game.
Click to expand...

Not to keep score in debate club but you can't write a post questioning actual data and then throw in a theory with no data whatsoever to back it up. It's an interesting point regarding referees potentially avoiding it but if we allow ourselves to consider that possibility we can't dismiss the actual data that's in front of us.
 
Big Cat said:
Ordinarily I'd agree and am openly skeptical about stats published by football's governing bodies. The VAR stat was patronizing and an insult to intelligence. However, in the case of the Herts Senior County League, it was used as a pilot specifically because the league had depressing figures when it came to 'recorded dissent'. Keep in mind that a Sin Binned player is still recorded as a C2 via WGS, but it doesn't incur a fine. I think the 50% reduction is an uncomplicated statistic which ought to be taken at face value. Even if some referees get shy with the idea of temporarily dismissing a player, I can't see that accounting for anything like a 50% reduction
Phil Sharpe is my RDO and the feedback he's getting from refs in these leagues is all positive. I'd have no reason to doubt this. I must admit, I wasn't keen on the idea, but the figures are bending my opinion
Click to expand...
I am not against the idea. I am only pointing out the shortcomings of the stats presented and the fact that there is a possibility of 'false positives' being present. Our associations has used it for a whole season now and I think it has merits. In my personal experience, at the beginning of the season the reduction of all dissents (recorded or not) was quite notable, but after a few rounds the novelty wore off but still not as bad as last season.

WilliamD said:
Not to keep score in debate club but you can't write a post questioning actual data and then throw in a theory with no data whatsoever to back it up. It's an interesting point regarding referees potentially avoiding it but if we allow ourselves to consider that possibility we can't dismiss the actual data that's in front of us.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right regarding my theory. Note that I have used words like 'I think', 'I doubt', 'in my opinion'. So I am aware I can't back my theory and I could be wrong.
I am not questioning the data collected. The stats are correct for the collected data. I am pointing out what they represent which is a reduction in punished (recorded) dissent not all dissents (punished and unpunished). Have 'all dissents' reduced though? The stats don't tell you that.
 
Here is an analogy to get my point across.

Say we had the stats for the number of penalties retaken due to keeper encroachment and then compare them for before and after it became a mandatory caution. In all likelihood, the number of retakes have been reduced. Now you can look at this two ways:
- The law makers would say, our new law has reduced keeper encroachment and we have the stats to prove it.
- Sceptics like me would say, referees are not punishing encroaching keepers anymore for fear of having to send them off for double caution and I have the 2018 World Cup freeze frames to prove it :)
 
I think it will show evidence that the system is working well. However, I do feel that at some point they'll be a game with several sin bins / double sin bins etc, that no referee wouldn't have been able to handle (ie sin binned players arguing off the field, lack of 22 watches) and they'll reconsider the idea.
 
Big Cat said:
Phil Sharpe is my RDO and the feedback he's getting from refs in these leagues is all positive. I'd have no reason to doubt this. I must admit, I wasn't keen on the idea, but the figures are bending my opinion
Click to expand...

What about your own statistics, are they going the same way?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top