[ad_1]
“Isso”. – “Isso”. – “This is how it is.”
Marco Reus repeated these words over and over again when asked by journalists. Discussion is not allowed, discussion is not necessary.
If Leroy Sané hadn’t knocked down his teammate Emre Can, but a Borussia Dortmund player had knocked down a Bayern Munich player: referee Marco Fritz would have blown the whistle. The BVB captain was confident that Fritz’s rating of the duel, which preceded Leon Goretzka’s goal by 3: 2, played a decisive role in the fact that his team ultimately lost 2: 4.
Once again, the soccer nation had the opportunity to re-discuss a well-known question: the now mythical “Bayern Bonus” (not to be confused with Bayern rags): does it really exist or not? (COMMENT: Reus is right, and yet he is so wrong)
Real Bayern bonus or not? Opinions are divided
Which may come as a surprise to some: As much as record champs become polarized, most fans tend to believe that this bonus doesn’t exist.
At SPORT1-Question of the week CHECK24 double pass decided, as of Sunday at 6pm, 62 percent of the more than 45,000 voters decided in favor of the option: No, Bavaria is not preferred.
Try DAZN for Free and Experience Bundesliga Friday and Monday Matches Live and On Demand | TO SHOW
And there was also skepticism among Dopa experts. Commentator Marcel Reif saw “little substance” in Reus’ accusation, former Gladbach coach André Schubert spoke of a “perception issue”, former Bayern player and Hertha coach Dieter Hoeneß was especially surprised that Reus “had just finished leave the scene “. derived such thesis.
In conversation with SPORT1 They also point to two veteran Bundesliga referees who had decided as Fritz.
“I would have made the same decision. With a neutral argument, this is not a foul, but a regular duel. Of course, Sané uses his body, but we play football!” Says former FIFA referee Torsten Kinhöfer . Dr. Jochen Drees, as video testing project manager, still in a responsible role at the DFB, sees it this way: “You could have accepted a whistle from Marco Fritz, but I thought it was better to keep playing.”
Reus’s claim that each referee would definitely have viewed the scene differently under the opposite sign is highly questionable. However, a closer look at the Bayern bond issue reveals that it is wrong to simply dismiss it as a fairy tale of the regulars that envious and bad losers have brought into the world.
Scientific studies have found evidence
The question of whether the referees whistle Bavaria in controversial situations has been the subject of scientific studies on several occasions, with remarkable results.
A working paper from the University of Münster compared the matches of Bayern, VfB Stuttgart and Hertha BSC, which were direct neighbors of the Munich table at the time, in the 2008/09 season.
Result: penalties, yellow and red cards, free kicks or corner kicks – Bayern benefited most often from missed whistles in five of the six categories. The research team did not see the “image-induced advantage of the FCB” as proven beyond doubt, but also not disproved in any way.
In 2016, a survey involving Frankfurt economics professor Eberhard Feess, among others, went a bit deeper and the picture became clearer: a systematic assessment of controversial gambling situations based on figures from the data service provider. Deltatre resulted in clear preferences for certain teams, including Bayern.
Established clubs are often preferred above average
“When we look at Bayern Munich’s games, and the penalties and goals that didn’t happen but should have been, we find that the probability of it affecting Bayern opponents is around 40 percent higher – it’s as if it were from Bayern Munich itself, “Feess said at the time SPORT1.
However, it should be noted that the investigation of the Frankfurt School of Finance and Management was not limited to the topic of the “Bayern Bond”. It also showed that generally established teams with big names, which were far ahead of the Bundesliga’s all-time table, benefited significantly more often from controversial or clearly wrong referee decisions than small clubs with less tradition in the league. first division. “It’s an image that emerges from the current strength,” Feess said.
Home teams and teams whose games are at stake at the end of the season are also more likely than average to be favored by the luck of the umpires.
There is also a BVB bonus
So the phenomenon is more complex and, as second in the all-time table, BVB also benefits from it. The catchy phrase “BVB bonus” (or “Werder bonus”, “Gladbach bonus”) is not such an important topic of discussion. And it will be because Bayern is the team that moves the most, in one direction or another.
“When Freiburg plays Hoffenheim and Freiburg has an advantage, then the Freiburg team is nice and everything is great, because they have almost no envious people,” says Kinhöfer.
And the extent to which the bonus phenomenon influences league events is also variable: this season, current figures from Deltatre show that Bayern were more often underprivileged than preferred in the event of major umpire errors in goals, penalties and expulsions.
This observation supports the opinion of Drees, who says: “I would rule out that table position plays a role in evaluations, that 50:50 decisions always go in the same direction.”
The referees are unconsciously influenced, even by the colors of the jersey.
However, in general, Drees knows that external influences can always be a factor in referee decisions and that all referees should be aware of this.
“I always approached it in such a way that I concentrated on the colors of the teams, so I played green against yellow, red against blue,” says the 50-year-old.
In his experience, “it is usually best when referees follow their first impulse to evaluate a scene. Spontaneous decisions are often the correct ones, and they also reduce external and internal influences that can undermine a decision.” I advise young referees to remember the motto ‘perceive and decide’ “.
