πŸ§‘β€βš–οΈ Referee Analysis⚠️ BIAS DETECTED

M DonohuevsCharlton

Analysis based on 6 matches since 2000

* Note: Detailed card statistics for matches before 2005 may be incomplete.

1
Wins
3
Draws
2
Losses

When M Donohue officiates Charlton matches, the statistics reveal a severe negative pattern. Based on 6 matches spanning multiple seasons, our comprehensive analysis shows Charlton achieves a 16.7% win rate under M Donohue, compared to the 45% baseline expected for teams at this level. This negative 28.3 percentage point difference suggests a meaningful pattern worth examining. The data includes detailed card statistics, match outcomes, and historical trends to provide football fans, bettors, and analysts with evidence-based insights into this referee-team dynamic.

🚨STRONG BIAS DETECTED

🚨 STRONG BIAS DETECTED

This referee has a significantly negative history with this team. Win rate is severely below average.

Bias Score
-28.3%
Matches Analyzed
6
⚠️

Notable Negative Pattern

With a bias score of -28.3%, this ranks among the more significant negative patterns in our database. Over 6 matches, Charlton has won 28 percentage points fewer games than expected. For bettors and fantasy managers, this historical trend suggests extra caution when M Donohue is appointed.

The Bias Meterβ„’

Bias Level-28.3%
Bias AgainstNeutralFavorable

Match History

6 matches under this referee

DateOpponentScoreResultCardsDivision
26 Dec 2025Norwich(A)0 - 1LOSS
🟨 2
Championship
21 Dec 2019QPR(A)2 - 2DRAW
🟨 4
Championship
26 Oct 2019West Brom(A)2 - 2DRAW
🟨 3
Championship
14 Sept 2019Birmingham(H)0 - 1LOSS
🟨 1
Championship
17 Aug 2019Barnsley(A)2 - 2DRAW
🟨 3
Championship
24 Nov 2018Bristol Rvs(H)3 - 1WIN
🟨 2
League One

Frequently Asked Questions

Detailed Statistics

Win Rate (Under Ref)16.7%
Baseline Win Rate45%
Bias Score-28.3%

Cards for Charlton

🟨 Yellows / Game2.50
πŸŸ₯ Reds / Game0.00

Cards for Opponents

🟨 Opp Yellows / Game2.67
πŸŸ₯ Opp Reds / Game0.17

Share This Analysis

Think your mates need to see this? Share the evidence.