πŸ§‘β€βš–οΈ Referee Analysis

S AttwellvsReading

Analysis based on 5 matches since 2000

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

2
Wins
2
Draws
1
Losses
πŸ“ŠNO SIGNIFICANT BIAS

πŸ“Š NO SIGNIFICANT BIAS

Results under this referee fall within normal statistical variance.

Bias Score
-5.0%
Matches Analyzed
5

The Bias Meterβ„’

Bias Level-5.0%
Bias AgainstNeutralFavorable

Match History

5 matches under this referee

19 Aug 2014
Huddersfield (H)
Championship
LOSS
1 - 2
Cards Awarded:
Reading:
🟨 2
Huddersfield:
🟨 2
29 Nov 2013
Nott'm Forest (A)
Championship
WIN
3 - 2
Cards Awarded:
Reading:
🟨 1πŸŸ₯ 1
Nott'm Forest:
🟨 3
25 Feb 2012
Middlesbrough (A)
Championship
WIN
2 - 0
Cards Awarded:
Reading:
β€”
Middlesbrough:
🟨 1
20 Sept 2008
Watford (A)
Championship
DRAW
2 - 2
Cards Awarded:
Reading:
🟨 4
Watford:
🟨 4
10 Aug 2008
Nott'm Forest (A)
Championship
DRAW
0 - 0
Cards Awarded:
Reading:
🟨 1
Nott'm Forest:
🟨 1

When S Attwell officiates Reading matches, the statistics reveal no significant bias pattern. Based on 5 matches spanning multiple seasons, our comprehensive analysis shows Reading achieves a 40% win rate under S Attwell, compared to the 45% baseline expected for teams at this level. This negative 5.0 percentage point difference falls within normal statistical variance. 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.

Frequently Asked Questions

Detailed Statistics

Win Rate (Under Ref)40.0%
Baseline Win Rate45%
Bias Score-5.0%

Cards for Reading

🟨 Yellows / Game1.60
πŸŸ₯ Reds / Game0.20

Cards for Opponents

🟨 Opp Yellows / Game2.20
πŸŸ₯ Opp Reds / Game0.00
πŸ’°

Betting Outlook

TIPSTER INSIGHT
πŸŸ₯

RED CARD RISK

Red card frequency: 0.2 per game

Higher than average dismissal rate in this matchup.

⚠️ This is statistical analysis, not betting advice. Gamble responsibly.

Share This Analysis

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