Quote:
Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef
...and my point is that to make a statement that the REFEREES decided the game with ONE CALL is simply folly. Assuming the shooter was a 72% shooter, there was slightly better than a 1/6 chance the shooting team would have ended up winning the game. In other words, there would have been roughly an 82% chance that the no call did NOT alter the outcome of the game. Had the shooter been a 60% shooter, the odds that the official's no call actually altered the winner would be at under 11%.
Put another way, there was an 82 - 89+% chance that this one call had NO EFFECT on the winning team.
My only point is to illustrate that it is unfair to take a play that represents 1/1920ths of the game (one second) and place 100% of the result of the entire game on this one play.
That said, in looking at the long video (the last 2 minutes of the game), it appears as though the Lead has him arm raised (with a fist???) as he is moving from the endline along the sideline. He did not immediately sprint off of the floor. Kind of strange.
|
That all depends on how you want to do the math. It's true that arithmetically, this call was not that likely to have determined the game, but geometrically, it was pivotal. The no call had a maximum impact (arithmetically of 3 points). But geometrically it took the teams chances of winning from some low percentage to strictly zero. A 100% decrease in chances of winning. In analyzing whether the officiating errors were determinative I think you need to look at both in some reasonable balance.
________
Laguna Beach Resort Jomtien Condo