Ff1 uva/gt

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by walt

Talked with the "C" who called it and is a very good friend of mine. They did not see the baseline angle and said from the angles they had to review at the monitor, it was a no brainer that he got hit in the chin with the elbow. Having seen the baseline angle afterward, still had a foul but would not have been FF1. Just letting you know.

Excellent info and a problem with the replay system that the NCAA/conference needs to fix.
I understand how plays can look very different from various angles. I believe that one of the issues here was that the calling official had a deceptive angle and came out of his primary for what he believed to be a non-basketball play that the crew had to get. Unfortunately, the studies which show that we are wrong about 70% of the time when we call in our secondary areas proved true here and the angle of view got your friend into trouble.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Excellent info and a problem with the replay system that the NCAA/conference needs to fix.
I understand how plays can look very different from various angles. I believe that one of the issues here was that the calling official had a deceptive angle and came out of his primary for what he believed to be a non-basketball play that the crew had to get. Unfortunately, the studies which show that we are wrong about 70% of the time when we call in our secondary areas proved true here and the angle of view got your friend into trouble.

I really doubt that studies show that the calls in a secondary are wrong 70% of the time. I suspect that is a made-up number more than an actual result of a study. Sure, they may be less accurate than in the primary, but I really doubt it drops that much on the kinds of plays people go get.

This call, specifically, wasn't wrong. The calling official didn't call an FF1 live. he called a personal foul...and it was. They went to video, which should be even better than a primary call, and then got it wrong because they didn't have the right view.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I really doubt that studies show that the calls in a secondary are wrong 70% of the time. ....

I've heard that calling outside of your primary is only 70% accurate, not 70% wrong.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I've heard that calling outside of your primary is only 70% accurate, not 70% wrong.

I could believe that. Your accuracy may drop, but it doesn't disappear. If it did, there would be little value in reviewing any video that didn't include 3-4 angles. Either way, I'm guessing the number is just made up or generated after someone viewed a relatively small set of plays and not a large comprehensive study. Furthermore, depending on the point you want to prove, a lot of judgement calls could be classified either way (as correct or incorrect), significantly skewing the results.


The question to ask then, regarding situations outside of your primary, would be whether it is better to call something or not call something. If you make the all, you'd be right 70% of the time and be wrong 30%. But, to not make that call you'd be wrong 70% of the time but be right 30% of the time. If officials are patient when calling outside of their primary, and only go get something they're confident in and believe needs to be called, it seems that the better option, at least regarding contact, is still to make the call since you're still much more likely to be right than wrong.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I've heard that calling outside of your primary is only 70% accurate, not 70% wrong.

I concur. I believe that I reversed the stats in my previous post.