Gotta get the obvious

[Rich]

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.

And without the foul, the kid had a zero percent chance.

I gotta say, I find this entire post and this line of thinking quite strange.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

And without the foul, the kid had a zero percent chance.

I gotta say, I find this entire post and this line of thinking quite strange.

Rich,
The original post indicated:
Just watched the California sectional between Etiwanda and Mater Dei..

I thought some strange coaching and time management at the end but Mater Die is up by 3 and Etiwanda has a last second shot for three right in fromt of their bench.... The player who is going to shoot the three gets grabbed and no call.... The initial view and physics of the play made it look like a foul... when looked at in slow motion and replay it clearly was a foul.

Moral of the story when youve got video you gotta get it right. Video does not lie... Three shot foul down by three could have made a difference...

We always hear let the kids decide the game. in this case the officials decided the game because a clear foul happened and did not put the shooter on the line.

My points were and are that:
1. Just because a game is on video does not mean that an official can be perfect all the time.
2. There is NO QUESTION that the official missed the call (lack of a pair or otherwise), BUT that call did not necessarily determine the outcome of the game.

While it is true that the shooting team's chances went from somewhat thin (10 to 20% or so) to zero, I still find it inaccurate to state that this ONE CALL decided the outcome of the game -- regardless how bad the call (no-call) may have been.