Quote:
Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan
That's a whole different question altogether. I'd be right there with you on that one. I personally would love it if officials also made statements after the game. I think European soccer does it if I remember correctly. I guess it might make the mob even more angry, but for me I would actually be able to get over calls if I actually heard the human being explain himself.
|
This is directed at everyone, but NJChiefsFan's comment made me think about it.
We know that no human being is perfect, so we can't reasonably expect 100 percent accuracy and consistency on officials' calls. If we fed truth serum to officials and then interviewed them, they'd admit on some calls that they messed up. Even if they don't, a detailed review would show errors on some calls.
So recognizing that we can't find a perfect official, what's the minimum accuracy rate that's acceptable? Is it 90%? 95%? 99%? 99.0%? Assume that these are errors that aren't corrected via review.