Did Jarrod Croker choke ?

[Doomednow]

Raiders_Premiers,

I might be wasting my time here, but consider this: teams have a designated kicker for a reason. Because, due to training and practice, they are a better kicker than anyone else on the team. Why are they better? Because on a statistical level they are more likely to kick it between the posts than anyone else on the team.

If it was a 50/50 chance for anyone why not just give it to anyone on the team to have a kick? These days designated kickers have averages well above 50 per cent and they kick from all over the field. Croker's kick was from a relatively easy position, boosting his chances even further.

However he still missed, most likely due to a lapse in concentration caused by pressure. A choke. Its not an insult in this case. I for one feel sorry for the guy, but no doubt he'll do a better job next time.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Are there low iodine levels in the water in Canberra?

So, to summarise this thread, Jarrod Croker choked.

A Dragons supporter would know wouldn't they?

 

[cleary89]

Haha look what I created.

Raiders, your not as bad as the others. They aren't debating his kicking % from there, you will notice madman said "every kick has a 50% chance".

They weren't trying to estimate what his percentage is from there, they were telling us the probability of any kick being sucessful, from anywhere on the field. It has 2 outcomes, so it must be a 50% chance. There are 16 teams, so each team as a 1/16 chance to win the comp.

You are overthinking (WTF, you overthing?, umpossible) the problem, and giving them more credit then what is due. However, we both know you were just trying to troll everyone, and rather then spell out that they were debating the probablity of every kick not just this one in particular.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

If there are two outcomes, then, probability wise, they are both as likely as each other.

Correct, only if there are no other contributing factors an example of this is flipping a coin, human sex determination (boy or girl).

Incorrect when it comes to goal kicking where factors including wind, rain, mental or physical state of kicker, experience of prior event etc decrease the probability of one result, that is kicking the goal.

This explanation seems complicated but its true:
Even though the number of outcomes remains constant the number of times these outcomes occur isn't constant if there are outside influences affecting one of those outcomes from occuring or not occuring.

There is a 50/50 chance that 1/16 of this is not true. :sarcasm:

 

[dontbro]

Correct, only if there are no other contributing factors an example of this is flipping a coin, human sex determination (boy or girl).

Incorrect when it comes to goal kicking where factors including wind, rain, mental or physical state of kicker, experience of prior event etc decrease the probability of one result, that is kicking the goal.

This explanation seems complicated but its true:
Even though the number of outcomes remains constant the number of times these outcomes occur isn't constant if there are outside influences affecting one of those outcomes from occuring or not occuring.

There is a 50/50 chance that 1/16 of this is not true. :sarcasm:

 

[dontbro]

Correct, only if there are no other contributing factors an example of this is flipping a coin, human sex determination (boy or girl).

Incorrect when it comes to goal kicking where factors including wind, rain, mental or physical state of kicker, experience of prior event etc decrease the probability of one result, that is kicking the goal.

This explanation seems complicated but its true:
Even though the number of outcomes remains constant the number of times these outcomes occur isn't constant if there are outside influences affecting one of those outcomes from occuring or not occuring.

No, you're wrong. This explanation is NOT complicated. I seriously can't believe some people believe that because a given action has only 2 outcomes, then this necessarily means there is equal chance of each outcome.

I blame the public school system for this sort of thing.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

A kicker who has an 80% conversion rate has a sh*tload better chance than 50% when kicking from 30m out in front of the goal. Is that straight forward enough for you?

This is what I was responding to

That's the probability of kicking a goal from any position. If you're trying to calculate the probability of kicking a goal from a particular position (say right in front) it would be the success rate of all kicks from right in front, which would be much higher than the overall success rate.

watatank summarised what I have been saying

Raiders_Premiers,

I might be wasting my time here, but consider this: teams have a designated kicker for a reason. Because, due to training and practice, they are a better kicker than anyone else on the team. Why are they better? Because on a statistical level they are more likely to kick it between the posts than anyone else on the team.

If it was a 50/50 chance for anyone why not just give it to anyone on the team to have a kick? These days designated kickers have averages well above 50 per cent and they kick from all over the field. Croker's kick was from a relatively easy position, boosting his chances even further.

However he still missed, most likely due to a lapse in concentration caused by pressure. A choke. Its not an insult in this case. I for one feel sorry for the guy, but no doubt he'll do a better job next time.

The problem is you guys are looking at this like footy fans, where I understand Croker realistically would probably have a better chance at kicking the goal than most other Raiders. However, this argument doesn't hold up mathematically, you have to prove it. You have to know Croker's success rate from that position and angle. And as I've already said, you need to go back and examine all his kicks to find out.
If you could show that from a similar position and angle he kicked say 9/10 goals then obviously the probability of him kicking the next goal from the same position would be very high

I'm not going to debate on how hard/easy the kick was, but find me a person who will say the kick wouldn't have been easier from the same position on the right side of the field. As a Raiders fan I have observed Croker's kicking and have come to the conclusion that he is worse kicking from the left side of the field as he is a left footed kicker. The missed conversion wasn't from right in front, despite what you may say. Again, if you have any evidence to the contrary I am happy to be proven wrong

Personally I would have had Campese kick the goal because he is a right foot kicker, but of course he was injured

 

[cleary89]

Why does everyone blame schools for everything. Blame parents for having retarted kids.

 

[greeneyed]

Certainty of thousands of Dragons supporters glad Jarrod Croker missed the kick and the Dragons didn't have to play the Raiders next week. 100 per cent.

Imbeciles.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

Certainty of thousands of Dragons supporters glad Jarrod Croker missed the kick and the Dragons didn't have to play the Raiders next week. 100 per cent.

Imbeciles.

:lol: Too true. They were absolutely sh*tting bricks

 

[Gidley Up]

Why does everyone blame schools for everything. Blame parents for having retarted kids.

...

 

[AlwaysGreen]

No, you're wrong. This explanation is NOT complicated. I seriously can't believe some people believe that because a given action has only 2 outcomes, then this necessarily means there is equal chance of each outcome.

I blame the public school system for this sort of thing.

There's a strong probability that you are correct.

 

[Apey]

http://images.memegenerator.net/genius-Girl/ImageMacro/2081477/I-can-count-to-potato.jpg

 

[dontbro]

The teacher gets paid a decent wage. When it comes to BASIC mathematics, there simply is no excuse. Granted the parents are to shoulder a substantial portion of the blame. But even the densest kids should be taught this sort of fundamental stuff. I hated mathematics when I was in high school, but I chose general maths so I can just learn the basics.

It's just unfathomable how one poster from the ACT can so passionately support his cause in the face of so much derision and ridcule.

 

[Willow]

Great news. This improves my kicking average dramatically.

I used to miss them from right in front. But now I'm told I have a 50% chance of success from anywhere on the field, busted foot and all.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

:lol: So facing derision and ridicule automatically means you're wrong, especially when it's coming mostly from Stain fans who a) are without doubt the most pathetic, delusional fans on LU and b) are upset by myself and others ridiculing them & their boring team

 

[dasherhalo]

Can't....not... reply......
Dammit - i got sucked in :crazy:

I figure this is trolling, but if not there are two outcomes: kick it or miss. that's TWO options.
The fact that one or the other has to be true doesn't make it 50/50 - it just means that each option is 50% of the available options.

The LIKELIHOOD of either option being true has nothing to do with the fact that either option only has two outcomes, or how often each will come back.

 

[Doomednow]

On another note,

Things going through Jarrod Croker's mind in the lead up to the kick:

"I need to make this kick to keep us in the match"

"I need to make this kick to stay in the finals"

"I need to make this kick because we are at home and a whole crowd of Raiders fans are counting on me to slot this not so difficult kick."

"No problem."

*Lines up for kick*

"If I miss this people are going to notice my last name rhymes with Choker."

"Oh fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu......"

 

[dontbro]

:lol: So facing derision and ridicule automatically means you're wrong, especially when it's coming mostly from Stain fans who a) are without doubt the most pathetic, delusional fans on LU and b) are upset by myself and others ridiculing them & their boring team

Hey, I'm a Manly fan so I hate St. George as much as you. But you can't argue with someone when they're arguing a mathematical concept which is black and white.

I'm much rather argue with them when they have those geniused looks on their faces, like a five year old who sees a santa claus at a Westfields, when they start going on about the possibility that they can actually win their first NRL premiership.

 

[Rodent]

I'm pissing myself laughing at the analysis of probabilities of kicking a goal in order to prove Jarrod didn't choke.
These are all the people who call the dragons chokers for not winning the comp. Even though they are in a commanding position, the betting markets (which best reflect the probability of the dragons winning the comp) have the dragons odds against. This simply means that is is more likely than not that they will lose again in season 2010.
I'm sure Croker was at least an 75% chance of kicking that goal. Sideline shots are what drag the % down. So if the dragons are chokers, Jarrod is an even bigger choker.