At the end of the NCAA Championship game last night Duke was up by five when underneath the Wisconsin basket there was a loose ball that went out of bounds. The officials first called it Duke's ball but went to the reply to confirm.
CBS showed multiple angles of it and, according to the announcers, it clearly showed that the ball actually went off of a Duke player (unless you live in Durham probably) -- I saw it the same way. So it came as quite a shock when the officials refused to overturn the call even though they saw the same replay angles.
And their explanation is what most intrigues me. Whether or not it played a hand in Duke's victory is not a concern to me though Duke did go down and hit a 3-pt shot to extend the lead on the next play.
Anyway, evidently the referees told CBS that it was not reversed because "they just couldn't see anything."
That amazes me. What exactly could they not see? It was so obvious from several angles that it went off of the Duke player and should have been Wisconsin's ball. How could they not see it? It was so clear, so easy to see.
As I pondered it this morning and how it relates to this blog I write, it caused me to wonder how much I miss, or we miss, that is right in front of us, and so easy to see? When we are presented with the data, or the facts, are there areas where we fail to reverse course because "we just couldn't see anything?" -- where we avoid the obvious because it means we have to admit we are wrong?