3262: Sports Commentary

Sports Commentary

|< < Prev #3262 (June 22, 2026)

Title text: The plural of anecdote may not be data, but the singular of data is anecdote.

|< < Prev Random Explanation

Explanation

This is one of 45 incomplete explanations: This page was created at a statistically insignificant time. Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

P-hacking is the academically problematic practice of attempting to come up with a question for which the data offers a significant p-value (probability value). This is in contrast to correct scientific analysis, in which a question is formulated clearly and then answered with data. A common way of doing p-hacking is analyzing subgroups to attempt to find significance when the full dataset does not yield statistically significant results; for instance, restricting the analysis of medical data to male subjects to derive a significant p-value when including female subjects would make the p-value insignificant, when the scientific question is largely gender-independent. Sports commentators do a form of p-hacking in which they cite a fact that's made to sound more significant by restricting the situations it applies to. Randall satirizes this with an example in which the restriction uses very specific criteria largely irrelevant to gameplay patterns in order to narrow down the subgroup sample size to a measly two games. Obviously the 0-2 record reflects random noise much more than any significant insight. As well as being irrelavent to gameplay, their P-Hacking also makes the game sound like confusing jargon, which would be quite difficult to understand-Ironic given a sports commentator's job is to explain matches and suchlike-Rather than making them harder and more vague!

This comic was published 11 days into the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The World Cup was also the subject of another comic published the Wednesday before: 3260: Messi. Sports commentary was also the subject of 904: Sports.

Transcript

This is one of 28 incomplete transcripts: Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

[Cueball and Ponytail are sitting at a table, looking at the wall behind them. On the wall is a screen showing a soccer field with some unreadable score information above it.]

Cueball: They could be in trouble. Over the last 36 years, they've gone 0 for 2 when they've scored in the 37th minute to lead 2-1 against a team whose country comes before theirs alphabetically.

[Caption below comic:]

I wish sports commentators hadn't discovered p-hacking.

  Add comment        Create topic (use sparingly)       Refresh 

Discussion

F1rst p0st! I'll do this explanation. 185.36.194.22 04:32, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Did this example actually happen? 47.151.65.120 04:33, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

This comic reminds me of 1122: Electoral Precedent and 2383: Electoral Precedent 2020. Generalizing coincidences.

I am not a native English speaker. What does " they've gone 0 for 2" mean? Obviously it cannot be the score, since they are already leading 2-1? Or does this refer to a previous match? And on a more general note, I am really surprised to discover the second football themed comic strip in a few days. OK it's the World Cup, but I always thought that Randall doesn't really care about sports? --92.209.171.90 08:37, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

I am a native English speaker, but it was also a bit impenetrable to me. In part, perhaps, because it was intended to sound impenetrable (as part of the joke). But, even if not, it may be because it's using Americanized sports-talk phrasing that just isn't (yet!) used so much in my more native Anglicised commentaries that I'm used to.

I'm also English, and it's totally alien to me too. GSLikesCats307 (talk) 11:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

However, I think they're saying that "in the two specific occasions in which all those other conditions occur, they won in neither of them".

A simpler version being perhaps to state that a given team/player has gone nought-for-two in previous matches with their current opponent(s). The results of those contests might have been anything (the winner having gone to 3-2 after penalties, 6-love/6-love/6-love, a par-4 advantage or getting them all out for 178 — depending upon the sport), it's just the win/lose (or win/not-win) count thats "0 for 2".

But this is a case of Overly Narrow Superlative (overlapping with P-Hacking), making it a dubious analysis. Starting with ignoring all the games there are in which a given svoreline was not achieved in a particular minute of play. I think part of this set-up is the difference between Gridiron 'football'/"hand-egg" having tons of points scored, whereas this football (Soccer) often turns on comparatively low scores that (one-nil can be a worthy and entertaining win/loss, and even a no-score-draw might have been fun to watch if your side isn't in desperate need for a win). These commentators, or at least the US audience they're commentating to, are used to spieling things about "the last time they were down on the forty-yard line in the fifth quarter, with two home runs and a shot from the free-throw line in hand..." (look, I know I don't know what they'd really say, to any accuracy, there was no point even trying!), at least to fill in the copious down-time/time-out pauses. (Which isn't actually as easy with low-scoring but more ever-moving 'soccer', where there's often much to be said about current player and ball movements almost all the time; although a five-day international cricket test match(!) commentary on the radio does rather famously lapse into 'filler' like discussing the nice cake that was sent to them by a listener, in the gaps between balls being bowled...)

Sorry, that was a long and convoluted paragraph. (But then, so was the Explanation, before I decided to say this down here. I hope it's been tweaked since then. I'm only really guessing about the Leftpondian commentator-speak being parodied here, and ball-sports aren't really my main interest in the sprorting sphere itself. (But, regarding balls that aren't themselves spheres, I'd happily discuss Rugby League or Rugby Union, and why they're 'better'... though I would totally acknowledge Aussie Rules as a class of its own as far as such contact-sports go.)

HTH, HAND. 82.132.236.84 10:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Closest match I can find is Germany - Curacao but there Germany took the lead in the 38th minute (not the 37th). I leave the deep dive on Germany's record against teams alphabetically before them when they have taken the lead 2-1 in the 37th/38th minute to someone else...

And, of course, Germany destroyed Curaçao 7-1, just like they did to Brazil (which is also alphabetically before Germany!) 12 years prior Wilh3lm (talk) 12:38, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
        Add comment