We are often more certain than the evidence really allows.
More quotesMinute 73. The attacker reaches the edge of the area.
Shoot: estimated chance of scoring, 40 per cent.
Pass: teammate’s estimated chance, 60 per cent.
Contract: £75,000 for a goal; £20,000 for an assist.
From the team’s perspective, the pass wins. From the player’s personal arithmetic, the shot has acquired an extra argument. Nobody needs to become selfish or corrupt. The incentive has changed which reasonable action pays.
The excerpt presents a hypothetical choice involving a real contract, rather than evidence that the named player actually ignored the pass for this reason. That distinction matters. Behavioural examples become cheap gossip when a useful mechanism is converted into an allegation.
The contract is still worth interrogating. Why reward the visible finish so much more than the action creating the better chance? Because goals are easy to count, emotionally loud and attached to one name. Positioning, decoy runs and passes that prevent a bad shot are harder to price neatly. Measurement chooses a hero and then acts surprised when people seek the heroic action.
Team bonuses help, although they can let passengers benefit from other people’s work. Individual recognition remains useful. The interesting work is identifying where one person’s gain diverges from the shared result.
The ball arrives at the edge of the area. Two defenders close. The contract cannot move either defender, yet it still affects the decision.