Cleverpens

By: Fatima Winniclare Jayme

The championship volleyball match between the Falcons and the Mariners was tied at two sets apiece.

The gymnasium trembled with excitement as the final rally unfolded.

A powerful spike from the Falcons sailed toward the back line. The Mariners’ defender lunged desperately. The ball flew out of bounds.

Immediately, the Falcons celebrated.

“Touch! Touch!” their supporters shouted.

The Mariners protested.

“No touch! The ball was out!”

Within seconds, the crowd had divided into two camps. Each side was convinced it had seen the truth.

At the referee stand, Official Reyes remained silent.

The line judge signaled a possible touch. Another official was uncertain. The play was close enough to warrant a video review.

The spectators grew restless.

“The replay is unnecessary!”

“We all saw what happened!”

Reyes listened but focused on the screen.

He watched the rally once.

Then twice.

He watched it a third time from another angle.

The first replay appeared to show a touch. The second seemed inconclusive. The third revealed a slight movement of the defender’s fingertips just before the ball changed direction.

After consulting the officiating crew, Reyes stepped forward.

“The ball made contact with the defender before leaving the court. Point awarded.”

One side cheered.

The other side sighed.

After the match, a young volleyball player approached the referee.

“How did you stay calm when everyone was demanding an answer?”

Reyes smiled.

“Because the loudest voice is not always the clearest evidence.”

The player thought for a moment.

“So justice is like officiating a match?”

“In many ways,” Reyes replied. “People often see the same event and reach different conclusions. Our task is not to decide quickly. Our task is to decide carefully.”

The young athlete glanced at the empty court.

He realized that the replay system was not there because referees lacked authority.

It was there because fairness required humility.

Occasionally what appears obvious from one angle looks different from another.

And occasionally the most important skill in volleyball is not serving, setting, or spiking.

It is the willingness to look again before making the call.

SUMMARY: The final volleyball match was deadlocked at two sets apiece between the Falcons and the Mariners. The Falcons had a big surge, but the Mariners challenged to split the audience. Referee Reyes called for a video review, which showed a defensive touch, and the point went to the Falcons. After the event, a young player asked Reyes how to stay calm under pressure. Like officiating, Reyes said, real justice is a process, which involves deliberate thought over snap judgment and the capacity to observe incidents from several angles. Humility is key, he said, in the pursuit of fairness.

DISCUSSIONS:

Potential Biases Present in the story

A. Confirmation Bias	Definition: The tendency to favor information that supports an existing belief. In the story: Falcons supporters immediately interpreted the play as a touch. Mariners supporters immediately interpreted it as out. Both groups may have been viewing the same event through the lens of their desired outcome. Discussion Question: How often do we seek evidence to confirm our position rather than test it?
B. In-Group Bias	Definition: Favoring members of one’s own group. In the story: Supporters identified with their team and instinctively trusted interpretations that benefited their side. Value Integration: Fairness Respect for others Sportsmanship Virtue Assimilation: Impartiality Justice Humility
C. Availability Heuristic	Definition: Relying on what is most immediate or memorable. In the story: Spectators believed their first visual impression was sufficient. However, the replay revealed details that were not obvious in real time. Discussion Question: Why do first impressions often feel more reliable than they actually are?
D. Overconfidence Bias	Definition: Excessive confidence in one’s judgment. In the story: Many spectators believed the answer was obvious despite limited information. Virtue Needed: Intellectual humility.
E. Outcome Bias	Definition: Evaluating a decision primarily by its result. In the story: People focused on who won the point rather than whether the review process was fair. Ethical Question: Is a fair process valuable even when it disappoints us?

Value Integration in the story: How do abstract values become practical guides for behavior?

Fairness	The referee did not reward the team with the loudest supporters. Integrated Value: Treat evidence consistently regardless of personal preference.
Truth-Seeking	The referee reviewed multiple angles instead of relying on intuition. Integrated Value: Truth is pursued through inquiry rather than assumption.
Respect	Both teams were given consideration. Integrated Value: People deserve to be heard even when they are mistaken.
Accountability	The referee was willing to justify the decision. Integrated Value: Authority should be accompanied by transparency.

Virtue assimilation asks:
What character traits must become habits if a person wishes to act well?

Prudence (Practical Wisdom)	The referee delayed judgment until sufficient evidence was examined.	Habit: Pause before concluding.
Justice	The decision was based on evidence rather than popularity.	Habit: Apply standards consistently.
Courage	The referee knew some people would disagree.	Habit: Do what is right even when it is unpopular.
Humility	The replay was used because officials recognized the limits of immediate perception.	Habit: Accept that one may be mistaken.
Patience	The referee tolerated pressure for a quick answer.	Habit: Allow understanding to develop before deciding.

Philosophical Psychology Perspective: The story illustrates a tension between two modes of thinking.

Immediate Thinking	Fast Emotional Intuitive Group influenced
Reflective Thinking	Deliberate Evidence-based Self-corrective

Linguistic Reflection

Notice the difference between “The referee delayed the decision” and “The referee carefully reviewed the evidence.” Both describe the same action. Yet one framing suggests inefficiency. The other suggests diligence. This demonstrates how language influences moral evaluation. Discussion Activity: Ask learners to rewrite key sentences using different wording and analyze how perception changes.

Integrative Reflection: The deepest lesson of The Touch Call may be this:

Justice is not merely the ability to make a decision. It is the discipline to resist deciding before one has earned the right to make it. In value integration, that lesson becomes fairness, truth-seeking, and respect. In virtue assimilation, it becomes prudence, humility, courage, patience, and justice. And in critical thinking, it becomes the habit of asking the following: “What evidence supports my conclusion, and what evidence might challenge it?”

TAKEAWAYS: This story underscores a key aspect of refereed justice. Fairness is not only about making judgments but also about making decisions after taking information from many views. The lesson is just as true for athletics, education, leadership, writing, and daily life.

DISCLAIMER: Names, characters, places, and incidents are products of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events, locales, or individuals, living or dead, is entirely coincidental. 

© 2026 Cleverpens. All rights reserved.