Watching a soccer match, it is evident that the player in front of the goal needs to shoot at it when he sees a path the ball could take into the goal. That is, in some manner, maximize the number of times their team shoots towards the goal.

Failing to shoot as well as missing the goal will be perceived as failure.

Thinking about tennis, a point is just a point. Winning a match depends on winning more points than the other. And the smaller the difference between the players, the closer it can get to a spectacular game spectators enjoy. Nevertheless, any time a shot is out, it’ll be considered a failure.

Watching such games no one knows if everyone has the same evaluation.

The soccer player may perceive it as a win that he had the opportunity to shoot. The tennis player might think that trying this shot in this situation impressed his opponent.

What is always depends on the assessment of the situation, the intention, and the player’s attitude.

It is the context of the game or competition that introduces an interpretation of success or failure. Rules serve as an easy interpretation of the situation. Whenever they define that a point has been won the player who won the point is seen as successful. The one who lost is perceived as having failed.

It is a convention.

That players will not always agree with it shows in the interviews they give after the game. They try to find an explanation to close the gap between their experience of the game and its result.