Mozart - where prejudoce leads to tally false statements

You always claimed that your assessment of players are correct - but perhaps one should consider one player who was under attack by you for the first two years of his international career.
Your attack on De Kock started the moment he replaced Graeme Smith in the ODI team and went on ever since.   Initially your stance was that De Kock has batting efficiencies and that his centuries in ODI's was only because he faced weak bowlers.   You said he had serious batting deficiencies which was supposed to be exposed by the Aussie bowlers .
Much has not changed since then.   Whenever he does well - the facts are not disputed by you and you have to an extent gone quiet or at least less open in what was a long-lasting campaign against the guy. 
Yet experts thinks that at 23 the guy has the makings of a cricketing great and that is stating even in a recent discussion of De Kock by experts.  
When will you admit that your campaign was based on serious deficiency in thinking and prejudice and that De Kock at 23  is already a better batsman than Graeme Smith ever was.        

9275 test runs vs 572? No contest.

 Nut case  again - De Kock had less than 2 years in test cricket - Smith had more than 12 years.    Smith opened the batting - De Kock batted at 7.
No contest - but in ODI's Smith was poor - mostly failing in matches for years - De Kock is top class recognized by all experts.   But you normally think you know better than the experts.  
What a fool we deal with here.