Relying on the Experts….a very slippery subject

How can Augie and Mozart think they know more than the experts whines Chabal. The same Chabal that denies all the history experts and thinks Rhodesia was a great country and who denies all the security experts and thinks Russia is entirely benign.

I’m not saying he’s wrong, I am simply pointing out the inconsistency. Are experts more likely to know more about  military balancing than amateurs. Sure, far more than in the case of rugby which is a simple game which we have all played.

But Chabal knows more about Russia than the experts. HasBeen knows more about vaccinations. Draad knows more about the virus. Hell some posters on here even think they are experts on the Indian Wars.

For all these posters and almost every other poster here,  on their hobby horse, experts are there to be discarded.

Hell most posters on here believe they know more about reffing decisions than the rugby establishment.

And that’s the fun of it, who needs a Board where we simply repeat expert opinion. 

My approach is to support my views with facts….statistics, review of incidents….numbers wherever possible. Sometimes I agree with experts, sometimes I don’t. History says they are often wrong. But they are the first case, and if you want to plausibly disagree you need facts to support your argument

I think Mostert does more for the team than Dud Toit. He is better in the lineouts, a better passer….very much the same toothless runner and a better tackler in space. His engine is just as big as I demonstrated a few years back in the comparison of tackles per minutes played. 

All these things I can provide numbers to support….I also think he is a smarter player and much more likely to be in the right place….hard to quantify. 

Dud is the bigger man and he is very clever on the pick and go. He has better hair and blue eyes. In South Africa if you have fair hair and blue eyes you are golden. I played for my school 1st team in standard 8, I was way not ready….but I had fair hair and blue eyes. South Africa is a country of favorites,

But I can provide numbers for the biggest difference between them, Mostert is likely to be available while Dud is likely to be injured. Being able to count on the player showing is so underrated.

So please use your experts, but if all they are providing is opinion….they are no more likely to be right than the next man. And if you want to just use their opinion as overriding proof, don’t be surprised if you are asked to endorse their other opinions. Frankly your own opinions are more likely to be fresh and interesting.

I’m far more interested in Plum’s opinion or Pakie’s opinion and when he’s with us,  Augie’s opinion….than that of some boring old rugby hack. IQ makes a difference..

This is mt a rugby issue and is being used again  for personal attacks on certain members - but then lets turn it into an issue about rugby expoertise.    According to Mozart the only experts hat count are those he thinks supports his idiocies based on petty hatred of Erasmus and some players,   

So he is interested in people who he thinks support him and the people who ever counter his nonsense he dreams up is on his hate list as well.   That is why you have this year won the Grand Pri zes for silliest Rugby, cricklet and tennis postings.   Not only were his postings silly - it was based entirely on prejudice.    

D uplication 

Feeling left out Tokkie, sorry I didn’t  mean to hurt your feelings. Clearly your discussions with experts like Bosman’s mother and Malherbe’s father have vastly enriched the Board, although to be honest, not always in the ways you intended.  In your case the experts were a very slippery slope. Still there’s nothing like a good laugh, keep them coming.

Thinking for yourself vs blind faith in whatever the "experts" say....I totally agree, especially since all the "experts" are never in total agreement either.

Dave

Agree with you on the issue.  Mozart facts on Mostert for instance is larfgely based on make-up garbage.   Mostert is no good in open-field tackling where even backline players runs through his tackle attempts - he is useless in Tight 6 performances and is a poor ball skills player useless at breakdowns  - yet Mozart spill the garbage without any proof whatsoever and then claims he is a better player than Du Toit.    

Fact is he was dropped from the starting line-up of the Springboks and mostly played from the bench because of injury to Du Toit and Snyman.   That is for a very good reason.    Mozart's descriptions of what happened in games is so prejudiced it is worthless from a performance  evaluation perspective.        A recent example is his description of  De Allende's performance was so vicious  and De Allende  being  the MOM is typical of the garbage he spouts on site.

Dave I don’t expect everybody to agree with me, but I can assure you I believe everything I say. I believe Allende was culpable for the Pom try….and I believe most centres would have scored the two tries he botched recently playing for Munster.

Plum you probably don’t follow baseball, I rarely do,  but there is an interesting movie called Moneyball on the Oakland As and their use of a numbers based approach to in effect change baseball. It’s the only Brad Pitt movie I have enjoyed and I think has lots of implications for rugby.

Worth a watch when you have nothing to do.