FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  When is a person expressing an opinion and when is he a liar

When is a person expressing an opinion and when is he a liar

Started by clevermike44 REPLIES831 VIEWS· 12 May 2015, 07:03
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 07:03
#1
12 May 2015, 07:03#1

The use of expressing an opinion is clearly abused by some members and the term liars by some.   So what is really the difference?


Expressing an opinion


Lets take an easily explained example and that is the following:-


*   A person should clearly indicate that his statement is based on his opinion as to what happened factually on the field of play


*   A person should give examples of what happened in which games and should base his examples in factual information


*   A person should not manufacture information to substantiate his opinion not based on factual information.


*   A person should not base his statement on one incident in a match - but should substantiate that information over a series of matches, bearing in mind that like any human being a player can make a mistake during a match or can have an "off day at the office" in one match.  


The situation is that insofar as player performances are concerned an opinion should be based on facts and should avoid being based on a single incident in one match or even what happened in a single match.


Everyone is entitled to state an opinion on issues - provided that opinion is supported by factual information.   Opinions should never be based on PERSONAL PREJUDICE OR LIKING OR DISLIKING OF PLAYERS.


Lies


This occurs when a person makes a general statement and cannot actually support the statement on a factual situation based on what a player produced in a series of games and not a single incident in a game  or even observations during only one game.


Take an easy example - a person has a tendency to miss tackles over a serious of games - that is factual.   If a person miss a tackle in one game during a series - that is not to be taken as a fact.   Another simple example is a player gets penalized once in a game and is not repeating it through a period - while his opponent normally is the one who gets penalties against him - that one penalty does not make him a poor scrummager.  


The situation is that if unsubstantiated opinions are expressed on the site - and especially when support for those opinions are fabricated by the person concerned - the issue that raises ts head is whether the person is "expressing an opinion" or is a lair.   The initial reaction normally is the "opinion" will be questioned by others on this forum and the original statement proven to be wrong.   


When that happened and the person, repeat his original statements as being factual repeatedly - there is absolute clarity that the person who does that is a liar.  


CONCLUSION


It is imperative that members make sure that their opinions are factually based - stats is a handy weapon to check the veracity of their statement on players.  Members must make sure that there factual support is not based on a single incident in a specific match or even what happened in a single match - the better way is to  ensure that a tendency is established over a series of matches.


Members who makes unsubstantiated statements or statements based on what happened in the case of a single incident during a match or even performance data  based on a single match - without a tendency in player performances being established - and then repeating unsubstantiated statements, are actually liars.  


A member who manufactures terms like "process tackles" and then apply the term to some players to discredit the players they do not like - but not to others they like - is guilty of being a liar. 


We all like some players and dislike others - but if opinions are expressed they should still be factual and not based on prejudice and manufactured disinformation like happened so frequently on the site.           




      




XA
Xavi
Pro1,924 posts
XA
XaviPro1,924 posts
12 May 2015, 08:13
#2
12 May 2015, 08:13#2
 Pot. Kettle. Black.
BE
Beeno1
Captain40,032 posts
BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
12 May 2015, 08:20
#3
12 May 2015, 08:20#3
 Sometimes people forget what they said. Other times they dont lie but make mistakes.Trying to paint one another as liars is unfortunate and mostly unhelpful.Stick to the facts AND IFR POSSIBLE ARGUE YOUR CASE LIKE I DID WITH EVOLUTION.
My only problem there was I provided the facts and the hapless athesits never did and couldnt refute them but simply bleated away in the most plaintive manner! Bwahhahahahahaha
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 09:57
#4
12 May 2015, 09:57#4
 @Ou Maaikie. Good set of rules. Do they only apply to the rest of us or are you including yourself?


@Beeno. If  you don't BS, you don't have to remember what you said. When you make a mistake, then just admit it. Don't keep on trying to explain that it was not a mistake. Do you really need an example? I can give you a perfect one, right now, if you wish.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 10:04
#5
12 May 2015, 10:04#5
 I include myself in application of the above.  If my substantiation id wrong everyone is welcome to disprove it and do it on an acceptable basis - not on a personal atatck basis. 
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 10:30
#6
12 May 2015, 10:30#6
Are you only going to include yourself from now on or are you saying that you have always adhered to those, let's call it, rules?
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 10:42
#7
12 May 2015, 10:42#7
 I have never criticized a player without giving exact reasons and quoting examples that have become a tendency in a player.   Other people could differ from me on that score iro of specific players and I accept that as a sound basis for discussion.  However, discussion can and should never be based on prejudice and become personal.   In the latter regard I have made mistakes as well - and afterwards felt bad about it.
It seems to me that player evaluation on this site should be factual and not airy-fairy general statements that has not been proven as fact.   Take as an example - the captain of the team leaves the field 17 minutes before end of play - and the Vice Captain takes over the role of the captain.  To come back and say that a third player took control of the situation can at best be described as flight of imagination.   There are way too many such airy-fairy statements on this site.    
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 10:56
#8
12 May 2015, 10:56#8
You are making heavy weather of this. I have not accused you of something. I just asked you a simple two-part question which would require no more than a simple "yes" or "no".

Let's try again:

1. Are you only going to include yourself from now on, "yes" or "no"?

2. Are you saying that you have always adhered to those, let's call it, rules, "yes" or "no".

Simples. One should probably be "yes" and one of them should probably be "no" .
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 11:08
#9
12 May 2015, 11:08#9
 Both should in all fairness be yes - since I have always given exact and statistically proven reasons insofar as player assessments are concerned.   I also do not write airy-fairy tales about players.  
I will give you a plain example - I have for the past two years always supported De Allende as a player.  I have at times criticized him also.  I have mentioned the fact that his tackling could be improved and I also mentioned that he had a comparatively poor game on Saturday.   I criticize a player if criticism is justified and is positive if he so deserves, but in doing that I will not invent reasons to give false praise or false criticism of a player - nor will I ignore any deficiencies because the player concerned is one of the players I in general support.


DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
12 May 2015, 11:26
#10
12 May 2015, 11:26#10
"I have never criticized a player without giving exact reasons and quoting examples that have become a tendency in a player."

You know Michael, when faced with critics I always ask questions. It does a few things, such as offer the other member an opportunity to explain themselves and you in particular like to dodge those questions! You like to dodge those questions, or at times abandon a thread entirely, and then proceed to start a new one where you single out other members as being all kinds of expletives and terrible things. That's very poor form in my book.

You make incidents up, you invent all kinds of fallacies which are quite easily taken apart. You accept statistics only when it suits you, you deny video footage as evidence, you only listen to certain people in the game if they agree with you and ignore anything even the most astute minds have to say. You never provide context or details to the stats you provide and instead create an entirely new narrative to mislead others. That is not balanced Michael, not by a very long way. I have dis-proven virtually everything you have said that we have disagreed on and gone to great lengths to state my case in lock-down manner. The response has always been the same, mud slinging.
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 11:27
#11
12 May 2015, 11:27#11
If your answer to the first one is "yes", does that mean that from now one you are going to stop fabricating BS like the "Morne Steyn/PSG" saga or the "Bakkies was dropped for Ali Williams" saga?


If the answer to the second question is "yes" then my friend you are already lying again. Reason being that one of your points is: "*   A person should not manufacture information to substantiate his opinion not based on factual information." and I can name a number of occasions where you have done exactly that. The two incidences above being two perfect examples.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 11:38
#12
12 May 2015, 11:38#12
 Letsal
I never made incidents up ever.  I do not invent reasons to criticize players ever, I do not give false accounts of what happens on the field of play.  When a player disputes things I say - they must base their arguments on facts not imaginary fiction.  that is why it is so difficult to debate things with you - because in most cases you have warped ideas about rugby players.  Your favourites make no mistakes ever and if they do imaginary reasons are found to exonerate them.  The longer list of players you dislike never does anything right in your book and reasons for criticism are manufactured on a grand scale.   Lack of objectivity on your part is par for the course.
Like Shezza said elsewhere,  it really is a waste of time to read your descriptions as to what happened on a field of play and that remains a problem on your part.   Stick to facts and not imaginary fiction and discussions on difference of opinion would be much more interesting.  


CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 11:43
#13
12 May 2015, 11:43#13
 clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 16701

RE: When is a person expressing an opinion and when is he a liar
May 12, 2015, 11:38:19  Letsal
I never made incidents up ever.


You just cannot help yourself, can you. You are lying right there.

DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
12 May 2015, 11:50
#14
12 May 2015, 11:50#14
You have maintained that New Zealand ran at Morné relentlessly in the Ellis Park test of 2013 and that Morné buckled. You claim he was the single reason why we lost that test. I have provided every kind of evidence that he didn't. This is another one of those occasions where you completely fabricated the entire game. Quite extreme. There are many more examples. The England test concerning Lambie and Matfield. The Dunedin test of 2012 concerning Goosen and Morné. Du Preez's 2006 Tri Nation tests against New Zealand. Du Preez's 2004 England tests as well as 2013 and 2014, Goosen's 2012 tests, Kirchner's New Zealand tests of 2012 and 2013. I have provided video footage for all but two of these and you have denied EVERYTHING. And in each case you continued to spew your own little story, whilst telling me I'm the doffdoos! Hilarious .
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 12:11
#15
12 May 2015, 12:11#15
 Letsal 
I never said that NZ players "ran at Morne relentlessly and he buckled" - those are your words.  What I did say his tackle stats were poor and and that he missed two tackles preceding the scoring of tries. 
*  You are irrational - Morne missed enough goal kicks at Dunedin to win the game - but Goosen is blamed for the loss of the game.
*   Matfield was yellow-carded and for the rest produced very little - we won the game - but Lambie gets blamed for everything imaginable.
Himmel to go on with the rest of the fairy tales is  impossible.  It is an amazing set of misrepresentations of fact.   Some of the things you rake up I never commented on (ie Du Preez in the 2006 Tri-Nations).   
I will not even comment on the rest of your imaginary BS.    
        
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
12 May 2015, 15:02
#16
12 May 2015, 15:02#16

Is this pathetic or what? Now if you lie about a player in a single game, it's not a lie. It's a strange strange world we live in Mast er Jack.

DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
12 May 2015, 15:47
#17
12 May 2015, 15:47#17

 
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
12 May 2015, 15:48
#18
12 May 2015, 15:48#18
Admin needs to implement some kind of archiving so we can access old posts properly.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 18:43
#19
12 May 2015, 18:43#19
Mozart
You are indeed a pathetic fool.  You misinterpreted everything I said because you are a stooge who base your arguments on anything but trends in player performances - with you one incident is career-defining if you do not like a player - but a player you like can make a string of bugger-ups and you will ignore it. 
You also missed out on what a lie is - but I guess it does not fit your book.  A lie is based on issues that is not fact-based and is expressed without evidence of a trend in the performances of a player.  I also said that such instances must be supported by facts not based on 1 incident a year or during a tournament.  You are a one-incident junkie and for you one incident is what  you base repeating allegations on.   The incident may even be imaginary and you will still repeat it ad infinitum on this site - turning an opinion into a string of lies. 
But carry on - most of the members on this site knows what to expect from you.     


CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
12 May 2015, 18:52
#20
12 May 2015, 18:52#20
Oh, the irony.

Funny that the same person who said:
"...If my substantiation id (sic) wrong everyone is welcom e to disprove it and do it on an acceptable basis - not on a personal atatck (sic) basis. "

..also said, a few posts later, on the same thread:

"......You are indeed a pathetic fool.  You misinterpreted everything I said because you are a stooge who base your arguments on anything but trends in player performances...."


CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
12 May 2015, 19:14
#21
12 May 2015, 19:14#21
 Letsal 
You really shoot yourself in the foot about those stats - so keep them coming.
Goosen0/189/30/1363132118/21/010/0
That is what Goosen did in less than 160 minutes in the three tests in 2012 that he played in.   Those stats for a flyhalf are from a performance perspective an indicator of a top class flyhalf.
Now do us all a favour and find the 2012 tests and then we can see what Morne produced in the 7 tests he played in that year.   Once we have that we can make a statistical comparison.
I do not expect that you or your liar colleagues will produce that because you will be shown up for what you really are - incapable of proper player evaluation driven by extreme dislike of some players.    
MO
Mozart
Captain49,914 posts
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
12 May 2015, 22:29
#22
12 May 2015, 22:29#22
My advice to you Moronic....don't bother writing about the truth, just tell the truth.  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
13 May 2015, 14:55
#23
13 May 2015, 14:55#23
Hahahahahaha!!! Here's the REAL truth!





This was already covered in detail here: http://www.ruckersforum.com/forum.cfm?threadid=7992#inscore_ifheight_xdc_500
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 15:01
#24
13 May 2015, 15:01#24
 I do not bother to watch video clips from years ago and the issue of Goosen has no bearing at present.  It is always rubbish what you come up with anyway.  Look at the stats for his whole playing time as a Springbok - not a clip you pick - you mental dwarf. And also explain why you say Morne is such an outstanding defender when in his last test he missed 8 of the 15 tackle attempts he made.  
DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
13 May 2015, 15:07
#25
13 May 2015, 15:07#25
"That is what Goosen did in less than 160 minutes in the three tests in 2012 that he played in. Those stats for a flyhalf are from a performance perspective an indicator of a top class flyhalf." - Post 1

"I do not bother to watch video clips from years ago and the issue of Goosen has no bearing at present.  It is always rubbish what you come up with anyway." - Post 2

Firsstly, it was relevant enough for you to bring it up in the first place. Secondly, video evidence is not what I came up with, it was recorded by someone else and is a perfect reflection of what really happened! You don't like video evidence because it leaves little room for *ahem* interpretation. 
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
13 May 2015, 15:20
#26
13 May 2015, 15:20#26
@ou Maaikie. Morne Steyn attempted only two less tackles in his last game than Goosen attempted in twice the game time that Morne has had in his last test. You said that Goosen has played less than 160 minutes of test rugby.


Goosen attempted 20 tackles in his test career. That is one attempt every 8 minutes.
Morne attempted 18 tackles in his last test. That is one attempt in ever 4.5 minutes.

Goosen made 18 tackles in his test career.That is one tackle every 8.9 minutes.
Morne made 8 tackles in his last test. That is one tackle every 10 minutes.

Goosen scored 8 points in his test career. That is one point every 20 minutes.
Morne Steyn scored 18 points in his last test. That is one point ever 3.33 minutes.
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
13 May 2015, 15:27
#27
13 May 2015, 15:27#27
 In Goosen's last test, at FB, he did not attempt a single tackle in the 57 minutes he was on the field. Not one.

In addition. Goosen's tackle  count is boosted by one outlier game, i.e. against Australia where he made 14 tackles. His combined effort for his other five test is less than that.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 15:32
#28
13 May 2015, 15:32#28
 Letsal
Between you and Ceradunce you always manage to bugger up the margins on this site. Please remove the two video clips you foisted on us - nobody would watch them in any event and the margins will be restored.
   
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
13 May 2015, 15:38
#29
13 May 2015, 15:38#29
 Ag f@k. Nou pis hy weer oor die margins. Dit moet darem hel wees om saam moet so 'n ou pisgat in dieselfde huis te bly.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 18:47
#30
13 May 2015, 18:47#30
 Ceradunce
Your info is all worth zero.  Morne may have made all those kicks at goal - but he also f#cked up the game completely in the end.  Morne made 15 tackle attempts and missed 8 of those - that means he has buggered up his defense as well.
Even Meyer would not pick him afterwards because he was never a test quality flyhalf and was only picked before he was accurate with his kicking at goal - bugger-all else.His ball sense was zero and his ability to read the game and make decision was minus zero.
The most predictable player in the world for years and that is a fact.  New Zealand was quite upset when he was left out of the tests subsequent to the Perth test - because with Morne they know exactly what to do to counter his senseless play.  
Anyway - you are an inconsiderate bloody idiot and Letsal is no better.   The thing is that I may be a "pisgat" - you have sh!t instead of a brain in your top storey and suffer dreadfully from the sh!t on your one malfunctioning brain cell disease - which remove your thinking ability to zero.      


DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
13 May 2015, 19:14
#31
13 May 2015, 19:14#31
What makes your opinion weak is that you do not consider the roles of each position or the roles each player has in any attacking movement, nor the options. Likewise defence, you never take into account the system being employed, the role of the individual in the system, the game situation or the attacking movement of the opposition. These are things stats cannot tell you. Stats cannot mask a lack of rugby IQ. That's precisely where you go wrong. That's why your opinions don't match up with game footage. Context is key.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 19:33
#32
13 May 2015, 19:33#32
 Stats cannot cover a lack of IQ of players like Morne Steyn and Francois Steyn in particular.  I do not base statictical information in respect of one match as a criterium for evaluating player performances - I look at a series of matches and try thus to determine a tendency shown by players.
Context is key whenever members of this site is trying to hide player deficiencies in actual performances.   Context should be seen against the circumstances prevailing during specific circumstances in a game - but those circumstances do not take away the responsibility to make tackles and deal with opposing team attacks.    
The situation basically is that stats over a series of games gives an indication of the strength and weaknesses of players.  There is not a single coach in World Rugby that ignore stats completely.   It remains a criterium to determine trends in player performances - whether you like it or not.  If a player shows the same tendency over a series and make the same mistakes or good plays regularly during a series it is taken into account.
The usage of context and circumstance are contributing factors in player evaluation - but definitely not the only or major consideration.
Please remove those clips distorting the margins of this thread.  Nobody will watch them in any event.       
  


DE
DezertFox
Pro2,288 posts
DE
DezertFoxPro2,288 posts
13 May 2015, 19:40
#33
13 May 2015, 19:40#33
woosh!
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
13 May 2015, 20:07
#34
13 May 2015, 20:07#34
The problem that you have here, ou Maaikie, is that one big difference between Morne and  your golden boy is that Morne does not turn his back and run away from tackle situations.

You have quoted Goosen's test tackling stats. In none of those games, bar the one against Oz, did he get any real telling figures for tackle attempts. Do you want me to quote his tackling stats per test?
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 22:28
#35
13 May 2015, 22:28#35
 Ceradyne
I do not have  a "golden boy" as you quoted above.  I just do not like to see players falsely accused of anything and the accusations made by Letsal about Goosen causing the loss at Dunedin and his myriad of accusations against Lambie - has resulted about this discussion on Morne Steyn.
Morne has some positives - the chief one is his boot - and nobody ever said that he turned and runs away from tackle situations.   However, he also have some serious negatives inasmuch as he cannot read games, cannot take split-second decisions and he virtually never attacks the gain line - making him one of the most predictable players in rugby and one whose tackle stats over years have indicated that despite his efforts he is not the best defensive flyhalf around. 
The story that Goosen turns and runs away from tackles is probably the biggest load of BS I have ever seen on this site.  I have watched Goosen played rugby for years and has NEVER seen anything like that.   This is the kind of BS allegations that makes my blood boil.
If you have any real allegations against Goosen come again and prove them - but don't come of rabid nonsense.        
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
13 May 2015, 23:16
#36
13 May 2015, 23:16#36
 I do not have any allegations against your blue-eyed boy. I don't need any. When he moved to France, I doubted that he would become this kingpin that you and your mate was trying to convince us. So far, nothing has happened that has proven that you were correct.
CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
13 May 2015, 23:45
#37
13 May 2015, 23:45#37
 Hou op om KAK te praat.   Let me quote you on Goosen:-
"The problem that you have here, ou Maaikie, is that one big difference between Morne and  your golden boy is that Morne does not turn his back and run away from tackle situations."
If that is not an allegation - then heaven knows what it is.
That is followed by an outright lie.   "When he moved to France, I doubted that he would become this kingpin that you and your mate was trying to convince us"   I never tried to convince you on anything relating to Goosen - but often enough referred to the fact that Morne was not making a success of his sojourn with Stade Francais - after which you always started with the Goosen scenario  to divert attention away from Morne.    
CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
14 May 2015, 00:09
#38
14 May 2015, 00:09#38
1. It is not an allegation, it was proven and you know it. Remember Lestat's video evidence?

2. Yes you did try to convince me and when I dared to disagree, you crapped yourself again........... as usual.

CE
Ceradyne
Pro9,374 posts
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
14 May 2015, 00:20
#39
14 May 2015, 00:20#39
 
clevermike

Status: Hall Of Fame
Posts: 16739

RE: Goosen set to announce his move to France, Likely Racing Metro
May 14, 2014, 03:19:33  Mozart
He is likely to be the first choice flyhalf of Racing Metro - not the failed robot of Stade Francais you always punted.    . 



CL
clevermike
Coach57,555 posts
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 May 2015, 05:15
#40
14 May 2015, 05:15#40
So he accused Goosen of turning around and running away from a tackle - then denied it and afterwards based it on one of Letsal's clips - the idiot comes up with BS again.
So because I wrote the following about Goosen the village idiot turned it around again and said I wrote the following in a thread dealing with an attack by you on Goosen.   Does not understand anything and afterwards took exception about my statement on Morne Steyn - which in fact is the truth.   Morne Steyn went to Stade Francais as their star signing and is being paid a fortune as their flyhalf - they would not have contracted him at that price to be their bench flyhalf, which he turned out to be.   The above statement by me was another reason for books to be written to cover up the flop of Morne iro Stade Francais. 
What a Village idiot the dunce really is.         
↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 2)

More from Rugby

More news