Why can we all look at the same statistics or watch the same game and come to polar opposite opinions on who was the better team or who is the best batsmen?
Opinions about the current Australian batting line-up are a great example of this.
Everyone is looking at the same stats on these players, they are published for all to see and yet some can pull out Shane Watson’s stats and say he is rubbish and others can look at the stats and say he is great.
Both can’t be right. Just read the comments on The Roar articles to see the amount of stats bandied about for proof of this.
While it has long been said you can make stats say whatever you want, the real question is why do we do this?
One reason, as outlined by Michael Shermer in The Believing Brain, is the notion that people form their beliefs first and then look for the explanations that prove them correct.
We form our beliefs based on our own subjective personal and emotional experiences and then search for the explanations that justify our belief.
Some will look at stats over the last year, others the last five years, some take out Shield games, others use those stats, all to find the ‘defining’ stats that prove what they had already decided on, without stats, was correct.
Some performances cannot be defined by facts, but our preconceived beliefs still drive our opinions.
Everyone who saw Quade Cooper’s performance for the Wallabies last week saw exactly the same performance, and yet to some he was a star who lifted the team and to others he was a dud.
This is because his performance was irrelevant.
We have seen and heard enough of Cooper to have already made up our minds about whether he is good or not and the reality of how he played is irrelevant to our opinion of him.
If we hate him we point out a bad pass, if we love him we point out a good run etc. to show our opinion is correct.
So, is Watson a good Test player? Should Cooper be in the Wallabies starting team?
Decide on your position and then start looking for the facts to back you up.
Of course, there are a lot of people who proffer their opinions as facts – but this is only to help them justify their biased opinions.
But then, that’s only my opinion…
Timmuh
Roar Guru
A large part of it comes down to how people prefer the Test team selected. The best pure batsmen and bowlers, or is being not quite there in either discipline but almost with both enough. My basic philosophy is that the best pure players get icked and secondary skills are only used for selection when there is nothing in the primary skill to separate them. On that front, Watson has one score in two and a half years. In the intervening time he averaged around 25, less in his "preferred" opening spot. Obviously with that being the most recent innings he won't be dropped now, but its not enough. Give anyone with a bit of talent as many chances as Watson has had and they will put up a good score at some point. He now has to do it more often. His batting has been the worst of a bad lot over a long time and one innings does not change that. One fiaulre should not be enough to get dropped, nor should one success keep a player in the side for a long time. Unfortunately, in this team, one success is as much as any batsman except Clarke is likely to produce in a 5 Test series. There is some preceonception there, but backed by a long period of failure in his primary skill - and he was unable to bowl for much of that period so his secondary skill was also worthless.
Lolly
Guest
Problem is the rest of the team, or at least the batsmen. In a stronger team, Watson would be seen as what he is. A good bowler and useful batsman. Problem is - as the team is so short of good batsmen - he is trying to be the other way around.
Steven McBain
Roar Guru
I think he's a pretty decent cricketer and a good all rounder. I think you are spot on about preconceptions in sport. Ian Bell is a classic example. His stats are pretty darn good for a test player yet there are countless (although fewer nowadays) people that still think he's pretty useless.
Nev
Guest
He's a good cricketer, but not a great. Anything less than being a great guarantees he will get torn down by some. To be fair to the man, I reckon every current international team would pick him in their XI. (South Africa excepted - at least until Kallis retires)