No, there's all sorts of things that no-one demurs from, everywhere. Doesn't mean they go from opinion to fact just because no-one actually puts a contradiction into words.
If the reasoning behind something (be it a selection or any other decision in any form of anything) is not sound, it's an error. Simple as.
Haha nah. You can make an error despite doing absolutely nothing wrong, and do things correctly more through luck than judgement.
Or, even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
I disagree. An error is something where the person who makes the error is at fault, in my book. And if dictionary definitions prove otherwise, I'll just use a different term where the dictionary definition fits.
No, not "simple as". You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what "error" means. An "error" is determined by outcome not hypothesis; hence "trial and error", not "error and error".
That's different though. A clock cannot be at fault - it's an inanimate object. There are two problems: one, that the clock has stopped; two, that (in 1438 of the 1440 minutes of the day anyway) the clock is giving a misleading time.
As I say - if error isn't the 100% appropriate word, there'll be another out there that is. "Mistake", or whatever.
The question isn't whether anyone thinks it's an error. The question is why the hell you should give a crap what anyone thinks!
So true.
I remember having a similar debate with Richard when he told me my World Cup prediction of Ireland beating Pakistan was a poor one... after the game. The bet I made on the game was also poor apparently, not unlike bet365 the next time I made a withdrawal.
Had the same argument when i said India had a pretty good chance of chasing down 400 against England in November on the eve of the fifth day. The fact that they actually did in the end didn't seem to affect his belief that no right-minded cricket fan would have expected it.
So true.
I remember having a similar debate with Richard when he told me my World Cup prediction of Ireland beating Pakistan was a poor one... after the game. The bet I made on the game was also poor apparently, not unlike bet365 the next time I made a withdrawal.
But we're not talking about "fault", we're talking about error. And both of the "problems" you've identified misses the point, which is that the stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
Knowing a clock can be right even if it is broken isnt the best way to tell the time. Its an error to look at a broken clock and assume it is 1 o'clock even if there is a chance of it being correct. Most likely it isnt accurate.
I'm not asking whether it's an error to trust the clock, merely whether the clock itself is in error
Indisciplined?
Understood and agreed
Not really. The fact that the unlikely can indeed happen is part of what makes cricket interesting. What's annoying is when people pretend that the unlikely was in fact likely, because it happened.
As I say - it's possible that error isn't an appropriate word. I'm talking about a case where someone has got something wrong - thus, are at fault - and should still be recognised to have gotten something wrong even if this getting-wrong ended-up paying dividends.
I can accept that argument in small doses only.