It's actually an appeal to authority buddy. That's where people base their own reasoning off of what someone in a more credible/authoritative position would reason. The logic chain is, if they say it, it must be true, because their opinion is expert enough to be taken at face value. Also, an appeal to authority is simply a fallacy, not a reason why an argument is wrong. Yet interestingly an appeal to authority is disputed in that sense and many believe it's a reasonable approach, especially if the credibility of the authority people often to refer to is high. So in this case, if you trust Pep, it's actually not as nonsense an approach as you may think. If you don't trust Pep, like I assume is the case for you, then it is just a fallacy.
Confirmation bias is where you either seek out information that backs up your beliefs or ignore information that goes against it.
See what you really wanted to say was that people who simply repeat Pep's logic as their own without showcasing a comprehension of the point are lacking in independent thought. Although as stated above it's not really a dumb approach if you trust Pep.
Your post I've quoted aims to point out the fallacy as both a reason why people's arguments are wrong AND why those people musn't be trusted. The former is known as the fallacy fallacy, which is where one concludes that a fallacious argument is an incorrect one. And the latter is known as ad hominem. This is where one attempts to disprove an opposing argument by attacking the credibility of those arguing it instead of the arguments themselves.
Believing Fernandinho to be better than Rodri is an absolutely reasonable point, and there's almost certainly enough evidence to back you up if you want to argue it, as you have been doing.
But being a pompous dick to other posters who disagree with you isn't an acceptable way of getting a point across. Especially given how poor a job you've made of it. In fact you've only harmed your own credibility now so anyone reading on my just think you're an idiot. Which I'm sure you aren't.
Tl;dr. Here to talk football mate, not nit pick over inane drivel.
Yup. I guess I should, like you, just pull out how good Dihno would have been at DM from my Arshole. Ignore what the Manager is doing with his selection.
I'm sure Pep is just trying to sabotage City. That bald fuk. I knew he was bent :)
Or perhaps, I dunno, you could watch games from his seven previous seasons with us? Manager selection and versatility does not equal who's best. There could multitude of reasons they are for (Gundogan not having the ability to play at the back, for one) many of which kept in house.
We've heard you, but you're in a tiny minority who thinks Gundogan is any good, and an even smaller one who thinks he's better than Dinho. Not sure what part of this isn't getting through.
Last edited: