The editor chooses to conclude his Thick End of the Wedge column (July 6) with a commentary on his perspective on the capabilities of the Springbok coach, Peter de Villiers, and arrives at the studied conclusion: “All other things aside, he just isn’t up to the job.”
I, like so many others, marvel at the things the coach says in press conferences. But then, I also marvel at some of the strange statements of a range of other people in leadership positions, including newspaper editors. But I would not arrive at the same conclusions about their capability or otherwise based merely on this.
What matters in sport is the result. Surely what matters in respect of the Springbok coach in this instance is that, unlike so many of his predecessors, he scored a series victory against the British and Irish Lions? Perhaps more importantly, I would invite the editor, who’s not the sports writer, to compare De Villiers’s results with that of his predecessors and only then arrive at a studied conclusion about his fitness for the job.
I want to digress to focus on the importance of this approach. Worryingly in SA, too many people, especially those of the new tribe styled “analysts” (whatever the job description), arrive at conclusions without any reference to facts or statistics. Sane people must do battle against such intellectual laziness.
There is a great exchange between two highly respected economists, Paul Krugman and James K Galbraith, about the differences between economists who use real-world data and the economist literati. Without data, conclusions cannot be taken seriously.
I know that I was bitterly misunderstood on the subject of the recession because I argued then, as I would even about rugby, that we should let the numbers speak. My pleading is that the editor of Business Day should let the numbers speak even as he writes his column late on a Sunday afternoon.
MP
Minister in Presidency: National Planning