Do we see what we want to see

After reading posts for 5 years i wonder if we see in players what we want to see

I know when i see and remember after a match

edwards i see the creativity others see the turnovers

Houli the hard running and disposal others see the lack of physicality

Rance I cringe when hes one out under a high ball others see the desperation

Nahas i see the speed to break open sides others see one sided lack of finishing

and so on

Do we judge fairly or only see what confirms our belief impression of what that player brings to the table

It appears this way to me. Open-mindedness is to entertain any perception of a player -- and believe none of them. But ultimately, someone has to be dropped and someone has to be elevated; someone has to be cut and someone has to be promoted. One perception must eventually supersede all the others.

Undoubtedly.

As a human you walk around with your own sets of perceptions, and you try and fit what you see with those perceptions - as it reinforces the fact that you're right. Cause we're all right - well except for my wife, but I don't tell her that.

In my case, I'm not a fan of Tuck's disposal. So I saw his up and under belt the ball forward kicks on Friday night as costing us a goal in one case, injuring a player in another case, and handing the ball straight to the opposition another case (just off the top of my head!). But someone else will see the fact he got the ball in traffic about 10 times and this relieved pressure, as well as giving our forwards a chance with quick movement.

Are my filters wrong? No. Are others filters wrong? No. They're just the filter we put between what we see and what we interpret.

It is termed Fundamental Attribution Error. We usually associate successes of the people we like to dispositional factors and their failures to situational factors. Likewise, in those we do not like we associate their successes with situational factors and their errors to dispositional factors.

This means we do not always accurately assess the true cause of situations and our thoughts and opinions of players is based on subjective material rather than hard line established facts. Is this a good or a bad thing, well Psychologically the FAE is a great way to keep our self esteem positive and motivated.

The other problem is the relative weight that people place on players deficiencies and strengths. So for me I see Tuck as an excellent person extract the ball from the centre, but he then just bangs it on the boot to move it forward and can often result in a turnover. Therefore his efficiency is questionable, however I am happy for this to be down from average because he does extract it more than normal.

That is amusing BTA...My initial response was written before I seen your post....it is amusing that we both agree that perceptions are not always right and that we both used the same individual for our example and argued it from opposite sides of the fence

But I disagree with you - because you're arguing he wins the ball 10 times, stuffs it up directly 3 times, so still gives us 7 chances to get it rights. I'd argue that the 10 times he wins it is 10 times that another Richmond player can't win the ball, and they'd be more efficient!

I'm right, You're right.

Filters and Perceptions - what makes the world interesting.

No we don't because I wanted to see a couple of kicks go out on the full in the NAB cup and they went through for goals.

Maybe you could hit Jacko with a tranquilizer dart from the stands next time TBR?

Hmmmmmm........................

The one thing all Richmond supporters see and agree on is the final score of each game. The numbers don't lie.

If some see creativity, hard running, desperation, speed...whatever, in certain players, in the end it's the scoreboard that counts, and if we lose, obviously some of those aspects of play is lacking somewhere in the team, the only thing we dispute , or see what we want to see, is who the weakness lies with.

That is the beauty of sport, anyone can have an opinion, and you wont get thrown in jail or worse for it. Part of putting your opinion out there, is to gauge the consensus, do most agree or disagree with you, and if there is a clear majority one way, then that is probably the correct view.

Now a forum of all Richmond supporters may lead to a very skewed consensus , which is great too, it's good to be in an environment of people on similar wavelengths.

Poor Jordy, he made Tiv seem like a favourite son.

Cheers!
Ms Tantie.
xox

I agree, this is what is continually happening to Brutus Graham.

mail is gus is a popular bloke around the club and hes worked his ass off this pre season. people bagging him surprises me. thought he did a solid job against the hawks. his first half was good.