Stu:
What a great post! I concur 100%, and I think you hit the nail on the head about the "celebrity = authority" complex that the public in general has. I love it when a movie celebrity, like a Susan Sarandon, "think" because they've achieved a level of success at such unrelated professions as e.g. acting, that they are then somehow "qualified" to take the podium and "be an authority" on, oh, say, politics, or international trade, or world financials, etc. It makes me laugh my head off. The sad thing is, the lemming public actually listen, because, ohmygod-ohmygod-ohmygod, "she's Susan Sarandon!!"
"He's Darren Appleton!" So? What does Darren know about coaching a team, and the qualifications that go into truly being a good coach? Darren plays a jam-up, world-class pool game, for sure -- noone doubts that. Darren's certainly an authority on the fundamentals of good play, winning one-against-one strategy, and perhaps -- by extension -- what he thinks a well-run tournament should look like. But he's jumped off a cliff if he thinks his knowledge "automatically extends" onto the realm of a good coach for a winning team in front of a stadium of spectators. Especially if he thinks that the coach selectee's past can be conveniently ignored, in favor of the cronyism that we all know is the true reason. Darren is still sponsored by Predator and Dragon, yes? If so, his "opinion" is automatically a wash. It doesn't count, by virtue of bias and cronyism.
A better example would be if Johan Ruijsink (Team Europe's captain) had said what Darren said. At least there's a foundation and context of knowledge there with Johan. But even then, the issues that Stu raised above still apply -- you can't ignore that CW is a ridiculous choice in the grand scheme of team coach qualifications and propriety.
-Sean