An argument of authority is when you claim something to be 100% valid simply because someone else said so based of the fact that their in a position of authority to do so such as being an expert in that field,
The reason is a fallacy is because despite being experts in a field, their still giving opinions and not facts while makes them debunkabke in the first place.
Claiming one guy is superior over another due to said position is a fallacious claim.
A strawman is when you claim someone said something or implying their implying it based of a meaningless assumption which is what you did earlier.
Dude !!! You were the one that made a utterly baseless claim that the 19.4 avg was a myth and went on to "debunk" it by saying that removing JJ's performance against supposedly minnow teams like SL and WI it will come down to 26. You were soo adamant that you were right and I was wrong that you made a churlish remark that we need to get better at mathematics but we all know how that ended ....
Forget logical fallacies. ... that sort of argument it actually doesn't even need any reliance on reputed Cricket experts to dismantle your utterly biased views. Sorry but you have no leg to stand on in this debate and worse challenge the experts.
So the only pertinent fallacy that needs to be discussed here is the fallacy that applies to you : "The armchair expert fallacy"
This occurs when someone, despite lacking the necessary knowledge, dismisses expert consensus and insists they know better and often based on misguided confidence powered by deep bias and rage* rather than bare facts. It's a classic case of Dunning-Kruger effect in action ( look it up ).
* The rage that I am referring to is the Pakistani specialty that occurs when an Indian challenges the Great Khan on matters involving fast bowling. The immediate response is for the entire kaum to dive head first into a dry swimming pool n an attempt to teach the offending fish a lesson or in urdu : "Tumhari yeh Zurrat !!"
Forget logical fallacies. ... that sort of argument it actually doesn't even need any reliance on reputed Cricket experts to dismantle your utterly biased views. Sorry but you have no leg to stand on in this debate and worse challenge the experts.
So the only pertinent fallacy that needs to be discussed here is the fallacy that applies to you : "The armchair expert fallacy"
This occurs when someone, despite lacking the necessary knowledge, dismisses expert consensus and insists they know better and often based on misguided confidence powered by deep bias and rage* rather than bare facts. It's a classic case of Dunning-Kruger effect in action ( look it up ).
* The rage that I am referring to is the Pakistani specialty that occurs when an Indian challenges the Great Khan on matters involving fast bowling. The immediate response is for the entire kaum to dive head first into a dry swimming pool n an attempt to teach the offending fish a lesson or in urdu : "Tumhari yeh Zurrat !!"