It's a lot easier to opine from the sidelines.
It's very easy for some men and in some cases women to sit back and say with 20-20 hindsight, "Tsk-tsk, should have done more." But it doesn't account for the reality.
To sit home, read one's favorite paper, and scoff at the misdeeds of the men who do things is easy, but it is markedly ineffective. It is what evil men count upon the good men's doing.
It's always easy to judge from afar
It's a fairly common phenomenon of London life - people having fully developed critiques of books they haven't read and films they haven't seen. I'd probably include myself in that.
People always think they know better. In football, everybody thinks they can be head coach and do it better. It's the same in F1: they always know better, even if they have no experience of it.
It is easy to criticize me from behind a pen or a microphone, from someone who never set foot on a football field.
You could arm-chair quarterback what the president did or didn't do, or was asked to do or asked not to do. I guess I'm more focused on what's going forward.
I discourage passive skepticism, which is the armchair variety where people sit back and criticize without ever subjecting their theories or themselves to real field testing.
It is easy to give advice from a port of safety.
Arm chair warriors often fail.
It's easy to give your opinion in front of the television without any responsibility.
Let's be honest: we all watch the show at home and play 'armchair' 'Survivor,' inserting our opinions, comments and yelling at the TV screen.
