Been meaning to start thread on this topic for a while...
First, I want to distinguish the scenario where you were either staunchly for or staunchly against a player/team/tactic, and then that player's/team's/etc. performance have had you change your mind. I remember Zinzan contending that Flintoff was overrated in 2004/05 and the English strongly disagreeing with him, and then Zinzan making a thread after the 2005 Ashes saying that he was wrong and that Freddy is awesome etc.
Not picking on Zinzan by any stretch, I think it was admirable to make that thread and I think everyone has made a call on a player and a team before the event and got it wrong. Spikey and Hilfenhaus probably the greatest one of them all I was of a strong belief that Gambhir was a gun opener and that his poor technique against the short ball or on bouncy tracks was being exaggerated by many. I have completely changed my mind on that.
But that is NOT the kind of "changing of mind" I am talking about here. I am more interested in a debate or discussion, whether it be about how good a present player is, how good a young player is going to be, or how good a past great was, and your view was changed due to the strength of the opposing argument. Persuasive debate in the purest sense I guess. Not the actual view you held being proven wrong due to actual events changing your mind.
I think for me I have been convinced by people's arguments on this forum quite a bit, and have become less and less stubborn in my views as time goes on. Its probably happened plenty of times, but just off the top of my head here are a few notable examples I can think of:
1. Dennis Lillee - I think I used to rate him lower than what he should be rated. I still obviously thought he was an atg, but always said he was below some of the greats such as Marshall, McGrath etc. Then after reading some of the posts of the pro-Lillee clan here, and in particular some of the testaments they quoted from gun players of the Lillee era, I definitely changed my mind and decided that his lack of travelling to the subcontinent should not prevent him from being right up the top of the greatest bowlers of all time.
2. Recent discipline of Twatto, Mitch, Patto and Khawaja - When I first heard the news on the radio and via text message my instant reaction was that this is just lame-o and horrible management. Now I still do not believe they should have been suspended from a test match, but I think some of the posts by Spark and Benchy convinced me that a tough stance had to be taken. I became more "there is a middle ground to this" when at first I was pretty strongly opposed to the fact that not doing your homework or now answering a survey could result in any discipline at all.
3. Hussey and Samaraweera (aka Black Magic) - I was always a huge huge Mike Hussey fan (and still am for the most part) but I think it was PEWS (**** it may have been someone else correct me if I am wrong PEWS and apologies if I am) who said a little while back that it is curious that Samaraweera gets so much flak for being a flat track bully when he had a similar home/away record to Hussey. This led me to have a serious look at Hussey's record at the time, and it made me think that maybe I had Hussey a rung too high. I still think he was a very very good batsman, but I had Hussey as one of the best batsman around from 2005-2011. I think I rethought my position due to the new perspective given to me by someone pointing out Hussey's home/away differential, and also just the fact that he doesn't get pinged on this whereas other batsmen, such as Samaraweera, do.
Have you ever changed your cricketing opinion based on some post(s) by CWers?