Producers unfortunate enough to have been allocated Tim James (below) as Platter visualizer for their precious babies that took a year and a lifetime to make, should read his public admission that he has no idea what he’s doing and makes it up as he goes along. Then they should contact the nearest branch of Standard Bank (owner of the wine label guide) and ask for a new taster. How can Reg Lascaris allow such brand-damaging drivel be aired in public by an employee?

Does anyone still take beauty contests seriously? Tim does. “Trying to be objective in these things is not easy: think, perhaps, about being fair if you were judging a human beauty competition while you had a definite preference for blonde busty women, or muscular hairy men, while being well aware that other people liked slim brunettes or slight, smooth men.

That’s my job in Platter. Those who think that in sighted tastings it’s simply a question of how much the wine costs or its reputation or whether it comes from a well-established region – they simply reveal their own crudity and inadequate understanding of the complexities involved in any sort of tasting.”

Does Standard Bank really pay Tim to judge blonde busty women? Does he have a Dolly Parton diploma? Those of us who question sighted tastings as practised by Standard Bank do not think its only a question of cost or reputation at all. It’s rather that seriously incoherent nitwits cannot give a fair assessment when hairy or busty labels are in full view. Give me crudity over crudités every time.

The admission “these incoherent thoughts are prompted partly by an email discussion I’ve been having with a wine-producer recently, but more immediately by the fact that my first load of Platter samples arrived yesterday” sets alarm bells ringing. Surely a wine should be evaluated by what’s in the bottle. Not by what’s in the email or what’s on the label? Come on Standard Bank. Close this charade down immediately. It’s getting reputational now. Yours.