Another reverse dictionary question.

[Andizzle]

Hello everyone.

After my last visit was so interestingly successful, I felt compelled to come back.

OK, after watching & listening the Swansea ball boy incident unfold on the Tv and radio, I had a thought.
Whilst I felt sympathy for the footballer who had kicked the boy, because I could see what he was trying to do, I also could clearly see how someone would see the incident as appalling.

I don't support the team that the footballer plays for and so I started finding it easy to castigate him, almost as a convenient opportunist way to attack the team.

This got me thinking. There must be dozens of occasions in politics where people argue points they don't necessarily believe, simply because they feel that there point is valid and it is an easy point scoring tactic.

So, my question is this: is there a word to describe an argument that is put forward fraudulently - i.e. because it is useful for the person putting forward the argument?

(I hope there's enough context there to answer the question, I think I'm looking for a word that could fill the space in one of these sentences: 'He is clearly arguing ________ly.' Or perhaps, 'His argument is a _________ one.)

Thanks in advance!

[Tdol]

If it's point scoring, you could call it playing to the gallery or grandstanding, but these don't necessarily suggest that the argument is dishonest or fraudulent, but they would give the idea of an over-the-top response to the incident.

[5jj]

I don't think any of these words/expressions is exactly what you want, but they may be relevant:

disingenuous, contentious, playing (the) devil's advocate, arguing for the sake of argument.

[emsr2d2]

His argument/point is spurious.

[Rover_KE]

...or specious.