I think people are trying to suggest you cannot take sports shots with a pinhole, and guess what..you are right. But I never saw any mention of that in KR's article.
We are not stupid, everyone knows that certain cameras have limitations. Quality of photos is subjective to a point...and we know that a webcam has bad IQ compared to even a cheap digi compact.
But I do see an over obsession with collecting gear, and flashing big lenses about etc..kinda like a parade. I dont think the article is insulting to those who have good quality stuff, it just puts things into perspective a little. We are all caught up in these tests and image quality. And I can tell you few people do give a damn about what lens you used, or camera. You might get asked by another photographer..but a normal person just wants to see the image.
Most of us have good stuff, and some have cheapo stuff too. That is life, if I need a fast lens, I go get one. If I cannot afford it, I buy an ebay one!
What the article is really saying is "worry about what really matters" and yes that is what you are doing, your ideas, your composition, lighting..and nothing wrong with that at all.
You dont need a D3 and pro lens to do sports photography, if you have it..its going to help, esp low light etc. And you can ebay a film SLR and cheap lens, and take good sports shots. (in good light)
My old man used to say, it's what comes out the end of the mincer that counts. It sure does. Good gear looks nice, good photos look nicer..
I do take my compact out sometimes, because its easier, it wont give the the quality of my SLR stuff, but its handy. And if I am up to it, it can be used to take good photos.
Some people are on a never ending quest for the ultimate image quality, 40mp + super high res lenses, this is all fine. But for some, what they have really is good enough to do the job. Its nice to have the right lenses for what you do, and decent gear, but its only a small part of the overall aspect of taking photographs.