Heh. Actually, I kinda agree with that, in a way....
I'm occasionally struck by the way our 'process' works when I get some recommendation from a consult specialist who obviously has never really practiced clinically. Mostly I note it with radiologists (because that's one of the primary specialist services I use): they'll read out the Rads/US/CT/MR, make some recommendation, and I'll promptly start rolling my eyes because the recommendation just doesn't make any sense, is clearly 'textbook' from a decade ago, their differentials are just crazy, or that sort of thing....
This isn't a slam on the awesome radiologists that support those of us in the trenches. I love the support we get and I think it's amazing that we can get images read out 24 hours a day within an hour. But I wish part of the DVM -> Internship -> Residency pathway involved significant exposure to real-world medicine.
I can almost always tell when the specialist giving me feedback (whether it's radiology, pathology, etc.) has practiced out in the 'real world'.
I think it's telling that it's a very regular occurrence in rounds to hear "... and radiology read it out as X and recommended Y [insert eye roll] but we did Z."