Which is confusing to newbies.  He's well within his rights to claim that the BCH chain is better, but he needs to state clearly that it's not compatible with the BTC chain.  Some of the visitors to the bitcoin.com website were looking for BTC and they're leaving with the wrong coin.  The fault of that lies primarily with the bitcoin.com website.  There's no defending it.  

Plus, they clearly know it was wrong because they've now updated their website to change it.

Emphasised, as that point probably shouldn't be lost in the discussion because it's quite important.  Yes, bitcoin.com now looks radically different and somewhat clearer as to which chain is which.  So we can probably stop arguing about it now.  I'm sure we won't, though.    

Although, even on the new version they've made, I do wish they'd stop calling it "Bitcoin Core", because they're not the sole developer.  BIP91, for example, was not a product of Core's repo.  It was merged in after another client (that wasn't Core) adopted it first.  Core are not the owner and don't make all the decisions.  You can't (honestly) argue they do because we can see empirically with BIP91 that they don't.  Also, that's not a "fanboy" argument, because it's an argument that seriously annoys certain fanboys who do mistakenly believe Core make all the decisions.