I think it's an illusion of understanding the thought process that went behind it. When I get a FC 4D though, people treat it as if it was a braindead reversal into huge damage, which it is in it's own way. The thing is, I do the exact same thing with Hazama's Rising Fang and get away relatively blame-free, sometimes even getting praised for a good call-out. Why? I use the exact same process when using both moves. They insist that being hit with Rising Fang was a reactionary reversal on my part, as opposed to praying and mashing 4D regardless of what's happening on-screen.
This is a generalization of how most discussions I've had with opponents went after the initial match:
"Rising Fang doesn't lead into fat damage, 4D does."
- Dude, I just did an easy 6~7k midscreen on you off a CH Rising Fang. I'm pretty sure you're in trouble regardless which one you get hit by.
"That Hazama combo was hard. Noel's is braindead."
- Sigh. Are we really discussing this?
"You can't even punish 4D on block. It moves her hitbox backward."
- C'mon, you have 8 free frames to hit her/get away afterwards. It's nothing compared to Rising Fang's OP knockback.
"Anything you do to bait out wakeup 4D gets beaten out by wakeup 2D. This 50/50 is unfair."
- Haku 5C, Haz 5C, Valk 2C, etc. And guess what? Not only do these moves beat out both, you'll be dead afterwards if you don't burst. These are P1 100 starters we're talking about here. On the other hand, Rising Fang doesn't even give a damn about highs or lows.
"Why should I need infinite matchup knowledge to deal with a scrub character?"
- And this, is what goes through every (technical) Noel hater's mind.