Double Points

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 8 hours, 48 minutes ago
Sorry ma, totally misunderstood your question
----------------------------------------------------------------------

no problem GC --

to be honest i dont really blame schumacher for what happened at aus 94 , for me micheal always had the corner and hill was chancing his luck if he thought micheal was going to move out the way for him -

must admit i have never forgiven micheal for knowingly driving an illegal car that year but i suppose he was young and hungry and ethics tend to go out of the window when you want a glittering bauble more than anything else in the world --

comment by M.U.D.D - Luke Shaw makes me throb with desire (U9612)
posted 9 minutes ago
A)Who ever wins the title deserves it.Winning is winning and you cannot begrudge someone for doing what they must to win.History remembers the winners.
=============

History will indeed remember the fraud that is Sebastian Vettel
----------------------------------------------------------------------

fluck me manx has vettel dropped a log in your rosebush or something mate

MA, "to be honest i dont really blame schumacher for what happened at aus 94 , for me micheal always had the corner"
I have to disagree. Schumacher went off circuit at the previous corner, came back and deliberately blocked Hill. He was nowhere near racing speed when Hill took the inside line at the corner, yet despite Hill being at least halfway alongside him, he IMO deliberately ran into him.
Again IMO disgraceful driving, especially considering what had occurred earlier in the season.

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 1 hour, 49 minutes ago
MA, "to be honest i dont really blame schumacher for what happened at aus 94 , for me micheal always had the corner"
I have to disagree. Schumacher went off circuit at the previous corner, came back and deliberately blocked Hill. He was nowhere near racing speed when Hill took the inside line at the corner, yet despite Hill being at least halfway alongside him, he IMO deliberately ran into him.
Again IMO disgraceful driving, especially considering what had occurred earlier in the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

yeh i hear what you are saying GC -- i tend to give the driver the benefit of the doubt and dont honestly believe any f1 driver would purposely take another off ( bar japan 1990 )

you have to bare in mind emotions and adrenaline were at mach 10 for both drivers just before contact was made , you had micheal desperately trying to defend his place and hill saw it as his one opportunity to pass micheal
----------- in all honesty i thought they both made a bit of a pigs ear of it and at a street circuit like adelaide i suppose contact was inevitable --

dont honestly believe any f1 driver would purposely take another off
I would say in Adelaide 1994, and Estoril 1997 Schumacher deliberately tried to take out another driver in an attempt to win the WDC. In 1994 against Hill he both succeeded and got away with it. Just look at the way he smiles after the event knowing he had won the WDC. a smugness that I am seeing in Rosberg.
In 1997 not only didn't he succeed, he didn't get away with it either.
I think if you look back in history I reckon these and the 1990 incident are just three of many more deliberate acts.
I'm not saying people caused accidents with any intention of hurting the other driver, just to gain an advantage.

Sympathy to any driver who comes 2nd but that is life.You win some you lose some.I think LH will be LH whether he wins the title or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with the point but in regards to "You win some you lose some" - would be disappointing for a man to win almost double the races of his next challenger, and not win the title.

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 19 hours, 58 minutes ago
dont honestly believe any f1 driver would purposely take another off
I would say in Adelaide 1994, and Estoril 1997 Schumacher deliberately tried to take out another driver in an attempt to win the WDC. In 1994 against Hill he both succeeded and got away with it. Just look at the way he smiles after the event knowing he had won the WDC. a smugness that I am seeing in Rosberg.
In 1997 not only didn't he succeed, he didn't get away with it either.
I think if you look back in history I reckon these and the 1990 incident are just three of many more deliberate acts.
I'm not saying people caused accidents with any intention of hurting the other driver, just to gain an advantage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

yeh you could be right GC as nobody knew what was going thru micheals mind so we can only guess as to what actually did go thru his mind at both those incidents -
---- i have always believed they were nothing more than racing accidents and to be honest have seen better drivers than micheal being alot more ruthless on the track than michael at ade 94 and jerez 97 and get away with it --

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

comment by The Guvnor V.I.K II-Frankenstein's Monster (U12889)
posted 10 hours, 15 minutes ago
comment by M.U.D.D - Luke Shaw makes me throb with desire(U9612)
posted 1 day, 3 hours ago
A)Who ever wins the title deserves it.Winning is winning and you cannot begrudge someone for doing what they must to win.History remembers the winners.
=============

History will indeed remember the fraud that is Sebastian Vettel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cmon mud,seb has had one bad season and you are already throwing him under the bus.Why not give him a few more seasons to prove that his 4 titles in a row was not a fluke. Also you can hardly call him a fraud for winning with the fastest car.What's he supposed to do,lose every race?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mate, I had my doubts even when he was "winning" those titles. He's been shown up. Car not planted to the ground, he's useless