Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
cavallino

The Schumacher Thread

259 posts in this topic

OK I can see the MS-came-back-for-fun thing surviving the wash for the first half of the season, but not more than that....that is if Nico can beat him, which was more my question, not really if his career will suffer (or not).

Are you thus proposing that no matter whom MS has as a team mate, they are doomed either to be an Irvine, or to live purely in MS's shadow, and any results they obtain, say outracing MS, that it was because MS was just there for fun, and wasn't trying so therefore and QED the other driver was gifted the results and is not a true indictment of their abilities? Would Lewis be in the same boat as Nico if MS was at Macca, or is it because Nico has yet to prove his worth by not having a race win?

....but then he's not once had a race winning car.....

I do. Look at what has happened to every one of Michael's team mates other than Massa who was taken under his wing so to say. MS did everything humanly possible he could do for EI to be WDC, have him the lead multiple times and still Mika got the title. Rubins, he is a great driver but he will always be a #2. Look at all of his Bennaton team mates. Other than Pique they all were "the other guy".

People always say he stoped in 06 because he was getting old and and you could see he had lost speed and all that stuff. That's nonsense, 05 was a clear cut case of having to fight for best of the rest with a bad car and 06 just showed how much fight he had in him still. A so-so car in the beginning of the season was transformed to the best car on the grid in Brazil by a mile.

Look at last season with Vettel and Webber, in the beginning people were saying Vettel would have his hands full with Webber. That made me laugh. And look at it now, Vettel steam rolled Webber. Really 09 proved what so many people were saying that just like RB or Irvine, Webber is a good #2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do. Look at what has happened to every one of Michael's team mates other than Massa who was taken under his wing so to say. MS did everything humanly possible he could do for EI to be WDC, have him the lead multiple times and still Mika got the title. Rubins, he is a great driver but he will always be a #2. Look at all of his Bennaton team mates. Other than Pique they all were "the other guy".

People always say he stoped in 06 because he was getting old and and you could see he had lost speed and all that stuff. That's nonsense, 05 was a clear cut case of having to fight for best of the rest with a bad car and 06 just showed how much fight he had in him still. A so-so car in the beginning of the season was transformed to the best car on the grid in Brazil by a mile.

Look at last season with Vettel and Webber, in the beginning people were saying Vettel would have his hands full with Webber. That made me laugh. And look at it now, Vettel steam rolled Webber. Really 09 proved what so many people were saying that just like RB or Irvine, Webber is a good #2.

Well, apart from that lil ol race in Japan where he did everything possible to stop Eddie from winning the first Ferrari world championship in eon's. He gave him the opportunity by breaking his legs, then came back and out drove him like always for the simple fact he is Michael and team numero uno and has the reddest of the red mist.

I've never subscribed to the idea that he stopped because he was getting old etc....I don't even think he was forced out of Ferrari, else why would he still have been employed by them for so long? I think Michael can be beaten in a straight fight, and he may well have been scared a bit of Kimi....who knows?

MS was good...maybe the best there was. But can he come back at the same level? Does he command the number one spot in the team still? Or does he have to earn it like any fresh team pairing? Does Nico have it in him not to be bullied?

We know Nico is no playboy to the extent of Irvine. F1 was a means to a very happy ends for Irvine - whilst to win the championship along the way would no doubt be a bonus, he was more than happy to use his stature to rack up the notches in his bed post.

Rubens on the other hand is weak in terms of controlling his emotions - yeah sure its great to see someone not acting like a robot, but to place him against someone like MS is like asking a lamb to maul a lion - in otherwords, very easily coerced into doing or believing things - just look at his outbursts during '09 "boo hoo hoo...Jenson is beating me...its the teams fault...boo hoo hoo"

Nico on the other hand appears nothing but hard working, keeps his mouth fairly well shut, has a father that as been there, done that, and then has kept his distance, and seems to be as quick as any of the other stars of today, and in equal equipment at least the equal of Lewis. So in my mind I can't see him getting steamrolled by Michael. And it won't be because Michael let him. It will be because Nico outdrove him. Credit should be given where credit is due.

Almost reminds me of another multiple world champ being outdriven by a rookie....so many excuses for the champ, but few kudo's for the new kid.

I think it will be great if Nico can better Mike. Can he? I think if given the same equipment, then yes. Does Mike deserve defacto number one status in the team? No. Is Mike fit enough to last the season? Yes. Does Mike know all the circuits? No. Does Mike know the new cars? No. Can Mike win the mind game with Nico? I'm not so sure.

It's going to be good to watch, but if Nico does beat him, then at least give Nico credit for it, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, Cav. I have learned to appreciate you like a fine wine. Too bad I drink beer. :P

Well, it certainly has taken a toll on you. tongue.gif

GET OFF MY LAWN!

I have always believed that every team mate of Michael's has had the same opportunity. It's what you do with that opportunity that counts. Michael has always stamped his authority on team mates by asserting himself, not only on track, but by putting in the out of hours effort equired to be at the top level and gain ultimate respect. It's the full package; fast, fit and fully committed. Yes, daunting to a team mate. The only other driver I see who understands it, who's acting it out in repeat performance, is Lewis. He understands it too. It's not rocket science but it can't be easy or they would all be doing it. Michael's driving took care of itself. It was an area he didn't concern himself with, so he concerned himself with other things too and gained a deeper understanding.

For me, it was never about controlling a team mate. It was about knowing the best way to achieve a goal. Michael understood that the best way to win a WDC was to get the full effort of his team. Once he proved it, he earned their trust and they backed him all the way. You may disagree with the methodology, but I think it's cold and calculated genius. It's sport at its most precise. Crystal clear thought process on the best way to get a job done.

So Jenson Button is less afraid than Michael because he is jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire? Well, if making a comeback at 41 years old, after three years out and no testing is somehow less of a challenge, I'm here waiting to be convinced. He wont have preference because he will have to prove himself all over again. Just like he did all them years ago.

The first two paragraphs are backed up by every teammate Mikey ever had with the exception of Rubens. Rubens, I feel, suffers from a lack of self-confidence and, as a result, need to inflate his ego. To him, if Mikey is faster, it must be because the team is favoring him. This can be proven by looking at his career and comments post-Ferrari.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cavalinno,

It appears you dont like rational discussion... So I dont knoe why I am bothering replying to you... In the unlikely case you want to engage a rational and non-childish discussion (most Schummi fans dont, as they are not prepared to get real), here are my first couple of comments... (If you behave like an adult, I promise I will post more..., but I dont think you will want me to do that)

First of all, we tend to forget that the only serious teammate MS had was NPiquet. But even so, he was about to retire, yet he was not smashed by Shummi. Actually the opposite: he (NP) had more points and more fastest lap if I am not mistaken.

About Massa: it only took one a couple of replays of launching starts in his first year at Ferrari to realize that Massa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another victory for polite, objective, considered debate at TF1

...woot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**grabs my popcorn and awaits cav's next installment**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cavalinno,

It appears you dont like rational discussion... So I dont knoe why I am bothering replying to you... In the unlikely case you want to engage a rational and non-childish discussion (most Schummi fans dont, as they are not prepared to get real), here are my first couple of comments... (If you behave like an adult, I promise I will post more..., but I dont think you will want me to do that)

First of all, we tend to forget that the only serious teammate MS had was NPiquet. But even so, he was about to retire, yet he was not smashed by Shummi. Actually the opposite: he (NP) had more points and more fastest lap if I am not mistaken.

About Massa: it only took one a couple of replays of launching starts in his first year at Ferrari to realize that Massa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cavalinno,

It appears you dont like rational discussion... So I dont knoe why I am bothering replying to you... In the unlikely case you want to engage a rational and non-childish discussion (most Schummi fans dont, as they are not prepared to get real), here are my first couple of comments... (If you behave like an adult, I promise I will post more..., but I dont think you will want me to do that)

If you make a point in a sophisticated way and use rational and objective thought processes, backed up with statistical fact, you will still be blown away by Cavallino but you wont be made to look quite such an arse. So good luck with all of that.

First of all, we tend to forget that the only serious teammate MS had was NPiquet. But even so, he was about to retire, yet he was not smashed by Shummi. Actually the opposite: he (NP) had more points and more fastest lap if I am not mistaken.

Michael came into the '91 season, as a rookie, with six races remaining. Are you suggesting this was an effective barometer?

You call me stupid, but comparing the first year of Massa at Ferrari with his 3rd year with Kimi is not any more intelligent, is it?

So why make the comparison you have just made above?

If you had the best ever driver in your team, with such a dominant car, with such a big margin opened in the first six races, while the closer competition seemed to be a BAR, would you shoe the world that you #1 driver might still need that 2 points????

People who try to discredit Michael love this example, and with good reason, it was a big blunder. But rarely is it brought up when discussing Michael's worth to the team, what he brought and what he delivered.

Apparently the level of confidence you has in Michael is not the same of Ross and Todt at that time...

It was because they had so much confidence in him that they allowed it to happen.

MS is certainly a good driver (only a fool would not recognize it). A very good one. But he still has not been tested (and only a fool would not recognize it) That was all I was saying...

So, for you, Michael's credibility as a great driver all hangs on this year? What a great shame. Sometimes real fans of motorsport base an overall opinion on what they have seen and what they feel and not by trawling through the insipid world of Wikipedia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael came into the '91 season, as a rookie, with six races remaining. Are you suggesting this was an effective barometer?

No, and I never intend to prove NP was better than MS. But unfortunately this was the only decent teammate in his whole career.

And people argue he is the best ever...

I was only showing he is as human as any other driver, and while it is true that he earned preferential treatment against RB and EI, it is not granted he would also beat other better drivers (like LH, JB, FA, Kimi).

shields, on 05 January 2010 - 12:11 AM, said:

You call me stupid, but comparing the first year of Massa at Ferrari with his 3rd year with Kimi is not any more intelligent, is it?

So why make the comparison you have just made above?

I will list a few differences between Massa´s case and MS´s one:

1- No one claims Massa is the best ever. Because people claim MS is the best ever without considering the circunstances in which his records were concquered, we are given the wright to use his rookie year as a barometer, as it was his only strong teammate.

2- Although both MSD and NP were retiring in the year FM and MS got into their teams, NP was not fighting for the WDC as was MS.

3- Massa clearly got into the team to serve MS which is understandable. That did not happen to MS in Benetton. In fact, marketing would recommend giving a promising rookie a boost against a retiring WDC.

4- Massa would do anything to secure a seat in Ferrari. And to do that he knew he had to be the best friend of MS. He (and everybody else) knew he did not deserved to be in that seat, based on his previous career performance.

Edited by shields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cavalinno,

It appears you dont like rational discussion...

Oh I love rational discussion. Posts made without any effort or research on the other hand infuriate me.

First of all, we tend to forget that the only serious teammate MS had was NPiquet. But even so, he was about to retire, yet he was not smashed by Shummi. Actually the opposite: he (NP) had more points and more fastest lap if I am not mistaken.

Again what constitutes a serious teammate to you? Two drivers that came within a hair's breadth of winning the championship don't cut it for you. Nor the guy who at his age outdrove Button a few times last year.

About Massa: it only took one a couple of replays of launching starts in his first year at Ferrari to realize that Massa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself why Michael gets preference?

He's earned the right, proved his consistency and you don't win 7x WDC for nothing, so there's the answer to the test.

Rock on, Steph!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm laughing so hard right now I can barely type. Just when my thoughts turn to wanting more people to join this forum, I go to other F1 sites, see the high number of members they attract because of the love, and the tolerance of stupidity and I come straight back here.

Oh boy. Still laughing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You SLUT dribbles...you. go. to. other. sites!! :o

Want some popcorn, by the way? I got caramel, butter, double butter, icing sugar, or triple butter (though that last one was really for the Yanks around here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Four points. F1 had a different points system back then (which you would know if you'd either done your research or had a clue).

Of course you are right. My bad... But that does not invalidate the fact that a supposedly best ever driver in a best ever car with that amount of point advantage with a #2 driver by contract should not need 4 points (ok, not 2) to be WDC...

You dont need to call me stupid, do you?

You would also know that the same BAR team under a different name was responsible for the design of last year's championship winning car.

If you call me stupid because a memory fade, what do you think about your own comment???

Do you think the BAR in 2002 was the same as Brawn in 2009????

You can ask people around you in case you dont believe me, but a lot of people were hired to make Honda stronger, including a certain Ross Brawn... And you called me stupid... :rolleyes:

I swear to you Ross Brawn was not there in 2002... But maybe you are too blind to believe me...

Are you, by any chance believing that Lotus gonna win this year??? Just because of the name???

You still failed to explain me how come that the greatest of all could not beat a unmotivated retiring WDC in Benetton... (his only serious teammate)

Edited by shields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if you would do some research into why he is considered the best ever? Ok, if you have any desire to not look like a complete moron, DO SOME BLOODY RESEARCH. You want to know why he is considered the best ever? Start with the words of people who worked with him. Then his teammates - they have a lot of very instructive things to say. Go through 15 years of interviews, reports by countless observers, journalists. Look at the opinions of people like Frank Williams, Ron Dennis, Ross Brawn - people who would know. You have no clue. Have you read about how delighted Haug is to finally get SChumacher, have you any idea of the years Mclaren tried to hire him.

Andr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look at the opinions of people like Frank Williams, Ron Dennis, Ross Brawn - people who would know. You have no clue. Have you read about how delighted Haug is to finally get SChumacher, have you any idea of the years Mclaren tried to hire him.

I see you ignore the way F1 works...

Everybody would want to have the most famous driver to attract sponsors, media attention, and publicity and fans... And of course Schummi (as it is evident here) is the one with the greatest number of blind supporters... which ultimately brings money to the team in the form of sponsors, etc... So what?

That is why in the last decades a lot of retired drivers were brought back to F1... Simply because this helps increase the general interest in the sport... in the team and this generally increase visibility and attracts sponsors...

Were they (retired drivers that were brought back to F1) the best options in terms of performance? Certainly not... Just look at Mansell. Or Villeneuve. Or even Prost: although he was WDC, it is not difficult to imagine other drivers winning with that car...

That is why other drivers from Indy were brought to F1 too... Like Andretti, JPM, Villeneuve, etc... (Not that they were bad drivers, but the best options? Comeon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured it out...

If any thread has a driver's name in the title, it quickly decends into fanboy handbags.

We had the Kovi thread, the Kimi thread and now the Schumi thread.

Next up - maure into the Hamilton birthday week thread - I mean - that title's just asking for trouble.

Oh - even better, I've walked in on a Mexican stand off...

3 User(s) are reading this topic

3 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

adamstrags, cavallino, shields

Sh#t - I'm off.

Edited by adamstrags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange....I never knew Prost was "brought back" - he had a year out due to a set of circumstances - he certainly did not retire, if thats what you are implying. Or JV for that matter.

JPM...hmmmm...I think he did a lot better than many European based drivers that entered F1 around the same time, and well, there's that JV guy who won the whole shooting match, again something that most would consider being better than other European based drivers that entered F1 around the same time.

So what exactly is your point here, dude? What are you trying to say? Schumi sucks? Mansell sucks? Prost sucks? JPM sucks? JV sucks? Andretti sucks? (Hang on, I'll give you Michael on that count, but not Mario)

Where should F1 drivers be brought from then, if not from the likes of CART as it was back then?

I think everyone here is really struggling to see where you are coming from....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured it out...

If any thread has a driver's name in the title, it quickly decends into fanboy handbags.

We had the Kovi thread, the Kimi thread and now the Schumi thread.

Next up - maure into the Hamilton birthday week thread - I mean - that title's just asking for trouble.

Oh - even better, I've walked in on a Mexican stand off...

3 User(s) are reading this topic

3 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

adamstrags, cavallino, shields

Sh#t - I'm off.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII know! Just look at them Alonso fanboys with their year long celebration of his birthday and their monobrows thread....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you are right. My bad... But that does not invalidate the fact that a supposedly best ever driver in a best ever car with that amount of point advantage with a #2 driver by contract should not need 4 points (ok, not 2) to be WDC...

My point is you're way out of your depth here. I missed this earlier, but did you seriously say BAR was Ferrari's closest challenger in 2002? You can't even get basic facts right, and you have waded into a debate on a topic which I have more than a clue about. That I find annoying. It would be like me walking into the Moto GP forum, comparing the merits of Mick Doohan vs Rossi based on 5 minutes of wikipedia research.

You dont need to call me stupid, do you?

Well no. I apologise for my earlier post. I am sure you don't suck at life, and are a decent enough chap/chapette :D Your F1 commentary on the other hand...

Do you think the BAR in 2002 was the same as Brawn in 2009????

Quite aside from the fact that BAR wasn't Ferrari's closest competition in 2002 (your post was so riddled with factual errors I missed that one), take these two statements:

"Ferrari's closest rivals were Minardi" - your statement would have some meaning since Minardi were always a bottom team.

"Ferrari's closest rivals were BAR" - meaningless

You still failed to explain me how come that the greatest of all could not beat a unmotivated retiring WDC in Benetton... (his only serious teammate)

Really? That's the crux of your argument? Sorry I can't be bothered answering that..

I see you ignore the way F1 works...

Everybody would want to have the most famous driver to attract sponsors, media attention, and publicity and fans... And of course Schummi (as it is evident here) is the one with the greatest number of blind supporters... which ultimately brings money to the team in the form of sponsors, etc... So what?

That is why in the last decades a lot of retired drivers were brought back to F1... Simply because this helps increase the general interest in the sport... in the team and this generally increase visibility and attracts sponsors...

Were they (retired drivers that were brought back to F1) the best options in terms of performance? Certainly not... Just look at Mansell. Or Villeneuve. Or even Prost: although he was WDC, it is not difficult to imagine other drivers winning with that car...

That is why other drivers from Indy were brought to F1 too... Like Andretti, JPM, Villeneuve, etc... (Not that they were bad drivers, but the best options? Comeon)

You manage to post without calling names so I feel bad going off at you, but your posts are rubbish. I can't be bothered explaining why. I really can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are right again, I misconfused 2004 season with 2002...

Anyway, both seasons were equally boring and it still holds that by Austria 2002, MS had more than 20 points over their main rivals (Williams). (Am I mistaken again :) yet again?)

And everybody would see that there was no real competition to Ferrari...

Ok. You picked my mistakes. But I feel that you try to concentrate your efforts in them, in order to avoid answering the questions that hurt you more as a blind fanboy.

To these questions you just keep saying you did not care to answer, but you did care to answer the others...

That pretty much exposes yourself and your own doubts about your religion

PS- The reason why I dont post names in quotes, is because discussions should not be personal, but rational. It should not matter who said it...

Edited by shields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you "misconfuse" :what: Wouldn't that mean you were not confused, as in you were right? I'm no genius here, but.......

The uproar at Austria was not that Ferrari was so far ahead in points and all, or they had the best car, or they didn't have faith in Michael, it was that Rubens had driven a ****en good race that day and deserved the win - everyone was cheering for Rubens, even McLaren fans. What people were upset about was that the great race they saw that day was spoiled in the last few hundred metres.

And then the resulting "no team orders" rule was just a stupid response by the FIA. F1 has always been a team sport - heck, drivers used to switch cars mid-race sometimes. Everyone understands team orders, and to have to hide it these days is just a joke.

Correct me if I am wrong, but your whole argument boils down to two things:

1) The toughest competition MS has had ever in his life was his few races with Piquet

2) He can not be considered fast as all his team mates were slow

Have you not followed motorsport very long? Have you not seen for yourself the metronomic mind numbingly boring way Michael could race lap after lap after lap after lap within a 100th of a qualifying time, and simply drive away from those around him. I have never liked him, so do not call me a blind fanboy, but I certainly respect his ability and skills, including putting in the fast laps when asked, able to switch and implement strategy changes mid race, and to position himself as team leader. I'm also genuinely pleased he's making a comeback - if he falls on his face or not is irrelevant - at least he has the balls to do it.

Stats and figures on some webpage do not account for what really went on. They do not convey the "hold your breath and suck up your poopy hole" moments like Hakkinen casually overtaking Schumacher at Spa in 2000. Nor do they convey the "holy Sh#t ****!" moments that keep you on the edge of your seat like the final lap at Interlagos in 2008, or watching the 1998 game of dodgems at Spa at the start.

It does seem that you go away having been told you are incorrect and google a response. If that's what you are doing, Michaels girlfriend, Cav, will always have the upper hand. And even balding people like Andre will too.

Come and enjoy the banter around here, but don't go calling people fanboy's, and be prepared to backup statements with facts. Everyone here, whether they like MS or not knows he is fast. We know what he can do, and what he has done.

Fanboy's around these parts normally get run out of here with their tails between their legs. We're motorsport fans here. That is, we have guys we would prefer to win, but we cheer and say "oh yay!" (well, Ben says that), when someone wins after a well raced race - like Webber bagging number one. Or cheering Button at Brazil. And we all collectively held our breath watching Kubica cartwheel in Canada, or Massa take a spring in his eye.

Sit, be cool, Mr/s Shields, and partake in some of the other debates around here....to find one still on topic after six posts is pretty rare, but it's how we like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I love rational discussion. Posts made without any effort or research on the other hand infuriate me.

Again what constitutes a serious teammate to you? Two drivers that came within a hair's breadth of winning the championship don't cut it for you. Nor the guy who at his age outdrove Button a few times last year.

bulls##t. That's doesn't deserve a response.

It wasn't his first year at Ferrari, he spent an year at Ferrari as test driver, back in the day when test drivers had a lot to do. You talk like it is blindingly obvious that the Massa who was nowhere near MS in 2006 and the Massa who outclassed Raikkonen at Ferrari were two vastly different drivers. You can't just make that statement, do some research and make your point, you can't throw stuff around like that.

Four points. F1 had a different points system back then (which you would know if you'd either done your research or had a clue). You would also know that the same BAR team under a different name was responsible for the design of last year's championship winning car. You would also know how close Ferrari had come to winning the title in 97,98,99, and might understand the reasoning behind wanting to hold on to every point they want to get.

Wow, very cleverly twisted. Let me see how many ways I can twist it - here's one - they had so much confidence in Michael that they knew there was no way Rubens would ever come close to matching Michael's pace that year, why deprive him of points that he might need if someone overtook them in car development. You would also know, if you weren't so staggeringly myopic that a large part of the advantage stemmed from the tyres, and that is also an advantage that can be overturned. (hint: check which tyres BAR were on that year).

Tested? Seriously? You're ridiculous? Are you suggesting the only way a driver is tested is wih him teammate? All the other 20 or so cars on the grid might as well not be there? Why do we even bother then? Let's just have two car races, that after all is the only way of being tested that will satisfy you. Racing against 3 generations of champions from Senna to Hakkinen to Alonso and Kimi isn't good enough for you?

Total crap. All his teammates were outclassed, none of them were slouches though, their records speak for themselves. Especially Massa. Massa is an excellent example, because he almost won a championship reacing against the so called torch carriers of this generation and sent Kimi off packing to WRC. Not decent enough for you eh?

Maybe if you would do some research into why he is considered the best ever? Ok, if you have any desire to not look like a complete moron, DO SOME BLOODY RESEARCH. You want to know why he is considered the best ever? Start with the words of people who worked with him. Then his teammates - they have a lot of very instructive things to say. Go through 15 years of interviews, reports by countless observers, journalists. Look at the opinions of people like Frank Williams, Ron Dennis, Ross Brawn - people who would know. You have no clue. Have you read about how delighted Haug is to finally get SChumacher, have you any idea of the years Mclaren tried to hire him.

You want a rational discussion, please get beyond the amateurishness you are showing right now. You want somewhere to start - there are countless posts and links on this forum that would let you become informed on the subject. Right now, you're just clueless, you can't even get basic facts like the points system in 2002 right. You really expect me to take you seriously?

Now I understand your mind and why you lost it. Excellent post Cav. I'm convinced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0