This Will Make Your Blood Boil...

[Fed up 0]

The problem with raising the bar is that it only works if maure does it too, otherwise it's futile really.

I do agree about that particular comment though, shame on you Fed Up!

Fair enough and I apologise, but...

I was prepared to give the guy the benefit of the doubt when he first joined and appeared to be winding up members of the board - But reading his posts over the past few weeks has led me to the conclusion that the guy is on here to deliberately antagonise.

For the most part I just ignore him and will continue to do so.

[Rainmaster 7]

October 10, 2007

John L Sharp's view of Fernando vs Lewis

MONACO: where this muddle started. Team orders were issued (to slow down) to preserve the engine for the next race (when Alonso, after 2nd pit stop had a +10sec advantage on Hamilton and close to 1 min on Massa). Alonso limited his car rpm down to 17000 rpm. Hamilton "failed" to listen and his complaint initiated an FIA investigation. No foul play. Alonso faster than Hamilton!

He didn't 'fail', he just ignored them. He shouldn't of.

INDIANAPOLIS: No orders were given to reduce rpms. Alonso was undoubtedly faster than Hamilton. Alonso tried just once to overtake Hamilton. Failed, but his reaction in the following lap suggested that maybe, just maybe, he was stopped from trying again by team orders. At least this would have been the consensus amongst English press should that have happened the other way round!! Alonso did not "request" the FIA to investigate what to everyone's eyes was more suspicious than what had "happened" in MONACO. Yes, Hamilton won the US GP (but Alonso outpaced Hamilton there!)And this includes all way throughout Q1, Q2 and Q3, until the very last extra flying lap (as also occurred previously in Canada).And we know that this season, apart from when there is a mechanical failure or significant human error, P1 is equivalent to victory (that's why enjoying that extra flying lap in Q3 is soooo important - with less fuel)

The bits in bold are speculative and pointless. Qualifying is important, P1 is not equivalent to victory, as we have seen many times this season.

MAGNY-COURS: mechanical problems for Alonso with the gear change system and suspension hydraulics or electronics. I can't remember now. No foul play. Probably bad luck?. Hamilton faster than Alonso!

SILVERSTONE: pole for Hamilton (this was clearly planned to satisfy British supporters). We know what happened after. Alonso faster than Hamilton!

NURBURGRING: Hamilton's incident. Alonso had the same problem with his car. Only he was luckier. I could not compare performances as Hamilton may have been physically in a poorer condition. But I have to give Alonso the benefit of the doubt in this one. Alonso faster than Hamilton!

HUNGARORING: the second incident. Naughty boys (both Hamilton and Alonso)! Alonso actually was faster when he did his best lap (faster than Hamilton with same fuel loads). Of course, Hamilton intentions were to steal Alonso's extra lap knowing than P1= Victory in here. He wanted to enjoy that extra flying lap (and with less fuel load) so it was likely he could have improved Alonso's lap. But on equal levels of fuel Alonso was faster. And do not forget, it was Alonso's turn to enjoy the extra flying lap (Hamilton prevented him from doing so). FIA sanction absolutely inappropriate. Hamilton should now have 2 points less and Alonso 5 more (as surely Alonso would have won that race and Hamilton would have finished 2nd or third). Unfortunately for Alonso, the "judges" were a British, a German and a Chinese (it is like having an English referee in the World Cup Final between England and Spain - biased decision!). Curiously same British guy that investigated the Japanese SC mess.

Bold bit is true.

TURKEY: relatively bad luck for Hamilton. Maybe he was pushing too hard and not looking after his tyres properly. Relatively because luckily for him, the tyre burst two or three corners before pit entry so he was able to finish 5th. However, Hamilton was faster!

Or maybe it was a simple tyre failure.

MONZA: Alonso faster. As simple as that!

SPA: Alonso faster. As simple as that! Poisonous strategy (Hamilton 5 extra laps 2nd stint). Not investigated by FIA. Hamilton's lack of speed prevented him from overtaking Alonso. Naughty Ron .

JAPAN: Alonso's accident. Difficult weather conditions! Erratic driving behind SC. FIA does not sanction Hamilton. Abnormal real tyre pressures after 1st pit stop. Overinflation. However, let's say that Hamilton was faster than Alonso, and luckier!

CHINA: Alonso faster than Hamilton, except Q3 by 0.6 sec! Tyre pressures used in Q3 appear to be overheated causing increase of pressure, measured at 1.5 psi - normally 0.2 psi. Max Mosley and FIA are aware of this and highly suspicious. Foul play, however, would be difficult to prove. Hamilton faster in Q3, but is that real or due to some sort of manipulation? The race as expected. From P1 usually you will maintain the momentum (independently of who you are). Poor tyre treatment: Hamilton was clearly abusing intermediate tyres, driving over dried tarmac, overheating and gradually destroying them. Yes, you get more speed that way but the life span greatly diminishes. And he paid for it. Bad luck, though.

FINALLY: There have been circuits were Alonso has been clearly faster during free practice, Q1, Q2 and most of Q3 until the very last lap, when Hamilton with the extra flying lap (less fuel, do not forget) has secured P1

[Rainmaster 7]

Well ... maure did call the thread "This will make your blood boil"...

Seems to me he has succeeded...

Yep.

Fair enough and I apologise, but...

I was prepared to give the guy the benefit of the doubt when he first joined and appeared to be winding up members of the board - But reading his posts over the past few weeks has led me to the conclusion that the guy is on here to deliberately antagonise.

For the most part I just ignore him and will continue to do so.

No worries with me mate, I completely understand. Not a bad idea, ignoring him.

[YHR 0]

I don't agree with civilised debate at all costs. This isn't PC Canada. An idiot should be told to improve themselves, for everyone's benefit.

I doubt very much he is an idiot, and will go as far as to say he doesn't enjoy being called one.

Name calling is the first sign of defeat. I am not sure what his motives were, but I bet he is laughing his a## off with some of these vitriol responses to him.

[YHR 0]

I would think it would be better to state the facts and let them speak. It is far more effective to let the reader to come to his own conclusion about the personalities involved, then to point a finger, and have your own intregity and motives questioned.

[Fed up 0]

I would think it would be better to state the facts and let them speak. It is far more effective to let the reader to come to his on conclusion about the personalities involved, then to point a finger, and have your own intregity and motives questioned.

You will soon come to the same conclusion - 99% of the forum can't be wrong

[maure 1]

Hmm, did I say Mclaren? Or did I say 'opinions'? - the quotation marks are a clue. Personally, I don't see the point of going around saying a load of rubbish just to provoke argument, which is clearly what you are (quite successfully) doing. Well done to you, but anyone can make up a load of stuff and shout it in the street, intelligent people back up arguments with evidence. Speaking of, do you have any yet?

Here is what you consider "making up stuff".

- McLaren has been found guilty of espionage.

- RD has uneqivocally confessed that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

- The season has been compromised, if nothing else, by the lack of credibility of first, RD, then McLaren, and finally, FIA.

[maure 1]

I see Maure taking a lot of trash talk and personal insults, but I don't think he himself has slung any at any member????? I kind of favour guys who don't take THINGS TO A PERSONAL LEVEL. Civil debate is about the issues.

I admit this is along drawn out thread that doesn't interest me much, so I might have missed something, but with just a quick read I noticed a lot of trashed aimed at the individual who is maure.

Too bad guys have to sink to that level.

Agreed!

A litttle surprised at the reaction of certain members also.

Too Bad!

They can not help themselves. Insults is apparently and strangely all they have to offer.

Trust me that guy Maure is a real fool -

Another insult, just to prove you guys wrong.

[maure 1]

When did I say, you said he crossed it? did I?

You first point out that he made a mistake and he was never punished and if it were Nando, he would have been punished, and later on you tone down as Paul corrects you.

If you follow F1, you know that there is a good chance that Alonso (and most other drivers) would have been penalized. Just think of Monza last year.

The rest of your comment is wishful thinking.

[maure 1]

WTF? I quoted you, you said 'it would at least be amusing' - implying it was not amusing, you later said 'you have me laughing again' - the again meaning you were laughing for a second time, when earlier you said you weren't laughing!

You are amusing sometimes and others... not. For example, your insistance on pinning down a comma is boring.

It was a genuine and simple request to you to explain the severity of the punishments to Alonso, have they been severe?

Right or wrong, Hungary was gifted to Hamilton. A whole race is not severe punishment for you.

The same thing happened to Shumacher in Monaco and Alonso in Monza last year. No severe enough for you, though.

As for 'artificial' - I wanted you to explain how Hamilton's points are artificial, he has go them himself hasn't he?

There is of course, RD blatant and unarguable confession that his whole objective is to defeat Alonso.

So his performance 'went to crap' did it? You must have a loose definition of crap.

The claim was that Hamilton was not allowed to leech Alonso's data starting in Silverstone. If we don't count Hungary that was gifted to Hamilton (right or wrong), Alonso score higher in 5 consecutive races.

It is how Alonso close the gap, by the drop in performance from Hamilton.

So you started a thread so I could ignore Sharp's observations? Thanks for thinking of me. Seriously though, why start a thread if all you expect is to be ignored or insulted?

Because there were a few days to kill before MotoGP started. Now it has so you can take a break and relax. Soon you will be again denying that McLaren cheated, that RD naively confessed that he is doing all he can to defeat Alonso, etc, etc.

OK mate, your right, you've done nothing to start any of this - it's all one sided, not your fault at all, everyone is against you, they're all wrong etc etc.

And they all, every single one of them, agree with you?

Well, as a last desperate move, you choose as argument the lynch mob. Good job, my boy, good job.

[maure 1]

Yes I believe those sources.

Gullible indeed.

I haven't seen any contradictory articles, no.

Just think what you are saying right here.

I suspect the spanish press produce them, and you may feel free to show them to me.

I can't say. But it confirms that you think Spaniards are idiots for simply being Spaniards.

All I will conclude is that Alonso is a liar

See, you make me laugh again.

or small sections of the spanish press are corrupt, since the BBC is trusted worldwide and would never make up quotes.

Wow, you really have a bigotted take on the Spaniards.

Down, boy, down.

If your argument relies on the fact that the BBC does just that, then I think it's about as ludicrous as any argument ever can be.

No they haven't.

You are the only one claimimg that the nationality of sources equates to trustworthiness.

Icky.

Ron has always said McLaren give each driver equal chances to win.

RD has also said that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

I have not seen any evidence whatsoever that Alonso's tyre pressures were incorrect in Q3 for the Shanghai GP.

You mean other than RD's confession and that Alonso was easily faster except precisely Q3.

Again, considering all that has happened this season, any reasonable person would suspect something is going on... unless you have it out for Spaniards as a nation in which case you would simply... ignore it all away.

Notice how the word "yet" was inserted into my sentence. It was clearly an invitation for you to produce evidence to back up your position.

Again, McLaren has been found guilty of espionage and RD admitted unequivocally that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

The burden of proof falls on those, like you, that insist that all is well and fair.

I simply want to show how ridiculous your position is. I think my job is almost done.

You are truly endearing.

When Alonso himself says there's no foul play, I'm satisfied.

Only because it is convenient for you.

See how you ignore RD blatant admission of favoritism. Why not bring it up? Because you naively believe that if you ignore it then "your job is almost done"

This bit honestly made me laugh!

I'll take your word for it because I like to think the best of people.

[maure 1]

As expected, it is impossible not to find contradictory articles regarding Alonso.

Here is one where they claim that Alonso expects fould play:

http://totalf1.com/view-article.php?newsid=231900

The article is biased to the point of being infantile. You are gonna love it, Murray, being the goofy gullible big bear you are.

[maure 1]

Here is yet another article, this time from the F1Rejects site that I am sure some of you know of:

http://f1rejects.com/centrale/2007/china/index.html

I'll put here just the opening parragraphs. Follow the link and read it all. They dish it out to Alonso too, including accepting as truth RD's claim that Alonso tried to blackmail him.

--------------------------------------------------------

It's amazing what one DNF can do. For much of this weekend, it seemed as if the powers that be were doing their utmost to script a Lewis Hamilton title clincher in Shanghai. What they could not control, however, was another error of judgment from the rookie in relation to tyres in changeable weather, followed by an embarrassing mistake on pit entry. The end result is that, thanks to Kimi Raikkonen's fifth win of the year with Fernando Alonso coming 2nd, we now have a tense three-way decider in Brazil.

The Chinese GP weekend began in dramatic fashion, with Hamilton being tried by Youtube as a spectator's home video shed new light on the incident between Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel behind the Safety Car at Fuji, and prompted an investigation by the stewards into Lewis' driving. The video showed clearly that Hamilton had suddenly slowed dramatically and gone to the outside edge of the circuit, causing Webber to almost come to a standstill as Vettel ran into the back of the Red Bull.

As the race leader, it was Hamilton's prerogative to take whichever part of the track he chose, and this did not excuse Vettel from his sheer brain-fade in failing to watch where he was going. But what Lewis did was extremely dodgy, to say the least. He did exactly what you would expect from a car pulling off to retire from a mechanical failure, and in so doing he invited a typical motorway accident. He set the tone for all this 'sprint-stop' practice which, as we said in our Japanese GP review, the FIA must clamp down on.

And for a while, it looked as though surely Hamilton would get penalised, either with a grid penalty in China, or perhaps with some kind of time penalty added onto his Japan result, which would have handed the victory to Heikki Kovalainen. Webber voiced his anger at Lewis' antics and it seemed as though he was in the majority. But, strangely, after the Friday evening stewards meeting in Shanghai, Hamilton was let off the hook and Vettel had his ten-place grid penalty replaced by a mere reprimand!

Had Hamilton been penalised in some way, even if it retrospectively changed the result of the Japanese GP, we would have had no trouble with that. If subsequent evidence can ensure a just result, that is more important. Giancarlo Fisichella was awarded the 2003 Brazilian GP days after the race. In recent days, Floyd Landis has been stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title over a year after the event. Peter Brock was not awarded the 1987 Bathurst 1000 until six months after the race and several court appeals.

But how strange it was that the usually-draconian stewards decided to be so lenient! There were weird goings-on which suggested that other forces were at play. The FIA had apparently already been concerned at Fuji about Hamilton's Safety Car antics, after it emerged that race director Charlie Whiting had warned Kovalainen to stay clear of the erratic McLaren. Why, then, did the stewards fold and let both Hamilton and Vettel go? Why did Webber, who had been so vocal about it all, suddenly change his tune when called before the stewards?

The official line was that the FIA decided to be lenient because of the difficult conditions at Fuji. Excuse me - aren't these the best drivers in the world?!? More to the point, was Webber pressured by Red Bull (which of course owns Toro Rosso) to defend Vettel? Is Webber angling for a McLaren drive in 2008? Was the FIA bowing to these new Gen-Z stars in Hamilton and Vettel at the expense of the journeyman Webber? After all, even Bernie Ecclestone has melodramatically declared Hamilton to be the saviour of F1!

If you are of the majority view that the punishment meted out to McLaren over Spygate was unwarranted, and the not-quite-so-majority view that the FIA has rigged the constructors title to hand it to Ferrari, then this almost seemed to be the FIA trying to hand the drivers title to Hamilton, after intervening so one-sidedly in Hungary, and having taken no action against Lewis here. But if that was enough of a sickening thought, then Hamilton, Alonso and Ron Dennis were all doing their bit this weekend to reduce their own credibility and respectability.

During the steward's investigation, Hamilton came out in the press and bemoaned how he was being victimised having tried to

[Autumnpuma 0]

Bring back true fans of Alonso!

I am still a fan of his racecraft, which is still the best on the grid, in my opinion. I am not a fan of the man. Normally I wouldn't care about the failings of a racing driver, but I cannot stand someone who has no sense of sportsmanship. In my eyes, Alonso has no sense of sportsmanship. Again, this takes nothing away from him being a damned good racer.

Yah that sure helps. Come on guys raise the bar a little will you.

Admirable. I'll try it.

[Jean Todt 4]

I am still a fan of his racecraft, which is still the best on the grid, in my opinion. I am not a fan of the man. Normally I wouldn't care about the failings of a racing driver, but I cannot stand someone who has no sense of sportsmanship. In my eyes, Alonso has no sense of sportsmanship. Again, this takes nothing away from him being a damned good racer.

Admirable. I'll try it.

I agree with you. It is just that, he cannot accept the fact that he is getting beaten by his team-mate, something which he may not have got used to. Anyways, He is a fine racer, and one of the best to watch on sunday, sipping cold coffee, with your maid behind you serving it. Damn, cold coffee , I am fasting for Ramzan.

Back on topic. Alonso still has the chance to win the crown. Rather than going around outside people crying and whining, he should be going around makin friends in Woking and try and win the crown.

[Jean Todt 4]

I don't agree with civilised debate at all costs. This isn't PC Canada. An idiot should be told to improve themselves, for everyone's benefit.

agreed

[Jean Todt 4]

Here is what you consider "making up stuff".

- McLaren has been found guilty of espionage.

- RD has uneqivocally confessed that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

- The season has been compromised, if nothing else, by the lack of credibility of first, RD, then McLaren, and finally, FIA.

Proof?

[Jean Todt 4]

If you follow F1, you know that there is a good chance that Alonso (and most other drivers) would have been penalized. Just think of Monza last year.

The rest of your comment is wishful thinking.

Ho, is this Nascar forum? Sorry!

Again, you say, good chance! You cant be sure.

[Max Mosley 2]

Maure, your posts are of such a quality that I'm beginning to feel guilty for debating with you. All I'll say is that I think almost everything you've argued is totally unsubstantiated and highly implausible. I can see no one is ever going to convince you, and in fact I suspect you are a prank poster tbh. Anyway, the forum has enjoyed the entertainment, I'm sure, so thanks.

I can't say. But it confirms that you think Spaniards are idiots for simply being Spaniards.

Wow, you really have a bigotted take on the Spaniards.

You are the only one claimimg that the nationality of sources equates to trustworthiness.

Icky.

You're making yourself look ridiculous. I never said all Spaniards are idiots, and I don't think they are. No doubt there are a few idiots in Spain though, like any other country.

RD has also said that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

You mean other than RD's confession and that Alonso was easily faster except precisely Q3.

Again, McLaren has been found guilty of espionage and RD admitted unequivocally that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

See how you ignore RD blatant admission of favoritism. Why not bring it up? Because you naively believe that if you ignore it then "your job is almost done"

Ron has said no such thing. In fact he has clearly stated the opposite. I think you are getting confused with the nuances of English, and the confusion may well be deliberate.

And btw, there's more evidence that Alonso cheated than Ron.

As expected, it is impossible not to find contradictory articles regarding Alonso.

Here is one where they claim that Alonso expects fould play:

http://totalf1.com/view-article.php?newsid=231900

The article is biased to the point of being infantile. You are gonna love it, Murray, being the goofy gullible big bear you are.

Nonsense! They do not claim that Alonso expects that at all. In fact they go so far as to call the Spaniard "paranoid". Rather the "complaints" could equally well refer to the Spanish media and fans. Furthermore the guy quoted (Carlos Garc

[yurp 0]

- Hamilton has enjoyed is 7 against 2 of Alonso. What do Murray and the other lewisterics have to say?.... silence.

First - disclaimer...

I am not and never have been a fan of Alo, Ham, Rai, Mas - infact last driver I actually had time for was Eddie Ivine and then only for the tenuous reason that he got thumped by Senna - ha - funny.

Second - two points that occured to me reading the original post.

i) I would guess that McLaren / Lewis supporters would say that Lewis has been leading the championship almost during those races where he was given the extra lap in Q3. Alonso got those extra laps when he was leading Hamilton in the standing. That pretty much runs as a good pattern through the season and would make sense. If any team wanted their driver to win the WDC then they'd probably opt for giving the extra lap in Q3 to their leading driver. To be fair - I probably would too.

ii) I think this was actually mentioned earlier... Ferrari (and for that matter, any other team) statistics probably tell the same story.

Like I say - I DON'T support ANY driver and I DON'T support ANY team. I just like good races, and a bit of healthy debate.

Edit - yep, concerning point (i) - just checked it out.

Out of the 16 races so far Hamilton and Alonso have come to 3 race weekends on equal points.

At 2 GP Alonso has come to the race weekend ahead on points.

Hamilton has entered 11 weekends ahead on points.

If McLaren were giving the extra Q3 lap to the driver ahead in the championship (which, I would think, could be a sensible tactic) Then 7-2 in favour of Hamilton would actually be rather kind to Alonso. The test of this theory would have been if they had given 7 Q3 extra laps to Alonso had he been ahead during most of this year. Since they gave him the extra laps at the start of the season (when he was ahead) this would kind of suggest that McLaren were following this strategy from the start irrespective of who it benefitted.

I'm not saying the Alonso's been treated completely fairly, but I think this argument might be a non-starter since one could say that had Alonso won more races at the start of the season, he would have been ahead and given the benefit of the extra Q3 lap.

I repeat - I DON'T support ANY driver and I DON'T support ANY team. So don't tell me I'm an FA hater or a LH hater or a McLaren lover please.

[pabloh20 1]

First - disclaimer...

I am not and never have been a fan of Alo, Ham, Rai, Mas - infact last driver I actually had time for was Eddie Ivine and then only for the tenuous reason that he got thumped by Senna - ha - funny.

Second - two points that occured to me reading the original post.

i) I would guess that McLaren / Lewis supporters would say that Lewis has been leading the championship almost during those races where he was given the extra lap in Q3. Alonso got those extra laps when he was leading Hamilton in the standing. That pretty much runs as a good pattern through the season and would make sense. If any team wanted their driver to win the WDC then they'd probably opt for giving the extra lap in Q3 to their leading driver. To be fair - I probably would too.

ii) I think this was actually mentioned earlier... Ferrari (and for that matter, any other team) statistics probably tell the same story.

Like I say - I DON'T support ANY driver and I DON'T support ANY team. I just like good races, and a bit of healthy debate.

Oh man, you were doing so well up until that point. I've been enjoying your posts up until then, now I feel like I've just been duped by a cheap person of ill repute!

Edit: Thought I better edit my initial response

[monza gorilla 1]

I have a theory.

[Rainmaster 7]

Here is what you consider "making up stuff".

- McLaren has been found guilty of espionage.

- RD has uneqivocally confessed that his sole objective is to defeat Alonso.

- The season has been compromised, if nothing else, by the lack of credibility of first, RD, then McLaren, and finally, FIA.

Mclaren has been found guilty of espionage, that is true, but your claiming that Mclaren are favouring (parity wise) Hamilton - there is no concrete proof for this, it's just your theory, it has some weight - but it is not recognised by anyone (apart from yourself!) that this is fact. Don't state your opinions as facts, it is quite annoying (almost to the point of boiling my blood - not). I agree, the season has been compromised.

WTF? I quoted you, you said 'it would at least be amusing' - implying it was not amusing, you later said 'you have me laughing again' - the again meaning you were laughing for a second time, when earlier you said you weren't laughing!

You are amusing sometimes and others... not. For example, your insistance on pinning down a comma is boring.

It was a genuine and simple request to you to explain the severity of the punishments to Alonso, have they been severe?

Right or wrong, Hungary was gifted to Hamilton. A whole race is not severe punishment for you.

The same thing happened to Shumacher in Monaco and Alonso in Monza last year. No severe enough for you, though.

That's all's I wanted, a straight answer on why you thought the punishment was severe. You are of course entitled to your opinion, severe is a subjective thing, but Alonso didn't lose 'a whole race', his race srategy was compromised and he lost some points. For me, the punishment was unnecessary, and the only way it could be described as 'severe', is because it shouldn't of been given in the first place, but as a standalone punishment - it wasn't that 'severe' - unlike a race ban for example.

'You are amusing sometimes and others...not' - no need for the 'and others...not' - the 'sometimes' is enough.

As for 'artificial' - I wanted you to explain how Hamilton's points are artificial, he has go them himself hasn't he?

There is of course, RD blatant and unarguable confession that his whole objective is to defeat Alonso.

It is 'arguable', just because Dennis would prefer Hamilton to win, doesn't mean he doesn't give equal treatment - there isn't any concrete evidence, a few quotes from Alonso doesn't prove much, he has a motive (a very good one) to say 'Mclaren are favouring Hamilton', he has however given comments to the very respectable and usually balanced Autosport (international) saying 'I expect equality in Brazil'. Now, what would Alonso have to gain by saying that? Nothing, which leads me to believe he is telling the truth, as you say though, drivers statements are often contradictory.

So his performance 'went to crap' did it? You must have a loose definition of crap.

The claim was that Hamilton was not allowed to leech Alonso's data starting in Silverstone. If we don't count Hungary that was gifted to Hamilton (right or wrong), Alonso score higher in 5 consecutive races.

It is how Alonso close the gap, by the drop in performance from Hamilton.

I agree, partially. Hamilton's performance may of 'dropped', but I just wanted you to elaborate as to how exactly it went to 'crap'. It wasn't 'crap', just not as good as Alonso, the reverse is true for Alonso in the first part of the season (that is Alonso's performance wasn't consistantly as good as Lewis', but it wasn't 'crap'). I just didn't think the word 'crap' was the right way of describing it, when you use words like that - it makes you seem like a Hamilton hater.

So you started a thread so I could ignore Sharp's observations? Thanks for thinking of me. Seriously though, why start a thread if all you expect is to be ignored or insulted?

Because there were a few days to kill before MotoGP started. Now it has so you can take a break and relax. Soon you will be again denying that McLaren cheated, that RD naively confessed that he is doing all he can to defeat Alonso, etc, etc.

OK mate, your right, you've done nothing to start any of this - it's all one sided, not your fault at all, everyone is against you, they're all wrong etc etc.

And they all, every single one of them, agree with you?

Well, as a last desperate move, you choose as argument the lynch mob. Good job, my boy, good job.

Thanks for reminding me the MotoGP is on. I don't know what 'you choose as argument the lynch mob' means, yes I agree with a lot of other members on some issues raised in this thread, are you saying just because there is a greater number of *them* than you, I shouldn't agree with them? Pah. I have a right to express my opinion just like you, if I happen to agree with others why can't I say that as well?

I still, out of interest, would like to know which parts of the article you disagree on - please reveal.

[goferrarigo 0]

I have a theory.

You do???????

[monza gorilla 1]

Yes, but it must remain a secret. Until it is proven. Which may take a while.