He Doesn't Deserve It!!!

will it become unfashionable to be in the vegetable club if it grows too much?

Do we have to grow vegetables in real life? Like on an allotment or something?

I think there have been a couple of unsavoury things from Rosberg this season (just my opinion) but I think it doesn't sit with his character. I actually like the guy, and rate the guy in general.

Think he's kept Hamilton honest despite the gap in no. of wins, and think he's proven to be a genuine title contender Hamilton is by a good little distance the better driver imo, but maybe I've got a far greater opinion of Rosberg in terms of where he'd fit in amongst the very good drivers on this grid

comment by Welshy (U1348)
posted 5 hours, 30 minutes ago
of course Hamilton deserves this title

So Mercedes have had the dominant car, but that's not the first time or last time that will happen. McLaren late 80's, Williams mid 90's, McLaren late 90's, Ferrari early 00's, RedBull early 10's.

The difference being to most of those (with McLaren late 80's being an obvious exception, maybe Williams mid 90's too?) is that Mercedes let their drivers race each other with no team-orders, no No.1/No. 2.

If this championship is cheap then heaven forbid what that says about Schumacher's/Vettel's/Mansell's/Prost's 4th title
----------------------------------------------------------------------

yeh --- fair play to merc for allowing the drivers to race welshy hats must be doffed to merc for that as team orders do nothing for the credibility of the sport -

as to the other drivers you mentioned , you always got the impression that red bull played it fairly fair with both drivers and let them race ,

historically williams have always played it fair and in all honesty i just believe mansell truly mastered the active suspension on his FW14 and decimated patrese on merit in 1992

from the race footage of 1993 you have to also say that hill was allowed to fight prost for the title and did put up a pretty good show on occasions against such a master -

Must agree with you about schumacher , his whole career was just one big fake phoney manufactured farce of team orders and weak team mates that were never allowed to race him and for me his titles are phoney and have very little credibility --

I got the impression that all was fair in 2010 between Vettel & Webber, but the gap after that I can't personally put down purely to ability.

Webber indicated where the favourite within the team lay, and I darn well hope we have an autobiography soon - would be a fascinating read.

On Prost - I actually think Hill could have had Prost that year - 3 retirements in a row from Hill whilst leading?

Personally I think Prost is actually a tad overrated - think Mansell was just as good doubt if many would agree though.

As for Schumacher - I think 96/97 proved how good a driver he was, and would be in my top 3 since I started watching F1 in 1992.

Senna/Hamilton/Schumacher

I rate Alonso/Prost - just not as highly as others

MartialThcko is an embarrassment.

He judges other people's intelligence by posting his own utter stupid views.

Neanderthals were not intelligent, damp squids, dogs on leases, Gettysburg address was long drawn out, Monaco low downforce,

I will have pleasure in awarding the Marty award to the JA606 member that tried to get as much wrong about F1 as MartialDickhead. Tough call I know but AnfieldRap gets it by being right on his predictions but missing the deadlines.

comment by Welshy (U1348)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
I got the impression that all was fair in 2010 between Vettel & Webber, but the gap after that I can't personally put down purely to ability.

Webber indicated where the favourite within the team lay, and I darn well hope we have an autobiography soon - would be a fascinating read.

On Prost - I actually think Hill could have had Prost that year - 3 retirements in a row from Hill whilst leading?

Personally I think Prost is actually a tad overrated - think Mansell was just as gooddoubt if many would agree though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

you have to judge prost on his whole career and not just on 93 welshy , from what i gather his mindset for that year was he knew he was the red hot favourite with zero competition in the FW15 but with all the slightly unreliable cutting edge technology in the car just set out to win the title whilst being as sympathetic with the machinery as he possibly could -

yeh -- mansell was very good with similar ability and mentality to the current lewis hamilton , i actually think mansell was slightly better than hamilton but that is another story ,

----------------- in reality prost did have a little to much in his vast armoury for mansell when they were teamed up at ferrari in 1990 and the frenchman really should have sown up his 4th title that year given the superiority of his technology advanced 641 chassis over the rest of the field -

Nah Hamilton>Mansell imo but both proper racers

comment by WTCBU (U13662)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
MartialThcko is an embarrassment.

He judges other people's intelligence by posting his own utter stupid views.

Neanderthals were not intelligent, damp squids, dogs on leases, Gettysburg address was long drawn out, Monaco low downforce,

I will have pleasure in awarding the Marty award to the JA606 member that tried to get as much wrong about F1 as MartialDickhead. Tough call I know but AnfieldRap gets it by being right on his predictions but missing the deadlines.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry folks

you know who is following me around on here with his usual infantile mindless unprovoked abuse and bile towards other forum members for absolutely no reason -

---------- truly pathetic behavior by somebody in his mid 60s
--- sorry folks

comment by Welshy (U1348)
posted 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
As for Schumacher - I think 96/97 proved how good a driver he was, and would be in my top 3 since I started watching F1 in 1992.

Senna/Hamilton/Schumacher

I rate Alonso/Prost - just not as highly as others

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

yeh must admit micheal was good in 1996 , but in reality the john barnard designed car was very , very quick with a brilliant chassis but ultimately fairly unreliable which prevented micheal from really challenging during 96

Micheals 97 310 chassis was also i believe the first rory byrne designed ferrari chassis that was designed around micheals driving style and make no mistake was an immensely quick machine that micheal could have won the title with given he was helped by williams not employing team orders for either HHF or j vill

---------------- but fair play to micheal he was very good in both those years -