Maybe not the marshalling (of which the volunteers do an epic job), but there are other areas that can be called into question. In effect, the comments about that do come under the same Article 12.2.1 f,k. I cant see why/how you can decide who gets wrong for the comments they have made.AeroDynamic wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49no, because Horner lied on the Marshall and a lot more people than Hamilton, are questioning the FIA and Masi after last season. The structural changes speak to it. Has any other team, driver, or personal besides Horner, collectively called into question the marshalling?chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:40I guess you 'could' look at it that way. But why treat one differently to the other? If anyone wants to question the integrity of the sport and those running it, they should both be punished?AeroDynamic wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:38
I think Hamilton tells the truth and is genuine. Horner is the most widely known hocus-pocus peddler in the paddock. The FIA probably weren't in the mood for his nonsense.
Why though? if one can question a marshall and get punished...they why can one question the race director/fia and not get punished?kenshi_blind wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49I would say Hamilton is more than entitled to question the integrity of the Sport with what happened in AD.... Horner was just bullshitting as usual... the two actions are not on the same level
I'd be willing to bet he chose his words very carefully, or even ran them past the team Lawers/PR specialists. He claimed no misdeeds on the part of any official, just that he "lost a little bit of faith within the system".chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:31But Hamilton is allowed to question the integrity of the FIA, admitting he's lost faith in them, and gets away with it?
https://the-race.com/formula-1/hamilton ... fter-2021/
I'm not the FIA, so I cannot speak for how they discern what is crossing the line. I just know that Marko accused the FIA of being biased towards Mercedes and I don't think he got in any trouble. Something about calling the Marshall 'rogue' was really unprofessional.chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:57Maybe not the marshalling (of which the volunteers do an epic job), but there are other areas that can be called into question. In effect, the comments about that do come under the same Article 12.2.1 f,k. I cant see why/how you can decide who gets wrong for the comments they have made.AeroDynamic wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49no, because Horner lied on the Marshall and a lot more people than Hamilton, are questioning the FIA and Masi after last season. The structural changes speak to it. Has any other team, driver, or personal besides Horner, collectively called into question the marshalling?
Why though? if one can question a marshall and get punished...they why can one question the race director/fia and not get punished?kenshi_blind wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49I would say Hamilton is more than entitled to question the integrity of the Sport with what happened in AD.... Horner was just bullshitting as usual... the two actions are not on the same level
Little off tangent with that....but hopefully the FIA decide to punish Lewis for not turning up. Otherwise you can then get others questioning the decisions for not punishing for following the sporting codes.
Ummm one was robbed. He had a right not go to the Ceremony. I would not. Going would mean you have accepted injustice. He was standing up for what was right. Also in some way it was beneficial for Max and the FIA that Hamilton did not go to the ceremony.chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:40AeroDynamic wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:38chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:31
Its interesting you mentioned that.... Horner got into trouble for criticising the marshalls about a 'rougue flag that went out' Got into trouble.
But Hamilton is allowed to question the integrity of the FIA, admitting he's lost faith in them, and gets away with it?
https://the-race.com/formula-1/hamilton ... fter-2021/
Certainly be interesting to see what the come up with. What are the sanctions for breaking the sporting code around Prize giving?
I think Hamilton tells the truth and is genuine. Horner is the most widely known hocus-pocus peddler in the paddock. The FIA probably weren't in the mood for his nonsense.
I guess you 'could' look at it that way. But why treat one differently to the other? If anyone wants to question the integrity of the sport and those running it, they should both be punished?
You seem to be thirsting for some misfortune for Hamilton.chrisc90 wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:57Maybe not the marshalling (of which the volunteers do an epic job), but there are other areas that can be called into question. In effect, the comments about that do come under the same Article 12.2.1 f,k. I cant see why/how you can decide who gets wrong for the comments they have made.AeroDynamic wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49no, because Horner lied on the Marshall and a lot more people than Hamilton, are questioning the FIA and Masi after last season. The structural changes speak to it. Has any other team, driver, or personal besides Horner, collectively called into question the marshalling?
Why though? if one can question a marshall and get punished...they why can one question the race director/fia and not get punished?kenshi_blind wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 22:49I would say Hamilton is more than entitled to question the integrity of the Sport with what happened in AD.... Horner was just bullshitting as usual... the two actions are not on the same level
Little off tangent with that....but hopefully the FIA decide to punish Lewis for not turning up. Otherwise you can then get others questioning the decisions for not punishing for following the sporting codes.
You're rating a pure opinion (professionalism) with a definite value (100%). You must either be 12 years old and as naive as a puppy or are just... ill informed at best.wogx wrote: ↑28 Feb 2022, 15:53
Is Russell more professional at his age? I'm 100% sure. We won't see Twitter dramas set up by him, he won't post telemetrical data online. If Lewis started his career in 2018, at Russell's age, would he made a PowerPoint presentation for Toto? Once more time - I doubt it.
I have to stop you right there. Yes! Where have you been?!
“I had a great five years with Lewis as his team-mate, and now actually thinking about it, it was an honour,” Bottas said. “Like, he’s a living legend!
“And he’s a great guy and great driver. Really fast. He definitely made me work hard to try and beat him.
“Sometimes I could, but on a season average, I couldn’t. So that’s how it goes.
“You always meet, eventually, someone who’s better than you and you need to accept it.
"And I’m fine with it. I’m happy that sometimes when I was at my best that I could beat him.
“But we came a long way. We achieved so much together, so many 1-2 results. Five constructors’ championships together.
“I learned from him about life and about racing, and maybe vice versa as well. So, it was a really good time with him.”
And Bottas has warned rival drivers to “beware” Hamilton’s determination as he bids to bounce back and win a record-breaking eighth crown this season.
“After everything that happened at the end of last year, you’ll see,” Bottas added.
“He’s going to be pretty strong and he’s going to have the fire inside him – so, beware!
Ad hominem/responding to tone is a weak rhetorical strategy, mate. It shows that you don't agree with my words, but you don't have a counterargument to defend your opinion.
I do, for example in france 2019 he was so overzealous to overtake his handicapped and obviously inferior teammate, that he lost the car and ended up taking out a foam brake point marker. He was lucky to getaway with little to no damage.
Hamilton almost winning the title in his rookie season, and absolutely ruffling the feathers of a 2 time world champion should tell you all you need to know.