Completely wrong backwards rewriting of reality to feel better about not so great performance of a favourite driver, business as usual in alternative internet realities. "In the races not affected" = as selective as it gets twisting of facts until desired result appears (reminds me of excluding Austria from qualifying speed comparison in some thread). Why?
1, Not all 'problems" are the same but let's lump them together, like local television commentators did with qualifying failures and technical problems - they were all called "problems"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/39ae2/39ae2f29de13e91858e3ed371269b09d2e1e9210" alt="Laughing :lol:"
, even funnier were selective statistics, instead of qualifying head to head they used poles, excluding Austria of course, same with wins (it was here I think) excluding Spa and Canada etc. etc.
2. Timing and dynamic is crucial - races after Singapore when Rosberg wins, is second at worst or Hamilton has servicing substance contamination (which would have been exactly the same thing!) would have looked like differently.
It's a waste of time to argue with this kind of mentality, I tried it once, step by step with tyres in Hungary, it's like banging your head against a wall and it was only one race
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c17d/0c17d8229049d2323b4ee9c4ee76e5c8074c85fa" alt="d'oh! #-o"
. Repeat that with 19, 19 not BS selective 10? No thank you, so I'll add only one question just for the sake of it: - from team's perspective would mechanical failure for Hamilton in Abu Dhabi be exactly the same as it was for Rosberg? Hint: yes of course, because (again) it's exactly the same thing, reality: no, not really.