Like not chopping yer hands off for coveting they neighbours wife etc? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Printable View
Like not chopping yer hands off for coveting they neighbours wife etc? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Yeah, something along that line, like the death sentence!Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Obviously a McLaren or Hamilton winning a title would have been good press, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
You seem to be forgetting that for their shenanigans McLaren were fined $100 million.
But lets not go into that.
What crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Max stated that the FIA needed him to negotiate the deal purely because he needs to save his own arse at the general assembly tomorrow.
Although having said that, Max should sue NOTW and other persons involved for all they're worth, whoever they are.
This will be the outcome, and don't forget you heard it from me first: Those voting for Max will vote he stays, those against Max will abstain, and Max will remain as President because he will claim he has an almost unanimous support.
Well, then that would go against what some have already seemingly announced as their "no" on Max vote.... :confused: :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
could it be that they are now afraid of loss of position or perhaps, afraid that Max and/or the fia will sue them, :eek: add them in along with his other lawsuits against Brundle and NOTW and all the rest? :rolleyes:
dunno!! I dreamt it last night.
That's crap, and I bet he knows more about the negotiations than you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malllen
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008...ne.motorsportsQuote:
Motorsport's governing body is deeply divided on whether to retain Max Mosley as its president, according to a poll carried out by the Guardian...Having canvassed 100 of the 222 clubs which make up the FIA general assembly, the Guardian can reveal that 37% wanted him to go, 25% were set to vote in his favour, 9% were either undecided or not qualified to take part in the voting procedure and 29% declined to comment
Let's see what members here wants (poll added) ;)
Let's clear this up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
My view stems from a few of these facts:
- Max and Bernie have pretty much seen eye to eye in relation to the sport since about 1980.
- Bernie wouldn't suddenly whip out a headline that'd do nothing but ultimately harm the sport. Which would harm his finances. This is plain logic.
- Max, who is a politically cunning creature, obviously wants to retain his position as the FIA president. So obviously those claims were based on some degree of political motive.
Do you not think that Bernie (who "declared war" according to you) could simply have been retaliating to claims by Mosley that were incorrect?
Though of course this is all just speculation. None of us here are experts!