Whats going to Happen at Mercedes

I am with you in that 100%

I too really hope he wins this title

And one final note, I'm okay with someone that has made two mistakes winning the championship. I'm not okay with someone who cheated twice and got away with it to his benefit winning the championship. I genuinely didn't mind who won the WDC this year at the start of the season because I really liked Nico and I really liked Lewis. From Monaco onwards I have been in Lewis's camp though and, to be honest, if it were Lewis that had cheated I'd be really disappointed in him as it's his integrity which endears me to support him now. After what we saw yesterday, I'm pretty confident that were it not for Lewis having difficulties in qualifying over the last number of races which put him on the back foot that we would have seen a lot more of this sort of thuggery from Nico.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Malicious intent was very clear. You go back one lap earlier where Vettel was in a similar situation and he had the smarts to go wide across the kerb. Rosberg could have done the same and carried on to fight another lap with Hamilton. He didn't and he knew exactly what he was doing. You're underestimating these drivers and exactly how good they are if you think they can't judge things like this to within the inch. Rosberg is one of the best drivers in the world and he knew full well that his wing was going to be damaged when he hit Hamilton's wheel, but he also knew that, no matter what happened, he probably wasn't going to come off as bad as Hamilton with a punctured tire. Yes, there was a minor chance that he could have come out the worse but that was very unlikely given the angle he was slicing the wheel at.

It's clear to me now that Rosberg is a dirty rotten cheat. The Monaco incident was clear enough but this one makes it 100% clearer again. The FIA must act on this and so must his team. This kind of behavior is bad for the sport. Not alone that, but Rosberg has now sent out a message that he intends to use his car as a weapon for the remaining 7 races. It could result in someone getting killed or worse so he must be sanctioned. With 8 races to go there was no need for this to be done. He's made it clear that he knows in a straight fight he can't beat Hamilton on pace so he is going to resort to dirty tricks. Lets face it, he hasn't actually beaten Hamilton all year really except for Austria where Hamilton beat himself by messing up in qualifying. He may have beaten him in Silverstone but given Hamilton's pace at the time Rosberg retired it's difficult to see Rosberg having kept him behind.

Anyway, all that aside, action needs to be taken here or it brings the sport into disrepute. And lets face it, F1 is dying as a sport as it is. Television viewing figures are down, half the stalls are empty when you go to races. I normally go to 7 or 8 races a year myself and I haven't bothered this year because seeing Vettel win 9 races in a row just killed my love for the sport somewhat. At least he's getting shown up this year. Action needs to be taken by the FIA now on this.

---

TBH it's posts like this and fans accusing the FIA of bias that brings the sport into disrepute much more than the incident does. Because when you are anyone else takes the point of view that you KNOW Nico intentionally caused the accident, you are overstepping the bounds of reality. You cannot know what Nico's intentions were any more than I can know your thoughts.

But in this and other posts you attach that suspicion as fact, and it just fuels the fire. Then you further embellish your opinion to the point you claim Nico is going to use the car as a weapon and might kill someone. That is no more fair than me claiming that since you are upset you are a danger to people in your work place or home, since IMO (opinion not stated as fact) you are more emotional than the situation warrants, which could results in erratic actions.


Read your post and reverse the situation. If I stated that strongly that Lewis caused the accident on purpose and tried to kill Nico, would you find it a reasonable thing to state?



I think Nico was the primary cause of the accident, and probably could have avoided it. But I think it was just that, and accident when racing hard. And I've said from the season start I think Lewis is the better driver on track, and would overcome the early points deficit. But at this point letting Nico get in his head is the worst thing he can do. And for any Hamilton fan to give up and join his battle of words, I feel they are making the same mistake Lewis is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

TBH it's posts like this and fans accusing the FIA of bias that brings the sport into disrepute much more than the incident does. Because when you are anyone else takes the point of view that you KNOW Nico intentionally caused the accident, you are overstepping the bounds of reality. You cannot know what Nico's intentions were any more than I can know your thoughts.

But in this and other posts you attach that suspicion as fact, and it just fuels the fire. Then you further embellish your opinion to the point you claim Nico is going to use the car as a weapon and might kill someone. That is no more fair than me claiming that since you are upset you are a danger to people in your work place or home, since IMO (opinion not stated as fact) you are more emotional than the situation warrants, which could results in erratic actions.


Read your post and reverse the situation. If I stated that strongly that Lewis caused the accident on purpose and tried to kill Nico, would you find it a reasonable thing to state?



I think Nico was the primary cause of the accident, and probably could have avoided it. But I think it was just that, and accident when racing hard. And I've said from the season start I think Lewis is the better driver on track, and would overcome the early points deficit. But at this point letting Nico get in his head is the worst thing he can do. And for any Hamilton fan to give up and join his battle of words, I feel they are making the same mistake Lewis is.

---

Actually I never stated that Nico tried to kill Lewis, nor did I ever think it. You just fueled that fire yourself. But on that note, no, I don't believe he was trying to kill Lewis.

And I never said that the FIA are biased either, I'm just saying that they lack the balls to do anything, the same way that Davidson didn't have the balls to come out and say that he felt Nico did it on purpose.

If you really feel this way, then you must feel that Schumacher was innocent in Jerez 97? There is no proof that he swerved into hit JV intentionally, you can't possibly know what he was thinking at the time, you're just looking at on-board footage. Rosberg swerved into Hamilton, much the same way Schumacher swerved into JV. If you believe one to be innocent, surely you believe the other to be as well?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

caused by glazing on his brakes rather than errors he made himself

---

Wouldn't be too surprised if it wasn't that evil German cheat who went and glazed our Ham's brakes the night before in order to pip him to pole on Saturday! :devil: :andrea:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Actually I never stated that Nico tried to kill Lewis, nor did I ever think it. You just fueled that fire yourself. But on that note, no, I don't believe he was trying to kill Lewis.

---

Nor did I claim you said Nico tried to kill Lewis. I simply stated that your comment about Nico intending to use his car as a weapon was out of line. And to clarify my reason for stating that, refer to your own post:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Not alone that, but Rosberg has now sent out a message that he intends to use his car as a weapon for the remaining 7 races. It could result in someone getting killed or worse so he must be sanctioned.

---

There is little if any grey area in the above. You are accusing a driver (for those that have forgotten another human being) of malicious intent. Understanding that there is bad blood between the drivers, we know there is tension there. But really that above statement would be like me claiming that I know you will intentionally beat your ex girlfriend because I can give an example of a time you were angry with her. It's a malicious statement claiming to understand the intent of a person when in fact we can't know the intent of that person.

For the record, if Nico had in fact admitted to causing or allowing the collision, it would completely change my point of view. But I'm not going to condemn him based on a maybe, or any speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

And I never said that the FIA are biased either, I'm just saying that they lack the balls to do anything, the same way that Davidson didn't have the balls to come out and say that he felt Nico did it on purpose.

If you really feel this way, then you must feel that Schumacher was innocent in Jerez 97? There is no proof that he swerved into hit JV intentionally, you can't possibly know what he was thinking at the time, you're just looking at on-board footage. Rosberg swerved into Hamilton, much the same way Schumacher swerved into JV. If you believe one to be innocent, surely you believe the other to be as well?

---

Did the FIA lack balls in handing out penalties for the Spygate scandal, or Flavio's race fixing? They certainly didn't lack balls after the Jerez incident either. Like many I often don't agree with the FIA decisions, but in black and white cases supported by evidence hard to dispute they do act, and often hand out very harsh penalties. Personally in the case of Jerez I think it was intentional, but feel absolute evidence was lacking in proving that without any doubt.


But as an example, do you think Alonso should be harshly treated by the FIA for running into the back of Vettel at Spa? He tried to put his car where it wouldn't fit, and impacted Vettel from behind with his wing running into Vettels tire. Yet I've seen no claims that he has shown he will use his car as a weapon and could kill someone. I wonder why that is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Nor did I claim you said Nico tried to kill Lewis. I simply stated that your comment about Nico intending to use his car as a weapon was out of line. And to clarify my reason for stating that, refer to your own post:

---

Read your post and reverse the situation. If I stated that strongly that Lewis caused the accident on purpose and tried to kill Nico, would you find it a reasonable thing to state?

Read your own post please before asking me to reread mine. If you're going to make a statement like the above after asking me to reverse the situation and not expect me, or anyone, to take from it that you are suggesting that I implied Nico tried to kill Hamilton then you need to be more careful in your phrasing. Quite frankly, I'm not sure what the point of the above statement was now. Feel free to clarify.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

There is little if any grey area in the above. You are accusing a driver (for those that have forgotten another human being) of malicious intent. Understanding that there is bad blood between the drivers, we know there is tension there. But really that above statement would be like me claiming that I know you will intentionally beat your ex girlfriend because I can give an example of a time you were angry with her. It's a malicious statement claiming to understand the intent of a person when in fact we can't know the intent of that person.

For the record, if Nico had in fact admitted to causing or allowing the collision, it would completely change my point of view. But I'm not going to condemn him based on a maybe, or any speculation.

---

He's a human being that already cheated in Monaco and, yes, I am accusing him of malicious intent. As for the beating of the ex girlfriends remark, I can't ever possibly think of a situation where someone beats another human being without intent. It's simply not in the same context. We're discussing something that a driver did to another driver. The question is whether there was intent. The answer is yes, there was, and that was clearly obvious from the moment it happened. Give me a logical explanation for the second turn of the wheel. Don't give me a "He couldn't have known he would hit Hamilton's tire" excuse. Rosberg is one of the best drivers in the world and knows exactly where his front wing is. Give me a proper explanation for turning in the second time please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Did the FIA lack balls in handing out penalties for the Spygate scandal, or Flavio's race fixing? They certainly didn't lack balls after the Jerez incident either. Like many I often don't agree with the FIA decisions, but in black and white cases supported by evidence hard to dispute they do act, and often hand out very harsh penalties. Personally in the case of Jerez I think it was intentional, but feel absolute evidence was lacking in proving that without any doubt.


But as an example, do you think Alonso should be harshly treated by the FIA for running into the back of Vettel at Spa? He tried to put his car where it wouldn't fit, and impacted Vettel from behind with his wing running into Vettels tire. Yet I've seen no claims that he has shown he will use his car as a weapon and could kill someone. I wonder why that is?

---

I'll tell ya what, if the FIA turn around and punish Rosberg I'll retract my statement that they lack balls. There have been many situations throughout the years, Monaco this year with Rosberg being one of them, where they have turned a blind eye. If they take action on this, then I'll retract my statement.

As for the Alonso incident, I don't believe he intentionally hit Vettel. Why would he? Unlike Nico, he had nothing to gain. It was a rare mistake from the most complete driver on the grid. We've already seen that Nico is predisposed to cheating this year and he gained 18 points in the championship lead because of what happened. He had plenty to gain from Lewis's exit. Plus once Alonso committed there was noway out for him. Nico always had a way out.

I think zako85's explanation for the second turn was good enough.

I've seen footage of the incident and it looks just like that.. like a racing incident.

However, the way Hamilton heard what he wanted to hear from whatever Rosberg told him and ran with it to media... I find that pathetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Ben

However, the way Hamilton heard what he wanted to hear from whatever Rosberg told him and ran with it to media... I find that pathetic.

---

I think many of us would like to see the transcript from that conversation as different versions or interpretations are being published by the media. I couldn't comment with any certainty or condemn a driver or team member for their statements because I haven't heard reliably what was said.

Would you mind sharing the transcript to allow us to discuss this a little more fairly?

Anything else? maybe some tea and cookies?