Donkey of the Race (Canada GP Edition)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

For me that isn't an apology is the proof of lack of brain as it was obvious that he DID cost Kimi the race!

---

As I said elsewhere, making comments about a 'lack of brain' in relation to Hamilton is not the best way to discourage others from making similarly unnecessary comments about Massa's 'lack of talent', etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

As I said elsewhere, making comments about a 'lack of brain' in relation to Hamilton is not the best way to discourage others from making similarly unnecessary comments about Massa's 'lack of talent', etc.

---

They talk what they wish about Massa's talent, he has given a strong answer on the track. I'm getting tired of people hitting the same guy no matter if he does well or bad.

Hamilton is doing himself no favors, not on the track nor in the press.
I don't dislike him for his race craft but for his arrogance and apparent lack of thinking. The day he proves he's using his cognitive capabilities I'll acknowledge it.

"I apologise to Kimi if I ruined his race. I would rather neither of us be out. I was so quick I was breezing it."

From the esteemed and unbiased Beeb Sport site
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/moto...ne/7443089.stm

:)

"I apologies to Kimi!" Would have been just perfect. I suppose he just couldn't say it! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

:laugh:

What you have to remember is that ioan is mature enough to change his mind depending on evidence. The fact that this opinion can change within a couple of sentences is commendable and has nothing to do with any preconceived bias or favouritism :p :

---

This is hilarious. A few pro-Hamsandwich people turn up and suddenly the truth is what they want it to be.......

Personally I think Button would have breezed it and I'm going to get a few people to say the same so we can pretend it's the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

For me that isn't an apology is the proof of lack of brain as it was obvious that he DID cost Kimi the race!

---

If you stop criticising Lewis for not using his brain, start using your own and actually read my post, you would realise that I pointed out that the usage of the word 'if' in Lewis' quote meant that the apology was conditional on Lewis ruining Kimi's race. Lewis clearly did ruin Kimi's race, as you so kindly point out, and so it is a valid apology.

Certainly, though, it was not stated in such bald terms as you seem to require.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

This is hilarious. A few pro-Hamsandwich people turn up and suddenly the truth is what they want it to be.......

Personally I think Button would have breezed it and I'm going to get a few people to say the same so we can pretend it's the truth.

---

Hamsandwich???

Daniel, I know you struggle sometimes but please try and make a point in your post instead of childish rhetoric.

What truth are you pretending with? That Button would win? Unlikely.

However, Lewis, coming out in 3rd with more fuel than the other 2, would have had a good chance of winning. Similarly, Robert and Kimi had a good opportunity to do the same.

Lewis was the quickest at the weekend and I feel he had a good opportunity to win. Don't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Hamsandwich???

Daniel, I know you struggle sometimes but please try and make a point in your post instead of childish rhetoric.

What truth are you pretending with? That Button would win? Unlikely.

However, Lewis, coming out in 3rd with more fuel than the other 2, would have had a good chance of winning. Similarly, Robert and Kimi had a good opportunity to do the same.

Lewis was the quickest at the weekend and I feel he had a good opportunity to win. Don't you?

---

Hamsandwich. It's like the worlds hamilton and sandwich combined. Strange concept I know.

My talk of button is what we in the English speaking world call an "example". Sometimes in English it is necessary not to take what people say too literally as they may be using a piece of text as an example. As in if I got a group of people together and said Button had the race in the bag I could claim it was the truth just as you have said that Hamsandwich had the race in the bag even though he was behind 2 other drivers more than capable of keeping him behind.

What's with the attitude Danny? ^^^

Bourdais: Awful showing in a race I thought he would have been beating down on Vettel. Unfortunately, Bourdais brought his temper from CCWS and threw his hand up in frustration at one of his pit members after a mix-up. Last time I checked everyone was on the same team!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Hamsandwich. It's like the worlds hamilton and sandwich combined. Strange concept I know.

My talk of button is what we in the English speaking world call an "example". Sometimes in English it is necessary not to take what people say too literally as they may be using a piece of text as an example. As in if I got a group of people together and said Button had the race in the bag I could claim it was the truth just as you have said that Hamsandwich had the race in the bag even though he was behind 2 other drivers more than capable of keeping him behind.

---

Ignoring your immature name calling then, what evidence do you offer to support you claim that:

1. I claimed that Lewis had the race in the bag
2. The other 2 drivers would have kept him behind
3. The extra speed that Lewis demonstrated coupled with the extra fuel he was carrying would not have been a winning strategy

For the record, I claimed that all 3 of them had a good chance of pulling off the win and quantified it with reasons you can read. You come up with unrealistic examples with nothing to substantiate your claim and then try to deflect away with some dictionary reference :confused:

There is a very good saying that says basically says that when you have nothing of substance to say, it’s not a good idea to say it. ;)