F1 title decider- who do you want to win?

cafcdave123 said:

SoundAsa£ said:

cafcdave123 said:

randy andy said:

Simple fact was LH had to win and have NR finish 4th or lower. So with traffic hard on NR's tail Hamilton had to slow and force NR into a fight with those two. LH literally had no other choice. If he accelerates away then NR pulls clear of the chasing cars, get's second and wins the title.

The one without any class is NR asking the team to tell LH to speed up. Basically admitting that he wasn't confident he was good enough to hold of MV and SV and that he wasn't good enough to get past LH even if he was going slow.

It was unreasonable of Mercedes to ask LH to speed up just to make NR's day easier when LH still had a chance of winning the championship.

They didn't ask to make NR's life easier they gave team orders as Vettel was lapping fast enough to overtake them both and they didn't want to throw away the team 1-2.

Oh come on.....do you honestly believe Vettel could have passed Rosberg.....let alone Hamilton. They could have ditched him in half a lap.

The speed Hamilton was lapping yes, NR was having to drive very defensively.

I'm not saying LH did anything wrong as it was the only way he could win but all this shit about NR having a superior car or being favoured by the team is bollox.

You don't know that anymore than I or any F1 punters do. I myself find it highly unlikely, but you can't say for sure, it's within the realms of possibility given some of the strokes being pulled nowadays in world sport generally.
German car with a German driver....the team managed by a German.....it's at least feasible......though as I've already said, somewhat unlikely.

There is a big problem in motor racing when you have a dominant team and generally great reliability. Hamilton is a far better driver than Rosberg, but lost out because he had uncharacteristic reliability issues. But it is all too boring. We really need the other teams to catch up next season.

It wasn't a question of Rosberg looking after his car better at all. Hamilton had poor luck with reliability and it takes a lot of catching up if when you win, the other bloke keeps coming second.

harveys gardener said:

McBobbin said:

Didn't Hamilton move to Monaco to avoid paying tax here?

TBF he only earns a fraction of his pay here (Silverstone) plus he could negate a lot of tax with the HMRC sweetheart deals on image rights. Thousands or more big earners working permanently who pay bugger all tax.

Cheers. I realise it's very much an international sport. I just don't get excited that he's British

cafcdave123 said:

SoundAsa£ said:

cafcdave123 said:

I appreciate that to get to the top of your chosen sport you have to be a bad loser to an extent but LH, imho, came across as an absolute bell end tonight!

Give me an example....he was gracious, seemed fairly well relaxed and smiled and congratulated Rosberg continuously.....I was watching Sky F1 channel.
You really are misrepresenting things to the enth degree just because you don't like the bloke.....it's utterly ridiculous.

Sorry, Only just seen this @SoundAsa£

When interviewed by C4 he was banging on about reliability etc and at the end on the interview was asked if it was fair to say they had the same car and over the the course of the season the better man won, he replied "er no that's not the case and we'll see next season when we're on a level playing field "

He's right though! If neither driver breaks down he wins. Been proven before and will be proven again! Why pretend the best driver won and ignore the obvious fact that reliability was the deciding factor?

It would be patronising of him to suggest otherwise. He is just being honest.

I'm a fan of Hamilton but he's always been a bad loser. We all know he's faster than Rosberg and has had mechanical problems, but he also had some poor starts and a poor Azerbaijan GP which would have won him the title. I fully expect him to dominate next season.

I do hope the changes next season results in a few teams challenging. The sport needs it.

Sad to see JB "retiring" also.

It's not just that Hamilton had bad luck. Mercedes switched around some of their support team. Toto Wolff said it was standard procedure, but Lewis saw it as them giving Nico the best team-members. He basically thinks fortune and the team favoured Nico this year, and I think he's probably right. Nico is the most average driver to win a world title in years. I'm really hoping next year allows the best drivers to race each other on a level playing field.

cafcdave123 said:

Algarveaddick said:

WSS said:

I liked his tactics to be honest.

I think that the "team" aspect is overplayed in F1, the focus should be on the individual driver. I think most drivers only care about themselves as well.

All of the most successful drivers (or successful people in any walk of life for that matter) are not universally liked - Schumacher was a nasty piece of work on the track for example. That edge makes them multiple champions.

I am right in thinking that only Rosberg or Hamilton could win the title right? If so why on earth would the team bosses expect Hamilton to hand it to his rival? Makes as much sense as getting sent off in rugby because of the angle someone hits the deck at...

They only made that call because Vettel could have passed them both so it was a team order to secure the 1 2 finish rather than let his teammate win the title

If they had finished second and third on the day, Mercedes would have had a world champion and won the constructors championship. In six weeks time no one in the world would have thought "You know what, I'm not buying Mercedes because they only finished second and third in Abu Dhabi last November".

I think the call was made because a German team in a German car wanted a German champion.

Nothing wrong with that, and nothing wrong with a sportsman wanting to give himself the best chance to retain his title.

Addick Addict said:

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the tactics, Hamilton was totally ungracious in defeat, has shown total disrespect on numerous occasions for a sport where he is very lucky to be earning £80m a year and one of only two drivers in the privileged position to win a title.

Perhaps that's what really annoys him - he came 2nd in what is a two horse race for the title. And that, to me, isn't sport.

Soundas wrote this earlier in response to a "bad loser" comment: "Give me an example....he was gracious, seemed fairly well relaxed and smiled and congratulated Rosberg continuously.....I was watching Sky F1 channel.
You really are misrepresenting things to the enth degree just because you don't like the bloke.....it's utterly ridiculous."

I didn't see any of it, so just quoting here, to lend a little balance AA.

kings hill addick said:

Truth is that serial winners are bad losers. When someone is more than happy to lose they fail to have the will and dedication to win.

This is true in almost all aspects of life. These people are so focused and determined to win. Nothing else matters so they don't care how people perceive them they just want to win. That is what makes them winners!

Exactly. As the quote goes "show me a good loser and i'll show you a loser"

cafcdave123 said:

There is being a bad loser and there is being ungracious in defeat.

When Chelsea didn't lose to us when we beat them on penalties, how many of you were say that's what makes Jose a winner?

No, that made him a wanker.

I'm not Lewis H's biggest fan, but he is a fantastic racing driver, and he just hates to lose. That is probably what makes him so determined, and so good.
He always acknowledges the part his team has played whenever he wins, and he looks really pissed off and gets a bit whiny when he doesn't.
He's not my favourite sportsman by quite a long way, but he is an immense talent behind the wheel, one of the best ever.

Mercedes are really winding me up at be moment.

They should be on their knees apologising for losing Lewis the title. It's a fact that had Hamilton not had about 4 engine failures (plus the one suffered in Malaysia that lead to a 28 point swing) he would have cruised it.

Why are they not acknowledging it and arse licking up to a guy who inherited the title instead?

Fair enough give Rosberg a pat on the back and a few tweets - but why the slamming of the best performing driver over the year? They should be saying sorry to him. Not having a go.

cafcdave123 said:

Oh do fuck off! Why do you wank over LH so much?

Who collected the most points over the course of the season?

How many of LH bad starts did he have a "mechanical failure"?

Bad starts wouldn't have mattered if the car had been the same as Rosbergs in its reliability.

Yes or No? Hamilton would have been World Champion if the cars had equal reliability.

This happens in F1, and always will, but the least the team can do is apologise to him. They have not mentioned it over the last couple of days and have thrown him under the bus.

I will respect Rosberg when he can race and beat Hamilton on merit.... Think I rank him mid table as a driver and well behind Vettel, Max, Alonso, Ricciardo, Kimi, Jenson (at his peak).... On a par with Hulkenberg, Bottas etc.

The only way he could win a title is down to better reliability. He got it eventually (8 engine issues for Lewis is chance???) - Merc need to apologise to Lewis because if the rival teams close in Rosberg won't cope. Lewis will be their only hope to take it to Red Bull - they need to show him more respect.

PS also winds me up how people quote Rosbergs reliability issues.... 9 times out of 10 he was behind Lewis and it never affected the title race. Abi Dhabi 2014 he was miles behind. Silverstone 2014 just balanced out Melbourne 2014. Singapore 2014 balanced out Canada 2014 etc