FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Just as it says...
User avatar
By sagi58
#425736
Schumacher was later punished by the FIA for causing an avoidable accident and was disqualified from the Championship


So the answer to the question is that the behaviour is deemed to be cheating

As usual, you take information that is easily googled and put your own slant on it.
That's fine; but, then, you can't get upset when I pull a you on you:
 wrote:">2009 Australian Grand Prix ...The Trulli/Hamilton case was reopened to examine new evidence, and both drivers were summoned to a stewards' inquiry prior to the Malaysian Grand Prix. Ostensibly at the urging of his team, Hamilton continued to insist he had not received orders to allow Trulli past, even after being played an audio recording of such an instruction being received over his team radio.[35] The stewards decided that Hamilton and McLaren had misled them, having contradicted the available evidence.[36][37] Hamilton was disqualified and McLaren stripped of their constructors' points. Trulli was re-instated into third place.[38] McLaren's Sporting Director, Dave Ryan, was subsequently suspended by the team the day after Hamilton's disqualification was announced.[39][40] McLaren were summoned to appear before the FIA on 29 April 2009 to answer charges of breaching the International Sporting Code...

From that excerpt, those who are new to the sport can be excused for believing that Hamilton and McLaren are cheaters, thus...
...that should be the end of discussion for anyone interested in the truth...

But, that doesn't mean that those who support Hamilton won't find defend him because...
...for some its the start of yet another deployment of the full complement of logical fallacies
User avatar
By sagi58
#425737
...Not being a fan is you exercising your right to choose what team to support. And, I also have the right to choose.
You don't have to like my decision/choice any more than I have to like yours.

It's called mutual respect.


Ok I respect your decision to respect these people/teams you support.

I was just stating the reasons why normal people don't lend their support to the same.

Was just about to thank you when I read the word "normal"!!
Backhanded comments like that don't fool me. Sorry!
By CookinFlat6
#425755
Schumacher was later punished by the FIA for causing an avoidable accident and was disqualified from the Championship


So the answer to the question is that the behaviour is deemed to be cheating

As usual, you take information that is easily googled and put your own slant on it.
That's fine; but, then, you can't get upset when I pull a you on you:
 wrote:">2009 Australian Grand Prix ...The Trulli/Hamilton case was reopened to examine new evidence, and both drivers were summoned to a stewards' inquiry prior to the Malaysian Grand Prix. Ostensibly at the urging of his team, Hamilton continued to insist he had not received orders to allow Trulli past, even after being played an audio recording of such an instruction being received over his team radio.[35] The stewards decided that Hamilton and McLaren had misled them, having contradicted the available evidence.[36][37] Hamilton was disqualified and McLaren stripped of their constructors' points. Trulli was re-instated into third place.[38] McLaren's Sporting Director, Dave Ryan, was subsequently suspended by the team the day after Hamilton's disqualification was announced.[39][40] McLaren were summoned to appear before the FIA on 29 April 2009 to answer charges of breaching the International Sporting Code...

From that excerpt, those who are new to the sport can be excused for believing that Hamilton and McLaren are cheaters, thus...
...that should be the end of discussion for anyone interested in the truth...

But, that doesn't mean that those who support Hamilton won't find defend him because...
...for some its the start of yet another deployment of the full complement of logical fallacies



:rofl::rofl::rofl:

So you are saying that despite receiving an answer to your original question of what would happen to a driver crashing another out, it has to be extended to Lewis and liegate???

That is ofcourse the fallacy of the red herring.
This means introducing irrelevant facts or arguments to distract from the question at hand. For example, "The opposition claims that welfare dependency leads to higher crime rates -- but how are poor people supposed to keep a roof over their heads without our help?" It is perfectly valid to ask this question as part of the broader debate, but to pose it as a response to the argument about welfare leading to crime is fallacious


and you have managed to combine it with the 'strawman' and the circular as well as the 'poor me'

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
User avatar
By sagi58
#425759
Either you're a great teacher or I'm a quick study!!

But, you'll notice I stay away from insulting others. :wavey:
By CookinFlat6
#425777
And she finally heads for the hills with the parting shot 'poor me' combined with 'appeal to the authorities' and the 'ad hominem' thrown in for good measure.

The only fallacy missing during this example of the dramatisation of a most simple 'crashing into others is cheating 'debate is the old 'I am not interested in debates at all, it was all a big mistake, I am leaving the forum' ( till the time I feel everyone has forgotten my non heroic conduct)

Alas the fact remains that MS was deemed a cheat for crashing into others intentionally
User avatar
By sagi58
#425805
Not sure what hills you think I headed for; but, it would seem
you have yet to master the concept of different time zones!

Just because your day is winding down doesn't mean mine is.
You may have the luxury of lounging after dinner, I don't.

Obviously you don't care; but, spare me the drama.
It's unbecoming of an adult!
By Hammer278
#425808
Was just about to thank you when I read the word "normal"!!
Backhanded comments like that don't fool me. Sorry!


It wasn't backhanded....ya'll are special. Or if you like...unique. :)
User avatar
By myownalias
#425810
I'm actually noting all this down and will sell this thread as a script to ABC for their latest soap opera, "A Bit Harsh :D "

:wink::twisted:
User avatar
By darwin dali
#425811
I'm actually noting all this down and will sell this thread as a script to ABC for their latest soap opera, "A Bit Harsh :D "

:wink::twisted:

You may provided I get royalties :whip:
User avatar
By sagi58
#425821
Was just about to thank you when I read the word "normal"!!
Backhanded comments like that don't fool me. Sorry!


It wasn't backhanded....ya'll are special. Or if you like...unique. :)

Image My gut tells me you just did it again; but, I give everyone the benefit of the doubt... once... :hehe:
User avatar
By sagi58
#425822
I'm actually noting all this down and will sell this thread as a script to ABC for their latest soap opera, "A Bit Harsh :D "

:wink::twisted:

Not an original plot, if The Old and The Useless is anything to go by.
Two people disagreeing on a soap has been overdone... :P

You may provided I get royalties :whip:

You'll end up in Receivership instead of collecting royalties!! :rofl:
By CookinFlat6
#425833
I'm actually noting all this down and will sell this thread as a script to ABC for their latest soap opera, "A Bit Harsh :D "

:wink::twisted:

Not an original plot, if The Old and The Useless is anything to go by.
Two people disagreeing on a soap has been overdone... :P


Now now, sagi don't be too harsh :D I am not that old and you are not that useless :wink:
User avatar
By sagi58
#425836
I'm actually noting all this down and will sell this thread as a script to ABC for their latest soap opera, "A Bit Harsh :D "

:wink::twisted:

Not an original plot, if The Old and The Useless is anything to go by.
Two people disagreeing on a soap has been overdone... :P


Now now, sagi don't be too harsh :D I am not that old and you are not that useless :wink:


I know you have a penchant for personalizing most things :whip: ;
but, I was referring to the long-running [North American] soap :

Image
User avatar
By sagi58
#426224
From the Mercedes camp:

 wrote:">Wolff: Hamilton and Rosberg equally deserving of F1 title

Toto Wolff says that both Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg deserve to win the Formula One world championship, with each driver impressing and suffering in equal measure over the course of the season...

...“Lewis has won 10 races, he has won more than Nico, scored more points but he has had some drama this season, where the car was on fire or had a brake problem,” said Wolff. “But then you had Nico, who out-qualified Lewis, probably the area where we would have judged Lewis to be the strongest driver out there, in raw pace in qualifying, and Nico was just there.

“What we have seen all season is an equal battle of two worthy champions,” he added. “Lewis fans would argue that he is the quicker driver, with more unreliability. Nico Rosberg fans would say that he was the quicker driver and that he was treated in a very hard way after Spa and he deserves to be world champion. You’re never going to make it right for everyone...
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12

See our F1 related articles too!