What's all this real champion bullsh*t? everyone that has won a world drivers title is a real champion whether you like the driver or not! 
For me a Champion isn't just about winning races. As a champion, I'd place Stirling Moss over all the current crop of drivers. That's not to say that some might not develop into the sort of champion he is. And, yes, as someone mentioned, he never won a WDC - but only because he decided he didn't want it on a bad stewards decision. For those of you who don't know, in the 1958 Hawthorn/Ferrari were penalised at the Portugal (I think?) GP. If SM had just said nothing, he was WDC for 1958. But, he went and spoke in favour of Ferrari, told the stewards that Ferrari hadn't broken the rules and got the stewards to reinstate Hawthorn/Ferrari. Hawthorn/Ferrari went on to beat SM by one point that year.
If you watch his recent interview, when he is asked about who is the better driver between Jenson and Lewis, he is complimentary to both drivers.
For me, he is a real champion.
That's rich, coming from someone who supports team orders which flagrantly break the rules. Are you expecting Fernando to stand up and and refuse to accept the championship if he wins by less than seven points?
We were punished for, what the race stewards saw as us breaking the rules. We didn't agree but we accepted our punishment. Exactly like Lewis was given a penalty for passing the safety car. He said he didn't remember doing it, but he also accepted his punishment. Things happen in races. I would no more expect Fernando to not accept the WDC that I would expect Lewis to not accept if his points from Valencia made the difference.
And me thinking that a rule is wrong in no way mitigates my right to have a view on who or what constitutes a champion. There was a rule that segregated people in South Africa - fortunately a lot of people spoke up against that rule. Ends out their views on a bad rule weren't "rich".
** ignoring insult mode ON**
You misunderstand, possibly deliberately, possibly not.
** ignoring insult mode OFF**
You expound that a real champion upholds the rules, even if making sure that they are applied correctly disadvantages him or her. Ferrari broke the rules, as you alluded to by the mention of the stewards' punishment and this infringement was upheld by the WMSC. The rule is stupid, barely enforceable, but it is still a rule. Whether or not the rule is wrong, it is in force this season and I was highlighting your double standards in lauding Moss for going with his conscience while finding nothing wrong with rule-breaking by Ferrari.
To avoid a protracted argument based upon semantics, I must point out that I am completely in agreement with you on the subject of team orders. It is a bad rule. My comments relate to your apparent view that because a rule is against the ethos of Ferrari then it is not a valid rule and does not figure into whether or not it should be obeyed.
There is a distinction that you have missed. In the case of Stirling Moss, he spoke up because he knew someone was being wrongfully penalized.
In the case you are quoting, Ferrari have accepted their punishment.
Now, if it is your supposition that, when a driver, in the eyes of the stewards "breaks any rule", irrespective of the penalty they are given, they should also be not entitled to win a championship, then, you can count out pretty much every driver in this year's WDC because they have all been penalised. I quoted the most obvious case of Lewis when he passed the safety car and was given a penalty that didn't involve the loss of any points as well. In both cases yours is, to me, a silly proposition. If you break the rule in the opinion of the stewards, you get the penalty, and that is that.
If you really think there should be some arbitrary additional penalty when, some pundits don't think the applied penalty is hard enough, go right ahead and lobby for it.
! Oh crap my bad I'm not a mod anymore, nevermind!
