F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

OK Sunny, You win. I should have realised that you were just looking for the reaction and I rose to the bait, I shouldn't have dignified your post with an answer but I did.

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

Sorry Sunny, I consider myself to be of normal, (or according to a recent IQ test slightly above normal)intelligence, but I cannot make any sense of your last post. I do not claim to be 'an authority on F1' I just consider myself to have a reasonable working knowledge of the sport and it's rulings and to be observant enough to notice minor inconsistencies in the way the rules are interpreted. As I read the posts, nobody was insulting anybody, far from it. WE all seem to agree that Schumacher was one of the fastest thinking drivers that F1 has ever seen.

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

@ Rich_ard. Yes and not the only time he deliberately crashed the car. But he usually hit another driver..... That was just the way his brain worked.... ''Ooops!! I''m out of this race but if I can damage Damon''s car enough I''ll win by 1 point....''... to think that way, t that speed when most other drivers will just be thinking ''Damn!!, I''ve broke the car now I''m gonna lose''.... Fair or not. I make no coment

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

Barry, just checked on ''wikipedia'' it was the 1997 British GP, still not sure whether it was Schumi who decided it or could have been Ross Brawn, another fantastic brain when it came to strategy. Also says on there that out of 30 wet races he contested in his career he WON 17 (once from16th on the grid). A remarkable statistic

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

Jigger. SchUmi had a fanastic brain, he could see things that others wouldn''t notice and work strategy while driving. I remember one race, can''t remember where or when, where Schumi had to serve a 10 second stop/go with two laps to go. he was better than 10 seconds ahead but knew that serving the penalty would lose him the win. he finished the race in the pit lane and won I''m sure I will be corrected, but I think it is the only time a race has been won with the car in the pits.... whenever a race finished one of the first things he did was sneak a look at the configurations of the other cars in Parke Ferme looking for that edge all the time. Good old days

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

Rich_ard. comments concerning safety cars relates to the times that the car is deployed, not even I would suggest that a driver would deliberately stack his car into a walll, soly tto bring the safety car out. As for the character limit, the only thing I can think there is that i''m using a mobile phone, maybe the limit doesn''t apply.

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

@ Mark. Nice one. must admit I never thought of that. (have I missed a conspiracy) @ Karga. I agree with you (really no sarcasm) I am getting fed up with trying to explain my position on this, but for you I will try one FINAL time. I believe that the FIA may be trying to influence the outcome of this years WDC. My reasons for thinking this are based on my own observations of stewards decisions this year. IF an enquiry into an alleged misdemeanor involving a Ferrari will affect the outcome of a race to the detriment of Ferrari then that case will either be dismissed or penalised by a fine. IF an enquiry into an alleged misdemeanor involving a McLaren will affect the outcome of a race to the detriment of McLaren then that case will penalised by a drive through penalty or, as at Spa, a time penalty which will benefit Ferrari. This extends to Safety car periods where IF a McLaren is leading by a reasonable amount of time over a Ferrari and the safety car is deployed, then the safety car remains on the track for a longer period of time, backmarkers are required to pass the safety car negating ANY advantage the McLaren has initially gained, this does not appear to occur to the same extent when a Ferrari is leading. MY OWN OPINION. I can no more prove the conspiracy than you can prove there isn''t one. Cherry on the top for you?.... You can never prove the non-existence of for instance, the Loch Ness monster / yeti / bigfoot you can ONLY ever prove they do exist

F1 » Raikkonen admits: I need a miracle.

@ Dany. Interesting idea for points system. Would need some thinking about because if everybody is scoring points then there may be a tendency for the drivers to ''not bother'' passing. some of the best drives (racing) this year has been for 7th 8th and 9th places. Maybe rather than 1 point for 20th 2 for 19th etc. it could be scored 1 to 5 points for 20th to 15th, 10to 20 points for positions 14 to 10, 40 to 50 points fot 9th place to 5th then 75 to 100 for the last 4 places. Add to that 10 points for pole, 10 points for fastest lap and 10 points for the most passes on the track, could be good.

F1 » Whitmarsh: Title to be decided by mistakes.

Barry, wish I hadn''t said anything now lol. Apology not neeeded but accepted. Not your fault just the usual people not reading, not reading properly, not having a sense of humour or not understanding what i''m trying to say.. Maybe I just shouldn''t rise to the bait

F1 » Whitmarsh: Title to be decided by mistakes.

Joe. I can leave it now or attempt to explain in words of one syllable or less (yes I know you can''t have less than one syllable in a word. I really do) "My comment on the conspiracy theory was a facetious reply to a comment made by another poster. I had no intention of turning this into a McLaren versus Ferrari argument nor did I expect or want to bring up ''spygate''again" Do you uderstand so fat? If you had bothered to read the original post you would have seen that I was asking, in a humourous way, for someone else NOT to bring it up. I will say again. YOU ALL KNOW MY VIEW. and it has been run into the ground.... No I can''t prove that there is a conspiracy anymore than you can prove there isn''t. So why don''t we jus agree to differ.