Crash.Net User: RSMick

Comments rating: 1190
Position in rating: 122

Show Comments on:

RSMick

February 04, 2015 9:57 PM

MotoGP » Sepang MotoGP test times - Wednesday (Final)


New year, new bikes, musical chairs yet still the same people spout the same stuff. If you dont like the way it is, as mentioned the way it has always been, don't watch, even for 'a laugh' or 'to see how bad it is' or other boring reasons, simply don't watch or don't comment. The 9x'ers 46's never change either, Marquez is a phenomenal talent, I know its hard to take but its true.

RSMick

February 04, 2015 10:26 PM

MotoGP » Marquez chooses ‘compromise’ Honda


RaceRoad: theres a great article on motomatters. mm had to put on a fresh tire in the last minutes to overcome Rossi. motomatters always has/gives great insight. Sepang 2 i hope wil be even better for Yamaha.!!! Seamless!!!
You mean like Rossi had to put a fresh tyre in to set his time? What point are you making? Emmet gets things wrong as well.

RSMick

January 27, 2015 9:10 PM
Last Edited 114 days ago

MotoGP » PICS: Aegerter starts 'Kawasaki' MotoGP test


Akira also prepare the Kawaski endurance bikes, this chassis is built by the same company that builds the official WSB bike chassis, this engine though is from Japan (Akira is French). As for KHI they are just the holding company, Kawasaki Motorcycles build motorbikes, it will be them who decides if they race in Motogp, not much point they have never been any good.

RSMick

January 20, 2015 4:08 AM

MotoGP » Satellite ‘winning packages’ in MotoGP 2016


VegasRyder: . When you look at the forward Yamaha there is a definate lower top speed. But the tech 3 bikes have no such disadvantage .
They have two totally different software packages, the Forward machines were limited on changable parameters, this is how they all will be next year. You also have to take into account the lease package with Forward was different to Tech3, they would have had to pay for a 6th engine as clearly pointed out by Lin Jarvis last year.

RSMick

January 19, 2015 8:33 AM
Last Edited 121 days ago

MotoGP » Satellite ‘winning packages’ in MotoGP 2016


Tetley: Yes I did. Ooops. Even the damn spellchecker didn't flag that. It's fortunate that the subject was grammar, not spelling.
Should one who criticises others for their poor grammar (even though they are American) be using words that they need a spell check? Unless of course they may be dyslexic, the letters 'banale' are in fact is recognised by the spell check as incorrect.
Tetley: You dare diss another's English?
Should that be a capital 'D' for a town in Norfolk if we not allowed to use poor grammar? That also should be at least "You dare TO diss another's English?" if not 'how dare you'. Strange to be all condescending about this when Brain was merely making a point about a sentence being incomprehensible, we are not expecting perfect English but now starting on punctuation, this is an area you really should not criticise!

RSMick

January 18, 2015 3:00 PM

MotoGP » Satellite ‘winning packages’ in MotoGP 2016


Tetley: "You mind deciphering that blob of letters into something coherent." When criticising someone else's use of the English language, it is banale for the writer to include schoolboy grammatical errors in his own critique. I'm guessing that the question should start "DO you mind ..." or "WOULD you mind ..." And because the "sentence" is a question, there ought to be a question mark at the end. Resorting to criticism of another poster's English grammar while avoiding the actual, relevant content of their comment is puerile and is a definite sign of losing the real debate, as is lewd inappropriate insults such as "swinging on Rossi's *** sack". Such caustic, inflammatory comments merely indicate the poster's propensity to escalate debates into arguments. Q.E.D.
Did you mean to write 'banal'?


Page 3 of 169
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  »

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2015 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.