Crash.Net User: Taipan

Comments rating: 7247
Position in rating: 5

Show Comments on:


April 06, 2014 11:27 AM

F1 » Wolff: Rule change requests ‘absurd’

The problem is NOT Merc having a 1 second advantage, good for them they've done a better job with the new regs so far and deserve their advantage. I wouldn't want to see the rules change to reduce their lead. (although I'm sure some will find that hard to comprehend) The problem is with the F1 package, the sound is far too quiet on TV, maybe just turning up the track side mics would help, I don't know. The racing so far has been terrible, watching cars cruise through the whole race 3 seconds apart is not entertaining, whether that is an aero issue or a fuel saving issue needs to be addressed. And passing everything off as great because they're saving some fuel is a crap argument, trying to promote F1 as leading the way in green technology then turning on 5000 high power lights so that the race can be run at a better time for TV audiences is utter hypocrisy!


April 06, 2014 2:10 PM

F1 » Wolff: Rule change requests ‘absurd’

Rob, take your McLaren, I mean Lulu, I mean Mercedes hat off (life long Mercedes fan, yeah I know) and tell me do you think F1 has improved under the new rules? now read that carefully, I said has F1 improved not have the results improved. Your predictable blame it on Luca losing stance is missing the point completely. Ferrari have been just as far off the lead for the last few years did they run a fans poll then? no they didn't. This shouldn't be about who your favourite team is, it's bigger than that it's about the well being of F1 and right now it's sick. Maybe some of you don't care about that, which wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, sadly.


April 06, 2014 2:17 PM

F1 » Ecclestone: Mercedes will be behind changes

Benignly, Why would rule changes be disastrous? They're not suggesting wide sweeping changes like new engines, they're talking about sticking a bit more fuel in the car so that they can actually race and possibly raise the revs to a point where they are audible. I agree with all that Bernie says (feel dirty now) other than the suggestion of shortening races, that's just daft. If you have to shorten a race so that you can claim to be saving fuel you may as well cancel the race and claim that you've saved even more!


April 06, 2014 10:23 AM

F1 » Hamilton sure mistake didn't cost pole

Fullofit, Vitriol, hate rant, hating on (eh?) jealous, epic, a few words and phrases that no fanboy can live without, although they usually can't get the spelling right! Richard, Tell the truth, during the 60's and 70's I bet you were thinking what F1 needs right now is a small man with a big hat and sparkly ears, I know that during the 80's I was thinking what we need now is a bunch of "fans" to invade F1 that make even Mansell's one eyed followers look normal!


April 06, 2014 9:21 AM

F1 » Ricciardo: Podium is unrealistic

It's a bit early to be jumping to conclusions after 2 races, Dan's done really well but thinking that he's better than Vettel, Webber was average etc is a bit premature, wait until both cars have worked for a few races and then see how they match up. As a side issue, IF Dan's the best thing since sliced bread, is JEV just as great having matched him for two years as a team mate?


April 05, 2014 9:52 PM

F1 » Rosberg takes pole after Hamilton error

Jim Clausen: I'd be willing to bet the farm if Mercedes has a WDC this year, it will be Rosberg. He may not have the outright speed of Hamilton, but he's a lot more consistent and much more controlled in pressure situations.
He may not have the outright speed of Hamilton? He says after Rosberg just blew Hamilton away in Qualifying.
In a car that was designed for Lulu, according to Lulu...

Page 6 of 602
« 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 - 2014 Crash Media Group

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