Crash.Net User: 1Jez

Comments rating: 876
Position in rating: 236

Show Comments on:


February 14, 2014 2:31 PM
Last Edited 44 days ago

F1 » Maldonado a ‘great fighter’ and ‘underestimated’

I think being such a "fighter" is his biggest problem, not an asset! Most drivers will finesse their way into a position to pass or defend. World champions will box cleverly, setting up with a jab to deliver a stronger blow. Maldonado just takes his gloves off and starts swinging haymakers like a buffoon. There is no denying that the sole reason he entered F1 was money. He did not leave Williams to go to Lotus - Williams dropped him and Lotus decided AFTER the Quantum deal turned out to be a dud that they were desparate enough for money to risk putting him in a car. Lotus were dead keen on Hulkenberg when they thought Quantum was coming to the rescue. He does not deserve a seat in F1 because he would certainly not have a drive without the money he brings. He fluked his win, as @sprulz explained.


February 25, 2014 4:05 AM

F1 » Susie Wolff to get two FP1 runs with Williams F1

Ty - I should elaborate... I don't think the glass ceiling is in F1. I don't necessarily disagree that Susie is getting a shot at least partially because of Toto, but if she can at least hold her own in FP1 then she can demonstrate to the old guard that girls can do it to. It would be naive to suggest that women receive the same opportunities as men in the lower and feeder categories of motor sport, which then means that they don't develop the same experience or are provided the same promotional opportunity. How many female drivers are there in GP2 or GP3 to show their talent to F1 teams?


February 12, 2014 5:53 AM

F1 » V8 GP support to adopt double points’ format

Trying to figure out why this story is posted in the F1 section. The V8 series has gone from massive manufacturer support in Group A times ("Win on Sunday, sell on Monday") with direct relevance to produciton cars, to a rubbish one-make side show that is as relevant to motoring as go karts. Why it is that Nissan has entered into this format is beyond me - the Maxima doesn't come with either a V8 nor rear wheel drive, so what is it they think they're marketing? It would be more honest of the series to just do away with the Holden, Ford, Nissan and Mercedes badges all together as the cars are identical under the skin. Either that or go back to something closer to Group A. Even as an Australian I find the V8 Supercars series painful and out of touch.


February 12, 2014 2:16 PM

F1 » V8 GP support to adopt double points’ format

Walrus909 - what are talking about? No, there isn't an Australian equivalent of the Mustang, not that that is relevant, though Ford are apparently looking at importing it here. The wheelbase is not really what I'm talking about. The point I'm trying to make is that the chassis in all V8 Supercars is built to the same spec, which means they have absolutely nothing to do with the road cars they purport to represent. The Holden Monaro, badged as a Pontiac GTO, used the GM GenIII 5.7L (I used to own one - loved it). Holden have not sold a 5 litre engine since 1999 - 15 years ago. The reason V8 Supercars is a 5 litre engine class is because both Holden and Ford sold only 5 litre engines when Group A was abandoned in the '90s - solely to ban the Nissan R32 GT-R - and the category was rewritten as V8 Supercars.


February 12, 2014 11:30 AM

F1 » V8 GP support to adopt double points’ format

Mustafur - I'm talking about a time when the cars raced in the old touring car categories were virtually the same as what you could buy in the show room. Everything from Ford Falcon GT-HO to the still impressive VK Group A SS Commodore. The manufacturers developed the cars (either directly or through subsidiaries with factory backing) under homologation rules, which means that the race cars were very directly relevant to the road cars. None of the manufacturers in V8 Supercars currently offer a naturally aspirated 5.0L V8 in the (not really) equivalent road cars they're racing. The category has gone from racing crazy fast road cars that actively pushed development to now being completely irrelevant to the cars that Holden, Ford, Mercedes and especially Nissan actually produce. It's even more artificial than F1. Also, this is an F1 page. Stories regarding irrelevant, ultra restricted, standard chassis (what's the definition of one-make?) tin-tops that only Australians are aware of (be


February 09, 2014 2:20 AM

F1 » Vergne eyes long-term Toro Rosso project

He's just being polite - Torro Rosso is not the pick of the midfield teams. Force India and Sauber are clearly better choices for points potential. MaxSmoot - you make some good points and I don't really disagree with you, however if a driver had their free choice of any team aside from the big guys, they wouldn't choose Torro Rosso in 2014.


February 05, 2014 1:12 AM

F1 » Coulthard: Pressure on Vettel, not Ricciardo

Giveway - if it was ALL about the car, Webber would have been runner up to each of Vettel's championships. I'm a Webber fan and therefor not one to pump Vettel's tyres, but even I can't deny that the kid is good. Very good. The car does play a huge role in the WDC, but it is not the sole reason a person becomes world champion. Button and Barrichello driving the Brawn is another example.


January 30, 2014 1:12 AM

F1 » Renault admits to power unit problem

Sokudo - I don't disagree with the sentiment of having some variety in the championship, but F1 not through the principle "slow and steady wins the race". It would be a travesty for F1 if the championships were won by the driver/team that is constantly qualifying in the midfield, is nowhere near the pace of the front runners, yet takes the top step of the podium most often by doing a Steven Bradbury week in, week out.

Page 9 of 31
« 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  »

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 - 2016 Crash Media Group

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