Crash.Net User: mrfill

Comments rating: 3427
Position in rating: 23

Show Comments on:

mrfill

July 27, 2014 11:15 AM

F1 » Horner angry at ‘negative’ focus in F1


Blacklines:
mrfill: Racing? I don't call two cars belting off at 2 seconds a lap faster than anyone else racing. If the Mercs are 1-2 on the grid, what overtaking is there at the front? The mid-pack produces racing and overtaking but the idea of racing is to win and when you have to hope for a breakdown to have any chance of a podium, its no surprise that interest is waning.
OK,so there's been no improvement in the racing? No overtaking? No spectacle or interest this year?? Jeez... maybe you should compare this to the late 90's and then talk about interest.. If you honestly think that "racing" is solely for the top 3 and thats all F1 is about, then maybe you should go back to watching football. Nice and simple for the mind to digest with either win lose of draw....
I don't and only a clown would conclude that from what I wrote. "The mid pack produces racing and overtaking" And my general point is trying to answer why TV audiences

mrfill

July 29, 2014 12:07 PM
Last Edited 22 days ago

F1 » Hamilton: Usual rules didn’t apply


107SS2009: .... when their authority will be challenged/ defied things will not be the same ever again, they will not ever forget, once that happens there is no turn back from it. Apart those (fan boys) and those with blinkers, nobody has talked/mentioned that, this Hungarian GP should have been one of Lulu’s most euphoric moments after his drive from the pit-lane to 3rd, but there was no mistaking that Lulu’s demeanour on the podium was subdued because HE KNOWS THERE WILL BE RAMIFICATIONS FOR HIS ACTIONS. to be continued.
Ramifications a bit like RBR imposed on Vettel for disobeying the Multi21 I suppose. The sort of ramifications that get you the championship.

mrfill

July 29, 2014 1:11 AM

F1 » Hamilton: Usual rules didn’t apply


Under the circumstances, I reckon that 3rd and 4th was about the best result for Merc. The right strategies won it (more by chance than judgement though) - RBR who put DR on the right tyres at the right time and Ferrari for not changing tyres when common sense said they ought to. With Alonso's 6m wide Ferrari, it would have needed a desperate lunge to get past him as he was in no mood to wave them past.

mrfill

July 28, 2014 7:02 PM

F1 » Axed Caterham staff to sue new team owners


These people may not be employees (PAYE and with the Caterham paying employers NIC) but contractors who maintain limited companies. The computer industry had lots of these in the 1990s. You got more money but no paid holidays, no sick pay, no pension scheme and you could have your companies contract cancelled without compensation. You oaid yourself a small salary (to avoid NIC) and took the rest using dividends (avoiding income tax and NIC). Redundancy does not apply as the employer (the limited company) still employs the employee.

mrfill

July 29, 2014 1:28 PM

F1 » Hamilton: Usual rules didn’t apply


107SS2009: mirfill, it will be useless and a waste of time to go over the ramifications as a result of Lulu's actions on Sunday (to himself). I have explained it all on here and elsewhere, but as I also said, I don't expect the like of you to understand.
I'm trying to be objective in the face of personal insults, which are quite unnecessary. Perhaps lulu will get stuffed by Merc for disobeying orders. I was pointing out that in a similar situation (multi21) that the transgressor did not appear to suffer too badly. If you had bothered to check you would have seen that I am not exactly a 'pop up mushroom' or a fan of Lord Stevenage as can be checked by looking through the 173 pages of previous comments. The blind hatred meant that you didn't even bother to reply to my post, just hurl a few insults around. I am genuinely surprised as normally I find your posts informative and interesting

mrfill

July 29, 2014 7:27 PM

F1 » Caterham set to counter-sue employees


This is no surprise. The 'team' doesn't employ these people, its a different company who then provides the team with a 'service'. Expect the employing company to be based outside the UK and the contracts to be subject to the law of somewhere you may never have heard of. By accusing the 'team' rather than the employer, the workers have made a mistake. However, a claim for damages has to be based on the financial damage to the company by the statement, which may be considered to be zero. One thing is certain. The only winners will be the lawyers.


Page 12 of 185
« 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  »

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.