Hello!

It looks like you’re new here. To join in the discussion, click the register link below to get started.

Badges

First AnswerThird AnniversarySecond AnniversaryFirst Anniversary1000 Comments500 Comments100 CommentsName Dropper10 CommentsPhotogenicFirst Comment
Welcome to the Codemasters Forums! Be sure to check the FAQ and Forum Rules before you get started.

AMS97KRR Race Engineer

About

Username
AMS97KRR
Joined
Visits
791
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
655
Badges
11
Twitter
@AMS97F1
Steam ID
AMS97F1
PSN ID
AMS97F1
  • Re: 2017 Mexicolan Grand Prix

    Oh, and now he's gone and said this.



    What. A. *****.
  • Re: Anyone else fed up with SkySports one-sided viewpoint?

    Hughesy said:
    Dude it’s always been that way no matter what channel it’s broadcast. Look at how Murray Walker reacted when Hill won the championship, yet nobody seems to moan about him. I’m not sure what in Brundles article is incorrect. Yea it was a great drive in the fastest car, nobody denies that. Go to Italian TV and see how they get behind Ferrari, or Germany with Schumacher.
    Martin just comes across very poorly in the article when talking about Vettel.

    Firstly, Baku has nothing to do with what happened in Malaysia with Alonso. (Alonso does not like Vettel, that move in Malaysia was well thought out by Alonso, he's done silly things like that before to him) We all know it was a silly move but it has little relevance to Alonso blocking Vettel, why criticise Vettel for what he said about the incident in the first little paragraphs of the column, rather than condemning Alonso for blocking an opponent? Reeks of bias to be honest, no need for it. 
    What he should have said is that Alonso is being a clown again towards Vettel because he is jealous of Vettel's success. And you know what, I understand why Alonso is upset about his career since 2006, he deserves to have a couple more titles. However, his vendetta towards Vettel is incredibly childish.

    Martin literally criticises Vettel for a "sense of entitlement" and yet does not bother to comment on Alonso and his.

    Then he goes right out and says the post-race incident should never have happened, and yeah, he is right, but again, why the criticism after the performance he just gave? It almost comes across as if he thinks Vettel should have done something differently, despite the fact that it was Stroll who was drifting into the path of Vettel, not the other way around. Although that's just me reading between the lines/speculating -whatever you want to call it, given the tone of the article.

    Edit: Oh and the steering wheel one is a joke, Vettel wasn't sure if the fans would come on track and didn't want it stolen. 

    As for the Halo/safety part, another pointless part with no relevance to anything.

    It actually takes him 10 Paragraphs/Lines to praise him, and even in that sentence he is slating him! 

    If he was criticising him post-Singapore, that is totally fair. But after that performance, he should be praising him at least a bit more than the almost zero praise he gave him.

    I like Martin Brundle a lot, but this is definitely one of his poorest columns.

    Edit: 

    A better opening would have been something like "Sebastian Vettel drove a scintillating Malaysian GP on Sunday, securing an excellent 4th place finish from the back of the grid to keep his title hopes alive". And then maybe gone into something about how Vettel should not have been in that situation and then maybe reflected on incidents in Baku and Singapore, question whether he really needed to be so aggressive off the start and if his attitude could have already cost him the title, despite a great drive last time out and for the majority of the season. 

    It sounds like fairer criticisms when you put it like that, rather than slating him for as much as you can on every topic possible and completely losing sight of the fact he just put in a brilliant drive. 

  • Re: DEUTSCHLAND '16

    *Raises concern about the sport*

    *Gets told that their just salty*
  • Re: The EU Referendum

    I'll be voting to stay. 

    In my opinion the best way to help shape the future of Europe is to actively be involved in the EU. I don't see the EU as a bad thing, our economy will only suffer if we leave according to experts. The immigration issue wont be solved by leaving, if we cut off immigration to Europe can you imagine how that would leave us in the eyes of the rest of Europe? 

    What if we ever wanted to rejoin? We would never get such a favourable deal as we have now. Honestly I cannot think of a good reason to leave. I don't trust the conservative party, and I'm not sure on the exact details so correct me if I'm wrong, but they would be able to change certain laws that the EU prevents them from doing. I don't remember the specific things, I saw/had a discussion on reddit about it a while back. 

    And to be honest I'm not massively against a European super state, which I admit puts me in a minority. 
  • Re: F1 2016 wishlist

    You're in for one hell of a disappointment come 2016 mate.