Jenson Button signs with McLaren

Isaint Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Slash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Isaint Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I think Brawn will be fine without him next
> > year,
> > > lets face it it was Ross and the car that
> gave
> > him
> > > the Championship. As soon as all the other
> > teams
> > > caught up he stopped winning and just went
> back
> > to
> > > being Button ........ the nearly man.
> > Fortuneatly
> > > for him every race some one was taking points
> > off
> > > of some one else so he held on to his early
> > lead
> > > but next year wll be frustrating and
> > humiliating
> > > for him and he will be placed firmly in the
> > shadow
> > > of Hamilton.
> >
> > mayabe this is exactly what he's looking for...
>
> > when Jenson signed for BAR everyone said it was
> a
> > suicide to go up against Villeneuve, dirvers
> said
> > that it was the worst move of his carrer and
> all
> > the same @#$%& as now Jenson going against a
> > former champion established whitin the team
> >
> > What if Jenson shows Hamilton how to race?
> > everyone will need to either swallow their
> words
> > and recognize him as a worhty champion, or
> > Hamilton image will be reduced to average.....
> > with the hype Hamilton has i think it will
> > probably be the first one
> > but of course this is all speculation
> > so pls, shut the @#$%& up and wait for Abu
> Dhabi
> > 2010 to see who ended ahead
>
>
> Watch your mouth mate, share your opinion but
> don't get carried away. Don't go getting all brave
> over an internet connection I hope that's clear
> enough for you.
> As for Abu Dhabi 2010, yeah let's wait and make
> sure you don't eat for a whole year ... because
> there will be plenty of words here for you to
> eat.


oh, ok

ps: you're so delicate!

DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wasnt that when Ron was in charge? You clearly
> sadi lies and cheating over the past several
> years. Whitmarsh has been in charge for one, 2009.
>
>
> You don't seem to be able to separate the "lies
> and cheating" part of it with (which was in
> reference to the team in general) the "proven team
> and performance" part of it (which was in
> reference to Martin specificly), which, until you
> do, is going to be quite a massive hindrance to
> this discussion.

What are talking about??

They are a proven team, but nothings changed except Martin is there and Ron isnt.

The lies and cheating you mention about Martin (it happened in ONE RACE, get over it!) happened with Ron too - what is your issue with Martin?

Ron cheated and lied. Martin cheated and lied... It did not just start with Martin!

The team went from one of the slowest cars to one of the quickest, if not the quickest. Fact. That's pretty proven to me. Just because they changed whoever runs it, does not mean their psat history means sh*t. Mclaren are proven, under Bruce, under Ron and will be under Martin.


So he goes to the "better team" for a challenge? That is an odd way of looking at it.

Missed that comment earlier.

That has to be a joke or you are just missing the point, or trying to be 'funny'.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

They are a proven team, but nothings changed except Martin is there and Ron isnt.

They are a proven team, except the man in charge has changed. Good argument.

The lies and cheating you mention about Martin (it happened in ONE RACE, get over it!) happened with Ron too - what is your issue with Martin?

Yeah...still didn't say Ron didn't cheat either. My problem with Martin? He's a slimy cheater. Once again - if this was Ferrari, you'd all be crying and PMSing over it. But seemingly because it's McLaren, everyone is very quick to forget everything.

Once *again*, your inability to see the difference between my point about cheating and my point about being a proven team is outstanding. Clearly the mistake was actually mine for making 2 points in 1 paragraph and thinking people would actually be able to distinguish between the 2. I'm not sure I'll write another reply to you until you can actually learn to see these points for what they are, rather than attempting to mix them for reasons I cannot begin to imagine.

The team went from one of the slowest cars to one of the quickest, if not the quickest. Fact.

"fact"? Bullsh*t. The car was never one of the slowest. It was mid-field at worst. Like all mid-field cars it had a couple of bad races, but that is once again due to the tight field. The car was never a back of the grid car, and the turn around was far from remarkable. I just love how Martins getting credit for the car getting better, but seemingly no blame for producing it in the first place.

Just because they changed whoever runs it, does not mean their psat history means sh*t.

Past does not prove the future. And Alain Prost, Jaguar and Red Bull should prove how much difference the man at the top makes.

Mclaren are proven, under Bruce, under Ron and will be under Martin.

Proven under Bruce? Really? Bruce died in 1970. They won 2 races under him. Your definition of "proven" is somewhat loose at best.

That has to be a joke or you are just missing the point, or trying to be 'funny'.

Hilarious isn't it. Wants a better car, you know...to reduce the challenge. But wants a better team mate...for the challenge. Faultless logic.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Get a room!


Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it