Vettel last year would have been my pick: clearly the best car, clearly the more talented driver at Red Bull, clearly favoured by the team and yet was never in the lead until the very end. But based on his performance this season he deserves to be a double WDC. I'll brush over whether or not overt racism is behind 2008 being mentioned yet the likes of 2007 not. Those who share my desire to leave this as a rhetorical statement will not quote me. In my opinion 1989, 1990 and 1994 have to be up there, even if the respective drivers weren't actually that bad. Bizzarely we have Schumacher to thank (for doing it twice) for bringing an end to that era.
Its people like you that are the reason many people don't like much of the Hamilton fambase and subsequently find themselves unable to support the man. If you find find the urge to post something using the racism card again, just dont. Its slanderous and no one wants to hear it.
And it's out of context responses such as that which give such suggestions credence Jacky. I think there are two main reasons why someone would see a WDC as undeserved: the driver did something disgusting in order to win it, or the driver had not yet demonstrated that he was among the best drivers in the world. A lot of the criticism of Hamilton over the last three years is justified, albeit overly magnified. But Hamilton was statistically the best driver over his first two years in the sport, and many respected observers of the sport considered him the most exciting (I'd say it was a tough call between him and Alonso). Things that would detract from it came after he had been crowed Champion.
How is it out of context and how does it give the arguement credence. There is absolutely no excuse for bringing the race card into this discussion whatsoever
And yet, following two well-constructed posts which included one controversial phrase, what is the only thing you are capable of talking about?
Are you actually being serious. Well constructed posts or not I cannot see why you bothered mentioning racism at all, it should not have entered the discussion and I am still at loss as to why you did enter it. Dont try and make out im at fault for dwelling on it
He would have won in 2007 and probably did deserve it that year and put not a foot wrong apart from maybe China. So going into 2008 even though he got very lucky you can argue that after that bad luck in Brazil 07 he probably deserved a bit of good luck. The most undeserving champion surely has to be Keke Rosberg. 1 win in a season come on... The most deserving champion surely has to be JB years of bad cars and abuse of playboy and slowboy and hasn'twonagrandprixboy ended in 09.
That old chesnut. Not heard that one before.......... Shall we go through every season to see why one driver did not win the WDC due to mechanical/other issues, then not dwell at all on the issues the guy who won the WDC also had? No? Fair enough.
Fair I suppose but don't try to deny that should Hamilton have missed out we would still be hearing (we still are I suppose) about the penalty he inflicted upon himself at Spa
I'll use the r-word for as long as ignorant people who cannot back up their arguments single out Hamilton for criticism in areas where he doesn't deserve it, for no obvious reason. I wasn't throwing it in your direction before, but am unsure now. Yet again you are incapable of making a rational argument as to why the 2008 WDC was the least deserving ever. Yet again you refuse to respond to the specific example I have given (the 2007 one).
It was wet, Glock kept the dry tyres and gained 1 net position Also cheating to win isn't very nice. If you get the fastest car you still deserve to win, but it won't be as special as winning in a lesser car
You know, I really don't see the point in this forum having any 'threads' at all. They all get turned into a Hamilton or Schumacher debate so why bother trying to talk about anything else? May as well rename the site 'not-anything-other-than-the-same-topic-please.com'
I made my point about 2008 clear, basically the foul luck that Massa had to endure. What about 2007, he was in the fastes car with the team's support and failed to win. What about it. If you are going to make slanderous statements at least have the courage of your convictions to name those you were referring
What nonsense, how can a 7 time winner be classed as undeserving? in 1994 it would have been a bigger scandal had he lost the championship owing to the draconian penalties laid at Schumacher by the FIA. They basically took 3 races away from him and (despite the car being the 2nd fastest) his rivals were still unable to gain a lead in the championship going into Adelaide, that is a superhuman championship effort and fully deserving of the WDC crown. The "undeserved" titles at Ferrari can be attributed to him enduring a few torrid years while he helped build a super competitive team from the ground up. Basically from 2000-04 he bore the fruit that his toils from 1996-99 deserved
Hamilton's WDC was more lucky than undeserving tbh. He barely had one mechanical problem with his car and still only just beat Massa, who had several problems with his car. Also about Kimi's win, he had quite a few mechanical retirements and neither Mclaren did, its so easy to go on about what happened in the last race and forgot the first 17/18. My vote goes to the obvious, JV even though i cant vote for him. If Webber won last year, it would have been him.
He ****ing cheated!!! Traction Control, illegal planks, ignoring black flags, deliberately running his rival off the road! He deserved everything he got and should consider following the TC scandal that he was allowed to be in the championship at all. The scandal is that he was allowed to keep the title. When re ran JV off the road in 97 he got kicked out. Why not in 94 when he actually profited from his dirty driving!?
