Pants and nose rings and driver safety

[mw88]

jm doc said:

Who else is being targetted?

No one is being "targeted".

People wanted the FIA to enforce the rules as they're written.

The FIA are now enforcing a pretty simple rule which has been in place for decades, just not enforced strictly.

There's bigger issues the FIA can deal with and they probably didn't expect this much noise around it but you can't complain about rules not being followed and then complain when they enforce rules.

[Red9zero]

andygo said:

One of the quotes from Hamilton I read early on in this spat was that he had a piercing in a place, "he couldn't mention".

It may be quite a large accoutrement judging by the theatrical adjustment of his crotch area every time he gets into the car. (Once seen you notice it every time unfortunately. ).

The porpoising could be fun with a big industrial PA down there

[Siao]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Siao said:

Bloody hell, this is so amusing. First the FIA are idiots that they didn't enforce their own rules last year. Now they are idiots that they are enforcing their own rules.

Can't freaking win...

Yeah, right. Cos it is exactly what is going on here isn't it.

The whole thing feels like when you tell off your grumpy teenager, and they try to petulantly make some kind of point by going too much the other way. Anyone who has been a parent to teenage kids will know what I am talking about.

It is exactly that, cherry picking the rules they like and the ones they don't; you either follow all the rules or you don't. There is no rule-o-meter to measure which rule you think is more important, they should all be adhered to, especially driver safety rules.

It is incredible that there is a rule that has been there from before most of these guys were racing. If they are admitting they don't know the rules of their profession, maybe it is not the best idea to rebel against the FIA. Bad policing is not an excuse to overrule the regs, two wrongs don't make a right.

We can agree to disagree otherwise.

[Siao]

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Who else is being targetted?

No one is being "targeted".

People wanted the FIA to enforce the rules as they're written.

The FIA are now enforcing a pretty simple rule which has been in place for decades, just not enforced strictly.

There's bigger issues the FIA can deal with and they probably didn't expect this much noise around it but you can't complain about rules not being followed and then complain when they enforce rules.

Thank you, you've put it much better than myself!

[thegreenhell]

Davie_GLA said:

I laughed out loud when I saw Hamilton with THREE watches on “they are set to three different time zones in case I get a call from them”…

He said he's going to wear four watches next time.

[Tazar]

Rules are rules for a reason.
Organising bodies make them for their own protection and for the individuals taking part.
At all levels of sports, from the child competing at the lowest level to that of world championships all must abide by the rules or they cannot compete.

Simple, rules must be followed without exemptions.

[jm doc]

Siao said:

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Who else is being targetted?

No one is being "targeted".

People wanted the FIA to enforce the rules as they're written.

The FIA are now enforcing a pretty simple rule which has been in place for decades, just not enforced strictly.

There's bigger issues the FIA can deal with and they probably didn't expect this much noise around it but you can't complain about rules not being followed and then complain when they enforce rules.

Thank you, you've put it much better than myself!

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

[mw88]

jm doc said:

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

What are the exceptions?

I can't see anything about exceptions in the ISC.

[a_dreamer]

thegreenhell said:

He said he's going to wear four watches next time.

It's very Jake Paul

[MarkwG]

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

What are the exceptions?

I can't see anything about exceptions in the ISC.

There seems to be some, as yet unconfirmed, reports that wedding rings are allowed.

[Red9zero]

MarkwG said:

There seems to be some, as yet unconfirmed, reports that wedding rings are allowed.

When I've been in hospital recently, they preferred wedding rings off, or if not possible, then wrapped in surgical tape. I assume they could do the same in F1.

[mw88]

MarkwG said:

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

What are the exceptions?

I can't see anything about exceptions in the ISC.

There seems to be some, as yet unconfirmed, reports that wedding rings are allowed.

Looking forward to see how people claim Hamilton should be eligible for that exception if that's the case. Maybe he'll get married before Barcelona

[jm doc]

MarkwG said:

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

What are the exceptions?

I can't see anything about exceptions in the ISC.

There seems to be some, as yet unconfirmed, reports that wedding rings are allowed.

Wedding rings are to be allowed according to The Times this morning. If that is correct, which seems likely given the source, the FIA are making themselves look worse with every pronouncement. The anti-Hamilton agenda is becoming more apparent and quite disturbing.

[Red9zero]

mw88 said:

MarkwG said:

mw88 said:

jm doc said:

Except, we now learn there are EXCEPTIONS to this rule. Do those exceptions apply to Hamilton? No.

Well what a surprise.

Bang goes all those muppets saying "it's not aimed at Hamilton" "everyone has to obey the rules" You can't make exceptions" "He's not been targetted"

Flamed.

What are the exceptions?

I can't see anything about exceptions in the ISC.

There seems to be some, as yet unconfirmed, reports that wedding rings are allowed.

Looking forward to see how people claim Hamilton should be eligible for that exception if that's the case. Maybe he'll get married before Barcelona

Doesn't say the wedding ring has to be on your finger

[mw88]

Red9zero said:

Doesn't say the wedding ring has to be on your finger

Fair point, but I think there's a prerequisite of being married before it's classed as a wedding ring

[Clockwork Cupcake]

mw88 said:

Looking forward to see how people claim Hamilton should be eligible for that exception if that's the case. Maybe he'll get married before Barcelona

He should come out as gay and marry a guy. That would REALLY get some PHers frothing. It'd be a double whammy.

[thegreenhell]

mw88 said:

Red9zero said:

Doesn't say the wedding ring has to be on your finger

Fair point, but I think there's a prerequisite of being married before it's classed as a wedding ring

But what makes a wedding ring safer than any other ring? There is no logical argument for it, so it's simple discrimination in that case.

[Tyre Smoke]

I agree, but the wedding ring has always been something that has been 'exempted' in industry. Fir example, when I was in the meat processing industry, no jewellery. Except plain band wedding rings. So it isn't just the FIA. It's some sort of universal thing.

[a_dreamer]

Tyre Smoke said:

I agree, but the wedding ring has always been something that has been 'exempted' in industry. Fir example, when I was in the meat processing industry, no jewellery. Except plain band wedding rings. So it isn't just the FIA. It's some sort of universal thing.

Nah it's defo an anti Hamilton thing. Defo. He knows the world is flat and they want to discredit him before he tells the world the truth

[mw88]

thegreenhell said:

But what makes a wedding ring safer than any other ring? There is no logical argument for it, so it's simple discrimination in that case.

What makes it safer? Nothing.

But the logical argument is that there's a long history of both religious and cultural significance surrounding a wedding rings that goes back a few thousand years. It's a pretty standard exemption.

There's no logical reason for Christmas Day to be different to any other day, other than someone's imaginary friend did something thousands of years ago.

Not everything is a conspiracy against Lewis.