In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
> if hamilton hadn't had some poor races during the season, then the engine failures wouldn't have been able to make a difference.
> hamilton also seems to forget that it was Massa's engine trouble with 2 laps to go back in 2009 that helped him to his first title- so, as in all sports, with 'external factors'/luck, you win some, you lose some.
But that's what we are saying, Rosberg was lucky to win and if it is based purely on merit Hamilton deserved it more than Rosberg as he was the better driver of the two (there may be other drivers in other teams who are better than either, or drivers in other champs that never get the chance etc but here we're talking about Rosberg or Hamilton). You say originally Rosberg deserved the win, I'm still not sure why you say that? Because he's a better driver, because he's fought his way up from the slums to reach the peak of the sport, because you think he's a nicer guy than Hamilton? I'll ask again, why did Hamilton deserve to lose?
> probably best if hamilton took a leaf out of rosberg's book and kept his mouth shut for now- but no, he's at it again:
Dunno, Rosbsberg is a bit whiney himself
> sad to see him diminishing himself that way. a great driver, but on this evidence, not a great champion...
You seem to be conflating the F1 world championship with a popularity contest? On your evidence I'm guessing you don't rate Schumacher, Senna or Vettel as great champions, all prone to little outbursts, tantrums (and running opponents off the road in two cases)?
PS, I don't particularly like Hamilton!