Well notice i called you a Boner (preferred term i believe) because i like you. I refrained from calling you a Neo Bopper so be grateful
I refuse to be drawn into a debate about Jerez 05. The only point it would serve is to take the focus away from todays incident and the comments that followed. You Boners and Neo's have used that tactic too many times when your god comes under fire for wrong doing. Besides i have not seen the 05 race for many years as i understand you are yet to see todays race so i will not comment unlike you.
Ah, the old line that has been used and ignored many times by many.
I am not commenting on the incident from a visual view and have made that perfectly clear but am commenting on the written word by yourself and for particular (and dare I say obvious) reasons of direct comparison between two like incidents.
You are correct in that people do raise comparitive issues as that is part of debate is it not when one can highlight a situation from past that was similar in order to make a point or seek clarification?
Why, as examples over the last few years we have seen numerous cases where people have asked 'why did this occur in 2011/2012 when no punishment was forthcoming in other years' (ie. the Simoncelli ride through at LeMans). Basically, people always use comparitive incidents as they set or are a precedent for what is deemed acceptable or not acceptable and whilst some aspects of tehse may change over time, essentially the incidents remain usable and discussable for debate.
In short, Stoner's move on Bautista has opened up dabate as to whether it was reckless, dangerous, negligent, deliberate, accidental etc, which is of course a fair amalgam of opinions. As a comparison similar incidents have occurred in the past with differeng results and discussion and that is what debate is about.
Did I ask about the Gibber v Rossi incident to debate?
Well not entirely but I did ask so as to highlight the differences that the riders involved can make to a viewers perception of the incident and Casey Stoner is after all a totally polarising figure within teh sport.
Your view (and that is what it is afterall - neither right nor wrong) is that it was a move that was (my term here) totally unnecessary and boneheaded ................ correct me if I have that wrong by the way.
I have no issues with the description as I am yet to see footage of the issue (have seen pics and still photos can at times not show the full story) but my take is that if Stoner is admitting fault than he ...... up. No excuses, he ...... up and he has admitted fault (yes Goat's link says different etc but still there is/was an apology and one can understand Alvaro being pissed)