Calling him out on his integrity? I'm pretty sure Stoner never thought that was what he was doing. He thought he was just criticizing Hayden for getting in the way, and that Hayden was getting in the way deliberately trying to get a tow. I don't think Stoner spent much time thinking about Hayden's honor or integrity.
Kropo, not only do you have a fantastic site, but you may also have a future as Casey’s spokesman. With all do respect, telling us what Stoner may have been “thinking” as a deviation of his actual words is actually not uncommon, but it is curious when one considers the source quote is so declarative.
We are still talking about the following quote right?
Stoner said. "It is frustrating as hell. I could understand if he accidentally got in my way but that was blatantly on purpose and that frustrated me a fair bit coming from a rider like Nicky, who I had a fair bit of respect for, so it's disappointing." Casey Stoner
Thanks for attempting to tell us what ‘you think’ Casey ‘may’ have been thinking (honestly, I do that often too), however, if you are right, it quite a deviation from what he actually said. Can we agree on that? You seem so surprised that one would conclude Stoner’s statement questioned ‘integrity’? When Stoner’s indictment here is fairly clear, and qualified it twice, first saying he could understand if it was “accidental” then, just in case somebody might want to tell us what he ‘really thought’ he left no more room for interpretation by saying it was “blatantly on purpose”. Still, it seems that wasn’t enough. Poor Stoner, even when he’s trying to be perfectly clear, with no uncertain terms, there’s still somebody ready to tell us what he ‘really’ thinks.
Kropo, based on your superb ability to transform expository writing into eloquent poetry, I think you might appreciate that words matter. Casey’s regard for Nicky wasn’t imagined, as he has stated several times he liked and respected Nicky and, particularly important, counted him as a friend. So coming out so harshly is what I find noteworthy, hence my take. Even when one of your friends ‘screws up’ (and we haven’t even debated the merit on this specific alleged balking, which for the record I think barely has standing, but not much, certainly not of the Randy Depuniet variety) you don’t go hammering him with a sledge hammer, in public no less. For the most part, when you think a friend has screwed up, one’s response is understandably measured…because he’s your friend. Stoner’s words were not measured in the least, quite decidedly the opposite. Was it not? Or was he ‘thinking it’ but just allowing his mouth to conduct a verbal outburst?
Stoner was being a .... about someone being on the racing line, he's always being a .... about someone being on the racing line. He has a point, it's pretty dangerous, but that doesn't mean he's not being a .... about it. After every debrief when Stoner complains about another rider (and it's almost every race weekend), the press come out shaking their heads, mystified about his complaints. The man is routinely half a second quicker than the rest of field, yet he's fussing about riders who are 1 or 2 seconds a lap slower than him getting a tow, laying into them for being dangerous. Then, of course, the press all scuttle away and write sensationalist stories with the gold Stoner has just handed them.
Here was Nicky response
"But I was on an out lap, and with these bikes on cold tires it's not easy. It's a laugh -- he carried on for a whole lap.” Nicky Hayden
See that second sentence? So Casey didn’t let it go with a “get your head out of your ...” wave. Which, I don’t have a problem with, heat of the moment type stuff. I observed Stoner wave at Nicky in real time. Then I watched on the track screen Stoner toy with Nicky letting him pass, then overtake, and giving him the helmet stare version of the evil eye. If safety was the concern, he forgot about it as he was ‘seeing red.’ One might say something similar to ‘not thinking clearly on the track’ (ironically, what he’s agree about). It’s was still a hot track, his antics were by his own standards, inappropriate. But I suppose this would best be a conversation for Stoner, as I don’t think you’re particularly making an argument of what constitutes proper track behavior.
For what it's worth, what I took away from that complaint was that Stoner was surprised at Hayden, that he regards Hayden as someone who is much better than that. Stoner never questions the integrity of riders like Hector Barbera because he doesn't think they have any, they're always looking for a tow and they're don't care that they're being dangerous and in the way.
Wait, was Casey Stoner accusing Nicky of trying to get a “tow”? Are you familiar with denying the correlative? I understand from his quote that he was upset at the “blatant on purpose” ‘balking’, because he was on a fast lap. To me, Casey seemed upset that his fast lap was screwed up, not so much that anybody was looking for a tow or a concern for safety. When he complained about Randy, he was clearly talking about safety, as he mentioned the speed differential was scary, this incident wasn’t of that variety, but rather of the variety that he met up with Nicky while he was on a fast lap and the lap was spoiled. Its here on this thread and the ether of the post-spectator-perspective raising the concern that he was harsh because of “safety” though, its a deviation from his quote.
For the record, I have been accused of misrepresenting some facts intentionally (most notably Burgess' "80 seconds" quote). Mostly, I just think ".... 'em". When I do things wrong (which is all the time) I try to hold my hand up and own up. But what other people think of me is largely irrelevant, and not something I can do much to change.
This is interesting. On your post Saturday round up, you spoke of Casey’s understandable feelings of vindication. You asked a rather, shall we say,
“captivating” question…
<from your site>,
I asked Stoner whether he took any pleasure in seeing Rossi struggle on the bike, after Rossi had made a few pointed comments about the Australian's performance on the bike in 2010, suggesting that it was hard to tell the potential of the 2010 Ducati because Stoner simply wasn't riding it hard enough.
What ever he responded must have been well measured, because he didn’t bite on the Rossi calling him out thing, but had comment on Burgess’ take regarding the now infamous ‘fixing the bike in 80 seconds’. He took most offense at this, as he described just how annoyed he was and equated Burgess’ comments as calling his team ‘stupid & useless”. Interesting, so Stoner does think words matter too. And he can extrapolate meaning from their intent as well, so it seems a bit far fetched that in this case regarding Nikcy, his discharges suddenly have a more benign meaning.
I found your questioning ‘fascinating’ for many reasons, one of them was because I had confronted Burgess myself at Indy about his eching suggestion that Casey wasn’t riding hard enough. As I felt he had questioned Stoner’s
integrity (that's what it is) when he suggested it seemed to him Casey was now riding for Honda (while still contracted to Ducati). Incidentally, do you have another take on what Burgess really meant? I asked Burgess and he said he stood by his words, though I told him, how could he say this if Stoner had already demonstrated that the front end of his bike was precarious. He even replied, “is it” as if to say, it doesn’t look like anything is wrong with it to him. Clearly incredulous to the problems everybody except him accepted about the Ducati, which at the time had the tell tail winglets. I walked away thinking, damn, this dude has balls calling Stoner out like that. And it seems Stoner had the same reaction as I read on your site concerning Burgess’ assessments from a distance. I’m just wondering, if you did have an alternate interpretation of Burgess’ suggestion, and perhaps a gauge on what he might have been thinking when he made his declaration, did you share that with Stoner?
You mention below, we spectators hang on every word from these sport principals and scrutinize their pronouncements, as if they were scripture (dismissing or highlighting); yet, based on your round up cited, it seems we’re all (journalist, principals, and mere spectators) are guilty of it, eh?
