Team New McLaren set to cause controversy - Page 2

TWRv12 · 1 Feb 2012, 13:11 (Ref:3019811)

sky sports story missing too
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12433/7467619/

May have been off the record quote

Marbot · 1 Feb 2012, 13:17 (Ref:3019815)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWRv12

May have been off the record quote

Indeed. It's entirely possible that at least one McLaren employee has had a bit of a talking to in the last 24 hours.

kimbo · 1 Feb 2012, 15:27 (Ref:3019847)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

Indeed. It's entirely possible that at least one McLaren employee has had a bit of a talking to in the last 24 hours.

Martin Whitmarsh made a kind of oblique referance to the effect that 'some employees are somewhat better informed than others' during the new car launch - maybe connected to the above?
Kim

Mr V · 1 Feb 2012, 16:07 (Ref:3019859)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

I don't suppose that it's going to go down too well with your team that you've pointed out that your car is a bit 'iffy' and that Vettel is actually quicker than your own drivers.

So maybe, as oppossed to spending extra millions on the car, Mac ought to just buy Vettel out of his contract

Mr V · 1 Feb 2012, 16:14 (Ref:3019865)

McLaren yet to work out Neweys secret according to Mark Hughes.

[disclaimer]Please be advised that that link will take you to Sky Sports, so those forum members who want nothing to do with Murdoch's evil empire should not click, you have been warned!!!!

[/disclaimer]

gregc · 1 Feb 2012, 16:24 (Ref:3019869)

It's ok, looking at the link doesn't involve giving the ***** any money

Marbot · 1 Feb 2012, 16:25 (Ref:3019872)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr V

So maybe, as oppossed to spending extra millions on the car, Mac ought to just buy Vettel out of his contract

Or pay another visit to a photocopy shop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr V

McLaren yet to work out Neweys secret according to Mark Hughes.

[disclaimer]Please be advised that that link will take you to Sky Sports, so those forum members who want nothing to do with Murdoch's evil empire should not click, you have been warned!!!!

[/disclaimer]

Maybe the 'real' McLaren car is the one that was talked about in the 'missing link'?

NaBUru38 · 1 Feb 2012, 16:33 (Ref:3019877)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregc

It's ok, looking at the link doesn't involve giving the ***** any money

But the advertirsers do pay Murdoch's empire, so it does make good him.

gregc · 1 Feb 2012, 16:35 (Ref:3019878)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

But the advertirsers do pay Murdoch's empire, so it does make good him.

adblock plus

NaBUru38 · 2 Feb 2012, 15:15 (Ref:3020356)

Even if you don't watch the ads, the ads are loaded and Murdoch gets paid. Only you know you aren't watching the ads.

fourWheelDrift · 2 Feb 2012, 17:22 (Ref:3020506)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Even if you don't watch the ads, the ads are loaded and Murdoch gets paid. Only you know you aren't watching the ads.

I don't like to argue but the http requests for the ads are sent by the web browser based on code included in the html of the web page, just like any image/video etc... ad blockers work by detecting which code calls the ads and either removing it before the browser renders the page, suppressing the requests or generating an artificial response which comes from the adblocker software rather than the advertiser so the ads are not viewed and becuase you don't have to wait for them you get a faster browsing experience too.

I don't use an ad blocker personally but I know how they work becuase I earn my daily crust by developing web applications.

**Aysedasi** · 2 Feb 2012, 18:20 (Ref:3020540)

I thought this thread was about the hugely controversial new McLaren with all those.....hugely controversial......bits that it.....might have.......

Still, I suppose blocking ads is probably more interesting......

Marbot · 2 Feb 2012, 18:31 (Ref:3020550)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I thought this thread was about the hugely controversial new McLaren with all those.....hugely controversial......bits that it.....might have.......

Well, they did have plenty of time to take'em off, after someone had pointed out to us, albeit fleetingly, that they might actually be something worth talking about. As it is, the McLaren is something of a disappointment in its current state.

Someone put an image of the Caterham on the web (can't find it now) in McLaren colours, and it actually looked much more purposeful than the real thing. Maybe the McLaren looks more of an 'aggressive' design in green?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Still, I suppose blocking ads is probably more interesting......

It is at the moment.

**Bononi** · 2 Feb 2012, 18:41 (Ref:3020558)

Well, blocking ads is controversial !

gregc · 2 Feb 2012, 19:51 (Ref:3020620)

In my defence I would point out this...
<-------

When a site is forward thinking enough to provide a way to view it without ads I'm more than happy to pay for the privilege. If only more places were as flexible (I'm looking at you, Digital Spy....).

</shameless plug/crawl to the mods>

I never thought that one little post was going to cause McLaren levels of controversy! Oh, wait...

Naburu - in my case the ads won't get loaded even without that particular measure, there's no place like 127.0.0.1

And on topic...

Surely there will be much controversy over the slightly taller rear wing endplates! This should be banned forthwith!

Pingguest · 3 Feb 2012, 08:38 (Ref:3020892)

Isn't it the case that, as long as Formula 1 isn't fully-standardized, any car is set to cause some sort of 'controversy'?

**Aysedasi** · 3 Feb 2012, 08:49 (Ref:3020897)

I think that's what the media boys would like us to believe, yes........

Marbot · 3 Feb 2012, 10:49 (Ref:3020951)

So far it would seem that the only controversy being caused is one of McLaren not actually being controversial. Quite the opposite in fact.

I await the launch of the Red Bull to see just how uncontroversial McLaren have been.

Pingguest · 3 Feb 2012, 13:49 (Ref:3021029)

So far the McLaren is controversial in the sense that it lacks the ugly nose.

**Aysedasi** · 3 Feb 2012, 14:55 (Ref:3021053)

I think it's a bloody disgrace that a team like McLaren should be allowed to even think of introducing a new F1 car which is completely lacking in controversy. I'm disgusted that the FIA have kowtowed to this team in such a blatant way. We can only hope that this initial indication proves to be as far-fetched as it sounds and that the controversy we know and respect F1 for will make itself known before the sport's reputation suffers any further......

Marbot · 3 Feb 2012, 16:18 (Ref:3021088)

I'm sure that normal service will be resumed at some time before the first race.

wolfhound · 3 Feb 2012, 18:26 (Ref:3021159)

Did anyone notice the hole in the fron of the MP4-27's nose, I suspect the air entering it has some effect on the front wing but what, or is it simply to keep Lewis cool?!?!

**Adam43** · 3 Feb 2012, 19:10 (Ref:3021181)

While the above post is probably just to make the comment about Louise I'll comment just in case:

These vents have been standard for quite a few years now.

NaBUru38 · 3 Feb 2012, 23:50 (Ref:3021272)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pingguest

So far the McLaren is controversial in the sense that it lacks the ugly nose.

It's a disgrace! :P

JeremySmith · 4 Feb 2012, 00:43 (Ref:3021287)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam43

While the above post is probably just to make the comment about Louise I'll comment just in case:

These vents have been standard for quite a few years now.

Precisely...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Controversy at the Australian Titles	marcus	Kart Racing	2	9 Apr 2010 09:29
[Rumours] KERS it! More controversy on its way?	mjstallard	Formula One	5	1 Apr 2009 12:20
Todt hints for an agreement: STR set for Ferrari power and RBR set for Renault power	Pro Racer	Formula One	10	3 Oct 2006 12:05
Jacques set to join Mclaren for 2003?	freud	Formula One	38	30 May 2002 02:14