scottsdad

A few times you've suggested it's "laughable" that the achievements of perhaps the greatest racing driver of all time is on a par with, or better than, the fourth best tennis player of his generation. There is a case to be made either way but to be so dismissive of Clark isn't a great look. In 50 years someone will be saying "Andy Murray? Never heard of him. To suggest his achievements are anything like xxx xxxx is laughable and ludicrous" as we tend to look to our own generations of sportspeople. It's difficult enough comparing F1 drivers of different generations, never mind comparing across sports. But on Clark, even now half a century after his death, he is revered. The Times listed him as their greatest ever F1 driver in 2009. Ayron Senna visited Clark's old school and spoke to the pupils about how Clark inspired him to become a racing driver. The accolades go on.

Nail on the head here. Some Labour types will say Burnham but that missed two key points. First, he isn't an MP. Second, he's an utter lightweight that will inspire nobody to vote Labour.

The overturning of the conviction was on a technicality. If there had been a retrial and he had been found not guilty, perhaps more people would take your view.

I missed Question Time last night. In fact I've missed it for the past few years. Don't think I'm missing out.

Plenty of people complained, mostly about the statute of limitations.

Baws - strange that I can see other people swear but can't do it myself!

That's Formula 2. You can watch it on Sky Sports if you're interested.

He was one of the 3 greatest racing drivers of all time. But the point about who he was up against is fair enough. His opponents at the time include Graham Hill, Jack Brabham, John Surtees, Denny Hulme...and many more.

Steady on... F1 (alone) - 2 world championships, 33 pole positions and 25 race wins (from 72 races), won 100% of available points in two seasons, record percentage of laps led in a season, and still holds the record for races where he led every lap, got pole, fastest lap and win. Add to that he won the Indy 500 , British Touring Car Championship, French F2 championship and the Tasman Series three times. He died at 32 and could have won more - but I reckon that he stands well enough on his own. No where near as impressive as Andy Murray? I'd argue that point with you.

I'm inclined to agree. I'm an F1 fan so know who he is, and have watched documentaries about the man. But if you're not into F1, would you know much about a driver who died over 50 years ago?

This is Hamilton's legacy problem in F1. He never really had a great rival. Who would you say he was against, Vettel? Rosberg? Hardly Senna/Prost, Fangio/Moss, Schumacher/Hakkinen. But in Scottish terms, Clark is the best F1 driver - even better than Jackie Stewart. In fairness, Stewart has said this as well.

Scunthorpe Scunthorp Scunthor Scuntho Scunth Scunt c**t

Gotcha, thanks!

Two things really. First, pre-widescale internet, people got their news from TV bulletins and newspapers. Nothing else. The internet has allowed people to access news sources way beyond this, diluting the reach of the newspapers. Secondly, as the newspapers shrink their staff also shrinks. Many news outlets recycle articles around, especially when they have a common owner. The diversity and quality of their offering is less than it was. They had a real power and monopoly in the 80s and 90s that they simply don't now.

Sure you can. And more, you can discuss why they're different.

Blast from the past!

John McVeigh is a tit This could be fun - any other requests?

You can't beat the American justice system! I wonder if he was poor and not famous if they would think him "unlikely to re-offend"

We've never had positive test numbers this high before. The most we had in January was (I think) 2,649 in a day. That was January 7th. On January 23rd we peaked at 2,026 in hospital. So we're at 60% more cases, and (currently) 84% fewer hospitalisations. Though, if we assume today is the peak of cases (which it isn't) we won't see peak hospitalisations for a couple of weeks.

Is this the delay from the Lighthouse labs?

The man is a picture of health.

Just in my own experience, pre (say) 2005 politics was conducted differently. And yes there was back-biting, smears, rumours and all that. But for me social media - especially Twitter - has turned it both nasty, and immediate. The flip side is the (very welcome) deterioration of the power of the press. In the 80s and 90s the newspapers really could swing an election. Neil Kinnock never stood a chance when the whole British press, read every morning by families up and down the country, was against him. Nowadays few people buy and read a newspaper every day. This is why I don't buy the argument that the press killed off Jeremy Corbyn.

On Cosby, the statute of limitations in the states where he was accused was 10 years. So anything pre-2004 was not possible to be charged. That left just one accusation as a possibility, the one being looked at here. You might not find it overwhelming but once it came out that he was being pursued for this one case, 60 women came forward to state that he assaulted them in years going back to the 1960s. California has now got rid of their 10 year statute of limitations as a result of this. And this instance of him being let out will, I think, not help women feel willing to come forward against powerful men in future.

Interesting point on the testing I heard discussed on radio. A lot of people are using lateral flow tests as a screener. They test negative and do no more. But if they test positive, then they go for a PCR test. In other words, a lot of potentially negative testers are being weeded out, making the % figure here higher than it would have been if everyone who did a test, did a PCR one. 6 deaths is more than we like to see, but at least still in single figures. ICU down again.