Even before the events at Singapore came to light, there were those who said Lewis Hamilton did not deserve to be the 2008 World Drivers' Champion.
Some claimed that as a result of "Spygate", the McLaren car contained Ferrari IP and therefore should have been disqualified from the Championship. This is despite it being proven by the FIA that this was not the case.
Yet others claimed that there was some sort of conspiracy during the last race which saw Timo Glock slow dramatically allowing Hamilton to secure the 5th place he needed.
Again this is despite the fact that Glock was on dry tyres on a wet track and Glock's team mate, Jarno Trulli actually recorded a slower time on his final lap.
And now there's "Crashgate" which saw current race leader Felipe Massa lose out due to a bungled pit stop after Nelson Piquet deliberately crashed to maximise team mate Alonso's chances.
If the crash had not happened and Massa and Hamilton had finished where they were prior to the crash, then the points after Singapore would have been Hamilton 86, Massa 87.
If this was translated to the final standings then it would have resulted in the WDC going to Massa on 107 points with Hamilton runner up on 100 points.
Of course the crash did happen and Hamilton managed to secure 3rd place and 6 points at Singapore with Massa trailing home in 13th.
That gave Hamilton a 7 point lead over Massa with 3 races to go.
What we don't know is what would have happened in the remaining races if Massa had left Singapore leading the WDC by 1 point.
Would Massa have suffered from nerves or changed his strategy to be more cautious?
Likewise, would Hamilton have gone more aggressive, especially so at Brazil which saw him qualify in 4th place?
So is Hamilton's first WDC going to be considered as flawed with caveats always being applied to it or did he win it fairly and squarely?
Some claimed that as a result of "Spygate", the McLaren car contained Ferrari IP and therefore should have been disqualified from the Championship. This is despite it being proven by the FIA that this was not the case.
Yet others claimed that there was some sort of conspiracy during the last race which saw Timo Glock slow dramatically allowing Hamilton to secure the 5th place he needed.
Again this is despite the fact that Glock was on dry tyres on a wet track and Glock's team mate, Jarno Trulli actually recorded a slower time on his final lap.
And now there's "Crashgate" which saw current race leader Felipe Massa lose out due to a bungled pit stop after Nelson Piquet deliberately crashed to maximise team mate Alonso's chances.
If the crash had not happened and Massa and Hamilton had finished where they were prior to the crash, then the points after Singapore would have been Hamilton 86, Massa 87.
If this was translated to the final standings then it would have resulted in the WDC going to Massa on 107 points with Hamilton runner up on 100 points.
Of course the crash did happen and Hamilton managed to secure 3rd place and 6 points at Singapore with Massa trailing home in 13th.
That gave Hamilton a 7 point lead over Massa with 3 races to go.
What we don't know is what would have happened in the remaining races if Massa had left Singapore leading the WDC by 1 point.
Would Massa have suffered from nerves or changed his strategy to be more cautious?
Likewise, would Hamilton have gone more aggressive, especially so at Brazil which saw him qualify in 4th place?
So is Hamilton's first WDC going to be considered as flawed with caveats always being applied to it or did he win it fairly and squarely?
fjvv9s7]Yes. His WDC is flawed
