The 2010 Formula One Season

[rixalex]

^some drivers use the runoffs to overtake and then try to justify that the other driver 'forced me over' when they don't want to give the place back.

Not mentioning any names mind

Aah yes..........Spa 2008 remember it well

(OK, i'll bite.)

I think though everyone (bar perhaps Alonso fans ) would concede that the situation in Spa 2008 was a more debatable infringement than the one PattayaParent refers to, because the place was actually given back before being retaken. Now i'm sure your argument will be that nevertheless, an advantage was gained by using the runoff, and i think you would be correct, but what then if an advantage of a different sort is gained by using the runoffs? - say for example that a driver brakes too late into a corner and rather than attempt to make the corner and inevitably spin the car, they use the runoff to avoid this happening, and in doing so the advantage isn't making up a place, but just as crucial, preventing the driver who was running a few seconds behind them from catching and passing. Do you want to penalise this, and if not, why not?

[b19bry]

I must admit, i wasn't particularly aware that other teams had been calling "foul".

Red Bull

What Ferrari did in my opinion

And in my opinion certain factions with an agenda are making a mountain from a molehill. As far as I'm concerned a more serious issue is the move Vettel made at the start and Schumacher's move on Barrichello in the next race. Steps need to be taken to improve the standards of driving before a major incident happens.

Well if we take this forum as an example, i think Alonso is far from being the only driver to get a lot of flack. Lewis, Schumi, Senna to name a few

Yes you're right that comments are made against all these drivers. but only Alonso and Schumacher are subjected to personal insults and character assassination. I think criticism is acceptable when justified with a solid argument, what I'm referring to are the very personal, often juvenile insults and jibes pointed at Alonso and to a lesser degree Schumacher (and I'm pretty critical of MS).

When I first followed GP racing most fans had a love for the sport (which it was then) and a respect for all the drivers even though they may have had their own favourites. There was even a camaraderie between the drivers, halcyon days.

[b19bry]

^some drivers use the runoffs to overtake and then try to justify that the other driver 'forced me over' when they don't want to give the place back.

Not mentioning any names mind

Aah yes..........Spa 2008 remember it well

(OK, i'll bite.)

I kind of thought you might

As I keep saying I'm no particular Alonso fan and though PP's post was obviously pointed at him I was making the point that he's not the only guilty party. What Alonso did at Silverstone was wrong and it was obvious he would be penalised, but the same applies to Hamilton's move in Spa and I'm sure there are others. It's pointless to try and make out one is more than the other unless you have some 'agenda'.

[rixalex]

As I keep saying I'm no particular Alonso fan and though PP's post was obviously pointed at him I was making the point that he's not the only guilty party. What Alonso did at Silverstone was wrong and it was obvious he would be penalised, but the same applies to Hamilton's move in Spa and I'm sure there are others. It's pointless to try and make out one is more than the other unless you have some 'agenda'.

Firstly, "make out one is more than the other"??? More what? I simply stated how the two incidents differed in nature. You surely don't deny they do differ?

Secondly, your insunuations and accusations at others being driven by an agenda are fine but please don't be so quick to exclude yourself.

[rixalex]

And in my opinion certain factions with an agenda are making a mountain from a molehill. As far as I'm concerned a more serious issue is the move Vettel made at the start and Schumacher's move on Barrichello in the next race. Steps need to be taken to improve the standards of driving before a major incident happens.

To me that's like saying in footballing terms that match-fixing is not such a big deal and that of more concern are nasty tackles from behind.

[rixalex]

but only Alonso and Schumacher are subjected to personal insults and character assassination.

Then you are obviously not aware of the reception Lewis has received in Spain from certain "fans".

[b19bry]

Firstly, "make out one is more than the other"??? More what? I simply stated how the two incidents differed in nature. You surely don't deny they do differ?

'More serious', 'more deserving of censure'

They do not materially differ, in both cases a driver attempted to secure a place by using more of the track than is allowable.

Secondly, your insunuations and accusations at others being driven by an agenda are fine but please don't be so quick to exclude yourself.

Sure I have an agenda, I've made that clear, it's about treating the drivers equally in such a situation rather than trying to single one out for censure.

[b19bry]

To me that's like saying in footballing terms that match-fixing is not such a big deal

I can't take that seriously, you're overstating your case........ everyone knows team orders happen. Match fixing on the other hand is a serious criminal offense.

and that of more concern are nasty tackles from behind.

I can't recall anyone dying as a result of a nasty tackle ? In any case there are red and yellow cards for such an offense in football. There are little or no penalties for dangerous driving in F1.

Edited August 14, 2010 by b19bry

[b19bry]

but only Alonso and Schumacher are subjected to personal insults and character assassination.

Then you are obviously not aware of the reception Lewis has received in Spain from certain "fans".

I must admit I'm not a regular observer of the Spanish media.

[rixalex]

Firstly, "make out one is more than the other"??? More what? I simply stated how the two incidents differed in nature. You surely don't deny they do differ?

'More serious', 'more deserving of censure'

They do not materially differ, in both cases a driver attempted to secure a place by using more of the track than is allowable.

Of course they differ. Such matters are rarely black and white, and decisions often come down to interpretation of the rules.

Take the example you raised of Spa 08. The rules state that if a driver cuts a corner and gains a place he must give that place back. This is what Lewis did - he gained a place and gave it back. However, he was deemed to have gained extra straight line speed which unfairly gave him an advantage in retaking the place shortly after he had conceded it back. This is a much grayer area and raises the issue that i mentioned of other types of advantage that may be gained from straightening out a corner.

Alonso's incident was quite different and much simpler to rule on in that going into the corner he was behind, but coming out and having left the track in the meantime, he was ahead.

[rixalex]

To me that's like saying in footballing terms that match-fixing is not such a big deal

I can't take that seriously, you're overstating your case........ everyone knows team orders happen. Match fixing on the other hand is a serious criminal offense.

Just because everyone knows something illegal is happening doesn't mean we should all just pipe down and let it be. As i have said, team orders that don't appear to be blatantly changing the finishing order will be turned a blind eye to, if for no other reason than it being quite impossible to prove. On the other hand, team orders that bring about one driver slowing to allow another to pass through and claim victory will never be acceptable all the time there is a Driver's Championship and both those drivers are supposedly in contention for it. "Other teams do it / have done it" is no reason to not be against the practice either.

[rixalex]

There are little or no penalties for dangerous driving in F1.

Penalities are there in the rules and they have been applied in the past. Perhaps not as much as they should have, but personally, if i have to choose between over-zealous and "under-zealous" officiating, it's not a tough choice.

[b19bry]

Of course they differ. Such matters are rarely black and white, and decisions often come down to interpretation of the rules.

Take the example you raised of Spa 08. The rules state that if a driver cuts a corner and gains a place he must give that place back. This is what Lewis did - he gained a place and gave it back. However, he was deemed to have gained extra straight line speed which unfairly gave him an advantage in retaking the place shortly after he had conceded it back. This is a much grayer area and raises the issue that i mentioned of other types of advantage that may be gained from straightening out a corner.

Alonso's incident was quite different and much simpler to rule on in that going into the corner he was behind, but coming out and having left the track in the meantime, he was ahead.

The outcome for both was the same, so for the authorities at least, there was no material difference.

The fact that Lewis made a cynical move to let Raikonnen back passed while maintaining enough momentum to ensure he would immediately re-pass was clear to see and did nothing to lessen the infringement. There was no gray about it, at least to anyone with any experience of motor racing.

The fact the Lewis and/or Mclaren then had the temerity to take this to a tribunal was just taking the p!ss.

[b19bry]

To me that's like saying in footballing terms that match-fixing is not such a big deal

I can't take that seriously, you're overstating your case........ everyone knows team orders happen. Match fixing on the other hand is a serious criminal offense.

Just because everyone knows something illegal is happening doesn't mean we should all just pipe down and let it be. As i have said, team orders that don't appear to be blatantly changing the finishing order will be turned a blind eye to, if for no other reason than it being quite impossible to prove. On the other hand, team orders that bring about one driver slowing to allow another to pass through and claim victory will never be acceptable all the time there is a Driver's Championship and both those drivers are supposedly in contention for it. "Other teams do it / have done it" is no reason to not be against the practice either.

I agree with your first line but to equate team orders to match fixing and insinuate they are of the same magnitude is in my view silly.

I've already explained that in Ferrari's view Massa was out of serious contention for the championship while Alonso was falling behind and needed a result to get back in contention.

"Other teams do it / have done it" is the reality and it's foolish to pretend otherwise. I happen to think Ferrari made the right call.

[b19bry]

There are little or no penalties for dangerous driving in F1.

Penalities are there in the rules and they have been applied in the past. Perhaps not as much as they should have, but personally, if i have to choose between over-zealous and "under-zealous" officiating, it's not a tough choice.

Penalties may be there in the rules but they're rarely used in the case of dangerous driving. That's got us to where we are now in terms of driving standards. If, for example, Senna had been punished for launching his car at Prost in Suzuka in 1990 or Schumacher had suffered some consequences for taking Hill out in Adelaide in 94 maybe the drivers of today would be a little more circumspect and respectful to their rivals.

[rixalex]

The fact that Lewis made a cynical move to let Raikonnen back passed while maintaining enough momentum to ensure he would immediately re-pass was clear to see and did nothing to lessen the infringement. There was no gray about it, at least to anyone with any experience of motor racing.

The fact the Lewis and/or Mclaren then had the temerity to take this to a tribunal was just taking the p!ss.

No gray about it? You have got to be joking!

What you are saying is that drivers must not only concede the position gained back, they must judge how much extra momentum they gained and lose it before they are allowed to overtake again. And this is in the rules is it? Really? OK. And so how exacty does a driver go about judging precisely how much momentum he has gained? Sounds tricky. Sounds anything but black and white. Sounds very open to interpretation.

[rixalex]

I agree with your first line but to equate team orders to match fixing and insinuate they are of the same magnitude is in my view silly.

When team orders resemble what Ferrari did, they are equal to match fixing in my book and perhaps if you had had a wedge of money on Massa to have won that race, you might feel cheated too.

[rixalex]

I've already explained that in Ferrari's view Massa was out of serious contention for the championship while Alonso was falling behind and needed a result to get back in contention.

If we look at the table as it stands today:

Webber 161

Hamilton 157

Vettel 151

Button 147

Alonso 141

Massa 97

and then add on the extra points that Massa had to give to Alonso; and also remember it is 25 points for a win, Massa should not have been written off of the title. It's simply too early for that.

"Other teams do it / have done it" is the reality and it's foolish to pretend otherwise.

Who's pretending? I didn't say other teams don't do it / haven't done it, i said that that fact doesn't make it any more acceptable.

[b19bry]

The fact that Lewis made a cynical move to let Raikonnen back passed while maintaining enough momentum to ensure he would immediately re-pass was clear to see and did nothing to lessen the infringement. There was no gray about it, at least to anyone with any experience of motor racing.

The fact the Lewis and/or Mclaren then had the temerity to take this to a tribunal was just taking the p!ss.

No gray about it? You have got to be joking!

Not at all, like I said if you have any experience in motor sport it's clear to see.

What you are saying is that drivers must not only concede the position gained back, they must judge how much extra momentum they gained and lose it before they are allowed to overtake again. And this is in the rules is it? Really? OK. And so how exacty does a driver go about judging precisely how much momentum he has gained? Sounds tricky. Sounds anything but black and white. Sounds very open to interpretation.

Essentially yes to your first question, what Lewis should have done was wait till they had cleared La Source before launching another attack. It's not at all tricky, common sense really.

[b19bry]

I agree with your first line but to equate team orders to match fixing and insinuate they are of the same magnitude is in my view silly.

When team orders resemble what Ferrari did, they are equal to match fixing in my book and perhaps if you had had a wedge of money on Massa to have won that race, you might feel cheated too.

Gambling is always a risk !

[b19bry]

If we look at the table as it stands today:

Webber 161

Hamilton 157

Vettel 151

Button 147

Alonso 141

Massa 97

and then add on the extra points that Massa had to give to Alonso; and also remember it is 25 points for a win, Massa should not have been written off of the title. It's simply too early for that.

Even given the extra points for a win in Germany (7) and considering his pace relative to Alonso, Massa looks pretty much out of it given those numbers. All five drivers ahead of him have all got to start failing on a regular basis for him to get back in the hunt. Just ain't gonna happen.

[rixalex]

What you are saying is that drivers must not only concede the position gained back, they must judge how much extra momentum they gained and lose it before they are allowed to overtake again. And this is in the rules is it? Really? OK. And so how exacty does a driver go about judging precisely how much momentum he has gained? Sounds tricky. Sounds anything but black and white. Sounds very open to interpretation.

Essentially yes to your first question, what Lewis should have done was wait till they had cleared La Source before launching another attack. It's not at all tricky, common sense really.

As you obviously have the benefit of more experience in motor racing than I, perhaps you could quote for me exactly what the wording of this ruling is, because my understanding, limited though it obviously is, is that it simply states that cutting a corner and gaining a place is not allowed. All this business about not having gained extra momentum is i believe a stretching out of the rule that whilst might not be without some merit and reasoning, is open to serious debate and questioning as to exactly how it is applied.

[rixalex]

I agree with your first line but to equate team orders to match fixing and insinuate they are of the same magnitude is in my view silly.

When team orders resemble what Ferrari did, they are equal to match fixing in my book and perhaps if you had had a wedge of money on Massa to have won that race, you might feel cheated too.

Gambling is always a risk !

Indeed although somewhat less so if you are a Ferrari employee.

[b19bry]

As you obviously have the benefit of more experience in motor racing than I, perhaps you could quote for me exactly what the wording of this ruling is, because my understanding, limited though it obviously is, is that it simply states that cutting a corner and gaining a place is not allowed. All this business about not having gained extra momentum is i believe a stretching out of the rule that whilst might not be without some merit and reasoning, is open to serious debate and questioning as to exactly how it is applied.

Without wishing to be rude I suspect I probably do, you don't write as someone who has or has had involvement in the sport. Am I wrong ?

I'm struggling to find the actual rule but I think It goes beyond just taking a place, I believe it states something about 'gaining an advantage' which Lewis clearly did, no debate about it.

[rixalex]

Without wishing to be rude I suspect I probably do, you don't write as someone who has or has had involvement in the sport. Am I wrong ?

It depends what is deemed as involvement, but i'd rather not get into some form of pissing contest in comparing what qualifies us to comment. This is a public forum where all are welcome and everyone's opinion is equal, like it or not.

I'm struggling to find the actual rule but I think It goes beyond just taking a place, I believe it states something about 'gaining an advantage' which Lewis clearly did, no debate about it.

So what we are saying then is that the rule is black and white and anyone with knowledge of motor racing would know that Lewis broke the rule... but we are not sure what the exact rule is. As you say then, clearly no debate about it.

[F1fanatic]

Without wishing to be rude I suspect I probably do, you don't write as someone who has or has had involvement in the sport. Am I wrong ?

It depends what is deemed as involvement, but i'd rather not get into some form of pissing contest in comparing what qualifies us to comment. This is a public forum where all are welcome and everyone's opinion is equal, like it or not.

I'm struggling to find the actual rule but I think It goes beyond just taking a place, I believe it states something about 'gaining an advantage' which Lewis clearly did, no debate about it.

So what we are saying then is that the rule is black and white and anyone with knowledge of motor racing would know that Lewis broke the rule... but we are not sure what the exact rule is. As you say then, clearly no debate about it.

I think its the one about going off line and gaining an advantage....

[wackysleet]

To one and all, just my two pennys worth, over valued probably.

Facts are facts, frequently blurred by ambiguity of the rules and of course most individuals interpretations of said facts and rules but in my humble view and certainly not as an expert, that makes the topic purely subjective thus making everyones opinion valid, beg to differ people and move on.

The End.

P.S. Been nice chatting with you all. David.:jap:

[F1fanatic]

To one and all, just my two pennys worth, over valued probably.

Facts are facts, frequently blurred by ambiguity of the rules and of course most individuals interpretations of said facts and rules but in my humble view and certainly not as an expert, that makes the topic purely subjective thus making everyones opinion valid, beg to differ people and move on.

The End.

P.S. Been nice chatting with you all. David.:jap:

Have to agree. Having read thru' the last 2 pages - there was nothing to add other than common sense and the actual rule!

[b19bry]

Without wishing to be rude I suspect I probably do, you don't write as someone who has or has had involvement in the sport. Am I wrong ?

It depends what is deemed as involvement, but i'd rather not get into some form of pissing contest in comparing what qualifies us to comment. This is a public forum where all are welcome and everyone's opinion is equal, like it or not.

I don't mean to get into a pissing contest either, I was responding to the facetious comment in your previous post which in retrospect was wrong for me to do so and I apologise. Yes this forum is for all.

Edited August 14, 2010 by b19bry

[b19bry]

To one and all, just my two pennys worth, over valued probably.

Facts are facts, frequently blurred by ambiguity of the rules and of course most individuals interpretations of said facts and rules but in my humble view and certainly not as an expert, that makes the topic purely subjective thus making everyones opinion valid, beg to differ people and move on.

The End.

P.S. Been nice chatting with you all. David.:jap:

Have to agree. Having read thru' the last 2 pages - there was nothing to add other than common sense and the actual rule!

I guess you don't like my prose then

Seriously though, well said to you both !