Official 2010 F1 thread

ShakenNstirred · 18 Sep 2009 at 05:34

therealnerd2 said:
pics?

cant take cams though security or phones

sunama · 18 Sep 2009 at 05:35

stockhausen said:
Yeah, well that's Eddie Irvine, isn't it. I always found it difficult to take any of his pronouncements seriously, his only claim to fame was a little local difficulty with some guy called Senna or summat - http://www.themagicofsenna.com/senna/suzuka.html

Don't forget he was also famed for being a judge in beauty pagents and shagging the contestants in toilet cubicles.

sunama · 18 Sep 2009 at 05:43

JRS said:
On the plus side, no-one yet has managed to twist this latest saga round as Yet Another Pro-Ferrari Conspiracy™

Don't worry JRS, if Renault are dealt with in a leniant manner, I will explain the clear link towards Ferrari bias.

FrankJH · 18 Sep 2009 at 07:47

kaiowas said:
The 2 race ban wasn't suspended, he missed Italy and Portugal. You also omitted Spa where he had the foresight to spin 360 degrees over the kerbs thus wearing down the skid block under his car and was subseqently stripped of his win for this dastardly attempt to gain an unfair advantage. Given how hard the FIA tried to stop Schumacher winning the title that season (the Silverstone and Spa incidents combined banned him for 1/4 of the season) I fail to see how the Hill sympathisers can still claim Damon deserved the title that year.

Have you got any idea how tough it must have been in '94 to be in the Williams team after Imola (driving the same car, having to step up mid season from No2 to No1 as a British driver in a British team

Face it - Schumacher cheated time and time again, and Adelaide was far worse than what happened in the 97 clicncher (much more dangerous for the other driver) and yet the FIA barely slap his wrist for 97 and do nothing about 94

Without a shadow of a doubt Hill deserved the title in 94 and was cheated out of it wrongly (the Benetton was an illegal car top to bottom - yet they got away with it time and again , of course you would put things on a racing car and yet not actually use them BOL)

sunama · 18 Sep 2009 at 07:56

FrankJH said:
Have you got any idea how tough it must have been in '94 to be in the Williams team after Imola (driving the same car, having to step up mid season from No2 to No1 as a British driver in a British team

Not as difficult as it would've been for Hamilton to go up against the reigning World Champion, who was at the peak of his powers and matching him point for point, in his first season in F1.

If Hill (or anyone else) wants to be World Champion (which Hill eventually became), then they must expect to be thrown into difficult situations and fight on the track with the very best that F1 has to offer.

To say that Hill deserved the WDC simply because Senna died and Hill had to step as No.1 is a joke. Being WDC should mean that you and your car were the best during the course of the season and NOT be awarded in sympathy, which I think is what you are suggesting.

FrankJH · 18 Sep 2009 at 08:16

sunama said:
Not as difficult as it would've been for Hamilton to go up against the reigning World Champion, who was at the peak of his powers and matching him point for point, in his first season in F1.

If Hill (or anyone else) wants to be World Champion (which Hill eventually became), then they must expect to be thrown into difficult situations and fight on the track with the very best that F1 has to offer.

To say that Hill deserved the WDC simply because Senna died and Hill had to step as No.1 is a joke. Being WDC should mean that you and your car were the best during the course of the season and NOT be awarded in sympathy, which I think is what you are suggesting.

1stly I didnt say that , but because of how the italian law works, that accident rumbled on for years - but in 94 it must have been intense (with that hanging over your head how the *** is anyone meant to race naturally in the same car

Hill was 2nd in the team upto Imola which gave MS a huge advantage to start with

Actually Hamilton had it easy - it was ALL about the racing and nothing else (which he was obviously born to do) it was his natural environment, so completely different to what was going around the Williams team in 94

Still easier to battle when you arent racing an illegal car, and having incredibly dodgy tactics to win used against you imho

edit - it seems that everyone who belittles Hill's efforts in 94' particularly doesnt take a HUGE factor into account, so I stressed it - if he didnt deserve it he wouldnt have got the points he did (and remember if Hill had been team leader from the start of the season, its quite possible he would have amassed enough extra points for Adelaide to be irrelevant anyway)

JRS · 18 Sep 2009 at 08:23

stockhausen said:
However, I am quietly confident that the Dwarf will find a way of sweeping everything under the carpet

I'm not sure I see how he can.....this is a matter for the FIA and WMSC, not FOM.

Glaucus · 18 Sep 2009 at 08:32

stockhausen said:
How have team orders reduced cheating
.

As it is easier to spot and thus fia can penalise.

EddScott · 18 Sep 2009 at 12:22

stockhausen said:
However, I am quietly confident that the Dwarf will find a way of sweeping everything under the carpet

He does wield a particularly effective broom. Gold plated to,they say.

stockhausen · 18 Sep 2009 at 18:38

AcidHell2 said:
As it is easier to spot and thus fia can penalise.

I'm still not with you; how can team orders make it easier to spot cheating? Makes no sense at all to me.

Kenai · 18 Sep 2009 at 18:46

stockhausen said:
I'm still not with you; how can team orders make it easier to spot cheating? Makes no sense at all to me.

I think when people are saying 'since team orders' what they actually mean is 'since blatant team orders were banned'.

stockhausen · 19 Sep 2009 at 00:03

Alain Prost to take over at Renault F!?

Glaucus · 19 Sep 2009 at 00:04

Kenai said:
I think when people are saying 'since team orders' what they actually mean is 'since blatant team orders were banned'.

this

JRS · 19 Sep 2009 at 08:53

stockhausen said:
Alain Prost to take over at Renault F!?

I would have thought he'd had his fill of F1 team management in his last stint at the game. Where'd you hear that gem?

stockhausen · 19 Sep 2009 at 10:45

JRS said:
I would have thought he'd had his fill of F1 team management in his last stint at the game. Where'd you hear that gem?

Not where I first heard it but it was certainly in the Guardian yesterday:

Renault are considering who to turn to in the wake of Flavio Briatore's decision to step down from the team after the race-fixing scandal.

At present there are five names in the frame, with the most obvious being four-time world champion Alain Prost, who also ran his own Formula One team from 1997 to 2001 and drove for Renault in F1 from 1981 to 1983.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/sep/17/renault-alain-prost-flavio-briatore

Google is your friend

JRS · 19 Sep 2009 at 11:16

stockhausen said:
Not where I first heard it but it was certainly in the Guardian yesterday:

Google is your friend

the most obvious being four-time world champion Alain Prost, who also ran his own Formula One team from 1997 to 2001 and drove for Renault in F1 from 1981 to 1983.

Yes, I can really see him as the most obvious choice. After all, it's not like he was fired by Renault at the end of the '83 season or anythi-.....oh.

Eh, what the hell. Maybe the Grauniad has actually got it right for once.

stockhausen · 19 Sep 2009 at 13:49

Does the Piquet fiasco spell the end for Charlie Whiting?

Nelson Piquet Sr. has revealed that he first informed the FIA of Renault's race-fixing at last year's Singapore Grand Prix just weeks after the event had allegedly taken place. The three-times world champion claimed he told the FIA's race director Charlie Whiting about the incident at the Brazilian Grand Prix in November last year.
...
According to Piquet Sr, when he approached Mosley, the FIA president said: "Charlie has already informed me but we can't prove anything unless someone comes to tell me the facts." In the event, Piquet Sr. approached the FIA once again after his son was sacked by Renault at the end of July following a string of poor results. Piquet Jr. on this occasion provided a statement in which he alleged that Renault team principal Flavio Briatore and executive director of engineering Pat Symonds asked him to crash in order to boost the chances of team-mate Fernando Alonso.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12433_5569221,00.html

If Charlie Whiting knew that Renault had instructed Piquet to crash and did nothing about it, doesn't that make him as bad as Briatore & Symonds?

Mosley may be on his way out of the FIA anyhow, so who cares about him. However, if true, this does go to show just how relaxed the FIA organisers are about blatant cheating.

Mr Jack · 19 Sep 2009 at 14:06

stockhausen said:
If Charlie Whiting knew that Renault had instructed Piquet to crash and did nothing about it, doesn't that make him as bad as Briatore & Symonds?

I think you're misreading it. Charlie thought that was what had happened because of the wierd way Nelson crashed but couldn't prove it. He didn't "know".

FrankJH · 19 Sep 2009 at 17:42

Mr Jack said:
I think you're misreading it. Charlie thought that was what had happened because of the wierd way Nelson crashed but couldn't prove it. He didn't "know".

so why didnt the FIA keep their radio traffic recordings if they already knew?

they had to get all this back from Renault because the FIA had "lost" all their own

Hard to prove without insider info admittedly - but you would think there should have been a more thorough investigation before this by the FIA if they where already aware

Flibster · 21 Sep 2009 at 12:14

Rumours coming through now... and not good ones.

Suspended ban for 2 years.
No fine, no actuals bans.

:mad:

***Official 2010 F1 thread***

Capodecina

Capodecina

Capodecina

Capodecina

Official 2010 F1 thread