Australian GP 2009 - Race 1/17 (NOT in HD BTW)

Glaucus · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:39

JRS said:
I think the FIA's point (God, I hate having to defend those *******) was that Hamilton and McLaren's testimony initially lead to Trulli getting penalised. When it turned out that they were less than truthful, and by being less than truthful had caused someone to be penalised when they shouldn't have been, they threw the book at them.

They could clear this up by giving the transcripts.
As they haven't released them, you do wonder what exactly was said. if it could have been a miss understanding or a total lie.

I don't have a problem with the punishment if they did lie, but why oh why do Stewerds not listen to the communications on the race day. I mean even listening to the entire lap would take 1min30 and it's not as if it's hard to get your hands on. that is what makes this a disgrace.

xyphic · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:39

Something doesn't add up. McLaren were insisting earlier that the reason for the disqualification was because they weren't forthcoming with the content of the radio conversation.

The FIA's statement contradicts this by strongly insinuating that two members of the McLaren team (Hamilton and David Ryan) lied about what happened.

The only hard evidence that we as the public have to base our judgments on are the transcripts of the radio conversation, Hamilton's interview and the FIA's assertion. The first two add up; what Hamilton says in the interview matches what was said in the radio conversation: he was told to let Trulli pass but wasn't convinced that he was required to. The FIA's assertion is that when asked *directly* about whether he was told to let Trulli pass, he answered 'no'.

If McLaren set out to try to get the extra place by lying about it, they did a ridiculously poor job of it. I can't make my mind up whether McLaren were just being morons, or if there's something we aren't being told. I don't think I'll ever be able to make my mind up until the third piece of evidence is released to the public: a transcript of the hearing in which Hamilton is asserted to have lied. But somehow I doubt that will be forthcoming...

Type_R · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:39

Mr Jack said:
But nothing they said has anything to do with whether Trulli deserved to be penalised.

Incorrect, what both Trulli and LH said had everything to do with JT being given a 25s penalty.

Mr Jack · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:41

Type_R said:
Incorrect, what both Trulli and LH said had everything to do with JT being given a 25s penalty.

It shouldn't do. Trulli said Hamilton slowed down so excessively that he had to pass him. That is something that should be determined by telemetry, not "he said; she said".

Peve · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:42

I feel really sorry for Hamilton as he drove a great race and he must be starting to get fed up with the constant FIA meddling.

eekfek · 2 Apr 2009 at 19:42

Hamilton and McLaren have been found guilty of allegedly providing misleading evidence

... complete an utter balls !!! a sport where the race is secondary to a panel of idiot stewards who decide on the outcome.. bunch of total smegs heads !!

NathanE · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:08

Peve said:
I feel really sorry for Hamilton as he drove a great race and he must be starting to get fed up with the constant FIA meddling.

Me too. IMO Hamilton is a victim in this. He put in a great race. Was desperately trying to do the right thing with the incident involving Trulli - to the point of going out of his way to ask the team repeatedly and even questioning their judgement.

Immediately after the race the BBC got hold of Martin Whitmarsh and he mentioned the incident for the first time (as it wasn't televised) and that he believed LH should have had 3rd place and that he had reported the incident to the FIA.

Then Hamilton, oblivious to what his team were plotting, decided to tell the complete truth to the reporters after the race.

Then his team, commanded by Whitmarsh's eye for a possible additional point, briefed Hamilton on what to say and what not to say in the stewards meeting.

Hamilton should have had the balls at this point to tell his boss that he wasn't going to twist the story, lie, exagerate, be economical with facts (or however you view it).

I believe this to be what has happened.

I'm frustrated and annoyed and my support of McLaren has taken a massive hit from all of this.

Apparently Martin Whitmarsh was sat outside the McLaren paddock, in the dark and rain and on his own this afternoon (or evening/night in Malaysia?) This was noted by James Allen on his blog. To me the body language in all of this is clear.

Martin Whitmarsh has made a monumental mistake on the very first race of his "team principal" career.

JUMPURS · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:13

That is exactly as i see it too Nathan, which is surprising considering how much we disagreed last year

rypt · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:22

NathanE said:
IMO Hamilton is a victim in this. He put in a great race.

No one forced him "misrepresent" the issue to the stewards.

JUMPURS · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:24

rypt said:
No one forced him "misrepresent" the issue to the stewards.

The person who writes his cheques may very well have.

pingwing · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:27

NathanE, spot on!

Cool phrases include;
"so say brother nathan" or "preacher man! preacher man!"

It's shown up in some respects Hamiltons character in that hes (potentially inadvetently) had to town the team line opposed to put his hands up and say what he thought happened and almost take the fall for the team....

Either way, its good trulli's kept 3rd as starting from the pits to drive the race he did is probably one of the most important bits of the weekend, mainly as they should be strong against brawn gp in the race next weekend....

NathanE · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:27

rypt said:
No one forced him "misrepresent" the issue to the stewards.

I addressed this very point in my post

rypt · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:28

JUMPURS said:
The person who writes his cheques may very well have.

All that shows is that he needs to grow a pair, he's the world champion after all - it's not like McLaren will fire him, and if they do I'm sure plenty of teams would gladly take him in.
Chances are he was happy enough to go along with it, just like Schumi has done on occasions.

NathanE said:
I addressed this very point in my post

Actually you didn't you said Whitmarsh planned it all .. which while true still does not mean Hamilton had to go along with it, as I said above...

NathanE · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:32

pingwing said:
NathanE, spot on!

Cool phrases include;
"so say brother nathan" or "preacher man! preacher man!"

It's shown up in some respects Hamiltons character in that hes (potentially inadvetently) had to town the team line opposed to put his hands up and say what he thought happened and almost take the fall for the team....

Either way, its good trulli's kept 3rd as starting from the pits to drive the race he did is probably one of the most important bits of the weekend, mainly as they should be strong against brawn gp in the race next weekend....

The best thing McLaren can do now is own up. They need to come clean and say "yes, ok, we admit... we put Lewis under duress in the stewards meeting"

A corporation can shoulder embarrasment better than an individual can.

It is unfair for Lewis to be called a liar when he was so blatently trying to do the right thing.

NathanE · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:33

rypt said:
Actually you didn't you said Whitmarsh planned it all .. which while true still does not mean Hamilton had to go along with it, as I said above...

I gave you the benefit of the doubt. But it seems you want to persist with this silly angle of attack.

Read my post in full. Do not skim read. You will find a part in there about the size of Hamilton's balls.

rypt · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:33

NathanE said:
It is unfair for Lewis to be called a liar when he was so blatently trying to do the right thing.

No, doing the right thing is what Vettel did, saying sorry, being truthful and so on.

rypt · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:34

NathanE said:
Read my post in full. Do not skim read.

I have read your post, it seems you are not reading mine.

If he had a pair he would not have gone along with what the team wanted to do and would have told the truth, as such he is not the victim due to him NOT stating the truth but rather stating the McLaren "story".

Sparky · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:37

rypt said:
I have read your post, it seems you are not reading mine.

If he had a pair he would not have gone along with what the team wanted to do and would have told the truth, as such he is not the victim due to him NOT stating the truth but rather stating the McLaren "story".

Heat of the moment who knows what anyone would do in the same situation.

NathanE · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:41

rypt said:
I have read your post, it seems you are not reading mine.

If he had a pair he would not have gone along with what the team wanted to do and would have told the truth, as such he is not the victim due to him NOT stating the truth but rather stating the McLaren "story".

He is the victim of the McLaren Corporate Machine. A view that has been increasing in weight for me for some time now...

rypt · 2 Apr 2009 at 20:43

CS||nuTs said:
Heat of the moment who knows what anyone would do in the same situation.

Heat of the moment? this is a good hour and a bit after the race

NathanE said:
He is the victim of the McLaren Corporate Machine. A view that has been increasing in weight for me for some time now...

Clearly he does not feel that way since we said last year he wants to spend his whole career with them, plus he could always move and buy out the contract, as Button has done before.