not really everything put together makes a very strong case.
You will never get you must move over. This is an as strong a case as FIA will ever get.
German Grand Prix 2010, Hockenheimring Circuit - Race 11/19
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
not really everything put together makes a very strong case.
You will never get you must move over. This is an as strong a case as FIA will ever get.
Smedly saying sorry? Magnanamous (sp?)? dejected faces? Conjecture and nothing solid and tangible as say "move over let your team mate past".
If Ferrari stick to their case and show that Alonso was faster than Massa, they have a strong case, regardless of what happened over the radio or after the race.
The point Im trying to make that there was a previous instance that happened in exactly the same way. The only difference is that this bigger is because Massa was leading whereas Heikki in the above example was not. Thats why this situation seems to have been more exacerbated.
Last edited:
Of course they had the team radio, the information being given to heiki that Lewis was faster, the same info massa was given and by some miracle Hekki takes it upon himself to move over.
Nice find Cavallino
All put together it is a strong case.
You sill not get pull over for your team mate. If Ferrari do get let off as there is not enough evidence, the rule might as well be removed. That is as strong a case as you will ever get.
Yes it could go either way, however FIA have got a strong case. There is some big differences in team radio. we shall see if WMSC accepts that those radio and all the other data together as a whole is acceptable as evidence for team orders.
Of course they had the team radio, the information being given to heiki that Lewis was faster, the same info massa was given and by some miracle Hekki takes it upon himself to move over.
Nice find Cavallino
No, they have radio saying Lewis is faster that is it. Not do you understand message, sorry, so on and so forth. That is a big difference.
Last edited:
Any ideas on the time frame of the world council decisions? I hope it isn't one of those 6 month decisions again
September 10th.
Appreciated, but what you have is evidence showing emotional reactions and words which can be interpreted in anyway depending on the listeners perspective, which are not as hard as facts of the championship and laptime data and events that happened during the race. Push comes to shove if they show Alonso was faster than Massa, they are in the clear.
Granted. But the ultimate effect is the same.
Limitation of competition by allowing your team mate to go through easily and manipulating race results, regardless of what was said.
I will use the same argument most have already against Alonso. If Hamilton was quicker, then why didnt he make his way round his team mate the racing way?
I don't think it is that simple. they have to show that Massa made his own mind up, FIA have to show it was more than that. It could go either way. But this is the best chance FIA will ever get and if that is not enough evidence then the rule should be removed.,
he should have, the difference is the FIA felt there was not enough evidence for team orders.
Two wrongs don't make it right, It is what can be proved, or at least proved to a degree the council is happy with.
What so on and so forth. A do you understand message means just that. The sorry means sorry you gave up your position. Yet that was massas call exactly as it was supposedly heikkis in 2008.
There is no big difference in the actions of the drivers to set up the race result.
Both teams gave the drivers the info and they acted of their own accord (in both cases we know that bull but thats beside the point) just because smedley says sorry doesn't add anything extra to it other than he's sorry that Massa yielded.
It does if the council takes it to mean something else and feels there is ground for punishment.
Don't say anything and the Council has no grounds.
of course there isn't, the difference is bringing a case against team orders, which has to be bigger than the driver. hence team orders.
So the only difference between the Mclaren situation and this stiuation is:
a) Smedly's sorry comment
b) Smedly's magnanamous comment
c) Dejected Massa at the end of the race
d) "Is Felipe alright?" comment by Alonso
a) Can be interpreted as sorry you had to lose the place since you were slower.
b) Nice of him to give up the place, meaning that HE (MASSA) made the decision to give the place up.
c) Who wouldnt be dissapointed to yield 1st place? Doesnt necessarily indicate team orders.
d) Did Felipe have a problem with his car?
Add to that all the data and post race commentaries as well as the championship situation of both drivers, laptimes etc. If this is FIAs best chance, but its not much better than any previous situations.
You're right AcidHell, two wrong dont make a right.
But one of the wrongs was not penalised.
The case against ferrari is no stronger than the one that would be against mclaren for that 2008 switch. The only difference is smeggie says sorry which is purely down to interpretation and he's already explained what he meant.
Theres no more evidence than that in difference between the two incidences.
In the monaco 2007 incident Dennis admits he employed orders for the race, thats the worst of the 3, he admits it. No punishment.
Theres no more evidence than that in difference between the two incidences.
In the monaco 2007 incident Dennis admits he employed orders for the race, thats the worst of the 3, he admits it. No punishment.
Soldato
I cant believe people want the team orders ban scrapped! Its basically manipulating the result, and if I had of had a bet on Massa to win I would be livid!
So would I, Livid at the sort of driver that signs a no 2 contract in the first place. They get paid in bananas.
Soldato
If it would be banned it means that the betting odds will change to reflect that, Massa would be on 20/1 to win instead of 10/1 for instance and you would know before you make the bet that team orders can mean Massa will not win if Alonso is behind him.
Soldato
Tailoring sports so it's better for gamblers is not the way forward.
Ditch the team orders rule.
Ditch the team orders rule.
Slight change in subject and I am upset that nobody has wondered how Yamamoto got on or why he retired. So to lighten everyone's mood after pages of bickering I shall let you all know. Sadly he retired due to accidentally pulling the fire switch instead of his brake bias and killed the engine in the process 
Poor chap, he even managed to start the race with his pit lane speed limiter on.
Poor chap, he even managed to start the race with his pit lane speed limiter on.
Last edited: