Results 71 to 80 of 83
Thread: 2015 Japanese Grand Prix
-
4th October 2015, 04:50 #71
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Location
- South East England
- Posts
- 1,490
- Like
- 232
- Liked 169 Times in 131 Posts
Just wanted to chip in here. I always thought if that's the standard for things, then this thread shouldn't exist.
Bagwan has answered this already
But I think Henners has already hit the nail exactly on the head. That was a K.O. post imo.SPAM - Going off topic to give you the deals you don't want.
- Likes: henners88 (5th October 2015)
-
4th October 2015, 11:50 #72
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Greenwich, London UK
- Posts
- 3,461
- Like
- 14
- Liked 792 Times in 654 Posts
Most motorsport site seem to have linked Ecclestone to the coverage of the Suzuka race which gave the Mercedes team as little coverage as was really possible. A coverage that only showed the start and its battle, a brief coverage of the pitstops and very briefly the end showing Hamilton crossing the line to win the race.
My thoughts during the race was that this was the worst TV coverage of a race l have ever seen. But why would Bernie fall out with the Mercedes team? One reason seem to be that he is not happy the Redbull teams are not getting Mercedes engines. Regardless of the reason, if this were true, this would be the most audacious abuse of office ever demonstrated in the clear view of the public. It also demonstrates the considerable power of the rights holders have over the series. Another way to look at it would be to say, it demonstrates how powerless and lacking of commercial influence the FIA is relative to the F1 rights holders. While the relationship of the Right holders and FIA is essentially a symbiotic relationship of sorts, it also seems like a puppeteer to puppet relationship most of the time such as demonstrated at Suzuka. Most of the issues faced in F1 at the moment can be traced to consequence of the unbalance in the relationship between these parties. An example would be the tyre specifications that Pirelli produce their tyres to.Last edited by Nitrodaze; 4th October 2015 at 11:56.
-
4th October 2015, 13:09 #73
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
That's a big assumption that I have never been in the pit lane during a race. I generally prefer to go out into track though and watch the action there but I have been in the pit lane during a race, from time to time, however that's really beside the point. If you listen to certain pundits, they have themselves said that it's widely accepted that Rosberg did this intentionally. It's plain as day and, as I said, Rosberg's a lucky boy that Warwick was one of the Stewards.
Yes, Rosberg would be driving a Merc had he tried to take Hammy out as clearly he is still driving a Merc having successfully taken Hammy out.
The second swipe is very clear on the screen. Anthony Davisdon even mentioned it in his analysis of the incident although he stopped short of saying he felt it was intentional, though it clearly was. If you can find it, and I'm sure it's on YouTube, have a look at his analysis, it'll show you the swipe since you're unable to see it with your own eyes.
-
4th October 2015, 21:23 #74
- Join Date
- Aug 2013
- Posts
- 84
- Like
- 13
- Liked 14 Times in 10 Posts
Can anyone honestly, really doubt that Rosberg's action during Q3 at Monaco wasn't deliberate?......it was!
judge for yourself.
https://vimeo.com/96710217
-
5th October 2015, 08:40 #75
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Posts
- 2,858
- Like
- 62
- Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
Last edited by The Black Knight; 5th October 2015 at 08:54.
- Likes: driveace (5th October 2015)
-
5th October 2015, 13:54 #76
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Posts
- 1,583
- Like
- 68
- Liked 182 Times in 139 Posts
- Likes: Mia 01 (5th October 2015)
-
5th October 2015, 20:47 #77
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Terra Germanica
- Posts
- 2,948
- Like
- 17
- Liked 146 Times in 122 Posts
No you haven't, unless you're riding semantics. I'm 100% positive, you've never been to the pit lane during an F1 weekend. Neither have I, but I was at the winter tests (that's the only accreditation non-commercial bloggers can afford) and what you call 'widely accepted in the pitlane' sounded distinctly different when you talked to people at Jerez and Barcelona, so I'm pretty sure you made that up.
как могу я знать что я думаю, пока не слушал что я говорю
-
5th October 2015, 20:49 #78
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Terra Germanica
- Posts
- 2,948
- Like
- 17
- Liked 146 Times in 122 Posts
-
5th October 2015, 22:14 #79
- Join Date
- May 2015
- Location
- Greenwich, London UK
- Posts
- 3,461
- Like
- 14
- Liked 792 Times in 654 Posts
-
6th October 2015, 00:26 #80
I would characterize all of these incidents as "deliberate" to some extent or another. I kind of get the impression that the stewards treat anything that happens between team mates as self-penalizing and not worthy of action.
I think Nico's Monaco move was deliberate, but with just enough plausible deniability to avoid any penalty. I'm sure Nico studied Michael's clumsy effort a few years earlier at La Rascasse and adjusted accordingly. The swipe at Spa looked pretty plain to me also; unfortunately for him it was just a bit too obvious.
As for Suzuka, that move of Hamilton's had the expected result; it certainly wasn't accidental on Hamilton's part. His attitude was along the lines of "One of us is yielding the corner. And let's face facts, Nico: it's you".
F1 has always included drivers pushing the boundaries of legality, because the mentality is necessarily incredibly aggressive. And you can only find out exactly where the boundary is by going right up to it and over it.
- Likes: henners88 (8th October 2015)
Almost all Finn's since Paavo Nurmi who are fast in their sport have been called "Flying", particularly the 1960's rally drivers, but I was actually thinking of "Flying Finnish" - the timing line at...
What's the first thing to come to...