I think everyone knows that Alonso is very emotional and passionate and that will sometimes overspill and lead to this. Even though its probably not right, it is also not a surprise to me.
Printable View
I think everyone knows that Alonso is very emotional and passionate and that will sometimes overspill and lead to this. Even though its probably not right, it is also not a surprise to me.
I think Alonso should have been a little bit sensitive to amount of support given to the Mclaren team by the Japanese fans. That said, it was obviously very difficult and frustrating to not be in a position to give these fans a positive race. But this is Alonso we love, he tells you like it is. He is a relentless racer, a winner and a world champion, he can be forgiven for his lapse of sensitivity on this occassion.
The camera focus on the battle for 12th position in the remaining 10-15 laps showed that racing can be interesting even with predictable race winners.
Also, with both Red Bulls having a poor start, as well as Massa, it was interesting to observe which of the midfield teams would capitalize on this situation. Force India, Lotus, and STR should be heading home pretty satisfied. Lotus did very well for its current financial situation, with 7-8 double-points finish. The Toro Rossos did pretty fine by scooping up the remaining points positions 9 and 10. Niko Hulkenberg did incredibly well, by finishing 6th after starting 13th in the gird.
I have to say, the televising of the Suzuka race wasn't great. The producer did not give the full spread of the grid an even coverage. We missed a lot of relevant actions, like Kimi getting into 4th, Hulkenberg reaching 6th or the Lotus pair securing top ten possitions for example. The coverage spent a lot of time on the actions outside the top ten and missed a lot of the action within the top ten. The top ten teams missed out on air time for their sponsors as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
The race appeared boring because the coverage was too narrow, thus made it appear boring.
On commentating, l have to compliment the pairing of Edwards and Coultard. Their commentating has been quite enjoyable and exemplary. The best pairing the BBC has put forward since Murray Walker and Martin Brundle. I am finding Coultard in particular most refreshing. He has become quite objective in his commentary and refreshingly candid with his frank but honest opinions. And Jordan is alway entertaining to behold. Suzi anchors the whole event in a manner that simply surpasses any of her predecessors. The BBC F1 team in general have made the limited coverage of F1 in recent times more bearable with their exemplary performance. Bravo guys, thumbs up from me.
Martin Brundle suggested that Mercedes weren't getting any TV coverage as punishment for refusing to supply engines to Red Bull. He was joking - I think...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Not quite. Bernie's arse is up against the wall. If nobody gives RB engines, he loses two teams. With Lotus still in limbo, it could very well be three. It's not the first time he's used TV blackballing as a 'negotiation tool'.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyL
On that "forceful" move by Hamilton , he said :
“I didn’t feel it was particularly that close. The inside line is the inside line so it was my corner. We were very close – I was understeering, running out of grip. I imagine Nico ran out of road but that is what happens when you’re on the outside.”
So , it wasn't that close , but they were very close ?
What ?
Nervous answer , where he admits he understeered into Nico's path , forcing him off the track , because he had the right to do so , being that he was on the inside .
And , Nico says he had to run wide to avoid an accident , which was a very measured response .
This is exactly the same situation that had Nico angry enough last year to hold his ground and be a part of an accident .
And Hamilton knows it .
He had acres of space to his right , and pushed his team mate off .
There is no doubt in my mind that had they been on different teams , there would have been a protest of the move .
Oh shut up :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
He's not the sharpest tool in the shed, but a tool nevertheless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
The stewards are afraid of the powerful Mercedes board. Thats why no punishment.
Could be. Maybe that's why Nico Rosberg never got punished for anything last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mia 01
But then Bernie is acting like a child messing about with Mercedes' TV time, so he's probably not afraid of upsetting them.
Yeah , I know .Quote:
Originally Posted by rjbetty
This one's hard to defend , isn't it ?
By the way , did you notice Seb , feeding into the awkward pre-podium moments , by speaking with Nico in German ?
Fart smella that Seb . Stir the pot .
The inside line is the inside line .Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Ben
Autosport now saying that Rosberg was down on power due to engine heat related issues and Wolff blames it on Nico's formation lap. Seriously? Is that guy trying to tell us you can actually overheat the engine on the formation lap? My guess would be he was left sitting on the grid a trifle too long. It's a pet peeve I've had with F1 for ages. The front row cars are idling forever in cars that rely on moving for the cooling.
My thoughts exactly which is why Rosberg ran out of space on the outside and was forced to avoid the closing gap on the exit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Racing can be tough, especially when not on the inside line.
It wouldn't be the first time it had happened. Barrichello overheated his engine on a formation lap in 2009. It's happened a few times with drivers throughout the years.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
If that's true (still an 'if' but could explain the slower start) perhaps that's by product of the 'no communication/help' for the starts? For example, if you could see on the monitor that the back of the field is a long way behind, you could back it up a little, avoid sitting on the grid too long.
Just imagine Rosberg = Rene Arnoux, Hamilton = Gilles and on Sunday we were watching Formula One and the start was actually ok Bagwan. ;)
This annoys me as well and the only way to resolve it is for it to be like a safety car situation where you can't stay more then say 3-4 car lengths behind the car in front coming up to the grid. It's the way it is now, but I agree that something should be done about it as, potentially, a team could use it to their advantage if their car was sat running 2nd and the other car much further back decided to take his sweet time eating to his grid slot. There should be some unambiguous rules implemented to govern this type of situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
And when not on the racing line, as Hammy was on Sunday and in Belgium last year where Rosberg blatantly took Hammy out of it!Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Rosberg did not take Hamilton out at Spa. It was in fact pretty much the same situation as on Sunday. Hamilton squeezed Rosberg into a tight space and gave him a simple choice: Back off or have a crash. At Spa Nico didn't back off and option 2 happened. You make it sound as if he was deliberately crashing into Hamilton, which is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
There are several cases of that happening, where Hamilton brought them into such a choice - Bahrain '14, Hungary '14. It was always the same: He ran Nico out of space and left him only that one choice. Same happened at turn 1 in Suzuka. Maybe Lewis just doesn't trust his ability to overtake in a clean fight.
I think it's a bit rich excusing Rosberg when it comes to squeezing drivers off track. In Bahrain 2013 he put Alonso on the gravel approaching turn 3 and did the same with Lewis the following year. Lewis did the same back to him of course.
Let's look at this clearly rather than executing favouritism. Both these guys are guilty of pushing their luck which is why I have no issue with what happened on Sunday.
They have a clear directive from the team due to prior indiscretions , and Nico followed this policy .Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Whereas Lewis knew he didn't .
He got away with one , as his team was never going to protest him forcing his team mate off .
Yes he did, Hamilton had the racing line in Spa. As evidenced by the accident, his from wing was nearly level with Hamilton's rear tire. So, instead of being a man and accepting he lost the position, he turned the steering wheel into him and punctured his tire. Therefore, I have no issue with Hammy serving him some humble pie, to the cheat Rosberg! karma is a bitcg and it is biting Rosberg for Monaco and Spa last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
He didn't force him off, he took the line, was ahead and it was Nico's responsibility at that point to not cause an accident. There is no issue, it's not even in the F1 headlines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
This is only an issue on forums for bashers with axes to grind. We all know the agenda here and that's the last I will say on it.
See you all next race if there is something interesting to discuss.
On cold tyres as it is at all start of the race, close racing like it was at Suzuka was always going to result in some sliding due to lose of grip at the corners. It was unfortunate for Rosberg that he could not get his car ahead, hence was going to lose the racing line to the car that was ahead. Should Hamilton have given some room to Nico? I don't think he could without handing over the advantage to him. Particularly with the car losing grip as it did at that corner.
I am sure Rosberg did not enjoy being wedged out at the corner, but that was going to happen regardless of who the driver in front was Hamilton or Vettel. This is racing, get ahead or get dumped back.
This is the sort of response that immediately identifies a Hamfosi. If Rosberg is a cheat, please list the cases and penalties from the gouverning body he received for his transgressions. In case you can't, you shouldn't be bandying about such allegations.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Lol this is rich coming from a Bieberboy.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
Fortunately for Rosberg he's lucky that the governing body favours some drivers over others and, certainly, I think Warwick has been very lenient on Rosberg because he's buddy's with his Dad which, imo, should by default mean that he should never be involved in the stewarding of incidents involving Rosberg.
It's widely accepted in the Pitlane that Rosberg intentionally instigated Monaco qualifying but got no penalty.
As for Spa, once again, he clearly l intentionally took a second swipe at the steering wheel to take Hamny out. It's there in the video footage - Hamilton had the racing line and was entitled to take it, Rosberg then took a swipe at him.
This is actually a pet peeve of mine in F1 - drivers getting away with this sort of thing and, it's much like many sports, the guilty aren't always convicted, just like life, but that doesn't mean they aren't guilty!
Are you familiar with the term 'weasel words'? And how can you know what's widely accepted in the pitlane? You never were in one, at least not during an F1 race.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Funny how that 'second swipe' was only seen by people who babble #44 at every possible opportunity. Are you seriously suggesting that Rosberg would still be driving a Merc if he had intentionally taken Hamilton out?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Just wanted to chip in here. I always thought if that's the standard for things, then this thread shouldn't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
Bagwan has answered this alreadyQuote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
But I think Henners has already hit the nail exactly on the head. That was a K.O. post imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
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.
Can anyone honestly, really doubt that Rosberg's action during Q3 at Monaco wasn't deliberate?......it was!Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
judge for yourself.
https://vimeo.com/96710217
There is absolutely not doubt that it was deliberate. It's clear that he saws the wheel and then locks up. But you know what, the blind will always be blind :)Quote:
Originally Posted by easy rider
Anyway, I've had enough of this thread now. See you all in a few days for Russian GP :)
I actually enjoyed the coverage of the last 20 laps. Instead of seeing the front cars driving in solitude for half hour, I really liked the battle for the 12th position. It was a nice battle even with no points involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
People say, Hamilton wasn't penalized for his 1st corner push at Suzuka, hence it cannot have been deliberate. Rosberg wasn't penalized for Monaco, neither was he penalized for Spa 2014. So which one is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by easy rider
I have to agree with that, the midfield was where the action was. And there was plenty of good racing action to keep me interested, but l still need occasional reminder of what is going on at the front. Even if the Mercs were running away with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by zako85
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by dj_bytedisaster
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.