Was Lewis passing Heikki legal?

When u look at other main series like Nascar or Indy, if it wasn't pointed out to u that two cars were in the same team, you wouldn't know. At least, not by common paint schemes.

I think that "team mates" in F1 is more important than in most other series. Both cars are painted in the same scheme, have consecutive numbers... they're basically two halves of the same organisation.
In F1, team mates and how they work together with each other is a main part of the sport. Watching Lewis pass Heiki earlier in the season was expected. Watching Massa pass Kimi today was expected.
In both cases, I would have been disappointed if the drivers didn't work together for their net benefit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

What goes around comes around., comes to mind.

I can't beleive you are bringing this up. What, you suffer of hypocritical sindrome? You know that's incurable, right?

After you defended Kovi letting Lewis getting by, now you are against it?
I am speechless.

---

Maybe I should try help u understand what is going on here?

I don't think Rollo or Jag are against what Kimi and Massa did today, just as they weren't against what Heiki and Lewis did earlier. Having seen how much you were against the earlier incident (and were so kind as to attach your comments for you), they just wanted to see/read your view on today's matter.

Do you now condone this team/driver tactic? Howcome you haven't posted similar comments regarding today's situation?

Feel privelaged :) It looks like someone reads what you post!

The hypocrisy rests with those who denounced Ferrari so strongly for using team orders in the Schumacher days, yet said little or nothing when McLaren did the same thing.

I question why this is so and I don't beleive my doing so is hypocrisy, it's more like wry bemusement that only my team gets criticised for team orders. McLaren go largely unquestioned for the same deed.

As for the two obvious cases this year, as ioan said, there's a pretty significant difference between Raikkonen moving over for Massa in the penultimate round and Kovalainen doing the same for Hamilton at the half way mark. Raikkonen could not win the title when he moved over. Kovalainen could, at least mathematically. Doesn't that go somewhat against McLaren's oft-stated modus operandi that they always let their drivers race until one can no longer win the title?

The sooner F1 stops this nonsense about team orders the better. If a team wants to operate with a No.1/No.2 driver policy then they should be allowed to. It worked for Ferrari for a decade and I can see it working for McLaren now.

I think that if a team spends millions of pounds in bringing two cars to a circuit, then by inference because they have made the investment, then they should be allowed to work as a team.
I didn't necessarily have a problem with Hekki moving over for Lewis, and for the record, I do not have a problem with Kimi moving over for Massa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

What goes around comes around., comes to mind.
I can't beleive you are bringing this up. What, you suffer of hypocritical sindrome? You know that's incurable, right?
After you defended Kovi letting Lewis getting by, now you are against it?
I am speechless.

---

The reason why i did bring this is the following: If you are going to bandy around allegations of hypocracy, then those allegations had better be founded in reason or fact; neither of which you've demonsatrated but amazingly keep on asking others to provide.

I think it was Noam Chomsky who defined hypocracy as the refusal to "apply to ourselves the same standards we apply to others". Yet when I find evidence of this, you immediately accused me of same without necessarily providing either evidence or corollative theory.

This is hilarious

Tell me about it. I nearly micturited in the act of cackination :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Especially when people can't make the difference between "mid-season" and "end of season", as well as between "still in with a chance" and "no more mathematical chance".

---

If you can show me any reference to those conditions in the FIA rules, I'm with ya brutha!
PM it to me or post it here when you manage to dig that up. Brazil is in two weeks. Think you'll be able to find that passage by then? :p

Quote:

---

Honestly, some people should think before they post.

---

Yep, it seems so... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

What goes around comes around., comes to mind.

I can't beleive you are bringing this up. What, you suffer of hypocritical sindrome? You know that's incurable, right?

After you defended Kovi letting Lewis getting by, now you are against it?
I am speechless.

---

I've previously made no comment on today's result. In fact, I rather enjoyed today's race. No complaints from me. As was pointed out, that is your post, just with the players changed.

I did assume you might be feeling sort of conflicted though, given how you went on & on & on a few months back. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

I think that if a team spends millions of pounds in bringing two cars to a circuit, then by inference because they have made the investment, then they should be allowed to work as a team.
I didn't necessarily have a problem with Hekki moving over for Lewis, and for the record, I do not have a problem with Kimi moving over for Massa.

---

:up:

Not sure whether the team or Massa was the clever, in the three years of his drive at Ferrari strategy of supporting driver which more probability to win, Massa performed such task quite subtle, I think in China it looks somewhat blatant.