I'd expect the FIA to be equal-handed full stop, but if your memory is right it appears Hakkinen & Alesi's offence was not spotted.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Printable View
I'd expect the FIA to be equal-handed full stop, but if your memory is right it appears Hakkinen & Alesi's offence was not spotted.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Well, my memory was almost right....it was Alesi who was overtaken on the warm-up lap, Barrichello was the other offender.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
"FIA disciplinary ruling press release
Racing series F1
Date
By FIA Media Relations
The FIA World Motor Sport Council met in Paris on 26 July 1994 under the presidency of Max Mosley, President of the FIA, to consider the report of the FIA Observer at the 1994 British Grand Prix and to decide whether any, or any further penalty should be imposed against the drivers of cars #0, 5, 7, and 14, or their respective teams, and against the Clerk of the Course, Mr. Pierre Aumonier.
After hearing the defence of all relevant parties, the World Motor Sport Council decided the following:
1. To impose a penalty of one race suspension on the driver of car #7 (Mika Hakkinen) for breach of Article 118 and Article 66 of the Formula One Sporting Regulations. In consideration of extenuating circumstances, the penalty is suspended for three races and will only be applied if a breach of the same part of the Formula One Sporting Regulations is made by Mr. Mika Hakkinen during that period.
2. To impose a penalty of one race suspension on the driver of car #14 (Rubens Barrichello) for breach of Article 118 and Article 66 of the Formula One Sporting Regulations. In consideration of extenuating circumstances, the penalty is suspended for three races and will only be applied if a breach of the same part of the Formula One Sporting Regulations is made by Mr. Rubens Barrichello during that period.
3. To acquit the driver of car #0 (Damon Hill). Mr. Hill was able to show that he slowed but did not stop and therefore did not breach Article 151 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations.
4. To exclude Benetton Formula Ltd. from the results of the 1994 British Grand Prix and impose a fine of 500,000 US$ for failing on several occasions to obey the instructions of the officials of the 1994 British Grand Prix. This penalty cancels and replaces the one imposed by the Stewards at the British Grand Prix.
5. To exclude the driver of car #5 (M. Schumacher) from the results of the British Grand Prix and impose on him a suspension of two races for non- observation of the black flag of the British Grand Prix.
Both Benetton Formula Ltd. and Mr. Schumacher have the right to appeal in front of the International Court of Appeal of the FIA through their respective National Sporting Authorities. If Michael Schumacher appeals, he will be allowed to race and to score full points until the appeal is heard.
6. The FIA World Motor Sport Council also found that the Clerk of the Course, Mr. Pierre Aumonider (Great Britain) failed in his duties with regard to various points. The FIA World Motor Sport Council decided to impose a suspension of one year of the super licence of Mr. Pierre Aumonier. The World Motor Sport Council also asked the Royal Automobile Club Motor Sport Association to conduct a full investigation into the organisation of the 1994 British Grand Prix and implement the necessary measures to avoid the occurrence of such incidents in the future.
The FIA World Motor Sport Council also considered the report of the FIA Formula One Technical Delegate in respect of the electronic systems used on car #5 (Michael Schumacher) at the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.
After hearing the representatives of Benetton Formula Ltd., the World Motor Sport Council reached the conclusion that, in common with the other two teams, Benetton's computer system contained a facility capable of breaching the regulations. In the absence of any evidence that the device was used and certain evidence that it was not, the World Council imposed no penalty involving the results of the event.
The World Council imposed a fine of 100,000 US$ on Benetton Formula Ltd for failing to make their computer source codes available immediately. An identical fine was imposed on McLaren for the same reason subject to McLaren's right to demand a hearing in October."
From an impeccable source....http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=919&FS=F1
But I digress.......
Theres the video....
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v295991MgjPQ72f
Clearly shows Hakkinen passing Alesi going into Maggots.
Re: Mosley not standing for re-election, perhaps we should wait and see...
In July 1999 Max said "'As I feel at the moment, if I last until October 2001 that will be it. I will think very carefully before standing for a third time because it is actually wrong for people to do these jobs for too long."
In February 2001 it was announced he'd stand again.
After being re-elected in October 2001 the FIA announced Max would not stand again when his term ended in 2005.
Then in April 2003 Max said he might stand again, but went on to say "The great danger is staying too long...I certainly wouldn't go on unless I got an indication of an overwhelmingly high proportion of people wanting me to stay and not just out of politeness."
In July 2004 he made clear he would not stand again, saying "I am not an F1 team principal so I don't change my mind every few minutes." (This was when he made his "not the sharpest knife in the box" comment about one of the team owners.)
In April 2005 Max proposed, and had accepted, a major overhaul of the FIA structure which, reportedly, made it far more difficult for anyone to mount a challenge to his position.
In October 2005 Max was re-elected FIA President unopposed.
Nice find, it only proves that someone, the FIA or the British stewards were out to stop MS' title bid. The double standards were clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
In what way? Hakkinen and Barrichello were penalised according to the info tamburello posted. They were not penalised as heavily as Schumacher because 1) MS overtook during warm-up laps - DC stalled at the first w/up lap, so there was another - twice and then 2) he and the team ignored the black flag after refusing to serve their penalty imposed during the race.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Anyway, as has been said, this is one for the H&N forum.
Given the subject of your thread is Max not standing, perhaps you have a view on how he has flip-flopped over the years and why we should believe him this time on this subject?
You've been going on about double standards of McLaren fans and how bad it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
And yet you been going on about team orders at German GP with no proof. And your having a go because this guy aint got any proof.
Proof was served on the other forum, several times, but you chose to ignore because it wasn't in english, so get off your high horse (and maybe learn some other languages too, in your way down).Quote:
Originally Posted by PolePosition_1
Mate there was no proof whatsoever. There was an article in Finnish with no quotes!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
All due respect, but if you base your opinions on proof in the form of a foreign article with no quotes, just their interpretation of how Heikki was. And on top of that you can't actually read the article, you rely on someone to translate it (and even then two people translated it differently) - its no wonder you appear to have no common sense for taking in what actually happened and what you think happened in your red tinted glasses outlook of F1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Didn't Max say that this is seen as a source of humour by most people?
Are people laughing with Max or at him over this I wonder?
For the last part, I said that nobody had retracted what has been officially quoted so until that happens, I feel my comment is qualified.
You cannot say that I cannot back up my claim when it still stands and has not been retracted.
As for future decisions that may or may not be made, I'm not a fortune teller and cannot comment on things that haven't happened. Seeing as Max normally attends GP's, perhaps his absence may speak volumes ;)