Did Ferrari cheat in Korea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

You know different do you? From what I can tell, the article has been spun with an additional headline on a secondary site.

Hughes might not always write in a totally impartial manner, but he does have primary access to F1 teams, has been writing about F1 for many years, and as far as I know does not write inflammatory articles that are likely to get him sued. :dozey:

---

He might not write inflammatory articles that might get him sued, but often does lie, just one example;

http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?T...ughes&id=42678

Hes clearly lying. Heres the lie.

'Fitting the softer tyres for Q2, he did one run and was quicker than Alonso by a whopping 0.6s.

However Fernando had made an error on his lap and so went out again for a second attempt, taking advantage of the track rubbering-in to set a lap 0.048s faster than Hamilton’s earlier effort.'


This never happened, he just made it up. Both Alonso and Hamilton went out together for one run in Q2 and Alonso beat Hamiltons time less than 1 minute later. You can check it on the live timing archive on F1.com although I also have the video of the session. One run in equal conditions at the same time and Alonso was faster. This fact proved a huge problem for Hughes because when you read the article you will see the whole frameword for his argument is that Hamilton was always quicker than Alonso in equal conditions throughout the weekend. So Alonso going quicker in the key Q2, the most important qual conditions session of all was an argument killer. So he just decided to lie and invent some bull**** and pretend Hamilton was quicker in Q3. A disgraceful piece of journalism.

The whole article is just full of hilarious excuses though, like where resorts to using Hamiltons first sector time of his final Q3 run to try to prove Hamilton was set to claim pole by 3 tenths thus proving he was the fastest man in qualifying. He spends the whole article picking little bits and moments from the weekend to try to prove Hamilton was quicker and totally ignoring actual completed laps or race pace.

All above quoted, because i'm not going through it again

Oh and just for the record, I think Hamilton is a great driver, i'm only posting this to do with Hughes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mike.flynn

Impeccable source, thats crap, he's just spreading rubbish so he gets more attention on his articles!

---

So this is rubbish? A lie?

Quote:

---

...the information that Massa was slowed came from inside the Ferrari team.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

So this is rubbish? A lie?

---

As it cannot be proven, then you must assume it is.

Otherwise any kind of slander is made legitimate.

I have it on good authority that Martin Whitmarsh is a pick-pocket. You would not believe that, I assume?

My sources in Ferrari state that Alonso loves Gummie Bears. Fat ones to be more precise..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

If you were a paddock insider rather than an armchair pundit like the rest of us I might just believe you there. Does Fred have a particular colour preference when he dips his hand in the packet? :p

---

Red of course!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'd prefer Silver if they did them, but any attempt would probably result in mercury poisoning. :eek:

---

You would just get accused of cheating for altering their colour ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

As it cannot be proven, then you must assume it is.

---

Tosh & piffle. As the author's source cannot be proved or disproved (wihout MH's source being revealed) we may draw our own conclusions.

If you wish to take this up with Mark Hughes he is responding to the discussion about his article in the Autosport website.

Quote:

---

...if Massa had passed Alonso and IF Hamilton had made the same mistake on the restart, then it would have been Massa that took advantage...

---

And if that order had remained the same then the points margin at the top of the WDC would look rather different.

But it's all ifs and buts :s mokin:

Ferrari have proved time and time again that a clear #1 / #2 driver policy is the most successful. I don't know what the issue is.

I think it is quite probable that Butt Monkey is towing the line and offering every assistance he can to Alonso as he should do. He has no chance at the championship and is being paid to tow the line.

I think Jenson will decide to assist Lewis if he possibly can now and would suggest Vettel should get behind Mark although there's not much chance there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

Ferrari have proved time and time again that a clear #1 / #2 driver policy is the most successful. I don't know what the issue is.

---

The example often given in favour of having a clear #1 is Williams in 1986 when Mansell and Piquet effectively allowed Prost to 'steal' the WDC from under their noses (that and Mansell's tyre blow-out!).

The Schumacher years at Ferrari is seen as being the perfect implementation of having a clear #1 and had any of this years main contenters been able to have such a policy the title might well have been won by now. However, the issue is Article 39.1 which prevents teams openly using team orders.

The sooner the FIA complete (start?) their review of Article 39.1 the better.