Hamilton: Maybe it's because I'm black

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

It's like Senna said, "Because he is out front"

---

"If I see a gap - I go for it. The moment you don't go for that gap, you are no longer a racing driver". That sort of thing you mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

"If I see a gap - I go for it. The moment you don't go for that gap, you are no longer a racing driver". That sort of thing you mean?

---

Exactly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

All this hoo ha over Hamilton, and not a mention about Sutil/Kobyashi at the corner before the hairpin.

Can't put my finger on why that is.........

---

Because Kobayashi didn't blame Sutil for it and say "It's because I've got slanty eyes isn't it!!!!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

So I put to those anti-Hamilton folks, show us evidence that conveys how Hamilton was wrong in the Maldonado incident. It's the same for the Massa incident really but clearly Lewis was a bit too opportunistic there but Massa did turn in on him taking an incorrect line into Loews.

---

I don't get why people are defending the move on Massa. I'm an out and out LH fan, I cut him more slack than a lot of people, but that move on Massa was only going to end with contact. The Maldonado one is what I've got an issue with, because it was basically the same move Lewis had pulled on Schumi earlier in the race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Because Kobayashi didn't blame Sutil for it?

---

It was far more black & white (pun intended) than any of Lewis' **** ups though. Koba just punted Sutil round.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

"If I see a gap - I go for it. The moment you don't go for that gap, you are no longer a racing driver". That sort of thing you mean?

---

I don't seem to remember the part of the sporting regulations that says "If Senna says it then it's part of the sporting regs" :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I don't seem to remember the part of the sporting regulations that says "If Senna says it then it's part of the sporting regs" :confused:

---

We all know that the sporting regs and their application is all subjective anyway, that's exactly why the penalties and decisions lack any degree of consistency. It's the same in most sports though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

but that move on Massa was only going to end with contact.

---

Not necessarily it wasn't. Rosberg could have (but crucially, did not) turned in on the Shoe, and the Shoe could have (but......) did not turn in on Lewis. Massa chose to turn in, Lewis did not invite him to do so. You need to look at the Shoe's move on Nico, from as far back as Lewis, and then listen to the commentary. Then contracst that to the Massa/Lewis move, and listen to the commentary. I think it is about this point that MB points out that an overtake requires a willing opponent.

Kudos to Lewis for trying. There are quite a few elsewhere on this 'ere forum slagging JB for not trying to pass Alonso...

Damned if you do, buggered senseless to clowns pocket proportions if you don't!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

It was far more black & white (pun intended) than any of Lewis' **** ups though. Koba just punted Sutil round.

---

Fair point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

I don't get why people are defending the move on Massa. I'm an out and out LH fan, I cut him more slack than a lot of people, but that move on Massa was only going to end with contact. The Maldonado one is what I've got an issue with, because it was basically the same move Lewis had pulled on Schumi earlier in the race.

---

:up:
True enough, but Schumacher didn't NEED to let Hamilton through, Hamilton never would have made the apex if Schumacher had chosen the racing line. Schumacher got criticised for what happened with petrov in Turkey so he chose to let the position go and keep on going. Imagine if Schumacher had done the same as Maldonado, imagine the stink over that.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Not necessarily it wasn't. Rosberg could have (but crucially, did not) turned in on the Shoe, and the Shoe could have (but......) did not turn in on Lewis. Massa chose to turn in, Lewis did not invite him to do so. You need to look at the Shoe's move on Nico, from as far back as Lewis, and then listen to the commentary. Then contracst that to the Massa/Lewis move, and listen to the commentary. I think it is about this point that MB points out that an overtake requires a willing opponent.

Kudos to Lewis for trying. There are quite a few elsewhere on this 'ere forum slagging JB for not trying to pass Alonso...

Damned if you do, buggered senseless to clowns pocket proportions if you don't!

---

Oh come on, Schumacher was alongside Rosberg and wasn't just sticking his nose in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

I don't get why people are defending the move on Massa. I'm an out and out LH fan, I cut him more slack than a lot of people, but that move on Massa was only going to end with contact. The Maldonado one is what I've got an issue with, because it was basically the same move Lewis had pulled on Schumi earlier in the race.

---

I'd agree with you. The Massa incident was mainly Hammy's fault. Massa is allowed to move once to defend his position and he did that. Saying that he could have avoided it by taking the normal racing line, it was avoidable if Massa chose. There was a little fault on his side as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I don't seem to remember the part of the sporting regulations that says "If Senna says it then it's part of the sporting regs" :confused:

---

Is there a point in racing with that view then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Fair point.

:up:
True enough, but Schumacher didn't NEED to let Hamilton through, Hamilton never would have made the apex if Schumacher had chosen the racing line. Schumacher got criticised for what happened with petrov in Turkey so he chose to let the position go and keep on going. Imagine if Schumacher had done the same as Maldonado, imagine the stink over that.......

---

Yeah, Schumacher would have been blamed by the very same people that are attacking Hamilton now.

It's funny people's perspective based on the drivers they support/like :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Not necessarily it wasn't. Rosberg could have (but crucially, did not) turned in on the Shoe, and the Shoe could have (but......) did not turn in on Lewis. Massa chose to turn in, Lewis did not invite him to do so. You need to look at the Shoe's move on Nico, from as far back as Lewis, and then listen to the commentary. Then contracst that to the Massa/Lewis move, and listen to the commentary. I think it is about this point that MB points out that an overtake requires a willing opponent.

Kudos to Lewis for trying. There are quite a few elsewhere on this 'ere forum slagging JB for not trying to pass Alonso...

Damned if you do, buggered senseless to clowns pocket proportions if you don't!

---

I'll have to look at the Schumacher/Rosberg overtake again, I thought Schumacher was closer than Hamilton was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

DiResta might tend to think different.

Anyway, those of us who know and are willing to see that the Maldonado incident was clearly not Lewis's fault have done more then enough. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary to suggest Lewis did anything wrong. There has been video and picture evidence shown in this thread that clearly shows Hamilton was in the clear and correct to attempt and overtake.

I'm waiting for evidence from the anti-Hamilton brigade to show how he was wrong in the Maldonado incident. Those that say he took his normal line are wrong, he clearly didn't as that line is not used by any driver on a regular lap. I woudln't see a Junior Karter take that line.

So I put to those anti-Hamilton folks, show us evidence that conveys how Hamilton was wrong in the Maldonado incident. It's the same for the Massa incident really but clearly Lewis was a bit too opportunistic there but Massa did turn in on him taking an incorrect line into Loews.

---

My god, your ability to argue a point is incredibly poor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Anyway, those of us who know and are willing to see that the Maldonado incident was clearly not Lewis's fault have done more then enough. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary to suggest Lewis did anything wrong. There has been video and picture evidence shown in this thread that clearly shows Hamilton was in the clear and correct to attempt and overtake.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Anyway, those of us who think that the Maldonado incident was clearly not Lewis's fault have done more then enough by purely thinking that Lewis wasn't at fault. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary to suggest Lewis did anything wrong other than the fact that he never even made the apex of the corner. There has been video and picture evidence shown in this thread that clearly shows Hamilton was in the clear and correct to attempt and overtake because by law Maldonado MUST drive in the same manner as Schumacher if he's being overtaken by Hamilton.

---

Your posts are no more than poorly reasoned rubbish that you think is right for all the wrong nonsensical reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Oh come on, Schumacher was alongside Rosberg and wasn't just sticking his nose in.

---

Seriously, have you watched and compared the two moves? Very similar they are indeed actually.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Is there a point in racing with that view then?

---

What view?

Can we all cool down please, I don't want to have to close this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

My god, your ability to argue a point is incredibly poor.


Your posts are no more than poorly reasoned rubbish that you think is right for all the wrong nonsensical reasons.

---

They are must better than your reasons my dear man. You haven't been able to convey in any single post a single reason why you believe Hamilton was at fault for Maldonado incident. All you've said is this is the way it should be because x y z. There have been images showing Hammy overtaking Schumacher and Maldonado incident alongside each other and no one has yet been able to show how Hamilton deserved to be penalised for it. Can you? Doubtful. You're happy to blame Lewis without opening your eyes because it suits you, not because it's actually fair.

Here's an example of your great contributions to this thread each one as **** as the next:

Quote:

---

Oh come on, Schumacher was alongside Rosberg and wasn't just sticking his nose in.

---

Oh yeah, this is epic reasoning.

Quote:

---

I don't seem to remember the part of the sporting regulations that says "If Senna says it then it's part of the sporting regs"

---

Another pointless contribution.
I could go on but I don't think I need to really. Go back to sleep baba.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

True enough, but Schumacher didn't NEED to let Hamilton through, Hamilton never would have made the apex if Schumacher had chosen the racing line. Schumacher got criticised for what happened with petrov in Turkey so he chose to let the position go and keep on going. Imagine if Schumacher had done the same as Maldonado, imagine the stink over that.......

---

But that could be said of the majority of passes, not least the JB/LH battle in Turkey. The whole thing with passing is that you need to trust that the other person is going to spot you and allow space. As you rightly mention the Schumi/Petrov thing in Turkey is an example of where this hasn't happened, likewise I feel the same about Hamilton/Maldonado this weekend. If drivers are always going to aim for the racing line and not give space to a car up the inside then we're going to be back to a rather tedious sport.

Incidentally, would people still be as annoyed by the Maldonado move if Hamilton hadn't already been involved in so much chaos? I suspect that many would have been happier to label it a 'racing incident', I certainly suspect that the stewards would've.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

Can we all cool down please, I don't want to have to close this thread.

---

I don't like having to repeat myself :hmh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Fair point.

:up:
True enough, but Schumacher didn't NEED to let Hamilton through, Hamilton never would have made the apex if Schumacher had chosen the racing line. Schumacher got criticised for what happened with petrov in Turkey so he chose to let the position go and keep on going. Imagine if Schumacher had done the same as Maldonado, imagine the stink over that.......

---

The Shoe had the intelligence to work out for himself that if he turned in on Lewis and made contact - he (the Shoe) would likelt end up in the barrier. Maldonado appears to be doing his learning the hard way, and is borne out by the Williams team not jumping up and down.

At some point, it will be accepted that Monaco is a narrow track, and without an intelligent opponent, overtakes will be risky. But if you are there to race, why not get on and race?

The stewards are clearly hell bent on becoming the new H&S nimbys and are on a mission to stifle what little overtaking there is at Monaco........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

Can we all cool down please, I don't want to have to close this thread.

---

Yeah please don't, in amongst the bickering there's some good debate :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

What view?

---

Oh look another superb post from Daniel :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

The stewards are clearly hell bent on becoming the new H&S nimbys and are on a mission to stifle what little overtaking there is at Monaco........

---

If we're talking H&S then I think we have to ask the question has F1 outgrown Monaco? Someone asked it on the Beeb and I did wonder. It's obviously great to see racing around the track, and the drivers love it, but we had some pretty nasty accidents this weekend (admittedly a higher ride height would probably have stopped 2 of them). Already it's been announced that the run off at the chicane will be moved back, but will another 50 yards have made much difference to Perez's accident?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

The Shoe had the intelligence to work out for himself that if he turned in on Lewis and made contact - he (the Shoe) would likelt end up in the barrier. Maldonado appears to be doing his learning the hard way, and is borne out by the Williams team not jumping up and down.

At some point, it will be accepted that Monaco is a narrow track, and without an intelligent opponent, overtakes will be risky. But if you are there to race, why not get on and race?

The stewards are clearly hell bent on becoming the new H&S nimbys and are on a mission to stifle what little overtaking there is at Monaco........

---

Tbh Maldonado would do well to do that the next time Hamilton tries it. The drivers will know he's not a pushover..... Maldonado did nothing wrong other than take his line...... If there was a wall there then Hamilton never would have tried it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

If we're talking H&S then I think we have to ask the question has F1 outgrown Monaco? Someone asked it on the Beeb and I did wonder. It's obviously great to see racing around the track, and the drivers love it, but we had some pretty nasty accidents this weekend (admittedly a higher ride height would probably have stopped 2 of them). Already it's been announced that the run off at the chicane will be moved back, but will another 50 yards have made much difference to Perez's accident?

---

Have a look at Joe Sawards' blog, there is an entry about a possible (locals don't like the idea though) of extending out to the sea and extending the track thus by-passing the tunnel.

I think the on/off nature of some of the less sophisticated EBD designs may well have contributed to the instability of cars braking on the limit over the bump on the exit of the tunnel.

I hope that Monaco remains on the calendar. Stewards attemps at stifling the racing aside, we have seen this year that you can make passes here, and it is such a unique event that warrants its inclusion for years to come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Have a look at Joe Sawards' blog, there is an entry about a possible (locals don't like the idea though) of extending out to the sea and extending the track thus by-passing the tunnel.

I think the on/off nature of some of the less sophisticated EBD designs may well have contributed to the instability of cars braking on the limit over the bump on the exit of the tunnel.

I hope that Monaco remains on the calendar. Stewards attemps at stifling the racing aside, we have seen this year that you can make passes here, and it is such a unique event that warrants its inclusion for years to come.

---

A lot of passes were made and most of them without contact or at least significant contact :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Have a look at Joe Sawards' blog, there is an entry about a possible (locals don't like the idea though) of extending out to the sea and extending the track thus by-passing the tunnel.[/font][/size]

I think the on/off nature of some of the less sophisticated EBD designs may well have contributed to the instability of cars braking on the limit over the bump on the exit of the tunnel.

[size=100][font=Times New Roman]I hope that Monaco remains on the calendar. Stewards attemps at stifling the racing aside, we have seen this year that you can make passes here, and it is such a unique event that warrants its inclusion for years to come.

---

I would hate to see the tunnel by-passed. It is one of the most memorable scenes on the F1 calendar to see cars flat out through the tunnel. I remember watching it as a kid and thinking WOW. It always stuck out in memory and would be shame to leave it go.
It is a pity about the stewarding. What the FIA need is a clear rule book, like in soccer. There will always be room for interpretation and while I felt the stewards made great strides last year with the inclusion of an experienced driver on the stewards room, they have taken 10 steps backwards in 2011 so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

But that could be said of the majority of passes, not least the JB/LH battle in Turkey. The whole thing with passing is that you need to trust that the other person is going to spot you and allow space. As you rightly mention the Schumi/Petrov thing in Turkey is an example of where this hasn't happened, likewise I feel the same about Hamilton/Maldonado this weekend. If drivers are always going to aim for the racing line and not give space to a car up the inside then we're going to be back to a rather tedious sport.

Incidentally, would people still be as annoyed by the Maldonado move if Hamilton hadn't already been involved in so much chaos? I suspect that many would have been happier to label it a 'racing incident', I certainly suspect that the stewards would've.

---

I agree mostly. When you conver yourself in as much "glory" as Hamilton did this weekend then you're going to attract attention for all of your moves, it's as simple as that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

I would hate to see the tunnel by-passed. It is one of the most memorable scenes on the F1 calendar to see cars flat out through the tunnel. I remember watching it as a kid and thinking WOW. It always stuck out in memory and would be shame to leave it go.
It is a pity about the stewarding. What the FIA need is a clear rule book, like in soccer. There will always be room for interpretation and while I felt the stewards made great strides last year with the inclusion of an experienced driver on the stewards room, they have taken 10 steps backwards in 2011 so far.

---

I take back what I've said, now that I've seen this stuff in a blog (I mean a blog!!!!! You can't just post opinion in a blog you know!!!!!) I realise that i was wrong and Lewis was right. Racist ****** stewards!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

I take back what I've said, now that I've seen this stuff in a blog (I mean a blog!!!!! You can't just post opinion in a blog you know!!!!!) I realise that i was wrong and Lewis was right. Racist ****** stewards!!!!!!

---

Huh? :confused:

The rules are quite clear, however F1 by it's very nature means that it's difficult to see who's at fault when you have limited visibility, momentum and the fact that decisions are made in fractions of a second. It's not the same as a footballer trying to kick someones legs away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The rules are quite clear, however F1 by it's very nature means that it's difficult to see who's at fault when you have limited visibility, momentum and the fact that decisions are made in fractions of a second. It's not the same as a footballer trying to kick someones legs away.

---

Even football raises quite a few fouls that divide opinion. I tend to think that we rely too much on seeing multiple angles and at different speeds, people seem to forget that it's not that simple. Like how Daniel posted that photo of Sutil coming back on the track with Hamilton a car's length away. It's all well and good as a still from outside the car, but at 100mph with your arse on the ground it's a fraction of a second decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The rules are quite clear, however F1 by it's very nature means that it's difficult to see who's at fault when you have limited visibility, momentum and the fact that decisions are made in fractions of a second. It's not the same as a footballer trying to kick someones legs away.

---

Interesting to get a viewpoint from Fred;

[quote="Fernando Alonso"]&#8220]

From: Looking back at Monaco «

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

Even football raises quite a few fouls that divide opinion. I tend to think that we rely too much on seeing multiple angles and at different speeds, people seem to forget that it's not that simple. Like how Daniel posted that photo of Sutil coming back on the track with Hamilton a car's length away. It's all well and good as a still from outside the car, but at 100mph with your arse on the ground it's a fraction of a second decision.

---

Very true. And I think you can't be too harsh on Hamilton for that. IMHO it's still his fault, but there was an accident happening in front and he was trying not to be part of it. If not for the other incidents I probably wouldn't have even mentioned it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The rules are quite clear, however F1 by it's very nature means that it's difficult to see who's at fault when you have limited visibility, momentum and the fact that decisions are made in fractions of a second. It's not the same as a footballer trying to kick someones legs away.

---

Of course it’s not the same and obviously in F1 a certain set of rules can’t be made, there are two many possible scenarios that can be played out but there needs to be more consistent policing of the rules or else we need the same stewards race after race that will make consistent decisions. The way it is right now I doubt even the drivers know what they can and can’t do and they are discouraging overtaking and in time that will ruin the show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by barryfullalove

Even football raises quite a few fouls that divide opinion. I tend to think that we rely too much on seeing multiple angles and at different speeds, people seem to forget that it's not that simple. Like how Daniel posted that photo of Sutil coming back on the track with Hamilton a car's length away. It's all well and good as a still from outside the car, but at 100mph with your arse on the ground it's a fraction of a second decision.

---

Indeed - the way some of these (don't laugh) 'professional' footballers dive, you'd imagine that, if you dug a whole in the pitch and put some hair round it, theyd start licking it too...... :laugh:

tbh I think the majority of the time when drivers are handed penalties they aren't fair. We don't want a situation where drivers are afraid to try to overtake because they might end up in trouble with the stewards. Most of the time they completely mess up their race as a result anyway and the only time the stewards need to intervene is if e.g. a driver runs into someone and ruins their race but they carry on unaffected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Very true. And I think you can't be too harsh on Hamilton for that. IMHO it's still his fault, but there was an accident happening in front and he was trying not to be part of it. If not for the other incidents I probably wouldn't have even mentioned it.

---

Daniel, have you become a born again Lewis supporter, or is this just the cynic in you 'avin' a lark'? ;)