Lol Deppchef, I hope you where not posting that to glorify Michael Schumacher, if so you may have forgotten that Schumacher had a 1 race ban for his violations of overtaking regulations whilst defending against Hill in that particular Grand Prix.
My memory fails me on that, to be honest.
He actually won the race (this is Spa '95, isn't it??) and nothing else happened?
edit: And no, I didn't want to glorify him, just wanted to show that fights between the two didn't always end in crashes.
He actually won the race (this is Spa '95, isn't it??) and nothing else happened?
edit: And no, I didn't want to glorify him, just wanted to show that fights between the two didn't always end in crashes.
ah I see. I thought it was '94 because of the rain and Hill being in car 0. (EDIT: Which Hill won)
It was '94 in that clip and Hill won because MSC was disqualified for illegal wear on the bargeboard, not for his driving.
'95 was the one MSC started 16th and finished first mostly because it rained and everyone else seemed to be water-soluble.
And the excessive wear was caused by a spin over the Radillion kerbs, not by cheating, naughty driving or anything like that. At that point the FIA a) hadn't worked out how to police MDF bolted underneath a car in real racing conditions b) had a vendetta against Schumi/Benetton at that point.
Hm, didn't see the 0 on his car actually. (I just watched it again and, can't see it 
Anyway in '94 Schumacher was disqualified because something on his car was irregular, though.
And the two race ban that season was because he didnt come in for a stop-and-go, after he had overtaken someone on the formation lap?
I don't see any bad driving on this clip anyway?
edit: hm.. too slow ^^
Anyway in '94 Schumacher was disqualified because something on his car was irregular, though.
And the two race ban that season was because he didnt come in for a stop-and-go, after he had overtaken someone on the formation lap?
I don't see any bad driving on this clip anyway?
edit: hm.. too slow ^^
There was at least one chop in there that I would consider unfair. I remember that John Watson agreed at the time.
In fact it was this very race that led to the one-lane-change-per-straight rule to be born after DH requested clarification. Since then this rule has often been used by Schumi fans to justify his chopping others onto the grass. As long is he only did it once per straight it didn't break the rule.
Well he had pissed everyone off alot in Silverstone by not stopping for the penalty in the formation lap, but that has been previously mentioned.
What was erroneously mentioned was that he was banned for 2 races because of that (Silverstone), which I doubt he was - I think it was paid as a fine.
Also, in 1994 as I recall the only one that had a race ban was Hakkinen, unless I'm mistaken... Oh wait... Irvine was around then, no? He probably has the record of race bans, so he probably got one too in that year.
EDIT:
Indeed he wasn't banned - thank you grandprix.com.
EDIT:
But then again it seems he was later on banned. So, I stand corrected. And again, thanks grandprix.com.
Which also explains why Becky thought he was banned for one race after Spa. Simply because the FIA - put a penalty on MSC and the team for what happened in Silverstone then changed it 4 races later.
Yes, Irvine got a 3 race ban from his accident at Interlagos. I don't remember Hakkinen getting a ban though
xaotik: I think Benetton protested one or two times and that's why he was banned that late.
After watching it again I also know why I was so puzzled:
The commentator says that they crashed in "Australia and Silverstone".
And I can't remember them crashing in Adelaide '93 or Silverstone '94..
After watching it again I also know why I was so puzzled:
The commentator says that they crashed in "Australia and Silverstone".
And I can't remember them crashing in Adelaide '93 or Silverstone '94..
I'd forgotten about that, I was referring to a ban for the following race which a quick check of Wikipedia says was Imola where it doesn't list him in the results. Becky's Memory 1 v Tristan's Memory 1
.I have a feeling we're either talking about different years or wikipedia's article need to get some data from grandprix.com.
Here's the 1994 races. Apparently he was banned at round 12 and 13 for what he did at round 8. San Marino was round 3.
Not that any of this we're discussing really makes any difference... it's done and over with.
Bernie thinks:
-FIA supports Ferrari
-Monza penalty was wrong
-Mass damper ban was wrong
http://www.f1total.com/news/06091311.shtml (German)
And newest rumour here:
http://www.f1total.com/news/06091313.shtml (German)
Michelin have photographed gas-mask wearing Bridgestone technicians applying liquid to Ferarri's tyres.
Sorry for the German links, I couldn't find the stories in English.
-FIA supports Ferrari
-Monza penalty was wrong
-Mass damper ban was wrong
http://www.f1total.com/news/06091311.shtml (German)
And newest rumour here:
http://www.f1total.com/news/06091313.shtml (German)
Michelin have photographed gas-mask wearing Bridgestone technicians applying liquid to Ferarri's tyres.
Sorry for the German links, I couldn't find the stories in English.
Xaotik 2, Becky+Tristan 0
First one is a classic example of part politics and shrewd marketing by Bernie (differentiating formula1 the company from FIA, because people tend to confuse the two pretty often) - and partly conclusions made by the person writing the article, nothing directly said by Ecclestone. It's obvious to anyone that the result of the ruling favors Ferrari, no one else is closer in the points to benefit.
Second one is going to be fun - we got past the interorganization politics (formula1 the company and FIA), past the team intrigue (Ferrari vs Renault) and have gone into the corporate espionage stage. I've seen this movie before I think...
Meh, it's not scoreworthy - I was just the one who had more free time to flog a dead hor... er... to look it up in the appropriate site...
(thisnameistaken)
DELETED
by thisnameistaken
http://formula-1.updatesport.c ... spray-explained/view.html
There it is for example.
There it is for example.
You quote me where he blames the FIA for a blown engine... He wouldn't have run high RPMs all the way through the race if he had started 5th, Renault know what they are doing. They wouldn't stress the engine with no hope in hell of making it pay off. Fastest laps mean nothing in a race, if he can lap quicker than them over a stint. Kimi set many fastest laps last year did it win him all the races?
Childish and whiny? This is the first time I've seen him complain and he has very right to do so. The FIA have gone out of there way to disadvantage Renault and Alonso this year.
Funny how they changed the rule just to get Schumcaher out of trouble for cutting the chicane, isn't it?
Keiran
http://www.sportnetwork.net/main/s491/st104237.htm
That article sums up the recent actions of the FIA.
That article sums up the recent actions of the FIA.
On the mass damper issue:
When Renault introduced the system, they did not present it to the FIA. They did not have to since the rules say basically "if you think it's legal, it is". Renault thought it was legal, hence never presented it.
This rule remains true until either the stewards or another team bring the issue before the FIA. Again, the stewards never did so, thus the FIA had for quite a while no reason to interact, after all, until the protest came, the device was basically deemed legal.
However, when McLaren (and pls do remember that Dennis isn't the biggest fan of Ferrari) presented the issue to the FIA, it finally had reason to decide on this issue. So there is really no conspiracy on the timing of the decision, it's just a result of rules that are pretty liberal but can bite you when you wrongly (in the eyes of the FIA) judge the legality of a device.
When Renault introduced the system, they did not present it to the FIA. They did not have to since the rules say basically "if you think it's legal, it is". Renault thought it was legal, hence never presented it.
This rule remains true until either the stewards or another team bring the issue before the FIA. Again, the stewards never did so, thus the FIA had for quite a while no reason to interact, after all, until the protest came, the device was basically deemed legal.
However, when McLaren (and pls do remember that Dennis isn't the biggest fan of Ferrari) presented the issue to the FIA, it finally had reason to decide on this issue. So there is really no conspiracy on the timing of the decision, it's just a result of rules that are pretty liberal but can bite you when you wrongly (in the eyes of the FIA) judge the legality of a device.
They banned it under a rule ruling that an aerodynamic device should not move. They have twisted the ruling to say that this influences the aerodynamics of the car and moves therefore is illegal, so on that logic ban the steering wheel, brake pedal and throttle pedal which all have a larger influence on the aerodynamics.
Ferrari are getting off with breaking rules with them disc things, and so are other teams. That is not one mould and is being changed everytime they change the wheels, thus breaking parc ferme rules. Have the FIA banned them? Ferrari used flexi wings for ages and there was clear evidence of the wing pulling apart from the car under stress, how long did it take for that to be banned? A life time. How long did it take them to say you can't use the mass dampers? Basically one day, forcing Renault to remove the system.
Plenty has gone on this season to disadvantage Renault and a lot of it has been very suspicious and quite frankly it shouldn't be. A decision shouldn't leave most of the teams and drivers except the one it's advantaging thinking "WTF!". A decision should be based on hard evidence.
Keiran
Im afraid that reasoning is a bit wrong.
The whole front wing is labeled as an aerodynamic device ,so it or parts of it cant move independently.
A steering wheel or pedals are not considered aerodynamic devices so they arent affected by this rule.
Well Renault and many other teams used flexi wings too.. they simply got scared that Ferrari (ab)used the principle in a more efficient way, so they filed a complaint.
The FIA might rule in favour of Ferrari now and then (just like they helped other teams to victory in the past) ,but i dont think u should see it as if everything is done to stop Renault. Every team tries to find loopholes in the rules and they all use them. The FIA just tries to stop the most blatant ones or if they are appealed.
About the wheel-rims , why doesnt renault install something similar..either that or appeal it with the FIA (which they havent done as far as i know?)
This doesn't state that only the front wing is included. This rule is designed to cover the whole car. It doesn't exclude the steering wheel, throttle pedal and brake pedal which all have a degree of freedom. This device has been in the Renault since the end of 05 and has never been questioned. Yet the FIA can just stamp there foot all of a sudden at a GP weekend and tell them to remove it. Even though the stewards are the people that ultimately make the decision on the race weekend and they stated that it was legal.
Ferrari were the ones running the most obvious Flexi wing to the lot. I've yet to see hard evidence of significant movement on the Renault wings, when I've seen pictures onboard the Ferrari where the whole upper element has come away from the nose cone.
This just isn't about the mass damper saga, fair enough if that was the only penalty given to Renault but so far there has been a few controversial decisions.
A) Changing the rules to let Schumacher off with corner cutting. Now any driver can just fly down the inside and as long as they are a nose ahead fly over the tarmac run off and take the position without having to let them re-pass.
B) Penalising Alonso for overtaking under yellow flag when he had no option but to as the car moved over and slowed. He was 3.8 seconds off or something like that at the split so wasn't even pushing under yellows.
C) Ban of mass damper which I still believe doesn't have a solid rule to ban it.
D) Monza penalty which only one team I've seen agree with and that's the red one.
E) Turkish GP start which I thought was very dodgy from Schumacher, in the end resulting in Fisi spinning.
There are drivers on that grid like Mark Webber who to me was hinting at the FIA putting Renault on there back foot when he was talking about the penalty and the ban of the mass damper.
F1 is in a sad state of affairs and with FIA logic it's not getting any better.
I think it is getting better. Just think - everyone currently hates F1, and thinks it's all rigged/biased/conspiracied. Which means all the 'I know about F1 honest' types feck off and leave the sport with those that understand it and enjoy it. Which is perfect for me!
It's been dumbed down enough by ITV, and the soon-to-be-new regulations, so if some of the people who needed it dumbed down leave then I shall be able to enjoy it in peace!!!!
It's been dumbed down enough by ITV, and the soon-to-be-new regulations, so if some of the people who needed it dumbed down leave then I shall be able to enjoy it in peace!!!!
I kind of agree with you, except that the only thing we will be left to enjoy is dumbed-down tripe!
Monza GP *Spoiler*
(187 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG