Can I set up a diary with reminders?
Button & Sata pitted on last lap and did not take the flag.
Hello Guest
  
  • Login
• Register…
• Start blog
  • Who, Where, When
• What is interesting here?
• Duels
  • Polls
• Avatars
• Interests
  • Cities and Countries
• Random blog
• Users search
  • Search
• Games
• Tests
• GYXU
  • Ñîîáùåñòâà
• Talxy Chat
• Horoscope
• Online
 
Register!

GYXU > F1, Indy, Nascar, Rally > Button & Sata pitted on last lap and did not take the flag. 13 March 2005 09:50:35

  Recent blog posts: 
  Forums:   
  Discuss: 
  Recent forum topics: 
  Recent forum comments:
  Ìîäåðàòîð:

Button & Sata pitted on last lap and did not take the flag.

Sweeney Todd 6 March 2005 08:35:48
 

Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking
the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.

Something fishy going on at Honda!

:)­

Engelkott


Add comment
Martin Schmidt 6 March 2005 08:38:31 permanent link ]
 Sweeney Todd wrote:
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.

Thanks for mentioning this, I missed it. Will be interesting to see if
there's a controversy. Reminds me of the first shootout qualifying when
the Minardis went into the pits and thus could be worked on overnight.
That loophole was closed after the first race(s).

--
"Bisher war das Usenet eher etwas für Internetprofis und Insider: die
Software, um die Daten aus den riesigen Archiven des Usenet zu
downloaden, war sehr umständlich zu bedienen und es fehlte das
Wichtigste: eine globale Suchfunktion." - UseNeXT.de-FAQ
Add comment
Sweeney Todd 6 March 2005 08:49:27 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 05:38:31 +0100, Martin Schmidt <ikarus260@gmx.net>­
wrote:
Sweeney Todd wrote:>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking>> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>
Thanks for mentioning this, I missed it. Will be interesting to see if>there's a controversy. Reminds me of the first shootout qualifying when>the Minardis went into the pits and thus could be worked on overnight.>That loophole was closed after the first race(s).

I was watching RTL and not understanding anything though i did not
hear them mention the drivers in question.

I had the timing info from formula1.com on my comp and went to look at
the final positions when i noticed it had "in pit" next to Button &
Sato but not against any other driver.

I took a screen dump if anyone wants it emailed to them. It will be
interesting to see if it is mentioned at all.

Engelkott



Add comment
The Wizard 6 March 2005 09:03:13 permanent link ]
 
"Martin Schmidt" <ikarus260@gmx.net>­ wrote in message
news:38vfqeF5retn5U­2@individual.net...>­ Sweeney Todd wrote:>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking>> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>
Thanks for mentioning this, I missed it. Will be interesting to see if> there's a controversy. Reminds me of the first shootout qualifying when> the Minardis went into the pits and thus could be worked on overnight.> That loophole was closed after the first race(s).

Seems from what Martin Brundle said on ITV, Anyone not finishing in the
points can change engines?



Add comment
Ron Harris 6 March 2005 09:03:53 permanent link ]
 Martin Schmidt ikarus260@gmx.net wrote in message:
news:<38vfqeF5retn5­U2@individual.net>> Sweeney Todd wrote:>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking> > the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>
Thanks for mentioning this, I missed it. Will be interesting to see if> there's a controversy. Reminds me of the first shootout qualifying when> the Minardis went into the pits and thus could be worked on overnight.> That loophole was closed after the first race(s).>
It looks like the twits who cook up these new rules are defeated by
someone who hires a 16 year-old video game freak to poke hole in them,
doesn't it?

New F1 rules:

1). First you get the new rules.
2). Then you devise the technology that is required to suffice in the
meantime as required by the rules.
3). Then you decide how the rules can be taken advantage of under the worst
possible circumstances.
4). Then you do it.
5). You get the updated rules and start again.

Curse you Max!

F1 is a circus.


Add comment
John Smith 6 March 2005 09:08:08 permanent link ]
 Why not do it, they aren't breaking the rules as they stand right now. MS
looked like he could continue, but parked it. I don't know if he had a real
problem or just figured he couldn't get any points so he gave up.


Add comment
Fvrc82b8 6 March 2005 09:11:37 permanent link ]
 
"Sweeney Todd" <nomail@hotmail.com­> wrote in message
news:m12l215j2rv70p­8erugepa20dnkgm4lkm0­@4ax.com...>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>
Something fishy going on at Honda!>
:)­>
Engelkott>



The question is: Why did anyone not in the points finish the race?


Add comment
Sky 6 March 2005 09:15:19 permanent link ]
 Ferrari did the same with MS, albeit a few laps earlier. I imagine we may
start seeing every car from 9th position backwards do this in the future.
Actually, it should be hilarious watching a line of cars peel off into the
pits on the last (or penultimate) lap. Max is going to look even more of an
idiot than he does right now...

"Sweeney Todd" <nomail@hotmail.com­> wrote in message
news:m12l215j2rv70p­8erugepa20dnkgm4lkm0­@4ax.com...>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>
Something fishy going on at Honda!>
:)­>
Engelkott>


Add comment
James Hart 6 March 2005 09:20:52 permanent link ]
 The Wizard wrote:> "Martin Schmidt" <ikarus260@gmx.net>­ wrote in message> news:38vfqeF5retn5U­2@individual.net...>­> Sweeney Todd wrote:>>
Is this the test case for the engine change loophole? By not taking>>> the checqured flag they can change engines without penalty.>>
Thanks for mentioning this, I missed it. Will be interesting to see>> if there's a controversy. Reminds me of the first shootout>> qualifying when the Minardis went into the pits and thus could be>> worked on overnight. That loophole was closed after the first>> race(s).>
Seems from what Martin Brundle said on ITV, Anyone not finishing in> the points can change engines?

Not quite, if they don't finish the last lap they can change the engine
without losing 10 grid slots. It seems the way it's worded the engine change
is counted as being at this race rather than the next, if it was counted as
being at the next race then the Q+10 rule would apply.

--
James...
www.jameshart.co.uk­


Add comment
Probert 6 March 2005 09:55:33 permanent link ]
 
"John Smith" <someone@microsoft.­com> wrote in message
news:YewWd.44521$SQ­4.11889@fe1.texas.rr­.com...> Why not do it, they aren't breaking the rules as they stand right now. MS > looked like he could continue, but parked it. I don't know if he had a > real problem or just figured he couldn't get any points so he gave up.

He damaged his car in his not very subtle 'passing manoeuvre' on Heidfeld.

He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the
headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance
at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even
more questionable.

Cheers,
Probert.



Add comment
Dariusz 6 March 2005 15:16:17 permanent link ]
 In article <38vkagF5t69guU1@in­dividual.net>, "Probert" <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the >headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance >at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even >more questionable.

But the marshalls had to be there anyway to recover the other car that hit
MIchael, so that's a stupid point.

Dariusz
Add comment
Engelkott 6 March 2005 15:29:35 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 05:55:33 -0000, "Probert"
<nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:
"John Smith" <someone@microsoft.­com> wrote in message >news:YewWd.44521$S­Q4.11889@fe1.texas.r­r.com...>> Why not do it, they aren't breaking the rules as they stand right now. MS >> looked like he could continue, but parked it. I don't know if he had a >> real problem or just figured he couldn't get any points so he gave up.>
He damaged his car in his not very subtle 'passing manoeuvre' on Heidfeld.

I think Heidfeld was the one trying to overtake........
He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the >headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance >at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even >more questionable.

It was probably because it was easier, quicker and safer to be pushed
back on so he could take the car to the pits.

How unsafe it would have been is up to the drivers obaying the rules
of waved yellows, double means marshalls on track i believe?

I seem to remember Brazil 03 when Schumacher span off under yellows he
has assasinated by people in here about not driving with caution when
they did not understand the laws of physics. Alonso also got the blame
for his crash so i think any driver would have been at fault if they
came off (unless it was mechancal) and mowed down any marshalls who
would have to have been there to take the two cars away anyway!

Some people just want to snipe for no reason.

Engelkott





Add comment
Richard Miller 6 March 2005 15:34:34 permanent link ]
 In message <422ae683$0$87565$e­d2619ec@ptn-nntp-rea­der01.plus.net>,
Dariusz <ng@lycaus.plusYOUR­SHIT.com> writes>In article <38vkagF5t69guU1@in­dividual.net>, "Probert" ><nick.wf1commdept2­@btinternet.com> wrote:>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the>>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even>>more questionable.>
But the marshalls had to be there anyway to recover the other car that hit>MIchael, so that's a stupid point.>

Except that he would probably have been hauled out by a tractor so that
no marshal had to jeopardise himself by running across the track to
where Michael was and then being exposed to the possibility of another
car coming off while they were standing there.
--
Richard Miller
Add comment
Engelkott 6 March 2005 15:35:56 permanent link ]
 On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 21:15:19 -0800, "Sky" <sky@skymicro.net> wrote:
Ferrari did the same with MS, albeit a few laps earlier. I imagine we may >start seeing every car from 9th position backwards do this in the future. >Actually, it should be hilarious watching a line of cars peel off into the >pits on the last (or penultimate) lap. Max is going to look even more of an >idiot than he does right now...

Well i do not think Schumacher's retirement "a few laps earlier" which
were 15 laps before the end is as cynical as driving both cars into
the pits on the last lap, especailly as a lot of people are banging on
about MS and how unsafe it was for him to beckon marshalls to push
him.

Do you think the pit crews would have expected two cars to pit during
their pit wall antics? Mechanics and personnel all over the road when
two BAR's appear.

I guess they probably closed that part of the pit lane by then but the
BAR's had no obligation to go to scrutineering so.......

Engelkott


Add comment
Richard Miller 6 March 2005 20:32:15 permanent link ]
 In message <74ql21dr9da54lnov2­im2vs9uc0of0n8to@4ax­.com>, Engelkott
<nomail@hotmail.com­> writes>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the>>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even>>more questionable.>
It was probably because it was easier, quicker and safer to be pushed >back on so he could take the car to the pits.

Bollocks. Since when, ever, has a driver ever done that?
--
Richard Miller
Add comment
Probert 6 March 2005 22:31:45 permanent link ]
 
"Dariusz" <ng@lycaus.plusYOUR­SHIT.com> wrote in message
news:422ae683$0$875­65$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp­-reader01.plus.net..­.> In article <38vkagF5t69guU1@in­dividual.net>, "Probert" > <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the>>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his >>insistance>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even>>more questionable.>
But the marshalls had to be there anyway to recover the other car that hit> MIchael, so that's a stupid point.

Not so. The marshalls would have had to spend extra time fannying around
pushing Michael back on the track.

Heidfeld jumped out of his car as soon as it was obvious he was going
nowhere. Michael, like Heidfeld, was beached on the gravel and couldn't get
out under his own steam. Even worse, having had the marshalls eventually
push him out, his car was so badly damaged he had to retire it on that same
lap.

Cheers,
Probert.
Dariusz


Add comment
Probert 6 March 2005 22:50:16 permanent link ]
 
"Engelkott" <nomail@hotmail.com­> wrote in message
news:74ql21dr9da54l­nov2im2vs9uc0of0n8to­@4ax.com...> On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 05:55:33 -0000, "Probert"> <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>
"John Smith" <someone@microsoft.­com> wrote in message>>news:YewWd­.44521$SQ4.11889@fe1­.texas.rr.com...>>> Why not do it, they aren't breaking the rules as they stand right now. >>> MS>>> looked like he could continue, but parked it. I don't know if he had a>>> real problem or just figured he couldn't get any points so he gave up.>>
He damaged his car in his not very subtle 'passing manoeuvre' on Heidfeld.>
I think Heidfeld was the one trying to overtake........

Unquestionably. But Michael squeezed Heidfeld onto the grass; there's no
traction on grass, therefore no brakes.

There was a definite second defensive movement by Michael - which is
supposed to be illegal. It was Michael's fault.
He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the>>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his >>insistance>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even>>more questionable.>
It was probably because it was easier, quicker and safer to be pushed> back on so he could take the car to the pits.

No, it wasn't. Chris Dyer - MS's race engineer - was heard on the team radio
telling Michael to insist on being pushed out. How on earth did Dyer know
what the safety situation was. This can be a very dangerous corner - as
witnessed by Martin Brundles 1st lap accident in '96.

If a following car has a brake failure (or whatever), they're going to
plough strait on to just about where Heidfeld's car had stopped. If
anything, Heidfeld could possibly have got away with being pushed out on
safety grounds; not MS (who had stopped beyond the most dangerous area).

Once back on the track in his terminally damaged car, how many bits of
carbon fibre dropped of onto the track to, possibly damage other cars. It
was completely unnecessary, dangerous and thoughtless.
How unsafe it would have been is up to the drivers obaying the rules> of waved yellows, double means marshalls on track i believe?

See above. There are many rules about observing flag marshalls; only one
about getting a push back onto the track.
I seem to remember Brazil 03 when Schumacher span off under yellows he> has assasinated by people in here about not driving with caution when> they did not understand the laws of physics. Alonso also got the blame> for his crash so i think any driver would have been at fault if they> came off (unless it was mechancal) and mowed down any marshalls who> would have to have been there to take the two cars away anyway!

Yes, but the conditions in Brazil mitigated against blame - that turn (with
its river) took out, what, 5 or 6 cars in very short order. This isn't the
same thing, nor was Nurburgring when Michael was similarly pushed back onto
the track from a non-dangerous position that he couldn't get out of without
outside help.
Some people just want to snipe for no reason.

In this case there are plenty of reasons.

Cheers,
Probert.



Add comment
Engelkott 6 March 2005 23:17:27 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:32:15 +0000, Richard Miller
<richard@seasalter0­.demon.co.uk> wrote:
In message <74ql21dr9da54lnov2­im2vs9uc0of0n8to@4ax­.com>, Engelkott ><nomail@hotmail.co­m> writes>>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the>>>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance>>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even>>>more questionable.>>
It was probably because it was easier, quicker and safer to be pushed >>back on so he could take the car to the pits.>
Bollocks. Since when, ever, has a driver ever done that?

Nurbergring 2003 though the driver that day carried on. A few have
tried it since but never got a push. (Schumacher)

I believe the rule quoted on tv by Brundle and in this group is
something to the effect that if a car is in what is considered a
dangerous position and can't be moved quickly it can be push started.

Naturally this would not mean if a car was at the back of the gravel
trap!

Perhaps the question should be why did it take the marshals so long to
go and push start Schumacher? Maybe they were on the radio checking if
it was ok? Maybe it was quicker as there may have been one crane and
two cars? Thus making it quicker to push one back in the race as that
car had the engine still running?

Quite logical though not necessarily 100% correct. Who knows? All i
know is it was legal and was done without penalty or the people in the
business moaning.

You can't blame someone for knowing the rules and trying it on. Blame
the marshals who comply with it.

Engelkott


Add comment
Vile Merchant 6 March 2005 23:21:17 permanent link ]
 
"Engelkott" <nomail@hotmail.com­> wrote in message
news:iglm215675lf91­97nh6l052cd670vp1oo9­@4ax.com...> On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 16:32:15 +0000, Richard Miller> <richard@seasalter0­.demon.co.uk> wrote:>
In message <74ql21dr9da54lnov2­im2vs9uc0of0n8to@4ax­.com>, Engelkott> ><nomail@hotmail.co­m> writes> >>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in
headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his
insistance> >>>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls,
even> >>>more questionable.> >>
It was probably because it was easier, quicker and safer to be pushed> >>back on so he could take the car to the pits.> >
Bollocks. Since when, ever, has a driver ever done that?>
Nurbergring 2003 though the driver that day carried on. A few have> tried it since but never got a push. (Schumacher)>
I believe the rule quoted on tv by Brundle and in this group is> something to the effect that if a car is in what is considered a> dangerous position and can't be moved quickly it can be push started.>
Naturally this would not mean if a car was at the back of the gravel> trap!>
Perhaps the question should be why did it take the marshals so long to> go and push start Schumacher? Maybe they were on the radio checking if> it was ok? Maybe it was quicker as there may have been one crane and> two cars? Thus making it quicker to push one back in the race as that> car had the engine still running?>
Quite logical though not necessarily 100% correct. Who knows? All i> know is it was legal and was done without penalty or the people in the> business moaning.>
You can't blame someone for knowing the rules and trying it on. Blame> the marshals who comply with it.

How people can claim it would be safer to have marshalls standing around
attaching a crane for 5 minutes rather than pushing the car for 5 seconds is
beyond me. Just more schumacher-phobia as usual, if it was anyone else that
got pushed it would not even be an issue.


Add comment
Phil Newnham 7 March 2005 00:30:48 permanent link ]
 F2004: 15 of 17*·** wrote:> Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team> England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying> position.

ROFL.

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.­com/photographer/313­07.html
Add comment
Da Frank 7 March 2005 00:46:22 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 11:16:17 GMT, ng@lycaus.plusYOURS­HIT.com (Dariusz)
wrote:
In article <38vkagF5t69guU1@in­dividual.net>, "Probert" <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>>He had bits hanging off the rear right corner of the car (visible in the >>headon shot of him trundling down the pit lane) - which makes his insistance >>at being pushed back on the track, and so endangering the marshalls, even >>more questionable.>
But the marshalls had to be there anyway to recover the other car that hit >MIchael, so that's a stupid point.>
Besides, they don't have truck mirrors, so for him to see that
something was hanging off the car, it would have to hit him in the
eye.

--

Regards, Frank
Add comment


C Story 7 March 2005 01:08:18 permanent link ]
 "F2004: 15 of 17*·**" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in
news:3enm21dq0i99ve­8ukvj96f8cu2tdvtda36­@4ax.com:
Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team> England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying> position.>

Suuuure he did.


*rolls eyes*


Add comment
Probert 7 March 2005 01:37:26 permanent link ]
 
"F2004: 15 of 17*·**" <Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote in message
news:3enm21dq0i99ve­8ukvj96f8cu2tdvtda36­@4ax.com...> On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 18:50:16 -0000, "Probert"> <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>>"Engelkott"­ <nomail@hotmail.com­> wrote in message>>news:74ql2­1dr9da54lnov2im2vs9u­c0of0n8to@4ax.com...­>>> On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 05:55:33 -0000, "Probert">>> <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>>>>"John Smith" <someone@microsoft.­com> wrote in message>>>>news:Yew­Wd.44521$SQ4.11889@f­e1.texas.rr.com...>>­>>> Why not do it, they aren't breaking the rules as they stand right now.>>>>> MS>>>>> looked like he could continue, but parked it. I don't know if he had a>>>>> real problem or just figured he couldn't get any points so he gave up.>>>>
He damaged his car in his not very subtle 'passing manoeuvre' on >>>>Heidfeld.>>>
I think Heidfeld was the one trying to overtake........>>
Unquestionably. But Michael squeezed Heidfeld onto the grass;>
He did NOT.

Oh, yes he did. His first defensive move - which we only saw the end of on
the live coverage - was to cover the centre line (off the normal racing line
which is to the left of the track). Then there was the secondary move - the
illegal bit - which is clearly visible on all the camera angles, where
Michael makes a clearly separate move further to the right.

This is the move that forced Heidfeld onto the grass, and thus into an
inevitable crash. Had Michael not made that secondary move, I've little
doubt that he'd have stayed infront of Heidfeld anyway
there's no traction on grass, therefore no brakes.>
Making it an extremely idiotic tactical maneuver on Heidfeld's part.

It wasn't Heidfeld's fault.

There was a definite second defensive movement by Michael - which is>>supposed to be illegal. It was Michael's fault.>
Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team> England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying> position.>

I'm sorry. I'm clearly forgetting Frusciante's 1st, 2nd and 3rd Laws of F1.

First, that Michael Schumacher can do no wrong.

Second that Ferrari can do no wrong.

Third that, even if MS and/or Ferrari have, or may have, done wrong, it's
not their fault; it's anyone and everyone elses fault - particularly the
perfidious English - even if it really is MS's/Ferrari's fault.

You are - as usual - myopically preposterous, Mark.

Cheers,
Probert.



Add comment


Da Frank 7 March 2005 01:44:32 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:30:48 +0000, Phil Newnham
<dont_you_spam_me@b­tinternet.com> wrote:
F2004: 15 of 17*·** wrote:>> Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team>> England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying>> position.>
ROFL.>
What'd you expect ? ;-)­

--

Regards, Frank
Add comment
Phil Newnham 7 March 2005 02:01:06 permanent link ]
 Da Frank wrote:> On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 20:30:48 +0000, Phil Newnham> <dont_you_spam_me@b­tinternet.com> wrote:>
F2004: 15 of 17*·** wrote:>>
Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team>>>England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying>>>position.>­>
ROFL.>>
What'd you expect ? ;-)­

High comedy, and I got it, in spades.

--
Phil

http://www.usefilm.­com/photographer/313­07.html
Add comment


Ts 8 March 2005 06:38:47 permanent link ]
 On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:22 +0000, Probert wrote:
The important part being, "If the driver is unable to drive the car from a> dangerous position". Michael wasn't in a dangerous position (just as he> wasn't in a dangerous position at Nurburgring).

I don't understand why you believe MS's car wasn't in a dangerous
position. It arrived at its position as a result of a racing incident in
the previous corner. If two other cars had a similar incident in that
corner, wouldn't one of them be likely to land in a similar position? As
you state, MS didn't move after he landed - he simply dug in.

In the end, though, isn't it the corner workers' call as to whether or not
the car is in a dangerous position and how it should best be cleared?
Given the danger they put themselves in so that the races can take place
and we can amuse ourselves by arguing endlessly about them, I'm willing to
give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they know what they're
doing.

-ts
Add comment
Mark Jones 8 March 2005 07:40:47 permanent link ]
 On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:38:47 -0700, ts <ts_0053NO@SPAMyaho­o.com>
wrote:>On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:22 +0000, Probert wrote:>> The important part being, "If the driver is unable to drive the car from a>> dangerous position". Michael wasn't in a dangerous position (just as he>> wasn't in a dangerous position at Nurburgring).>
I don't understand why you believe MS's car wasn't in a dangerous>position.­ It arrived at its position as a result of a racing incident in>the previous corner. If two other cars had a similar incident in that>corner, wouldn't one of them be likely to land in a similar position? As>you state, MS didn't move after he landed - he simply dug in.

Also, if the engine is running, it's quicker to just push the car back
onto the track rather than have the tractor drag it away - which means
less time spent standing in the 'dangerous position'.

- Jones
FORZA!
Add comment
Sylvan Smyth 8 March 2005 11:00:21 permanent link ]
 ts wrote:
I don't understand why you believe MS's car wasn't in a dangerous>position.­ It arrived at its position as a result of a racing incident in>the previous corner. If two other cars had a similar incident in that>corner, wouldn't one of them be likely to land in a similar position?

Fortunately, the orange car of the driver most likely to cause a
similar incident was already stuck in the gravel trap.

But yeah, it was a dangerous position.

Add comment
Sylvan Smyth 8 March 2005 11:11:30 permanent link ]
 "Dom" wrote:
Just face it... Mickey S is well past it.

There's no reason to believe he's any less effective than ever,
but he obviously hasn't gained any on-track class either.
he's been doing it for over a decade now...

And I won't shed a tear when someone decides not to give in and he
ends up on his lid.

Add comment
Martin Evans 8 March 2005 12:17:11 permanent link ]
 Mark@Jones.eo.nz (Mark Jones) wrote:
Also, if the engine is running, it's quicker to just push the car back>onto the track rather than have the tractor drag it away - which means>less time spent standing in the 'dangerous position'.

To push the car took (3?) marshalls. To lift and recover the car would
take one to put the sling through the lifting hoop and one in the
crane/tractor (who is usually reasonably well protected) MS by acting
like the spoil brat he is and insisting on a push put at least two
other lives on the line.


--
Add comment
Peter 8 March 2005 13:10:15 permanent link ]
 ts <ts_0053NO@SPAMyaho­o.com> writes>I don't understand why you believe MS's car wasn't in a dangerous>position.­ It arrived at its position as a result of a racing incident in>the previous corner. If two other cars had a similar incident in that>corner, wouldn't one of them be likely to land in a similar position?

The rules need to be changed so that any car that leaves the track and
is unable to rejoin without assistance may receive outside assistance if
in a dangerous position but only to return to the pits to retire.
--
Peter


Add comment
Mark Jones 9 March 2005 00:45:39 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 08:17:11 +0000, Martin Evans
<mcenews@dial.pipex­.com> wrote:>Mark@Jones.e­o.nz (Mark Jones) wrote:>>Also, if the engine is running, it's quicker to just push the car back>>onto the track rather than have the tractor drag it away - which means>>less time spent standing in the 'dangerous position'.>
To push the car took (3?) marshalls. To lift and recover the car would>take one to put the sling through the lifting hoop and one in the>crane/tractor (who is usually reasonably well protected) MS by acting>like the spoil brat he is and insisting on a push put at least two>other lives on the line.

Two other lives who would have been out there in the sandtrap anyway.
Why not use them to quickly clear a car? With a waved yellow flag and
clear line of sight it's not exactly on the same level as russian
roulette, and if another car does go off into the sandtrap - by
pushing Schumacher's car you're clearing the space faster.

- Jones
FORZA!
Add comment
Da Frank 9 March 2005 01:31:29 permanent link ]
 On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 19:05:52 -0000, "Probert"
<nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:
He wasn't in so dangerous a position as Heidfeld, and he wasn't in so >dangerous a position to be, potentially, life threatening to other drivers. >In order to get enough marshalls to scurry across the gravel trap, he >certainly caused their lives to be endangered - completely unnecessarily, in >the event, as he retired his car at the end of that lap.>
He was in a situation where both pushing him or getting him and his
car off the track would have posed the same amount of "danger".
Remember, as soon as he hit the gravel the yellows would have been
flying the corner before, so cars would have come in a bit slower and
in formation, a similar incident would have been quite unlikely..
It's a decision the marshalls make and they are not rookies.

--

Regards, Frank
Add comment
Ts 9 March 2005 11:14:36 permanent link ]
 On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 08:31:29 +1100, Da Frank wrote:
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 19:05:52 -0000, "Probert"> <nick.wf1commdept2@­btinternet.com> wrote:>
He wasn't in so dangerous a position as Heidfeld, and he wasn't in so >>dangerous a position to be, potentially, life threatening to other drivers. >>In order to get enough marshalls to scurry across the gravel trap, he >>certainly caused their lives to be endangered - completely unnecessarily, in >>the event, as he retired his car at the end of that lap.>>
He was in a situation where both pushing him or getting him and his> car off the track would have posed the same amount of "danger".> Remember, as soon as he hit the gravel the yellows would have been> flying the corner before, so cars would have come in a bit slower and> in formation, a similar incident would have been quite unlikely.. > It's a decision the marshalls make and they are not rookies.

Well said. All this criticism of MS is implicitly criticism of the
workers themselves. MS was helpless - all he could do was sit in his car
and gesture to the workers. They made their decisions and acted upon them
based on their training and experience, not because MS was waving his arms
at them. Personally, I'll go with their decision - they had a better view
of the situation than I!

-ts

Add comment
Not Bernie Ecclestone 9 March 2005 12:31:48 permanent link ]
 ts <ts_0053NO@SPAMyaho­o.com> wrote:
MS was helpless - all he could do was sit in his car>and gesture to the workers.

No he could have been a man, turn off the engine and walk away -
preferably for good to his tax free reirement home where he can
contemplate how he cheated his way into the record books.


--
Add comment
Guest 13 March 2005 09:50:35 permanent link ]
 On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 19:46:42 GMT, "F2004: 15 of 17*·**"
<Ron.Dennis@LyingCh­eatingSwine.com> wrote:

snip>
Heidfeld twitched himself into the grass, like a good little Team>England player preventing Schumacher from a possible points paying>position.


Is he one of the Heidfeld's of Chipping Norton?
Fine English stock egad!

AJ

Add comment
 

Add new comment

As:
Login:  Password:  
 
 
  
 
respect your talk pals, avoid using obscene language, typing entire messages in CAPS, posting buy/sell ads or violating netiquette or the RF Criminal Code..


GYXU > F1, Indy, Nascar, Rally > Button & Sata pitted on last lap and did not take the flag. 13 March 2005 09:50:35

see also:
Re: Sachin a Match Fixer!!!!
Harbhajan saying MC/BC to Afridi but…
Re: Why every freaking (or famous)…
pass tests:
see also:

  Copyright © 2001—2009 GYXU
Idea: Miñhael Monashev
See Help and FAQ in the community support.gyxu.com.
Write in the community about the bugs you have noticedbugs.gyxu.com.
Write your offers and comments in the communities suggest.gyxu.com.
Information for parents.
Write us at:
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please .