Dramatic finish to Brazillian GP!

redspider

amacachi wrote: »

So in answer to my previous post, did Toyota have a secret radio between themselves and Glock to tell him how much to slow down by?

You ****ing spastic, read over the ****ing thread.

Probably gonna get banned for that.

Well maybe if you read my post and other posts you wouldnt get yourself into such a tizzy. (ps: I wont be reporting you).

I dont think there is a conspiracy theory and I stated that. I do think however that Glock slowed down more than he needed to. Not all radio communications are made public and a simple "slow-down, tip-toe around, dont block/protect/fight" comm to both Trulli and Glock would have given them both similar final lap times.

Whether Glock knew his slowing down would affect the championship result is hard to know but he did let those 3 cars past far too easily and without a fight, his car was nowhere near slipping, not even a twitch which is very unusual for slicks on a wet track. He was not fighting to keep his place. In his defence, it was the last lap of the season and there was no need to fight tooth and nail to win points.

What is clear from re-viewing the footage:

1. Kubica unlapped both Vettel and Hamilton and this spurred Vettel to overtake Hamilton. Before that Vettel was happy to stay behind Lewis and coast on the last lap.

2. Glock slowed down more than he needed to given track conditions and the attacks of other cars. Glock did let Hamilton past.


Overall, as I stated in my post as well, these things are part of the sport. Letting drivers through or not happens in each race multiples of times. This particular one (letting through) in the last few corners is just another one of these events that happens 1000's of times in a season. There is no illegal sanction possible (or at least its highly unlikely) and Massa and Ferrari accepted 2nd place with grace. Kovaleinen let Hamilton through on the very first corner at the start of the race. Its all part of the game.

It was a good race, a good closely fought season and Hamilton makes a good driver champion. Massa would have as well, and it was that close.

Redspider

ibanez777vbk

KamiKazi wrote: »

Oh and you guys might appreciate this

quality.the best man won championship

Alun

redspider wrote: »

2. Glock slowed down more than he needed to given track conditions and the attacks of other cars. Glock did let Hamilton past.

Well, to be honest, neither you, or anyone else on this forum, actually have the faintest clue as to what the conditions were like in that car at that time on that track, only Glock knows that, so it's a moot point really.

Anyway, possibly he did let him (and Vettel too, don't forget) through, but possibly more to avoid hitting either of them and still end up with some points (he still got 3 points out of it all) , rather than some unfounded conspiracy theory.

amacachi

redspider wrote:

I dont think there is a conspiracy theory and I stated that. I do think however that Glock slowed down more than he needed to. Not all radio communications are made public and a simple "slow-down, tip-toe around, dont block/protect/fight" comm to both Trulli and Glock would have given them both similar final lap times.

Not all radio comms are made public, but the FIA does have access to all of them.

I can't even be bothered arguing about the other any more.

Duzzie

Perhaps you could provide some real proof that Glock slowed down more than he needed to?? On what do you base your statement that he slowed down more than he needed to?? Glock and Trulli were there only 2 that stayed on dry tyres. Both did the same time for the last lap. I have yet to see anything to suggest that Glock did anything. As I said before, Glock is no fan of Hamilton and has accused him in the past of forcing him off the track, so again I ask, what reason could he have had to let him through.

Similarly why are you making such a fuss about this. I didnt see such conspiracy theories flying around when Massa "overtook" Kimi in China. You may say that it is different as they are in the same team but as team orders are banned, why not complain about that?? There is a lot of people out there who will say anything to discredit Hamiltons WDC.

As Amacachi has already posted, both Farrari and McLaren are very restrictive about their radio broadcasts. However, the FIA does have full access to them

The facts are :

• Hamilton finished the season with more points than anyone else,
• There has been no proof to demonstrate that Glock slowed down more than he had to. On the contrary, the only 2 drivers that stayed on dry tyres did 1:44 last laps,
• The vast majority of contentious decisions made over the season have benifitted Farrari and Massa,
• Hamilton was comfortably in 4th place before the final rain shower. He went down to 5th as a result of Glock not pitting for wets. Had Glock not taken the risk, or had Toyota wanted Hamilton to pass Glock, why did they just not pit him??

The way i see it, you are just very bitter about Hamilton winning. You and many others just want to discredit his acheivements. The facts are clear. If anyone has the right to question the points scored this season it is Hamilton and McLaren.

Get over it, Hamilton won the WDC and Massa didnt. Massa has accepted it gracefully and with dignity. Why cant you?? You are letting your dislike of Hamilton to cloud your judgement. You are looking for a conspiracy where there is none. As I said, please show me one thread of proof to show that Glock slowed down more than he had to.

redspider wrote: »

Well maybe if you read my post and other posts you wouldnt get yourself into such a tizzy. (ps: I wont be reporting you).

I dont think there is a conspiracy theory and I stated that. I do think however that Glock slowed down more than he needed to. Not all radio communications are made public and a simple "slow-down, tip-toe around, dont block/protect/fight" comm to both Trulli and Glock would have given them both similar final lap times.

Whether Glock knew his slowing down would affect the championship result is hard to know but he did let those 3 cars past far too easily and without a fight, his car was nowhere near slipping, not even a twitch which is very unusual for slicks on a wet track. He was not fighting to keep his place. In his defence, it was the last lap of the season and there was no need to fight tooth and nail to win points.

What is clear from re-viewing the footage:

1. Kubica unlapped both Vettel and Hamilton and this spurred Vettel to overtake Hamilton. Before that Vettel was happy to stay behind Lewis and coast on the last lap.

2. Glock slowed down more than he needed to given track conditions and the attacks of other cars. Glock did let Hamilton past.


Overall, as I stated in my post as well, these things are part of the sport. Letting drivers through or not happens in each race multiples of times. This particular one (letting through) in the last few corners is just another one of these events that happens 1000's of times in a season. There is no illegal sanction possible (or at least its highly unlikely) and Massa and Ferrari accepted 2nd place with grace. Kovaleinen let Hamilton through on the very first corner at the start of the race. Its all part of the game.

It was a good race, a good closely fought season and Hamilton makes a good driver champion. Massa would have as well, and it was that close.

Redspider

IanCurtis

Duzzie wrote: »

The facts are :

• Hamilton finished the season with more points than anyone else,

Yes, he did

• There has been no proof to demonstrate that Glock slowed down more than he had to. On the contrary, the only 2 drivers that stayed on dry tyres did 1:44 last laps,

The other driver was Trulli? Glock's team-mate

• The vast majority of contentious decisions made over the season have benifitted Farrari and Massa,

Correct, Ferrari-bias all year

• Hamilton was comfortably in 4th place before the final rain shower. He went down to 5th as a result of Glock not pitting for wets. Had Glock not taken the risk, or had Toyota wanted Hamilton to pass Glock, why did they just not pit him??

I don't think it was that pre-meditated tbh

I would love to see onboard footage from Glock's car if it exists. He definitely looked like he had slowed down on the straightish section before the last real corner.

It looks blatant, but justice was done for Hamilton as he deserved to win despite the ridiculous decisions against him through the season.

amacachi

IanCurtis wrote: »

I would love to see onboard footage from Glock's car if it exists. He definitely looked like he had slowed down on the straightish section before the last real corner.

It looks blatant, but justice was done for Hamilton as he deserved to win despite the ridiculous decisions against him through the season.

What looks blatant?

vincenzolorenzo

Duzzie wrote: »

I fully understand that Hamilton is disliked by some people and that they would rather have seen Massa, Kimi, Alonso or anyone else win but him. However, give the guy a break, he ended the season on the most points and so is WDC 2008. All this talk of a conspiracy is nonsence.

If you look back at the season, the majority of contentious decisions have gone against Hamilton and Massa and Farrari have benifitted, such as Hamiltons penalty for cutting the chicane at Spa, 2 dangerous pit incidents for Massa, Massa/Bourdais incident, Hamilton's start in Singapore. Whether they were right or wrong, all of the dicisions taken on these events benifitted Massa and/or Farrari.

I do not subscribe to the theories of bias or fixing. There have been some very poor decisions by the stewards, particularly the bourdais incident, but i dont believe that there was any conspiracy or bias in those decisions. Hamiltons overtaking of Glock was down to Glock and Trulli being on the wrong tyres for the conditions, nothing more, nothing less. Glock had no reason to let Hamilton through. Glock accused Hamilton of running him off the track earlier in the season so why should he gift him the championship?? If Toyota wanted Glock to let hamilton through, why did they not just pit him when everyone else did. Why take the risk of staying out on drys, which if it had worked would have resulted in Hamilton not winning the title??

I'm not asking people to like Hamilton but he does deserve repect and credit for winning the WDC. I felt very sorry for Massa yesterday as he did all he could and the title was taken from him on the last corner. It was very tough on him. But he was a very good loser and was very magnanimous and dignified in defeat. If he's big enough to accept that Hamilton won, so should everyone else. Massa deserves a lot of respect for the improvement in his driving and in the way he handled the situation yesterday. My estimations of him have greatly increased.

+1. At last someone with a bit of sense compared to the extreme level of BS in this thread. Totally agree with Duzzie

zeris

What is interesting is any talk of conspiracy regarding Glock is defined as "BS" and "bitter".

Meanwhile, conspiracy about FIA collusion with stewards is taken as fact and paraded about as a badge of honour.

lalique

Perhaps you all should read this article from Autosport magazine, its a quote an Italian newspaper interview with Massa.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72008

I really hope this "shuts up" all those on here and other forums who are trying to make out there was a conspiracy with Glock to let lewis past.

I'm also disgusted at the way his family have been abused, especially Lewis's brother Nic.

I'm sure if any other driver had won, then we wouldn't be hearing all this rubbish.

It's amazing how all of a sudden we have so many experts in F1 on here.

My rant over, that's my opinion and yes I do support Mclaren and am a member of Team Mclaren but love F1 in general.

zeris

lalique wrote: »

I'm sure if any other driver had won, then we wouldn't be hearing all this rubbish.

Really? Even Massa?

vincenzolorenzo

lalique wrote: »

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72008

And that is one of the reasons why i like massa so much. The guy is an absolute gentleman. Very fair and sportsmanlike. If only they were all like that! Even after the race, probably the most disappointing moment of his life he found time to congratulate Hamilton (I haven't heard hamilton once mention felipe or commiserate with him since he won).

lalique

Even if Massa had won, I wouldn't have started slagging him or his family off.

Also it depends on what publications you read, if you read trashy stuff then you can hardly expect to get the full picture. I have certainly read interviews where Lewis has praised Massa for a hard fought battle.

Surely people are intelligent enough to understand MOTOR (SPORT) and in my opinion that doesn't include racial abuse and targeting "the family".

Even Mr Alsono had the decency to go and congratulate Lewis.

We are all entitled to our own opinions but leave skin colour and family members disabilities out of it.

SalthillGuy

DBraithwaite wrote: »

what a dramatic finish to Brazillian GP, you have to feel sorry for Massa. They both would have been worthy winners:D

I was exciting TV, but you have to question it.
I watched it all and rooted for Hamilton, but after it was over I said, I WONDER.....????

SalthillGuy

T-Maxx wrote: »

Pathetic.

Just shows you what money (=power) can do...:mad:

I think this race(?) devalues F1.

vincenzolorenzo

lalique wrote: »

Even if Massa had won, I wouldn't have started slagging him or his family off.

Also it depends on what publications you read, if you read trashy stuff then you can hardly expect to get the full picture. I have certainly read interviews where Lewis has praised Massa for a hard fought battle.

Surely people are intelligent enough to understand MOTOR (SPORT) and in my opinion that doesn't include racial abuse and targeting "the family".

Even Mr Alsono had the decency to go and congratulate Lewis.

We are all entitled to our own opinions but leave skin colour and family members disabilities out of it.

My apologies, i have read a few interviews with him, mainly on ITV and BBC websites but didn't hear him say anything. But if he did then thats fair enough. Agree wholeheartedly with you lalique, slagging off his family is pointless and wrong

vincenzolorenzo

SalthillGuy wrote: »

I think this race(?) devalues F1.

Eh, wha'????? In 15 years of watching F1 this was by far the most exciting i've ever seen. How exactly does it devalue F1?

lalique

vincenzolorenzo wrote: »

My apologies, i have read a few interviews with him, mainly on ITV and BBC websites but didn't hear him say anything. But if he did then thats fair enough. Agree wholeheartedly with you lalique, slagging off his family is pointless and wrong

Here is an interview with Lewis where he congratulates Massa on his win and challenging him all year.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71951

Duzzie

zeris wrote: »

What is interesting is any talk of conspiracy regarding Glock is defined as "BS" and "bitter".

Meanwhile, conspiracy about FIA collusion with stewards is taken as fact and paraded about as a badge of honour.

I dont see threads like this about about any other driver. Looks like bitterness to me

I dont hear any former drivers, lets face it what does anyone on here know about driving an F1 car (me included), saying that Glock did anything wrong or that the race/championship was in any way fixed in favour of Hamilton.

I have heard quite a few former drivers saying that some of the steward decisions were wrong, particularly the one on the Massa/ Bourdais incident.

I do not believe that there was a conspiracy to favour Mclaren but I do believe that there were some very poor steward decisions. However if you look at the season as a whole, there are far more reasons to suspect that the might be pro-Ferrari bias than pro-Mclaren bias.

Any chance that we can move on now?? Next season should be a good one. Hopefully it will not just be a McLaren- Ferrari two horse race. Hopefully Renault will be up there in the mix too and we will see a Hamilton - Massa - Kimi - Alonso fight for the WDC. Hopefully the drivers will be allowed to race each other without all the interference from the stewards and the FIA.

zeris

Hopefully 2009 will be a good season.

According to a couple of news sites today (eg http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20963.html) the FIA is planning to at least add some transparency to their decisions next year which can only be a good thing.

One thing I didn't know is that stewards must be eligible for the FIA's super licence to be a steward.

IanCurtis

vincenzolorenzo wrote: »

Eh, wha'????? In 15 years of watching F1 this was by far the most exciting i've ever seen. How exactly does it devalue F1?

Because it looks like another driver on a different team pulled over to let someone else win the championship ahead of the driver who had just come 1st in his home town.

It's not rocket science, it's every bit as bad as the soccer match-rigging allegations of the late 80's.

As a mate of mine said "this is like watching WWF"

Where's that fcuking onboard footage of Glock??? It must be out there somewhere (as if Bernie would release it)

amacachi

IanCurtis wrote: »

Because it looks like another driver on a different team pulled over to let someone else win the championship ahead of the driver who had just come 1st in his home town.

It's not rocket science, it's every bit as bad as the soccer match-rigging allegations of the late 80's.

As a mate of mine said "this is like watching WWF"

Where's that fcuking onboard footage of Glock??? It must be out there somewhere (as if Bernie would release it)

And his teammate magically posted the exact same time? Or were there secret radio messages? And why would Toyota want to help Mercedes exactly?

IanCurtis

amacachi wrote: »

And his teammate magically posted the exact same time? Or were there secret radio messages? And why would Toyota want to help Mercedes exactly?

I don't know, but I've been following the sport since 1991.

I think any doubts should be cleared up by showing telemetry from Glock's car and/or onboard footage.

I don't know why he would slow up at that part of the circuit. He was so wide of the apex it was ridiculous, and if he'd blocked Hamilton at the apex, would have clearly held his position as the last few turns are at full throttle and caused no problems during the race in the wet.

The turns causing the problems were the Senna Ss, particularly the left turn up the hill, which seemed to have a pool of water. Glock was nowhere near this.

It all stinks, the more I watch of the replays.

amacachi

IanCurtis wrote: »

I don't know, but I've been following the sport since 1991.

I think any doubts should be cleared up by showing telemetry from Glock's car and/or onboard footage.

I don't know why he would slow up at that part of the circuit. He was so wide of the apex it was ridiculous, and if he'd blocked Hamilton at the apex, would have clearly held his position as the last few turns are at full throttle and caused no problems during the race in the wet.

The turns causing the problems were the Senna Ss, particularly the left turn up the hill, which seemed to have a pool of water. Glock was nowhere near this.

It all stinks, the more I watch of the replays.

Yeah, and if there was any evidence of it you can bet your arse it would've come out.

Maybe he slowed up because he was on the wrong bloody tyres?

I'll ask again, why would Toyota help Mercedes? Toyota are only in Formula 1 as an advertisement for themselves, so why let a Mercedes-powered car? How would Glock and Trulli have known how much to slow down?