Formula 1 2010: Round 5 Monaco

Oblomov

Once you start calling people names to try and substantiate an argument you have lost.

It's not about like or dislike for a driver, not like most of the contributors, but the rules of the game.

You can get all agitated and emotional but the ruling still stands, the ruling and judgement of the stewards was that Herr Schumacher was in direct contravention of a rule.

The line Schumacher took in overtaking Alonso was to intimidate and push the Ferrari as wide as possible. The closing frames from behind the cars clearly shows.

Regardless of how many drivers thought or didn't think of the the overtaking rule. At that time only one driver sought to gain an advantage from the situation.

That one driver was Michael Schumacher.

samsemtex

Oblomov wrote: »

Once you start calling people names to try and substantiate an argument you have lost.

It's not about like or dislike for a driver, not like most of the contributors, but the rules of the game.

You can get all agitated and emotional but the ruling still stands, the ruling and judgement of the stewards was that Herr Schumacher was in direct contravention of a rule.

The line Schumacher took in overtaking Alonso was to intimidate and push the Ferrari as wide as possible. The closing frames from behind the cars clearly shows.

Regardless of how many drivers thought or didn't think of the the overtaking rule. At that time only one driver sought to gain an advantage from the situation.

That one driver was Michael Schumacher.

I distinctly remember Rosberg having a go at alonso as well.

So what you really mean is Only one driver successfully completed a move and gained an advantage.

That one driver was Michael Schumacher.

frostie500

Oblomov wrote: »

You can get all agitated and emotional but the ruling still stands, the ruling and judgement of the stewards was that Herr Schumacher was in direct contravention of a rule

Oblomov wrote: »

The line Schumacher took in overtaking Alonso was to intimidate and push the Ferrari as wide as possible. The closing frames from behind the cars clearly shows

Do you still not think that the decision of the marshals to wave green flags had no bearing on the attempt by Schumacher to make the move? There's no way that he would attempt a move if yellow flags were waving.

If Schumacher was so at fault why has the FIA announced that they will discuss this rule at their next World Council meeting?

Oblomov wrote: »

The line Schumacher took in overtaking Alonso was to intimidate and push the Ferrari as wide as possible. The closing frames from behind the cars clearly shows

What difference does the manner of his move in this instance? If, as you claim, the move was illegal why does it matter if Schumacher was overly aggressive?

vincenzolorenzo

Oblomov wrote: »

Once you start calling people names to try and substantiate an argument you have lost.

And this happened where?

Oblomov wrote: »

It's not about like or dislike for a driver, not like most of the contributors, but the rules of the game.

You can get all agitated and emotional but the ruling still stands, the ruling and judgement of the stewards was that Herr Schumacher was in direct contravention of a rule.

The line Schumacher took in overtaking Alonso was to intimidate and push the Ferrari as wide as possible. The closing frames from behind the cars clearly shows.

Regardless of how many drivers thought or didn't think of the the overtaking rule. At that time only one driver sought to gain an advantage from the situation.

That one driver was Michael Schumacher.

I'm not disagreeing with you - Schumacher did break the rule. My argument has two sides to it:

1. There was a lack of clarity about the rule. Marshals waving green flags clearly indicates that racing is free to continue, so the Monaco situation was confusing
2. While I agree that schumacher did break the rule I can't understand why that rule was there. Either leave it as it was, ie - no overtaking until the S/F line or else or else let racing continue once the safety car comes in. Why complicate things by introducing subclauses and exceptions to new rules? (On a separate note I think the constant meddling and rule changing by the FIA just makes the sport more complicated and doesn't gain any new fans at all.)

And as for the move itself it was just an opportunistic manoeuvre. Alonso made a complete balls of his exit from rascasse. Schumacher saw the gap and went for it. There was no intimidation or deliberate pushing of alonso. Just a racing manoeuvre

frostie500

vincenzolorenzo wrote: »

While I agree that schumacher did break the rule I can't understand why that rule was there. Either leave it as it was, ie - no overtaking until the S/F line or else or else let racing continue once the safety car comes in. Why complicate things by introducing subclauses and exceptions to new rules? (On a separate note I think the constant meddling and rule changing by the FIA just makes the sport more complicated and doesn't gain any new fans at all.)

The rule is there from the previous safety car rules-o overtaking until the line-when the safety car line was brought in the FIA apparently forgot to remove this contradictionary rule

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

Regardless of how many drivers thought or didn't think of the the overtaking rule.

Excellent, so you have now gone from all the other teams knew what the rule meant, to all the other drivers knew what the rule meant to it doesn't matter what the drivers think the rule means.

And now it would appear that even the FIA doesn't know what the rule means and are going to rewrite it.

Oblomov wrote: »

At that time only one driver sought to gain an advantage from the situation.

Why would a racing driver on a clear racing circuit with a green flag choose the race and gain an advantage? Hmm, still a tricky question. :rolleyes:

Oblomov

This debate centres around a presumption that this is a new rule. It is accepted that on a last lap situation, there's no overtaking for the distance of the pit entrance, i.e. exit of the safety car and the start and finish line for the end of the race. At any other time, the green flag will indicate it is safe to resume at racing speed..... that's all, not overtake everyone....

The conversion between Schumacher and the pits clearly indicates that sooner than comply,but, to challenge.. and the resulting 20 second penalty.

The armchair enthusiasts can procrastinate and debate but the general consensus across the formulas is that last lap safety car hold positions and do not overtake.

The formula one drivers have to comply with the regulation for the Super license, and having an understanding of the rules, both standing regs of the day, and the FIA formula one regs... it's part of the job. Driver briefings will remind any drivers of new and different procedures.

When Michael Schumacher was questioned immediately after the incident, his actions were those of being caught and wishing to avoid any questions or any possible responsibility for the furore.

You may wish to debate or ignore certain parts, you might like to add the feelings of others, the possible intervention of the fairies, the introduction of a time machine to re-write this small incident but the result stands. Any possible appeal was discarded and the Stewards ruling has become etched in stone.

Oblomov

At a two day meeting including both national and international drivers, from national formulas to international, across a broad section of racing cars, including saloon, single seater open wheel to fully enclosed and in discussion with various officials the general consensus was, bloody fool he knows the regulations and so does Brawn.

Oblomov

Jesus you're the most anti schumacher head i've heard in a long time, and i've heard quite a few.

And speaking from experience, when you see the green flag, your racing!!!

Not on a last lap your not.

but all of us at the race school thought it was a disgrace that he got the 20 seconds punishment.

Let me know what race school and I won't send any friends or novices there

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

The armchair enthusiasts can procrastinate and debate but the general consensus across the formulas is that last lap safety car hold positions and do not overtake.

Except as I quoted earlier:

I am told that of the six teams with drivers in the top 10, three of them told their drivers they could overtake, two of them said the race was effectively over and they could not, and one of them said they could race, but not overtake.

so there wasn't a "general consensus".

Oblomov wrote: »

When Michael Schumacher was questioned immediately after the incident, his actions were those of being caught and wishing to avoid any questions or any possible responsibility for the furore.

I saw him being interviewed after the race by Holly Samos as he was very happy to talk to her and discussed the last lap. Where did you get the above paragraph from?

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

At a two day meeting including both national and international drivers, from national formulas to international, across a broad section of racing cars, including saloon, single seater open wheel to fully enclosed and in discussion with various officials the general consensus was, bloody fool he knows the regulations and so does Brawn.

More "general consensus". What was the event and how many of the officials expressed an opinion agreeing with the way the FIA interpreted rule 40.13 and how many disagreed.

Ghost Train

Williams say loose drain cover cause Rubens crash
http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-drain-cover-caused-barrichello-crash/

zeris

Ghost Train wrote: »

Williams say loose drain cover cause Rubens crash
http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-drain-cover-caused-barrichello-crash/

Patrick Head talked a bit about Rubens' and Nico's accidents in this months Motor Sport Magazine podcast.

frostie500

Oblomov wrote: »

At a two day meeting including both national and international drivers, from national formulas to international, across a broad section of racing cars, including saloon, single seater open wheel to fully enclosed and in discussion with various officials the general consensus was, bloody fool he knows the regulations and so does Brawn.

Just out of curiosity what two day meeting was this and were you present at said meeting or this more hearsay on your part?

TheChrisD

This whole furore over the Schumacher incident makes me think one thing.

What would happen if say, at the Indy 500 next weekend, the pace car comes in at the end of Lap 200, and the cars are free to race from the acceleration zone out of Turn 4 to the finish line - and someone goes and overtakes Helio for the win.

Would there be a massive outcry over the rules like what is happening here? Who knows. Because as far as I know, no other race has technically had a caution/SC period be considered over on the last lap for the fact the track is clear, and not just because it's race over. This combined with the fact that F1 went to make itself a little better by adding a safety-car line similar to the acceleration lines used in IndyCar and NASCAR, and by allowing overtaking from those lines to the start/finish line - again just like those series - led to all this confusion.

Of course it's a silly rule in F1 that the safety car HAS to come in on the last lap if it would otherwise end under caution. If they don't want G/W/C finishes like NASCAR, then leave the damn pace car out like the IndyCars. They had races finish behind it last year, and I didn't hear people complain.

Cream Puff

*

Oblomov

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8694243.stm

Grinning and avoiding the question.

Lightening

And can I ask what is your experience?

.......Extensive, at all levels.

If your friends are as closed minded as yourself then we wont want them.

Fabulous, let me know where and it will save a lot of time and trouble. I'm sure management will be pleased that you are turning possible business away.

Stewards make decisions applicable to the evidence supplied, not conjecture or suggestions or supposition. The ruling is " in all probability" and not "beyond reasonable doubt" as in court of law. There is a very strong line between the two.

If you ever get the chance go into race control during a race and see the evidence collection at work. Together with observers statements, evidence of the incidetn from all authorised parties. It will be an eye opener.

Of course, you may disagree, but then you should put your money up front and protest.

EvilMonkey

Round and round the magic roundabout goes.
When will it stop, nobody knows.


The problem is with the rules and how race control handled it(green flags etc).

Schumacher had case but officials in almost every sport have one thing in common, when they **** up they circle the wagons.
They made a call it had to go one way or the other, not surprised who they backed.

The FIA is going to clarify the rules, Schumacher has the moral victory.

amacachi

I love how Oblomov seems to think that the FIA agreeing with him is a good thing. :pac:

Were you watching the live coverage after the race Oblomov? Yer one on BBC interviewed Schumacher and he was smiling and jovial. If one were to twist that because of their opinion of him I suppose one could say he was "smug".
At least half the drivers in the top 10 were told to race.

From my reading of the rules I thought there was no way he should have been penalised, but once the FIA made up their mind one way they were never going to go back on it. The fact they're going review the rule/procedure says it all really.
Also with Todt being top of the FIA and Hill being a steward there's no way one could say the FIA or the stewards were biased against Schumacher. :pac:

BoardsRanger

Has this debate not ran its course? There has been no new evidence or facts since Monaco.

Oblomov- if you think Michael was trying to avoid questions about the incident post race- your delusional at best! And im not sure what racing drivers you have been talking to- but every driver i have talked to about it concur that a green flag means race.

Perhaps a way of finishing this circular debate would be to place a poll and just let the common viewpoint prevail.

One final point- the only thing that makes up for an utterly dire decision by the stewards in Monaco, is the smile on Michael's face in this interview(@1.02). Irrespective of points and penalties, he knows he has just got one over Fernando and furthermore, he knows he still has the talent and ability.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb1XFQgk-s8

Oblomov

it's all about standing by your beliefs and principles, and not following the herd.

Which I'll readily accept.


I've met drivers I wouldn't allow to steer a shopping trolley let alone a car. To let them loose on a circuit, any circuit is taking faith way beyond any religious boundary.

You can be sanctimonious about your own beliefs but .. the stewards decision holds, Schumacher was penalised for his actions.

It;s not a crusade, it's just an understanding of the rules. The Brawn argument, the speed in which it was presented clearly demonstrates a team prepared for the objection and the, subsequent, Steward's hearing

The depth of experience of humans and the way they answer question is left open to debate, but the supposed smug, yes, he was hoping to get away with something..... and if you think he didn't avoid the question....... please watch it again.

Immediately changing from the end of the race to the beginning ...... well, that might be OK to you but......

Hey ho, we will have to wait and see what rule changes are made, maybe they will just put it in upper case instead of lower.

EvilMonkey

Heres what the FIA said

The problems identified during the final lap of the Monaco Grand Prix, counting for the 2010 FIA Formula One World Championship, showed a lack of clarity in the application of the rule prohibiting overtaking behind the Safety Car.

Adjustments to the regulations are necessary to clarify the procedure that cars must meet when the last lap is controlled by the Safety Car whilst also ensuring that the signaling for teams and drivers is made more clear.

These adjustments will help to avoid the problem which occurred during the Monaco Grand Prix from happening in the future.

The Formula One Commission, upon a proposal of the F1 Sporting Working Group will submit an amendment to the Sporting Regulations to address this issue. These amendments will be considered by the World Motor Sport Council at its next meeting in Geneva on June 23.

http://fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pressreleases/f1releases/2010/Pages/f1_press_mco5.aspx

The stewards decision is final so obviously the penalty has to stand, dosent mean it was right.

Oblomov

The stewards decision is final so obviously the penalty has to stand, dosent mean it was right.

Doesn't mean it was wrong, either

BoardsRanger

Oblomov wrote: »

it's all about standing by your beliefs and principles, and not following the herd.

Indeed your right- a difference of opinion is healthy

and if you think he didn't avoid the question....... please watch it again.

Immediately changing from the end of the race to the beginning ...... well, that might be OK to you but......

Did you watch the start of the race? Michael had a great start! He wasnt avoiding the question- he just didnt want her to skip over his quick start. And when asked the question- he didnt try and avoid it. Ive seen him plenty of times avoiding questions- this time was not one of them.

Anyway, my opinion stands, i have voted in the poll and thus will not comment further.

Looking forward to Turkey!

samsemtex

Oblomov wrote: »

The depth of experience of humans and the way they answer question is left open to debate, but the supposed smug, yes, he was hoping to get away with something..... and if you think he didn't avoid the question....... please watch it again.

Immediately changing from the end of the race to the beginning ...... well, that might be OK to you but......

See this is the part where it just shows you as someone who is nothing more than a man blinded by hatred. He doesn't avoid the question, he talks about the start of the race first as he would in normal circumstances. He is well used to interviews at this stage and obviously he didnt want to just be question about this one incident when the rest of his race was pretty good.

Anyway, he answers all her questions on the subject at the end.

Its funny that you ignore all the quotes such as Rosberg also attempting to pass Fernando as well as the FIA admitting that the rule was unclear.

If this rule was so crystal clear as you claim why is it being clarified? If it is so clear what is this line about?

showed a lack of clarity in the application of the rule prohibiting overtaking behind the Safety Car.

Adjustments to the regulations are necessary to clarify the procedure that cars must meet when the last lap is controlled by the Safety Car whilst also ensuring that the signaling for teams and drivers is made more clear.

Oblomov

See this is the part where it just shows you as someone who is nothing more than a man blinded by hatred.

ROFLMFHO

What???? That's such a crock

Listen to the video, the question of race end is ignored and Herr Schumacher decides to talk about the start of the race, at the same time grinning sheepishly.

Now, how you can make a supposition that I'm blinded by hatred,............... wow.. that's a step too far.

Now, given the extremes the pro Schuie bunch are willing to go to, a poll to try and substantiate a point of view and so badly supported...oohh dear.

Then accusations of blinded by hatred,

It would appear that the fervent support you give to your flawed hero is some what suspect and such accusations only underlined the extent of your own hero worship.

Michael Schumacher has lost any possible credibility becasue of his past history of ignoring the rules, the ethics and the mission statement of Formula One.

No doubt, the man has talents but with those talents come a responsibility that he blatantly ignores and chooses to set a new low in standards of behaviour.

I also think that the present comeback has increased pressures on him to being seen to improve and to succeed resulting in the frantic grab for a place in Monaco, regardless of the rules.

samsemtex

Dear god...

Once again, why are the rules being clarified if it is just a case of Schumacher setting new lows in standards of behaviour? Why did 6 of 10 teams tell their drivers to race? What question does Schumacher ignore from Holly Samson when she asks him AFTER he talks about the start of the race?

You do come across as completely unreasonable so that could explain why we are looking at you in this light. Everone except you it seems has acknowledged that the rules are unclear. Feck it, even the FIA have said it yet you seem to know better. Thats why it seems like you are full of it.

Oblomov

OK which six out of ten D1 teams...??? and source?

The FIA made a ruling that Schumacher under the existing rules contravened a regulation and penalised him.

That's a fact

The FIA also made a ruling in light of the misunderstanding as to the flags displayed to clarify the specific regulation, that all, the use of the plural does nothing for your argument.

Now, within this forum, how many people voted.... and suddenly I must throw aside what I consider the mist obvious of regulation and bow to the .. how many voted.....

You are equally determined to have me acquiesce to your interpretation of the rules. You sieze upon the FIA ruling as the vindication of all you believe in. But, the new ruling has not been made and the exact point of clarification is still awaited.

We choose to differ.

Now, at no time have I suggested you may be anal retentive in your attitude to Michael Schumacher, I have not suggest you are blinded every time he bends over and when you make completely surreal remarks to any possible regard I have for anyone is,,,,,,, well, staggering.

If your powers of mind reading are so good, I would suggest any of the topical TV talent shows to further a burgeoning career.

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

Now, given the extremes the pro Schuie bunch are willing to go to, a poll to try and substantiate a point of view and so badly supported...oohh dear.

The thought that people mightn't agree with how the FIA stewards interpreted the rules doesn't occur to you? An opposing view that is well supported in the framework of the current rules.

But no, for you it all comes back to Schumacher. How interesting.

samsemtex

That crafty old scumbag now even has Robert Kubica covering for him. God he is so....so crafty! Grrrr :rolleyes:

Renault driver Kubica said that as far as he was concerned, if the safety car pulled in, racing was allowed to take place from the restart line.
"I was looking to overtake," he said. "The team was not telling me, it's my job to read the regulations.
"If the safety car is coming in, for me the race is restarting. For me, the track was not clear, but the message was quite simple."
The Pole added that he had done his best to familiarise himself with the regulations, and felt that the rules should be adjusted to make things clearer.
"I read the regulations before the start of the season," Kubica said. "I re-read the regulations after China just to make sure, because Lewis [Hamilton] overtook one of the Red Bulls at the last corner, that I understood it well and from my understanding I knew what I had to do in Monaco on the last lap, because the safety car came in with the lights off.
"But I think there can be two or three different interpretations so it's quite confusing rules.
"I don't want to go too much into the details. I think everybody agreed that the rule is quite complicated and it's quite complicated to make everything right. I think it would be very simple to go back to the old rule where you can restart overtaking at the start/finish line."

Everybody except Oblablabla that is.

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

OK which six out of ten D1 teams...??? and source?

You want people to provide evidence for their claims now? You go first.

Slutmonkey57b

The poll's not entirely fair, though is it?

The question is "justified".
Certainly, under the rules, the fact that he had to be penalised is clear.
Race control's handling of it was poor.
And the steward's hands were tied as to what punishment they could dish out.

I think the general consensus is that while the penalty wasn't invalid, the effect was harsh.
"Race control are idiots"
or
"Penalise the guy but just put the places back where they were" would be better added to to poll.

zeris

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

And the steward's hands were tied as to what punishment they could dish out.

Not really, they had a range of punishments to choose from as 40.13 doesn't specify any particular punishment and doesn't limit it to just 16.3 and even then couldn't rule 18.1 supersede any specific punishment in 40.13. They just picked a punishment that couldn't be appealed.

Oblomov

ROFL... you didn't think the Poll would ask a question that might undermined the Schumacher adoration squad...... did you? Honestly?

But no, for you it all comes back to Schumacher. How interesting.

Well, He was the offender, Wasn't he? You could hardly leave him out in a discussion on the penalty

Could you?

The facts, as is written the regulations clearly state no overtaking, the argument arises from the interpretation of the use of the green flag, but considering the purpose of the green flag, it would appear teams are willing to argue for a possible advantage.

The clarification will ensure the flags are correctly understood and in their use.

The FIA did get the nick name of Ferrari International Assistance in the help they gavet to both Ferrari and their favourite driver.......... Hmmm, I wonder who that was???? LOL

EvilMonkey

Oblomov wrote: »

The FIA did get the nick name of Ferrari International Assistance in the help they gavet to both Ferrari and their favourite driver.......... Hmmm, I wonder who that was???? LOL

No they didn't.
Only idiots with an agenda used it and tried their best to make it stick, but failed.

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

Well, He was the offender, Wasn't he? You could hardly leave him out in a discussion on the penalty

Could you?

I can also use the term car number 3. Makes no difference to me. My previous statement "The thought that people mightn't agree with how the FIA stewards interpreted the rules doesn't occur to you?" still stands.

Oblomov

"The thought that people mightn't agree with how the FIA stewards interpreted the rules doesn't occur to you?"

DUH, isn't that exactly what you are doing?

Ohh I'm aware, but that usually because they are seeking to add or detract from the original meaning ... those words 'no overtaking' seem to be ignored.

frostie500

Oblomov wrote: »

The facts, as is written the regulations clearly state no overtaking, the argument arises from the interpretation of the use of the green flag, but considering the purpose of the green flag, it would appear teams are willing to argue for a possible advantage.

I still do not understand how you believe that the reguation is crystal clear. The reason there has been so much chatter worldwide in relation to this is that the rules are clearly unclear and that race control did not have a full understanding of the regualtions. There are very posters that are incensed by the penalty on Schumacher, most are annoyed that an issue such as this transpired due to race controls decision to wave green flags.

Oblomov wrote: »

The clarification will ensure the flags are correctly understood and in their use.

Do world class drivers with 20 years racing experience really need a lesson in what the flags mean? From your earlier posting though in relation to the green flag meaning the 'track is clear but drivers can't overtake' it would seem to me that you could do with a refreshers course yourself

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

DUH, isn't that exactly what you are doing?

Oh, it might occur to me, I just don't think it occurs to you.

Oblomov wrote: »

Ohh I'm aware, but that usually because they are seeking to add or detract from the original meaning ... those words 'no overtaking' seem to be ignored.

Like people who don't understand conditional phrases.

Oblomov

'track is clear but drivers can't overtake'

Really, I thought I put "track clear continue at racing speed"

Why do I get this feeling that you are intolerant to people not holding the same opinion.

Oblomov

Don't expect any comments for the next three days I'm off to play with the racing cars.

vincenzolorenzo

Oblomov wrote: »

Don't expect any comments for the next three days I'm off to play with the racing cars.

Good

Oblomov

Now, Now Vincenzo, that's not nice, definitely not gentlemanly

zeris

Oblomov wrote: »

Don't expect any comments for the next three days I'm off to play with the racing cars.

Off to find more "general consensus" no doubt.

recyclebin

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Oh thank god I have awoken to find it's Friday morning and the cars are back on the track so we can all move on.