I think F1 has hit rock bottom today. A race deficient as competition
(Rubens lying down and doing his "token attempt to pass" schtick again),
deficient as spectacle (F1 cars look pitifully small and slow at Indy
and that infield circuit makes the road course at Rockingham look like
Spa), and deficient organisationally (the utter farce over the Montoya
black flag).
The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
An utterly tedious race of attrition, bereft of any positive aspects,
that resulted in undeserving cars grumbling around into the points now
"nobody goes home empty-handed".
Yawn.
pete
—
p…@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
On 20 Jun 2004 19:05:01 GMT, Pete Fenelon <p…@fenelon.com> wrote:
>Spa), and deficient organisationally (the utter farce over the Montoya
>black flag).
Very true. I found myself thinking that if the FIA wanted to reduce
the spend levels in F1, they should consider not making teams run for
an hour and half before telling them they weren’t allowed to race,
should consider not allowing a track to be so sprayed with debris that
cars were being destroyed by the minute, should generally get a grip.
>The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
>is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
So it seems, though still rather nasty. Second concusion in not very
long, and a nasty one with it… hope he’s back on top form quickly.
As for the rest, I say "thank goodness for Sato", who provided the
only decent racing on track all day. A well deserved podium.
—
([:]) by Kimbo! http://www.foca.co.uk
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? I am not a moderator.
note: hotmail address is a spam bin,
write to kim at foca_co_uk for a reply
Pete Fenelon wrote:
> The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
> is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
What bothered me the most was how long it took the medical personnel to
arrive at the scene given that it happened just before the pits.
According to Speed Channel, it was 3 minutes before anyone arrived at
Ralf’s car. Alex Zanardi would be dead if CART was so slow to act.
Mark
Just two things I wish could be cleared up. First one is MS pass on RB after
the SC period. Legal/illegal? I have seen TV screenshot of MS name appearing
first after he broke the timing beam suggesting that the pass was illegal
but the commentators said that RB’s name appeared first. Quite bizzare too
that they mentioned RB was ahead by 0.0 seconds when the timing is done in
0.000 seconds.
Another one, which is not as easy, is whether there was a team order to RB
and MS to hold stations after RB’s last stop. RB did appear to have a MUCH
faster car. Surprisingly I have been reading the post race conference and
not a single interviewer asked them about this.
On 21 Jun 2004 01:25:04 GMT, Mark <Mark…@comcast.net> wrote:
>Pete Fenelon wrote:
>> The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
>> is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
>What bothered me the most was how long it took the medical personnel to
>arrive at the scene given that it happened just before the pits.
>According to Speed Channel, it was 3 minutes before anyone arrived at
>Ralf’s car. Alex Zanardi would be dead if CART was so slow to act.
I’m afraid I was sitting on the sofa shouting "where are the fucking
marshalls!!!??" by that point. I was appalled. I also thought they
should have stopped the race. Bugger the TV schedules, there *are*
more important things.
—
([:]) by Kimbo! http://www.foca.co.uk
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? I am not a moderator.
note: hotmail address is a spam bin,
write to kim at foca_co_uk for a reply
On 21 Jun 2004 01:25:04 GMT, Mark <Mark…@comcast.net> wrote:
>Pete Fenelon wrote:
>> The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
>> is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
>What bothered me the most was how long it took the medical personnel to
>arrive at the scene given that it happened just before the pits.
>According to Speed Channel, it was 3 minutes before anyone arrived at
>Ralf’s car. Alex Zanardi would be dead if CART was so slow to act.
My read on the situation is that there was no way to get to the
accident without using course vehicles which had to drive around the
circuit once the race had been neutralised. US insurance requirements
prevent marshalls from going onto the track until the race has been
neutralised.
Car stood up remarkably well to a big impact, once again demolishing
the the argument that indycars are stronger because they are heavier.
(Surprised to hear Mark Blundell regurgitating that particular piece
of received nonsense on the ITV, but then he claimed indycars would be
faster than F1s on the oval as well. Might have been true once.
Certainly isn’t now.)
Disappointing that the race was presented to Michael on a plate, but
then he is the luckiest driver we have ever seen in the history of the
sport <g>. Don’t agree with Pete that Rubens and his crew didn’t give
it a good go, though. But for getting caught out on the restart –
which was a brilliant move by MS rather than a cock-up by RB, I
thought – he would probably have won. They certainly made a serious
attempt to get back in front by varying the fuel strategy and Rubens
had a good dig at getting by…..no way Michael was ever going to let
him of course.
Perfectly reasonable at that point that the team said OK, now bring
them home safely.
Real loser on strategy was Sato. Now if BAR had refuelled him during
the second yellow along with the Ferraris I think we would have seen a
race. No way of knowing how much faster the Ferraris could have run,
of course, but on paper it looks like the BAR had the legs on them
yesterday. First win can’t be far away…..roll on Silverstone.
Great to see a huge, enthusiastic crowd and great that we will be
coming back. Once again unlike Pete, I think F1s look tremendous at
Indianapolis……and a bloody sight better than those hunch-backed
IRL jobbies.
I do have to agree with the criticisms over the Montoya exclusion,
though. It should have been obvious that he came under starter’s
orders in the primary car and couldn’t then switch to the back-up. He
shouldn’t even have been allowed out of the pit lane. What was there
to think about for an hour and a half?
Biggest organisational question is whether we need to go to red flags
for dealing with significant incidents on high speed circuits. I’d
hate to see it, personally, but we have to be concerned about
debris-related tyre failures. I found it nerve-wracking for a while,
to say the least.
Enjoyed much of the TV coverage very much once my nerves had settled,
though. We got to see some good, close racing in the pack, so I can’t
really feel too negative about the race.
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
On 21 Jun 2004 06:15:01 GMT, Ezran <na…@tm.net.my> wrote:
>Just two things I wish could be cleared up. First one is MS pass on RB after
>the SC period. Legal/illegal? I have seen TV screenshot of MS name appearing
>first after he broke the timing beam suggesting that the pass was illegal
>but the commentators said that RB’s name appeared first.
Seems pretty clear that he didn’t pass him before the line, but was in
the process of doing so. No reason not to penalise him if he did. I
don’t see any way he could deliberately have times it so perfectly
though. I think he went a bit too early and got lucky. (No surprise
there.)
>Quite bizzare too
>that they mentioned RB was ahead by 0.0 seconds when the timing is done in
>0.000 seconds.
Just verbal shorthand, surely. No need for conspiracy theories. Even
if you accept the widely held perception that the FIA favours Ferrari,
a Ferrari would have won anyway.
>Another one, which is not as easy, is whether there was a team order to RB
>and MS to hold stations after RB’s last stop. RB did appear to have a MUCH
>faster car. Surprisingly I have been reading the post race conference and
>not a single interviewer asked them about this.
Standard practice for Ferrari to hold positions after the final stop.
Seems like they did allow Rubens to have one go at getting by, then
told them to be sensible. Nothing wrong with that and only to be
expected. It is a team sport, after all.
It’s also likely that Rubens was only ‘much faster’ for a single lap
on his new tyres, after which they limited him to about the same race
pace as Michael. Overall, the both ran the race at the same speed,
being separated in the mid-race by differing fuel strategies. Michael
actually won it on that restart.
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
agreed, it wasn’t the best but I have to marvel at the excellence of Michael
Schumacher, the guy is a genius. Remember that he did make his car a little
faster by making the wing adjustments and this gave the extra speed making
it near on impossible to pass him, this extra straight line speed allowed
him to get passed rubens to take the lead.
Obviously crazy things like making the cars go through the debris when they
could have gone through the pit lane and also taking so long to black flag
Montoya made the race seem crap. Was probably the most exciting 20+ laps of
a grand prix for the neutral – but agreed the rest of the race was a tad
Yawnish…
Sid
"Pete Fenelon" <p…@fenelon.com> wrote in message
news:blm4bc.ue7.ln@fenelon.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I think F1 has hit rock bottom today. A race deficient as competition
> (Rubens lying down and doing his "token attempt to pass" schtick again),
> deficient as spectacle (F1 cars look pitifully small and slow at Indy
> and that infield circuit makes the road course at Rockingham look like
> Spa), and deficient organisationally (the utter farce over the Montoya
> black flag).
> The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
> is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
> An utterly tedious race of attrition, bereft of any positive aspects,
> that resulted in undeserving cars grumbling around into the points now
> "nobody goes home empty-handed".
> Yawn.
> pete
> —
> p…@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:20:22 CST, Kim Andrews <some…@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On 20 Jun 2004 19:05:01 GMT, Pete Fenelon <p…@fenelon.com> wrote:
>>The only positive thing I can find to say about the whole sorry farrago
>>is that Ralf Schumacher isn’t badly injured.
>So it seems, though still rather nasty. Second concusion in not very
>long, and a nasty one with it… hope he’s back on top form quickly.
Well, it’s a good job we don’t have another back-to-back race, because
I don’t see any way he would be racing in a week’s time. Quite
possible that he will still have to miss out in France, I would have
thought. Also quite likely that he will take a while to get back to
full fitness. A number of drivers who have come back from big
concussions say they suffered headaches and nausea in the car for some
while….although they wouldn’t admit to it at the time.
I seem to remember Frentzen practicing on a Friday and then going home
a couple of years back at the race following his Monaco shunt.
Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
He is, after all, in line for a drive with them next year. I doubt
Dave Richards would stand in his way and Honda might be quite keen to
get some feedback on what the BMW feels like.
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
>Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
>they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
Marc Gene seems a more obvious choice to me as he has experience in the
car.
–
Emma – The Chocolate Monster
ChocMonsterLand is back @ http://www.chocmonster.rules.it
David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
> Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
> they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
> He is, after all, in line for a drive with them next year. I doubt
> Dave Richards would stand in his way and Honda might be quite keen to
> get some feedback on what the BMW feels like.
Or just put Webber in the car a few months early. It’s not like Jaguar’s
achieving much, or indeed is likely to achieve much, and the mutual
enthusiasm between Ralf and Williams was very much under control even
before the disqualification and accident…
pete
—
p…@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:10:33 CST, Emma <E…@excalvehs.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
>David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
>>Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
>>they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
>Marc Gene seems a more obvious choice to me as he has experience in the
>car.
That is who I meant. Marc Gene the Williams test drivers rather than
Ricardo Zonta the Toyota test driver. Where did I leave my brain this
morning?
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
Ezran <na…@tm.net.my> wrote:
> Another one, which is not as easy, is whether there was a team order to RB
> and MS to hold stations after RB’s last stop. RB did appear to have a MUCH
> faster car. Surprisingly I have been reading the post race conference and
> not a single interviewer asked them about this.
Ferrari policy is not to race each other after the last stop. Had
Rubens been ahead he would’ve led the race, maybe even almost to the
last corner
pete
—
p…@fenelon.com "how many clever men have called the sun a fool?"
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:10:24 CST, Pete Fenelon <p…@fenelon.com>
wrote:
>David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
>> Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
>> they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
>> He is, after all, in line for a drive with them next year. I doubt
>> Dave Richards would stand in his way and Honda might be quite keen to
>> get some feedback on what the BMW feels like.
>Or just put Webber in the car a few months early. It’s not like Jaguar’s
>achieving much, or indeed is likely to achieve much, and the mutual
>enthusiasm between Ralf and Williams was very much under control even
>before the disqualification and accident…
Or even, reflecting on something I have just posted in another thread,
might not this be the ideal chance to give JV a go. He says he’s in
training and has bought a new helmet.
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
>Emma <E…@excalvehs.demon.co.uk>
>>David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
>>>Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
>>>they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
>>Marc Gene seems a more obvious choice to me as he has experience in the
>>car.
>That is who I meant. Marc Gene the Williams test drivers rather than
>Ricardo Zonta the Toyota test driver. Where did I leave my brain this
>morning?
I was wondering but as it’s Monday morning you’re forgiven.
Rumours are suggesting they could give their other test driver Pizzonia
a chance too.
–
Emma – The Chocolate Monster
ChocMonsterLand is back @ http://www.chocmonster.rules.it
David Betts posted:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:10:24 CST, Pete Fenelon <p…@fenelon.com>
> wrote:
> >David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
> >> they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony
> Davidson. >> He is, after all, in line for a drive with them next
> year. I doubt >> Dave Richards would stand in his way and Honda might
> be quite keen to >> get some feedback on what the BMW feels like.
> > Or just put Webber in the car a few months early. It’s not like
> > Jaguar’s achieving much, or indeed is likely to achieve much, and
> > the mutual enthusiasm between Ralf and Williams was very much under
> > control even before the disqualification and accident…
> Or even, reflecting on something I have just posted in another thread,
> might not this be the ideal chance to give JV a go. He says he’s in
> training and has bought a new helmet.
Yep, JV over Webber any time.
–
Paul-B
"If everything seems under control, you’re just not going fast enough."
– Mario Andretti
Reply to address is spam-trap. Use paul at streetka dot biz if you
really must!
In article <jpadd0derts3m2pdeft1r7ee36m4nr7…@4ax.com>,
David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 04:10:24 CST, Pete Fenelon <p…@fenelon.com>
> wrote:
> >David Betts <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
> >> they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
> >> He is, after all, in line for a drive with them next year. I doubt
> >> Dave Richards would stand in his way and Honda might be quite keen to
> >> get some feedback on what the BMW feels like.
> >Or just put Webber in the car a few months early. It’s not like Jaguar’s
> >achieving much, or indeed is likely to achieve much, and the mutual
> >enthusiasm between Ralf and Williams was very much under control even
> >before the disqualification and accident…
> Or even, reflecting on something I have just posted in another thread,
> might not this be the ideal chance to give JV a go. He says he’s in
> training and has bought a new helmet.
I’ll have a go! I’ve been practising on my PlayStation!
–
-Take out Ron to reply-
Votre mere etait un hamster et votre pere a senti des baies de sureau
I’m still much bothered by the 0.0s thing. James Allen just quoted that
number (again) in his article in the ITV site. What the heck happened to two
more decimal points?
Well then the policy is a team order. I guess all the other teams would
apply the same thing if they were in the same situation as Ferrari.
Ezran wrote:
> I’m still much bothered by the 0.0s thing. James Allen just quoted that
> number (again) in his article in the ITV site. What the heck happened to
> two more decimal points?
Live Timing only gives one decimal place, so he was probably quoting that.
—
John Briggs
"David Betts" <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote in message
news:n53dd0lr72gc7dkmk6d4afgnlsivtrbapq@4ax.com…
> Just a thought. If Ralf does have to miss out at Magny Cours, will
> they run Zonta or might they ask BAR for a loan of Anthony Davidson.
Why not give JV a try out!
On 22 Jun 2004 00:35:00 GMT, Ezran <na…@tm.net.my> wrote:
>Well then the policy is a team order. I guess all the other teams would
>apply the same thing if they were in the same situation as Ferrari.
Sorry Ezran, but I can only assume you are replying to me because you
are not leaving in any quoted material. Please take a look at the way
other people post, or read the guidelines at http://www.rasf1m.net.
Anyway, the answer is not necessarily. Some teams – Williams for
instance – leave the drivers to sort it out between themselves. Others
don’t. Team orders have always been part of the sport and the FIA ban
is only aimed at preventing the sort of obvious late change of
position which people got so upset about a couple of years ago. It’s
only effect will be to ensure that any deliberate late changes of
position between team mates are covert rather than overt. As such, I
think it’s a negative rule, but that’s probalby just me.
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:00:23 CST, "John Briggs"
<john.brig…@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Ezran wrote:
>> I’m still much bothered by the 0.0s thing. James Allen just quoted that
>> number (again) in his article in the ITV site. What the heck happened to
>> two more decimal points?
>Live Timing only gives one decimal place, so he was probably quoting that.
Amyway, 0.0 is the same as 0.000. The other two decimal spaces become
>.
spurious. Amusing thing is that when the same two drivers attempted to
stage a dead heat at Indy they failed
David Betts (dav…@motorsport.org.uk)
"In the end it’s always a matter of more accelerator and less brake" – Frank Gardner
British Racing Green: http://dbetts.motorsport.org.uk/brg
"David Betts" <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote in message > Anyway, the
answer is not necessarily. Some teams – Williams for
> instance – leave the drivers to sort it out between themselves.
Even when they were dominating F1 all those years ago? I wasn’t following F1
that closely back then.
(sorry about not quoting, I tend to delete most text and use only when
absolutely required)
Ezran <na…@tm.net.my> wrote:
> "David Betts" <dav…@motorsport.org.uk> wrote in message > Anyway, the
> answer is not necessarily. Some teams – Williams for
>> instance – leave the drivers to sort it out between themselves.
> Even when they were dominating F1 all those years ago? I wasn’t following F1
> that closely back then.
Williams largely gave up on team orders when Carlos Reutemann, leading a
race for them, ignored a "JONES-REUT" pitboard. Several times.
And since AJ retired, drivers have "just been employees", anyway.
pete
—
p…@fenelon.com "there’s no room for enigmas in built-up areas"