No Offical Protest From Ferrari?

No Offical Protest From Ferrari?

Post by Rich » Sun, 30 May 2004 17:43:22



Quote:




>>>>Not that it would do any good, but if Montoya were at complete fault
>>>>for the shunt, why no protest from Ferrari for consideration of future
>>>>penalties? In their press releases and web scribbling's , they have
>>>>made it clear enough that they were innocent of any blame. Me thinks
>>>>they do protest too much?

>>>>Is it they don't want to explain 50 meters of tyre marks?

>>>The FIA are not going to penalize Montoya/Williams.  

>>They did so last year, so why not this year?

> Ferrari continued *** in the face of Formula England.

Back to the "Formula England" paranoia? Change the record, this one's broke.
Quote:

>>It was a racing incident, therefore no penalty was deemed necessary.

> It was not a racing incident, ***wit; it occurred under safety car
> control:  Completely inexcusable and unacceptable, it was, by
> definition and regulation, and avoidable accident completely
> chargeable to Montoya putting his meager brain into neutral.

> ....And yet, no sanction.

Schumacher slammed on the brakes unnecessarily (locking up for that
length of time will flatspot your tyres, so there's no way MS's argument
of "I was just warming my tyres and brakes" is plausible"), and Montoya
was too close. Montoya and MS were trying to out-intimidate each other,
and they both lost out. End of story. But then, you'll never accept the
obvious, cos it's much more fun to go with the *** theorys, isn't
it...

Just for the record, I've not been a Montoya fan since I saw him take
out his team mate for trying to overtake him, when Montoya had only 3
wheels on his wagon in one of the lower formulae, a number of years
back. And he's made a number of stupid mistake in F1, but this incident
was not entirely his fault.

--

Rich N

"A One that is not cold, is barely a One at all."

 
 
 

No Offical Protest From Ferrari?

Post by F2004: 5 of 6 » Sun, 30 May 2004 22:21:25


Quote:






>>>>>Not that it would do any good, but if Montoya were at complete fault
>>>>>for the shunt, why no protest from Ferrari for consideration of future
>>>>>penalties? In their press releases and web scribbling's , they have
>>>>>made it clear enough that they were innocent of any blame. Me thinks
>>>>>they do protest too much?

>>>>>Is it they don't want to explain 50 meters of tyre marks?

>>>> The FIA are not going to penalize Montoya/Williams.  

>>>They did so last year, so why not this year?

>> Ferrari continued *** in the face of Formula England.

>>>It was a racing incident, therefore no penalty was deemed necessary.

>> It was not a racing incident, ***wit;

>Of course it was ... it occurred during a race, with
>two drivers playing silly headgames with each other.

It occurred under safety car control, under which all racing activity
is to be suspended until such time as the safety car has pulled off
and the cars have passed the S/F line.

Quote:
>Both at at fault, hence no penalty or sanction.

>It's really not that complicated.

Not rocket science at all:  Keep trying, even you will get it
eventually.

 
 
 

No Offical Protest From Ferrari?

Post by C Stor » Sun, 30 May 2004 22:57:21



Quote:





>>>>> On Tue, 25 May 2004 13:31:45 GMT, Vic Elford

>>>>>>Not that it would do any good, but if Montoya were at complete
>>>>>>fault for the shunt, why no protest from Ferrari for consideration
>>>>>>of future penalties? In their press releases and web scribbling's
>>>>>>, they have made it clear enough that they were innocent of any
>>>>>>blame. Me thinks they do protest too much?

>>>>>>Is it they don't want to explain 50 meters of tyre marks?

>>>>> The FIA are not going to penalize Montoya/Williams.  

>>>>They did so last year, so why not this year?

>>> Ferrari continued *** in the face of Formula England.

>>>>It was a racing incident, therefore no penalty was deemed necessary.

>>> It was not a racing incident, ***wit;

>>Of course it was ... it occurred during a race, with
>>two drivers playing silly headgames with each other.

> It occurred under safety car control, under which all racing activity
> is to be suspended until such time as the safety car has pulled off
> and the cars have passed the S/F line.

The race was still underway .. to suggest that
Schumacher doesn't use every opportunity to gain
an an advantage is well, pretty doggone naive.

Quote:

>>Both at at fault, hence no penalty or sanction.

>>It's really not that complicated.

> Not rocket science at all:  Keep trying, even you will get it
> eventually.

Oh, I got it a long time ago .. just trying to offer
some directions.

 
 
 

No Offical Protest From Ferrari?

Post by Mark Jon » Tue, 01 Jun 2004 06:26:20

On Fri, 28 May 2004 08:02:28 +0100, Richard Miller

Quote:



>>Has Schumacher ever had a collision with a lapped driver before?

>Well, with a car he was lapping, yes.

>> And if so, does the rasf1 collective consider those collisions part of
>>Schumachers "villainous prime directive", or simple racing incidents?

>The general take among the non-tifauxsi seems to be that it was a case
>of Schumacher being stupid.

Ok.  Ok.  So, then, your analysis shows that instead of chalking this
incident up to the evil of Michael Schumacher, it's more likely to be
a simple racing incident, with blame to be judged based on
predjudicies.

- Jones
FORZA!