Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Matt Pop » Mon, 04 Aug 2003 22:53:42


... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
Barrichello.

I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

--
Cheers,

Matt Pope

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Richard Mille » Mon, 04 Aug 2003 23:44:21



Quote:
>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>Barrichello.

>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

If he had just concentrated on getting away instead of looking to block
people behind him, he would have been second into the corner behind his
team-mate and there would have been no problem.

It's not a question of the tactic being dodgy but permissible. It is a
question of drifting across the track for no damn reason at all.
--
Richard Miller

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by qaz » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 00:53:32

On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 15:44:21 +0100, Richard Miller

Quote:



>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>Barrichello.

>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>If he had just concentrated on getting away instead of looking to block
>people behind him, he would have been second into the corner behind his
>team-mate and there would have been no problem.

>It's not a question of the tactic being dodgy but permissible. It is a
>question of drifting across the track for no damn reason at all.

And the fact that he initiated the contact that caused the retirement
of three drivers...

Drifting and contact to me are as different as looking at a dancer's
ass at a strip bar and raping a ***age hotel clerk...

Montoya has been very vocal about having contact with Ralf himself,
Nurburgring last year a prime example...

This isn't Nascar:  rubbin' isn't racin'...

I can't help but remember Ralf taking out his teammate Fisi at that GP
in South America in '97 or '98...

Ralf needs a one-race ban...

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Malachi Constan » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:25:59

Quote:

>On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 15:44:21 +0100, Richard Miller



>>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>>Barrichello.

>>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>>If he had just concentrated on getting away instead of looking to block
>>people behind him, he would have been second into the corner behind his
>>team-mate and there would have been no problem.

>>It's not a question of the tactic being dodgy but permissible. It is a
>>question of drifting across the track for no damn reason at all.

>And the fact that he initiated the contact that caused the retirement
>of three drivers...

>Drifting and contact to me are as different as looking at a dancer's
>ass at a strip bar and raping a ***age hotel clerk...

>Montoya has been very vocal about having contact with Ralf himself,
>Nurburgring last year a prime example...

>This isn't Nascar:  rubbin' isn't racin'...

No, it isn't.

Quote:
>I can't help but remember Ralf taking out his teammate Fisi at that GP
>in South America in '97 or '98...

>Ralf needs a one-race ban...

...Why is everyone giving "Wrong Way" Raikonnen a pass on this?
 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by raymond o'har » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:57:42


Quote:

> >On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 15:44:21 +0100, Richard Miller



> >>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start.
Giving
> >>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or
move
> >>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside
of
> >>>Barrichello.

> >>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there
should
> >>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
> >>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

> >>If he had just concentrated on getting away instead of looking to block
> >>people behind him, he would have been second into the corner behind his
> >>team-mate and there would have been no problem.

> >>It's not a question of the tactic being dodgy but permissible. It is a
> >>question of drifting across the track for no damn reason at all.

> >And the fact that he initiated the contact that caused the retirement
> >of three drivers...

> >Drifting and contact to me are as different as looking at a dancer's
> >ass at a strip bar and raping a ***age hotel clerk...

> >Montoya has been very vocal about having contact with Ralf himself,
> >Nurburgring last year a prime example...

> >This isn't Nascar:  rubbin' isn't racin'...

> No, it isn't.

> >I can't help but remember Ralf taking out his teammate Fisi at that GP
> >in South America in '97 or '98...

> >Ralf needs a one-race ban...

> ...Why is everyone giving "Wrong Way" Raikonnen a pass on this?

kimi was making a legit pass on ruebens , if shu jr. doesn't hit rube
everyone makes it to first corner safely . kimi was a victim of idiot
lil'bro too .
 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Treebear » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 03:29:42

On 03 Aug 2003 13:53:42 GMT, Matt Pope

Quote:

>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>Barrichello.

>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

If Rubens had got a better start or had backed off when squeezed, it
wouldn't have happened. If Kimi hadn't made a storming start, it
wouldn't have happened. If Ralf hadn't drifted left, it wouldn't have
happened. Racing incident. Ralf didn't know Kimi was coming up fast on
the other side. Sorry. Must stop talking sense...

David

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by ´┐íngelkot » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 05:25:26

On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 19:29:42 +0100, Treebeard

Quote:

>On 03 Aug 2003 13:53:42 GMT, Matt Pope

>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>Barrichello.

>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>If Rubens had got a better start or had backed off when squeezed, it
>wouldn't have happened. If Kimi hadn't made a storming start, it
>wouldn't have happened. If Ralf hadn't drifted left, it wouldn't have
>happened. Racing incident. Ralf didn't know Kimi was coming up fast on
>the other side. Sorry. Must stop talking sense...

>David

IMHO Kimi only made a slightly better start than Rubens. Kimi was
slightly ahead of Rubens, the guy who started in front of him and
Rubens was almost parael with Ralf, who started in front of him. I
would not call that a poor start by Rubens. Ralf yes!

Just my opinion.

Engelkott

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Gunther Rola » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 07:17:35


Quote:

>On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 19:29:42 +0100, Treebeard

>>On 03 Aug 2003 13:53:42 GMT, Matt Pope

>>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>>Barrichello.

>>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>>If Rubens had got a better start or had backed off when squeezed, it
>>wouldn't have happened. If Kimi hadn't made a storming start, it
>>wouldn't have happened. If Ralf hadn't drifted left, it wouldn't have
>>happened. Racing incident. Ralf didn't know Kimi was coming up fast on
>>the other side. Sorry. Must stop talking sense...

>>David

>IMHO Kimi only made a slightly better start than Rubens. Kimi was
>slightly ahead of Rubens, the guy who started in front of him and
>Rubens was almost parael with Ralf, who started in front of him. I
>would not call that a poor start by Rubens. Ralf yes!

Not sure what you mean by "parallel" - but when Ralf started drifting to
the left, Rubens was still behind and when they finally made contact, Ralfs
rear wheel hit Rubens front. Rubens had plenty of time to back out of the
accident. He was actually the only one who had that option - Ralf didn't
know that Kimi was left of Rubens and Kimi couldn't see Ralf moving over.

Still, I think the stewarts decision to punish Ralf is ok - won't stop people
from moving around on the start, but makes them suffer the consequences
when things go wrong.

Two things are still funny: When Ralf got his flying lesson at Australia
last year, it was still his fault, according to rasf1 majority opinion -
how come?

Second, what was it with Ferraris start? The McLarens, Renaults and Toyotas
came flying past left and right. At first I thought that maybe they were
running much heavier, but that didn't seem to be the case. Is their launch
control that pathetic or is this another of Michelins many advantages?

Gunther

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by David » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 07:56:53

Quote:

> Two things are still funny: When Ralf got his flying lesson at Australia
> last year, it was still his fault, according to rasf1 majority opinion -
> how come?

Dunno. I just checked what I posted, and I was quite clear who's fault I
thought it was - Rubens. And yes, it was clearly Ralf's fault today.
Obviously, any criticism of Ferrari drivers is normally not allowed in
rasf1 by certain posters, maybe that's where you got the idea it must
have been Ralf's fault in Aus? ;-)

--
David

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by qaz » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 08:13:43

On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 12:25:59 -0400, Malachi Constant

Quote:


>>On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 15:44:21 +0100, Richard Miller



>>>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>>>Barrichello.

>>>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>>>If he had just concentrated on getting away instead of looking to block
>>>people behind him, he would have been second into the corner behind his
>>>team-mate and there would have been no problem.

>>>It's not a question of the tactic being dodgy but permissible. It is a
>>>question of drifting across the track for no damn reason at all.

>>And the fact that he initiated the contact that caused the retirement
>>of three drivers...

>>Drifting and contact to me are as different as looking at a dancer's
>>ass at a strip bar and raping a ***age hotel clerk...

>>Montoya has been very vocal about having contact with Ralf himself,
>>Nurburgring last year a prime example...

>>This isn't Nascar:  rubbin' isn't racin'...

>No, it isn't.

>>I can't help but remember Ralf taking out his teammate Fisi at that GP
>>in South America in '97 or '98...

>>Ralf needs a one-race ban...

>...Why is everyone giving "Wrong Way" Raikonnen a pass on this?

What did Kimi do wrong?  He was never off the track.  He used all of
the track.  That's racing.

Rubens is allowed to be on the patch of track he is on.  

As I said, Ralf initiated the contact.  Enough said.  

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by qaz » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 08:16:57

On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 19:29:42 +0100, Treebeard

Quote:

>On 03 Aug 2003 13:53:42 GMT, Matt Pope

>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>Barrichello.

>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>If Rubens had got a better start or had backed off when squeezed, it
>wouldn't have happened. If Kimi hadn't made a storming start, it
>wouldn't have happened. If Ralf hadn't drifted left, it wouldn't have
>happened. Racing incident. Ralf didn't know Kimi was coming up fast on
>the other side. Sorry. Must stop talking sense...

>David

Damn.  By that logic Ralf can take his god damn car anywhere on the
track and any contact made with his car is not his fault.

I can't believe Frank is actually appealing the FIA ruling.

SInce when does Frank stand up for shithead drivers???

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by C Stor » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 08:20:02



Quote:

> ...Why is everyone giving "Wrong Way" Raikonnen a pass on this?

Because he didn't do anything wrong ...

Chris Story

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Gunther Rola » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 08:38:08



Quote:

>> Two things are still funny: When Ralf got his flying lesson at Australia
>> last year, it was still his fault, according to rasf1 majority opinion -
>> how come?

>Dunno. I just checked what I posted, and I was quite clear who's fault I
>thought it was - Rubens. And yes, it was clearly Ralf's fault today.
>Obviously, any criticism of Ferrari drivers is normally not allowed in
>rasf1 by certain posters, maybe that's where you got the idea it must
>have been Ralf's fault in Aus? ;-)

Well, I think I got the idea from rasf1 headlines like this
(after Aus 2002):

"Ralf you blind f*cker"
"Blind Ralf"
"Ralf: I'm Flying !!!!!"
" Ralf : "I was Saving My Brakes"

etc etc etc.

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by jamesh.. » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:14:22

Quote:

>On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 19:29:42 +0100, Treebeard

>>On 03 Aug 2003 13:53:42 GMT, Matt Pope

>>>... but this is a tactic we've seen employed before at the start. Giving
>>>the opponent a slight squeeze to get the opponent to back off and/or move
>>>over. However, the mitigating factor was Raikonnen being on the outside of
>>>Barrichello.

>>>I'm not defending the move, indeed, this is evidence as to why there should
>>>be a stop put to it, particularly by MS. Ralf, as usual, can't quite
>>>imitate his brother and gets the squeeze all wrong.

>>If Rubens had got a better start or had backed off when squeezed, it
>>wouldn't have happened. If Kimi hadn't made a storming start, it
>>wouldn't have happened. If Ralf hadn't drifted left, it wouldn't have
>>happened. Racing incident. Ralf didn't know Kimi was coming up fast on
>>the other side. Sorry. Must stop talking sense...

>>David

>Damn.  By that logic Ralf can take his god damn car anywhere on the
>track and any contact made with his car is not his fault.

uh huh.

Quote:
>I can't believe Frank is actually appealing the FIA ruling.

>SInce when does Frank stand up for shithead drivers???

My take on that is that he is probably not standing up for Ralf at all
- but he is standing up for the potential grid position of one of his
two cars next race as he has always valued the CC more than the DC.

David

 
 
 

Without wanting to DEFEND Schumacher...

Post by Wayne Stua » Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:56:51

Quote:



> >IMHO Kimi only made a slightly better start than Rubens. Kimi was
> >slightly ahead of Rubens, the guy who started in front of him and
> >Rubens was almost parael with Ralf, who started in front of him. I
> >would not call that a poor start by Rubens. Ralf yes!

> Not sure what you mean by "parallel" - but when Ralf started drifting to
> the left, Rubens was still behind and when they finally made contact, Ralfs
> rear wheel hit Rubens front. Rubens had plenty of time to back out of the
> accident. He was actually the only one who had that option

Yeah, but why should he?

Quote:
> - Ralf didn't
> know that Kimi was left of Rubens and Kimi couldn't see Ralf moving over.

Irrelevant.  You can only move into a piece of track if it is not
already occupied.  Kimi and Rubens weren't the ones changing their lines
- Ralf was, hence, it is HIS responsibility to not run into anyone while
he's doing so.  

--
This message was brought to you by Wayne "Dark 1" Stuart

And this site is ***- Don't go here:
http://SportToday.org/