2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[DChemTech]

We can't say for sure that Mercedes refrained, all we can say is that if they did it wasn't broadcast!

Did they lobby Monza? You are right, I don't remember anything being broadcast. But I remember in the post race interview Toto refrained unlike Horner in Silverstone.

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

“was never anywhere near alongside”

“I’ve watched this replay several times now Michael and I’m feeling really cross about it. That corner there Michael – that’s not a place to stick a wheel up the inside of a car.”

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

Out of interest , what were the words to Masi after the incidents in Monza and Silverstone ? were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ? How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand

"Michael I sent you an email"

I can understand horner. Emotional talk of someone who just lost an important bunch of points. I don't agree with it, but can see where it comes from.

Toto, on the other hand, was very calmy saying, in effect, "Michael, read this thing I sent telling you how to do your job". Sorry, but thay is way worse.

[AeroDynamic]

Did they lobby Monza? You are right, I don't remember anything being broadcast. But I remember in the post race interview Toto refrained unlike Horner in Silverstone.

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

“was never anywhere near alongside”

“I’ve watched this replay several times now Michael and I’m feeling really cross about it. That corner there Michael – that’s not a place to stick a wheel up the inside of a car.”

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

Out of interest , what were the words to Masi after the incidents in Monza and Silverstone ? were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ? How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand

"Michael I sent you an email"

I can understand horner. Emotional talk of someone who just lost an important bunch of points. I don't agree with it, but can see where it comes from.

Toto, on the other hand, was very calmy saying, in effect, "Michael, read this thing I sent telling you how to do your job". Sorry, but thay is way worse.

But Horner just lied and argued about the cars being along side or not. Toto wanted to make sure the rules were being consistent with what they were informed of by Charlie (IIRC Charlie created it)

It is atleast an honest move to reinforce facts, not hocus pocus. I agree the boundary was wrong because a TP shouldn’t have to do that. But when your rival TP is lying on air and clearly lobbying and trying to manipulate the stewards and it is seemingly acceptable, I think it’s a natural reaction to respond.

Like I said before, RBR were the catalyst for the lobbying.

What is an email? Communication. About what? The document they were given years ago from the FIA. Discussing the rules isn’t that offensive. Not as offensive as telling the stewards who is to blame and who’s corner it was, and trying to enforce your opinion of the incident on them. That is out of order.

[DChemTech]

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

“was never anywhere near alongside”

“I’ve watched this replay several times now Michael and I’m feeling really cross about it. That corner there Michael – that’s not a place to stick a wheel up the inside of a car.”

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

Out of interest , what were the words to Masi after the incidents in Monza and Silverstone ? were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ? How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand

"Michael I sent you an email"

I can understand horner. Emotional talk of someone who just lost an important bunch of points. I don't agree with it, but can see where it comes from.

Toto, on the other hand, was very calmy saying, in effect, "Michael, read this thing I sent telling you how to do your job". Sorry, but thay is way worse.

But Horner just lied and argued about the cars being along side or not. Toto wanted to make sure the rules were being consistent with what they were informed of by Charlie (IIRC Charlie created it)

It is atleast an honest move to reinforce facts, not hocus pocus. I agree the boundary was wrong because a TP shouldn’t have to do that. But when your rival TP is lying on air and clearly lobbying and trying to manipulate the stewards and it is seemingly acceptable, I think it’s a natural reaction to respond.

Like I said before, RBR were the catalyst for the lobbying.

Well, I disagree. Whether Horner lied or not is a bit of a technical discussion, but 'sufficiently alongside' is also subjective. Still, I don't expect Horner would have thought such a statement to be very effective. It's no different than the soccer players and coaches screaming from the sideline, which is rightfully ignored typically. Wrong in the sense that I would prefer such communications to be absent altogether, but vile? nah. Basically pushing a 'rulebook' (and an unofficial, obsolete guideline at that) under the RDs nose and saying 'Michael look at this' on the other hand is hugely condescending. It implies the RD would not be properly aware of the rules and that it's fine if a team boss 'reminds' him how to do his work.

Is RB more visible when it comes to 'lobbying'? Well, they are more vocal in exclamations, and usually quite blunt. Mostly I wouldn't call it lobbying though. More attention seeking, loudly and brashly, but also ineffective. Mercedes, in my view, actually lobbies more. 'Real' lobbying is calm, pretty invisible, suggestive. Not loud, open and making absolute statements. Suggesting maybe some other teams are playing with the wing regulations, suggesting that maybe the pitstop procedures should change, suggesting the other team might have made illegal changes to their engine. Not all of those suggestions were followed up upon (the last one wasn't, just for Mercedes to come with a rocketship of an engine later - seems it's only a problem if the competition suddenly finds performance), but overall, their influence seems bigger than RBs. I guess they learned from being related to a world-leading car manufacturer there. Industry lobbying doesn't happen through open, brash statements either.

[AeroDynamic]

"Michael I sent you an email"

I can understand horner. Emotional talk of someone who just lost an important bunch of points. I don't agree with it, but can see where it comes from.

Toto, on the other hand, was very calmy saying, in effect, "Michael, read this thing I sent telling you how to do your job". Sorry, but thay is way worse.

But Horner just lied and argued about the cars being along side or not. Toto wanted to make sure the rules were being consistent with what they were informed of by Charlie (IIRC Charlie created it)

It is atleast an honest move to reinforce facts, not hocus pocus. I agree the boundary was wrong because a TP shouldn’t have to do that. But when your rival TP is lying on air and clearly lobbying and trying to manipulate the stewards and it is seemingly acceptable, I think it’s a natural reaction to respond.

Like I said before, RBR were the catalyst for the lobbying.

Well, I disagree. Whether Horner lied or not is a bit of a technical discussion, but 'sufficiently alongside' is also subjective. Still, I don't expect Horner would have thought such a statement to be very effective. It's no different than the soccer players and coaches screaming from the sideline, which is rightfully ignored typically. Wrong in the sense that I would prefer such communications to be absent altogether, but vile? nah. Basically pushing a 'rulebook' (and an unofficial, obsolete guideline at that) under the RDs nose and saying 'Michael look at this' on the other hand is hugely condescending. It implies the RD would not be properly aware of the rules and that it's fine if a team boss 'reminds' him how to do his work.

Is RB more visible when it comes to 'lobbying'? Well, they are more vocal in exclamations, and usually quite blunt. Mostly I wouldn't call it lobbying though. More attention seeking, loudly and brashly, but also ineffective. Mercedes, in my view, actually lobbies more. 'Real' lobbying is calm, pretty invisible, suggestive. Not loud, open and making absolute statements. Suggesting maybe some other teams are playing with the wing regulations, suggesting that maybe the pitstop procedures should change, suggesting the other team might have made illegal changes to their engine. Not all of those suggestions were followed up upon (the last one wasn't, just for Mercedes to come with a rocketship of an engine later - seems it's only a problem if the competition suddenly finds performance), but overall, their influence seems bigger than RBs. I guess they learned from being related to a world-leading car manufacturer there. Industry lobbying doesn't happen through open, brash statements either.

Yeah, we can’t agree on any of those things you’re claiming there. For example, the nature of Toto’s move. I think clarifying rules that were explained to you by the FIA previously is actually ok. I did not listen to Toto tell the FIA his view on the incident or who was to blame. For me, the latter is more lobbying. Toto was ‘lobbying’ what he understood were official rules. Horner was lobbying hocus-pocus —sorry, his view—along with JW in an effort to persuade their opinion to fit their own. Unacceptable. Teams have the right to clarify and discuss the rules or the understanding of them, reciting them to the FIA, I have a lot less of a problem with. What Toto said in Abu Dhabi, for me, was unacceptable.

[morefirejules08]

"Michael I sent you an email"

I can understand horner. Emotional talk of someone who just lost an important bunch of points. I don't agree with it, but can see where it comes from.

Toto, on the other hand, was very calmy saying, in effect, "Michael, read this thing I sent telling you how to do your job". Sorry, but thay is way worse.

But Horner just lied and argued about the cars being along side or not. Toto wanted to make sure the rules were being consistent with what they were informed of by Charlie (IIRC Charlie created it)

It is atleast an honest move to reinforce facts, not hocus pocus. I agree the boundary was wrong because a TP shouldn’t have to do that. But when your rival TP is lying on air and clearly lobbying and trying to manipulate the stewards and it is seemingly acceptable, I think it’s a natural reaction to respond.

Like I said before, RBR were the catalyst for the lobbying.

Basically pushing a 'rulebook' (and an unofficial, obsolete guideline at that) under the RDs nose and saying 'Michael look at this' on the other hand is hugely condescending. It implies the RD would not be properly aware of the rules and that it's fine if a team boss 'reminds' him how to do his work.

Discounting whether the guideline was obsolete or not but isn't this essentially what Wheatley did in Spa regarding Perez for which you praised him for "schooling" Masi?

[Wouter]

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

... were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ?
How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand .

.
So, RB/Horner according to you:

were vile
were utterly disgusting!
a clown
pathetic
a lie

Those are some pretty serious allegations about the longest-serving team boss in F1.
I thought personal accusations were not allowed here.

[DChemTech]

But Horner just lied and argued about the cars being along side or not. Toto wanted to make sure the rules were being consistent with what they were informed of by Charlie (IIRC Charlie created it)

It is atleast an honest move to reinforce facts, not hocus pocus. I agree the boundary was wrong because a TP shouldn’t have to do that. But when your rival TP is lying on air and clearly lobbying and trying to manipulate the stewards and it is seemingly acceptable, I think it’s a natural reaction to respond.

Like I said before, RBR were the catalyst for the lobbying.

Basically pushing a 'rulebook' (and an unofficial, obsolete guideline at that) under the RDs nose and saying 'Michael look at this' on the other hand is hugely condescending. It implies the RD would not be properly aware of the rules and that it's fine if a team boss 'reminds' him how to do his work.

Discounting whether the guideline was obsolete or not but isn't this essentially what Wheatley did in Spa regarding Perez for which you praised him for "schooling" Masi?

Did I praise him for that?

[NathanOlder]

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

... were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ?
How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand .

.
So, RB/Horner according to you:

were vile
were utterly disgusting!
a clown
pathetic
a lie

Those are some pretty serious allegations about the longest-serving team boss in F1.
I thought personal accusations were not allowed here.

I stick to what I said, That is my personal opinion of christian horner after his comments that day. As they were all complete lies. Or are you telling me I am wrong and he didnt lie?

Was Lewis never alongside ?

Do cars never over take there ?

Or did he get it completely wrong and has no idea about overtaking?

I'm sure its the lying part he falls in to.

[Jolle]

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

... were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ?
How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand .

.
So, RB/Horner according to you:

were vile
were utterly disgusting!
a clown
pathetic
a lie

Those are some pretty serious allegations about the longest-serving team boss in F1.
I thought personal accusations were not allowed here.

As on record:

The FIA also expressed some ‘concern’ about claims made in the letter in which Red Bull requested the review of the Silverstone crash.

While it is unclear what these claims were, the FIA suggested they could have been relevant to the stewards if the review had gone ahead.

The FIA added: “The Stewards note, with some concern, certain allegations made in the Competitor's above letter.

“Such allegations may or may not have been relevant to the Stewards if the Petition for Review had been granted. The Stewards may have addressed these allegations directly in any decision that would have followed. The Petition having been dismissed, the Stewards make no comments on those allegations.”

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia- ... y/6638591/

Horner/Marko went so low, very low. as one could say, vile. And not in the heat of the moment, but with consideration, on paper, after a week to think about it.

[AeroDynamic]

RedBull at Silverstone were vile, the words coming from Horners mouth were utterly disgusting!

These are words of a clown who has never watched any race at Silverstone in his life.

... were they are pathetic as Horners ? were they as big of a lie as Horners ?
How anyone can defend horner that day is impossible to understand .

.
So, RB/Horner according to you:

were vile
were utterly disgusting!
a clown
pathetic
a lie

Those are some pretty serious allegations about the longest-serving team boss in F1.
I thought personal accusations were not allowed here.

I stick to what I said, That is my personal opinion of christian horner after his comments that day. As they were all complete lies. Or are you telling me I am wrong and he didnt lie?

Was Lewis never alongside ?

Do cars never over take there ?

Or did he get it completely wrong and has no idea about overtaking?

I'm sure its the lying part he falls in to.

I can answer that one. CH was lying. We said it all last season. RBR like the hocus-pocus and manipulation. Marko tried to deny the break testing and had to come out and apologise for lying about that. It’s not acceptable behaviour.

And indeed, the concerning allegations by the FIA regarding Horner / RBRs claims about Silverstone, show the FIA were having none of it.. thankfully.

hocus-pocus
/həʊkəsˈpəʊkəs/

meaningless talk or activity, typically designed to trick someone or conceal the truth of a situation.

[morefirejules08]

Basically pushing a 'rulebook' (and an unofficial, obsolete guideline at that) under the RDs nose and saying 'Michael look at this' on the other hand is hugely condescending. It implies the RD would not be properly aware of the rules and that it's fine if a team boss 'reminds' him how to do his work.

Discounting whether the guideline was obsolete or not but isn't this essentially what Wheatley did in Spa regarding Perez for which you praised him for "schooling" Masi?

Did I praise him for that?

Forgive me, the quote i am thinking of was attributed to another forum member.

[NathanOlder]

.
So, RB/Horner according to you:

were vile
were utterly disgusting!
a clown
pathetic
a lie

Those are some pretty serious allegations about the longest-serving team boss in F1.
I thought personal accusations were not allowed here.

I stick to what I said, That is my personal opinion of christian horner after his comments that day. As they were all complete lies. Or are you telling me I am wrong and he didnt lie?

Was Lewis never alongside ?

Do cars never over take there ?

Or did he get it completely wrong and has no idea about overtaking?

I'm sure its the lying part he falls in to.

I can answer that one. CH was lying. We said it all last season. RBR like the hocus-pocus and manipulation. Marko tried to deny the break testing and had to come out and apologise for lying about that. It’s not acceptable behaviour.

And indeed, the concerning allegations by the FIA regarding Horner / RBRs claims about Silverstone, show the FIA were having none of it.. thankfully.

hocus-pocus
/həʊkəsˈpəʊkəs/

meaningless talk or activity, typically designed to trick someone or conceal the truth of a situation.

Exactly, the constant lying, and all proven lies from the top top men in the team is sad and it's exactly what makes it hard or impossible to like redbull. Max really needs to distance himself from these 2.

[AeroDynamic]

I stick to what I said, That is my personal opinion of christian horner after his comments that day. As they were all complete lies. Or are you telling me I am wrong and he didnt lie?

Was Lewis never alongside ?

Do cars never over take there ?

Or did he get it completely wrong and has no idea about overtaking?

I'm sure its the lying part he falls in to.

I can answer that one. CH was lying. We said it all last season. RBR like the hocus-pocus and manipulation. Marko tried to deny the break testing and had to come out and apologise for lying about that. It’s not acceptable behaviour.

And indeed, the concerning allegations by the FIA regarding Horner / RBRs claims about Silverstone, show the FIA were having none of it.. thankfully.

hocus-pocus
/həʊkəsˈpəʊkəs/

meaningless talk or activity, typically designed to trick someone or conceal the truth of a situation.

Exactly, the constant lying, and all proven lies from the top top men in the team is sad and it's exactly what makes it hard or impossible to like redbull. Max really needs to distance himself from these 2.

The FIA should do more about this behaviour from RBR. Why stop with banning lobbying?

The gaslighting as well.. Thankfully they were held accountable for that when they tried to do this about the Marshalls in Qatar. CH looked stupid on Sky Sports apologising afterward.. sounds familiar? Same thing with Marko after Jeddah.

[DChemTech]

I really think too much credence is given to the outcries of RB, especially Horner and Marko.
It's a lot of emotional talk, on how they see certain things. Nothing different from a soccer player or coach doing the same. Sure, wrong when it's done on the radio during a race because, as mentioned, attempts at influencing the race director in general should not be condoned. But influential? Hardly, I reckon. Just like those soccer players hardly succeed in influencing the ref (and are probably more likely to talk themselves into a card than seeing one handed to the opponent). Or look at society. Who is really influencing? People shouting in the streets, or backroom lobbyists that make subtle suggestions or nudgings? People shouting in the streets, like Horner et al., manage to gain a lot of attention and generate outrage with those who disagree (see this topic for case in point). But do they influence decisions? Hardly. They're mostly ignored, or arrested if they start getting in the way. Which is why I personally take more issue with the Mercedes lobby - it's more of a real lobby than an outrage machine, and more effective at that. Anyway, I won't play favorites, future regulations should be such that both approaches are infeasible.

[morefirejules08]

I really think too much credence is given to the outcries of RB, especially Horner and Marko.
It's a lot of emotional talk, on how they see certain things. Nothing different from a soccer player or coach doing the same. Sure, wrong when it's done on the radio during a race because, as mentioned, attempts at influencing the race director in general should not be condoned. But influential? Hardly, I reckon. Just like those soccer players hardly succeed in influencing the ref (and are probably more likely to talk themselves into a card than seeing one handed to the opponent). Or look at society. Who is really influencing? People shouting in the streets, or backroom lobbyists that make subtle suggestions or nudgings? People shouting in the streets, like Horner et al., manage to gain a lot of attention and generate outrage with those who disagree (see this topic for case in point). But do they influence decisions? Hardly. They're mostly ignored, or arrested if they start getting in the way. Which is why I personally take more issue with the Mercedes lobby - it's more of a real lobby than an outrage machine, and more effective at that. Anyway, I won't play favorites, future regulations should be such that both approaches are infeasible.

I think you would be hard pressed to objectively argue that RB's lobbying via team radio had no influence on the decisions made by the RD/stewards.