Adios, Alonso

[Belatti]

icef1mkd, I agree that Fernando is like you say.

And there is only one team where Fernando would be trated like N°1 and would have a team mate used to serve him for years, and that would build a car for his driving styles and that would pay him a lot.

But that team is occupied (for now) by a revel star driver who does what he likes and barely listens for opinions (that makes that team boss very very angry, aparently) and that is not doing as well as some in that team expected (maybe cause adaptation period, maybe because his team mate was not as slow as everyone imagined).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is, friends, that I have waited for 13 years for someone who fills the gap that the last hero left. And no one can do that.
MS is maquiavelo itself
DH was too soft
JV was late to the teams distribution
MH was quick, but with the quickest ca or if his rival broke his legs
Then maquiavelo again! And for five years!
And finally FA, who was starting to show something, till he began playing like AP (that is a Politician mixed with a racing driver) by the way... who remembers AP now ???

For the future we have got LH... cause KR is way down that (hero) line

[Belatti]

Sory friends, anyone can run wide

[Rob W]

...He was pretty selfish and unfair, requiering even more focus on his campain. He also negotiated with McLaren, allegedly, behind Flavio's and his team's back. Just wonderful.

Show me a driver who isn't selfish, self-centred and I'll show you someone who will never be good enough to be at the top.

Likewise, it's pretty unfair to malign Alsono for talking to McLaren without Renault knowing - all drivers do this, that's how they move teams. Moreso, Renault had made comments implying they were rethinking their involvement in F1 - leaving him little choice but to at least start looking for a new job.

Much of the Alono bashing here, for the most part, is unwarranted. He is the double world champion and an amazing driver - fact. Teams have played driver favourites for years - fact. If anyone currently on the F1 grid was in a position to negotiate some sort of preferential treatment based on their results, it is Alonso - fact.

Rarely have comments reported by the media as having come from him actually been true quotes. The British, German and French mainstream run their F1 news-items like movie-star gossip - i.e. 99% of the time they selectively use a single quote and then write a whole story most of which is based on nothing more than a desire to get the biggest headline.

Rob W

[Ciro Pabón]

... Show me a driver who isn't selfish, self-centred and I'll show you someone who will never be good enough to be at the top...

Well, Rob, I agree with you: on most cases that's true, people who compete tend to center on themselves.

However, if the problem is just to show a driver, I'm not sure about it, but it seems fair to propose "old timers" like the shy Scot, Jim Clark, "Fat head" ("Cabezón") Froilán González, Juan Manuel Fangio or Tazio Nuvolari, "The master" ("Il Maestro"). Some of them were modest, but some of them maybe went beyond modesty: they seemed really devoted to the well being of others, or so I like to believe.

I know, I know, proposing Nuvolari is stretching it a bit, but, hey, everyone is entitled to one opinion (at least one, in my case... ).

Heck, maybe Regazzoni could qualify, I dare to say. He, who seemed from afar a man devoted to paraplegics while he ran the Paris-Dakkar in a wheelchair: no amount of press manipulation by modern drivers can dream of achieving that hard-to-dispute generosity. Rejected by major teams in his disability, he seemed to be using the last drops of fame toward the benefit others, while he himself was not precisely buoyant.

If that's true (that there were drivers "driven outward") then I conclude (arbitrarily, I concede) that you don't necessarily have to be a spoiled brat to be a good driver.

Actually, I think some drivers enjoyed (or enjoy) their modesty too much to be declared "true modesty". You know how it is: the kind of people that goes through the world saying or implying they are "the most modest man on Earth".

However, it is impossible for everybody to be the same: I bet some saint must have slipped among the pilot ranks. Perhaps some promoter should be canonized (not in the last decade, I know, but...).

Maybe there are saints even in this forum, you never know. I propose Dave, for example...

About Alonso, I don't know. I think Ron Dennis will evaluate the odds and decide. I'll believe anything about Alonso's moves only when I see team's owners declarations. Meanwhile (and it will be in a short time) I better wait. Most of the declarations and articles seem to bring their venom, trying to discharge all the blame on the World Champion.

I wish to believe (that maybe gives me some points toward sanctity... ) that they are wrong and McLaren behaved like the Three Stoges: I doubt very much that any team cheating with other team's info will be so stupid as to discuss it on e-mail or scanning it...

Now, for some people, the fact that Alonso received info means he did it by despise. Some writers in the news believe we are retarded...

They want us to believe that Alonso managed all the operational aspects of McLaren (McLaren! A team where I imagine not a speck of dust moves without planning!). Surely Dennis seems absent of operation... I imagine is the "need-to-know", as it's called by the American Executive Branch.

Probably Alonso took a couple of wrenches, entered the garage in the middle of the night, fixed the car, and took a couple of laps in the dark by himself. Or better yet, suggested figures out of nowhere to mechanics. Coughlan also did the same, as all chief mechanics do: they simply invent exotic configurations, without giving any reasoning for them to their bosses.

Nobody else knew, according to sworn statements of 140 McLaren employees, as Dennis reminded us. First, it was Coughlan alone. Then it was ONLY Coughlan, Alonso and De La Rosa. The rest of the team is blind and, the best part is they expect these three guys (chief mechanic, chief tester and, let's say it frankly, chief driver) to work "by instinct".

Yeah, sure. I might be a saint, but I don't think I'm stupid.

[Rob W]

... Show me a driver who isn't selfish, self-centred and I'll show you someone who will never be good enough to be at the top...

(drivers)...like the shy Scot, Jim Clark, "Fat head" ("Cabezón") Froilán González, Juan Manuel Fangio or Tazio Nuvolari, "The master" ("Il Maestro").

Ha ha.. yeah, I thought of Johnny Herbert also after I wrote it. Definitely there are plenty of nice guys out there... the main thing I think is a single-minded determination to succeed. No driver on the grid can say they haven't been beneficiary at some time from info which was gathered beyond the spirit of rules of racing.

McLaren, as you say, should be wary of trying to pass any blame onto Alonso. He probably actually saved them if you look at it from a purely legal point of view. Ferrari had their appeal date set already so the info about the emails would have come out sooner or later. Alonso's pre-strike actually set in motion the events which eventuated with the drivers being offered immunity. No matter what happens now, the drivers cannot be removed from the championship. Aside from the fine, McLaren can still get all of the glory with a Driver's World Championship title which is the one people really care about.

If things hadn't come out for weeks or months and the other other (planned) appeal hearing was convened McLaren would likely have been excluded completely.

Some writers in the news believe we are retarded...

They just want to get the headline and nothing else. Rarely does the truth or real context come out until the horse has bolted.

Rob W

[checkered]

McLaren, as you say, should be wary of trying to pass any blame onto Alonso. He probably actually saved them if you look at it from a purely legal point of view. Ferrari had their appeal date set already so the info about the emails would have come out sooner or later. Alonso's pre-strike actually set in motion the events which eventuated with the drivers being offered immunity. No matter what happens now, the drivers cannot be removed from the championship. Aside from the fine, McLaren can still get all of the glory with a Driver's World Championship title which is the one people really care about.

If things hadn't come out for weeks or months and the other other (planned) appeal hearing was convened McLaren would likely have been excluded completely.

I don't think McLaren

will nor needs to pass blame. Ron will adhere to his philosophy of letting his drivers race, no matter how dire the circumstances. Other fallout will follow without his active participation, the issue is much larger and besides, tending to matters to do with his entire team and not one driver is his clear priority. Whether or not Alonso's revelation (which he soon after recanted as Ron immediately implied going to Mosley with it) in Hungary was timed so that the process eventually didn't end up with exclusion is, for his active participation in the matter and given the perspective of the risk involved in his actions, a bit of a mute point.

And Alonso, as is evident from the transcripts of the WMSC meeting, did give the emails that served as evidence to Ecclestone before he supplied them to the FIA. One can only suspect that he left Ron out of the loop about this little development. As a result, at least Bernie was left in no doubt about how robust a defence he had to come up with to keep McLaren, or alternatively the drivers at least, from being excluded.

The drivers' immunity was a bit academic, it originally had only to do with their super licenses, not exclusion. Whether Mosley originally planned to extend the indemnity to cover other things such as exclusion, well, everyone can draw their own conclusions about how much other repercussions of having Fernando and Lewis withdrawn from the series weighed in the considerations. And in fact, the drivers can still be removed if McLaren makes an appeal to the court of appeals, they have full discretion to revise every aspect of WMSC's decision.

Edit: Now this would be a controversial move, in light what has happened: Alonso to Renault? Why not Ferrari? (link, grandprix.com) If this happens, McLaren might be prompted to look at recent events and actions in a whole new light indeed. There certainly could be a couple of arguments raised as to the objectives behind certain actions.

[Rob W]

in fact, the drivers can still be removed if McLaren makes an appeal to the court of appeals, they have full discretion to revise every aspect of WMSC's decision.

The immunity was offered by Max to the drivers. It was done before the hearing and Max himself has said he couldn't revoke the offer. No matter what happens now the drivers cannot be punished by the FIA - only the team can.

Max even went as far as warning McLaren not to hamper Alonso's championship chances in revenge (a lose wheel-nut perhaps ).

Rob W

[monkeyboy1976]

silly season kicking off in style

[Militia Est Vita]

Max even went as far as warning McLaren not to hamper Alonso's championship chances in revenge

Is this stated in the FIA transcript from the hearing? I just read it quite quickly and didn't notice. Interesting

[checkered]

The immunity was offered by Max to the drivers. It was done before the hearing and Max himself has said he couldn't revoke the offer. No matter what happens now the drivers cannot be punished by the FIA - only the team can.

Max even went as far as warning McLaren not to hamper Alonso's championship chances in revenge (a lose wheel-nut perhaps ).

Rob W

I definitely got

the impression from the transcripts and documents that the indemnity was originally portrayed as only shielding from the loss of a super license, as that was directly referred to in the request for the emails in question. For example Frank Williams put it in an interview that he didn't know "the exact wording" based on which the FIA president by himself could offer a complete amnesty. When the offer itself was made doesn't come into it if it falls outside the statute of the FIA president to do so. Mosley himself later stated that he, and other FIA lawyers wanted to sanction the drivers also in the WMSC meeting and only pleas that weren't strictly to do with regulations saved them from being docked points, for example. Doesn't sound like even Mosley himself believed that he had offered a complete amnesty to anyone or intended to do so. And still, if Ecclestone was already in possession of the emails in question, it seems extraordinary indeed that the drivers were offered anything at all. Unless they produced more emails than what they already had, which seems unlikely as the content revealed obviously represents only a fraction of the total exchange.

I still believe the FIA can yet sanction the drivers, too, but only if McLaren decides to appeal. That may be a long shot since the team would have to believe that the ICA would find against the driver(s) and besides, the window to do so closes tomorrow. But at least technically, that's still possible and I would believe certainly considered in the light of where everyone attempts to be employed come next season.

ARTICLE 23 - INTERNATIONAL COURT OF APPEAL
1. Missions: The International Court of Appeal (ICA) shall be entrusted with judging definitively any dispute or conflict resulting from the application of the present Statutes, of the Statutes of the body governed by Swiss law or of the rules decreed by the FIA, with settling any dispute of a sporting nature arising between members of the FIA, and with hearing any litigation of a sporting nature which may be submitted to it by the President of the FIA.
It will also hear:
1) Appeals brought by members of the FIA from decisions taken by the bodies of the FIA in application of the present Statutes (affiliations, striking off the rolls, sanctions, etc.).
...
http://www.fia.com/thefia/statutes/File ... court.html

7) Is the Court independent of the FIA Sporting Authority?

Yes. The Judges are elected by the FIA General Assembly and act entirely independently of the FIA executive. The ICA respects the ‘adversarial principle’ and more generally the rights of defence. The appellants and respondents, therefore, after having been given adequate notice of the hearing, have the right to set out their respective cases, call witnesses and submit evidence. The ICA decision’s are reasoned (Article 189 of the ISC). There is also nothing to prevent any party from pursuing any right of action before any Court or Tribunal (Article 191bis of the ISC). These ICA procedures reinforce its independence.
...
http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Re ... 05-01.html

[Rob W]

This is what the article, with Mosely's own comments, said about it. It does seem to cover more than the super licence.

...due to the immunity clause in his letter to the three McLaren drivers, and with Alonso and de la Rosa both providing information in email exchanges between the two, no sanction was imposed.

"When I made the threat about the super licence, I also said if you do give us the information, we won't penalise you," remarked Mosley.

"This is something that happens in all commerce, even in criminal matters.

"It's very usual to offer a witness immunity or an indemnity in return for information. It is sometimes the only way you can get the information.

"That having been done, and even though the e-mails were pretty damaging, I couldn't possibly go back on that (offer)."

This was my point above. The drivers have in-essence saved McLaren from being kicked out of this year's championship. The info they knew would have come out eventually - but Max's pre-empting their cooperation basically ensured McLaren would be allowed to remain in the driver's championship.


Rob W

[checkered]

This is what the article, with Mosely's own comments, said about it. It does seem to cover more than the super licence.

This was my point above. The drivers have in-essence saved McLaren from being kicked out of this year's championship. The info they knew would have come out eventually - but Max's pre-empting their cooperation basically ensured McLaren would be allowed to remain in the driver's championship.

Rob W

What do you

think, is the man just plain contradicting himself now? This seems really peculiar.

I would have taken all the points away from Hamilton and Alonso on the grounds that there is a suspicion they had an advantage that they should not have had.

A significant majority on the council thought they should keep their points, about five - mostly lawyers - thought all the points should go.

I'm slightly disappointed because when history comes to be written and all the emotions are gone they will say, 'Hang on a minute, we just don't know what happened and would Raikkonen or Massa have won had it not been for this information?'

The lawyers all felt everything should go because how can you give the cup to a driver who may have had an unfair advantage over the other drivers.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/62451

I wouldn't characterise making ambiguous threats to one's team boss about giving damaging material (that the team boss quite likely wasn't aware even existed) to the series authorities in order to get preferential treatment within the team as an exercise in saving one's team. Not by a long shot. Especially as one's actions have kept the team in comparable jeopardy for six months, all the time risking the very same punishment, namely exclusion from the series.

To me it seems likely that there was a lot of damage control behind the scenes after the situation reached meltdown within McLaren and there was a scramble to explain it away. Basically the only thing that kept the WMSC from acting in a consistent fashion was the threat of a "mutually assured destruction". Too much damage to the series. The drivers were the only straw all the parties could hang on to, because trying to prove who didn't know anything became impossible. The immunity was a trojan horse in many a sense, but it certainly wasn't the intent or innovation of Alonso. Ron recognised the parameters of the situation, went to Max and "took one for the team".

Bernie claimed that Max would've sunk McLaren if left to his own devices. To me, that sounds a lot like playing "good cop, bad cop". There's a lot that goes way beyond the drivers and their ambitions here; even the latest WMSC hearing was IMO rushed as investigations are still ongoing. We'll know later on whether, given time, amnesties would've been required to keep McLaren in Formula One.

[Belatti]

Ayrton Senna was a selfish, self-centred and winnig driver. But that is in a different form (to me) than Fernanado is. (I doubt I´m being objective here, but Senna is Senna)

However, if the problem is just to show a driver, I'm not sure about it, but it seems fair to propose "old timers" like the shy Scot, Jim Clark, "Fat head" ("Cabezón") Froilán González, Juan Manuel Fangio or Tazio Nuvolari, "The master" ("Il Maestro").

Proud to see in that list 2 countrymen!

Recently a TV show here in Argentina made this Poll:

Who did better represented Argentina to the world?
A- Maradona
B- Fangio
C- "Che" Guevara

Guess who won...

[Carlos]

Why Belatti - Outside of Argentina it would be "Che" Guevara - he's on more T-Shirts around the globe than Maradona or Fangio - Better world wide marketing. In Argentina I would think it is the great athelete and hero, still very current, football
player Maradona. I would prefer it had been the best pilot the world has ever produced, the gentlemenly Fangio - but thats too much to hope for.

Here's a list of Argentinains that didn't make the list

http://gosouthamerica.about.com/gi/dyna ... Argentines

Way OT Belatti

[Belatti]

And the wineeerrrr is... surprise surprise... Juan Manuel Fangio!

I understand why:

- Maradona is too related to drugs these times, he is always in the middle of some scandal, saying political incorrect stuff. He is trying hard to be a new "media" Che Guevara (Fidel friend, anti Bush) but his taste for wasting money hasnt change.

- Che had good convictions and intentios... but his method was too violent to be a real hero.

-Then, gentlemenly and humble Fangio was left