Singapore GP 2011 - Massa told to destroy Hamilton's race

[Steven]

Absolutely agree with people above – absolute non event.

1) It's entirely legal to impede another driver - when you're racing against them.
2) It's entirely legal to use one team member to hold up a competitive driver (as long as they're racing against them), and let the other team member scamper off.
3) Trying to destroy each other's races and have the best one you can have is exactly what F1 is about. There's rules about exactly how much distruction you're allowed to dole out, but it's still what it's about.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this instruction at all.

The perfect analysis of this thread!

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

It was all legit.

If there is any whinging it's to deflect from hamiltons own flaws, of which we have already seen.
How massa is at fault for the Singapore incident is beyond belief.

[PlatinumZealot]

Whinging from who?

Massa sat his car on the apex to cause an accident (slight brake test). Said accident would only lead to one result: the #3 Mclaren being penalized.

It's ironic how the command to Massa was to destroy Hamilton's race but Massa ended up destroying his own race in the end. Pathetic.

Also Ironic is the fact that Hamilton was penalized for "destroying Massa's race," when it was Massa went out with the intention destroying another drivers race.

No matter why Hamilton ignored him in the paddock. Makes sense now.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

The usual suspects whinging when Hamilton makes a mistake.

Lord almighty knows that the guy is actually human and not some cyborg sent from the future to be mr perfect. The sooner Hamilton fans realise this, the less strenuous a past time it would be enjoying a fantastic talent that Hamilton is!

[Lycoming]

Its rob smedley. He says odd stuff. Destroy his race obviously means hold him up as msc did at monza, not take him out of the race.

[flynfrog]

Whinging from who?

Massa sat his car on the apex to cause an accident (slight brake test). Said accident would only lead to one result: the #3 Mclaren being penalized.

It's ironic how the command to Massa was to destroy Hamilton's race but Massa ended up destroying his own race in the end. Pathetic.

Also Ironic is the fact that Hamilton was penalized for "destroying Massa's race," when it was Massa went out with the intention destroying another drivers race.

No matter why Hamilton ignored him in the paddock. Makes sense now.

so you have the data of the brake pressure then or the data of the acceleration meters on the car? Face it your hero couldn't make a clean pass and lost his wing. I don't think he deserved the drive through but such is that state of F1

[ringo]

The usual suspects whinging when Hamilton makes a mistake.

Lord almighty knows that the guy is actually human and not some cyborg sent from the future to be mr perfect. The sooner Hamilton fans realise this, the less strenuous a past time it would be enjoying a fantastic talent that Hamilton is!

So you need random people on forums to realise something for you to enjoy a driver's talent?

Let me spoil your past time even more:

He's a cyborg from the future.

His right foot is lead an his left foot is depleted Uranium.



Surely to be a real fan you shouldn't care what others think?

Andrea Stella and Marc Gene thinks Alonso is the greatest thing since the wheel, and he tells the world this every month.
http://planetf1.com/driver/18227/721511 ... ete-driver

Does that make you feel it's justified to bash Alonso to make him look more human?

[CHT]

I actually think that the reason for LH poor season is purely because other drivers are becoming less forgiving on his race craft and giving him less space for overtaking.

[Fil]

Massa sat his car on the apex to cause an accident (slight brake test). Said accident would only lead to one result: the #3 Mclaren being penalized.

It's ironic how the command to Massa was to destroy Hamilton's race but Massa ended up destroying his own race in the end. Pathetic.

Let's not take Smedley's instructions out of context to help infer that Massa was trying to crash.

The instruction was, "Hold Hamilton as much as we can." Followed by the validation, "Destroy his race as much as we can, c'mon boy!"


That's not an instruction to cause an accident; that's an instruction to delay/slow a rival threatening the team's chances at a podium with their primary driver.



And an accusation of a brake test? Really? The stewards, and McLaren, would be all over that in a second if there was any semblance of truth in that.

Surely we're all aware on F1T of the racing tactic of slowing on the apex to prevent the faster driver from using his speed advantage exiting the corner?

Alonso was universally praised for famously doing it for a whole stint to Schumacher in Imola in 2005. Vettel did it to Hamilton in Barcelona this year.
It's a standard defensive tactic, not a brake test in the slightest.

[ringo]

Fil you have a very good imagination.

Destroy is a very descriptively accurate word. It has a clear meaning; which is nowhere as nice as what you imagine it to be.

I agree holding is a possibility, which is not legal anyway, in case people didn't know that.

Other possibilities are testing, be it brake, lifting or by moving unusually slow to cause a colission or act as a stumbling block.

These acts aren't legal contrary to what you think. They are the equivalent of moving twice by the regulations.

It is legal to defend hard at your normal pace, but it is not legal to drive slow and block. That is dangerous.

30.13 At no time may a car be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed
potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person. This will apply whether any such car is being
driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

Now i don't think Smedley wanted them to crash. But he definitely wanted some physical obstruction to take place.

It does the sport injustice if people think it is ok to "destroy" races. That driver meeting should be about Massa and Smedley.

We are beginning to lose the plot when it comes to what defending is. Defending your position from being taken is one thing, because you can't go faster. Holding back to lay wait and destroy another's race is just malicious.
Q3 can arguably be another instant of Massa being the antagonist to protect Alonso.

If someone is going to respond to my post. Do so intelligently. (i don't mean Fil, i mean anyone ready to shout fanboy!! to avoid the discussion)

[Lycoming]

where does it say holding is illegal? and it would be hard to verify that he was driving slowly as it was only over a single apex and they only have timing by sector. Another thing, if this is the case, why was kobayashi not penalized or investigated for what happened in canada when heidfeld ran into the back of him?

[raymondu999]

Yeah; I never knew it was illegal to be slow (if you're slow you're holding someone up). What if an HRT somehow got ahead of a McLaren, and managed (somehow) to hold the McLaren behind? I don't see how holding would be illegal.

EDIT: Didn't see the quote there; sorry. It's very hard to argue it's "unnecessary" though

[Fil]

Cheers Ringo. I agree, "Destroy" on it's own means something completely different than in the context of Smedley's instruction. But that's irrelevant, as the context is clearly there clear to hear & read.

30.13 - thanks for posting it. Sounds like it is a rule, which in literal terms, your definition of is absolutely correct.
However, real-world precedent (which i gave you two examples of), proves to be interpreted differently. Kinda like the 'flexing bodywork' rules; what it says isn't literally what it means.

If you could kindly provide an example or two of your interpretation being enforced in F1, I will accept it as correct. Until then, F1 precedent stands.


I will wholeheartedly agree with one of your points though. Smedley's instruction to Massa was absolutely malicious.
BUT - read your sig - "DON'T HATE THE PLAYER, HATE THE GAME!"

The FIA allowed for such malicious intent as soon as it legalised Team Orders. Your frustration should be directed that way, not at Ferrari or Massa.

[ringo]

This idea of holding; what is holding exactly?

Never heard of it. I heard of...

20.2 Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as more than one change of direction to defend a position,
deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.

The words such as suggests that changing direction and crowding are just 2 examples of hindering. There may be other ways to hinder other drivers; which is up to the stewards to determine.

But don't believe that "holding" is legal, whatever that means.
You can't hinder a driver in any way.

If Massa doesn't have grapple hooks on his car, it is really hard to imagine what Smedley was asking him to resort to. No hooks no hold.

Whatever it was, it had to fall into article 20.2 as Massa simple had no other means of keeping Hamilton behind in that DRS zone.

[Ray]

Holding back to lay wait and destroy another's race is just malicious.

How long have you been watching racing? Since Lewis came to Formula 1? There's nothing Massa did that comes close to "making more than one move" as you accuse him of. Holding up the field (or another driver) has been around since the beginning of Formula 1. Holding up a team rival, through taking away his ability to brake when he wants, not giving him a good line, or going slow enough to stay in front but not fast enough to give him an advantage is completely normal. Like someone said, that is exactly what Alonso did to Schumacher in Imola.Lewis couldn't get past and hit Massa. Why are you always calling foul when Lewis can't overtake someone? Yes, he is one of the top overtakers in F1 and single seater racing for that matter, but everytime someone doesn't kindly get out of his way and they make him work for it isn't a reason to constantly bleat about it. If Massa was holding him up he should have been classic Lewis Hamilton and blown his doors off. Instead he hit him. Incessantly going on and on about it and quoting regulation that isn't applicable, he wasn't driving erratically nor did he put Lewis in any form of danger, means nothing. Lewis ran into the back of a car he should have passed. Just because he's Lewis doesn't mean he shouldn't have to fight for what he wants and doesn't mean those he can't pass should be penalized or reprimanded. Massa was a bit of an ass for what he did, but Lewis should have never made contact with his car. Especially because everyone holds him on a pedestal of greatness.

The only thing I've seen from Lewis lately is extreme impatience and immaturity. He came into a top team, deservedly so I guess I would agree, and now he's finding out that Formula 1 isn't so easy and your team isn't always king of the hill. He would be smart to shut his mouth and earn his paycheck because brash mistakes on the track and BS like chewing out his mechanics isn't doing him any good in the paddock. Alonso threw a massive tantrum and look where that got him. I'm not saying that Lewis would do something like that, but his immaturity and rash moves aren't winning him any fans. People, especially high profile sports teams, tend to shy away from hotheads no matter how talented they are. He needs to buckle down and do what he's paid to do. That being win races and championships for McLaren. He's got more talent than easily half the field but his teammate, who gets undeserved scorn by many here, is doing the deed for McLaren and without a shred of negativity in his actions. He needs to take a good hard look at himself and figure out what's going on and correct it. I don't mean everything is his fault of course, he's gotten genuinely screwed many number of times, but something has changed and his on track and off track behavior are suffering. Lewis is better than all this, he just needs to find that happy place, return to it, and start kicking ass again week in week out.