Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

[Just_a_fan]

hill has said he was aware of the responsibility but having done it doesn't think it is correct , he thinks it should be advisory ; saying that he didn't discover the nature of the job until several months after the public is the clueless and ignorant part ...anyway, in reality , the vast majority of the public thought it was advisory because the press presented it that way..

pure BS

I imagined I would be there as a consultant providing driver insight to the stewards, who would then make the decisions.

He was under the illusion that others would make the decisions. He clearly said it himself. The public has been very clear about the way the driver stewards work. A person with a minimum interest in doing a solid job should have known what was specified in the job. If he disagreed he could have rejected the job earlier. Bottom line: Screw up.

I have no problem with the Schumacher decision. One can in all honesty come to that decision as one can also come to the decision that the rules were not sufficiently clear.

I would have refused to pass judgement on Schumacher and left it to the ICA to sort out a potential Ferrari protest. The stewards have the power to make reasonable decisions if the FiA and race control make a hash of the rules. They have taken contrary interpretations (for instance on mass dampers) in the past. They could have done it again in this case if they felt the application of the messy rules would be unfair. They did not and that is the end of any reasonable debate on this in my view. There is a result and it stands.

Really? I was under the impression that the driver steward's role was as Hill described. Perhaps you thought it was really more involved and thus assume that Hill made all the calls and thus you justify your derision of the fellow. As the rules are badly written it's just as likely that the driver steward's terms of reference are badly written. Or would that just get in the way of your ire?

You state that you have no problem with the decision reached and yet still protest about Hill's involvement in that decision. The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that you dislike Hill personally and this is a good chance to publically vent that dislike. I hope that is not the case but that's how it's looking from here.

[WhiteBlue]

You state that you have no problem with the decision reached and yet still protest about Hill's involvement in that decision. The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that you dislike Hill personally and this is a good chance to publically vent that dislike. I hope that is not the case but that's how it's looking from here.

I don't protest about Hill's involvement in the Monaco decision. Why should I? I just think his job performance as a steward had the same subterranean quality as the other blokes.

At the season start he pompously advised the FiA to come down hard enough on Michael. When he had the chance to show he is even handed he missed to punish a clear sporting foul by Rubens and over penalized the guy who attempted a pass advised by his team.

There was nothing unfair about Michael's action. He simply had the bad luck that the stewards did not have the balls to reject a badly written set of rules.

Instead of smugly stating that he had no choice but applying an unfair penalty Hill should have grabbed the bull at his horns and declared that the rules were wrong.

[andrew]

Gee thank, just what I want to see before I cook my tea - squashed roadkill. #@&$*?% disgusting!

There will never be a common agreement about the Monaco stewarding decision so there is no point discussing it further. If Schumacher and Merc can move on then so can us armchair enthusiasts so there is no point in flogging a dead horse.

[forty-two]

Gee thank, just what I want to see before I cook my tea - squashed roadkill. #@&$*?% disgusting!

There will never be a common agreement about the Monaco stewarding decision so there is no point discussing it further. If Schumacher and Merc can move on then so can us armchair enthusiasts so there is no point in flogging a dead horse.

+1
For once I think we agree on something!

[aral]

Whiteblue, your continued attack on Hill is despicable.

Not at all. He richly deserves some hard words and a slap on the hands in my view.

Hill was a mediocre driver in his time compared to the greats. He is now in the best possible job he ever had, presiding over the old boy's club. He should stop meddling with current sporting events and go back to his BRDC job.

I do agree that Hill was not the best driver around, but I still think that your constant harranguing of him is despicable. You may have your own personal opinion, but trying to ram it down our throats is pretty pointless. I wish that the moderators would put a stop to your abuse of Hill.

[ringo]

This thread still alive?

Let's move on, It's not any different from lie gate, weave gate, pit lane overtaking gate etc. In fact it's more clear cut. And shumi fan boys need to let it go, he's ok, he won monaco many times. It's just a cock up, hill is not to blame, the regulations are.

Shumi fan boys are the most die hard it seems,

[WhiteBlue]

I still think that your constant harranguing of him is despicable. You may have your own personal opinion, but trying to ram it down our throats is pretty pointless. I wish that the moderators would put a stop to your abuse of Hill.

I'm not ramming anything in at all. Have your opinion and leave me mine. This place requires no uniform opinion about drivers or issues. We are not in a dictatorship forum.

You should tolerate what you feel is abuse on Hill as much as Schumacher fans have to live with constant abuse of their hero by some worthy members. Grow a thicker skin!

It is the way of this forum, that only members are protected against attacks not any public persons. The longer you criticize me for going on about Hill the more I get to explain. So it is all up to you. Shut up and we will be finished.

[andrew]

It is pointless argument about something that is in the past and cannot be changed.

Schumacher broke rules which are very clear - FACT!

The penalty was heavy-handed and excessive but sadly nothing can be done so it is pointless arguing about it.

Now lets move onto Turkey and hope for a good, trouble free race.

[raceman]

+100

Right said. Useless to argue on Monaco GP now as the results are set in stone and cannot be changed.

Let's move onto Turkish GP.

[aral]

I still think that your constant harranguing of him is despicable. You may have your own personal opinion, but trying to ram it down our throats is pretty pointless. I wish that the moderators would put a stop to your abuse of Hill.

So it is all up to you. Shut up and we will be finished.

So nobody is allowed an opinion except yourself! Is that an order?

[mep]

Schumacher broke rules which are very clear - FACT!

No, it's not a fact that rules are clear otherwise we wouldn't have such a long discussion about it and FIA would not check the rules.
I thought we could even agree on this point but it seems it’s more important for some of us to let Schumacher look like a cheater.

Well vall is pretty obvious that you judge Alonso and Schumacher with different scales:

vall:
I guess you are implying Alonso plays games behind the scenes, but again there is not proof or what so ever. He won everything he did on track, while MS was involved in some of the most controversial events in F1. The ban of the mass-dumpe comes to mind and it is quite clear who benefited of this. IMHO, after 1997 MS should have received 2 yeaR ban from the motor sport. He blatantly tried to take out his competitor to win the WCD. For me such an act is of the same magnitude as getting caught doping in athletics, and for this you get 2 year ban......

vall about Alonso’s crashgate:
you assume that he is involved in all these wrong-goings and manages somehow to get away clean. What about the possibility that he has truly nothing to do with it!!!!! Many others have been caught and proven doing wrong (do not want to repeat then), yet, you come up with a pure speculations and target the innocent guy

You want to ban Schumacher for 2 years for defending his racing line in a very common fashion these times (just think of Senna, I never heard about any punishments). you even blame him to be responsible for the banning of mass damper, well in fact he has nothing to do with it. You just missed to blame him for Rascass parking, what is questionable, too.

Meanwhile you want us to believe that crashgate and McLaren disaster are pure speculations and Alonso has nothing to do with that. In fact several people admitted that these things had happened and blamed themselves with that.
Just look at Piquet, he crashed his car risking his health and career to serve Alonso a victory. Nobody ever did a similar thing for Schumacher.

Moreover I think we must make a difference for thinks you decide in seconds on track compared to thinks you plan during long time.

[volarchico]

WhiteBlue...what sort of animal is that roadkill? Kangaroo? And did you just happen to have a picture waiting for that post or did you have to do a search? I shouldn't even promote that kind of post, but my curiosity has gotten the best of me because it's a strange looking picture.

[WhiteBlue]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oq9ohCVv ... r_embedded[/youtube]

Incredible footage on the Barichello crash. You can see that he throws the wheel immediately and sits in there for a long time. Even the foam he deposits on the car and later into the cockpit. He must have realized that he effed up.

[Giblet]

From that angle it looked like he sort of hucked the wheel at the top of the nose, it missed, and took a really poor bounce.

Really doesn't look like a man throwing it on the racing line, but a semi honest mistake.

He still should have placed it on the car, no excuses there.

[ringo]

Ugly sounding V8s ....