Matt Seabrook Posted May 17, 2010 Author Posted May 17, 2010 FWIW Damon Hill didn't make the decision all on his own, despite what a lot of people think he (and Johnny Herbert and Alex Wurz etc) is there as part of a four man 'team' and is there to aid the stewards by giving the "driver's perspective" rather than as the Chairman with an overriding vote... I dont think anybody has said it was him alone made the call. Quote
peterg Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 No Matt, I don't think anyone did actually say it but reading between the lines I reckon quite a few people think he had an undue influence on the outcome Quote
FW500 Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 I like Johnny Herbert but I'm not convinced he'd be particularly pro-Schui either if so much as half the stories about Schui's relationships with teammates are to be believed. I'd bet between those 2 British ex F1 drivers there'd be 2 votes against the German. As far as I'm concerned the outcome was a positive one for my favoured team so I'm not going to complain - but I really don't believe Schui was dealt a fair and impartial hand in the enquiry. It's kind of like seeing a bloke you punched a few years ago on the magistrates bench when you're up for speeding don't you think? Quote
peterg Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 TBH I didn't really care what the decision was as I have an equal abiding dislike of Shoemaker and Alonso for differing reasons Ross Brawn came up with a very plausible argument for why Mercedes should be allowed to keep 6th place with screenshots of the green flags being waved from the onboard camera and timelines for communications from the FIA regarding the state of the track (ie if it was under SC conditions or not...) - maybe Ferrari still hold some influence after all Quote
Captain Colonial Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Let's face it, the reason all this happened is because of the desire to have an image of the chequered flag being waved at the finish line without a safety car or a yellow flag in view. There should have been communication to all teams saying "no passing" if a green flag was to be displayed. Drivers and teams in any race, let alone a tight street circuit like Monaco where passing is almost impossible, just coming out of a safety car situation on the final corner of the final lap, don't have an encyclopaedic memory of the rules at that moment. They just want to race. Alonso blew it, pure and simple. Whether or not it was legal to do so, he deserved to get passed. So was it right to punish Schumacher? By the letter of the rules, yes. By the spirit of racing, no. As for previous comments about Damon Hill's racing abilities, he may not have been the world's best ever F1 driver, but he was champion against Schumacher and many others in 1996 and deserving of respect. He worked hard with the team to develop the car and himself for years, has natural talent, and wasn't there just because of his heritage. To suggest otherwise seems rather biased and blinkered to me. Quote
RedditchJay Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 all fair IMHO..... racing is racing..... pace car in... race commenced.... end of... Quote
Blatman Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Met Damon a few times and my brother has worked with him as an engineer. Suggestions that he is there on anything other than merit is preposterous and he most certainly as talent. His journey to F1 was one of really hard slog. The first time I met him, in the 80's, was when he was working as a despatch rider in London. Hardly the employment of a supposedly crowned prince... Quote
stephenh Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Yeah I know. Just seeing if I can get a bite out of FW500... I've got split loylties here. Schui fan and believe it or not also have a mild liking of Ferrari. On balance I'm with Matt, Schui should have had the place. As for Hill, he is and always was a pointless little man who only ever got to sit in an F1 car because of his dad IMO. Shabby ex-F1 drivers with their broken egos should not be involved in the decision process especially when they're passing judgement on drivers who consistently made them look silly in the past. I thought Damon Hill was World Champion!? And before that was Formula 3000 champion? And after that was the first person to win a Grand Prix in a Jordon. Then was elected to succeed Jackie Stewart as chairman of the BRDC? I must be thinking of someone else, Silly me. Quote
Blatman Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Also interesting that "we" are accused of closed mindedness and then in the next breath a shining example of closed mindedness is revealed by a Schui fan who clearly holds Hill responsible for the 1994 incident in question when just about everyone else in the world sees it for what it was. Hoisted by your own petard? Quote
Norman Verona Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Sorry if I'm being dim but I don't understand this conversation. The rule appears to me to be clear. If the Safety Car is out on the last lap it will go in before the finish line but the cars will act as if it's still on track (is that a fair interpretation?) So, an offence was committed. I woulld imagine the judges conversation wasn't on guilt but punishment. And if the guilty driver pleads forgetfulness or missuunderstanding of the rule he should have the penaly doubled. All drivers should understand the rules that they must abide by. Quote
pistonbroke Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 QUOTE As for Hill, he is and always was a pointless little man who only ever got to sit in an F1 car because of his dad IMO. Shabby ex-F1 drivers with their broken egos should not be involved in the decision process especially when they're passing judgement on drivers who consistently made them look silly in the past What happened to " The best driver "always " wins the world championship " Seem to remember someone making that statement not to long ago , wonder who that was Hill family were bankrupt when his father Graham crashed killing himself and several other people, the aircraft was not insured for the flight. Damon Hill was left skinter than i am , and beleive me that is skint Quote
Carl Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 QUOTE Sorry if I'm being dim but I don't understand this conversation. The rule appears to me to be clear. If the Safety Car is out on the last lap it will go in before the finish line but the cars will act as if it's still on track (is that a fair interpretation?) So, an offence was committed. I woulld imagine the judges conversation wasn't on guilt but punishment. And if the guilty driver pleads forgetfulness or missuunderstanding of the rule he should have the penaly doubled. All drivers should understand the rules that they must abide by. Norm, obviously all the others drivers are dim as well as they all gunned it for the line as normal. Alonso was asleep and deserved to loose the position. Quote
greenandmean Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 The rules USED to read after a safety car pulls in there is no overtaking until after crossing the start/finish line, had that rule still been in force this "problem" would not have happened, classic case of if it wasn't broken why mend it. Not a Shuie fan but got to admit he never misses an opportunity and what a fantastic move, thats a racers mind at work GO FOR IT and to hell with the consequences. Quote
Dave Eastwood (Gadgetman) - Club Chairman Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 No Matt, I don't think anyone did actually say it but reading between the lines I reckon quite a few people think he had an undue influence on the outcome If that was referring (in part) to my post; any Hill/revenge comments were purely meant as a wind up. Even if Hill had, have had sole responsibility for the decision, which even from the jokes in the Beeb coverage at the time, he plainly didn't, I wouldn't for one moment actually believe he'd do something like that. Quote
FW500 Posted May 17, 2010 Posted May 17, 2010 Also interesting that "we" are accused of closed mindedness and then in the next breath a shining example of closed mindedness is revealed by a Schui fan who clearly holds Hill responsible for the 1994 incident in question when just about everyone else in the world sees it for what it was. Hoisted by your own petard? No sir that's BS. Either you're just trying to get me to bite again or you haven't read my post. I don't hold either Hill or Schumacher responsible for the 1994 incident. Where have I said anything that gives you that impression? None-the-less it does make me chuckle when the anti-Schumacher brigade bleat on about how Hill was robbed that year... what with being disqualified from 2 races and excluded from another 2 for some might argue to be trivial matters the season should never really have come down to Adelaide anyway. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.