Italian GP 2006

[mini696]

So, if Alonso had slow down in order to let Massa overtake him that wouldn't affect Massa's aerodynamics (+ trajectory)?!

You know it would and since it would be so in both scenarios than Alonso wasn't able to skip this punishment at all!

I agree, and then he probably would still have gotten the penalty for impeding cos the FIA would have claimed he went out knowing he wouldnt make the start line.

This ruling is ---. Would Massa have complained if he didnt make the mistake on his last lap and gone faster? How do we know he wasnt told (or did it on his own accord) to slow down deliberatly?

RACE COMMENT: How close was MS to crying in the post race conference!!
Well done Kubica.
Well done Kimi, its going to be sad for you to go to Ferrari next year, I wont be gunning for you because you drive for the most biased and biggest cheating team in the sport. However, I wish you luck.
I'm still dissapointed Alonso is going to McLaren. I dont like FA at all.

Webber, get your --- together.

[pRo]

Anyone remember the rules? It's not about possibly maybe perhaps impeding someone. It's about deliberately impeding.

(A. 116b) If, in the opinion of the stewards, a driver deliberately stops on the circuit or impedes another driver in
any way during the qualifying practice session his times will be cancelled.

(Yes, you could argue whether the deliberately only means stopping or also impeding. There have been dozens of cases where a driver has undeliberately impeded another though, so it must mean both, right?)

I'll also quote what The Official Formula 1 Website said:

Massa complained to officials that Alonso had blocked him whilst on his final run at the end of session. The stewards agreed and deleted the Renault star’s three fastest times from Q3, though they did concede that Alonso’s actions may not have been deliberate.

So they are more or less saying that maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but we'll punish him anyway.

You are wrong. Deliberate has nothing to do with impeding in that rule.

If that is so, then "If a driver impedes another driver in
any way during the qualifying practice session his times will be cancelled", right?

1) When a driver drives off the track and brings some dirt on the track, his times will be cancelled?
2) When a driver blows his engine and gets oil on the track, his times will be cancelled?
3) When a driver drops something from his car on the track, his times will be cancelled?
4) When a driver spins, his times will be cancelled?
5) When a driver causes yellow/red flags, his times will be cancelled?

All have happened, none have been punished.

The list goes on and on and on. The little devil in me really wishes that every team will protest about every little thing that causes their driver maybe possibly perhaps losing time.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

How come nobody said anything about how Alonso passed Heidfeld today? Didnt it remind you of MS's move from Hungary? Some people here went wild about that, what's the difference? That Alonso didnt finish the race? Didnt get an afterwards point?

I didn't like Alonso's move BUT, 1. Heidfeld was too slow for Alonso to let him back passed and 2 (and this is the most important part) Martin Brundle raised his eyebrows about the pass and them commented that Renault & FA had not been punished because AFTER schumi's move in Hungary the FIA (one again changing the rules for the benifit of schumi) clarified that if the drive had made the move before the turn THEN gone off the track his move is still legal. And now they have to apply those rules to FA and all the other drivers too.

If Ferrari's "frisbies" are such an efficient aero device, how come Renault havent copied it yet?

So if Renault's mass damper system gives an unfair advantage why iusn't Ferrari using it? Same argument, different point of view. Maybe Ferrari don't use Renault's system as it doesn't work well with their car. Or Renault don't use the frizbees because they dont work well with their car?

REGARDLESS of where Ferrari do/don't use a mass damper like reanult, The point is that Ferrari's wheel Frisbee's are a blatent moveable aerodynamic device, the also beech the rule that the wheels are to be made of a homogeneous material AND (if they really are for brake cooling) then when they change tyres they are changing parts of the braking assembly during pitstops - which is illegal.

BUT the FIA have declaired it legal....so fine. What we CAN complain about is that if those wheel frisbee's aren't a moveable aerodynamic aid, how can a mass damper which never comes into contact with airflow be one?

The problem is not with the wheel frizbees, but with their legality relative to the mass damper.

who has access to all the data

somehow I don't think that teams are willing to let rival teams view their telemetry. (Unless I misunderstood your post in which case...sorry )

Renault's behavior has been digusting through the whole weekend

Really? I'll have to remember that next time people talk about Martin Luther King, and when he spoke out about unfair treatment for blacks in the USA...yup that was disgusting behavoiur because he didn't just lay down and let people walk over him. Oh and Mandela and the Aparthide? Yup disgusting how he spoke his mind there. I know these are MUCH more significant, but I fail to see how someone who has been hard-done by speaks their mind against what they feel is wrong as their behaviour is called "disgusting"...its a deocracy that we live in, even though Max Mosley may THINK its a dictaorship.

When Flavio was bound to stand behind his harsh words and belief he chose to bend over and downplay them as jokes. That shows you of how serious his claims are.

At the end of the day the only person who knows if those words wree jokes or not is Flavio himself. Sure he could be lying trying to dig himself out of a hole...but then again lots of people say rash things when they are angry. That's not to say that he can be excused for it...but I fail to see how Falvio's actions can cause someone to think that the whole Reanult team and FA now do not deserve the championship.

Put it this way, I see very few people arguing againt Renault on this matter, and the arguments of those who are seems to be nothing more than clutching at straws.

When half of the rest of the grid that I've seen interviewd (there could be more) are saying things like "Renault are being hard done by" and "they [the FIA] are making it very hard for them [Renault]" its plain to see that those involved agree renault are being hard done by, all the evidence stacks up.

[kheopsb]

ITV-f1's website:

The 37-year-old German revealed his decision to quit to the team over the pit-to-car radio as he drove his victory lap

did anyone hear the team radio feed on MS' victory lap?

[FLC]

Everyone is having a hard time in F1, it's just that the whiners seem to be having a lot more of it.

Ferrari were using a system similar to that of Renault, and if they were using it and putting time, money and effort to prob. refine and improve it, you can be sure it was valuable to them. Not only Renault lost that advantage and Ferrari wasnt the team to complain about it. I find it very strange that Renault have come over it so quick. It's always the easiest way to say "they took it from us and now we're not as good". Germany wasnt about the dampers, Hungary was the team's fault and Turkey was good to them. So excuse me, but I dont see where the big lose was. Like I said - when they cry about it - it seems to be much harsher.

Alonso's move wasnt clean. If he hadnt cut the chicane he wouldnt have passed Heidfeld. You say they changed the rules "for MS" to gain an advantage from, but all we got is Alonso's gain yesterday. All in all, they both didnt finish the race after those controversial moves and nobody gained anything. Again - a lot of fuss in Hungary about nothing.

When Alonso did what he did in Hungary to fail MS (slowing down deliberatly in front of Kubica) I never said anything. It's part of the game. Just like any other sport, if you gain an advantage by being smart, even if not very honest, its your lil bonus. EVERYBODY does it. Sad but true. You are more than welcome to search for videos on YouTube showing Alonso answering questions about the incidnet and you will see from the look on his face that he was rather suspicious.

About the data - you can be more than sure that the teams are collecting data of rival teams, far behind what you might think. Thats why the word "proffesional" was there. Bugs for listening in, anyone? Sound recorders maybe?

Martin Luther King and Mandela stood firmly behind their belief and never downplayed them as jokes (are you even serious to match them with Flavio?). A big difference. They were willing to pay the price for it. Flavio bent over before the evening. It just shows of how much his remarks were serious and trust me, he knows better than both of us. If he had something in his hand he would have taken it further.

Most of the "half" of the grid and Martin Brundle has background and interest that doesnt make em very objective. After all, MS and Ferrari beat the --- out of them for almost a decade.

Just to be clear - I am not sure that it was the right thing to punish Alonso. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I have no doubt that he impeded Massa, but he couldnt move over or else he wouldnt be able to complete another lap. It was just a weekend of bad luck for him, starting with the blown tire and ending with the blown engine. Which, by the way, was brand new and was supposed to hold on. It got nothing to do with where he started. He was 6th almost right from the begining, a difference of one place in theory. Crying, I said?

[vyselegend]

Everyone is having a hard time in F1, it's just that the whiners seem to be having a lot more of it.

Yes, Felipe Massa to begin with.

Alonso's move wasnt clean. If he hadnt cut the chicane he wouldnt have passed Heidfeld.

Are you sure? If I remember correctly, they were both in that situation where your only possible line does cross the line of your opponent, so Alonso was forced straight, while Heidfeld was forced outside. Both drivers acceleration were compromised, so there's absolutly no proof NH would have overtake back.

When Alonso's front wheels touched the grass, he was allready in front of Nick, anyway. So he hadn't to give back position. On that particular point I have to admit I'm not happy with this rule, but I think chicanes are not regular turns, and probably it have been admited that most chicanes have only one on-track line, which led them to accept having a driver cutting it (as long as he doesn't win position) for obvious safety concerns.

It was just a weekend of bad luck for him, starting with the blown tire and ending with the blown engine. Which, by the way, was brand new and was supposed to hold on. It got nothing to do with where he started. He was 6th almost right from the begining, a difference of one place in theory. Crying, I said?

How can you say that the engine would have blown anyway?!!
Yes, he was 6th at the begining, a gain of 4 places. So let me ask, where do you think he'd have been, if he had started fifth (especially considering Ferrari's poor start)? Do you really think Renault would have pushed the RS26D that hard if FA was in front of MS? Following Button in the first part of the race certainly didn't help cooling too...

Sorry if I give the impression to play the "if" game, as I'm precisely trying to prove it's worthless.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I find it very strange that Renault have come over it so quick. It's always the easiest way to say "they took it from us and now we're not as good". Germany wasnt about the dampers, Hungary was the team's fault and Turkey was good to them. So excuse me, but I dont see where the big lose was.

Well with the mass damper gone Renault have to get the car re-optimised to work without it, continuing to whinge and complain won't help matters, that's probably why they have gotten over it "so quickly". Nobody said Germany was about the dampers (well at least I didn't) Alsonso & Renault were just plain off the pace. Turkey worked well for them until about 15laps form the end yes your right.

So excuse me, but I dont see where the big lose was

I think your misunderstanding what I have grievance with. Its not the loss of the mass damper. Alone I don't really care about it. Its a cumulation of circumstances that I dislike:
1. The FIA knew about, and legalised the mass damper in 2005
2. The mass damper was outlawed right during the test ban, in the middle of the season for a VERY suspisious interpretation of the rules.
3. The mass damper is banned on the grounds its a moveable aerodynamic device, whereas the wheel frizbees aren't

Thats the problem I have. I think I should also make it clear that on the basis of "Moveable aerodynamic device" i think BOTH should be allowed. The rule about moveable aerodynamic devices exists to outlaw parts which are intended to decrease drag as speed increases (Flexi-Wings, Cockpit Adjustable Wings, Flexi diffusers etc etc etc) The wheel frisbee does not contraveen this rule, it DOES however contraveen the rule about the wheel being made of a single homogeneous material...but then again IS IT part of the wheel? yes and no. Its a grey area. I say LET IT STAND.

The MASS DAMPER however, was outlawed on the basis it's a moveable aerodynamic device, because it moves and effects the cars pitch sensitivity which inturn effects the aerodynamics. Common you've got to admit this is a very shaky link? It (unlike the wheel frizbee's) never comes into contact with the airflow! So with regards to what the rule is there to prevent i doesnt contraveen the rule.

THAT is what my problem is, how two devices, one is potentially (but not really) illegal with regards to that rule, the other is quite clearly not. But only the latter is banned. I just want to see a fair playing field and I personally believe if both, or neither, and been banned this would still be the case.

It just seems Ferrari have been allowed to bend the rule more than Renault.

Alonso's move wasnt clean. If he hadnt cut the chicane he wouldnt have passed Heidfeld

I agree and as such should (under the OLD rules) be punished. BUT, after Schumi's move in Hungary which seeminly everybody complained about the FIA "clarified" the rule stating that (basically) if the car has track position before the corner, both go off, the move is legal. Or some such nonsence. I don't believe that should be the case. BUT the FIA have made it so, and I was pleased to see Alonso didn't get a penalty because Schumi didn't at Hungary. HOWEVER, I think both moves deserved a penalty as both were similar and in my mind shouldn't be allowed.

About the data - you can be more than sure that the teams are collecting data of rival teams, far behind what you might think.

Oooh that's what yu meant, I though u meant other teams were veiwing rival teams telemetry data. No i agree there's an element of espionage, but the FIA have access to all the telemetry which other teams do not. I'm sure no other team could read the data needed to clarify if one car had been impeeded by the other. (Maybe a reading on front end aerodynamic load is nessecary - i dunno).

Martin Luther King and Mandela stood firmly behind their belief and never downplayed them as jokes (are you even serious to match them with Flavio?).

I realise that Mandela and Martin Luther King are completely different to Flavio and I stated that in my post. However the point is that Flavio has the right to say what he wants. We live in a democracy. I can call George W. Bush a mindless monkey if I like, I could call Max Mosley a fool who has no idea what he's doing as proven by his pathetic CDG wing, and they cannot punish me as I am allowed by human rights to voice my own opinion. Flavio too should be allowed to. And if he says he was joking then how can we PROVE he wasn't? we can't. Just like we can't 100% PROVE MS stopped deliberatly at Monaco quali (even tho the data points to show he probably did...only Schumi knows 100% if he did or didn't).

Most of the "half" of the grid and Martin Brundle has background and interest that doesnt make em very objective. After all, MS and Ferrari beat the --- out of them for almost a decade.

What and you don't think Alonso and renault beat the --- out of them last year? (with the excpetion of Kimi & Mclaren of course, and MB who wasn't drving last year obviously) I see the point you are trying to make but that the end of the day I see no reason as to why half the grid would side with Alonso over Schumi if Alonso wasn't hard done by. That the end of the day they are ALL rivals, and don't really want to have to pick sides for either, so if they DO, then you know something is up.

Just to be clear - I am not sure that it was the right thing to punish Alonso. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I have no doubt that he impeded Massa, but he couldnt move over or else he wouldnt be able to complete another lap

I completely agree. And I believe he probably did impeed massa, BUT how was he to know. I think his penalisation for impeeding him is redicuous, as the rule is there to prevent drivers blocking, not to have drivers accounting for the laws of physics. So next time in quali how much room do we have to have between each car Max? Lets do what they do in the Air Traffic Control and have all the cars circulating a pre-determinded didstance appart. Its completely stupid to suggest that Alonso's time should be taken because the laws of physics state that the wake of his car will effect massa's.

[manchild]

sorry, wrong topic... I've deleted my post

[vyselegend]

This is really disgusting. If you point out (with arguments) that the FIA is bringing the sport into disrepute, then the FIA turns at you and say "your comment bring the sport in disrepute"! LOL.
That seem so easy when your the one deciding what is right and what is wrong.

[tinhouse]

Did anyone see the interview with Mark Webber that went out in the pre-race coverage in the UK? He listed the contraversial decisions that the FIA have made lately and described them all as 'dubious'. He had the two main ones about mass dampers and Alonso's relegation, but also added the mysterious decision to resurface parts of Monza just prior to the test there.

Now obviously it was just prior to a test to the teams had the chance to collect data on it, but the implication he made was clearly that it might favour one kind of tyre over another.

Obviously just another conspiracy theory, but I thought it was an interesting observation that's gone largely unremarked.

TH

[FLC]

Spencifer_Murphy,
To conclude our debate I think we can agree on one main thing: the FIA isnt doing the best job in the world, to say the least. I'm not defending their actions, but still I really think that this whole conspiracy theory has gone way out of control.

I'm not saying that Flavio cant speak what's on his mind. I couldnt care less if he talked about Max's momma, but I think that their whole behaviour, as a team, was not in place. Luca di-Montezemolo put it in words better than me: "While I accept that there are people who talk about Ferrari from time to time, there is someone who talks too much and who missed a good opportunity to stay quiet" and ""In life you need to have a little bit of class and so I prefer not to respond".

I think it's different when a certain team beats you for a decade and then one team does it for one year after a pretty close battle with Mclaren. That is in terms of jealousy and so on...

About the Monza resurfacing theory - if FIA/Ferrari/Bridgestone tried anything like that I'd say they are pretty damn bad at it. All through the weekend Michelin seemed to be doing a better job.

[mini696]

Anyone remember the rules? It's not about possibly maybe perhaps impeding someone. It's about deliberately impeding.
(Yes, you could argue whether the deliberately only means stopping or also impeding. There have been dozens of cases where a driver has undeliberately impeded another though, so it must mean both, right?)

I'll also quote what The Official Formula 1 Website said:
So they are more or less saying that maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but we'll punish him anyway.

You are wrong. Deliberate has nothing to do with impeding in that rule.

If that is so, then "If a driver impedes another driver in
any way during the qualifying practice session his times will be cancelled", right?

1) When a driver drives off the track and brings some dirt on the track, his times will be cancelled?
2) When a driver blows his engine and gets oil on the track, his times will be cancelled?
3) When a driver drops something from his car on the track, his times will be cancelled?
4) When a driver spins, his times will be cancelled?
5) When a driver causes yellow/red flags, his times will be cancelled?

All have happened, none have been punished.

The list goes on and on and on. The little devil in me really wishes that every team will protest about every little thing that causes their driver maybe possibly perhaps losing time.

Good points, and I am sure if something like that happened by McLaren or Renault causing Ferrari to lose time, then yes they probably would be in trouble. Thats just the way of the FIA lately.

If the engine blows or the car breaks, it is of no fault from the driver, so they wont be punished. I get your point though.

If the driver is on his outlap, maybe the stewards would ask "Why were you going so close to the limit (causing you to go off track) on your outlap?" Otherwise it would be a "racing" incident.

I think what I should have said is. "Deliberately" doesn't HAVE to be part of the impeding. The rule can be read either way, and therefore interpreted both ways.

Whichever helps Ferrari more I guess (kidding)... Well kidding to a certain point.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

Spencifer_Murphy,
To conclude our debate I think we can agree on one main thing: the FIA isnt doing the best job in the world, to say the least.

You've got that right!

I'm not defending their actions, but still I really think that this whole conspiracy theory has gone way out of control.

A month ago I wuld ahve agreed that the consipracy thing is a bit OTT, but its all getting to be a bit too much...just my opinion though.

I'm not saying that Flavio cant speak what's on his mind. I couldnt care less if he talked about Max's momma, but I think that their whole behaviour, as a team, was not in place.

I can understand what you disliked about Flavio's behaviour, but I don't see what was wrong with the behaviour of the team?

About the Monza resurfacing theory - if FIA/Ferrari/Bridgestone tried anything like that I'd say they are pretty damn bad at it. All through the weekend Michelin seemed to be doing a better job.

You're right about that too! They di a better job of that when the circuit in Bharain was surfaced for the first time!!!

To conclude our debate

I think you're right again, its time to conclude our debate. I guess to paraphrase from Martin Brundle in his gridwalk interview with Max Mosley:
"I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one then".

[manchild]

Bridgestone photo still concerns Michelin

By Jonathan Noble Wednesday, September 13th 2006, 18:01 GMT



This exclusive photograph (to the right) of a Bridgestone engineer in protective gear and a gas mask continues to cause concern for Michelin, despite the FIA providing explanation to the French tyre maker at Monza on Sunday.

As autosport.com revealed on Sunday, Renault's director of engineering Pat Symonds and Michelin's F1 director Nick Shorrock approached FIA race director Charlie Whiting after the Italian Grand Prix to question the activities of Bridgestone. Sources claim that Renault boss Flavio Briatore also attended the meeting later on.

Symonds and Shorrock were concerned that the picture, which fell into Michelin's hands over the Italian Grand Prix weekend and is now published exclusively on autosport.com, is evidence that Bridgestone could be illegally spraying chemicals on to their tyres.

Such activity would provide tyres with extra grip for one lap, before wearing away to reveal the rubber of the tyre that was better suited to longer runs.

Whiting investigated the matter and subsequently told Symonds and Shorrock that the Bridgestone engineer was wearing the clothing to protect himself from rubber particles released into the air when tyres are cut open for post-session inspection.

However, despite Shorrock saying on Sunday that he was happy with the explanation, autosport.com has learned that there are still doubts over the matter within Michelin.

A leaked memo obtained by autosport.com today suggests that Michelin officials remain doubtful about the explanation from Bridgestone.

"This photo concerns Michelin for the following reasons," said the memorandum. "Normal working practice for a tyre company at an F1 race or test consists of fitting, inflating and demounting tyres. For these procedures we would not use this type of equipment.

"As regards the practice of dissecting and analysing tyres at the track, this also does not call for this type of equipment.

"According to our own environmental experts, this type of equipment would be required in the case of products giving off fumes or toxic by-products. We do not use any such substance at an F1 race or test track."

The FIA currently has no plans to follow up Michelin's complaints and believe that Bridgestone's explanation is satisfactory.

"We are aware of the photograph, we have looked into the matter and we have no concerns," a spokesman for the governing body told autosport.com.

But sources close to the FIA, who do not wish to be identified, believe that Michelin's continued doubts about the photograph are an over-reaction.

Referring to the fact that the engineer appears to be eating a snack, one source cheekily suggested: "The governing body was not convinced that the application of yoghurt to the surface of a tyre would necessarily provide a competitive advantage..."

[wazojugs]

I think Ferrari we doing this trick back in around 1999/2000 this caused mclaren to get angry and move over to michelin as bridgestone were giving more service to Ferrari.