Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
"What Hamilton did there goes beyond all boundaries," Lauda, who was commentating on the race for German TV, said. "He is completely mad. If the FIA does not punish him, I do not understand the world any more. At some point there has to be an end to all the jokes. You cannot drive like this … as it will result in someone getting killed."
This has been posted a dozen times in the race thread. Other than Hamilton-bashing (and this forum has enough of those thread and sub-threads already), is there any point to this thread?
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
andrew wrote:Niki Lauda knows what he is talking about. He is far better qualified to comment than anyone on here.
Maybe, but I disagree with his assessment of Hamilton and even more so with his choice of words.
"Someone is going to get killed" is a deliberate overstatement and he should know better.
F1 is a very safe sport. Regulators, engineers and designers have worked hard to achieve that. And now Hamilton suddenly changes the equation and makes F1 a death sport again?
Please.
I have been Lauda's biggest fan but this sort of talk serves no purpose.
OTOH, I found Fittipaldi's assessment to be fair and on the money.
It is safe to a point but after that point it is a leap into the unknown. Many thought that F1 was safe at the start of 1994 and the safety warning were largely ignored. Where safety is concerned, complacency is very dangerous. True in any field where safety is a factor.
Look at Perez's accident in Monaco. He is very lucky indeed to be virtually unscathed. A couple mph faster, or a slightly different angle of impact could have been a whole 'nother mess.
Niki Lauda is dramatic in his statement but I can see where he is coming from. Freak accidents do happen from time to time and they are the leap into the unknown. Perhaps Lauda having his own near death accident makes him a lot more aware of the danger than those of us who have not been in that situation.
It is safe to a point but after that point it is a leap into the unknown.
Fair enough. But that point has not been reached since 1994. So I think it is fair to say it is a safe sport. Hell, more people have died in bicycle sports since then, and nobody is going ballistic over that.
andrew wrote:
Look at Perez's accident in Monaco. He is very lucky indeed to be virtually unscathed. A couple mph faster, or a slightly different angle of impact could have been a whole 'nother mess.
Sure, but look at Webber's ridiculous airborne crash in Valencia 2010. I for sure thought he was toast, but he got out of the car unscathed. That goes to show how safe F1 really is.
andrew wrote:
Niki Lauda is dramatic in his statement but I can see where he is coming from. Freak accidents do happen from time to time and they are the leap into the unknown. Perhaps Lauda having his own near death accident makes him a lot more aware of the danger than those of us who have not been in that situation.
Agreed. But Lauda has not raced for more than 25 years and F1 has come a long way since then. In reality, so much has changed that literally nothing is the same now as it was then.
His criticisms of Hamilton are exaggerated, and his choice of words is impetuous.
n smikle wrote:Lauda Knows who is a threat to Vettel's future success. Singled Hamilton out right away. Public enemy number 1.
why would the driver in forth place who cant go a race without hitting another car be a threat to anybody other than those who have to share the track with him, the marshals, and spectators
n smikle wrote:Lauda Knows who is a threat to Vettel's future success. Singled Hamilton out right away. Public enemy number 1.
why would the driver in forth place who cant go a race without hitting another car be a threat to anybody other than those who have to share the track with him, the marshals, and spectators
Because
1) You're yet another one using hyperbole to describe hamilton – hitting people in 2 races out of 7 is about as bad as any other driver on the grid who hasn't vanished into the distance on the first lap.
2) And he's the biggest threat, because right up until the point where he got unlucky for a couple of races, he was by far the closest competitor, and appears to be the most ready to compete driver of the most ready to compete team.
Lauda is getting old, and that's that. He took it too far. Lewis' moves are a bit more aggressive, but he would never pull a move that would endanger another fellow racers life. Anyone who's watched F1 for some time now would know that.
I believe Lauda is right, but the way to put it is wrong.
I think Hamilton is having a bad year and when I have seen him making a mistake I've said so, but I don't share the criticism to his attitude.
There is no need to look for malice as an explanation, when stupidity suffices. I talk from experience: my worst mistakes I've made without malice but with a large, humongous capacity to be stupid.
I also feel that is unfair to criticize his age. I'm sick and tired of old people (like me) that, as soon as someone younger stands to be judged, cite his age or his impetuosity as a motive. The only response they get is from the young ones in the crowd, which in turn yell at them: "hey, you old mommy!..."
However, some people has no blood in their veins or, either, they have such bad capacity to remember how they were (and how they are not anymore) that they amaze me. I hope Lauda, a driver which long ago fazed into legend, doesn't belong to the later category. Judging by his coolness, he might be in the former one.
The fact is that yes, Lauda brings a valid point: crashing when going fast is always dangerous.
The feeling I have in my throat when I go over 200 kph is like... I don't know, cowardice is full of shades.
Anyway, I know I would be in panic in a crash at 300 kph in the straight, I swear.
That's the main reason why, when a driver loses its focus, everybody notices. Actually, believe it or not, even Senna was scared once in a while.
I'm sure guys like Coulthard, that seem monolithic and talk nonchalantly about the danger involved also have felt that tingle in the crotch... Everybody is like you and me, it's only that it takes longer for some to accept that.
... and everybody prays silently for Hamilton to recover quickly, because you don't want to run besides him.
So, yes, Ham is having a "Tiger Woods". He will overcome it.
However, to me (I'm sorry, I was born like that) it's funny to mock the people that still learn to love a driver style (which is good) when his car is fast (which is not as good, because that advantage doesn't last forever).
We all suffered the insufferable (at some point in his career, of course) Schumacher.
So, if you want us to understand Lewis Hamilton, why don't you try to understand us? After all, even by a shade, we, fellow posters, are closer to you than Mr. Hamilton.
Actually, we did not suffer Schumacher directly (I have never meet him, I would be a coward and a lier if I criticized him): we suffered his fans. So, his fans we can criticize: we were in direct contact with them.
I don't doubt Hamilton and Schumacher are persons like everybody, lovable, responsible, excellent athletes (as good as it gets).
I also share the general idea of this forum: it is unfair to criticize public persons that behave like you would do.
They have the right of any person to make mistakes but WE do not have the right to forgive because we do not have the right to condemn them, in the first place.
Let's their friends and family do that (forgive and condemn them). Anyone who criticize someone he doesn't know in person or through his work, is a moron.
However, anyone who boast about his abilities when he's at the top is also a moron. He should know (better than anyone) that no one stays at the top forever and, when the inevitable descend happens, he will see the envy pile on him.
Now, on the other hand, before you start to criticize those "envious" critics, tell me also: who are we to criticize envy, when we have also felt it?
And, more important: isn't it true that when some people here (which others have called "Hamilton haters") criticize acts of vanity their motive is to promote humbleness and not envy?
At least I swear I love when Hamilton wins. I have a weakness for British drivers. Now, I hate when he gives interviews about how great he is. I also have a weakness (but negative) for self-judgment, even if you are correct.
So, I say, register this year (funny for some, a catastrophe for others) and let it be. Ham is no more (nor less!) dangerous than Senna, Alonso, Fangio or anyone at this point in their respective careers.
Finally, someone has to talk to him. Heck, someone talked to me back then.
Ommmm.
Last edited by Ciro Pabón on 13 Jun 2011, 23:53, edited 3 times in total.
