Stewart has his say on the Massa debate

I thought the debate was over, or is it just on FerrariChat that the world has been put to rights on that particular issue?

 

This is what really pisses me off about the FIA rules because they are so open to interpretation, and it causes alot of arguments, so much so it can make it look like a farce.

As it happened in the race everyone was guessing and hoping it would go in Massa's favour, point is know one really knew ...why is this ?

How hard can it be to have a rule that says if you do X it will result in a Y penalty no BS about it. I think the outcome of the Massa incident was fair, but when it happens next time with whoever, from now the penalty has got to be the same no question.

If it isn't , take cover..

I can't understand why Max can't resolve this rule quandary, well scratch that, yes I can he spends to much time tied up...

Jackie is right about the FIA, it needs a face lift pronto and its head needs to go first.

 

Ferrari Iinternational Aassistance, old joke I know. But, the fact that it’s an old joke just makes it sad. I think he's right in his idea to have former formula one drivers as the primary stewards. Max will never fully define rules that allow him to tinker with the show. As soon as I figured what the points race would be with Massa winning and closing the gap to Hamilton I knew he wouldn't get a stop and go. That wouldn't be good for the "show."

 

Stewart completely ignores that Massa (or rather Ferrari) was the first for ages to get a penalty for such an incident. I've said it before, we have had a situaiton like that in every second race, and nothing happened. If it has any bias, it is contra Ferrari. But I doubt there's any bias at all, it could have happened to any other team, and it's the randomness of the decision that has to be criticized, the lack of a clear rule and the lack of an explanation why this incident led to a penalty while every other event of that kind didn't have any consequences.

 

Whatever way you think Florian, it all boils down to the same one thing MAX wants everyone in his pocket, and he probably likes the fact there is always grey area's in the rules, so if a team has pissed him off he will bring his wavering unjust hammer down on them.

 

Same old myopic cast of characters here I see.

Massa was not at fault, the team was at fault. Massa had no advantage as an outcome, in fact, he lost time exiting the pits. To penalize Massa would have been ridiculous, the same would apply to any driver in the same situation, including Hamilton. If you consider a lot of "events" in the last 18 months, such accusations of nearly hitting SC, break checking, many drivers were not penalized. Consider the accusations of favoritism when the venue is on the home turf of a driver or team. And how many times have we seen a near miss in the pits with absolutely no penalties issued?

Ferrari was penalized. No damage, no advantage.

For Stewart to suggest in public that if this were Hamilton, and that the driver would have been penalized and not the team is reckless speculation.

These retired grand prix drivers need to just shut up. Their very obvious favortism would make the situation worse.

 

What's that meant to mean..

Who is saying on here it was Massa's fault..yet again

Yes penalized for the price of good round of ale.

Is that so, You think Max and RD are bum chums all of a sudden.

Same could be said for a few on here.

 

What point(s) were you trying to make? None of your comments make any sense. Or was this just an attempt to mimic Franco since he is now gone??

 

I was asking you questions , ones in which you don't appear to be able to answer.

Well we will have to ask Tony about that then, and I have an idea what he thinks, and you won't like it.

 

There were no real questions from you, only really silly comments.

Read between the lines as to the myopic reference.

Did I say that anyone here suggested that it was Massa's fault? I didn't, so why would you make such a silly inference? I think we both know the answer to that. Once again, please do not create an issue where there is none.

The only other statement from you that might be a question was that ridiculous comment about Max and Ron Dennis suddenly becoming friends. The stewards don't call Max on the telephone to get his opinion about a situation, they make the decisions on their own, at the track, and did you know this is done with many interested observers standing around? Including representatives of non involved teams. McLaren likely had an observer there Sunday.

And would you really think that under the circumstances if Max did get involved, he would actually cause a controversy concerning McLaren?? If anything, he would probably beg off of being part of any decision. Too obvious! The penalty to Ferrari was fair, especially when you consider that I can not remember any other penalities that were given for any of the other near misses in pit lane this year. Or last year, or the year before, etc. Possibly we should consider the penalty to not be fair, and that Ferrari was being singled out by the Valencia stewards. Does anyone know the nationality of the three stewards??

Could there be bias against Ferrari? And I do remember Massa being DNF'd for missing a red light at the end of the pits last year, not sure how that is considered a bias in Ferrari's favor.

Consider:
For 2008, the FIA have put in place three nominated officials for each race and will be assisted by president Max Mosley’s representative, Alan Donnelly. The three officials will be neutral, therefore not hailing from the nation holding the Grand Prix. The FIA say that it is hoped this change will bring about swifter resolutions to incidents, apparently prompted by the five days it took to solve the saga of Lewis Hamilton’s driving behaviour following the Japanese Grand Prix last year (NO PENALTY - obvious Hamilton favortism, right?). The cool-fuel saga also took a fair amount time to resolve, delaying the final result of the final race and leaving fans frustrated.

And what is your point about Tony? The only Tony I know here has been banned. Do you finally realize that your comments are generally are baseless so you need to hide behind Tony? Although I respect most opinions here that are not the same as mine, such as Tony's, have you not noticed that I do not give a rat's posterior what anyone else thinks??

It appears you are just looking to create a stir. In that case, I really do not consider you much different than Franco 355.

 

Someone should tell him about FerrariChat, he'd be right at home here!

 

Dead on!

I think Max doesnt' *want* it to be resolved with set-in-stone rules, because then they can't "interpret" the rules and fudge the outcome. Because it's a judgement call what the penalty will be, it gives Max more power to decide what will happen.


-Toyota steals reams of Ferrari data through defecting engineers. The responsible parties are criminally prosecuted, but the FIA does *nothing*

-Renault admits to stealing McLaren data *and* using it in their car... hard drive(s) full. The FIA grudgingly investigates and does.... *nothing*

-McLaren admits posession of Ferrari data through would-be defecting engineer, team acknowledges problem before the FIA finds out... FIA levies the biggest fine ever in all of sports

Errr, what?


-McLaren has a gearbox that passes all FIA regulations and tests, and they have been given a preliminary 'green light' that it will be given the green light. They use the gear box, but get smacked down by the FIA, losing all constructor points from the race where it was used, and being fined IIRC $50,000

-Ferrari has a floor that does not pass FIA regulations and tests, and it's found to run contrary to the rules, and the FIA says "well, just don't use it anymore"

-Renault has an innovative mass damper system that is an engineering coup de grace and helps them leap head and shoulders above all others. It's consistently ruled to be legal and acceptable... but then Renault starts to win a lot, and it's bafflingly suddently ruled ILLEGAL and must be removed from the car, ensuring Renault drops way down in the standings.

-Hamilton gets lifted by a crane and put back on track and that's OK... errr, what?
-Similarly, Schumi gets pushed out of the gravel by track marshalls and that's OK... err, what?
-Many other cars have accidents and get stuck and never get any assistance


Not meant to be a shot at any specific team, but the rules are apparently applied as those in charge see fit. Does Max converse with the local officials before the rulings are handed down?

I think there should be specific penalties for specific things - and this BS of "we'll investigate after the race is over" is crap. Once the race is over, they aren't going to adjust the results unless gross violations were found. IMO they wait until after the race to see what the outcome is and decide how that outcome should be affected. That's crap. The rules are the rules - whether the guy is leading his biggest rival in the last race of the season and whoever wins gets the WDC, or whether it's the first race of the season and the slowest driver in the slowest car commits the mistake - the penalty should be the same for the same rule violation, period.

 

Pot and kettle I think. What was the point of the "myopic" comment if not to belittle the views of others and create a stir?

 

MYOPIC: lacking foresight or scope; "a short view of the problem"; "shortsighted policies"; "shortsighted critics derided the plan"; "myopic thinking"

Simply stating fact, not creating one.

 

Suggesting that other posters are myopic (and you've done that twice in a couple of days) because they have the temerity not to share your views is NOT stating fact. It is being deliberately provocative, something you seem to find unacceptable from others but apparently OK if it comes from you.

 

Thanks for that Mike, if that lot came from of the top of your head simply brilllant, I'm sure the list could go on ..I totally agree.

 

Exactly..
It's a new word he has learnt, probably one of Ted's, he likes wearing them out.

 

Yeah what he said ... nail has been hit.

F1 is a joke because of this.
Pete

 

A time penalty against Massa would have been absolutely absurd and probably would have handed the victory to someone that did not deserve it. The team decides when Massa leaves the pits, what else is there to say about that?

 

Jackie & Niki always gives stupid, useless comments most of the time.

 

If Jackie winds Max up it ain't stupid ......mate...

 

LoL, true, but i meant on the track stuff. i seriously can't stand their comments regarding the action on track.

 

Ahh: This makes sense, .... if Stewart was assuming that Hamilton would have run into the other car.


The team released Massa at the wrong time -- team penalty (fine). Massa *avoided* the other car -- no driver penalty.

The team didn't warn Hamilton of the red light in Canada '08 -- same as Massa and Ferrari in Canada '07.
Massa ran the red light --- and got BF'd.
Hamilton ran the red light *and* crashed into a Ferrari --- both Lewis and KImi DNFd, and Lewis got a grid penalty.

Does that sound like a pro Ferrari bias?

There are inconsistencies in the rules, but any bias seems geared toward keeping the contest tight:

Nurburgring '07 -- six cars run off into the kitty litter in a rain washed corner. One McLaren gets craned back on track, and the driver is allowed to unlap himself at the restart.

China '07 -- A McLaren gets stuck in the pit-in, and several track workers can't push a 1400 lb (600 kg) car clear.

 

What is the big deal? It's not like Massa was trying to race him in the pit lane, it is impossible, Massa was on the outside any way and he had to let him go first or he would have hit the wall. If Lewis H would have did the same thing, it would have turned out the same way. Massa didn't get any kind of advantage from it and Adrian Sutil even let him go past once they got on the track. I think Jackie must have had a bad day that day.

I wonder if he thought that the Japanese driver should get a penalty for slamming into the back of Alonso on the first lap?