Max says NO! to Juan

[race aficionado]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport/hi/engli...00/1927869.stm

some gems:

Motorsport boss Max Mosley has rejected the idea of having permanent race stewards for Formula One.
Mosley said that F1 would continue with the current system, where a small pool of stewards rotate from race to race, with three attending each Grand Prix.

So much for the boss wanting to make things better . . . .

"Ex-drivers tend to be a little out of date, and yet seen as total authorities - that combination is dangerous.
"It is like referees in football. You don't need to have been a footballer, you only need to know the rules."

Exactly! They have to know the rules!! But do they??????
At this point, do we??? we need some rule clarity with the way they are being imposed.


and now this doooozie . . . .


[

"From his [Montoya's] point of view it is probably a little unwise to complain about other drivers in case something happens which might cause him difficulties.

??????? What can happen Max?

"We try not to get involved in these sort of things unless somebody really starts to damage the sport."

So according to Max, damage has not started to happen yet . . .

I'll sit down and watch the races, root for my fav driver and hope for the best.

[calais]

i'd say the sport has already been damaged continuously since adelaide 94.
who's max trying to kid

[Dr. Austin]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by race aficionado

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ex-drivers tend to be a little out of date, and yet seen as total authorities - that combination is dangerous.
"It is like referees in football. You don't need to have been a footballer, you only need to know the rules."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like this isn't a joke! Mosley himself is a former driver, yet he was brilliant enough to bring us grooved tires. Maybe he is too out of date to be president. Mosley says the stewards need to know the rules, but then something like Brazil happens.

Maybe they can hire some whineos for the next race. Just drink this free bottle of whine and give the thumbs down to anything but the red cars, got it? Do a good job and we'll give you another bottle after it's over.




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We try not to get involved in these sort of things unless somebody really starts to damage the sport."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just let the level of officiating become so inept that someone dies as a result. The the FIA will appear to have ample reason to step in and stop the madness with more poorly thought out "safety measures."

[Dr. Austin]

Originally posted by calais
i'd say the sport has already been damaged continuously since adelaide 94.
who's max trying to kid

Deliberate, but instinctual.

[calais]

he's back!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[race aficionado]

Mosley said: "We will not be having permanent stewards because they can become part of the circus."

The part of 'the circus" does make sense . . .

[Dr. Austin]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by race aficionado
[B]Mosley said: "We will not be having permanent stewards because they can become part of the circus."

Maybe some competent, impartial officials will help remove some of the "circus" atmosphere. Permenant stewards will have to have credibility, but that will stop the FIA from intervening whenever they don't like a decision. With the weekend only goons they have now (like Naz), the FIA can get whatever they want, but if you install someone competent who has a little integrity, he won't be so willing to stay silent and roll over. That's what the FIA DOES NOT want. They can't afford to have anything other than yes men in officiating positions.

[RT]

Originally posted by calais
i'd say the sport has already been damaged continuously since adelaide 94.
who's max trying to kid

I'd say the damage was done before Adelaide. It was done when Michael Schumacher's season was damaged by legalistic considerations, with the "unintended" results that Damon could have a shot at Nr 1 and also that we could have an "exciting" end of the '94 season.

[calais]

well RT, if schumacher hadnt had those earlier indiscretions in the 94 season, we wouldnt have had those "legalistic considerations", would we??????

[Gt_R]

Quote: "Mosley says the stewards need to know the rules, but then something like Brazil happens."

The point is....you assume the stewards are being biased and ignorant of rules simply because their decisions happen to go against yours...

So you think you know the rules and can do a good job at officiating? Most probably, if i put somebody of your integrity at the position, you would make the same decisions but pro another driver instead and/or against a particular driver.

How do i know? From looking at yours "consistent" responding analysis of similar actions by different drivers...somehow the consistency was missing too...

The thing is, the so called Brazil decision is one that you hold onto your own opinions...which i think is as flawed as mine or anybody elses including the stewards.Even Montoya backed down and said that this is a racing accident (see ITV-F1.com) and not a intended or planned incident to take himself out by MS.

[Dr. Austin]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RT
[B]

I'd say the damage was done before Adelaide. It was done when Michael Schumacher's season was damaged by legalistic considerations,"

Every one of which Schumacher or his team brought on themselves.

What would you have the FIA do to a guy who continually ignored a black flag and then publicly stated that the entire affair was nothing but "hot air?" What would you have them do about a team caught red-handed cheating on the re-fuellling apparatus? What would you have them do when the Benneton did not pass tech inspection after Spa? What would you have had them do when Benneton was continually in the middle of cheating and rule breaking scandals?

Schumacher's suspension was completely justified. You do not ignore a black flag. Period. He should have had his super license revoked on the spot. The team should have been thrown completely out of the championship for the refuelling apperatus cheating scandal.

The real damage was done when the entire Benetturd team continually thumbbed their noses at the FIA and they did next to nothing.

[Gt_R]

As for Michael's F1 career...i would recognise his clash with JV at Jerez 97 as his only permanent black spot. As for his clash with Damon and the finding of TC-software in Benetton, perhaps they are stains.....but as for "the chop" and all the conspiracy theories, just purely lame and ridiculous.

Before you just jump in and nod heads with JPM, perhaps spare some time to think that his idea is NOT perfect either and open to even more controversies. Sure, a panel of permanent stewards, in theory it works..but what happens if the stewarts are biased in nature? So instead of us having a couple of odd races where steward decisions are unfair...we now have 17 races filled with controversies...that's nice isn't it?

[calais]

Originally posted by Gt_R
As for Michael's F1 career...i would recognise his clash with JV at Jerez 97 as his only permanent black spot. As for his clash with Damon and the finding of TC-software in Benetton, perhaps they are stains.....

pretty big stains.
after 8 years they still havent come out in the wash!!

[Gt_R]

How can they get the stain off when some self proclaimed righteous individuals keep spilling their bitter whine..(oops..wine i mean) on the laundry?

[race aficionado]

BobbyC from another forum said this:

"Montoya's views are based on his CART experience with CART stewards, considering he has raced under the auspices of veteran CART Chief Steward Wally Dallenbach Snr. I think JPM is a fan of Wally's enforcement of rules in CART and would like someone of Wally's calibre to be the official instead of Charlie Whiting and "random" officiating."

is he right?
Because if he is, this would be an example of someone that knows what he's doing and that it is possible to enforce the rules.

[Mr V]

considering that formula 1 is meant to be the "premiere motorsport series" i find it absolutly amazing, that they can't have a full time race steward, hey i've got an idea, why don't i ask my local doctor to take sid watkins place at spain? and maybe the guy who runs the local kart track could stand in for charlie whiting? how about the bank manager swapping roles with bernie?

makes abit of a joke of the whole series doesn't it? but then again, if the "premiere motorsport series" can run on grooved tyres then why not?!

[Sato san]

Originally posted by Gt_R
As for Michael's F1 career...i would recognise his clash with JV at Jerez 97 as his only permanent black spot. As for his clash with Damon and the finding of TC-software in Benetton, perhaps they are stains.....

Gt_R , i do respect your opinion etc etc ,

but surely banging Damon out of the championship in 94 was a little more than a stain !!..it is a massive blotch in his record book . He made a mistake and hit a wall which broke his rear suspension , he then takes out of the race Damon ( the only other person that could win the champioship ) so he keeps it for him self . His car was already broken !!! , he plainly cheated .

i tell you this , if i ever have to stand up in court for a bank robbery or something ......then i hope your the judge , because you could say , not to worry mate , i'll just give you a warning not to do it again . Rather than Lock me up in jail .

[Gt_R]

Try to look on the positive side?

A used example is in soccer...you don't see the same referee in every match of major soccer leagues either...instead you get a main referee, and a few lines man helping to judge things on the field...and if any controversies, there is always the video to go to. And these change in another match.

F1 employs a similar structure. And with stewards rotating at each race, it actually helps to make a fairer system over a season, if not over 2 races. Simply because, stewards are humans and humans have preferences...but preferences vary. And with rotation, we minimise the chance of a biased panel working over a season..which is more potentially damaging. Eg. If a panel was chosen and all 3 stewards are actually anti JPM. They can just foul DC at every race...while keeping a blind eye to DC and Michael. However, with rotation, even if the 3 anti-JPM stewards come together at the first race, their effects will only affect that race (or at most one or 2 more), while the other races would be free of their biased judgement.

Seriously, stop having one-sided assumtions because they really keep you from seeing the other side of the coin. As i said, JPM's suggestion can be ideal...but in reality, it's really difficult to put together the idea and ensure it is as ideal as planned to be.

[f1truestory]

i think Max is gay with the TGF

[mariov]

Originally posted by Gt_R
Quote: "Mosley says the stewards need to know the rules, but then something like Brazil happens."

The point is....you assume the stewards are being biased and ignorant of rules simply because their decisions happen to go against yours...

Well Gt_R...What I want is clean racing, and the rules to be clarified and applied justly....and if Nosley does not see a problem then he should review the dossiers of the personel that he is administracting.

This was supplied to us gracefully by Suzy...this is the record of one of these competent employees....if you where racing this weekend...would you want him officializing your race? Since you alreday mention that the 97 incident was a mark on MS record....then the following would be a proff of a biased judgement on the stewards part...here is his record...makes for interresting reading...now how he got back in as a steward id beyond me.

_________________________________________________
Original Quote by Suzy:
I've found out now: Nazir Hoosein, Radovan Novak and Kanagalingam Kasippilai, saw a different picture.

Hooray, it's Naz!!! Let me explain: Nazir Hoosein has been involved in the following decisions since 1997:
1) he was one of the stewards at Jerez 1997 who deemed the collision between Michael and Jacques a "racing accident";
2)he was responsible for deeming the McLaren brake pedal "illegal" in Brazil after the FIA had deemed it acceptable;
3) he was one of the stewards at Silverstone in 1998 when there was that confusion over the stop-go penalty awarded to Michael Schumacher when Michael took his penalty after the race had finished thus having already won it.
4) he was involved yesterday when penalising JPM after Michael nudged him!

This Naz has already lost his licence for stewarding once (after the Silverstone 1998 fiasco) but was given it back again. In his spare time he runs a cinema in Bombay! He is also a die-hard Ferrari supporter who admits to it. I think this could explain Montoya's penalty!
_______________________________________________

[Nicholas]

Trouble is, with soccer, if you can't referee properly, you either get told to get lost or you have to do the lower divisions instead. I've never heard that happening in F1. Well didn't that Hoosain guy get *******ed for what happened at the British GP a few years ago, but he's still a big TGF fan, hasn't changed.

And if you fail to turn up to an appeal (a la US GP last year) does anyone mind?

[Champ69]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gt_R
[B]As for Michael's F1 career...i would recognise his clash with JV at Jerez 97 as his only permanent black spot. As for his clash with Damon and the finding of TC-software in Benetton, perhaps they are stains.....but as for "the chop" and all the conspiracy theories, just purely lame and ridiculous.

I agree, And thank god that they are all in the past RIP.


As for the stewards, There are a few there that have some black marks against their records. Maybee they should be dropped and new ones picked up. There is a good article on grandprix.com about the actual stewards and what they do for a living and their history.

[Speed]

Originally posted by Sato san
banging Damon out of the championship in 94 was a little more than a stain !!..it is a massive blotch in his record book . He made a mistake and hit a wall which broke his rear suspension , he then takes out of the race Damon ( the only other person that could win the champioship ) so he keeps it for him self . His car was already broken !!! , he plainly cheated .

This video can help to confirm yur point...
http://www.globalf1.net/downloads/video/1994.stm

[Gt_R]

Quote: "i tell you this , if i ever have to stand up in court for a bank robbery or something ......then i hope your the judge , because you could say , not to worry mate , i'll just give you a warning not to do it again . Rather than Lock me up in jail"

Ah...misconception. If i'm the judge, you the robber...i'd sent you to jail for as long as i deem fit, of course with the jury's assistence to judge your guilt. In short, i won't hesitate to punish you. But after your jail term, i'd treat you as a brand new leaf (or give you the benefit of doubt)...and not keep dragging up you shameful past every week or so. Integrity intact.

As for the Damon/Schuey incident...it is controversial, and been debated too many times. My views on that has yet change..so any response on this have to be dug up by the interested party.

[Mania]

Speed - you keep bringing up 94 each time you wanna take a shot at Schumacher but the footage just proves that Hill was as usual over ambitious -(as he always was when he was nervous) and took himself out of the running. Get over it mate.