FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[f1usa]

Bernie has 100 year lease of FIA commercial rights. His company siphons off approx $400M per year. Bernie has a daughter who is in line for his inheritance. Replacing Bernie will be only an illusion, he still retains the FIA commercial rights purse strings. Team owners must regain control of commercial rights of F1 racing. Right now, Bernie's $400M per yr. has corrupted FIA governing body from Paris to Maranello. Money is causing the corruption, dry that up and the arrogant rule of Mad Max will go away.

[Dazza]

#1 Movable floor pan in Australia, #2 100M fine in spygate saga, #3 Brazil appeal for cold fuel. Ron Dennis does not want Kimi's WDC title. RD and all of us know Max and the FIA will not let that happen. The point is, this will be three times the the FIA and stewards have made arbitrary and biased rulings that have affected McLaren. The more examples of controversial and biased decisions by FIA, the better. McLaren and Mercedes will seek a legal solution to some of the FIA rulings of 2007 season. This will open the door for more thorough investigations of FIA, Max and Bernie.

What about Lewis' car being recovered by a crane in Germany and placed back on the track?

What about Lewis being let off the hook in Japan despite Vettel and Webber crashing due to Lewis stopping behind the safety car?

What about Lewis not being penalised in brazil for using extra tyres? all he got was a fine. When ralf Schumacher did the same thing in Monaco in 2005, he was handed a time penalty that affected his qualifying aggregate.

I don't see much anti-McLaren bias there...

[Ron Dennis]

#1 Movable floor pan in Australia, #2 100M fine in spygate saga, #3 Brazil appeal for cold fuel. Ron Dennis does not want Kimi's WDC title. RD and all of us know Max and the FIA will not let that happen. The point is, this will be three times the the FIA and stewards have made arbitrary and biased rulings that have affected McLaren. The more examples of controversial and biased decisions by FIA, the better. McLaren and Mercedes will seek a legal solution to some of the FIA rulings of 2007 season. This will open the door for more thorough investigations of FIA, Max and Bernie.

What about Lewis' car being recovered by a crane in Germany and placed back on the track?

What about Lewis being let off the hook in Japan despite Vettel and Webber crashing due to Lewis stopping behind the safety car?

What about Lewis not being penalised in brazil for using extra tyres? all he got was a fine. When ralf Schumacher did the same thing in Monaco in 2005, he was handed a time penalty that affected his qualifying aggregate.

I don't see much anti-McLaren bias there...

1/ Hamiltons car was in a dangerous position - Lots of drivers have benefited - well done Lewis for having the presence of mind to keep the engine running.

2/ Lewis did nothing wrong - Vettel hit Webber

3/ The FIA are not consistent with their penalties

[racechick]

#1 Movable floor pan in Australia, #2 100M fine in spygate saga, #3 Brazil appeal for cold fuel. Ron Dennis does not want Kimi's WDC title. RD and all of us know Max and the FIA will not let that happen. The point is, this will be three times the the FIA and stewards have made arbitrary and biased rulings that have affected McLaren. The more examples of controversial and biased decisions by FIA, the better. McLaren and Mercedes will seek a legal solution to some of the FIA rulings of 2007 season. This will open the door for more thorough investigations of FIA, Max and Bernie.

What about Lewis' car being recovered by a crane in Germany and placed back on the track?

What about Lewis being let off the hook in Japan despite Vettel and Webber crashing due to Lewis stopping behind the safety car?

What about Lewis not being penalised in brazil for using extra tyres? all he got was a fine. When ralf Schumacher did the same thing in Monaco in 2005, he was handed a time penalty that affected his qualifying aggregate.

I don't see much anti-McLaren bias there...

Cars are(were) allowed to be removed from a dangerous position.
Cars behind have to not crash into the ones in front
The tyres?I guess they didnt want to screw up the season any more than they already had. (Must admit I was not around when the tyre thing happened so am not sure of the facts of it)

[McLaren Fan]

Vettel admitted straight away he was to blame for the crash. After the race Webber totally lambasted Vettel for causing the crash. Then, all of a sudden, a few days later, Webber insists it was Hamilton's fault. Strange, to say the least.

[Ron Dennis]

at the end of the day F1 seems to be a big pile of bullpoo

something we can all agree on

[Woodchip]

What about Lewis' car being recovered by a crane in Germany and placed back on the track?

What about Lewis being let off the hook in Japan despite Vettel and Webber crashing due to Lewis stopping behind the safety car?

What about Lewis not being penalised in brazil for using extra tyres? all he got was a fine. When ralf Schumacher did the same thing in Monaco in 2005, he was handed a time penalty that affected his qualifying aggregate.

I don't see much anti-McLaren bias there...

Can I just highlight that Schumacher's penalty was for a different breach. It wasn't for using to many tyres, it was something about fitting them incorrectly, or some other daft thing.

[Dazza]

agreed (with RD)

[Dazza]

Can I just highlight that Schumacher's penalty was for a different breach. It wasn't for using to many tyres, it was something about fitting them incorrectly, or some other daft thing.[/quote]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsp ... 564295.stm

I don't see much difference to be honest.

[Woodchip]

The Formula One driver was found to have used a left front tyre that had not been officially allocated to him in the session on Thursday.

Hamilton's tyres were allocated to him, he just used too many of them.

[Dazza]

So we agree in both cases the tyre rules were breached.

[darwin dali]

at the end of the day F1 seems to be a big pile of bullpoo

something we can all agree on

I don't agree. And I don't appreciate your constant negativism with which you comment on F1 - if you don't like it, then go away and play with Nastycar or whatever.

[Woodchip]

So we agree in both cases the tyre rules were breached.

Yes, but different parts of it. Much like a driver only using the softer option throught a race. It's a breach of tyre rules, but a different one to RS and LH. Or a driver using tyres supplied by another company. It's still a breach involving tyres.

[Ron Dennis]

at the end of the day F1 seems to be a big pile of bullpoo

something we can all agree on

I don't agree. And I don't appreciate your constant negativism with which you comment on F1 - if you don't like it, then go away and play with Nastycar or whatever.

wah wah wah

[Ron Dennis]

at the end of the day F1 seems to be a big pile of bullpoo

something we can all agree on

I don't agree. And I don't appreciate your constant negativism with which you comment on F1 - if you don't like it, then go away and play with Nastycar or whatever.

wah wah wah