Jump to content


Photo

Who you don't believe or trust?


  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

Poll: Who you don't believe or trust? (266 member(s) have cast votes)

  1. Trulli / Toyota (36 votes [13.64%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.64%

  2. Hamilton / McLaren (134 votes [50.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.76%

  3. FIA / Stewards / Max Mosley (94 votes [35.61%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.61%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:25

In the Trulli/Hamilton case, I think that the problem is not with Trulli or Lewis but rather the problem is with the FIA or the stewards. The penalties are unreasonable and the process is very confusing. There is no consistency with their ruling. Furthermore, the investigation was not asked by McLaren and Toyota also withdrew their appeal.

Advertisement

#2 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,745 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:27

None of the above....

#3 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:28

It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.

#4 otoelpiloto

otoelpiloto
  • Member

  • 1,691 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:36

sometimes I think we all live in parallel worlds :drunk:

just has the FIA posted the official declaration on its website with rather clear points towards mclaren "straying from truth", and still might think mclaren is innocent...it must be all around fanboyism, mustn't it?

#5 se7en_24

se7en_24
  • Member

  • 14,280 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:36

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu
It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.

:up:

#6 ademm

ademm
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:37

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu
It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.


Lying and making the opponent lose well deserved 5 points?
Hardly trivial.

#7 karlth

karlth
  • Member

  • 16,258 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:38

All it does is to reinforce the general feeling of McLaren being FIA's whipping boy.

#8 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:38

Originally posted by ademm


Lying and making the opponent lose well deserved 5 points?
Hardly trivial.

Did McLaren asked for an investigation and hand Trulli a penalty? Furthermore Toyota also withdrew their appeal and suddenly FIA took over?

#9 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:40

Originally posted by ademm


Lying and making the opponent lose well deserved 5 points?
Hardly trivial.

It's only the FIA accusing McLaren of lying.

You know, the FIA that lied about what their former chief steward said over a previous penalty and was forced to admit they had done so. In an FIA-inspired attempt to screw McLaren.

#10 ademm

ademm
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:40

Originally posted by alg7_munif

Did McLaren asked for an investigation and hand Trulli a penalty?


I didnt say stewards were blameless. They shouldnt have trusted a proven liar. I hope thet dont do it again.

#11 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,990 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:43

The only one i believe is trulli

#12 ademm

ademm
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:43

Originally posted by ensign14

It's only the FIA accusing McLaren of lying.

You know, the FIA that lied about what their former chief steward said over a previous penalty and was forced to admit they had done so. In an FIA-inspired attempt to screw McLaren.



I didnt see anywhere a McLaren quote denying Lewis lied to the stewards? Did you?

#13 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,915 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:43

Wrong question.
Should be: "Who fxcked up most" ?

#14 ExcessIsBest

ExcessIsBest
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:45

This is all about McLaren's continuing pattern of dishonesty and lack of honest sportsmanship. Aren't they still on probation after their industrial espionage and $100M fine? They have consistently demonstrated a willingness to twist the truth for their own benefit.

The thing that amazes me is that they continue to deny lying in the face of recorded conversations on the radio and with the media and in the FIA transcripts. Hamilton was asked point blank if he allowed Trulli to pass and he denied it to the FIA. This is a blatant violation of the sporting code and a demonstration of low moral fibre. If he was my child, I'd spank him and send him to bed without dinner.

The FIA should sanction Hamilton and McLaren further for their blatant and loud denials in the face of the truth!

#15 bankoq

bankoq
  • Member

  • 2,078 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:45

Originally posted by Lontano
The only one i believe is trulli


From posted above yes, only Trulli is credible imho.

#16 Vice::

Vice::
  • New Member

  • 24 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:46

FIA would have lost a lot more credibility if they had not punished Ham/McLaren as they did. They must be sure they can trust the driver statements, because the statements are what they are relying on in their investigations.

And McLaren's error was pretty clear after reading the radio conversation.

#17 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:47

Where's the transcript of the Melbourne hearing? :wave:

The infringement was there. FIA, show us the evidece, the transcript of the lie!

#18 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:47

Originally posted by ademm


Lying and making the opponent lose well deserved 5 points?
Hardly trivial.


I was referring to casual or new viewers. The ones that watch and hopefully enjoy a motor race.

Not the ones that spend the rest of the week repeatedly refreshing websites and forums to know about the stuff that has happened in the background.

The people that are going to tune in on Saturday, to have Humphreys try and explain why what they saw the week before doesn't mean anything anymore.

If you can't be arsed to read or comprehend what I just said then just read this:






I know the penalty was for allegedly lying to stewards. This is obvious because NOTHING happened on track. As someone else said Hamilton and Trulli both put their lives at risk to put on one hell of a show. They both had excellent races. The thing casual or new viewers tune in to see. This is my POINT.

For someone interested in RACING, and not politics and internet forums, it IS trivial.

#19 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 5,576 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:47

Originally posted by Lontano
The only one i believe is trulli

Same

Advertisement

#20 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,690 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:49

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu







I know the penalty was for allegedly lying to stewards. This is obvious because NOTHING happened on track. This is my POINT.

For someone interested in RACING, and not politics and internet forums, it IS trivial.


Except the lying influenced the race result.

#21 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:50

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Except the lying influenced the race result.


Did it Ross?

Did it really?

#22 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:51

Originally posted by Vice::
FIA would have lost a lot more credibility if they had not punished Ham/McLaren as they did. They must be sure they can trust the driver statements, because the statements are what they are relying on in their investigations.

And McLaren's error was pretty clear after reading the radio conversation.


What error? They were punished because: 'FIA insists McLaren misled stewards', that happened on the Melbourne hearing, not in the radio conversation.

#23 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,858 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:52

Originally posted by ademm


Lying and making the opponent lose well deserved 5 points?
Hardly trivial.

You don't think that the stewards, in not listening to the evidence for themselves, had anything to do with that do you? You don't think they were in any way culpable for this perceived injustice?

Maybe you've just not thought it through but when you do I hope that you'll realise that the stewards have a duty of care and yet were shown, once again, to be hopelessly incompetent.

#24 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:52

Originally posted by hunnylander
Where's the transcript of the Melbourne hearing? :wave:

The infringement was there. FIA, show us the evidece, the transcript of the lie!

The fact that they took hours to investigate what should have been a drive through penalty, I doubt that the will show us the fact.

I wonder what would happen if this incident happens earlier in the race, when they can't question any of the drivers, what would they do?

#25 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,690 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:52

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu


Did it Ross?

Did it really?


Yes, it cost Trulli 3rd place. If Hamilton had told the truth, he'd be 4th right now instead of disqualified.

#26 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:54

Also congradulations on another useless Poll that does NOTHING but show who likes/dislikes who.

48 votes, and what, 15 qualifications of opinion.

#27 gincarnated

gincarnated
  • Member

  • 445 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:54

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Except the lying influenced the race result.


Only because the stewards were incompetent in the first place.

I say just throw McLaren out of the sport. F1 would be a better place without them.

#28 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,858 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:55

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Yes, it cost Trulli 3rd place. If Hamilton had told the truth, he'd be 4th right now instead of disqualified.

Same as if the stewards had done their jobs.

#29 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,354 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:55

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu
It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.

It might attract new people. They want to know what this is all about and where else do you get a soap opera involving race cars and good looking girls?

#30 PassWind

PassWind
  • Member

  • 4,985 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:56

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu
It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.



What would be the maximum penalty that he could be served for that particular act? The level of severity is relative to the maximum not our opinion on the matter.

Guilty or Not Guilty decide.

Punishment is mitigated by the circumstances if found guilty.

Personally not bothered either way it went, but I would’ve simply like to have seen hey Jarno your now 4th and Lewis your still 3rd at the very beginning of this. Stewarding in formula one has taken a weird turn for the worst and it may be the influence of the legal mind of Max and or others in the FIA with similar backgrounds when they issue their guidance statements.

Stewarding should be in my opinion is to help the participants rather than police them, make the race safe and that it is mostly run within the rules. Big thing I see out of this for both drivers neither had intent. Intent for mine is a powerful decider of guilt in the sporting arena, the guys are under enough pressure, mistakes that contravene the regulations happen these should be treated as a exercise in learning and if the act adversely effected some else’s race then balance it. Intent to be negligent in the performance of your duty as a driver or a team should be treated as they are now harshly. I cannot see that there is intent at the action to be negligent. Now of course the actual offense has nothing now to do with the incident, everything is now based on what was said and has nothing to do with the racing. If anything what should be learned from this is the Stewards need to get their shit in one sock if they want to hear evidence for proving a particular thing.

Maybe its now so complicated for them that what happens at the track is purely a hearing to determine whether its warrants going to a summary authority (if it gets to this then the system is broken). Police if required but the stewards at the track could've simply made a fricken decision that provided clarity rather than what we have now.

#31 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:57

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Yes, it cost Trulli 3rd place. If Hamilton had told the truth, he'd be 4th right now instead of disqualified.


Oh you're such a big friend of the FIA, please ask from your dilettante friends the transcript of the Melbourne lie! It's just a couple of words. Thanks in advance! :wave:

#32 Slick

Slick
  • Administrator

  • 3,329 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:57

I don't like lying for any reason (white lies not included in this) especially when trying to gain an advantage. Jordan lost my support when they lied about the vodafone deal a number of years ago and I fear McLaren and Lewis have lost my support now as my opinions of previous episodes are also changing in light of this incident.

I don't think there should be any further penalty, an exclusion from the race is enough for now but a second incident this year should be a complete exclusion from this year. And that is coming from a hardened McLaren supporter, or as the case is now a much reduced support if at all.

#33 Anomnader

Anomnader
  • Member

  • 8,616 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:59

theres a lot of people making statements but we still don't know the exact words that they have supposed to have lied about

#34 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,350 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 15:59

Originally posted by HP
It might attrack new people. They want to know what this is all about and where else do you get a soap opera involving race cars and good looking girls?


I cannot see that it does. It just reinforces the bad stereotype of it all being corrupt and boring. If anything it makes other series like MotoGP or BTCC look attractive.

Me and my boss were discussing it earlier at work, and people over heard and gave their dated clichés of why F1 is shit nowadays, and why they don't watch it.

Up until the Trulli 25-second penalty I thought Aus was a barn-storming opener, just what it needed to get back on the stage.

#35 ExcessIsBest

ExcessIsBest
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:02

Originally posted by gincarnated


Only because the stewards were incompetent in the first place.

I say just throw McLaren out of the sport. F1 would be a better place without them.


Agreed!

#36 AyePirate

AyePirate
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:02

Originally posted by RoutariEnjinu
It's not about trust, it's about a massive penalty from something completely trivial yet again putting off new or casual watchers.


The FIA gets involved and a small thing becomes a big thing. They just can't stand to see the focus be on racing can they?

#37 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,858 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:03

Originally posted by AyePirate


The FIA gets involved and a small thing becomes a big thing. They just can't stand to see the focus be on racing can they?

How are you going to explain this to your lad?

#38 Vice::

Vice::
  • New Member

  • 24 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:07

Originally posted by hunnylander


What error? They were punished because: 'FIA insists McLaren misled stewards', that happened on the Melbourne hearing, not in the radio conversation.


"FIA insists McLaren misled stewards" means that Hamilton didn't tell the truth in the hearing about the radio conversation. He didn't tell that his team told him twice to let Trulli pass. What he told was that Trulli just overtook him and he didn't let Trulli pass.

#39 ademm

ademm
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:09

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld


Yes, it cost Trulli 3rd place. If Hamilton had told the truth, he'd be 4th right now instead of disqualified.


Hamilton lying could be justfied. He worked his ass off and deserved that 3rd place. If FIA had given 3rd to McLaren and 4th to Trulli and left it there, it should have been perfect. But after FIA punished Trulli they should have come forward and tell the truth.

Advertisement

#40 stevewf1

stevewf1
  • Member

  • 3,259 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:09

F1

#41 Lazy Prodigy

Lazy Prodigy
  • Member

  • 2,458 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:12

no good pole options it should be who do you trust;) I trust Toyota guys though. At this point I dont believe McLaren or the FIA for their past histories

#42 ExcessIsBest

ExcessIsBest
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:13

Originally posted by ademm


Hamilton lying could be justfied. He worked his ass off and deserved that 3rd place. If FIA had given 3rd to McLaren and 4th to Trulli and left it there, it should have been perfect. But after FIA punished Trulli they should have come forward and tell the truth.


Only attorneys can justify lies. Lying for your own benefit is never justified. Lewis is not a worth champion or role model.

#43 stevvy1986

stevvy1986
  • Member

  • 3,168 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:15

Originally posted by ademm


Hamilton lying could be justfied.


no lieing can be justified in my opinion

#44 alg7_munif

alg7_munif
  • Member

  • 1,619 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:17

Originally posted by ademm


Hamilton lying could be justfied. He worked his ass off and deserved that 3rd place. If FIA had given 3rd to McLaren and 4th to Trulli and left it there, it should have been perfect. But after FIA punished Trulli they should have come forward and tell the truth.

Come forward with what truth? There are statements by Lewis and Norbert Haug saying that they let Trulli pass.

#45 AyePirate

AyePirate
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:18

Originally posted by Buttoneer
How are you going to explain this to your lad?


What do you mean?

It's just crazy. LH is so slick he can't seem to give a straight up answer to anything. He didn't do anything wrong until he tried to be slick with the FIA. He should know by now that the FIA are going to keep looking until they find something for Max to hang his whip on.

BTW
Why does the Green FIA insist on flying people in for questioning? Wouldn't a conference call suffice?;)

#46 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:19

Originally posted by Vice::


"FIA insists McLaren misled stewards" means that Hamilton didn't tell the truth in the hearing about the radio conversation. He didn't tell that his team told him twice to let Trulli pass. What he told was that Trulli just overtook him and he didn't let Trulli pass.


Is that a lie?

Anyway these are your written words not Lewis', I wanna see the transcript of the hearing. The quotes of the misleading words.

#47 AyePirate

AyePirate
  • Member

  • 5,818 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:21

Originally posted by Lazy Prodigy
no good pole options it should be who do you trust;) I trust Toyota guys though. At this point I dont believe McLaren or the FIA for their past histories


Toyota?

everyone involved has a "history" .

#48 Ferrim

Ferrim
  • Member

  • 822 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:24

What I can't understand is why on earth Hamilton told the media he had been told by the team to let Trulli pass, and immediately after that, during the stewards enquiry, he told them he hadn't been told anything. :confused:

If he wanted to win one point from a disqualification of Trulli, that's already bad. But to tell a lie when he had told the truth a few minutes before... WTF? That's just stupid.

#49 ademm

ademm
  • Member

  • 646 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:27

Originally posted by alg7_munif

Come forward with what truth? There are statements by Lewis and Norbert Haug saying that they let Trulli pass.



But this is the whole problem.

They went to FIA and said Trulli passed them in a SC situation. They had every reason to claim that third position. Even lying could be tolerated. Hamilton worked his ass off and deserved that 3rd place.

Now if FIA had only given their 3rd place back and had 4th place gone to Trulli , I think FIA would not make it public even if they knew about McLaren lying.

But when FIA punished Trulli stripping him of his 4th place. McLaren didnt come forward.

They deserve this and much more in my opinion.

#50 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,858 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 02 April 2009 - 16:28

Originally posted by AyePirate


What do you mean?

You sat down with your lad and watched an exciting race last Sunday. This Sunday you're going to have to explain how the order they cross the finishing line is irrelevant to the proceedings.