2696 replies to this topic

[Disgrace]

I wouldn't say anybody is accusing Nico of being in control of anything (certainly not his emotions) in that Les Combes incident! In the aftermath some journos and drivers went off on a bit of a tangent wittering on about intentionally puncturing tyres and what not, believing that was somehow an argument against the act of colliding being deliberate. It isn't. All I can tell is that Nico acted a bit of an arse on and off track.

As for the topic, unless Nico holds his hands up nobody will ever know for sure if it was deliberate, or not. Having suspicions about it is hardly outlandish, but there isn't any concrete proof either. To paraphrase Brother Fox above, only if you are a Nico lover/ Hammy hater are you going to be 100% certain it wasn't deliberate.

 

If I may bring everything back on topic. I was addressing a post that stated "Spa confirmed" that Rosberg did park it deliberately at Monaco. Acting like a bit of an arse is not a clincher for me - all drivers can do that.

[SanDiegoGo]

This doesn't fulfil the criteria of either having no idea of the consequences or caring. To these drivers, their actions were designed for the successful attainment of championships, i.e. all they ever care about. If you are referring to potential punishments, then you are misguided because as I always say, penalties are not deterrents.

 

 

again, you are confusing intent and consequence. senna crashed into prost to prove a point the he was mistreated and lied to by the FIA that was his intent and it was personal. he won the championship as a consequence. you're right about schumacher though. he was pure calculating intent.

[ensign14]

This doesn't fulfil the criteria of either having no idea of the consequences or caring. To these drivers, their actions were designed for the successful attainment of championships, i.e. all they ever care about.

 

So did Ayrton Senna have no idea that he risked wrecking the entire field when he punted Prost off, or did he not care about them?  Because I can't see that he definitely knew he would hit Prost so hard they would both go through a ginormous gravel trap into the barriers.

 

Unless he did know he was going to hit Prost that hard - in which case he had no idea, or cared not, whether either or both would be seriously injured.

 

Certainly though Senna's acts were not reckless.  They were deliberate and he should have been parked for a season there and then, or even for life.  Had no place in motor racing whatsoever.

[Disgrace]

again, you are confusing intent and consequence. senna crashed into prost to prove a point the he was mistreated and lied to by the FIA that was his intent and it was personal. he won the championship as a consequence. you're right about schumacher though. he was pure calculating intent.

 

I am not because I don't think they can be separated as easily as you suggest. That is my point about these being the best drivers in the world; they are more than capable to translate intent into action and therefore consequence. It's not as if Senna winning the title by crashing into Prost was an unintended consequence.

 

If Rosberg wanted to make contact with Hamilton, we must assume the intent was to create an advantage for himself, otherwise he is damaging his car and therefore his chances of winning that race and the title. I don't think that it's plausible he otherwise would disadvantage himself like that, especially if he's so willing to take liberties with the rules in Monaco qualifying, which to relate to my original post, is what this discussion is about. Perhaps he simply lost his temper at Spa, and again, it would have nothing to do with Monaco.

[Paincake]

When everyone in the paddock explicitly says words such as ''110% done on purpose'', and still people being naive, I just smh....  

But as I have said before, the Monaco incident is nothing compared to Nico saying ''I was trying to prove a point'' after the Spa incident.

Edited by Paincake, 09 November 2014 - 00:56.

[Ev0d3vil]

I posted here at the time, but an eminent psychiatrist friend of mine who has no interest in the sport, but watched Nico after qualifying said that without doubt he was not telling the truth about his 'accident' in qualifying.

This is really interesting

[payinkind]

Saying something is reckless in hindsight is not the same thing as saying you didn't *care* about the consequences. Just that you didn't *think* enough about them beforehand. Which in F1, where things happen quickly, happens all the time. I'm sure Lewis would agree he's had a reckless moment here and there before as well.

Its quite ridiculous to say that one action presumes another in this situation as well. Just because I steal a candy bar from a store doesn't mean I'm equally capable of beating a kitten.

 

It just means that you are morally corrupt which may explain why Brundle has changed his mind about Rosberg.

[RubalSher]

Here is what Brundle said

 

 

Let us not forget Monaco where I am becoming more and more convinced that Nico Rosberg did that on purpose.... umm and I wasnt at the time but things changing my mind.

[Seanspeed]

It just means that you are morally corrupt which may explain why Brundle has changed his mind about Rosberg.

A moment of recklessness is not being 'morally corrupt'. WTF

And in general, doing one bad thing does not automatically make someone capable of doing *any* bad thing. Its an absolutely ridiculous, black and white perspective.
 

Well, yes, it is. That's pretty much the legal definition of recklessness.

It really isn't.

Either way, Lewis has been reckless too, so we can presume that he is equally capable of doing what Rosberg did. Of course you're going to try and come up with some way to dismiss it so that only Rosberg is guilty.
 

And one action can presume another. If you're an ethical driver you wouldn't do either. If you're an unethical driver you might do one or both.

One action *can* presume another. It does not *automatically* presume another, though.

Most drivers have moments of recklessness in their careers. It does not make them all 'unethical'.
 

I posted here at the time, but an eminent psychiatrist friend of mine who has no interest in the sport, but watched Nico after qualifying said that without doubt he was not telling the truth about his 'accident' in qualifying.

****ing lol

I really thought the Kimi vs Alonso thread was the height of ridiculousness on the board. I stand corrected.

Edited by Seanspeed, 09 November 2014 - 09:54.

[TheRacingElf]

I rate Brundle quite high, he has a lot of connections in the paddock and was at the time very protective to Nico. That even he now thinks it was on purpose says enough to me

[TomNokoe]

Jog a few memories ;-)



On second viewing, it looks way more suspicious than it originally did.

As the season has progressed, it's been easy to see Rosberg's excellent precision in quali in regards to using absolutely all of the track on turn in, yet he is pathetically off line here.

[P123]

Acting like a bit of an arse is not a clincher for me - all drivers can do that.

Your suggestion of "simply lost his temper" is where my opinion lies, i.e- acted a bit of an arse. He tried in that moment to be uncharacteristically aggressive because it looked like he was losing out again in a wheel to wheel battle with his teammate, and fluffed it. Reminded me of Ralf spinning into JPM at Indy..... similarly reacting to being 'bullied' by his more aggressive teammate on prior occasions.

In relation to Monaco, I'd guess the only link is that Nico's judgement or ethics may get thrown out the window at times, but he's not alone in that.

Edited by P123, 09 November 2014 - 11:48.

[blackgerby]

I rate Brundle quite high, he has a lot of connections in the paddock and was at the time very protective to Nico. That even he now thinks it was on purpose says enough to me

This.

[SanDiegoGo]

Nah

 

Brundle made the comment on SKY during qualifying. A good 20 mins before Nico took pole. That is why it has been brought up again

 

 

when exactly did he say it? was it during Q1,2 or 3, or during the build up?

[f1RacingForever]

I think this thread is past its expiration date. We done have any new information. We never will, just more speculation. Besides, it happened a while ago. Time to move on.

[kamikaze1]

I posted here at the time, but an eminent psychiatrist friend of mine who has no interest in the sport, but watched Nico after qualifying said that without doubt he was not telling the truth about his 'accident' in qualifying.

 

I'm a medicolegal consultant for a Psychiatrist.  This psychiatrist once told me, from what she has seen of Lewis, that she believes Lewis has either a personality disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder, resulting in a clinical reactive depression.    I can't say I disagree with her.    These well-experienced psychiatrists can tell a lot just by observation.   It would explain a lot about Lewis' hypersensitivity.  

Edited by kamikaze1, 09 November 2014 - 12:46.

[discover23]

I'm a medicolegal consultant for a Psychiatrist. This psychiatrist once told me, from what she has seen of Lewis, that she believes Lewis has either a personality disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder, resulting in a clinical reactive depression. I can't say I disagree with her. These well-experienced psychiatrists can tell a lot just by observation. It would explain a lot about Lewis' hypersensitivity.

Cool, So to go back on topic.. Did Rosberg park it or not?

[SophieB]

I think this thread is past its expiration date. We done have any new information. We never will, just more speculation. Besides, it happened a while ago. Time to move on.

It's better here than in the Hamilton vs Rosberg thread, and people wanted to discuss Martin Brundle's comments. My own view on those comments is that they are not helpful. I believe he is sincere in his belief but without giving any evidence, or even what he's basing his change of heart on, what's anyone supposed to do with that information?

If people believed Rosberg was guilty before, sure, it will be accepted as one more bit of 'proof'. But if people believe him innocent, then how is anyone to refute his comments when he doesn't share the grounds he has for making them? Annoying.

Edit: And yes, let's not start diagnosing people on the TV with mental health disorders.

[Szoelloe]

Here is what Brundle said

 

Which doesn't make it less of a pile of BS, really. Old, hard, dried out pile too.

[Paincake]

I rate Brundle quite high, he has a lot of connections in the paddock and was at the time very protective to Nico. That even he now thinks it was on purpose says enough to me

Quotes from entire paddock such as ''110% on purpose'' and now Brundle too... despite all of that, people prefer to stay in a state of cognitive disonance and pretend like nothing happend. I don't even care anymore, does anyone.

[NateF1]

Jog a few memories ;-)

http://youtu.be/aX2841KPMW8

On second viewing, it looks way more suspicious than it originally did.

As the season has progressed, it's been easy to see Rosberg's excellent precision in quali in regards to using absolutely all of the track on turn in, yet he is pathetically off line here.

Wasn't too sure either way at the time but viewing it again now it looks hilarious. Like a drunk person playing on the playstation. Nico has proved himself too good a qualifier for me to find it easy to believe that this is a genuine attempt to take that corner as best he could.

I always pay attention to what Brundle says as he talks more sense than just about any other English-speaking pundit and seems to have good paddock insight. Would be rather helpful he explained what things had changed his mind though...

[kraduk]

I'm a medicolegal consultant for a Psychiatrist.  This psychiatrist once told me, from what she has seen of Lewis, that she believes Lewis has either a personality disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder, resulting in a clinical reactive depression.    I can't say I disagree with her.    These well-experienced psychiatrists can tell a lot just by observation.   It would explain a lot about Lewis' hypersensitivity.  

a few of his karting buddies have died in the past from what i believe. I dont know if its this or something else... makes you wonder though

[Jon83]

This one certainly needs more discussion 

[Leprechau]

Deliberate or not, Rosberg confirmed it was at the very least reckless - i.e. he didn't care about the likely consequences.

 

If someone is capable of doing that, they are capable of other shenanigans, like parking at a street circuit to guarantee pole because for the first time all season you've temporarily scraped ahead of your team-mate.

 

 

Oh no no no, gentleman. Sometimes, when you support to much a driver, it can lead to you distorting things. So, let's straight things up, shall we?

 

It was far from being the first time he was faster than Hamilton and not exactly a scrape ahead either.

 

Rosberg was staggeringly faster in Bahrain's qualifying where he was 0,3s faster. He was also faster in rainy Q of Melbourne and China. In the former, he didn't get an extra lap and in the latter he spun in last sector after being faster than Lewis pole time untill second intermediate.

 

Nobody has the power to read minds, so discussing if he did on purpose is absolutely pointless, in my view. Fans of Hamilton will usually say things like "oh, it was so blatant" while fans of rival drivers will usually say "Oh, Nico wouldn't do that". It's just bias view against bias view.

 

The point I focus is the one I can discuss. If Rosberg did it on purpose or not, it was pointless, the thing is he didn't/doesn't need to. He's usually faster than Lewis. He already was pole in Monaco last year and then further showed that by being faster than Lewis in both Q3 attempts in Montreal(Lewis' track).

 

Rosberg claimed pole again, in Monaco,  for no other reason than being the fastest on track, it's as simple as that. Hamilton went crying to the press_even claiming to be 2 tenths down, when in fact his first sector, of the second attempt, was a tenth slower than Rosberg's pole time_ to make it as an excuse.

 

Rosberg has been humiliating the guy recently(2 pole laptimes in Suzuka, 3 in COTA) and Lewis was lucky yesterday cause Nico was coming for a 1.09.8 on his first attempt until the mistake in the last corner(Lewis's 2nd intermediate was 53.65 and Nico's 53.38). So, I understand the bitterness of your post, but you gotta deal with it.

 

At least Lewis is gonna take the champion's trophy, in the end.

[Paincake]

Hahaha, oh dear lord. The selective memory going on in this thread is amazing.

[David Lightman]

It was as deliberate as Schuey in 2006, just not quite so obvious.

[TomNokoe]

WELL THEN

[KTownDevil]

I was pretty sure that ohne of Lewis' fanboys would dig out this thread. 

[garoidb]

The key is to be faster than your team-mate on the banker lap. Simple as that.

 

Edit: then there can be no messing.

Edited by garoidb, 19 May 2015 - 20:55.

[SR388]

Yep, on a track a tight as monaco, you can't leave your faith in the sportsmanship of your teammate. Much like Gilles, Hamilton hopes hopes that those around him will operate at the same level of fairness as he does.

[Ducks]

Was it posted somewhere that Lewis is going to be allowed to go out first this year at Monaco by the team?

 

It kinda confirms the team knew what went on last year and don' t want a repeat.

[BullHead]

Lol

[P123]

Was it posted somewhere that Lewis is going to be allowed to go out first this year at Monaco by the team?
 
It kinda confirms the team knew what went on last year and don' t want a repeat.

Oh come on, you're surely pulling some legs!

I think the Merc drivers alternate race by race as to who gets choice of when to run. Usually the track only gets quicker during quali in Monaco, so going as late as possible is best, but leaves you open to yellow flag damnation.

[Richard T]

Did he park it?

Yeees, of course he did!

[Jimisgod]

Rosberg also shot JFK and faked the moon landing.

[Norm]

Yep, on a track a tight as monaco, you can't leave your faith in the sportsmanship of your teammate. Much like Gilles, Hamilton hopes hopes that those around him will operate at the same level of fairness as he does.

 

What like in 2007 at the Hungarian GP? 

 

Nothing like a bunch of English homers.

[MikeV1987]

still havent got over it i see..

[jcpower13]

What like in 2007 at the Hungarian GP? 

 

Nothing like a bunch of English homers.

I see, so Hamilton overtaking Alonso on a warmup lap (against team 'rules') is akin to a driver deliberately causing yellow flags to stop their rival from putting in a faster qually lap? I suppose Alonso spending 22 seconds parked up, stopping Hamilton from doing his qually lap in time is fair play, right?

[SR388]

What like in 2007 at the Hungarian GP? 
 
Nothing like a bunch of English homers.

Please stay on topic.

We are trying to discuss what happened at monaco in 2014 and its repercussions. If you want to drag out an off topic discussion I would be happy to have one with you via pm.

[Norm]

I see, so Hamilton overtaking Alonso on a warmup lap (against team 'rules') is akin to a driver deliberately causing yellow flags to stop their rival from putting in a faster qually lap? I suppose Alonso spending 22 seconds parked up, stopping Hamilton from doing his qually lap in time is fair play, right?

 

Hamilton deliberately screwed his teammate over in Hungary. That was his intent.

 

Maybe I should have used Austrailia 2009 as an example?

[OO7]

Rosberg also shot JFK and faked the moon landing.

He's been a busy boy hasn't he.

[jcpower13]

Hamilton deliberately screwed his teammate over in Hungary. That was his intent.

 

Maybe I should have used Austrailia 2009 as an example?

Screwed his teammate? Alonso still had his shots at qually laps, Lewis only deprived him of track position. As for Aus 2009, you mean Liegate where Lewis actually was quite right to take 3rd and was poorly advised? His lying was dumb as rocks, but it's hardly scandalous behaviour.

 

[ANF]

I've changed my mind and I'm gonna say yes.

[Norm]

Screwed his teammate? Alonso still had his shots at qually laps, Lewis only deprived him of track position. As for Aus 2009, you mean Liegate where Lewis actually was quite right to take 3rd and was poorly advised? His lying was dumb as rocks, but it's hardly scandalous behaviour.

 

 

It is never scandalous behaviour when an English driver is involved. At least on this forum.

[jcpower13]

It is never scandalous behaviour when an English driver is involved. At least on this forum.

I see, so the English are the only bias nation then? Nice to know the rest of the World is xenophobic too, I mean it's not like you're painting a whole country with a single brush... Oh wait, that's exactly what you're doing.

Every single country has homers, every single driver has fanboys and haters, why on earth you're singling out the English is beyond me. Did we pee in your cereal or something?

[Norm]

I see, so the English are the only bias nation then? Nice to know the rest of the World is xenophobic too, I mean it's not like you're painting a whole country with a single brush... Oh wait, that's exactly what you're doing.

Every single country has homers, every single driver has fanboys and haters, why on earth you're singling out the English is beyond me. Did we pee in your cereal or something?

 

If the rolls were reversed (for arguemnts sake) and it was Lewis that pulled what Nico did at Monaco, do you honestly think the English media and fans would be talking about it a year later?

 

The only reason I can think of to bring this poll back to life is to get that Yes vote up. 

 

So to quote an F1 driver who hags out with Kardashian's "Go swivel".

Edited by Norm, 19 May 2015 - 23:36.

[MightyMoose]

Maybe I missed it, but what is new about the circumstances known about Monaco 2014?

 

Given the clear nature of how this conversation is going and raising temps already because positions are widely known, there is nothing worthwhile about this being open, it's being cooled off unless something obvious bounces out in the next few days.