Jump to content


Photo

No more permanent steward?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 anbeck

anbeck
  • Member

  • 2,036 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 24 January 2008 - 13:53

Oh, please tell me that I misunderstood the following article:
http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/64826

Does it mean that there will be no permanent race steward in the future? Didn't they make a fuss about all that 2-3 years ago in order to have more consistent decisions?

a.

Advertisement

#2 Certified Half-Wit

Certified Half-Wit
  • Member

  • 181 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 24 January 2008 - 13:59

Cue lots of posts about how stewards were only there to help Ferrari...

#3 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:00

Originally posted by Certified Half-Wit
Cue lots of posts about how stewards were only there to help Ferrari...


Or replace 'Ferrari' with 'Hamilton' depending on your persuasion....

#4 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 20,701 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:01

imo there were less idiotic decisions by stewards before the appointment of the permanent steward so i would say its no great loss.

#5 K-One

K-One
  • Member

  • 5,917 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:03

Alonso will never get a penalty again!

#6 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:12

It is understood that one of the catalysts for the change was the fact that it took the FIA stewards five days after last year's Japanese Grand Prix to rule on whether or not Lewis Hamilton did anything wrong in his driving behind the safety car in Fuji.

Eh?

I thought it took that long for the spectators youtube video to come to the attention of the officials?

#7 Chiara

Chiara
  • Member

  • 1,847 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:17

Originally posted by Buttoneer

Eh?

I thought it took that long for the spectators youtube video to come to the attention of the officials?


Just going back through the timeline on articles on autosport and the Chinese Grand Prix was the following weekend to Fuji. The decision was made on the friday night in Shanghai. So yes it is 5 days...(although I also thought it was longer than that).

#8 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:27

Long overdue, from 1994 for starters, not to mention the 1997 "racing incident".

I'm a bit nervous about Max' Official Representative being there as well, but hopefully they will at least have the bottle to take the difficult decisions.

I think the cool fuel thing in Brazil was more a factor, recently, than Fuji. The ambient temperature was a genuine doubt, but not the doubt about where the fuel was supposed to be measured, that was chickening out.

#9 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 24 January 2008 - 14:30

Originally posted by Chiara


Just going back through the timeline on articles on autosport and the Chinese Grand Prix was the following weekend to Fuji. The decision was made on the friday night in Shanghai. So yes it is 5 days...(although I also thought it was longer than that).

I'm not disputing that at all, but my point is that they were all packed up and gone by the time the video came to light. This means they had to take the complaint from Franz Tost when it came to them, which will probably have been the Thursday at the earliest.

#10 Maldwyn

Maldwyn
  • Member

  • 1,486 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 24 January 2008 - 15:35

Bringing Tony-Scott Andrews in as a permanent steward was a positive step. At least he was present at all the races and so ensured that there was at least some consistency in the decision making process. Why they have gone back on that idea who knows :drunk:

I guess the fact that Max Mosley's official representative will assist the different stewards at each event should reassure everyone :rotfl:

#11 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 928 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 24 January 2008 - 17:06

I don't see what changing the stewards arrangements has to do with the speed of the decisions. The stewards are slow or fast depending on the individuals involved, not on the method of selecting them.

This is another FIA flip-flop. Like the championship points system (changed to reward winning and then changed to reward consistency), the stewards change will be changed again as fits the perceived errors of the system of the moment.

#12 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 24 January 2008 - 17:17

Originally posted by Buttoneer

I'm not disputing that at all, but my point is that they were all packed up and gone by the time the video came to light. This means they had to take the complaint from Franz Tost when it came to them, which will probably have been the Thursday at the earliest.


In Shanghai they reached the correct decision, cancelling Vettel's unfair penalty from Fuji which was obviously NOT needed to deter him from doing that again...

In Fuji it was Charlie Whiting who should have had the penalty, for not saying something to Hammy while he was following the pace car.

It's about time they cleared up these woolly definitions of "avoidable accident" and "racing incident", which don't provide any useful guidance at all. Most accidents are "avoidable" and every incident is "racing", more or less.

Hopefully there will be a small pool of neutral professional stewards who will gain experience and be more consistent. But in general stewards do seem to be as emotional and lacking in objectivity as anyone else.

#13 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 24 January 2008 - 18:15

Originally posted by Lifew12


Or replace 'Ferrari' with 'Hamilton' depending on your persuasion....



or replace 'Hamilton' with 'Max Mosley'
http://www.grandprix...ns/ns19972.html

#14 Chiara

Chiara
  • Member

  • 1,847 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 24 January 2008 - 19:55

I would have thought it would be more sensible to have three permanent stewards, all from neutral countries, with the necessary experience that attend every race if you want to get some consistency into the decision making process. Otherwise if your choping and changing them every five minutes they are all going to have their own ways of doing things.

I think the FIA want to tighten up what penalties they hand out as well, have very set penalties - as up until now they have seemed to be done on a whim.

#15 GNT4ME

GNT4ME
  • Member

  • 185 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 January 2008 - 20:16

In stewards we not only look for fast, fair and consistent decision making, but also impartiality.
Do I believe that Max has an impartial bone in his body...Not a chance!
Do I believe that Alan Donnelly will be able to do anything but his masters bidding....again, Not a chance!
Do I believe that there will now be controversy in 2008 over alleged Ferrari favouritism, Lewis love –ins etc etc…….You bet ya!

Megalo Max strikes again, and grabs yet another piece of power….. :(

#16 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 09:37

Andrew Davies on planet-F1 has pointed out that Allan Donnelly runs a PR company that works for Ferrari.

http://www.planetf1....3076296,00.html

How impartial is he going to look?

#17 Durant

Durant
  • Member

  • 694 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 09:44

Great they finally got rid of that biased moron Tony Scott. He clearly hated Alonso and liked penalizing him. Bad news for Hamilton though, the free ride might be over.

#18 Sbastien

Sbastien
  • Member

  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 11:38

Originally posted by undersquare
Andrew Davies on planet-F1 has pointed out that Allan Donnelly runs a PR company that works for Ferrari.

http://www.planetf1....3076296,00.html

How impartial is he going to look?

That article is an outright lie, check the list of clients , there is no Ferrari on that list like Andrew Davies claims.

Bernie seems happy with them though:

"Our experience shows that while many professional advisors make claims - Sovereign delivers"



#19 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,746 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 11:47

Originally posted by Sébastien

That article is an outright lie, check the list of clients , there is no Ferrari on that list like Andrew Davies claims.

Bernie seems happy with them though:


Without wanting to disagree and seem harsh they removed it form their list a couple of days ago, search google and they are still in the google search...

Sovereign Strategy - our clients
Ferrari. Formula One Management Ltd. Helius Energy. Intuit. JM Communications. Marine Current Turbines. MWH. NEXUS. North East Economic Forum ...
www.sovereignstrategy.com/clients2.asp


In a recent announcement, Ferrari, the famous automobile manufacturer, which will be celebrating its 60th year of road car production later this year, appointed Sovereign Strategy to provide public affairs counsel.

http://www.ameinfo.com/126999.html

Advertisement

#20 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 11:52

Originally posted by Sébastien

That article is an outright lie, check the list of clients , there is no Ferrari on that list like Andrew Davies claims.

Bernie seems happy with them though:


They have removed them. Grandprix.com also reported it on 14th January...

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns19972.html

So whoever is being dishonest, it's not Andrew Davies.

#21 Sbastien

Sbastien
  • Member

  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 12:08

Originally posted by Mika Mika


Without wanting to disagree and seem harsh they removed it form their list a couple of days ago, search google and they are still in the google search...



In a recent announcement, Ferrari, the famous automobile manufacturer, which will be celebrating its 60th year of road car production later this year, appointed Sovereign Strategy to provide public affairs counsel.

http://www.ameinfo.com/126999.html

Indeed I stand corrected, they removed Ferrari from the list, stupid move imo also because I found a quote from Donnelly (be it on another matter ) in which he wrote this:

"Alan Donnelly of Sovereign Strategy has written to me outlining the fact that Sovereign already ­declares all its clients on its website and clarifying that it is the intention of Sovereign Strategy to adopt a new position as regards paying MPs or peers."

#22 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,746 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 January 2008 - 12:15

Originally posted by Sébastien

Indeed I stand corrected, they removed Ferrari from the list, stupid move imo also because I found a quote from Donnelly (be it on another matter ) in which he wrote this:

"Alan Donnelly of Sovereign Strategy has written to me outlining the fact that Sovereign already ­declares all its clients on its website and clarifying that it is the intention of Sovereign Strategy to adopt a new position as regards paying MPs or peers."


No worries,

I totally agree with you, they would be far better to be honest... Look where being dishonest got F1 last year, last thing we need is controversy!!!