Your Reject of the Race - Great Britain!

dresda · Post by **dresda** » 11 Jul 2010, 15:29

The Red Bull team management for their obvious favouritism towards that sniveling little ratfaced git Vettel.

The stewards for the penalty on Alonso.

Waris · Post by **Waris** » 11 Jul 2010, 15:43

I was thinking of Vettel, but that would be rather harsh. No, I'm going to go with Ferrari on this one, for a performance that was, well, all-around rejectful.

LukeB · Post by **LukeB** » 11 Jul 2010, 15:43

It wasn't long ago Vettel was one of the most popular drivers, how much long term damage is Red Bulls shambolic management doing to his image?

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Jul 2010, 16:00

Red Bull Management gets the nod from me for ROTR. Not only did they have the cheek to give Webber's front wing the Vettel when Vettel's broke, they said it was a championship decision, and then had the nerve to blatantly lie about the equal treatment. Someone needs to tell them they can't dig their way out of a hole.

Honourable mentions:

Renault; despite being promising in practice, both cars struggled through qualifying and the race, ruining what could've been a key turning point for them in the fight with Mercedes.

Race Control, as well as People saying Alonso should be ROTR - say what you like about the guy, but I'm a massive Kubica fan and even I think the penalty was absurd and completely unfair. Yes, Ferrari have gotten off in the past, but that's no reason to punish them as harshly as they did, it sets a horrific precedent. He could've given the place back, but he felt he was forced off and was justified in going off the track - he's entitled to his opinion. He didn't have to give the place back until the stewards said so. But then Kubica went out, so Alonso could not give the position back anyway. Is that Alonso's fault? bathplug no. If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia. There is no way in hell that cutting Club gained Alonso the 20 seconds or however much time he lost with the drive-through.

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 11 Jul 2010, 16:09

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:He didn't have to give the place back until the stewards said so. But then Kubica went out, so Alonso could not give the position back anyway. Is that Alonso's fault? bathplug no. If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia.

That is an excellent point.

Mister Fungus · Post by **Mister Fungus** » 11 Jul 2010, 16:21

No. A driver must yield when he overtakes illegally, the punishment was fair and penalties are given post race only if there's not enough time to give them out during the race so there is no logic in the 5 second penalty. After all Hamilton was punished 25 seconds after the race in Spa 08, even after he yielded and then overtook him the next corner and Kimi was also out of that race. So I don't think there should even be a discussion about this decision. For all the weird and stupid decisions the stewards have made this year, this one was pretty clear and straightforward.

I don't understand in what universe is it ok to overtake with cutting the chicane.

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 11 Jul 2010, 16:39

Mister Fungus wrote:No. A driver must yield when he overtakes illegally

Alonso felt he was in the right, as he is entitled to think. The overtake isn't officially illegal until the stewards say so.

The punishment was fair and penalties are given post race only if there's not enough time to give them out during the race so there is no logic in the 5 second penalty.

Bulls**t. Fair, my eye. You cannot reasonably suggest that Alonso gained the equivalent of a drive-through penalty by cutting one corner.

After all Hamilton was punished 25 seconds after the race in Spa 08, even after he yielded and then overtook him the next corner and Kimi was also out of that race. So I don't think there should even be a discussion about this decision. For all the weird and stupid decisions the stewards have made this year, this one was pretty clear and straightforward.

So, because Hamilton and McLaren got shafted nearly 2 years ago, Alonso has to get shafted now as payback to Ferrari? What you are effectively doing by saying this is supporting an unfair and broken precedent. So what if Ferrari supported that particular ruling then - by supporting it now, you become as bad as them, when the vast majority of fans after Belgium 2008 felt that the penalty levied against Hamilton was far, far too harsh.

I don't understand in what universe is it ok to overtake with cutting the chicane.

I'm not okay with cutting chicanes. But I'm also not okay with penalties dished out that are ridiculously draconian and unfair.

Mister Fungus · Post by **Mister Fungus** » 11 Jul 2010, 16:51

Alonso felt he was in the right, as he is entitled to think. The overtake isn't officially illegal until the stewards say so.

What he feels, and what the rules are are two quite different things. Especially in a blatantly obvious case like this.

Bulls**t. Fair, my eye. You cannot reasonably suggest that Alonso gained the equivalent of a drive-through penalty by cutting one corner.

What he gained, or did not gain is not important. It is only important that he blatantly broke the rule, knew he did it, and didn't act upon it because reasons only known to him. Of course that the judges were going to act upon it, and if Kubica was still in the race he would need to let him through, but alas he was not. That however doesn't mean that Alonso should've been left unpunished and this was the softest possible punishment for him during the race.

What you are effectively doing by saying this is supporting an unfair and broken precedent. So what if Ferrari supported that particular ruling then - by supporting it now, you become as bad as them, when the vast majority of fans after Belgium 2008 felt that the penalty levied against Hamilton was far, far too harsh.

What? I am saying that the precedent was established (whether or not I agree with it), and that is how things are. After all people complain about stewards not being consistent, and here they certainly were consistent.

I'm not okay with cutting chicanes. But I'm also not okay with penalties dished out that are ridiculously draconian and unfair.

I'm not either but in this circumstances it was a logical punishment. Is it fair to punish drivers if they go over the white line with such huge punishments as Rosberg was in Singapore last year? Maybe not, but that's what the rules are and I'd still rather have them give out penalties during the race then after it. (which is why I think that stewards handled the whole Valencia affair very badly, and that Alonso was unfairly treated there).

Also no more vivisections please, eh?

Dan B · Post by **Dan B** » 11 Jul 2010, 18:34

- Ferrari and the Stewards: The rules are clear as day. If you cut the corner and pass someone, you have to give it back. This isn't news, and what Ferrari SHOULD have done is to tell Alonso to give the place back immediately. A +5sec penalty would have been fairer. That, and the Stewards took longer than they needed to. Again. That said, the person to blame should be Stefano Domenicali for not telling Alonso to move over.

And as for Massa, I like the guy but he isn't the same man as he used to be, I'm afraid. That or he has a bunch of gremlins in his car.

- Toro Rosso: Algersuari binning it at the end of the race and who the heck is Buemi? Oh yeah, that guy...I wouldn't be surprised if Buemi doesn't get a seat for next year.

Biggest reject though is:

- Red Bull: I know I mention Red Bull a lot in RoTR, and while I might seem like I am bashing them unfairly, I want to like the team. However, giving Webber's front wing to Vettel for a "championship decision", then lying about giving drivers equal opportunity leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Vettel barging past Sutil also looked rather dumb too.

coops · Post by **coops** » 11 Jul 2010, 18:51

Dan B wrote:And as for Massa, I like the guy but he isn't the same man as he used to be, I'm afraid.

Theres something not right in that helmet, and its either as a result of last years accident or this years team-mate.

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 11 Jul 2010, 19:28

Christian Horner-- How many different ways can he favor Vettel while saying nothing of the sort? And then to do that just to get shown up... brilliant.

Ed24 · Post by **Ed24** » 11 Jul 2010, 19:30

Ferrari for me. They said before the race that it would be a litmus test for the rest of the year, so it could be a switch in focus to 2011 based on that result.

Both drivers drove poorly as well. Alonso made an arrogant and stupid move on Kubica, and Massa was erratic, and still can't qualifying very well.

Debaser · Post by **Debaser** » 11 Jul 2010, 19:32

Christian Horner gets my vote, with his refusal to admit his team are supporting Vettel and his way of avoiding answering questions he'd make a terrific politician.

Post by **mario** » 11 Jul 2010, 19:33

Hmm, predictably the Alonso penalty is provoking a fair amount of debate. Leaving that aside for the moment, there are a few nominees:
Vettel - he should have been more circumspect off the line, as Webber had the position, and Vettel was always going to end up being dumped onto the tarmac at that corner. Admittedly, he was a little unlucky in puncturing his tyre, but Hamilton was always going to be aggressive off the line, given it is his home race, he was determined to put on a show for the home crowd, and that would have been his only chance to pass the Red Bulls.
Although he made up quite a few places, that owed more to luck, after the safety car bunched everybody up, and literally barging Sutil out of the way was reckless - he could have quite easily locked wheels with Sutil and put them both out of the race (say what you like about Hamilton, Button or Alonso, but they have been quite a bit cleaner when passing somebody else). All in all, he made a rod for his own back there.
Speaking of making a rod for your own back, Horner is in there with a shout - the comment Webber made after the race ("Not bad for a Number 2 driver"), and Horner's comment ("Will that make you smile now?") speaks of potentially quite destructive inter-team friction.
Red Bull might be trying to calm things down a bit, but it is clear that Webber is certainly not at ease with the direction the team is taking, and the recent decisions (Eddie Jordan made a point that many might agree with, when he said that Red Bull had "made it too obvious" who they are backing). Of all the pairing from before the season, Vettel-Webber was always considered to be the least volatile, but how things have changed, now things are so tight between those two drivers.

Renault - where did it all go wrong for them? Kubica was struggling for pace in the first stint (which allowed Button to pass those ahead of him, because Kubica had backed the pack up so much), before his differential let go, and Petrov was struggling badly towards the end of the race. What had originally looked like a promising weekend turned into a bit of a nightmare for them, and set them back quite a bit in their battle with Mercedes.

Now, to the thorny issue of Alonso's penalty. Firstly, was the decision correct? It is true that without cutting across the inside of the chicane, Alonso would have been unable to pass Kubica at that corner, so you would have to say that Alonso did gain an position, and therefore an advantage (through improving his position) by cutting the track. Now, if he had slowed down and let Kubica past, he would have avoided all of this, but given that there were quite a few drivers running quite close to Kubica, slowing to let Kubica past might have caused him to loose a few more places - so, it seems that he took the chance that the stewards might look favourably on his actions. What is unfortunate is the fact that he and the team decided to let Kubica past a few laps later, only for Kubica to break down.

Now, the problem is, Alonso had benefited, in terms of track position, from passing Kubica, and it seems that Renault had protested about that - so, given the outstanding complaint from them, it is logical that the stewards would have investigated. The rules are pretty clear about this matter - gaining an advantage by cutting the track, unless you give the place back, results in a drive-through penalty, or time penalty if applied after the race. Harsh? Yes, because Alonso was hammered by the safety car bunching the pack up (speaking of which, why did Sauber send De La Rosa back out when his rear bodywork was disintegrating? He was going to be very slow, and was putting others at risk, with bits of his rear wing endplates falling off as he went down the Hanger straight).
However, was the decision correct, according to the rules? Looking at it, yes - and it seems that even Alonso admits that whilst he would have acted in the same way, he is remarkably sanguine about it, and doesn't seem to be that upset by the decision. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85223

Archie2K · Post by **Archie2K** » 11 Jul 2010, 20:00

Have Ferrari ran over a black cat or something. There's a certain luck of the draw when it comes to safety cars but for Alonso to get so royally screwed two races running requires some mighty bad luck. In Valencia, five-second penalties were awarded because although in infraction of the rules took place, it would've required the drivers to engage in dangerous driving in order to comply with the delta time. Here, Alonso was no longer able to give a place back as Kubica had retired, and if any penalty applies, then a five-second post-race penalty would've been proportionate. That the safety car came out almost immediately afterwards made the penalty wildly disproportionate and stuffed his race.

Red Bull could wind up as rejects of the year at this rate. Their car is as if not more dominant than Brawn's last year and yet infighting and reliability woes could well wind up losing them both championships.

But reject of the race has to be Sauber for not bringing De La Rosa in and changing his disintegrating rear wing.

Jordan192 · Post by **Jordan192** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:32

Debaser wrote:Christian Horner gets my vote, with his refusal to admit his team are supporting Vettel and his way of avoiding answering questions he'd make a terrific politician.

Politicians have to be good at dodging questions. Horner may do it all the time but he's really bad at it.

Enforcer · Post by **Enforcer** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:34

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:People saying Alonso should be ROTR - say what you like about the guy, but I'm a massive Kubica fan and even I think the penalty was absurd and completely unfair. Yes, Ferrari have gotten off in the past, but that's no reason to punish them as harshly as they did, it sets a horrific precedent. He could've given the place back, but he felt he was forced off and was justified in going off the track - he's entitled to his opinion. He didn't have to give the place back until the stewards said so. But then Kubica went out, so Alonso could not give the position back anyway. Is that Alonso's fault? bathplug no. If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia. There is no way in hell that cutting Club gained Alonso the 20 seconds or however much time he lost with the drive-through.

I have to disagree, it's well established at this stage in F1 that if you cut across the grass to pass someone, or to make a pass stick, you have to give it back - or else. Alonso knows this.
As for being forced off the road - Kubica was holding the racing line, if he'd swerved over to his right to make sure Alonso had to leave the track, then maybe there'd be a point there in Alonso's favour but he didn't. They were side by side at the apex, Kubica drove the racing line, the fact that Alonso had insufficient grip and room on the track wasn't Kubica's problem, it was Alonso's, and he handled incorrectly. Alonso should've given it back straight away, almost anyone else bloody well would have, but he clearly felt outed by Kubica and let it cloud his better judgment.

The penalty was timed arseways by race control, and that should be looked at and improved if possible (ie. given him leeway to let the pack spread out a little after the SC or something) but it still doesn't detract that Alonso could've avoided the whole situation and possibly passed Rosberg and finished 3rd. He's a double World Champion, he's been in F1 for nearly a decade, he should know better. That's what makes him a reject candidate.

Ross Prawn · Post by **Ross Prawn** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:34

LukeB wrote:It wasn't long ago Vettel was one of the most popular drivers, how much long term damage is Red Bulls shambolic management doing to his image?

He is increasingly looking and talking like a spoiled kid. Must be getting some bad advice from somewhere. But at least we were spared the pointy single finger thing this weekend. Didn't see him waving fingers in the air either.

Anyway, my nominee is Admiral Horatio Nelson. This may strike you as an unusual choice but I had to take relatives for trip round HMS Victory on GP day, when |could have been at Silverstone instead. (Snuck off to the pub to watch the start though.)

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:37

The obvious winner of ROTR is Renault for a gutless showing with both cars when it mattered.

noisebox · Post by **noisebox** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:43

Mark Webber: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 799573.stm

Make sure your own house is in order before you s*** on someone else's doorstep...

Barbazza · Post by **Barbazza** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:43

F1 as a whole - if every single race is going to contain a stewards decision that is plainly ridiculous, I really won't be arsed to watch it any more at this rate.

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:54

Debaser wrote:Christian Horner gets my vote, with his refusal to admit his team are supporting Vettel and his way of avoiding answering questions he'd make a terrific politician.

Well, Horner was just talking bull**** there, red bull**** to be exact. Maybe that's why the team is called Red Bull ...

Enforcer · Post by **Enforcer** » 11 Jul 2010, 21:57

Their drink certainly tastes like ****

ZINGER!

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 11 Jul 2010, 22:43

noisebox wrote:Mark Webber: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 799573.stm

Make sure your own house is in order before you s*** on someone else's doorstep...

I'm not sure if he's trying to rattle McLaren's cage in the same way that McLaren have said this to rattle Red Bull a little bit.

BabyG · Post by **BabyG** » 11 Jul 2010, 22:46

I'm going to give reject of the race to Hispania for giving Yamamoto the drive for one race! One race! Way to undermine your drivers who already have to struggle at the back with a car that can't perform - no matter who is in it.

As regard to the Alonso penalty debate: I am in favour of a rule change or clarification that states if it impossible for a driver to yeild a possition that has been gained unfairly through a breach of rules, ie a driver that should be yielded possition to has retired, then a 5 second penalty shoud be applied to the offending driver at the end of the race, with notice of the penlty given to the driver/team during the race if possible as per normal direction form race control.

It was, as was the situation that arose in Valencia, one that has not happened before and the rules should be adapted to make sure that a driver is faily punished in the future.

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 11 Jul 2010, 23:52

Argh, Guess what?Race Control/Stewards/What ever you like to call them
Ok, people say that Alonso did cut the track and got an advantage. Problem is, he was up on the side of Kubica when the corner started, and while you can say, Kubica had the inside lane, that doesn't make it legal for him to push Alonso outside the track. This is something racers learn as early as karting; "When two vehicles is side by side,- side by side is defined front wheel at the hight of the front of the rear wheel of the other car, both have to give eachother room on the track. This means that none of them have the right to drive where they want. One does not have to make a big room, but enough for the other vehicle to stay on the track"
In other words, Vettel vs Webber was perfectly legal (talking about Turkey) as Webber gave Vettel enough room. And also T1 today was ok, remember, even though it's written down, you are allowed to make small personal judgements. However. If Alonso had tried to keep himself on the track today, they would've crashed. Kubica did not leave enough room for Alonso to put his safely on the track. In other words, Alonso had no other choice. He was forced to do so, or crash into Kubica. When you are forced of the track, then the personal judgement is implented, the same way as VIlleneuve vs Hill in 97, at Hungaroring, Villeneuve made the pass while he was on the grass, but he didn't really have much choice. Neither had Alonso here.

Remember, the rules doesn't say "cut a corner" but "driving off the track and make an advantage of that". (not in these words, but they mean these things)

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 12 Jul 2010, 00:52

Red Bull: The excrement hit the fan with the wing saga. Coupled with Vettel helping create his own demise at the start and doing bathplug all until the safety car came out they didn't have a good week. Infact I did a few calculations last night while I was trying to get to sleep after the race and under the Old points system Red Bull as a team have lost something between 45 and 57 points. ROTY material if I've ever seen it.

Michael Schumacher: Ok so he qualified 10th and finished 9th so there is an improvement... but yet again he got his arse kicked by Rosberg. Infact if it wasn't for Ross Brawn this guy would be unlikely to be driving in 2011.

Tonio Liuzzi: Daftness got his qualifying penalty then was anonymous for almost the entire race

Ferrari: Both cars collided at the start. Alonso became his own worst enemy after overtaking Kubica illegally and got epically screwed over by the FIA

The other massive Kubica fan wrote:If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia.

and couldn't do anything for the rest of the race. Meanwhile Massa was nowhere after the pitstop and even spun off on the exit of Woodcote as a reminder of 2008.

Toro Rosso: 16th and 17th on the grid, Alguersuari spun off and Buemi anonymous. On a weekend where Button was struggling (in qualifying) and Renault and Ferrari were self destructing that is not good.

Renault F1: Kubica barely made it into Q3 and strugged for pace to an extent until the car broke down while Petrov's car broke down in Qualy and he suffered a puncture during the race.

The FIA: I'm not even going to bother saying anything because there is nothing new I can add

The ONE Commentry Team: Last race it was bagging out Kovy. This race it was STILL bagging out Kovy and saying teams like Hispania don't deserve to be in F1 because of their lack of pace before the start.

coops · Post by **coops** » 12 Jul 2010, 05:56

Christian Horner - As he drowns he describes the water.

Dj_bereta · Post by **Dj_bereta** » 12 Jul 2010, 06:43

Ferrari: Obvious choice, multiples reasons and in front only lotus, virgin and hispania.

Wizzie wrote:The ONE Commentry Team: Last race it was bagging out Kovy. This race it was STILL bagging out Kovy and saying teams like Hispania don't deserve to be in F1 because of their lack of pace before the start.

In brazil TV coverage is the same thing.

Jack O Malley · Post by **Jack O Malley** » 12 Jul 2010, 08:08

CarlosFerreira wrote:
BlindCaveSalamander wrote:He didn't have to give the place back until the stewards said so. But then Kubica went out, so Alonso could not give the position back anyway. Is that Alonso's fault? bathplug no. If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia.

That is an excellent point.

seconded

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:04

I want to nominate Alonso but not quite for the reasons other people have suggested. Each time he has been penalised, unfairly or otherwise, he ends up in the midfield, out of the points, and he always seems incapable of hauling himself back into the lower end of the points, unlike Button or Vettel (although admittedly both had longer to do so, and were able to rely on the safety car to close gaps up...). Is it because he sees red mist and has no fog-lights to see through the mist, or he just gives up and trundles round, dwelling on how he has been aggreived?

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:08

dr-baker wrote:Is it because he sees red mist and has no fog-lights to see through the mist, or he just gives up and trundles round, dwelling on how he has been aggreived?

In all fairness, I think it's the red mist hypothesis. I do believe he always puts in everything, especially when he feels he's suffered an injustice (ie, always...)

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:13

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:He didn't have to give the place back until the stewards said so. But then Kubica went out, so Alonso could not give the position back anyway. Is that Alonso's fault? bathplug no. If they wanted to give a penalty, an appropriate one would be a 5-second penalty similar to the ones we saw in Valencia.

Alonso shouldn't have to wait until the stewards told him to hand the place back. He knew he was past Kubica and he knew he'd gone off the circuit in the process. He should have moved over the moment he got onto the straight between Club and Abbey and he would have spared himself the trouble. The penalty for not giving back a place that was unfairly claimed was and always has been a drive-through. The simple fact is that Alonso benefited the moment he was clear of Kubica - he could have set faster laps and put himself in a better position pit strategy-wise. To give him a five-second penalty would have done about as much for him as Hamilton's drive through at Valencia did. The only reason anyone is making anything of this is because it's Alonso and Ferrari. If this was a case of Liuzzi passing one of the new teams, nothing would have been made of it.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:15

CarlosFerreira wrote:
dr-baker wrote:Is it because he sees red mist and has no fog-lights to see through the mist, or he just gives up and trundles round, dwelling on how he has been aggreived?

In all fairness, I think it's the red mist hypothesis. I do believe he always puts in everything, especially when he feels he's suffered an injustice (ie, always...)

But unfortunately for him (as I am no Alonso fan to be fair) it just seems to get in the way of him being able to acheive what he ought to be capable of. If he wasn't so emotional and petchulant, I'ld like him a bit more...

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:22

dr-baker wrote:
CarlosFerreira wrote:In all fairness, I think it's the red mist hypothesis. I do believe he always puts in everything, especially when he feels he's suffered an injustice (ie, always...)

But unfortunately for him (as I am no Alonso fan to be fair) it just seems to get in the way of him being able to acheive what he ought to be capable of. If he wasn't so emotional and petchulant, I'ld like him a bit more...

Absolutely. Autosport ran a piece a couple of weeks ago on the pros and cons of each of the current greats in F1. About Fernando they said exactly that - he seems to lose out frequently for being too emotional. Likewise, Webber is too eager (I was reminded of it when he lost it completely at the start in Valencia and went on to try to get just a tad too much toe from Kovalainen), same as Hamilton (who is getting better and more calm, truth be told), while on the other hand Vettel comes packing that larger-than-life ego.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:54

CarlosFerreira wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
CarlosFerreira wrote:In all fairness, I think it's the red mist hypothesis. I do believe he always puts in everything, especially when he feels he's suffered an injustice (ie, always...)

But unfortunately for him (as I am no Alonso fan to be fair) it just seems to get in the way of him being able to acheive what he ought to be capable of. If he wasn't so emotional and petchulant, I'ld like him a bit more...

Absolutely. Autosport ran a piece a couple of weeks ago on the pros and cons of each of the current greats in F1. About Fernando they said exactly that - he seems to lose out frequently for being too emotional. Likewise, Webber is too eager (I was reminded of it when he lost it completely at the start in Valencia and went on to try to get just a tad too much toe from Kovalainen), same as Hamilton (who is getting better and more calm, truth be told), while on the other hand Vettel comes packing that larger-than-life ego.

It was probably that article that made me realise what I dislike about hime and subsequant races have shown that to be true. Worthy ROTR material?

CarlosFerreira · Post by **CarlosFerreira** » 12 Jul 2010, 10:00

dr-baker wrote:It was probably that article that made me realise what I dislike about hime and subsequant races have shown that to be true. Worthy ROTR material?

Maybe. I wouldn't give ROTR to someone for being eager and having a fighting spirit, but Fernando needs to think it through, that's for sure. As it stands, he is losing too much for excessive aggression - he is a show in himself, but at the end of the day others walk away with the points and trophies.

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 12 Jul 2010, 10:33

Captain Hammer wrote:Alonso shouldn't have to wait until the stewards told him to hand the place back. He knew he was past Kubica and he knew he'd gone off the circuit in the process. He should have moved over the moment he got onto the straight between Club and Abbey and he would have spared himself the trouble. The penalty for not giving back a place that was unfairly claimed was and always has been a drive-through. The simple fact is that Alonso benefited the moment he was clear of Kubica - he could have set faster laps and put himself in a better position pit strategy-wise. To give him a five-second penalty would have done about as much for him as Hamilton's drive through at Valencia did. The only reason anyone is making anything of this is because it's Alonso and Ferrari. If this was a case of Liuzzi passing one of the new teams, nothing would have been made of it.

However, as I tried to explain, he didn't really have much choice, you cannot penalize a driver that is forced to do his move.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 12 Jul 2010, 11:57

How was he forced? He was on the outside going into Vale. Kubica had the racing line. If Alonso was forced off-line, it was his own fault.

Aerond · Post by **Aerond** » 12 Jul 2010, 12:00

The stewards, again.

They´re going to win the reject of the year award as well...