We have a Champion

[Mr. Benedict]

Ironically, if the spy scandel hadn't occurred, McLaren would've won the constructors by a point.

:hilarious:

Oops.
But then again, would their car have been as good?

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

This really is clutching at straws. MacLaren are doing a Sheffield United here

Although Steve Berry, the motorbike journo, had an interesting stat last night.

The last person to be found guilty of a fuel temperature violation was Mika Hakkinen in 1997, when he finished 3rd at Spa. His fuel was found to be 12 deg C below the required temperature.

The punishment?

He was disqualified and stripped of his points.

Ahh, the good ole FIA, as consistent as ever. Whilst Championships ought to be won out on the track, the FIA are in a massive pickle here. If Steve Berry's comments last night were correct, then there is a direct precedent on point. McLaren ought to feel very bullish about their prospects in the Court of Arbitration for Sport if they wanted to take it that far - and after the punishment that FIA handed out to them this season, McLaren owe them no favours at all.

If McLaren decide to run that argument, I have no idea what the FIA are going to say in reply.

:eek: :confused:

 

[Pubey]

Although Steve Berry, the motorbike journo, had an interesting stat last night.

The last person to be found guilty of a fuel temperature violation was Mika Hakkinen in 1997, when he finished 3rd at Spa. His fuel was found to be 12 deg C below the required temperature.

The punishment?

He was disqualified and stripped of his points.

Ahh, the good ole FIA, as consistent as ever. Whilst Championships ought to be won out on the track, the FIA are in a massive pickle here. If Steve Berry's comments last night were correct, then there is a direct precedent on point. McLaren ought to feel very bullish about their prospects in the Court of Arbitration for Sport if they wanted to take it that far - and after the punishment that FIA handed out to them this season, McLaren owe them no favours at all.

If McLaren decide to run that argument, I have no idea what the FIA are going to say in reply.

:eek: :confused:

exactly my point, a precedent has been set in the past... but then again this is the FIA we're talking about. McLaren have a leg to stand on with this IMO and I expect them to go the distance... but would still like some answers as to why Hamilton 3-stopped and effectively put to bed his chances of catching up, what really happened to his car and why they left him out so late in china?

 

[C C Csiders]

Max Molesley

I believe I am right in saying that he is Oswald Molesley's son. Maybe he is living out his father's planned dictatorship in the world of motor sport? Is it correct that someone who is the son of an open Hitler admirer, can run a sport. However, wasn't the Spanish bloke in charge of the Olympic movement, whose name escapes me, one of Franco's mates?

 

[Uncle Leo]

I believe I am right in saying that he is Oswald Molesley's son. Maybe he is living out his father's planned dictatorship in the world of motor sport? Is it correct that someone who is the son of an open Hitler admirer, can run a sport. However, wasn't the Spanish bloke in charge of the Olympic movement, whose name escapes me, one of Franco's mates?

Juan Antonio Samaranch?

 

[C C Csiders]

Juan Antonio Samaranch?

That's the one.

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

From Wiki: -

he was appointed as the Government Secretary for Sports by Spanish dictator Francisco Franco in 1966, also becoming the president of the Spanish National Olympic Committee and a member of the IOC. Samaranch was a prominent figure in the last year of Franco's regime.

 

[C C Csiders]

Meet the next President of FIFA:

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

 

[steveo]

If he fails to disqualify the cars which used superdense fuel he will only confirm that he is on a McLaren witch hunt

And also set a dangerous precedent that will allow teams to use it next season, presumably without punishment.

 

[WestRoadShrimper]

Although it will seem a little strange for the world champ to be crowned well after the end of the race, are the FIA REALLY that stupid that they will stick to thier current line of 'yes the rules were broken, but we're not going to impose a punishment'?

If the precedent has been set they're going to have to disqualify them or look VERY silly in the long run.

 

[BLUEBLOOD]

I have to admit i'm not really an F1 fan, but did watch the last couple of races in the hope of seeing a British champion ... however i feel that if this fuel thingy means LH is world champion then how hollow a victory will that be ??? let sleeping dogs lie and hope he wins it "the proper way" next season

 

[JoshC]

I have to admit i'm not really an F1 fan, but did watch the last couple of races in the hope of seeing a British champion ... however i feel that if this fuel thingy means LH is world champion then how hollow a victory will that be ??? let sleeping dogs lie and hope he wins it "the proper way" next season

i agree but if the other teams hadnt have cheated then perhaps hamilton would have come 5th and won. Its all very well saying how he should have won but if 3 of the cars that beat him were cheating then he deserves to win. Besides we need some happiness in british sport after last week

 

[BLUEBLOOD]

i agree but if the other teams hadnt have cheated then perhaps hamilton would have come 5th and won. Its all very well saying how he should have won but if 3 of the cars that beat him were cheating then he deserves to win. Besides we need some happiness in british sport after last week

Well now you put that way :rolleyes: Kick the cheating bastids out and crown Hamilton champion :D

 

[FeedTheGoat]

Although Steve Berry, the motorbike journo, had an interesting stat last night.

The last person to be found guilty of a fuel temperature violation was Mika Hakkinen in 1997, when he finished 3rd at Spa. His fuel was found to be 12 deg C below the required temperature.

The punishment?

He was disqualified and stripped of his points.

Ahh, the good ole FIA, as consistent as ever. Whilst Championships ought to be won out on the track, the FIA are in a massive pickle here. If Steve Berry's comments last night were correct, then there is a direct precedent on point. McLaren ought to feel very bullish about their prospects in the Court of Arbitration for Sport if they wanted to take it that far - and after the punishment that FIA handed out to them this season, McLaren owe them no favours at all.

If McLaren decide to run that argument, I have no idea what the FIA are going to say in reply.

:eek: :confused:

excellent spot there. I had a quick search but could find no precedent, but alas if this is the case then the FIA do indeed find themselves in a bit of a predicament, especially after all the spiel about being happy that the championship was decided on the track, rather than off it.

Still, would they not just say their rules have changed since '97? Would save the main sporting body from making a decisive rule. now where have I heard that one before....:o

 

[FeedTheGoat]

why the 3rd stop?! that's the question i want answering

To be honest, I think the 3rd stop is the least of their worries. I heard one of the MacLaren team saying that the low fuel actually gained Lewis 10 seconds over the course of the 2nd half of the race. I don't believe this, as if it were the truth, surely every team would do it to gain circa 20 seconds per race? I can, in this instance however, see their strategy on this, to give LH a lighter car to catch up with the pack and try to take them, but I still don't fully undersatnd how it makes sense, as a pit stop takes up at least 25 seconds :confused:

For me, however, the team has but one question to answer. Why the devil was Hamilton kept our in China on a bald tyre? :thump: :thump:

 

[steveo]

from Ron:

“People are very quick to talk about strategy but the simple headline is that Fernando, who executed a perfect two stop-strategy in our opinion, was 33 seconds ahead of Lewis when we chose to switch to a three-stop strategy and at the end of the race was 20 seconds ahead of him.

The Gearbox problem cost Hamilton 30-40 seconds and about 10 places. That was the reason he didnt win the title.

 

[Mr. Benedict]

The lower temperature of the fuel would have only gained the cars 7-10BHP, which isn't that great an increase and one which I doubt would have had an impact on the race.

 

[WestRoadShrimper]

The lower temperature of the fuel would have only gained the cars 7-10BHP, which isn't that great an increase and one which I doubt would have had an impact on the race.

How much, though, does 7-10BHP mean in terms of time per lap - then multiply that by the number of laps they'd done. Would that have made a difference to the final places?

I don't know the answer to that one, but I'm sure someone will do!

 

[Mr. Benedict]

Not more than a couple of tenths I reckon.
If Hamilton had finished right behind the pair it probably would have had an effect - however he was well behind at the flag.

 

[WestRoadShrimper]

Now if that's correct, it would've made a big difference. A couple of tenths over a lap, 71 laps = 14.2 seconds over the race. This would have put him within a few seconds of them at the end. Add in the change to a 3 stop to try and help him catch the cars in front - this would not have been necessary as he would have been closer to them already, taking another handful of seconds off of his time.

Not saying it would definitely made a difference, but I'm equally not sure it can be dismissed out of hand.