• Re: Masi

    From Mark@21:1/5 to user@account.invalid on Mon Dec 13 12:41:43 2021
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From keithr0@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 13 22:24:49 2021
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 13 13:35:48 2021
    keithr0 wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull).

    "nobody"?

    It is would not have been an ideal end to the race but if he had
    followed normal procedures nobody could complain that it was
    fundamentally unfair... even if they had cleared the track and sent all
    the lapped cars a lap earlier.

    If he kept all
    the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high
    heaven.

    As they would have done if the race had ended under the SC.

    So by following normal procedures only one team would have been unhappy
    but they were going to lose the race if the accident had not happened
    so the status quo would have been maintained.

    So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all.

    Track position vs brand new soft tyres. With Hamilton needing to finish
    the race in order to be champion that was only ever going to go one way.

    Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    What Merc tactic did that? There was no better tactic available to them
    without being forewarned that the RD would change his mind multiple
    times and eventually choose not to follow the regulations.


    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    The only one of those who did not follow the normal procedure as laid
    out in detail in the F1 Sporting Regulation 2021.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Mark on Mon Dec 13 10:55:34 2021
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very old
    softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael Masi
    is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen came to both
    turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was defending the inside.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From alister@21:1/5 to Mark on Mon Dec 13 19:40:15 2021
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 12:41:43 -0000 (UTC), Mark wrote:

    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he
    tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately
    Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    Masi , yo follow the rules which was either wait a lap after the lapped
    cars have passed the saftey car (which would have meant a saftey car
    finish)
    or bring it in when he did leaving Max to contend with the lapped cars - difficult but not totally impossible.

    Bending rules is bad - completely ignoring them is inexcusable, who does
    he think he is Boris Johnson?



    --
    Laugh, and the world ignores you. Crying doesn't help either.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 14 10:12:30 2021
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 10:17:52 2021
    On 14/12/2021 7:55 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would >>> have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in >>> place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    No, we went car-procession followed by an unearned and gifted win.


    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Like you would have or could have ?


    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very old
    softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael Masi
    is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen came to both
    turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was defending the inside.

    Maybe you should write in offering to tutor him on how to defend ?

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 13:31:19 2021
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he
    tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately
    Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 13:32:27 2021
    On 2021-12-13 1:17 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 7:55 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past >>>> then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to >>>> set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    No, we went car-procession followed by an unearned and gifted win.


    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Like you would have or could have ?

    How about like Perez did to him: hard but fair?



    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very old
    softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael Masi
    is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen came to both
    turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was defending the inside.

    Maybe you should write in offering to tutor him on how to defend ?

    Maybe someone should...

    ...because he gifted Verstappen the inside opportunity at turn 5.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 10:44:50 2021
    On 14/12/2021 10:31 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all
    the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high
    heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all.
    Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?


    Somebody back here a wee way did exactly that - posted a list of races
    (last races of season even ?) ended under safety car.

    And a list of races ended under this circumstances - ie none.


    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    No, but I wouldn't be surprised if you had, with your skewed biased POV
    when it suited you.

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    No. Because it had never been done in that manner before. Nobody would
    have ever thought of that permutation of the rules being vaguely possible.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 10:47:19 2021
    On 14/12/2021 10:32 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:17 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 7:55 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past >>>>> then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to >>>>> set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    No, we went car-procession followed by an unearned and gifted win.


    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Like you would have or could have ?

    How about like Perez did to him: hard but fair?



    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very old
    softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael
    Masi is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen came to
    both turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was defending the inside.

    Maybe you should write in offering to tutor him on how to defend ?

    Maybe someone should...

    ...because he gifted Verstappen the inside opportunity at turn 5.

    Or maybe he knew his tyres better than you knew his tyres, and didn't
    want to take out VER, or be taken out by VER, or lose control given his
    speed, trajectory, and braking.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 21:50:21 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 13:55:32 2021
    On 2021-12-13 1:44 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 10:31 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all
    the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high
    heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all.
    Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?


    Somebody back here a wee way did exactly that - posted a list of races
    (last races of season  even ?) ended under safety car.

    And a list of races ended under this circumstances - ie none.

    "Somebody", huh?

    Let's see it.



    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    No, but I wouldn't be surprised if you had, with your skewed biased POV
    when it suited you.

    Nope. I honestly don't know.


    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    No. Because it had never been done in that manner before. Nobody would
    have ever thought of that permutation of the rules being vaguely possible.

    Sorry, but you're still making a claim you won't support.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 13:58:51 2021
    On 2021-12-13 1:47 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 10:32 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:17 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 7:55 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody >>>>>> would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he
    tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    No, we went car-procession followed by an unearned and gifted win.


    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Like you would have or could have ?

    How about like Perez did to him: hard but fair?

    Well?




    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very old
    softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael
    Masi is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen came to
    both turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was defending the inside. >>>
    Maybe you should write in offering to tutor him on how to defend ?

    Maybe someone should...

    ...because he gifted Verstappen the inside opportunity at turn 5.

    Or maybe he knew his tyres better than you knew his tyres, and didn't
    want to take out VER, or be taken out by VER, or lose control given his speed, trajectory, and braking.

    So you're saying he didn't want to risk losing...

    ...by letting himself lose.

    And this is where your ignorance of racing comes in:

    Hamilton's error wasn't failing to brake later.

    It was failing to defend the inside line.

    You're right that Hamilton knows his tires, and he knows that it is
    possible to take a slower line that forces a driver wanting to overtake
    to go around the outside.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Bigbird on Mon Dec 13 14:01:00 2021
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened before
    that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or that the
    safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 22:46:55 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:17 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 7:55 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:41 a.m., Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars past then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull).
    If he kept all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would
    have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on
    one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics
    made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past
    precedent. He didn't.

    I'm sorry, but are you a lawyer or a motor racing official?

    I'll go with Masi's words to Toto Wolff:

    "Toto, it's called a motor race, okay? We went car racing."

    No, we went car-procession followed by an unearned and gifted win.


    Hamilton should have worked harder to keep Verstappen behind him.

    Like you would have or could have ?

    How about like Perez did to him: hard but fair?


    In what way is it relevant to the discussion as to whether the
    regulations were adhered to?

    The situations were not identical. For instance, Perez had not just
    restarted on worn hard tyres behind a SC, Perez could afford a
    collision, Hamilton could not so, the attempted inferences are simply
    ignorant.

    I expect no more of someone who argued that applying a boot full of
    throttle and full lock would not have any effect on an already
    understeering car but turning in on cold hard tyres doesn't always go
    as might be hoped.

    The fact is that Max did get past Lewis as anyone with a smidgen of
    knowledge would have expected was very likely.

    Let me give you a couple of clues. The delta between hard and soft
    compounds is around 1.5 seconds.... when they are brand new. Now add
    that to the difference between brand new tyres and tyres that have done
    40 laps.



    Perez did it to him for one lap after all, and Perez was on very
    old softs when he did it.

    Hamilton didn't even defend the inside going into turn 5. Michael
    Masi is definitely not responsible for that. When Verstappen
    came to both turn 6 and turn 9, you better believe he was
    defending the inside.

    Maybe you should write in offering to tutor him on how to defend ?

    Maybe someone should...

    ...because he gifted Verstappen the inside opportunity at turn 5.

    Because you know so much more than a 7 times WDC about what is and
    isn't possible of cold hard tyres. So you claim you would have defended
    the inside and been a sitting duck all the way down the longest
    straight on the circuit.

    Give it a rest you conceited jerk.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 22:54:42 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars past then the race would have finished behind the
    safety car and nobody would have been happy (especially Red
    Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull
    would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to set up a
    one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention to note that this has never happened before but a lot of
    us are quite fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls
    no matter a clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    .

    You thick cunt.

    The regs don't even call for the cars to unlap themselves in all
    situations so your attempted assertion is plain ignorant. You should
    read the regs before attempting to be a smart arse.

    Now if you claim there is a precedent for the disregard of the SC
    regulations as happened on Sunday

    "..you're just a liar."

    But we already know that.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 23:01:32 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:44 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 10:31 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars past then the race would have finished behind the
    safety car and nobody would have been happy (especially Red
    Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull
    would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to set up a
    one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?


    Somebody back here a wee way did exactly that - posted a list of
    races (last races of season  even ?) ended under safety car.

    And a list of races ended under this circumstances - ie none.

    "Somebody", huh?

    Let's see it.



    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    No, but I wouldn't be surprised if you had, with your skewed biased
    POV when it suited you.

    Nope. I honestly don't know.


    So you admit being an ignorant blow hard who knows of no such precedent
    or any mention of any such precedent among all the articles written
    since Sunday; IOW as far as you know it is unprecedented.

    What a shocker.


    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 23:01:38 2021
    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    That is simply untrue.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 13:16:17 2021
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past  then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody  would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped  cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he  tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately  Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened before
    that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or that the
    safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than
    attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 16:34:52 2021
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 15:24:16 2021
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past  then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody  would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped  cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he  tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately  Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 18:38:18 2021
    On 2021-12-13 6:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a
    foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are
    quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than
    attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.
    As I said, it's not my place to claim anything.

    Others have claimed there is no precedent for this.

    Let them prove it.

    In the absence of that, I have the rejection of Mercedes's protests.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 17:08:31 2021
    On 14/12/2021 3:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 6:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
      > On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
      >> On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
      >>> Alan wrote:
      >>>
      >>>> On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
      >>>>> On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
      >>>>>> The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
      >>>>>> past  then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and
      >>>>>> nobody  would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
      >>>>>> all the lapped  cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
      >>>>>> to high heaven. So he  tried to set up a one on one one lap
      >>>>>> winner takes all. Unfortunately  Mercs tactics made it a foregone
      >>>>>> conclusion.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?
      >>>>>
      >>>>> Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> No precedent whatsoever for what he did.
      >>>>
      >>>> How do you know that?
      >>>>
      >>>> Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
      >>>> introduced?
      >>>>
      >>>> Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no
    one
      >>>> here would have batted an eye.
      >>>
      >>> Don't be so bloody stupid.
      >>>
      >>> You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
      >>> to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are
    quite
      >>> fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
      >>> clear disregard of the written regulations.
      >>
      >> If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
      >> before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
      >> that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...
      >>
      >> ...you're just a liar.
      >
      > You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than
      > attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.
    As I said, it's not my place to claim anything.

    Others have claimed there is no precedent for this.

    Let them prove it.

    In the absence of that, I have the rejection of Mercedes's protests.

    Pathetic. Why don't you just admit that the is no precedent ? Nobody in
    the media, teams, or commentators has even suggested that there is a
    precedent - quite the opposite.

    Maybe, jut maybe, there is none.

    geoff

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 20:23:58 2021
    On 2021-12-13 8:08 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 3:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 6:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the
    lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he
    kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have
    screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a
    foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season,
    no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are
    quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no
    matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never
    happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap
    themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following
    lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather
    than
    attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.
    As I said, it's not my place to claim anything.

    Others have claimed there is no precedent for this.

    Let them prove it.

    In the absence of that, I have the rejection of Mercedes's protests.

    Pathetic. Why don't you just admit that the is no precedent ? Nobody in
    the media, teams, or commentators has even suggested that there is a precedent - quite the opposite.

    Maybe, jut maybe, there is none.


    Maybe there isn't.

    But no one posting HERE knows whether or not that's true.

    But they're all busily posted as if the know it all.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From texas gate@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 21:05:39 2021
    On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 9:24:01 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 8:08 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 3:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 6:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the
    lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he
    kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have
    screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a
    foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season,
    no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are
    quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no
    matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never
    happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap
    themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following
    lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather
    than
    attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.
    As I said, it's not my place to claim anything.

    Others have claimed there is no precedent for this.

    Let them prove it.

    In the absence of that, I have the rejection of Mercedes's protests.

    Pathetic. Why don't you just admit that the is no precedent ? Nobody in
    the media, teams, or commentators has even suggested that there is a precedent - quite the opposite.

    Maybe, jut maybe, there is none.
    Maybe there isn't.

    But no one posting HERE knows whether or not that's true.

    But they're all busily posted as if the know it all.

    you pair of fags
    get a room
    use protection ffs

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From texas gate@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 21:13:25 2021
    On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 9:24:01 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 8:08 p.m., geoff wrote:

    Maybe, jut maybe,

    Maybe

    get a room you pair of wishy washy fags

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From texas gate@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 21:21:42 2021
    On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 9:24:01 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:

    But they're all busily posted as if the know it all.

    you fucking freak

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From texas gate@21:1/5 to geoff on Mon Dec 13 21:26:10 2021
    On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 9:08:37 PM UTC-7, geoff wrote:

    Maybe, jut maybe,

    you feminine piece of shit

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From texas gate@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Dec 13 21:33:19 2021
    On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 9:24:01 PM UTC-7, Alan wrote:

    But they're all busily posted as if the know it all.

    Hi brain dead
    form a sentence
    you stupid cunt

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From keithr0@21:1/5 to Mark on Tue Dec 14 16:23:25 2021
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship going
    to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close to the final lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I
    leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed around
    here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the
    result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton that he had a
    likely victory taken away by events beyond his control, but he is hardly
    the first to suffer that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 13 23:38:42 2021
    On 2021-12-13 10:23 p.m., keithr0 wrote:
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship going
    to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close to the final
    lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I
    leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed around here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the
    result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton that he had a likely victory taken away by events beyond his control, but he is hardly
    the first to suffer that.

    The last reason he lost was that he failed to defend the inside into
    turn 5...

    ...and that one was all on him.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Harran@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 09:03:57 2021
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 13:31:19 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he
    tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately
    Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?


    Can you give a single example of an incident where the race director
    allowed *some but not all* lapped cars to pass the safety car?


    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    That decison would ghve generated discussion no matter what race it
    took place in.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Harran@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 09:06:13 2021
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 18:38:18 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 6:24 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:34 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 4:16 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 11:01 am, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed
    to high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap
    winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a
    foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one >> >>>> here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are
    quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    You are the one who's favourite line is "prove it". So rather than
    attempting to deflect (as per normal), simply prove it.

    I'm not the one claiming that this move is without precedent.

    I have the FIA's rejection of both of Mercedes protests on my side.

    So I guess that is a "can't prove it" then.
    As I said, it's not my place to claim anything.

    Others have claimed there is no precedent for this.

    Let them prove it.

    In the absence of that, I have the rejection of Mercedes's protests.

    Asking people to prove a negative - the last refuge of idiots who
    can't some up with a single example to disprove a claim.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Harran@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 14 09:07:23 2021
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 23:01:38 -0000 (UTC), Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced? >>
    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    That is simply untrue.


    What would you know, have you ever driven a racing car? ... :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 22:07:31 2021
    On 14/12/2021 8:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 10:23 p.m., keithr0 wrote:
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody
    would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship going
    to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close to the final
    lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I
    leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed around here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton that he had a likely victory taken away by events beyond his control, but he is hardly the first to suffer that.

    The last reason he lost was that he failed to defend the inside into
    turn 5...

    ...and that one was all on him.

    Even if you were right (not suggesting your assertion is actually
    correct), VER would certainly still have got past with his fresh soft tyres.

    geoff

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ~misfit~@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 14 22:08:39 2021
    On 14/12/2021 7:23 pm, keithr0 wrote:
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and nobody would >>> have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in >>> place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship going to the winner in the last
    race and a safety car so close to the final lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I leave that to those with more
    inside knowledge that is displayed around here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the result gone the other way, it
    is kind of sad for Hamilton that he had a likely victory taken away by events beyond his control,
    but he is hardly the first to suffer that.

    Have you heard what other drivers, ex-drivers and people around F1 have had to say? Or are you
    happy in your bubble that 'them's the breaks'?
    --
    Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
    in the DSM"
    David Melville

    This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to geoff on Tue Dec 14 01:23:29 2021
    On 2021-12-14 1:07 a.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 8:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 10:23 p.m., keithr0 wrote:
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:
    ;
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past
    then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would
    have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped
    cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven. So he
    tried to
    set up a one on one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs
    tactics made it a foregone conclusion.
    ;
    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?
    ;
    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.
    ;
    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship going >>  > to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close to the
    final lap.
    ;
    ;
    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I
    leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed
    around
    here.
    ;
    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the
    result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton that he
    had a
    likely victory taken away by events beyond his control, but he is
    hardly
    the first to suffer that.

    The last reason he lost was that he failed to defend the inside into
    turn 5...

    ...and that one was all on him.

    Even if you were right (not suggesting your assertion is actually
    correct), VER would certainly still have got past with his fresh soft
    tyres.

    Eventually... ...maybe.

    But Hamilton had to hold him off for LESS than one lap.

    There are really only three bonafide overtaking opportunities at Abu Dhabi:

    Turn 5

    Turn 6/7

    Turn 9

    Defending the inside at turn 5 was racing 101.

    Again:

    Perez on very old soft tires held off Hamilton for pretty much an entire
    lap.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 14 11:01:04 2021
    keithr0 wrote:

    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:

    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to
    high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner
    takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past precedent. He
    didn't.

    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship
    going to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close to the
    final lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or wrong I
    leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed
    around here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had the
    result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton that he had
    a likely victory taken away by events beyond his control, but he is
    hardly the first to suffer that.

    I don't think you are reading the room particularly well. Of course it
    goes without saying that if the manipulation had not changed the result
    people would talk about it less but it would be hardly any less
    controversial; just as with other incidents that did not affect the
    final result. With a few exceptions most around here are willing to see
    both sides of the coin and are not totally invested in the drivers they support. If Max had won without interference in the rules most would
    have accepted it as he has had a stunning year. For myself when the
    safety car came out I thought it had been handed to Max anyway as it
    looked like the accident would be cleared with time for a lap or two...
    and it probably would have if the RD had followed what has happened
    previously with releasing the lapped cars somewhat earlier in the
    process. It would have been unfortunate for Lewis but totally fair.

    What we got was an unprecedented manipulation. The ref at a
    football(soccer) match doesn't hand out penalties during injury time
    just to make things interesting.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 11:05:23 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-14 1:07 a.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 8:38 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 10:23 p.m., keithr0 wrote:
    On 13/12/2021 10:41 pm, Mark wrote:
    keithr0 <user@account.invalid> wrote:
    ;
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped
    cars past >> >>> then the race would have finished behind the safety
    car and nobody would >> >>> have been happy (especially Red Bull).
    If he kept all the lapped cars in >> >>> place then Red Bull would
    have screamed to high heaven. So he tried to >> >>> set up a one on
    one one lap winner takes all. Unfortunately Mercs >> >>> tactics made
    it a foregone conclusion.
    ;
    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?
    ;
    Masi. In a race like this, you rule in line with past
    precedent. He >> >> didn't.
    ;
    AFAIK there was no precedent for the situation, the championship
    going >> > to the winner in the last race and a safety car so close
    to the final lap.


    I see what Masi was trying to do, whether that was right or
    wrong I >> > leave that to those with more inside knowledge that is displayed around >> > here.

    I do feel that there would be less hand wringing around here had
    the >> > result gone the other way, it is kind of sad for Hamilton
    that he had a >> > likely victory taken away by events beyond his
    control, but he is hardly >> > the first to suffer that.

    The last reason he lost was that he failed to defend the inside
    into turn 5...

    ...and that one was all on him.

    Even if you were right (not suggesting your assertion is actually
    correct), VER would certainly still have got past with his fresh
    soft tyres.

    Eventually... ...maybe.


    The very next corner... almost certainly unless Max screwed up.

    But Hamilton had to hold him off for LESS than one lap.

    There are really only three bonafide overtaking opportunities at Abu
    Dhabi:

    Turn 5

    Turn 6/7

    Turn 9

    Defending the inside at turn 5 was racing 101.


    As is getting a run down the straight.

    As stupid as you are you have to admit Lewis knows a thing or two about
    racing and he was probably thinking a few corners ahead of you.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 11:20:59 2021
    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-14 1:07 a.m., geoff wrote:

    Even if you were right (not suggesting your assertion is actually
    correct), VER would certainly still have got past with his fresh soft
    tyres.

    Eventually... ...maybe.

    But Hamilton had to hold him off for LESS than one lap.

    There are really only three bonafide overtaking opportunities at Abu Dhabi:

    Turn 5

    Turn 6/7

    Turn 9

    Defending the inside at turn 5 was racing 101.

    Again:

    Perez on very old soft tires held off Hamilton for pretty much an entire
    lap.

    Now I *know* you're trolling.

    Hamilton simply couldn't afford any contact with Perez in the earlier situation. And, no, before anyone suggests it, I am *not* suggesting any
    dirty tricks from Perez, but he could certainly aggressively defend in
    the knowledge that:

    a) Hamilton is going to avoid contact; and
    b) Even if he's aggressive, the consequences of such contact are
    much worse for Hamilton/Mercedes than for Red Bull.

    That is just a very different situation to Verstappen on fresh rubber
    chasing down Hamilton. If there was contact between the two of them (particularly given the dire warnings about contact given during the
    preceding week) the risk would be about being declassified...in which
    event (no matter where Verstappen ended up) he would also lose.

    This was a no-win situation the second the Race Director made it a
    single lap sprint pitting Hamilton on worn tyres against Verstappen on
    fresh tyres with no obstructions.

    Go on: directly address that. If you *really* know anything about
    racing, you know this is true. If you change the subject again, it just
    shows you are deliberately obfuscating the discussion.

    I do not have a problem with most of this race. I *do* have problems
    (with Hamilton, Verstappen, Mercedes *and* Red Bull) in different ways
    at different points earlier in the season. The Race Director and
    stewards have created a problem that has come to a climax in the final
    race. IF it had ended under the SC (or similar) such that Hamilton won,
    it would have been a somewhat contentious/compromised outcome. IF it had
    ended with different calls putting Verstappen ahead and winning the race
    there would have been a different set of recriminations.

    The issue for me is this: Masi took a number of "peculiar" positions on
    the ending of the SC that conflict with the accepted interpretation of
    the rules. No matter how much people play lawyer with "X overrides Y",
    the fact that this happened in an unprecedented* way in the one way that guaranteed a specific impact on the result looks bad.

    That Masi and his rulings have become the story is a problem.

    * If you are unhappy with "unprecedented", you need only state the
    precedent. It doesn't even have to be precisely the same context, just
    show me in a grand prix in the past 30 years (quite a long time, lots
    of SC periods) where the race director both partially unlapped the
    cars and called the SC in the same lap rather than the "following
    lap".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From alister@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 12:13:58 2021
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:01:00 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all
    the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high
    heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes
    all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened before
    that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or that the
    safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    the rule clearly states FOLLOWING lap
    it has been posted in full numerous times
    are you claiming that this is not so?



    --
    Building translators is good clean fun.
    -- T. Cheatham

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to alister on Tue Dec 14 11:00:37 2021
    On 2021-12-14 4:13 a.m., alister wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:01:00 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars
    past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and
    nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all >>>>>> the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high >>>>>> heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes
    all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention
    to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened before
    that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or that the
    safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    the rule clearly states FOLLOWING lap
    it has been posted in full numerous times
    are you claiming that this is not so?

    No.

    I'm stating that to present as factual that which you know you do not
    have full knowledge of...

    ...is just another way of lying.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bigbird@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 19:57:04 2021
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-14 4:13 a.m., alister wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:01:00 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the
    lapped cars past then the race would have finished
    behind the safety car and nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all the lapped cars in
    place then Red Bull would have screamed to high heaven.
    So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes
    all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season,
    no one here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention to note that this has never happened before but a lot
    of us are quite fed up with the inconsistency of even
    subjective calls no matter a clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves,
    or that the safety car has never come in before the "following
    lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    the rule clearly states FOLLOWING lap
    it has been posted in full numerous times
    are you claiming that this is not so?

    No.

    I'm stating that to present as factual that which you know you do not
    have full knowledge of...

    ...is just another way of lying.

    Claims the biggest fucking liar on the group.

    You falsely implied that someone had said that there were definitely no precedents in order to present your falsehoods.

    Now having thought about it I can categorically say that since that
    rule was re-introduced and probably ever, I don't believe there are any precedents for what happened on Sunday and you claiming there are is a deliberate falsehood that for all you blustering, you cannot support.

    --
    Bozo bin
    Build
    Texasgate
    Enjoy!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Mark on Wed Dec 15 09:58:46 2021
    On 15/12/2021 12:20 am, Mark wrote:
    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-14 1:07 a.m., geoff wrote:

    Even if you were right (not suggesting your assertion is actually
    correct), VER would certainly still have got past with his fresh soft
    tyres.

    Eventually... ...maybe.

    But Hamilton had to hold him off for LESS than one lap.

    There are really only three bonafide overtaking opportunities at Abu Dhabi: >>
    Turn 5

    Turn 6/7

    Turn 9

    Defending the inside at turn 5 was racing 101.

    Again:

    Perez on very old soft tires held off Hamilton for pretty much an entire
    lap.

    Now I *know* you're trolling.

    Hamilton simply couldn't afford any contact with Perez in the earlier situation. And, no, before anyone suggests it, I am *not* suggesting any dirty tricks from Perez, but he could certainly aggressively defend in
    the knowledge that:

    a) Hamilton is going to avoid contact; and
    b) Even if he's aggressive, the consequences of such contact are
    much worse for Hamilton/Mercedes than for Red Bull.

    That is just a very different situation to Verstappen on fresh rubber
    chasing down Hamilton. If there was contact between the two of them (particularly given the dire warnings about contact given during the preceding week) the risk would be about being declassified...in which
    event (no matter where Verstappen ended up) he would also lose.

    This was a no-win situation the second the Race Director made it a
    single lap sprint pitting Hamilton on worn tyres against Verstappen on
    fresh tyres with no obstructions.

    Go on: directly address that. If you *really* know anything about
    racing, you know this is true. If you change the subject again, it just
    shows you are deliberately obfuscating the discussion.

    I do not have a problem with most of this race. I *do* have problems
    (with Hamilton, Verstappen, Mercedes *and* Red Bull) in different ways
    at different points earlier in the season. The Race Director and
    stewards have created a problem that has come to a climax in the final
    race. IF it had ended under the SC (or similar) such that Hamilton won,
    it would have been a somewhat contentious/compromised outcome. IF it had ended with different calls putting Verstappen ahead and winning the race there would have been a different set of recriminations.

    The issue for me is this: Masi took a number of "peculiar" positions on
    the ending of the SC that conflict with the accepted interpretation of
    the rules. No matter how much people play lawyer with "X overrides Y",
    the fact that this happened in an unprecedented* way in the one way that guaranteed a specific impact on the result looks bad.

    That Masi and his rulings have become the story is a problem.

    * If you are unhappy with "unprecedented", you need only state the
    precedent. It doesn't even have to be precisely the same context, just
    show me in a grand prix in the past 30 years (quite a long time, lots
    of SC periods) where the race director both partially unlapped the
    cars and called the SC in the same lap rather than the "following
    lap".

    No - we have to 'prove' that this hasn't happened before. Apparently. Ha ha.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From geoff@21:1/5 to Martin Harran on Wed Dec 15 10:00:54 2021
    On 14/12/2021 10:07 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 23:01:38 -0000 (UTC), Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced? >>>
    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here
    would have batted an eye.

    That is simply untrue.


    What would you know, have you ever driven a racing car? ... :)

    I drove a go-kart, but got overtaken at turn 5.

    geoff

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From alister@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 21:41:55 2021
    On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 11:00:37 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-14 4:13 a.m., alister wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:01:00 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars >>>>>>> past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and >>>>>>> nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept
    all the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to >>>>>>> high heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner
    takes all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone
    conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough
    attention to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us
    are quite fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no
    matter a clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened
    before that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or
    that the safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    the rule clearly states FOLLOWING lap it has been posted in full
    numerous times are you claiming that this is not so?

    No.

    I'm stating that to present as factual that which you know you do not
    have full knowledge of...

    ...is just another way of lying.

    How can a direct copy and paste form the official FIA document regrding
    rule 48.12 be anything but factual?

    I quoted the rule in full & it was not adhered to (which you have now
    admitted in another post.
    I await your apologies, but I wont hold my breath as I doubt you have the integrity to do so (I will happily apologise for this remark if it proves
    to be wrong)



    --
    "Don't think; let the machine do it for you!"
    -- E. C. Berkeley

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Matt Larkin@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Dec 14 22:45:19 2021
    On Tuesday, 14 December 2021 at 19:00:39 UTC, Alan wrote:
    On 2021-12-14 4:13 a.m., alister wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:01:00 -0800, Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:50 p.m., Bigbird wrote:
    Alan wrote:

    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:
    On 14/12/2021 1:24 am, keithr0 wrote:
    The guy was on a hiding to nothing, if he let all the lapped cars >>>>>> past then the race would have finished behind the safety car and >>>>>> nobody would have been happy (especially Red Bull). If he kept all >>>>>> the lapped cars in place then Red Bull would have screamed to high >>>>>> heaven. So he tried to set up a one on one one lap winner takes
    all. Unfortunately Mercs tactics made it a foregone conclusion.

    So whos at fault? Masi, Mercs strategists, Latifi or who?

    Plenty of precedent for ending the race under safety-car.

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was
    introduced?

    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one
    here would have batted an eye.

    Don't be so bloody stupid.

    You may not mind the regs being flouted, nor pay close enough attention >>> to note that this has never happened before but a lot of us are quite
    fed up with the inconsistency of even subjective calls no matter a
    clear disregard of the written regulations.

    If you're claiming you know for a FACT that it has never happened before >> that not all cars have been allowed to unlap themselves, or that the
    safety car has never come in before the "following lap"...

    ...you're just a liar.

    the rule clearly states FOLLOWING lap
    it has been posted in full numerous times
    are you claiming that this is not so?
    No.

    I'm stating that to present as factual that which you know you do not
    have full knowledge of...

    ...is just another way of lying.
    OK, here is a simple question.

    I cannot think of a single time when the safety car was brought in
    in an F1 race before a whole lap had been completed following the
    unlapping of cars.

    Can you? Just one example would be fine.

    I have looked through records and cannot identify a single time, but
    I accept I may be wrong. I am happy to be proved otherwise.

    Unless I list every time a safety car has been used and link to the
    precise lap charts etc, I assume you will not believe it has not ever
    happened.

    I'm happy to go digging if you point me towards a couple of races
    where you think this breach of rule 48.12 may previously have
    occurred.

    I'm pretty confident that the worldwide press might have picked out
    an example by now if one exists, but maybe they are just being lazy.

    So to my satisfaction, that negative has been proven factually,

    Here is an apparently comprehensive listing of all SC deployments
    in F1 history.

    https://f1.fandom.com/wiki/Safety_Car#Safety_car_finishes

    In none of them that I have browsed through is there any reference
    to either a partial unlapping of the field or the SC coming in after
    unlapping was allowed early.

    Over to you.

    (And yes, I know it doesn't matter because the final decision was that
    the RD can do what he wants, and that is now "the law" as we should
    understand it, but I'd still like to see evidence of this having happened previously and I have not yet discovered any)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Harran@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 15 08:26:08 2021
    rOn Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:00:54 +1300, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org>
    wrote:

    On 14/12/2021 10:07 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 23:01:38 -0000 (UTC), Mark <mpconmy@gmail.com>
    wrote:

    Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    On 2021-12-13 1:12 p.m., geoff wrote:

    No precedent whatsoever for what he did.

    How do you know that?

    Have you reviewed every safety car incident since the rule was introduced? >>>>
    Honestly: if this had happened in the middle of the season, no one here >>>> would have batted an eye.

    That is simply untrue.


    What would you know, have you ever driven a racing car? ... :)

    I drove a go-kart, but got overtaken at turn 5.


    :)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Brian Lawrence@21:1/5 to Matt Larkin on Wed Dec 15 10:40:09 2021
    On 15/12/2021 06:45, Matt Larkin wrote:

    Here is an apparently comprehensive listing of all SC deployments
    in F1 history.

    https://f1.fandom.com/wiki/Safety_Car#Safety_car_finishes

    That list does have an error, which also exists in the similar list
    in Wikipedia.

    In both lists the 2009 Japanese GP is shown as having a SC from lap
    1 to 7 (5 full laps). If we can agree that ForIX is a good source,
    they have a lapchart which is generated from the official FIA lap
    chart. The only SC in that GP started on lap 46 and ended on lap
    49, with 4 laps remaining. The Wikipedia report for that race

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Japanese_Grand_Prix>

    says, "whilst Jaime Alguersuari lost control after touching the astro
    turf on the outside of 130R which resulted in a spin into the tyre wall
    and the safety car being deployed ten laps from the end."

    The Wiki list has a link to a BBC text commentary for that race, but the
    link points to a text from the 2012 Japanese GP.

    When Alguersuari crashed there were two cars that had been lapped
    (Grosjean & Webber). Neither were allowed to unlap themselves before
    the SC was withdrawn. It should be noted that Webber was 2 laps down,
    having started from the pitlane and made 3 pitstops in the first 4
    laps.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)