Fernando Alonso
Discussion
TheDeuce said:
Naturally as Brits with a team such as McLaren at stake we have a particular interest. But surely anyone that was watching during his time at the team must have noticed he's a bit of dick sometimes 
Well yeah, I was just trying NOT to say that! Trying to be a bit more objective about that specifically as I know that when I see Alonso and think of spygate, I don't think about de la Rosa, Coughlan or Stepney. Just Alonso. However, I agree and that was my point about it being inevitable he would go on to leave Ferrari under a cloud. Because he's a bit of a dick at times. deadslow said:
But the oft-quoted 'blackmail' attempt was actually just an argument. Alonso went to Ron and asked him to stop Hamilton acting like a prize prick. The argument got out of hand and Alonso threw the spygate stuff into the conversation. Ron D later stated he would expect no less from such a committed winner. Within 10 mins Alonso had apologised and the matter could have been forgotten or at least dealt with internally.
Rose tinted glasses much? Alonso was furious at the 5 place grid drop and went to Ron with his manager Luis Garcia Abad and demanded something was done about Hamilton and also demanded that McLaren make Hamilton run out of fuel in the race.
Alonso threatened Dennis that if the team did not do what he wanted, he would reveal to the FIA emails he had that were relevant to the 'spy-gate' case, in which McLaren had recently escaped censure for one of their engineers possessing a document of confidential Ferrari technical information that ran to nearly 800 pages.
Also not ten minutes from Alonso, but around half an hour from his manager
About half an hour after the meeting, Abad went back to Dennis and said that Alonso wanted to apologise - he had lost his temper and completely retracted everything he said.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/46226823
Crashgate where he insisted he knew nothing?
Byker28i said:
deadslow said:
But the oft-quoted 'blackmail' attempt was actually just an argument. Alonso went to Ron and asked him to stop Hamilton acting like a prize prick. The argument got out of hand and Alonso threw the spygate stuff into the conversation. Ron D later stated he would expect no less from such a committed winner. Within 10 mins Alonso had apologised and the matter could have been forgotten or at least dealt with internally.
Rose tinted glasses much? Byker28i said:
Benson is not a source - he is an embarrassment 
deadslow said:
congratulations! No post on this thread has less insight.
really? ...you should probably go back & re- read a few chapters of that book you've supposedly read (seem to remember a particular chapter called 'buying loyalty'? ...& then read Hamilton's (Maurice- no relation)
Fundoreen said:
Why the hell would the stewards get involved in a driver sitting in his team box for a few seconds longer?
Quite obvious that the hamiltons went and complained.
So its a fair assesment that they cost Mclaren the titles.
so you think stewards only get involved if they are asked? ...even if a specific offence (impeding another driver) is done for a full 10s (not a few) in full glare of TV camera's (along with Ron losing his sQuite obvious that the hamiltons went and complained.
So its a fair assesment that they cost Mclaren the titles.
t)?it's an interesting opinion
angrymoby said:
Fundoreen said:
Why the hell would the stewards get involved in a driver sitting in his team box for a few seconds longer?
Quite obvious that the hamiltons went and complained.
So its a fair assesment that they cost Mclaren the titles.
so you think stewards only get involved if they are asked? ...even if a specific offence (impeding another driver) is done for a full 10s (not a few) in full glare of TV camera's (along with Ron losing his sQuite obvious that the hamiltons went and complained.
So its a fair assesment that they cost Mclaren the titles.
t)?it's an interesting opinion
But whats not in doubt is the result of this incident made all the difference to wether they won the drivers and constructors that year.
You only have to look at the final table. Always a bit of myopia there amongst the mclaren fans.
Fundoreen said:
Maybe Fred should have stalled the car. Obviously just not crafty enough.
But whats not in doubt is the result of this incident made all the difference to wether they won the drivers and constructors that year.
You only have to look at the final table. Always a bit of myopia there amongst the mclaren fans.
IMHO that is rubbish. McLaren scored 218 points before they were DQ, Ferrari were on 204, so that incident cost the team zero positions. The single incident that cost them the WDC was China, leaving Hamilton out on bald tyres. As I mentioned earlier I think that was deliberate, this view has been more or less confirmed by a colleague who was a senior track-side engineer for McLaren at the time.But whats not in doubt is the result of this incident made all the difference to wether they won the drivers and constructors that year.
You only have to look at the final table. Always a bit of myopia there amongst the mclaren fans.
KevinCamaroSS said:
Fundoreen said:
Maybe Fred should have stalled the car. Obviously just not crafty enough.
But whats not in doubt is the result of this incident made all the difference to wether they won the drivers and constructors that year.
You only have to look at the final table. Always a bit of myopia there amongst the mclaren fans.
IMHO that is rubbish. McLaren scored 218 points before they were DQ, Ferrari were on 204, so that incident cost the team zero positions. The single incident that cost them the WDC was China, leaving Hamilton out on bald tyres. As I mentioned earlier I think that was deliberate, this view has been more or less confirmed by a colleague who was a senior track-side engineer for McLaren at the time.But whats not in doubt is the result of this incident made all the difference to wether they won the drivers and constructors that year.
You only have to look at the final table. Always a bit of myopia there amongst the mclaren fans.
KevinCamaroSS said:
IMHO that is rubbish. McLaren scored 218 points before they were DQ, Ferrari were on 204, so that incident cost the team zero positions. The single incident that cost them the WDC was China, leaving Hamilton out on bald tyres. As I mentioned earlier I think that was deliberate, this view has been more or less confirmed by a colleague who was a senior track-side engineer for McLaren at the time.
But why, and on who's authority?thegreenhell said:
KevinCamaroSS said:
IMHO that is rubbish. McLaren scored 218 points before they were DQ, Ferrari were on 204, so that incident cost the team zero positions. The single incident that cost them the WDC was China, leaving Hamilton out on bald tyres. As I mentioned earlier I think that was deliberate, this view has been more or less confirmed by a colleague who was a senior track-side engineer for McLaren at the time.
But why, and on who's authority?I mentioned it earlier.
Simply put, the powers that be did not want a rookie winning the championship because it made F1 look too easy to be the pinnacle of motorsport.
As regards the points the 2 McLaren drivers still scored more than the 2 Ferrari drivers, therefore the Hungary incident had no effect on the WCC.
Simply put, the powers that be did not want a rookie winning the championship because it made F1 look too easy to be the pinnacle of motorsport.
As regards the points the 2 McLaren drivers still scored more than the 2 Ferrari drivers, therefore the Hungary incident had no effect on the WCC.
So you mean Bernie and/or Max Mosley? How did they persuade the team to hobble their own driver?
It all seems extremely unlikely, especially considering the whole Spygate affair and the animosity between Max and Ron. They might conceivably have traded Ham's WDC for leniency in Spygate, but as they didn't receive any leniency then I can't see why they would conspire like that and still leave themselves open over Spygate. There's no upside for the team on either side of the equation to make them do it.
It all seems extremely unlikely, especially considering the whole Spygate affair and the animosity between Max and Ron. They might conceivably have traded Ham's WDC for leniency in Spygate, but as they didn't receive any leniency then I can't see why they would conspire like that and still leave themselves open over Spygate. There's no upside for the team on either side of the equation to make them do it.
KevinCamaroSS said:
I mentioned it earlier.
Simply put, the powers that be did not want a rookie winning the championship because it made F1 look too easy to be the pinnacle of motorsport.
As regards the points the 2 McLaren drivers still scored more than the 2 Ferrari drivers, therefore the Hungary incident had no effect on the WCC.
I don't buy it, because firstly they had no problem when Jacques Villeneuve looked like doing the same thing, and secondly because, from my point of view, I thought having a rookie win was going to be sensational and I'd have taken it as a sign that the rookie was an exceptional talent, not that the competition was too easy. It's not like newcomers make a habit of winning it at their first attempt.Simply put, the powers that be did not want a rookie winning the championship because it made F1 look too easy to be the pinnacle of motorsport.
As regards the points the 2 McLaren drivers still scored more than the 2 Ferrari drivers, therefore the Hungary incident had no effect on the WCC.
So, not saying you're right or wrong, but if that's an opinion, I certainly don't share it. First rookie champion since, well since 1950 as far as I know, first black champion, rookie beats double world champion team mate, the publicity had he won it would have been huge. That's a hollywood movie storyline, because people love seeing those kinds of stories.
What ruined 2007 for me was spygate and the halfway-house penalty applied to McLaren, which neither committed to saying their cars were illegal and couldn't compete, nor committed to saying their cars were OK so carry on. I think it destroyed McLaren's season, and whether or not they deserved it, the punishment didn't fit the decision. If the cars were copies, then exclude them and the drivers. Instead they settled on some neither here nor there solution that let the championship go down to the last race, when either a) McLaren should have wrapped it up easily and not got hobbled to make the show more interesting, or b) McLaren should have been excluded including the drivers.
I never saw Hamilton's Japan retirement because by that time I had stopped watching the races. Once the FIA had announced their verdict, I lost all interest in what could have been one of the most sensational seasons ever if they hadn't meddled and tried to engineer it.
thegreenhell said:
So you mean Bernie and/or Max Mosley? How did they persuade the team to hobble their own driver?
It all seems extremely unlikely, especially considering the whole Spygate affair and the animosity between Max and Ron. They might conceivably have traded Ham's WDC for leniency in Spygate, but as they didn't receive any leniency then I can't see why they would conspire like that and still leave themselves open over Spygate. There's no upside for the team on either side of the equation to make them do it.
I would agree.It all seems extremely unlikely, especially considering the whole Spygate affair and the animosity between Max and Ron. They might conceivably have traded Ham's WDC for leniency in Spygate, but as they didn't receive any leniency then I can't see why they would conspire like that and still leave themselves open over Spygate. There's no upside for the team on either side of the equation to make them do it.
There was also the tampering of Alonso's tyre pressures which understandably pissed him off.
Uncle Ron was firmly in Hamilton's corner
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/60251/1/mclaren-to-b...
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff