FIA / GPMA - F1 from 2008 (FIA and GPMA in agreement!)

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:50 pm

julian mayo wrote:I think JV is referring to the bambino/indy series in 2008- a six car ch'ship watched by two drunks and a dog, while the rest of us drunks, dogs, n otherwise watch the mclarens-fords, williams- toyota,
minardi-vw,bar-bently,reynard-cosworth,honda-honda etc in F1

Comments like this belong in the F1 idiots forum.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:59 pm

K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:I think JV is referring to the bambino/indy series in 2008- a six car ch'ship watched by two drunks and a dog, while the rest of us drunks, dogs, n otherwise watch the mclarens-fords, williams- toyota,
minardi-vw,bar-bently,reynard-cosworth,honda-honda etc in F1
Comments like this belong in the F1 idiots forum.

I take it that is your opinion, does anyone else agree with you?

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:59 pm

julian mayo wrote:
K-D wrote:
julian mayo wrote:I think JV is referring to the bambino/indy series in 2008- a six car ch'ship watched by two drunks and a dog, while the rest of us drunks, dogs, n otherwise watch the mclarens-fords, williams- toyota,
minardi-vw,bar-bently,reynard-cosworth,honda-honda etc in F1
Comments like this belong in the F1 idiots forum.
I take it that is your opinion, does anyone else agree with you?

I have no idea, but posts like yours are what is currently stopping this forum from becoming the success that it could have been. There is nothing wrong in disagreeing, but if becomes nothing more than what you have contributed in this thread the past couple of days, it is not a surprice that so few stop and post their opinion.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 6:20 pm

Oh, dear. K-D, sweet fellow, I will post my opinions, as does everyone else. If for some reason, fathomed only by yourself, (although you do appear to take umbrage with anyone who criticises Ferrari), these opinions of mine offend you......tough luck sweety.

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:12 pm

julian mayo wrote:Oh, dear. K-D, sweet fellow, I will post my opinions, as does everyone else. If for some reason, fathomed only by yourself, (although you do appear to take umbrage with anyone who criticises Ferrari), these opinions of mine offend you......tough luck sweety.

Opinions is not really my gripe. You can disagree as musch as you will, but if your concept of arguments or discussion is throwing personal opinions and nothing else. Then there is no argument or discussions possible. Which is why a 9 page thread in this forum have contributions from 10 maybe 11 posters.

You are doing this site a huge disservice, by not being able to seperate being funny, and being serious. This site is more about F1, than about Icetea. Go to the F1idiots and comment on the latter, but keep the F1 discussions and opinions serious.

I have not commented on ferrair the past 3 days, I have commented on the perception of Sauber having been a willing tool of Ferrari, of Red Bull becoming a willing tool of Ferrari, and I have questioned why the same allegations are not being raised against Jordan / Midland.

If you want to critique ferrari, you should chose facts. Jayvee yesterday wrote "facts are facts" - They may be, but exactly whaty facts are we talkig about?? Seems not facts that she will share with me. You consider Ferrari the worst of the worst, this is your opinion, I am not sure why you think so, but you presumably have reasons, which are hopefully not the same childish ones that JayVee has.

But since your postings never answer these questions, there is no way of knowing.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:26 pm

Normally I would not bother to answer your comment , but you have made the mistake of calling JV' comments childish, as well as belittling me. Attack me and be damned Sir, but do not attack some one who is not directly involved in posts with you, please. That is caddish.
Now let us consider the situation shall we.
I posted a comment that in my considered opinion Red Bull would be the ferrari "B" team for reasons stated. You have yet to provide a logical, reasonable counterpoint to this. JV then made a comment of a similar nature. You have yet to provide aa logical counterpoint to her comments.
Instead you resort to personal attacks in a manner unbecoming a gentleman, yet which seems to sit comfortably upon you.
Perhaps the reason for your perceived numerical scarcity of "posters" lies elsewhere than where you would lay blame.
Regardless, I strongly commend to you a sense of humour.

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:10 pm

Normally I would not bother to answer your comment , but you have made the mistake of calling JV' comments childish, as well as belittling me. Attack me and be damned Sir, but do not attack some one who is not directly involved in posts with you, please. That is caddish.

Try to pay attention instead of mouting of. JayVee have posted and commented, I have replied to booth your and her childish somments.

Now let us consider the situation shall we.
I posted a comment that in my considered opinion Red Bull would be the ferrari "B" team for reasons stated. You have yet to provide a logical, reasonable counterpoint to this.

You are the one who have sofar failed to give anything but inane, childish comments. I have explained logically and reasonably whay I think your comments to be incorrect. But you seem intent on not acknowledging that.

JV then made a comment of a similar nature. You have yet to provide aa logical counterpoint to her comments.

All you have to do is read the thread. I have replied to every single post made by JayVee.

Instead you resort to personal attacks in a manner unbecoming a gentleman, yet which seems to sit comfortably upon you.

What persoanl attacks?? You post drivel and childish, and I call you on that. That is a personal remark?? Go read a dictionary.

Perhaps the reason for your perceived numerical scarcity of "posters" lies elsewhere than where you would lay blame.

Neither of us know, I have posted what I think.

Regardless, I strongly commend to you a sense of humour.

Posting style like yours?? No thanks.

rah · Post by **rah** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:14 pm

Ok kids, its time to play nice, or I will take your toys away.

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:29 pm

K-D wrote: It is similar in the sense that Jordan / Midland is paying for engines to Toyota. A Toyota driver gets no more or less help from a lapped Jordan / Midland driver, than any other lapped driver.

If you really mean this then I am sorry to tell you that you are naive in thinking that way. Todt never bothered walking down the pit lane to ask Peter Sauber for one of his drivers to move over when being lapped but he does when it is another team

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:40 pm

K-D wrote: I am bothering because the rule was there to be used, but Michelin refused to use them.

No the FIA have not done a back-flip. It has nothing to do with being right or wrong, your refusal to blame the tire manufacturer for the USGP farce, cloud your judgement. Your dislike for Max Mosley cloud your judgement. You should read all the post by all the posters in regard the USGP farce, instead of sitting in your sandbox, throwing toys out.

The FIA have no need to save face, the only party with egg on their face is Michelin, who will be paying for this in several years to come, and not just fiscal.

Again K-D you are being naive (or pretending to be) when you say the FIA have not done a backflip. The FIA ruled that the teams were GUILTY, the teams wanted to appeal then the FIA all of a sudden clears them. If that is not a backflip I don't know what is.
The FIA knew they were very WRONG. If they had any say and I mean any say they would have at least waited until the appeal was heard and then cleared them. Clearing them after ruling they were guilty was a huge slap in the face but (and using your words) your love for Mosley clouds your judgement.

Read what I said about Michelin. I did say it was their fault to start with but we could have had a race had it not been for Mosley. The report by the 19 drivers support what I said, oh I forgot they are clouded too. Actually everyone is clouded except for anyone named K-D and anyone else who repeats what K-D says (but I haven't seen many of those!!)

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:46 pm

K-D wrote:
What is this ?? This is just too defensive!
What does that mean??

It means you assumed I will be looking at the Toyota/Jordan relationship differently. You were wrong!

Facts are facts, a team being supplied an engine by another will make sure they maintain a good relationship.
Yes that I have not disputed at any time. It is the continued insistence byt you and others, that a good relationship is replace with indenture.

In order to keep a good relationship you must keep the supplier happy

The Sauber - Ferrari was as will be the Red Bull - Ferrari similar to the Jordan - Toyota relationship.
Yes a a supplier to a paying customer relationship. Nothing more, nothing less.

Again a naive way of looking at it

A Jordan/Red Bull is less likely to wreck a Toyota's/Ferrari's race than wreck a BAR's race
Utter and complete nonsense.

Niether Toyota nor Ferrari are fighting for the championship so you will not likely see it this year but in 2003 (if you care to remember, Sauber moved over for Ferrari far easier than for other teams)

Jordan signing with Bernie is expected. Now we have 3 super teams to race in F1. Read somewhere that Toyota aren't interested in renewing with Jordan then we may soon hear of a Ferrari - Jordan deal.
Is there a meaning hidden somewhere here??

No hidden meaning, just raising the possiblity that Ferrari will also supply Jordan next year and beyond and then you can watch Formula Ferrari from 2008

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:55 pm

K-D wrote:.... the same childish ones that JayVee has ...

Call my comments childish, but as I mentioned in a few posts above, your thinking that Ferrari and Toyota don't have any leverage over Red Bull and Jordan is naive. Pure a simple. No need for facts if you understand how businesses work (which I am sure you do).
If you remember the 2003 season, remember how Saubers used to jump out of Ferraris way. Of course you may choose not to remember but that is up to you.

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:32 pm

If you really mean this then I am sorry to tell you that you are naive in thinking that way. Todt never bothered walking down the pit lane to ask Peter Sauber for one of his drivers to move over when being lapped but he does when it is another team.

I simply do not understand what you are saying.

I contend that Sauber have never instructed his drivers to move over for the Ferrari drivers specifically. I contend that Ferrari have not asked Sauber to have their drivers behave differently to the Ferrari drivers than any other drivers.

Your statement seem to agree with me.

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:33 pm

Again K-D you are being naive (or pretending to be) when you say the FIA have not done a backflip. The FIA ruled that the teams were GUILTY, the teams wanted to appeal then the FIA all of a sudden clears them. If that is not a backflip I don't know what is.

No they have not done a backflip. The FIA had no other parties to blame than the teams, wherefore they had then hauled in front of the World Council. The FIA did not find the guilty of anything, the World Council did.

This whole matter is a case of politics, and control of F1, and as soon as the teams started sending peace signals, the FIA met with their representatives and have suggested to the FIA senate, that no penalties are given to the teams.

The Senate may or may not decide to follow the recommendation of the FIA.

The ?new evidence? is once more showing how this USGP farce were the fault of Michelin and no one else. Mosly, the stewards and the FIA could not do other than insist that the rules and regulations were followed. Your contention that they could have had a race with all cars, is dependent on the track being reconfigured. That is patently against the rules, which is why it was never going to happen.

I don?t care what 1, 2 or 200 drivers think or support. The rules and regulations that the F1 championships are being fought for under, are the same rules for all. And no matter how much or little you, I and x number of drivers think of them, they can not be changed in the middle of a race, based on a tire manufacturer messing up in building a race tire.

There is no being correct by being in the majority, that is only being in the majority nothing else. I have no idea how many posters agree with me, I think that they are staying away in droves, due to the poor posting style of posters like Julian, he thinks not.. You seemingly agree more with him than me.

K-D · Post by **K-D** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:35 pm

JayVee wrote:
K-D wrote:.... the same childish ones that JayVee has ...
Call my comments childish, but as I mentioned in a few posts above, your thinking that Ferrari and Toyota don't have any leverage over Red Bull and Jordan is naive. Pure a simple. No need for facts if you understand how businesses work (which I am sure you do).
If you remember the 2003 season, remember how Saubers used to jump out of Ferraris way. Of course you may choose not to remember but that is up to you.

Sauber drivers never did.

You posted 2 days ago "facts are facts"

What are the facts????`A few or even one example would be interesting.