Clicky

Jump to content
Insider

Today In F1

Recommended Posts

Someone might have told him that honest little boys don't go to hell. Or he could be playing mindgames. Or he doesn't care at all because RBR favour him. Will RBR still favour him after some more such actions and words? My powers of deduction are limited so I'll go with time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring some of the debate around this (which is pointless to go around again), one area where Seb was silly to make such a public statement was that from an employment law/contract perspective an employer could claim evidence of gross misconduct:

  • Clear evidence of insubordination
  • Bringing company into disrepute

OK, so currently he is at the top of the pile and RBR are very unlikely to want to sack him, however over time if the relationship deteriorates, he continues to disobey them or does something that really annoys the team/sponsor, he has given them an excuse on a plate to sack him without any form of compensation.

Better I would have thought, even if he feels this way to keep it quiet and go about his business. I'm not sure I see what he gains from making such public statements of defiance.

Having said that he is probably off to Ferrari so does not care anyway....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring some of the debate around this (which is pointless to go around again), one area where Seb was silly to make such a public statement was that from an employment law/contract perspective an employer could claim evidence of gross misconduct:

  • Clear evidence of insubordination
  • Bringing company into disrepute

OK, so currently he is at the top of the pile and RBR are very unlikely to want to sack him, however over time if the relationship deteriorates, he continues to disobey them or does something that really annoys the team/sponsor, he has given them an excuse on a plate to sack him without any form of compensation.

Better I would have thought, even if he feels this way to keep it quiet and go about his business. I'm not sure I see what he gains from making such public statements of defiance.

Having said that he is probably off to Ferrari so does not care anyway....

He is doing them because bad behavior has been hailed these past weeks as "the thing great drivers should do". His comments about this being a way of paying back Webber only surfaced after everybody else mentioned Mark's past antics. It is obvious that when he did what he did in Malaysia he was not thinking about Silverstone, or Interlagos.

Personally, I find it sad that people is so eager to justify "cheating". Whether he cheated or not is debatable, but the arguments are along the lines of "he cheated, but that's what champions do". I wonder how do you draw a line? Cahmions can cheat but not steal? Or cheat and steal but not commit arson? Or cheat, steal and arson but not murder?

Again, I am not saying Seb cheatad, in fact I think he didn't, I just don't like the idea of people saying "if he did, all the better". The argument that most top drivers "chetaed" is not a valid justification (and in some cases, a grossly distortion of facts). If any, they are champions despite the bad behaviour, not thanks to it. Rascasse, Hungary 2007, Liegate, none of those are marks of true champions, they are petty not too moral acts.

As for his situation with the team, I don't think anybody asking for measures against Seb is really worried about some subversion of the work forces relationships (you commie b#####ds :P) but more just wanting Seb to be punished because they think he is just an unsufferable snotty kid (and, let's be frank, he is :D)

What the team should do is acknowledge that this is a challenge and they must choose a path to deal with it. Options:

1) Accept that the guy's questioning of intra team's chain of command. He practically is isaying "I will do what I please". But he is also unquestionably the biggest asset in the team along with Adrian. Horner is now an ornamental figure.

2) Decide to enforce team's discipline above all. Public flogging of Vettel, and putting Buemi in his place...errr...

3) Discretely bring Seb back to his senses. They should start by finding some way of shutting up him and Marko...not sure they can/want to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4) Replace Webber. Otherwise Seb is right to run his mouth since his teammate doesn't have as big an influence as he does. So either they let him question command and establish his own privilege (a la Ferrari) or they find someone who will be more of a challenge so that they can race and respect each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5) Let the media and some fans worry about it for a couple of races. Let Webber brood. Do absolutely nothing significant with Vettel other than token gestures like apologising, because in reality, they know it will make no difference just as it made no difference in the past with either of these two. And in that past they still won everything, by the way!

The argument that some of the great champions cheated as a justification for Vettel's "cheating" is of course not at all valid. All anybody who makes that argument is actually saying is "when cheating leads to success cheating is okay" which is stupid, though I'm not sure if many people would actually make such an obviously fallacious argument. I think the point is more about context. It's a natural reflex to react to new events by making reference to past events and doing some sort of comparison. As to what that means, well it doesn't have to mean anything in terms of a justification but it probably means everything in terms of understanding the new event in question, the causes behind it, the consequences, and placing our own reactions in proportion, and so on.

The reason I brought up the actions of other drivers was to point out that people should be consistent in their judgement of drivers rather than cherry picking. So you cannot say "Vettel is a cheater" based on this incident without also branding many other drivers cheaters, including the other two top drivers today. That's a sad fact but nonetheless a fact, according to that definition of cheating. I know that will sound like a justification to some people's ears but it isn't, it's only an obvious appeal to fairness and reality in our criticism. "But this is only about Vettel, other drivers are irrelevant, stop defending Vettel!" Other drivers are only irrelevant if you already accepted that other drivers did equally bad things and worse compared to Malaysia 2013, if you don't accept that, other drivers are entirely relevant because if you are unable to see the mistakes of other drivers compared to a particular driver, that brings into question your whole ability to judge that driver at all in the first instance. Bringing up the ethical mistakes of other drivers is a "defence" of Vettel only in the same way that comparing the crimes of one criminal to another is a defence of the first criminal, i.e. not at all a defence.

It's a point about consistency and context rather than to do with arguing for, against, justifying or defending anything (as it happens there are good arguments for describing it as cheating and even better arguments against it, not to be written again..). The only thing worse than people making poor arguments for "cheating", or anything, is when people then go on to apply their own poor arguments that they are making in an inconsistent way (though it's never a surprise that there's a link between those two phenomena). So to say "oh driver Y is a cheat for disobeying a team order but driver X isn't... because...(insert something vague that boils down to you liking one and not the other)".

So by all means call Vettel a cheater! All that's asked is to apply the unfair label fairly tongue.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5) Let the media and some fans worry about it for a couple of races. Let Webber brood. Do absolutely nothing significant with Vettel other than token gestures like apologising, because in reality, they know it will make no difference just as it made no difference in the past with either of these two. And in that past they still won everything, by the way!

The argument that some of the great champions cheated as a justification for Vettel's "cheating" is of course not at all valid. All anybody who makes that argument is actually saying is "when cheating leads to success cheating is okay" which is stupid, though I'm not sure if many people would actually make such an obviously fallacious argument. I think the point is more about context. It's a natural reflex to react to new events by making reference to past events and doing some sort of comparison. As to what that means, well it doesn't have to mean anything in terms of a justification but it probably means everything in terms of understanding the new event in question, the causes behind it, the consequences, and placing our own reactions in proportion, and so on.

The reason I brought up the actions of other drivers was to point out that people should be consistent in their judgement of drivers rather than cherry picking. So you cannot say "Vettel is a cheater" based on this incident without also branding many other drivers cheaters, including the other two top drivers today. That's a sad fact but nonetheless a fact, according to that definition of cheating. I know that will sound like a justification to some people's ears but it isn't, it's only an obvious appeal to fairness and reality in our criticism. "But this is only about Vettel, other drivers are irrelevant, stop defending Vettel!" Other drivers are only irrelevant if you already accepted that other drivers did equally bad things and worse compared to Malaysia 2013, if you don't accept that, other drivers are entirely relevant because if you are unable to see the mistakes of other drivers compared to a particular driver, that brings into question your whole ability to judge that driver at all in the first instance. Bringing up the ethical mistakes of other drivers is a "defence" of Vettel only in the same way that comparing the crimes of one criminal to another is a defence of the first criminal, i.e. not at all a defence.

It's a point about consistency and context rather than to do with arguing for, against, justifying or defending anything (as it happens there are good arguments for describing it as cheating and even better arguments against it, not to be written again..). The only thing worse than people making poor arguments for "cheating", or anything, is when people then go on to apply their own poor arguments that they are making in an inconsistent way (though it's never a surprise that there's a link between those two phenomena). So to say "oh driver Y is a cheat for disobeying a team order but driver X isn't... because...(insert something vague that boils down to you liking one and not the other)".

So by all means call Vettel a cheater! All that's asked is to apply the unfair label fairly tongue.png

Lovely stuff! Oh, no...wait, I forgot I'm not Brad!

BTW, I wasn't thinking about you when writing about other drivers' actions (I do think about you when...but I'm disgressing). I was thinking more about the likes of Bernie, or Marko/Vettel...mostly the RBR guys. Seriously, defending Vettel for disobeying them makes them look rather stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and Webber's month of misery continues - in addition to being disqualified in qualifying for running out of fuel:

- He was hauled up in front of the stewards for potentially using DRS whilst there was a yellow flag (and cleared)

- Has been handed a 5 grid spot penalty for the next race for colliding with Vergne

- RBR were fined as a result of an unsafe release as his wheel was not put on properly

I'm not surprised he's signed elsewhere!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More social inclusion in F1! I can't believe the EU isn't onto that already, considering the results they got from their elderly employment campaign with Schumi :P

Sorry guys, my studies are muddling my brain it was literally the first thing I thought of when I read the article >.<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how it is with the older generation. It isn't in any way excusable to say such things, especially to a F1 journalist who we all know take a driver's shrug to mean that he is confirmed to be signing for Ferrari in 2016 for a 5 year deal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know how it is with the older generation. It isn't in any way excusable to say such things, especially to a F1 journalist who we all know take a driver's shrug to mean that he is confirmed to be signing for Ferrari in 2016 for a 5 year deal

:lol:

Besides, Britney already proved him wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing about Moss' comments are that they were not just a random interview, they were apparently for a programme about Susie Wolff and female drivers that aired on the BBC recently. Needless to say they chose the wrong person to interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://planetf1.com/...l-skill-for-F1-

A man that fell down an elevator shaft should not question other people's mental skills.

I am amazed that these male chauvinist claims are stillb being made well into the 21st century.

And yet even the "new" media do nothing to stop it. In America, there are endless comparisons of Simona de Silvestro to Danica Patrick, but never to any other driver. She's racing the entire field (which doesn't even include Patrick anymore), yet it was just trying to drum up some rivalry where they compete in their own class separate from the men. Even as de Silvestro has fought to end that, asserting herself as a racing driver and a racing driver only. The "new" media covering the Daytona 500 treated Patrick like a little girl instead of a professional racing driver. "Ooh, will Danica be able to do a restart?!" Well, gosh, she's been racing professionally for about a decade, so I'm going to guess "yeah." "Watch out, Danica's coming into the pits, is she going to get slowed down in time?!" Good point, since, you know, in hundreds of top-level Indy and NASCAR races, she's never done a pit stop before. They then scream "HE'S HITTING HER BECAUSE SHE'S A WOMAN" when someone races her too closely. It's this super male-white-knight mentality of covering female drivers: they assume she can't do anything because she's a woman, and then defend everything that happens because she's a woman. I also remember one blurting out, "IN WHAT OTHER SPORT COULD YOU SEE A WOMAN COMPETING AGAINST THE MEN?!" He was corrected that it happens in pro bowling, and then he farted something to the extent of, "well, in pro bowling, the women aren't crashing into walls at 200 mph!" These are supposed to be the people from this generation...yet they can't just talk about a race as a race and a racing driver as a racing driver. They make gender, race, nationality, etc. "a thing" in this super white-knight effort to convince everyone they aren't sexist, racist, xenophobic, etc.

The only things that will hold a female driver back in Formula One are what Ecclestone says, getting a ride, and having the added pressure of dealing with a media who makes you into a total novelty, portraying you as weak and risky so that they can set themselves up to then write articles of passionate defense for everything you do.

If anyone had the mental skills to follow anything I said, congratulations. I don't even know what I just wrote. laugh.png

But I guess it doesn't surprise me to see comments like this. It was hard to know what decade we were in with some of the stuff that surrounded Lewis Hamilton as his career began. I can only imagine what will happen the first time a racing driver shows up to the track with his boyfriend or her girlfriend. I think even as attitudes change, the media environment in which everything but the race and the racing is allowed to be the story will always promote looking down on, or the different treatment of, any driver with a backstory that differs from the more common ones. It's not that it isn't significant when someone breaks barriers of entry; it is. What's not significant is the fact that a racing driver can accelerate, brake, steer, shift gears, do a pit stop, make a pass, and deal with everything mentally and physically. Somehow, the clamor is for that to be the story, and it indirectly adds continuity to attitudes vaguely similar to "separate but equal."

When I raced karts, I was too scared to hold it flat in any of the full-speed corners. I always lifted; I lost a(n entirely meaningless, youth league) race in a close finish (as if age 10-17 indoor karting is exciting for the spectator laugh.png) by lifting. Apparently, my gender was supposed to preclude that fear. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right not to be surprised. It isn't surprising at all that such opinions still exist and it's not surprising that someone like Moss would hold them. What is more surprising or more dangerous is when such comments are presented by the media without any kind of comment on how wrong they actually are, or how much of a minority they represent, so that somebody who didn't know better might actually place weight on them. Moss is usually considered a respected figure after all.

Of course the biggest barrier to woman in F1 is not physical or mental but social. However, I'm not too sure the best social explanation for the lack of female drivers is sexism, though it is no doubt an issue worth talking about. I think you probably only need a statistical argument to explain it, that is much less females take up karting than males. That still ultimately boils down to a social argument because the reason less females will take up karting is that they are socialised at an early age into different gender roles than males, and female's gender socialisation more often than not does not include being competitive, aggressive, being interested in mechanical things, etc.

That's not quite the same as sexism, although it may be wrong of parents and society to socialise children that way (but that's extremely unlikely to change and a broader "problem"). It certainly doesn't mean girls won't or can't become competitive and interested in motorsport, it just makes it less likely. I don't think it's a reason that's as perceptible as sexism or as easy to actually do anything about, and I think it's completely right to address sexism in all areas, I'm just not sure that sexism in motorsport is as powerful an explanation for the lack of female F1 drivers as say, sexism in large companies is for the lack of female CEO's or board members, for example.

Edited by Rainmaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're exactly right, George. I was referring to a hypothetical female driver who was competing at some level like GP2, and what would make both her entrance to F1 and her time in F1 difficult. Actually getting a driver in that situation is much harder for what you outline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, the Long Beach Grand Prix contract is up, and Kevin Kalkhoven/Gerry Forsythe (the guys who just sold Cosworth, and used to own Champ Car) may or may not sell it. They deny the rumors, but I bring it up because F1 LBGP revival rumors have persisted for the last two years.

Zak Brown of Just Marketing is a huge, huge player in F1 and racing in general. He said this:

"I'm an advocate of F1 buying the Long Beach Grand Prix,'' Zak Brown told MotorSport magazine last month. Brown is a former driver and CEO of Just Marketing who has close ties with Eccelstone. "I think I can facilitate that and I've been having those conversations. You can make an argument that Long Beach would be a good investment. It's got so much heritage. One (U.S.) race (for F1) certainly isn't enough."

http://www.presstele...iss-rumors-sale

So, if Brown's actually having conversations, I'd consider this a decent development to follow. The track would need to change to accommodate F1, however, and I'm still not sure about the New Jersey race. I've heard all kinds of different things. People from the track saying it's 100% on next year, a guy at Tilke saying it's 50/50 (and reporting that they wouldn't "fix" the crowning in the roads since Coulthard liked it so much, but Hindery says they got the funding to do it so they will), and Ecclestone giving it no chance at all (like he and I did for some track in Texas. Ha! Like that would have ever happened). wink.png

Anyway, I get that the U.S. is a very big country, and an important automobile market. However, when the total TV viewership in the U.S. is as low as it is, having three races in one country seems ridiculous. A lot of places want to host Grands Prix, and I'm sure many can. It just seems odd to have three races in the same nation. I realize they want to grow F1 in the U.S., but they have to be careful to not do too much, too soon. They have a good thing going in Texas so far, and the schedule already needs to make room for Sochi, Mexico, and Thailand, among others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like to partake in Ecclestone bashing, but that was a pretty rough read. Though I don't know the situation in Bahrain too well, personally, it sure seems super out-of-touch to think these protests are analogous to how speed limits differ from country to country. Yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I heard a funny factoid today: apparently, during the Bahrain weekend, Kimi, for the -first- time in his F1 career, spoke at the Friday drivers meeting. Apparently he asked Charlie Whiting if Perez should've been punished for his driving in China [img]http://www.gptoday.com/forums//public/style_emoticons/default/wink.png[/img].

[url="http://ts.fi/moottoriurheilu/kolumnit/476993/Sound+of+silence"]http://ts.fi/moottoriurheilu/kolumnit/476993/Sound+of+silence[/url]

(in Finnish, unfortunately google's translation to English is pretty incomprehensible) Edited by Ikyrotz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Kimi is such an angry man and the person that removed the icecream from his gob needs to be shot and icecream duly reinserted in Kimi's mouth so as he can never speak during briefing ever again!!!!

FFS

Senna

!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...