Hamilton 'may be negative for F1' - Max Moseley

[f1box]

"If he does the same thing next season as he's done this season, it will certainly have a big effect," he said.

"It will start to be negative because we'll get the Schumacher effect where people start writing to me saying can't you do something to slow him down."

" ............... I think there is a tendency to exaggerate the importance of Lewis Hamilton."


... and there is nothing like giving a 'steer' to influence the upcoming fuel 'irregularity'

" ....... if they excluded those cars they are not obliged to reclassify Hamilton. There's absolutely no need, if they don't wish to, to change the position that Hamilton was in."


Commenting on Lewis and 'spygate'  - "It would be surprising if he didn't know something of what was going on, but I've got absolutely no evidence that he had. On that basis it would be wrong of me to suggest that he had." 


Full article at http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7070564.stm


David

[f1box]

The latest, oh so mildly delivered (doesn't he sound so reasonable with his soft tones), meanderings of Max!

How does he conclude that Hamilton, winning less than a ¼ of the races and finishing second in the Championship, may be "negative for F1" whilst holding the view that Hamilton's impotance is exaggerated?
The two premises don't hang together!



As previously trailed by Max - we already know the outcome of the hearing/appeal on the 15th November (but thanks for reminding us!)


His comment on Hamilton and the spygate affair is particulary pernicious and a fine example of disinformation and propaganda designed to undermine someones position. Max, with his lawyer training, is very particular about his words - but he could be sailing very close to the wind in hinting at a Hamilton knowing about spygate. There are £Millions riding on Hamilton and his image - some sponsors may not take kindly to having their brand mascot's reputation tarnished!


David

[Steven Roy]

I would have thought that Alonso winning two championships and within a caouple of points of a third is more the kind of domination that should worry him.

Secondly, why ahould stewards have the right to decide whether to re-classify people.  I know it has always been the case but it is fundamentally wrong and can only ever lead to the conclusion that there is manipulation of the championship.  The way round this problem is incredibly simple.  You write as many of the rules as possible in simple terms with clearly defined punishments.   Fro example, fuel temperature will be measured at the rig.  If it is below 25 degrees the driver will be disqualified.  Forget ambient temperature and all the other unnecessary complications.  I would also have a rule that stated that if a driver is disqualified the following car automatically gets the points.

Some rules have to be complicated.  I accept that but there are a lot of rules that could be simplified.

[rmassart]

The way round this problem is incredibly simple.  You write as many of the rules as possible in simple terms with clearly defined punishments.

Yes but if it were simple there would be no room for Max to favour Ferrrari all the time....

[cosworth151]

I would have thought that Alonso winning two championships and within a couple of points of a third is more the kind of domination that should worry him.

I seem to remember some German chap winning several WDC's in a row. Didn't that worry Max?

There are £Millions riding on Hamilton and his image - some sponsors may not take kindly to having their brand mascot's reputation tarnished!

That assumes that anyone actually pays any attention to what Max spews out.

[Alianora La Canta]

Max was worried about the German chap. It was, after all, one of the excuses he gave for the 2003 rule changes...

[Ian]

So were all the other drivers 

[Steven Roy]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19825.html

Why can't Max keep his mouth shut.

Having twice attacked Sir Jackie Stewart as being a "certified halfwit", Mosley's remarks about Hamilton were pretty controversial as well, saying that "it would be surprising if he didn't know something of what was going on, but I've got absolutely no evidence that he had. On that basis it would be wrong of me to suggest that he had."

So why say it?

[Alianora La Canta]

Why say it? Because Max was being asked some tough questions by someone used to interviewing professional politicians and he kinda crumbled. It's quite sad to watch, really, but the 22-minute pasting can be seen in this video at the BBC's site.

[leather12]

Is Max starting to feel that old that a new driver might win the championship..
Lewis did a brilliant first season, and who knows started to diminish the likes of Fisichella and many others....That's how it goes guys...you are young, talented...and one days some youngster does it better dan you...so does the life
I would like to see a bit more fresh blood in F1...less talking, fast racing..

[SennaMan]

Why say it? Because Max was being asked some tough questions by someone used to interviewing professional politicians and he kinda crumbled. It's quite sad to watch, really, but the 22-minute pasting can be seen in this video at the BBC's site.

thanks for the link ALC - personally i think max outwitted the 'Hard Talk' interviewer stephen SACKUR who frankly i thought was a political journalist out of his depth and although had done his background research had no feeling let alone passion or understanding of motor racing sport let alone F1

to go on at length about the 'gas' used in the FERRARI tyres as somehow some magic bullet for FERRARI's success and therefore McLAREN were cheating to even have the information and consider using it was laughable in the extreme and drawing a ridiculously long bow

and the somehow mystical gas was never identified [and Max was clever enough not to come to the hapless interviewer's aid either] when every schoolboy knows about the benefits of inflating tyres with Nitrogen - the technology has been around for 40 years or more

hell i know of people who have used it for over 30 years

so, quelle horreur! naughty McLAREN for considering using Nitrogen what ever will they steal from FERRARI next!

the mind boggles

just a load of bo**ocks when viewed against the illegal movable floor used by FERRARI in the winning car at Melbourne 2007, the opening race of the series and which garnered 10 ILLEGAL points for KR who wins the WDC at season's end by one point

nigel STEPNEY, the so-called FERRARI spy was so troubled by the illegality that after getting stymied by incalcitrant FERRARI managment as high as jean TODT he blew the whistle to charles WHITING!

now we know why he was dismissed by FERRARI

and it has since been revealed that charles WHITING, FIA's chief technical honcho, knew about the technical breach two days before the race, let FERRARI race and then told them to remove the floor!

imagine had it been FA's or LH's car

all hell would have been loosed

of that i have little doubt

methinks Max is not as silly as many would have us believe

the way he keeps deflecting examination of the inconsistencies of the FIA is masterly

just another gifted English eccentric perhaps but one who does not have half the charm of someone say like the bumbling but quite delightful murray Walker

either way 14 years at the helm in any enterprise today is far too long

the founding fathers of the American Constitution were smart enough to know the negative ramifications of unfettered and lengthy power and limited the presidency to a maximum of two consecutive terms

that concept should be arbitrarily applied and enforced globally - no exceptions

would clean up a lot of bullshit wouldn't it?

trouble is the modern world runs on bullshit and it would probably collapse 

sorry folks  - just my rant for today 

[Steven Roy]

I have to say I agree with most of the points you raise.  I cannot understand why anyone thinks nitrogen is revolutionary or figure out what McLaren were using if it was not nitrogen.  As an example of how well known that nitrogen is used in racing tyres I got a phone call from my mate's 10 year old son 3 or 4 years ago.  He had been asked as part of his primary school homework to find out what gas was used in F1 tyres?  By sheer coincidence Autosport had published an article on the use of nitrogen in tyres a couple of weeks before.

I thought the interviewer was hopelessly out of his depth.  I was waiting to hear him ask why the Ferrari was allowed to race in Australia when both Nigel Stepney and McLaren had told the FIA what the problem was with the car.  I was waining to hear him ask why the FIA had not investigated Nigel Stepney's claim that he was receiving info from Mike Coughlan in return.  I would also love to know why he accepted Max's assertion than 780 pages was Ferrari's entire intellectual property for the year.  That is absolutely laughable.  A team that employs 700(?) people generate 1 page of IP per person?  They must have some great editors to get every drawing for every part of the car, every simulation and strategy,  all data-logging etc etc into less than 800 pages.  The BBC would have been far better letting Nigel Roebuck loose on him.

[romephius]

Perhaps it was 780 pages of A0 (36" in Imperial standards) paper???........ drawn out of a colour plotter??

Sorry I could help but be stupid here....... LOL

Rom 

[Alianora La Canta]

I don't think Ferrari ever alleged that McLaren had all their IP (merely implied it). 780 pages sounds like what would fit on a standard CD in PDF format if the pages were A4. The interviewer did miss quite a few points, but I thought Max made enough of a hash of the questions he was asked that his credibility had been dented enough as it stood.

[Steven Roy]

Ferrari didn't claim it was all their IP.  Max did in the interview. 

I don't think Max performed well at all and a well informed interviewer could have made him look really bad.  The interviewer looked like he was on a time line and moved subjects based on time rather than whether or not they had concluded the point.