The Untouchables

So, things have cooled down enough to allow for some more thoughtful considerations. My question is: Why Rossi and Marquez have not been properly warned and reined in by the MotoGP authorities? Why have they been allowed to push things too far?

Someone could object that Rossi has been punished, and Marquez did not deserve any penalty -- but that is precisely what I'd like to discuss. It's not that simple. Rossi at Sepang was punished but not immediately, whereas (almost) any other rider would have been severely sanctioned in his place -- with a ride through or even a black flag, penalties that would have impacted his race results.

I say "almost" any other rider, because precisely Marc Marquez would have probably received the same kind of soft treatment, had he been in Rossi's position. In fact at Sepang he put up a very personal fight against Rossi. It was so evident that some form of reprisal should have been given to him too. One could say he had been provoked by Rossi's allegations during the press conference -- which is probably true, but that's not a justification.

I said it immediately after the facts, but even after two weeks I feel the same: both Rossi and Marquez should have been punished at Sepang. Or some strong warning should have been given before the race to both of them, before things got out of hand. In the lower classes they have a black and white flag to show to young riders when they get into duels that are more like personal fights.

But they weren't. Not at all, or not enough. The very fact that Rossi openly accused Marquez of something that cannot be proved shows how much he feels personally important and above other considerations. And the very fact that Marquez openly did precisely what Rossi had accused him of doing, shows how much he feels above the rules himself.

So these two apparently are the "Untouchables" of MotoGP. The Old one and the Young one, they both have been allowed things that would not have been allowed to others. Why? Because they have a huge fan base and attract the crowds, of course. More than any others.

It pains me because they are both great champions, and favorite riders of mine. But it's a fact that they should not be above the rules, but they are --at least to a certain extent. Marquez even more than Rossi in perspective, because he's young and is the future. Rossi less and less, because his time is over and he will be an ex-rider before long. But even after retirement he will still be a big mediatic figure for MotoGP.

The real blame has to go to the governing bodies. They did not act, did not prevent things, and when things got out of hand took feeble and belated action. But above all, in the previous years they allowed two great champions to become Untouchables -- and that's the original sin.

Edit to add: I forgot to mention the third Untouchable: Repsol Honda.

J4rn0 said:

So, things have cooled down enough to allow for some more thoughtful considerations. My question is: Why Rossi and Marquez have not been properly warned and reined in by the MotoGP authorities? Why have they been allowed to push things too far?

Someone could object that Rossi has been punished, and Marquez did not deserve any penalty -- but that is precisely what I'd like to discuss. It's not that simple. Rossi at Sepang was punished but not immediately, whereas (almost) any other rider would have been severely sanctioned in his place -- with a ride through or even a black flag, penalties that would have impacted his race results.

I say "almost" any other rider, because precisely Marc Marquez would have probably received the same kind of soft treatment, had he been in Rossi's position. In fact at Sepang he put up a very personal fight against Rossi. It was so evident that some form of reprisal should have been given to him too. One could say he had been provoked by Rossi's allegations during the press conference -- which is probably true, but that's not a justification.

I said it immediately after the facts, but even after two weeks I feel the same: both Rossi and Marquez should have been punished at Sepang. Or some strong warning should have been given before the race to both of them, before things got out of hand. In the lower classes they have a black and white flag to show to young riders when they get into duels that are more like personal fights.

But they weren't. Not at all, or not enough. The very fact that Rossi openly accused Marquez of something that cannot be proved shows how much he feels personally important and above other considerations. And the very fact that Marquez openly did precisely what Rossi had accused him of doing, shows how much he feels above the rules himself.

So these two apparently are the "Untouchables" of MotoGP. The Old one and the Young one, they both have been allowed things that would not have been allowed to others. Why? Because they have a huge fan base and attract the crowds, of course. More than any others.

It pains me because they are both great champions, and favorite riders of mine. But it's a fact that they should not be above the rules, but they are --at least to a certain extent. Marquez even more than Rossi in perspective, because he's young and is the future. Rossi less and less, because his time is over and he will be an ex-rider before long. But even after retirement he will still be a big mediatic figure for MotoGP.

The real blame has to go to the governing bodies. They did not act, did not prevent things, and when things got out of hand took feeble and belated action. But above all, in the previous years they allowed two great champions to become Untouchables -- and that's the original sin.

Edit to add: I forgot to mention the third Untouchable: Repsol Honda.

Click to expand...

Again, as Jumkie says, any offence by MM at Sepang was reliant on determination of his intentions, presumably by mind-reading. He made no illegal moves, Rossi made hard moves equal to his in their contest prior to the illegal move which actually took MM out, and HRC made no illegal moves either as far as I am aware.

I agree there is a problem in that RD allowed both the Rossi move on Gibernau at Jerez 2005 and the MM move on JL at Jerez 2013, perhaps not entirely unrelated to the identity of the perpetrators.

michaelm said:

Again, as Jumkie says, any offence by MM at Sepang was reliant on determination of his intentions, presumably by mind-reading. He made no illegal moves, Rossi made hard moves equal to his in their contest prior to the illegal move which actually took MM out, and HRC made no illegal moves either as far as I am aware.

I agree there is a problem in that RD allowed both the Rossi move on Gibernau at Jerez 2005 and the MM move on JL at Jerez 2013, perhaps not entirely unrelated to the identity of the perpetrators.

Click to expand...

MM's intention at Sepang was evident and although he formally stayed clear of punishable behavior he was provoking (by passing and then allowing himself to be passed again, and so on) a dangerous situation that could have ended in a high speed crash, much worse than what happened through Rossi's punishable move.

Nobody knowledgeable and unbiased (or in his senses) saw that dangerous farce as a "beautiful duel". WTF, 25 passes and counter-passes in two or three laps are as preposterous in our sport as a soccer match's score of 25 to 26. Let's be honest. It doesn't happen even in Moto3.

J4rn0 said:

MM's intention at Sepang was evident and although he formally stayed clear of punishable behavior he was provoking (by passing and then allowing himself to be passed again, and so on) a dangerous situation that could have ended in a high speed crash, much worse than what happened through Rossi's punishable move.

Nobody knowledgeable and unbiased (or in his senses) saw that dangerous farce as a "beautiful duel". WTF, 25 passes and counter-passes in two or three laps are as preposterous in our sport as a soccer match's score of 25 to 26. Let's be honest. It doesn't happen even in Moto3.

Click to expand...

You, all of italy & the yellow nation worldwide keep forgetting your boy initiated the conflict. What were you all expecting Marc was going to do? Pull over & let him pass?? Rest assured if the situation was reversed the out come would have been the same, if not worst. And Marc would still come out as the bad guy. rossi hate for Marc started back yesteryear at Laguna Seca, when Marc played his move on him at the cork screw. His mind has been ...... ever since & anything Marc did from that point froward was a conspiracy against rossi. PI was when his little mind exploded.

MM will be penalized monetarily via loss of VR fans he was to inherit and with jeers for years and years to come. So there's that.

J4rn0 said:

MM's intention at Sepang was evident and although he formally stayed clear of punishable behavior he was provoking (by passing and then allowing himself to be passed again, and so on) a dangerous situation that could have ended in a high speed crash, much worse than what happened through Rossi's punishable move.

Nobody knowledgeable and unbiased (or in his senses) saw that dangerous farce as a "beautiful duel". WTF, 25 passes and counter-passes in two or three laps are as preposterous in our sport as a soccer match's score of 25 to 26. Let's be honest. It doesn't happen even in Moto3.

Click to expand...

Your post refutes itself. Rossi obviously made half of the passes in the "duel", and was the one who eventually pulled the illegal move.

Juan Derribar said:

Your ....... ........ Jarno. Your misspelled user name is ......... Your posts are ......... Theres plenty of I love Rossis .... websites. Go away please

Click to expand...

While I don't have your seniority here on the site - I have been lurking long enough to read J4rno's posts and I notice that unlike you he never insults people and isn't afraid to argue his point with members who are his intellectual equal or thereabouts. Also despite the fact that English is his second language he knows how to compose an intelligible sentence and doesn't spell like a twelve year old. After scanning a number of his posts, I also notice that unlike you he has been on this forum for a long time and is not always telling others they are not welcome here. I thought this was supposed to be one of the few forums with no net nanny. There are a multitude of forums jam packed with people who vomit venom at those who are smarter than them. Maybe you should shop a few of those and see if you feel more at home in one of those.

evo9 said:

You, all of italy & the yellow nation worldwide keep forgetting your boy initiated the conflict. What were you all expecting Marc was going to do? Pull over & let him pass?? Rest assured if the situation was reversed the out come would have been the same, if not worst. And Marc would still come out as the bad guy. rossi hate for Marc started back yesteryear at Laguna Seca, when Marc played his move on him at the cork screw. His mind has been ...... ever since & anything Marc did from that point froward was a conspiracy against rossi. PI was when his little mind exploded.

Click to expand...

One could say that Marc didn't need to stage that theatrical pass at Laguna, he was faster and could have passed anywhere. It was just to piss Rossi.

Anyway we are not at kindergarten, pointing fingers and crying "he started it". Doesn't matter who started it, they both should have been stopped and it was quite apparent that things were going out of hand already before the Sepang race.

That's why I am calling the two of them the Untouchables. They are great riders, but they have been spoilt and allowed to always get away with anything. It was fatal they should clash.

Btw, your notion of Italy as a Yellow fanboy country is rather naif. I wonder if you have ever been here.

J4rn0 said:

One could say that Marc didn't need to stage that theatrical pass at Laguna, he was faster and could have passed anywhere. It was just to piss Rossi.

Anyway we are not at kindergarten, pointing fingers and crying "he started it". Doesn't matter who started it, they both should have been stopped and it was quite apparent that things were going out of hand already before the Sepang race.

That's why I am calling the two of them the Untouchables. They are great riders, but they have been spoilt and allowed to always get away with anything. It was fatal they should clash.

Btw, your notion of Italy as a Yellow fanboy country is rather naif. I wonder if you have ever been here.

Click to expand...

Not referring to italy as a yellow fanboy country. The yellow nation worldwide means, the yellow fans all across planet earth.

michaelm said:

Your post refutes itself. Rossi obviously made half of the passes in the "duel", and was the one who eventually pulled the illegal move.

Click to expand...

You know MIchael, I am kind of surprised that in this one matter you do not seem to keep your usual objectivity. I'll give you an example.

Imagine you are faster than me -- you can pass me and then ease it just a bit and let me pass you again, and so on -- it's a pass feast and TV commentators rejoice, but when racing in earnest you would just pass me and disappear, wouldn't you.

But, in that case I could follow you and use your tow to reach the one who's leading. You do not want that so you use this time-tested but dirty race tactic (it has been used hundreds of times, it's nothing new!) to slow me down.

This is what happened at Sepang, in an open way. Not punishable, as Race Direction said, but evident. At P.I. it may have been just Rossi's paranoia, it was very subtle if it was there at all -- and in the end MM won, so one has every reason to doubt. But at Sepang it was blatant.

Juan Derribar said:

Your ....... ........ Jarno. Your misspelled user name is ......... Your posts are ......... Theres plenty of I love Rossis .... websites. Go away please

Click to expand...

J4rn0 is the least explosive rossi fan from italy we have here on this forum. No need to hammer at him like this. If you look thru some of his past post over the years. You will find some good contribution on his behalf to this community.

J4, are you a journalist/blogger?

Asking as I have seen near those exact words previously in a few places and they have been linked .......... just wondering

J4rn0 said:

You know MIchael, I am kind of surprised that in this one matter you do not seem to keep your usual objectivity. I'll give you an example.

Imagine you are faster than me -- you can pass me and then ease it just a bit and let me pass you again, and so on -- it's a pass feast and TV commentators rejoice, but when racing in earnest you would just pass me and disappear, wouldn't you.

But, in that case I could follow you and use your tow to reach the one who's leading. You do not want that so you use this time-tested but dirty race tactic (it has been used hundreds of times, it's nothing new!) to slow me down.

This is what happened at Sepang, in an open way. Not punishable, as Race Direction said, but evident. At P.I. it may have been just Rossi's paranoia, it was very subtle if it was there at all -- and in the end MM won, so one has every reason to doubt. But at Sepang it was blatant.

Click to expand...

What is your ....... point mate?

If MM wants to .... with Rossi's head while staying within the rules then he is perfectly entitled too. But, if he did or not is not a knowable fact, so, either way, your talking .....

People are funny really, when they are kids they believe all kinds of made up stuff like the tooth fairy and what-not and finally they figure out it's not true and adjust their world view. The funny part is that morality is also made up ....: it's not a real thing like gravity or fire; most people are aware of that and that's what leads to tolerance. People who don't realise that are "self righteous": it's a form of delusion that your imagined, made-up .... is superior to everyone else's imagined or made up .....

You choose to be offended by the assumption of a particular behaviour because it doesn't fit your particular, delusion of what is ideal. Sorry, but that's ridiculous.

J4rn0 said:

You know MIchael, I am kind of surprised that in this one matter you do not seem to keep your usual objectivity. I'll give you an example.

At P.I. it may have been just Rossi's paranoia, it was very subtle if it was there at all -- and in the end MM won, so one has every reason to doubt. But at Sepang it was blatant.

Click to expand...

And what objectivity are you applying to PI? Glossing over PI is glossing over a smoking gun. At PI MM takes 5 points AWAY from JL. This action HELPS Rossi. End of, in any sane mind. But one mind clearly was insane.

The correct action is immediately following the Sepang press conference Rossi is summoned, charged and fined heavily for his comments which bring the sport and participants into disrepute.

But this is not sport. This is WWE MotoVR. It is as much a poplularity contest about viewership revenue, so why would I be surprised in the slightest it played out in the most dramatic $$$ fashion possible?

Cool Blue said:

What is your ....... point mate?

If MM wants to .... with Rossi's head while staying within the rules then he is perfectly entitled too. But, if he did or not is not a knowable fact, so, either way, your talking .....

People are funny really, when they are kids they believe all kinds of made up stuff like the tooth fairy and what-not and finally they figure out it's not true and adjust their world view. The funny part is that morality is also made up ....: it's not a real thing like gravity or fire; most people are aware of that and that's what leads to tolerance. People who don't realise that are "self righteous": it's a form of delusion that your imagined, made-up .... is superior to everyone else's imagined or made up .....

You choose to be offended by the assumption of a particular behaviour because it doesn't fit your particular, delusion of what is ideal. Sorry, but that's ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Y'know I rarely disagree with you. But to say that a rider is "entitled" to .... with the championship hopes of another rider, is IMHO - ......... People on this forum quote the rulebook the way gun nuts quote the 2nd Amendment when it suits their narrative. Folk can chose to look the other way because there's a wave of hatred for Rossi, but those who claim to be true fans of MotoGP and view racing as a sport, must recognize the rules of ethics and how particularly, sports ethics do apply. Many here were outraged when Rossi used legal means to fight the decision, but then use ambulance chaser lawyer logic to excuse MM's behavior at PI. To say if it's not in the rulebook - it's not a rule is sophmoric. Their is a distinct difference between "morality" and ethics.

Yes - Rossi was unraveling at PI and said some crazy ...., but that doesn't excuse MM's behavior. I'm not a Rossi fan, and don't excuse his running MM off the track, but that incident does not cancel out MM's unethical behavior; and frankly I'm tired of hearing all the sophist rationales for why people choose to believe that MM wasn't perfectly capable of passing Rossi. Too many people are drunk on Schadenfreude and are in denial about MM's behavior at PI.

People can talk all they want about how MM is alleged to have been Rossi's greatest admirer up until PI - but as J4rno pointed out (myself as well) the manner in which MM passed Rossi in the corkscrew at Laguna... clearly was an expression of his contempt for Rossi that long preceded Philip Island. That Rossi said stupid things and provoked MM into acting like an ... is undeniable, but the ethical thing for MM to do would have been to take the high road and just run his own race.

Keshav said:

Y'know I rarely disagree with you. But to say that a rider is "entitled" to .... with the championship hopes of another rider, is IMHO - ......... People on this forum quote the rulebook the way gun nuts quote the 2nd Amendment when it suits their narrative. Folk can chose to look the other way because there's a wave of hatred for Rossi, but those who claim to be true fans of MotoGP and view racing as a sport, must recognize the rules of ethics and how particularly, sports ethics do apply. Many here were outraged when Rossi used legal means to fight the decision, but then use ambulance chaser lawyer logic to excuse MM's behavior at PI. To say if it's not in the rulebook - it's not a rule is sophmoric. Their is a distinct difference between "morality" and ethics.

Yes - Rossi was unraveling at PI and said some crazy ...., but that doesn't excuse MM's behavior. I'm not a Rossi fan, and don't excuse his running MM off the track, but that incident does not cancel out MM's unethical behavior; and frankly I'm tired of hearing all the sophist rationales for why people choose to believe that MM wasn't perfectly capable of passing Rossi. Too many people are drunk on Schadenfreude and are in denial about MM's behavior at PI.

People can talk all they want about how MM is alleged to have been Rossi's greatest admirer up until PI - but as J4rno pointed out (myself as well) the manner in which MM passed Rossi in the corkscrew at Laguna... clearly was an expression of his contempt for Rossi that long preceded Philip Island. That Rossi said stupid things and provoked MM into acting like an ... is undeniable, but the ethical thing for MM to do would have been to take the high road and just run his own race.

Click to expand...

i can't help but notice your post is timestamped Nov 21st. If you were so sure MM was unethical at PI where are your posts pointing to it in the race thread?

And where are the posts in the leguna thread explaining MM passed Rossi at the corkscrew out of contempt? Revisionist posts don't count.

Then what is all this about MM being perfectly capable of passing Rossi at PI? I thought he did, and passed JL as well.

Maybe you mean Sepang. The whole thing is ......... We all know 10 years ago Rossi would have brushed the likes of MM and Iannone aside and been battling for 1st whenever he pleased. But this is old Rossi, not as fast, clearly not as smart, and not even particularly wise. But desperate, and manipulative, yes still possessive of these qualities.

Keshav said:

Y'know I rarely disagree with you. But to say that a rider is "entitled" to .... with the championship hopes of another rider, is IMHO - ......... People on this forum quote the rulebook the way gun nuts quote the 2nd Amendment when it suits their narrative. Folk can chose to look the other way because there's a wave of hatred for Rossi, but those who claim to be true fans of MotoGP and view racing as a sport, must recognize the rules of ethics and how particularly, sports ethics do apply. Many here were outraged when Rossi used legal means to fight the decision, but then use ambulance chaser lawyer logic to excuse MM's behavior at PI. To say if it's not in the rulebook - it's not a rule is sophmoric. Their is a distinct difference between "morality" and ethics.

Yes - Rossi was unraveling at PI and said some crazy ...., but that doesn't excuse MM's behavior. I'm not a Rossi fan, and don't excuse his running MM off the track, but that incident does not cancel out MM's unethical behavior; and frankly I'm tired of hearing all the sophist rationales for why people choose to believe that MM wasn't perfectly capable of passing Rossi. Too many people are drunk on Schadenfreude and are in denial about MM's behavior at PI.

People can talk all they want about how MM is alleged to have been Rossi's greatest admirer up until PI - but as J4rno pointed out (myself as well) the manner in which MM passed Rossi in the corkscrew at Laguna... clearly was an expression of his contempt for Rossi that long preceded Philip Island. That Rossi said stupid things and provoked MM into acting like an ... is undeniable, but the ethical thing for MM to do would have been to take the high road and just run his own race.

Click to expand...

Sorry Kesh but ........................

Nowhere did cool say that MM was entitled to f*ck with the championship but he does say that MM is entitled to f*ck with Rossi's mind which (IMO) he is fully entitled to, just as VR is entitled to have done in years past and just as VR is entitled to have attempted this year ............. just that in 2015 things backfired a bit.

You may well mention PI but herein lay the issue ........... not one person thought anything was untoward about PI until VR made allegations at a press conference, and even today many paddock observers still cannot see anything untoward about PI in terms of MM's riding. He said he overcooked the front and backed off a bit, which is a perfectly logical comment and statement and thus, I happily will say that I believe him. VR however saw and felt something else (AI only mentioning when asked after VR)

As for Sepang, well that is a different matter altogether and personally I do not blame MM for being p*ssed off given the accusations made by VR prior to the race, particularly given that the one being accused had actually won that very race. So MM may (and I say may) have reacted in a manner that may seem unethical to some (some riders had no issue) but at all times he remained within the rules of the sport.

He may have been focussed on Rossi and if I go with that thought, personally I do not think it had anything to do with championship positions but was his personal response to VR having levelled accusations against him on a professional and personal level whilst effectively questioning MM's integrity. Hell, I know that I would be p*ssed off at the person who levelled such claims and I would want to respond in some way, shape or form. Again, if this is the case it has nothing to do with championship and everything to do with egos and personal dislike.

Now, I agree that if we go the path that MM was 'playing' with Rossi then he would have been best off to run his own race but human nature is human nature and when someone questions your integrity, should you let it slide?

VR started the entire issue and then got a reaction that he did not expect or want, both from the incredulity of the media at the time of the accusations and subsequently the perceived on track responses. He then continued to espouse his view and attack, all the time involving other people into his myriad of accusations (Lorenzo, Alzamora, others etc) and throwing a few under the bus ............

If we want to talk ethics, where were Rossi's at Sepang when he did a practice start from BEHIND a group of riders and chose to buzz Lorenzo, when standard unwritten rules say the riders at the front do their practice starts first?

If we are to talk ethics, what about making an unfounded and unproved (some may say unprovable) accusation regarding a fellow rider?

What about the ethics of saying that rider A is doing all he can to 'gift' rider B the championship?

Ethics do not exist in high flight sport or business and personally I think it is rough to expect that MM should apply ethics where none have existed before from the very person on the receiving end.

I have never been a fan of VR the person, go back to when I joined this place and that is clear and whilst some of the character assasination is over the top, some of the defense of VR is as over the top as the assasinations themselves.

VR was not the victim .................... MotoGP WAS the victim

This is what Daryl Beattie had to say when the incident happened at Sepang while commentating on Australian tv.
"Rossi then goes straight ahead here, doesn't even take the turn and takes it away from Marquez. To me, that's the end of the world championship for Valentino Rossi because you can't do that to someone in a Grand Prix race."

Other commentator asks "So do you think he will be penalised and what type of penalties can apply?"

Beattie responds "Awww do I think?? Just watch the pictures, tells the story, the track goes right and if you go left, there are no left signs on race tracks, so it's pretty simple. I'd imagine they would have to take all his points off him for this round, but I'm not the guy who makes the rules but it's pretty simple, and I'd imagine that someone like Valentino Rossi would watch that back afterwards and be pretty embarrassed about what he just did."

birdman said:

And what objectivity are you applying to PI? Glossing over PI is glossing over a smoking gun. At PI MM takes 5 points AWAY from JL. This action HELPS Rossi. End of, in any sane mind. But one mind clearly was insane.

The correct action is immediately following the Sepang press conference Rossi is summoned, charged and fined heavily for his comments which bring the sport and participants into disrepute.

But this is not sport. This is WWE MotoVR. It is as much a poplularity contest about viewership revenue, so why would I be surprised in the slightest it played out in the most dramatic $$$ fashion possible?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't go so far as your last sentence, since they actually did charge and penalise Rossi.

I share your anger about the Sepang press conference remarks concerning PI, however, which is where my "objectivity" got lost. I have never professed to be anything other than a fan, obviously very strongly a Stoner fan previously and more than I had thought now a Lorenzo fan, whom I originally admittedly at least partly adopted because I thought he was the best chance of beating MM whom I had disliked on his way up because of incidents like the Willairot incident.

What the press conference remarks brought home to me was something I had not previously considered until you raised it in a post a couple of years ago, that Rossi is fully complicit in, and has used as a weapon, the campaigns of vilification against pretty well all his significant rivals by the more extreme element of his fan base. I had previously blamed Stoner's disillusionment and exit from the sport on those extreme fans, and perhaps a personality unsuited to the limelight, but this latest thing is not even tacit on Rossi's part.

As I have said, Rossi's performance in this season at age 36 prior to the Sepang press conference could only add lustre to his glittering career, whether he won the championship or finished a close second, and that career surely did not require vindication by an 8th/10th title, but he has made it abundantly clear that he is very willing to use off-track manipulation, which gives credence to previous rumours such as the various tyre conspiracies you have mentioned in other recent posts. I did not know it was an established fact that they changed the tyre mid-season in 2008 btw, I had thought that was more a Lexian hypothesis.

It does annoy me that JL is denied due credit for his championship as has been the case with other riders in the Rossi era, and as a Lorenzo fan I was annoyed that Rossi had tried to influence riders other than MM not to race him; the rumours concerning him bailing up Dani Pedrosa about racing/beating him in a race prior to PI reported by Kropotkin now seem very credible in view of VR's continuing attitude post-season.

Keshav said:

Y'know I rarely disagree with you. But to say that a rider is "entitled" to .... with the championship hopes of another rider, is IMHO - ......... People on this forum quote the rulebook the way gun nuts quote the 2nd Amendment when it suits their narrative. Folk can chose to look the other way because there's a wave of hatred for Rossi, but those who claim to be true fans of MotoGP and view racing as a sport, must recognize the rules of ethics and how particularly, sports ethics do apply. Many here were outraged when Rossi used legal means to fight the decision, but then use ambulance chaser lawyer logic to excuse MM's behavior at PI. To say if it's not in the rulebook - it's not a rule is sophmoric. Their is a distinct difference between "morality" and ethics.

Yes - Rossi was unraveling at PI and said some crazy ...., but that doesn't excuse MM's behavior. I'm not a Rossi fan, and don't excuse his running MM off the track, but that incident does not cancel out MM's unethical behavior; and frankly I'm tired of hearing all the sophist rationales for why people choose to believe that MM wasn't perfectly capable of passing Rossi. Too many people are drunk on Schadenfreude and are in denial about MM's behavior at PI.

People can talk all they want about how MM is alleged to have been Rossi's greatest admirer up until PI - but as J4rno pointed out (myself as well) the manner in which MM passed Rossi in the corkscrew at Laguna... clearly was an expression of his contempt for Rossi that long preceded Philip Island. That Rossi said stupid things and provoked MM into acting like an ... is undeniable, but the ethical thing for MM to do would have been to take the high road and just run his own race.

Click to expand...

I quite often agree with you as well, and while pretty much agreeing with Kropotkin's initial take, on this forum if not his own site, which was essentially that Rossi lost his mind in the press conference, MM "rode like a ...." but legally in the Sepang race, and that Rossi then lost his mind a second time and took MM out, I can't go as far as you have.

There was nothing untoward about the PI race imo, and as I have said if MM is so good that he can somehow manipulate the result as he was accused of doing whilst simultaneously winning the race and finishing 5 seconds ahead of Dani Pedrosa on the other HRC bike there is nothing any one can do about it and little point complaining. The remedy was in Valentino's hands, he could either be fast enough to beat everyone including MM, or fast enough to not let Jorge get away in front in the first place.

I have only followed the sport for 3 decades and you may have both some time and racing experience on me, but the unwritten Laverty law, seemingly not universally recognised in his own family, was a new one on me. I don't recall Mick Doohan arguing no-one should get between him and Wayne Rainey when he fruitlessly returned for the last 2 races of 1992, a season he had dominated prior to his crash and injuries much more than VR had this season prior to PI.

I think in MM's position he had an obligation not to take out a championship contender with a rash move, an obligation he definitely fulfilled at PI and Valencia, and may have done at Sepang if not for Rossi's pre-race outburst. Otherwise a rider is either racing legally for position or not, and cannot imo be penalised on the basis of intent. Valentino raced Stoner at least as hard at LS08, and I would argue with less control than MM exhibited at Sepang. Go back and look at some of Rossi's races in his pomp, Colin Edwards frequently ran interference for him, if not quite as vigorously as MM did at Sepang, and again if that was legal as long as he was racing for position at that time then it is legal now, and surely cannot be rendered illegal by the identity of the rider as far as regulations go.

Again Rossi was racing MM at Sepang and by his own choice at least as vigorously as MM was racing him, and the possibility still exists that their bikes were fairly evenly matched but with different strengths at that stage of the Sepang race with the then current fuel load and condition of tyres.