FIM To Review Jerez Accident

MotoGP Forum

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
michaelm said:
The bottom line whatever his motive is that he couldn't have given rossi more room except by actually leaving the track as gaz implies.
Click to expand...

Mike,

I am not in anyway suggesting that Stoner is at fault. I am trying to understand the cause of the accident. I am bored by the accusations flying to and fro and am trying to explore whether there is any truth in Rossi's statement that 'He was not intending to pass'.
 
Renjith said:
Mike,

I am not in anyway suggesting that Stoner is at fault. I am trying to understand the cause of the accident. I am bored by the accusations flying to and fro and am trying to explore whether there is any truth in Rossi's statement that 'He was not intending to pass'.
Click to expand...

yours is an explanation of the incident also propounded by kropotkin and is a possibility. If so, you can't expect stoner to have seen it that way at the time of the actions and /or comment which have others have contended make him the villain of the piece .
 
michaelm said:
yours is an explanation of the incident also propounded by kropotkin and is a possibility. If so, you can't expect stoner to have seen it that way at the time of the actions and /or comment which have others have contended make him the villain of the piece .
Click to expand...

I think you are misunderstanding me. I am not vilifying anyone.

My stand on this whole issue is

1. I think Rossi made a non-deliberate mistake

2. Marshals didn't favor Rossi. He held the clutch while Stoner turned the engine off.

3. I have no issues with Stoner's comments. I agree with you that they are similar to Rossi's comments on Stoner and esp Lorenzo to Italian TV. It is reasonable that Stoner was seeting with anger on both Rossi and marshals and made the comment which to me are justified as it cost him the lead in the championship.



But my point in the last post was about the attitude of the forum. When I gave an alternate explanation, the immediate response by one of the members was to paint me as a Stoner hater. I would be glad to argue on the points objectively rather than emotionally.
 
hawkdriver said:
When a guy is constantly kicking your ..., crying won't help, you have to fight back, look at Lorenzo.
Click to expand...

I didn't read this part of your post in my previous reply and do take exception to it. Making an error and taking a competitor out in no way constitutes kicking their ... and nor does responding to being taken out as stoner did on this occasion constitute crying about it. He was making a fair fist of replying to rossi and his critics this year before some ..... took him out in this race. When he has kcked rossi's ... in the past rather than this being acknowledged he was vilified for it.
 
Did Vale attempt to pass Casey.....of course he did. But his ambition outweighed his talent.



Did Rossi deliberately crash into him...of course not. He is ruthless but not a psychopath.



Did the marshalls deliberately favour Vale....absolutely not. It was just an unfortunate series of events and Casey was left floundering through no fault of his own.



Were Casey's remarks justified....fucken A. He handled the situaion as well as could be expected...shook hands and had a slight dig...big deal.



Was the Rossi apology genuine...I am sure he was remorseful. But leaving his helmet on and lobbing with the rent a crowd wasn't very classy at all.



Should Casey be fined or incur a penalty for his on track excursion.....Yes - If it was in violation of the rules.
 
Renjith said:
But my point in the last post was about the attitude of the forum. When I gave an alternate explanation, the immediate response by one of the members was to paint me as a Stoner hater. I would be glad to argue on the points objectively rather than emotionally.
Click to expand...

One Member? Now compose a post containing some mild criticism of Valentino...which is tantamount to heresy on here.

Watch what happens in comparison, and prepare for the Spanish Inquisition.



Why all these 'hater' allegations? I really don't understand - Jeez it's even written in one members signature. I say again, personally I don't hate any of these guys - I like racing. I can meanwhile shame the 'members' who have openly expressed hatred of Casey Stoner. This is precisely why many of my good friends and valued members simply don't bother posting on here any more.
 
Renjith said:
I think you are misunderstanding me. I am not vilifying anyone.

My stand on this whole issue is

1. I think Rossi made a non-deliberate mistake

2. Marshals didn't favor Rossi. He held the clutch while Stoner turned the engine off.

3. I have no issues with Stoner's comments. I agree with you that they are similar to Rossi's comments on Stoner and esp Lorenzo to Italian TV. It is reasonable that Stoner was seeting with anger on both Rossi and marshals and made the comment which to me are justified as it cost him the lead in the championship.



But my point in the last post was about the attitude of the forum. When I gave an alternate explanation, the immediate response by one of the members was to paint me as a Stoner hater. I would be glad to argue on the points objectively rather than emotionally.
Click to expand...

Apologies, I think you misunderstood me, partly because I was on pay for time internet which was imminently to run out, and there is an extra "have" in my post; I was specifically saying that "others" rather than you had used stoner's reaction to vilify him .

(EDIT I am not dismissing the possibility of yours and kropotkin's explanation either. I also entirely support kropotkin's response to outlandish speculation by one poster on his site that rossi had "planned" the accident. The same applies to your not very serious suggestion about stoner luring rossi into it; too many variables to plan it, particularly since it is hard to know the exact position of somebody behind you.)
 
Arrabbiata1 said:
One Member? Now compose a post containing some mild criticism of Valentino...which is tantamount to heresy on here.

Watch what happens in comparison, and prepare for the Spanish Inquisition.



Why all these 'hater' allegations? I really don't understand - Jeez it's even written in one members signature. I say again, personally I don't hate any of these guys - I like racing. I can meanwhile shame the 'members' who have openly expressed hatred of Casey Stoner. This is precisely why many of my good friends and valued members simply don't bother posting on here any more.
Click to expand...

I am not questioning the attitude of Stoner fans here. I am sure if I compose a post which criticizes Rossi, I will get similar reply. That exactly was my point - People look at who you support here and decide whether to listen to anything you say or not. I am not alleging that he called me hater. I am criticizing the need to have two factions - pro Rossi and pro Stoner and you have to be in only one of the groups.
 
In terms of safety I think the marshals had no onus to help either rider. In fact they should not place themselves in any danger.



I would not be surprised if this is the reality of findings for the incident.



I think the Marshal issue is just distraction from the real issue here.
 
Renjith said:
I think you are misunderstanding me. I am not vilifying anyone.

My stand on this whole issue is

1. I think Rossi made a non-deliberate mistake

2. Marshals didn't favor Rossi. He held the clutch while Stoner turned the engine off.

3. I have no issues with Stoner's comments. I agree with you that they are similar to Rossi's comments on Stoner and esp Lorenzo to Italian TV. It is reasonable that Stoner was seeting with anger on both Rossi and marshals and made the comment which to me are justified as it cost him the lead in the championship.



But my point in the last post was about the attitude of the forum. When I gave an alternate explanation, the immediate response by one of the members was to paint me as a Stoner hater. I would be glad to argue on the points objectively rather than emotionally.
Click to expand...



I don't think anyone believes you are a "hater". Naive and Pollyanish maybe...
<
 
Arrabbiata1 said:
Why all these 'hater' allegations? I really don't understand - Jeez it's even written in one members signature. I say again, personally I don't hate any of these guys - I like racing. I can meanwhile shame the 'members' who have openly expressed hatred of Casey Stoner. This is precisely why many of my good friends and valued members simply don't bother posting on here any more.
Click to expand...



its been noted for a while.
sad.gif
mad.gif




On the FIM Opening a inquiry into Jerez is just stupid

there making a rod for there owns backs



if thats what they want to do they better get 100's & 100's of hours of footage out and check every crash - off track excursion and

all marshall actions out.

plain stupid







 
Renjith said:
I am not questioning the attitude of Stoner fans here. I am sure if I compose a post which criticizes Rossi, I will get similar reply. That exactly was my point - People look at who you support here and decide whether to listen to anything you say or not. I am not alleging that he called me hater. I am criticizing the need to have two factions - pro Rossi and pro Stoner and you have to be in only one of the groups.
Click to expand...

Then don't use the term, and don't add fuel to the flame wars
 



Jum, if you keep burying comments about my posts in the middle of your (rather long..) posts to others, my chances of answering them is really minimal. Maybe that's what you prefer
<




Anyway, now it's clear that the marshals were more of a hindrance than a help for Rossi, as he had his engine on and would have rejoined the race even without any help; while Stoner had killed the engine and needed a really strong push, without which his double-clutch Honda wouldn't restart (some say it's almost impossible to push-start this Honda anyway). Whatever... as you say marshals have no duty to help riders restart their bikes, so no fault since they did not restart Rossi's bike either.



Regarding your outcry about a supposed NASA-like development of the Ducati "for Rossi", reality has been confirming what I have been saying: the bike is still the same. Developments will come, but slowly. Nothing out of this world. The new bike is for 2012, not for this season.
 
BarryMachine said:
In terms of safety I think the marshals had no onus to help either rider. In fact they should not place themselves in any danger.



I would not be surprised if this is the reality of findings for the incident.



I think the Marshal issue is just distraction from the real issue here.
Click to expand...

Which leads to this question, if a rider is not injured and wants to resume the race, should he be required to pick up his own bike and restart it by himself. In F1. if you hit the gravel and the car cannot get out without assistance, your race is finished.
 
J4rn0 said:
Jum, if you keep burying comments about my posts in the middle of your (rather long..) posts to others, my chances of answering them is really minimal. Maybe that's what you prefer
<




Anyway, now it's clear that the marshals were more of a hindrance than a help for Rossi, as he had his engine on and would have rejoined the race even without any help; while Stoner had killed the engine and needed a really strong push, without which his double-clutch Honda wouldn't restart (some say it's almost impossible to push-start this Honda anyway). Whatever... as you say marshals have no duty to help riders restart their bikes, so no fault since they did not restart Rossi's bike either.



Regarding your outcry about a supposed NASA-like development of the Ducati "for Rossi", reality has been confirming what I have been saying: the bike is still the same. Developments will come, but slowly. Nothing out of this world. The new bike is for 2012, not for this season.
Click to expand...

Not true, over the years it has been shown time and time again that Rossi does not have the ability to pick up his bike once it is down. Without the marshals help, he would have been out.
 
Renjith said:
Mike,

I am not in anyway suggesting that Stoner is at fault. I am trying to understand the cause of the accident. I am bored by the accusations flying to and fro and am trying to explore whether there is any truth in Rossi's statement that 'He was not intending to pass'.
Click to expand...



trying to understand the cause of the accident



WELL .... MY OLD BOOTS . hes was attempting a pass on a bike well known for the front end giving way with no warning in the pissing rain . while on the eighth lap oif his first proper ride of the bike in the rain . SO BASICLY ....... MADNESS nine times world champion or not.



And i'm a fan of the bloke.



and i'm also of the oppinion that the advantage he has got at the mo is everyonr one the track will be giving him a wide bearth.
 
povol said:
Which leads to this question, if a rider is not injured and wants to resume the race, should he be required to pick up his own bike and restart it by himself. In F1. if you hit the gravel and the car cannot get out without assistance, your race is finished.
Click to expand...

In 2003 Nurbergring, Schumacher had a duel with Montoya and ended in gravel. But he was controversially pushed back to track by marshals. But thats only time I saw something like that in F1
 
After so many talks about this jubject from all the different people, it's better to see this meeting, otherwise everybody will say bs about marshals favoring Rossi. I think that's the only reason, fim asked for this. but if they care they may learn a few lessons from it all. like how marshals should react next time, when a rider cant start his bike, and how far should they push him.
 
[font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]its going to rumble on all year this debate



Talking about spicy racing, how about that MotoGP in Spain at the weekend?









Craig Lowndes



I sat up late and watched qualifying and the race. Our Casey Stoner did a fantastic job in qualifying.



It was unfortunate that Valentino Rossi took him out in the race. I thought his pass was way too ambitious.



You'd think there would be a penalty for that.



It's early in the season and probably not a championship decider, but if Stoner loses by a few points, he will look back at that incident with raw emotion.



It was also interesting to see the marshals help Rossi get restarted after the crash but not Stoner.



There will surely be a lot of discussion about that.



wink.gif




[/font]
 

Similar threads

#22
David Emmet: A peek into the soul of Marc Marquez
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
#22
#22
P
Things, feelings, points about 2020.
2
Replies
25
Views
7K
warthog1
warthog1
P
Marquez's next move and the 2020 Champion
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
birdman
birdman
P
Random Thoughts for 2020
2
Replies
26
Views
6K
michaelm
M
R
Marquez banned for 2 races
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
11K
Keshav
Keshav

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top