The Untouchables

Kropotkin said:

Most of Race Direction's work are judgement calls. It must necessarily be that way, there is no better way to do it. Asking for irrefutable evidence is a particularly pointless exercise.

Click to expand...

I understand some of it is judgment calls, that's fine.

But, would you agree or disagree that Webb's statement after he met with both riders was unnecessary?

J4rn0 said:

Respectable opinions have no value? Well, I think they have. There, you have another opinion!

Click to expand...

When it comes to handing out punishment, respected opinions mean NOTHING. That is why there is no rule about racing title contenders, its unenforceable. Mike Webb can no more set in his chair and say with 100% certainty that a rider is not giving his all at any particular moment than a 2 year old sitting on his dads lap at track side. You have to have facts, not opinions. Webb was out of line for for even mentioning Marquez's name in his statement because as he said, Marquez didnt break one rule. Its not against the rules to piss off Rossi as much as you want it to be. I was debating this debacle with a friend and he says, { Im done with Moto GP }. Of course i asked why and he says { I cant believe that they made Rossi start from the rear of the field when he was going for his 10th title, they should have fined him or punished him later and let him start at the front where he normally starts. I told him first off, Rossi qualified 12th, but thats not the point. The point is, just because of a riders name, you would like to see rules that are put in place for everyones safety just thrown to the wind to enhance his chances of winning another title. Imagine for a second what precedent you would set if you allowed riders to serve a sentence later when it suited their situation better. Riders would be knocking each other off left and right if they knew they could defer their penalties. That would be like me kicking the .... out of somebody, getting arrested, but deferring my jail sentence to when i was 80 years old as to not interfere with my current situation. Sorry judge, this really isnt a good time for me to go to jail, lets put that .... off till it really doesnt affect my life. Thats not reality, and is the reason Rossi fans are held in such disdain from the rest of the GP community.

J4rn0 said:

"We heard both drivers; we are of the opinion that there was fault on both sides, but according to the rules Marquez has not sought any contact, and did not break any rules, but we believe that his behavior was bothering Rossi who therefore reacted. Unfortunately he reacted in a way that goes against the rules."

Click to expand...

J4, you see the above comment is where I believe Webb stuffed up, and it all comes to a small number of words ............ 'we believe'.

Had they have used the words 'we found' when describing MM's behaviours thence I do suspect that a lot of the discussion would have been different given the two meanings.

One is an opinion, and the second, whilst still an opinion is making a finding and personally to me, if they believed then they should have found (if that makes sense)

By saying 'we believe' it has left open an insinuation that MM was in some way deserving of the end result as he had 'provoked' Rossi which is an exceptionally dangerous precedent in that if provoked, then it is somewhat acceptable to react in a petulant and unsavoury manner. This finding can have some serious repercussions throughout the sport given the level of 'bash and barge' that occurs in other categories, and as such I await consistency.

Interesting with Webb's comments was no mention that MM may have also been provoked by the inflammatory comments at the press conference, which leads further to the perception that there are rules for some riders, rules for others and that the goose that laid the golden egg is not to be touched.

Personally, I said a long time back in this form that the choice of words by Webb was poor as it was open ended and that he could have shut a lot down with different wordings at the time.

J4rn0 said:

The evidence is in just watching the Sepang race -- if one has eye one sees, if one doesn't want to see, that's another matter and they can hide behind the formula "he did not do anything against the rules".

So many ex-racers and knowledgeable people have expressed their opinions on the Sepang race in complete agreement with Mike Webb and Race Direction -- I'd say the overwhelming majority. That should mean something even to you.

Ah, for those who like to mix things -- you may have not noticed, but I'm speaking of the Sepang race here.

Click to expand...

By Sepang its already too late. Rossi made his allegations of match fixing in public before Sepang. We therefore we have a fire burning, maybe not yet out of control, but it might be have been a good idea to douse the flames. In any other sport this is a massive allegation to make. So what should RD or the FIM or the governing body have done? Ah, investigate the allegation maybe?

Option 1. Penalise MM for PI. Are you comfortable with that. I'm not.

Option 2. Do nothing. As usual, FFS as far as I know hey didn't even get VR and MM in to discuss.

Option 3. Clear MM of all wrong doing. Minimum requirement in my book.

I would have gone further. I would have required Rossi to publically retract his allegations of match fixing at PI. Remove any motivation of MM to retaliate.

Look at it this way. By the race at Sepang the fire is burning out of control. What the governing body effectively did what shove MM, a rider with a history of run ins with other riders, out into that fire, hoping for the best. Dumb, but not surprising.

Kropotkin said:

Most of Race Direction's work are judgement calls. It must necessarily be that way, there is no better way to do it. Asking for irrefutable evidence is a particularly pointless exercise.

Click to expand...

Agree, that's a good point Kropo. And I appreciate your input. Given such challenges, 'perhaps' why Race Direction have so little intervention. Party because intent is impossible to ascertain and almost never make a bold statement about it, EXCEPT they made a spectacular one about who they 'believed' at Sepang. Which in a normal world, the perpetrator usually does not get the benefit of the doubt. This was one of those situations where the two involved did not come equally before the judge. One came in to the interrogation as the clear perpetrator. Yet, in this case they chose to believe the perpetrator with a greater leniency than the victim! They listened to both accounts, they believed Rossi while disbelieved Marquez. That's a fact. Mike Webb admitted this much. The guy that broke the rules was the guy they gave the benefit of the doubt. That's a peculiar "judgment". Think about that if you haven't already, it's like the judge is listening to the accounts of the robber and the home owner, then decided because the robber 'came clean' admitting to breaking into the house (admitted to taking Marc wide in a non-racing action) that the burglar was telling the truth when he said "but I didn't mean it" for the homeowner to fall down the stairs when I pushed him (Marc crashing). Meanwhile the homeowner is disbelieved who had not broken rules, and had raced as hard as Iannone did at Phillip Island. They chose to believe the guy abiding by the rules as the liar. Why?

Iannone raced Rossi at Phillip Island with the same determination that Rossi raced Marquez at Sepang (notice the order). I've rewatched PI several times, every time I'm stunned at how aggressive Iannone raced, easily the most aggressive of the four. Iannone raced harder than Marquez on Rossi (I prefer to say Rossi on Marquez) at Sepang, that is before the incident that ended the exchange. The ONLY difference in Race Direction's "judgment" between Australia and Malaysia was solely based on Rossi poisoning the well. There is NO way Marc would have been considered as having fault in his riding by Race Direction at Sepang in as much as Race Direction had no public opinion about Iannone at Phillip Island. Its now impossible to say what Race Direction would have opinioned WITHOUT Rossi's accusations, that's what makes his accusations so powerful in casting a shadow of mendacity for the sport that you and others have been trying to uphold.

What's still rather astonishing is that Race Direction felt the need to 'sound' impartial by assigning "fault" on Marc for Rossi’s actions. That is, they gave life to the notion of justifiable reaction, based solely on Rossi's PERCEPTION. Again none of US (you, me, Mike Webb) perceived Iannone out of line at PI (seriously watch it again) for spirited racing as Marc and Rossi at Sepang, except in light of the infamous accusations (honestly i cant repeat this enough). Do you think Race Direction would have 'believed' Iannone was simply determined to BEAT Rossi at PI if Race Direction had asked him why he cut the nose of Rossi and made contact with him? Frankly that would have been an absurd question. It's crazy to think that Race Direction would have taken that position right? Yet we accept Race Direction were correct in not believing Marc's account for Sepang? Why? The racing wasn't any different. The only difference for this "judgment" was Rossi's accusations. Race Direction (and many others) are SURE Marc had ill will. So sure that its perverted racing! That is how Rossi's accusations influenced Mike Webb. Lets examine further other considerations that influenced Direction's decision, they set a standard where they will consider championship standings first, regardless of a black flag worthy offense (which frankly only applies to Rossi, because I don't think they'd enforce the same standard again for others.) That is, Race Direction ( given this precedent) will see an egregious sequence on the track, then FIRST look down the championship standings, if the rider involved is high enough, then would be obliged to let him continue to circulate on the track despite the state of mind of that rider. Deliberately taking out a rider (as Rossi did at Sepang) clearly indicates the rider in question is not in a correct state of mind for such an undertaking, especially when you consider that the party responsible to keep others safe would first consider the rider in question's championship standing (no not if he is a danger to others).

If Lorenzo got this message then it gave him more liberty to manipulate his race at Valencia 2015, as he perceived he had at Valencia 2013 (a race management that should be seared in everyone's mind who viewed it). That is to say, Lorenzo could have deliberately taken out Marc or Pedrosa for the win, with the assurance that Race Direction wouldn't intervene during the race nor doc him championship points after the race. This is why I dismiss the absurd notion that Lorenzo would stand to accept that being passed by Marquez or Pedrosa at Valencia 15 knowing that Race Direction would have allowed him take either rider off the track to preserve that win...especially on the last lap.

As you say, asking for irrefutable evidence is pointless, yet Race Direction are asked to judge when a rider breaks the rules. They admitted Rossi broke rules while saying Marquez did not. YET felt compelled to call Marquez a liar to assign "fault". That is highly unprofessional. You and I can debate intent, but for Mike Webb to voice his opinion while explaining a ruling, especially one where he found no rules broken by Marc to then go on and express his opinion about the Spaniard's INTEGRITY is out of order. So out of order in fact that it manifest his inability to be impartial. The implications and repercussions were also felt at Valencia. Mike Webb's glib opinion of fault as a matter of opinion by calling Marquez's integrity into question set up the outcome of Valencia to be disparaged!

Mike Webb called Marc a liar, how do you suppose that affected the perception of millions as they viewed the Valencia race unfold-- the race to define the championship title?

Mike Webb should also bear some responsibly for the general perception amongst many fans that Lorenzo's championship was not earned but rather part of conspirancy by Marquez against Rossi. This is why Mike Webb's opinion, as an official of the League, is so damaging to the sport.

Kropotkin said:

Most of Race Direction's work are judgement calls. It must necessarily be that way, there is no better way to do it. Asking for irrefutable evidence is a particularly pointless exercise.

Click to expand...

Do they have a history of making judgements about matters outside of the ambit of the regulations? Is that their job? The point being that, if they step outside of their ambit, then they should have irrefutable evidence to support their accusations.

There is only one rule that they had to judge on and that is 1.21.2 which states that riders should ride in a responsible manner which does not cause danger to other competitors or participants... The boundaries of "responsible manner" are not defined, so it's up to them to judge that and they have discretion, by dint of their knowledge and experience, to make a call on that and to decide the severity of the punishment. And they don't need irrefutable evidence for that.

But this only applies to their rulings based on the regulations. Can you provide a reference to that part of their commission that empowers them to make unsubstantiated, libellous statements about riders, regarding actions that they, by their own admission, deemed to be within the regulations??

If they had a problem with MM's riding visa vis the regulations then they have the power to impose a penalty. They didn't and they didn't.

If they want to make a libellous statement about his intent, while conducting himself within the bounds of the regulations, without bringing disrepute onto themselves, then they should limit themselves to provable facts.

Jumkie said:

Iannone raced Rossi at Phillip Island with the same determination that Rossi raced Marquez at Sepang (notice the order). I've rewatched PI several times, every time I'm stunned at how aggressive Iannone raced, easily the most aggressive of the four. Iannone raced harder than Marquez on Rossi (I prefer to say Rossi on Marquez) at Sepang, that is before the incident that ended the exchange. The ONLY difference in Race Direction's "judgment" between Australia and Malaysia was solely based on Rossi poisoning the well. There is NO way Marc would have been considered as having fault in his riding by Race Direction at Sepang in as much as Race Direction had no public opinion about Iannone at Phillip Island. Its now impossible to say what Race Direction would have opinioned WITHOUT Rossi's accusations, that's what makes his accusations so powerful in casting a shadow of mendacity for the sport that you and others have been trying to uphold.

Click to expand...

Not to mention Pedrosa's battle with Rossi at Aragon. I don't remember Race Direction casting dought on Pedrosa's motives. Clearly Pedro should have had a stern warning. Do not race Rossi for position within the rules.

SlartyBartFast said:

Not to mention Pedrosa's battle with Rossi at Aragon. I don't remember Race Direction casting dought on Pedrosa's motives. Clearly Pedro should have had a stern warning. Do not race Rossi for position within the rules.

Click to expand...

Difference there is that VR had not proactively accused Pedro of any activity that may have affected VR's championship and as such RD had no reason.

In saying that, what I mean is that by making the accusations or suggestions at the Thursday press conference prior to Sepang, Rossi than put the allegation in the forefront of RD's mind. Thus, should something occur on track involving Marquez, Rossi had already foreshadowed that MM may have played a part and as such RD (rightly or wrongly) had in their mind to also look at MM's actions as in some way contributory to any incident.

In short, it was a bit like a coach who comes out in the press and says 'player X is always standing offside' as a means to have the referee look at the actions of player X.

Say what we want of the proactive accusations but in some way it may have been a 'genius' move from Rossi, but the results back fired in so much as the reaction was not that which he expected and in the end, he became the flustered/frustrated one

Gaz, I don't buy Rossi’s accusations were some mind game, as was the prevailing assessment (until he took his spreadsheets and lap time charts to the Italian press, still get a chuckle). Everyone was sure this was a classic Rossi mindfuck. I didn't (because I've never bought he is some mental genius) his body language in the presser, one of a sleep deprived paranoid individual whose mist of sweat was a dead give away, indicates to me that he was already flustered, broken and desperate. Btw, it's the same assessment I've had of him several times before. Remember when he set up the mock interview with his dad? It's the Faithful and the media who advance this idea that Rossi breaks souls and minds. When in fact the only thing broken that these odd episodes highlight is Rossi's sense of self.

SlartyBartFast said:

Not to mention Pedrosa's battle with Rossi at Aragon. I don't remember Race Direction casting dought on Pedrosa's motives. Clearly Pedro should have had a stern warning. Do not race Rossi for position within the rules.

Click to expand...

Further to Gaz's comment, the difference is that "everybody knows" that Dani did not intend to interfere with Rossi's championship. He was just racing him. And "everybody knows" that the opposite was true for MM.

So RD are free to deliberate based on their infallible mind-reading skills, which are miraculously in synch with the balance of public opinion.

If the Marquez camp had a mind to, I would have thought they could have an absolute picnic in the courts. The only reason I can think of that this doesn't happen is that they feel that they are fine money wise and that they think that racing motorbikes is more fun.

Jumkie said:

Gaz, I don't buy Rossi’s accusations were some mind game, as was the prevailing assessment (until he took his spreadsheets and lap time charts to the Italian press, still get a chuckle). Everyone was sure this was a classic Rossi mindfuck. I didn't (because I've never bought he is some mental genius) his body language in the presser, one of a sleep deprived paranoid individual whose mist of sweat was a dead give away, indicates to me that he was already flustered, broken and desperate. Btw, it's the same assessment I've had of him several times before. Remember when he set up the mock interview with his dad? It's the Faithful and the media who advance this idea that Rossi breaks souls and minds. When in fact the only thing broken that these odd episodes highlight is Rossi's sense of self.

Click to expand...

Not a mind game on MM, but a mind game for himself in that he was making an accusation and hoping that people would listen ............ I do believe that he firmly believes that he is right.

I (like you) do not buy into the 'mind f*ck' approach as these riders do not get where they are by being mentally deficient or prone to an opponents 'mind games', but being menatlly f*cked because of other characters I can see (ie. Melandri as the result of his inability to come to terms with the Ducati)

What I am firmly of the belief is that VR tried to get attention and backing, it failed but by making the comments he had planted a seed in some heads, the results of that seed are fertile growth in some heads, minor growth in others and a firm no growth in yet more.

Essentially, he tried something because he believes both what he was saying and that the approach had worked for him in the past .......... in this case, all failed.

Gaz said:

Not a mind game on MM, but a mind game for himself in that he was making an accusation and hoping that people would listen ............ I do believe that he firmly believes that he is right.

I (like you) do not buy into the 'mind f*ck' approach as these riders do not get where they are by being mentally deficient or prone to an opponents 'mind games', but being menatlly f*cked because of other characters I can see (ie. Melandri as the result of his inability to come to terms with the Ducati)

What I am firmly of the belief is that VR tried to get attention and backing, it failed but by making the comments he had planted a seed in some heads, the results of that seed are fertile growth in some heads, minor growth in others and a firm no growth in yet more.

Essentially, he tried something because he believes both what he was saying and that the approach had worked for him in the past .......... in this case, all failed.

Click to expand...

The simplest explanation is that it was just a face-saving excuse.

I think the simplest explanation is that the cheat from Tavullia is surrounded only by yes men who dare not contradict the child emperor. So as a child king, he never learns to stfu or when to stop doing something really stupid.

Cool Blue said:

The simplest explanation is that it was just a face-saving excuse.

Click to expand...

A pre-emptive face saving excuse?



To me, it looked like a guy under intense pressure (generally self imposed) having a moment of doubt where he suddenly started to question if he was now capable of achieving the very aim that he had put a lot of time and effort into achieving. However, at the same time being to 'precious' to accept that he was the one in control of his destiny and as such he was looking for extraneous reasons as to why he may not achieve that to which he felt he was entitled, so yes, excuses

If so, he is not the first athlete to have had such a moment and he will not be the last

Gaz said:

A pre-emptive face saving excuse?



To me, it looked like a guy under intense pressure (generally self imposed) having a moment of doubt where he suddenly started to question if he was now capable of achieving the very aim that he had put a lot of time and effort into achieving. However, at the same time being to 'precious' to accept that he was the one in control of his destiny and as such he was looking for extraneous reasons as to why he may not achieve that to which he felt he was entitled, so yes, excuses

If so, he is not the first athlete to have had such a moment and he will not be the last

Click to expand...

Well, yes: preemptive, but not for the race, for the championship I mean.

Bern1 said:

I think the simplest explanation is that the cheat from Tavullia is surrounded only by yes men who dare not contradict the child emperor. So as a child king, he never learns to stfu or when to stop doing something really stupid.

Click to expand...

Near everyone in the pits is surrounded by yes men as they will carefully hand pick their close team members (I say this with regard to the paid riders, not the paying riders)

It is commonly reported that you do not speak up against either Marquez as Alzamora will see you removed, just as whilst Puig was around one did not say No to his wishes and so forth.

Let us not forget that at PI in 2013 when MM started lap 11 (or whichever it was that meant a DQ) some team members knew immediately that he was to be disqualified and showed their displeasure. Then, at year end 2013 there was a cleanout of the team and some of those members were 'reassigned' to other roles.

Cool Blue said:

Well, yes: preemptive, but not for the race, for the championship I mean.

Click to expand...

I believe that we have the same feel on the issue.

I believe that only after PI did VR start to think that he was not 100% certain to win the title and the rest flowed from that doubt.

I've said it before, and will say it again. Rossi sensed he was in trouble after Aragon. PI confirmed his fears as he knew he didn't have the pace of not only his teammate, but Marquez as well. On top of that, they were headed to the last 2 races where Dani excelled. Simple math told him he was in trouble and he cracked and started lashing out to save face.. I don't think it would have mattered one bit if Marquez had won Valencia, Rossi not winning the title was always going to be his fault simply because Rossi instructed his mindless followers that this was the case.

Gaz said:

Near everyone in the pits is surrounded by yes men as they will carefully hand pick their close team members (I say this with regard to the paid riders, not the paying riders)

It is commonly reported that you do not speak up against either Marquez as Alzamora will see you removed, just as whilst Puig was around one did not say No to his wishes and so forth.

Let us not forget that at PI in 2013 when MM started lap 11 (or whichever it was that meant a DQ) some team members knew immediately that he was to be disqualified and showed their displeasure. Then, at year end 2013 there was a cleanout of the team and some of those members were 'reassigned' to other roles.

Click to expand...

Wow, ok. Didn't know the extent of this. Seems like a miserable way to live really....

Bern1 said:

Wow, ok. Didn't know the extent of this. Seems like a miserable way to live really....

Click to expand...

The main reasoning Bern is that NO is negative and these guys are highly strung athletes who do not want any negativity surrounding them and as such they do not tolerate it as it is like opening a door to failure, and these level athletes do not accept or tolerate failure.

It isn't just MotoGP but most high level sportspeople who simply do not accept the word NO within their chosen sporting pursuit.

Whilst there will be some technicians who may not be 'YES' men, their role allows the flexibility to 'question' the rider without being seen as a NO person. That said however, the technicians are not responsible so much for the 'man management' of the individual rider and it is these areas where you will find the pure YES man as anyone who says NO will likely be a very short term hire