Rubens Barrichello has waded into the Renault Singapore row by siding with Nelson Piquet Jnr over remarks made by Flavio Briatore.
Briatore made disparaging remarks in the Italian press referring to a man Piquet Jnr used to live with, his mechanic Agnaldo Furlani.
Barrichello slams Briatore’s remarks
"Barrichello said the newly painted helmet that he was using at the Italian Grand Prix was in part a homage to say how much he missed Piquet, and fellow Brazilian Felipe Massa, in F1." Interesting – Brawn's explanation earlier was that it was a helmet designed by Barrichello's children. I'm awaiting a reply from them…
Possible gearbox change for Barrichello
"I don't want it changed – some people want it – I don't want to be leading the race and have a failure, at the same time I have to fight for what I really can achieve which is winning tomorrow." Brawn have since confirmed Barrichello will not change his gearbox.
James Lawton: Formula One finds a way to plumb ‘new depths’ courtesy of the Piquet family
"Formula One teams have already been found guilty of massive industrial espionage and the most bare-faced lying, but the charges made by the Piquets move us on to another dimension. They suggest that the sport has on at least one occasion been utterly subverted, literally from the start to a finish shaped by the spurious intervention of a safety car. With its absolute contempt for both human safety and the idea of fair play this is arguably the worst yet. It makes the diving of footballers and the cynical appealing of cricketers seem relatively minor infractions, if not the persistence with which the managers of the guilty men dispute that such practices are making the games more or less morally worthless."
Formula One is the real crash victim
Brundle on Piquet Jnr: "His rationale is that his contractual option hadn’t been taken the previous month so he was stressed and wanted to please the team. Try waiting the whole winter to sign a race-by-race contract days before the first grand prix of the season — that’s stress, but still not enough to crash a car intentionally." I'm wondering to which of his years he's referring. 1994?
These are links I’ve bookmarked using Delicious. You can see my Delicious profile here.
David
13th September 2009, 18:49
This whole business over Renault and Picquet does rather support my contention that the Safety Car is an anomoly. We have the technology to return the cars to the start line and let them restart in the order they were when the crash happened. They are then restarted with the appropriate time differences separating them. No safey car and no more confusion and what is more important – no more distorted results.
HG
14th September 2009, 0:27
Interesting proposal David, i had never thought of that before. It could be a good idea, but i’m guessing that that the powers that be may not want such a system because it takes away from the ‘spectacle’. That is, bunching the field up and having a restart with the cars close together since the start of races now days is often the most interesting part of a race.
Tom L.
14th September 2009, 19:07
But what would you do with guys a lap down, if it was based on time differences? They’d have to start in amongst the frontrunners, in order to be sufficiently behind the car in front…
HG
15th September 2009, 2:15
i suppose you could start them from the pits straight, but then it sounds like its getting overly complicated
James
16th September 2009, 1:33
You just start everyone as they were on the track, the guys a lap down would be started in their “track position” but still a lap down . . . seems to work pretty simply?
Tom L.
16th September 2009, 18:29
Well, it seems to me that it would near-impossible to determine exactly where on the track they were at the moment the SC was deployed… you’d get some drivers who’d slow down straight away, others who’d wait a little bit longer to gain an advantage… and what if someone was in the pits? Would they have to wait there and restart from where they were?