The stewards speak
05-30-2006, 11:11 AM
#1
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,853
Received 6,862 Likes
on
3,482 Posts
The stewards speak
from itv:
One of the three FIA stewards who concluded that Michael Schumacher was guilty of parking his car deliberately during qualifying for the Monaco Grand Prix, Joaquin Verdegay, says he was proud of the job they did on Saturday.
Verdegay said that while the decision to put Schumacher to the back of the grid had been a difficult one to come to, he and co-stewards Christian Calmes and Tony Scott Andrews had no choice.
“It was a difficult decision because we couldn’t afford to make a mistake when the reputation of a driver is at stake,” Verdigay told Italian newspaper Gazzetta dello Sport.
“We do not know if the whole manoeuvre was deliberate but it is certain that at that point of the track he had never done anything of that sort all weekend.”
The Spanish steward added that all the evidence suggested Schumacher could have avoided the incident, which saw his Ferrari stop at the exit of Rascasse in the dying moments of qualifying.
The German maintained his innocence throughout, claiming it was a driving error and that he did not know who was still on qualifying attempts.
Both Fernando Alonso and Giancarlo Fisichella had laps ruined in the incident.
“He braked 50% harder than he had on the other laps and made a counter-steer movement which was absolutely not necessary, which lasted for five metres, to the point at which it was no longer possible for him to correctly turn the corner,” said Verdigay.
“He lost control of the car when he was travelling at 10mph, which is absolutely unjustifiable and the engine stalled because he wanted it to, losing the time necessary for engaging the clutch.”
Verdigay admitted however that had Schumacher crashed his car, rather than simply parking it, the FIA would probably have never investigated the incident.
“It’s true that if he had damaged the car we would probably have put the case done to a simple error,” he said.
“Instead parking it in this manner can only be done intentionally so we applied Srticle 166 of the sporting regulations which is that if a driver prejudices the performance of others he can lose all his times.
“We are here to judge mistakes, we did what we needed to do.
“We have studied the case and for that it took many hours. We are proud of the job we did.”
One of the three FIA stewards who concluded that Michael Schumacher was guilty of parking his car deliberately during qualifying for the Monaco Grand Prix, Joaquin Verdegay, says he was proud of the job they did on Saturday.
Verdegay said that while the decision to put Schumacher to the back of the grid had been a difficult one to come to, he and co-stewards Christian Calmes and Tony Scott Andrews had no choice.
“It was a difficult decision because we couldn’t afford to make a mistake when the reputation of a driver is at stake,” Verdigay told Italian newspaper Gazzetta dello Sport.
“We do not know if the whole manoeuvre was deliberate but it is certain that at that point of the track he had never done anything of that sort all weekend.”
The Spanish steward added that all the evidence suggested Schumacher could have avoided the incident, which saw his Ferrari stop at the exit of Rascasse in the dying moments of qualifying.
The German maintained his innocence throughout, claiming it was a driving error and that he did not know who was still on qualifying attempts.
Both Fernando Alonso and Giancarlo Fisichella had laps ruined in the incident.
“He braked 50% harder than he had on the other laps and made a counter-steer movement which was absolutely not necessary, which lasted for five metres, to the point at which it was no longer possible for him to correctly turn the corner,” said Verdigay.
“He lost control of the car when he was travelling at 10mph, which is absolutely unjustifiable and the engine stalled because he wanted it to, losing the time necessary for engaging the clutch.”
Verdigay admitted however that had Schumacher crashed his car, rather than simply parking it, the FIA would probably have never investigated the incident.
“It’s true that if he had damaged the car we would probably have put the case done to a simple error,” he said.
“Instead parking it in this manner can only be done intentionally so we applied Srticle 166 of the sporting regulations which is that if a driver prejudices the performance of others he can lose all his times.
“We are here to judge mistakes, we did what we needed to do.
“We have studied the case and for that it took many hours. We are proud of the job we did.”
05-30-2006, 02:41 PM
#3
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,853
Received 6,862 Likes
on
3,482 Posts
yeah, it's all good unless your name is Michael Schumacher 
05-30-2006, 03:46 PM
#5
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,853
Received 6,862 Likes
on
3,482 Posts
counter-steer movement for 5 meters which was unnecessary is pretty harsh judgment.
05-31-2006, 10:16 AM
#7
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,853
Received 6,862 Likes
on
3,482 Posts
This straight-on in the middle of the corner bs was why I told my wife he was doing it on purpose. I just couldn't fathom why he would lock up at such a low rate and then not be able to recover.
Trending Topics
05-31-2006, 10:35 AM
#8
Senior Moderator
I don't think we'll ever know the truth. However, I think the right call was made. It seems that not everyone is in the pockets of the Ferrarimafia.
CART used to have a rule where if you stopped on course during qualifying (whether by accident or failure), you had your best lap time removed. I don't know if Champ Car still has this rule, but it makes sense, especially in street courses.
CART used to have a rule where if you stopped on course during qualifying (whether by accident or failure), you had your best lap time removed. I don't know if Champ Car still has this rule, but it makes sense, especially in street courses.
06-01-2006, 09:59 AM
#9
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,853
Received 6,862 Likes
on
3,482 Posts
y'know, I thought for sure they would penalize him but I thought maybe (and still do) the FIA stewards would do so via adding time onto his aggregate race time. I figured 15 seconds would have been a good amount, maybe 30 tops.
06-01-2006, 02:20 PM
#10
2G TLX-S
I guess the penalty wouldn't be this heavy if there is no advantage to MS after he "stopped" on track. But his move prevents Alonso from making a flying lap to beat his pole-setting time, which is to MS's advantage.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
emailnatec
5G TLX Tires, Wheels & Suspension
29
09-28-2018 04:27 PM
InFaMouSLink
Car Parts for Sale
3
10-30-2015 09:43 AM