planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:12 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too


Personally, I'd "wager" that there is no such mention in Vettel's contract for either of those drivers or any other driver. Just paddock baloney being used to "sell papers" most likely.


Why?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too


Personally, I'd "wager" that there is no such mention in Vettel's contract for either of those drivers or any other driver. Just paddock baloney being used to "sell papers" most likely.


Why?

Because it can never be proven. But it does make a great story


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2986
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this


I read the same thing on a website regarding Vettel and his old contract but in his new contract there is no such stipulations. Probably because it's been changed to Kimi always has to be my teammate :lol: .

Why wouldn't Brundle compare the two penalties, everywhere I looked online I saw people comparing the two and calling Kimis harsh, is Brundle not allowed to have an opinion? What if he was asked the question? Is he meant to just not answer. Abit over the top to say your disappointed in Brundle.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
F1_Ernie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this


I read the same thing on a website regarding Vettel and his old contract but in his new contract there is no such stipulations. Probably because it's been changed to Kimi always has to be my teammate :lol: .

Why wouldn't Brundle compare the two penalties, everywhere I looked online I saw people comparing the two and calling Kimis harsh, is Brundle not allowed to have an opinion? What if he was asked the question? Is he meant to just not answer. Abit over the top to say your disappointed in Brundle.

But I am disappointed. So why would it be wrong to say so?

The penalties are for two completely separate offences and as such aren't really comparable. Brundle trying to link the two is a little odd in my book and suggests he feels upset about it. Which again speaks to impartiality


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:28 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7478
Zoue I don't think Brundle is saying Vettel got of lightly, but used it as an example to show that Kimi's penalty was too harsh.

IIRC before the FIA hearing over Baku he said he wouldn't give any further penalty to Vettel if it were up to him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Zoue I don't think Brundle is saying Vettel got of lightly, but used it as an example to show that Kimi's penalty was too harsh.

IIRC before the FIA hearing over Baku he said he wouldn't give any further penalty to Vettel if it were up to him.

You may have a point there. I still don't think the two are comparable, but it does change motive :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
Zoue wrote:

I read the same thing on a website regarding Vettel and his old contract but in his new contract there is no such stipulations. Probably because it's been changed to Kimi always has to be my teammate :lol: .

Why wouldn't Brundle compare the two penalties, everywhere I looked online I saw people comparing the two and calling Kimis harsh, is Brundle not allowed to have an opinion? What if he was asked the question? Is he meant to just not answer. Abit over the top to say your disappointed in Brundle.

But I am disappointed. So why would it be wrong to say so?

The penalties are for two completely separate offences and as such aren't really comparable. Brundle trying to link the two is a little odd in my book and suggests he feels upset about it. Which again speaks to impartiality[/quote]

Someone thinking Vettel should have got a harsher penalty is impartial?

Doesn't apply to Brundle anyway. A few tweets from him after Baku -

"We've all had 100 shoves than "disgraceful Baku" and nobody even noticed or cared"

"Overall Stewards got it right, I wouldn't have excluded or banned Vettel for walking pace slap, we see much worse with 'no further action'"

There's a few more as well.

He was happy with the penalty given. I think you don't like what he's saying so you're trying to discredit him with accusations of bias that don't stand up to a jot of scrutiny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
But I am disappointed. So why would it be wrong to say so?

The penalties are for two completely separate offences and as such aren't really comparable. Brundle trying to link the two is a little odd in my book and suggests he feels upset about it. Which again speaks to impartiality


Someone thinking Vettel should have got a harsher penalty is impartial?

Doesn't apply to Brundle anyway. A few tweets from him after Baku -

"We've all had 100 shoves than "disgraceful Baku" and nobody even noticed or cared"

"Overall Stewards got it right, I wouldn't have excluded or banned Vettel for walking pace slap, we see much worse with 'no further action'"

There's a few more as well.

He was happy with the penalty given. I think you don't like what he's saying so you're trying to discredit him with accusations of bias that don't stand up to a jot of scrutiny.

No, bringing up old news and complaining that someone should have had a harsher penalty demonstrates an axe to grind. Which could be viewed as being less than impartial, especially when combined with the pot-stirring comments about the alleged contract clause.

But Black_Flag_11 has pointed out another possible interpretation of the penalty comment, so I'm happy to stand corrected on that one


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6385
Location: Nebraska, USA
mcdo wrote:
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too


Personally, I'd "wager" that there is no such mention in Vettel's contract for either of those drivers or any other driver. Just paddock baloney being used to "sell papers" most likely.

If you think drivers don't have clauses in their contracts about other specific drivers then I don't know what to say. It has definitely happened in the past and it's not preposterous to assume that it's ongoing practice


Perhaps you could show me the contract(s)? We often hear about what us in contracts, but very, very rarely ever see it verified... even many years later when the driver is no longer racing. I cannot even begin to count the number of times it has been posted that #2 status was written in a driver's contract, but have yet to see it proven.

The point here is that Brundle is passing on (I am being generous here) a rumor that he cannot back up. All journalists do it, but many times it is nothing but smoke... still it serves their purpose... selling their product. The other side of such gossip peddling is those wanting to believe it end up claiming a noted journalists statemment as some kind of proof.... when it is nothing of the sort.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4862
slide wrote:
yea lol I watched it on channel 4 ,on my daughters phone we were camping , so he is back then , that is good news

mods maybe delete this , sorry


We can just edit our own posts into some dots if you want?

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
But I am disappointed. So why would it be wrong to say so?

The penalties are for two completely separate offences and as such aren't really comparable. Brundle trying to link the two is a little odd in my book and suggests he feels upset about it. Which again speaks to impartiality


Someone thinking Vettel should have got a harsher penalty is impartial?

Doesn't apply to Brundle anyway. A few tweets from him after Baku -

"We've all had 100 shoves than "disgraceful Baku" and nobody even noticed or cared"

"Overall Stewards got it right, I wouldn't have excluded or banned Vettel for walking pace slap, we see much worse with 'no further action'"

There's a few more as well.

He was happy with the penalty given. I think you don't like what he's saying so you're trying to discredit him with accusations of bias that don't stand up to a jot of scrutiny.

No, bringing up old news and complaining that someone should have had a harsher penalty demonstrates an axe to grind. Which could be viewed as being less than impartial, especially when combined with the pot-stirring comments about the alleged contract clause.

But Black_Flag_11 has pointed out another possible interpretation of the penalty comment, so I'm happy to stand corrected on that one


I do genuinely think he was meaning that the Kimi penalty was harsh. Seeing as he says the penalty was harsh in the race and has agreed with the stewards on Vettel's penalty in the past.

I don't think he has complained at all that Vettel should've had a harsher penalty?

Even then I don't think it would be impartial to suggest Vettel should've got a weaker or stronger penalty. It's just an opinion on one issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9898
Location: Travelling around the world
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too


Personally, I'd "wager" that there is no such mention in Vettel's contract for either of those drivers or any other driver. Just paddock baloney being used to "sell papers" most likely.

If you think drivers don't have clauses in their contracts about other specific drivers then I don't know what to say. It has definitely happened in the past and it's not preposterous to assume that it's ongoing practice


Perhaps you could show me the contract(s)? We often hear about what us in contracts, but very, very rarely ever see it verified... even many years later when the driver is no longer racing. I cannot even begin to count the number of times it has been posted that #2 status was written in a driver's contract, but have yet to see it proven.

The point here is that Brundle is passing on (I am being generous here) a rumor that he cannot back up. All journalists do it, but many times it is nothing but smoke... still it serves their purpose... selling their product. The other side of such gossip peddling is those wanting to believe it end up claiming a noted journalists statemment as some kind of proof.... when it is nothing of the sort.

When a guy who signed more than a few F1 contracts in his time reckons it's so plausible as to mention it on air then I don't think it's a ridiculous notion. He's not some armchair enthusiast or corporate shill, the guy has first hand experience in grinding F1 contracts out

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
But I am disappointed. So why would it be wrong to say so?

The penalties are for two completely separate offences and as such aren't really comparable. Brundle trying to link the two is a little odd in my book and suggests he feels upset about it. Which again speaks to impartiality


Someone thinking Vettel should have got a harsher penalty is impartial?

Doesn't apply to Brundle anyway. A few tweets from him after Baku -

"We've all had 100 shoves than "disgraceful Baku" and nobody even noticed or cared"

"Overall Stewards got it right, I wouldn't have excluded or banned Vettel for walking pace slap, we see much worse with 'no further action'"

There's a few more as well.

He was happy with the penalty given. I think you don't like what he's saying so you're trying to discredit him with accusations of bias that don't stand up to a jot of scrutiny.

No, bringing up old news and complaining that someone should have had a harsher penalty demonstrates an axe to grind. Which could be viewed as being less than impartial, especially when combined with the pot-stirring comments about the alleged contract clause.

But Black_Flag_11 has pointed out another possible interpretation of the penalty comment, so I'm happy to stand corrected on that one


I do genuinely think he was meaning that the Kimi penalty was harsh. Seeing as he says the penalty was harsh in the race and has agreed with the stewards on Vettel's penalty in the past.

I don't think he has complained at all that Vettel should've had a harsher penalty?

Even then I don't think it would be impartial to suggest Vettel should've got a weaker or stronger penalty. It's just an opinion on one issue.

er, I already said I'm happy to stand corrected? In the post you were replying to, no less...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2587
Location: England
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Blake wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too


Personally, I'd "wager" that there is no such mention in Vettel's contract for either of those drivers or any other driver. Just paddock baloney being used to "sell papers" most likely.

If you think drivers don't have clauses in their contracts about other specific drivers then I don't know what to say. It has definitely happened in the past and it's not preposterous to assume that it's ongoing practice


Perhaps you could show me the contract(s)? We often hear about what us in contracts, but very, very rarely ever see it verified... even many years later when the driver is no longer racing. I cannot even begin to count the number of times it has been posted that #2 status was written in a driver's contract, but have yet to see it proven.

The point here is that Brundle is passing on (I am being generous here) a rumor that he cannot back up. All journalists do it, but many times it is nothing but smoke... still it serves their purpose... selling their product. The other side of such gossip peddling is those wanting to believe it end up claiming a noted journalists statemment as some kind of proof.... when it is nothing of the sort.


It's not just Brundle suggesting it (seems to have become common knowledge over the weekend) so insinuating that Brundle is the instigator for whatever daft purpose that is supposed to serve is a bit odd. If there was a clause in his contract, its not exactly breaking new ground in F1, is it? A certain French chap who was quite handy himself had exactly that to prevent being beaten in the same car in the early 90s by another driver who like Alonso was held by most at the time as the best around. The guy he didn't want in that team is famous for vetoing teamates in his Lotus days.....

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
Also, remember as I said way back in this thread, Brundle is a manager himself (partner in a company now) and deals with this sort of thing directly and indirectly through his business and contacts.

He may well be going on hearsay, but his horses mouth is going to be far closer to the trough than many others. (which does not make it right I agree)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:04 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28069
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this

Mercedes were in talks with Vettel, it could have got back to Hamilton on what conditions he might have considered joining Mercedes?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this

Mercedes were in talks with Vettel, it could have got back to Hamilton on what conditions he might have considered joining Mercedes?

well, according to this Mercedes never held any contract talks with Vettel, so I guess it depends on who you believe...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 6:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
I'd trust Hamilton as a much impartial source than Brundle.


Last edited by mikeyg123 on Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 7:12 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28069
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?

How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this

Mercedes were in talks with Vettel, it could have got back to Hamilton on what conditions he might have considered joining Mercedes?

well, according to this Mercedes never held any contract talks with Vettel, so I guess it depends on who you believe...

So Lauda is just a habitual liar?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 2nd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 7:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
I suspect Merc did approach Vettel but Lauda is a slave to massive hyperbole.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
TBH, if a rep from all teams does not 'speak to' all drivers at some time during the season something is amiss.
We say 'Vittel' or 'Hamilton' when in reality we are talking about a small company. They have agents and helpers who's job it is to feel the way before they sign up and let them know what the options are.

IF I signed for Ferrari, I would have expected a report from my 'people' about what Toto and co, Horner and co, etc had said was in the offing with their teams and weighed up my options without committing myself.

So it is quite probable Vettel spoke to Niki in much the way you or I would sound out a car salesman before placing my order down the road.
No committal, just a look incase it was a better deal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
How can you call it rubbish when you have as much access to knowing these things as I do as in no access as well.

Meanwhile Hamilton says he's aware that Vettel will not countenance being in the same team as him, I think people in the paddock get to know such things.

I've explained why I called it rubbish above. Meanwhile, as far as what Hamilton says goes I very much doubt he's privy to anything that's written in somebody else's contract. He's not above sh*t stirring himself and that's as much credibility I'd give him as a source for things like this

Mercedes were in talks with Vettel, it could have got back to Hamilton on what conditions he might have considered joining Mercedes?

well, according to this Mercedes never held any contract talks with Vettel, so I guess it depends on who you believe...

So Lauda is just a habitual liar?

I've no idea. But if Wolff is to be believed - and I'll admit, I don't really trust him very much - then the Lauda/Vettel "talks" were just exploratory comments, rather than anything in-depth. Which makes it less likely that they would go into specific contract details on the likes of Vettel having an Alonso veto. And quite why Vettel would feel the need to give details of his Ferrari contract to Mercedes is anybody's guess.


Last edited by Zoue on Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1583
It is funny how people believe Vettel has a a no Alonso clause in his contract, when Ferrari themselves have said they don't want Alonso.

Now for the folks that believe that and Brundle himself, instead of the campaign after election, I reckon he should be actively pushing Alonso to Mercedes atleast Bottas has not been confirmed as far as I know, but no it seems the Ferrari everyone advised him to leave after Ferrari wasted is career according to some is where they want him to be now.

Like I said folks are so lazy now that any rubbish, or jargon a so called expert says they lap it up and even come up with a defence for something they have no proof of.


Last edited by Rockie on Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'd trust Hamilton as a much less partial source than Brundle.

when Hamilton says things on the lines of Vettel being afraid to have him as a team mate, you don't think he's being partial? No self-promotion involved?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
moby wrote:
TBH, if a rep from all teams does not 'speak to' all drivers at some time during the season something is amiss.
We say 'Vittel' or 'Hamilton' when in reality we are talking about a small company. They have agents and helpers who's job it is to feel the way before they sign up and let them know what the options are.

IF I signed for Ferrari, I would have expected a report from my 'people' about what Toto and co, Horner and co, etc had said was in the offing with their teams and weighed up my options without committing myself.

So it is quite probable Vettel spoke to Niki in much the way you or I would sound out a car salesman before placing my order down the road.
No committal, just a look incase it was a better deal.

I'd agree they all probably talk to each other constantly, in terms of sounding each other out. But it's not likely they would reveal intimate contract details in such a scenario


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14200
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'd trust Hamilton as a much less partial source than Brundle.

when Hamilton says things on the lines of Vettel being afraid to have him as a team mate, you don't think he's being partial? No self-promotion involved?


Yes exactly. I mean to say a lot less impartial and have now corrected :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'd trust Hamilton as a much less partial source than Brundle.

when Hamilton says things on the lines of Vettel being afraid to have him as a team mate, you don't think he's being partial? No self-promotion involved?


Yes exactly. I mean to say a lot less impartial and have now corrected :thumbup:

ah, fair enough. I misunderstood


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6385
Location: Nebraska, USA
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I'd trust Hamilton as a much less partial source than Brundle.

when Hamilton says things on the lines of Vettel being afraid to have him as a team mate, you don't think he's being partial? No self-promotion involved?


Of course, self-promotion is the case. Likely just another mind game that Lewis is trying to play with Seb. Lewis likes his mind-games, and to be honest, he is very good at it. He also seldom misses a chance to play them.

It is all fair, though just how well they work on Vettel, I don't know... I suspect though, Seb has bought into them on occasion.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1316
The sooner Brundle is out of Formula One completely the better the sport will be. He is just a bitter old man sowing discontent and pessimism all the time. For the millions of viewers influenced by his voice, he does not paint a picture of a glorious sport with brave young men, but rather one of seedy mistrust and unsavory actions. I understand that Murray Walker is past his due date, but I miss how he expressed his love of this sport.

It is very simple. If you want to enjoy this sport, do not listen to Brundle. If you do listen to this old hack, then you get caught up in pessimistic and negative drama between the drivers and teams.

Life is too short, and this sport is too wonderful to wallow in the mire of pig manure.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9898
Location: Travelling around the world
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
The sooner Brundle is out of Formula One completely the better the sport will be. He is just a bitter old man sowing discontent and pessimism all the time. For the millions of viewers influenced by his voice, he does not paint a picture of a glorious sport with brave young men, but rather one of seedy mistrust and unsavory actions. I understand that Murray Walker is past his due date, but I miss how he expressed his love of this sport.

It really is both and that's what makes it compelling

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 9:43 am 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6456
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
The sooner Brundle is out of Formula One completely the better the sport will be. He is just a bitter old man sowing discontent and pessimism all the time. For the millions of viewers influenced by his voice, he does not paint a picture of a glorious sport with brave young men, but rather one of seedy mistrust and unsavory actions. I understand that Murray Walker is past his due date, but I miss how he expressed his love of this sport.

It is very simple. If you want to enjoy this sport, do not listen to Brundle. If you do listen to this old hack, then you get caught up in pessimistic and negative drama between the drivers and teams.

Life is too short, and this sport is too wonderful to wallow in the mire of pig manure.


And Schumacher. My god did he love that man or what!

I agree, he wasn't the best commentator, but his passion was amazing. Go go go!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 9:46 am 
Online

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6456
Rockie wrote:
It is funny how people believe Vettel has a a no Alonso clause in his contract, when Ferrari themselves have said they don't want Alonso.

Now for the folks that believe that and Brundle himself, instead of the campaign after election, I reckon he should be actively pushing Alonso to Mercedes atleast Bottas has not been confirmed as far as I know, but no it seems the Ferrari everyone advised him to leave after Ferrari wasted is career according to some is where they want him to be now.

Like I said folks are so lazy now that any rubbish, or jargon a so called expert says they lap it up and even come up with a defence for something they have no proof of.


In fairness, if there was such a clause in Vettel's contract, what would you think Ferrari would say?

That "we want Alonso but can't have him because of Vettel's contract"? They'd play the "we are not interested" line of course


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1731
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?


Here's the thing - sometimes you know something is true, but can't prove.

For example, I have seen parts of Hamilton's 2007 contract. I can't get into details because it was due to someone else's incompetence and might get him in trouble. I have a choice to either tell what was in there, and be called a BSer, or never share anything. I never share anything since people would call me a liar. But if I were a journo I would've.

FWIW, there was no "don't compete with FA" clause I could find in the pages I saw. I wasn't lucky enough to see FA's contract. Would've easily paid $10,000 for that.

The fact that it was so easy for complete nobody like me to see the contract at a company as paranoid as McLaren under Ron Dennis of all people, I wouldn't be surprised if Brundle has actually seen a copy of the real contract.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1979
I doubt Hamilton as a 2007 rookie would have had the balls to ask for a clause like that as he just would have been happy to be in F1 in a top team. Even now I doubt he would ask for a 2nd driver veto being supremely confident in his abilities. However he did make public noises about how he did not see Alonso at Mercedes so made his feelings publicly known about that prospect. Probably doesn't fancy a rerun of the 2007 drama. As to Alonso doesn't he maintain that Dennis promised him No1 status but reneged as the 2007 season unfolded ?

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6385
Location: Nebraska, USA
Indeed, I believe Alonso does say that, and i believe it to be true. I'd bet it isn't in the contract though. If it were Alonso could have been making legal demands of Dennis. Like in many negotiations, I'd suggest it was a verbal agreement.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2915
Location: UK
Siao7 wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
The sooner Brundle is out of Formula One completely the better the sport will be. He is just a bitter old man sowing discontent and pessimism all the time. For the millions of viewers influenced by his voice, he does not paint a picture of a glorious sport with brave young men, but rather one of seedy mistrust and unsavory actions. I understand that Murray Walker is past his due date, but I miss how he expressed his love of this sport.

It is very simple. If you want to enjoy this sport, do not listen to Brundle. If you do listen to this old hack, then you get caught up in pessimistic and negative drama between the drivers and teams.

Life is too short, and this sport is too wonderful to wallow in the mire of pig manure.


And Schumacher. My god did he love that man or what!

I agree, he wasn't the best commentator, but his passion was amazing. Go go go!

To be fair I don't think he ever had a bad word to say about any of the drivers, even the obviously hopeless ones. I greatly admire Murray sticking up for Schumacher and trying to dispel the 'nasty German' cartoon villain type character that the British press always portrayed him as.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4862
Blake wrote:
Indeed, I believe Alonso does say that, and i believe it to be true. I'd bet it isn't in the contract though. If it were Alonso could have been making legal demands of Dennis. Like in many negotiations, I'd suggest it was a verbal agreement.


It was yeah. Whitmarsh confirmed Dennis admitted it to him after Hungary when Martin wanted Alonso sacked on the spot.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 9:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1583
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mcdo wrote:
On Sunday Martin Brundle said it's believed Vettel has a clause in his contract that Alonso can't be signed as his teammate. I'd wager there's a Ricciardo clause in there too

I'm disappointed in Brundle that he'd peddle this rubbish. He'll know people will lap it up, but there's not a shred of proof behind it. He's just gossip mongering and I thought he was better than that.

I read that he tweeted about Kimi's penalty in Spa and referenced Vettel's for his brain fade, comparing the two penalties. It's looking increasingly like Brundle has some sort of hard on for Vettel and is looking to knock him any chance he has. Case of patriotism clouding his judgement, perhaps?


Here's the thing - sometimes you know something is true, but can't prove.

For example, I have seen parts of Hamilton's 2007 contract. I can't get into details because it was due to someone else's incompetence and might get him in trouble. I have a choice to either tell what was in there, and be called a BSer, or never share anything. I never share anything since people would call me a liar. But if I were a journo I would've.

FWIW, there was no "don't compete with FA" clause I could find in the pages I saw. I wasn't lucky enough to see FA's contract. Would've easily paid $10,000 for that.

The fact that it was so easy for complete nobody like me to see the contract at a company as paranoid as McLaren under Ron Dennis of all people, I wouldn't be surprised if Brundle has actually seen a copy of the real contract.


This is just BS.

Once a contract is terminated it stops being confidential and if you have access to it and disclose it, no one can sue you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2036
Rockie, that's just wrong. Of course, confidentiality clauses can last beyond the termination of a contract, legally.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Junglist, pokerman, Siao7 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group