|
| Site Partners: | SpotterGuides | Veloce Books |
| Related Sites: | Your Link Here |
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 15:51 (Ref:222953)
|
#1 | ||
|
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 4,304
 |
If the Toyota's didn't qualify would teams let them race?
If (and I'm not saying they will) the Toyota's finished outside the qualifying rule - would the other teams let them into the race?
It's fair to say that there has been some reported friction between Toyota and the other teams last year re: Ove's supposed paddock behaviour (peeking into garages?). If the car's had problems or they simply couldn't get within the Q rule - do you think teams would let them race for the good of the series - or bring them down to earth with a bump and keep them in the garage on raceday. If so what effect do you thnik this would have and what would Bernie's reaction be to see a car maker (that he know's are desperately needed to maintain F1), publicaly excluded from the race...... |
||
|
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 16:08 (Ref:222958)
|
#2 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,168
|
Personally, I think new teams should be given a three race veto from the 107% rule. Didn't Minardi get both of their cars onto the grid last year in Melbourne, even though only one qualified? I think that was good for the sport.
|
||
|
|
__________________
Growing old is mandatory. Growing up is optional.
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 16:11 (Ref:222959)
|
#3 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,168
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 16:37 (Ref:222965)
|
#4 | |
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,953
|
Mwahahaha don't let them start
 That's what I would say if they didn't qualify, but I don't think they will. They've been pretty good in testing and I'm sure they'll score a handful of points if not the odd podium.  Tarso started at Melbourne because his engine blew up or something so he didn't get enough laps done, and I think that's why he was allowed to race then, unlike at Silverstone it was his fault. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I watched neither event. |
|
|
|
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 17:54 (Ref:223015)
|
#5 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 1998
Posts: 2,762
|
I thought it was up to the race steward to decide who can and cannot race. When did F1 become a democracy?
|
||
|
|
__________________
Never forget #99
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 18:27 (Ref:223029)
|
#6 | ||
|
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 496
|
The other teams have no vote on letting or not race outside the qualifying rule...
|
||
|
|
__________________
Greatness does not consist in receiving honours but in deserving them. Aristotle
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 18:33 (Ref:223032)
|
#7 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,986
|
Well they had more testing than the other teams so I think they should be more than ready. If they do not qualify I say let them buy tickets to the race!
|
||
|
|
__________________
Eventually we learn
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 21:23 (Ref:223227)
|
#8 | |||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 13,211
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
__________________
That's so frickin uncool man!
|
|
26 Feb 2002, 23:53 (Ref:223317)
|
#9 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 7,491
 |
I think, and please correct me if I am wrong, that Tarso actually lapped within the required time during practice, but his car blew up before he could get within this time during quals. Under the circumstances, he did prove that he could lap within the 107% rule, and he was allowed to race after the Stewards met and discussed the position. The race steward can make this decision under exceptional circumstances, but if a team cannot show they could lap within the required time, I don't think that it would be allowed to race.
|
||
|
|
|
|
27 Feb 2002, 01:00 (Ref:223349)
|
#10 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 663
|
My understanding of Tarso being allowed to race in Australia was that Stoddart asked the stewards and no teams objected to the application.
Also Stoddart stated that Tarso was allowed to race because he was within 107% of everyones time except for Shumis pole time which was very very quick. If Toyota failed to qualify the following would have to happen top be allowed to race. an application to the stewards would have to be made. No team objects to the application. If they where not to far outside the 107% time I think they should be able to race but if they where very slow (Lola slow) than it would be to dangerous to let them race. |
||
|
|
__________________
It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail - Gore Vidal
|
|
27 Feb 2002, 01:37 (Ref:223360)
|
#11 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5,917
|
I think if Toyota fail to cut into the 107% time on qualifying due to their lack of pace, they should not be allowed into the race. Otherwise, why do we still need the rule for?
I would like to see Toyota in the races. But still, unless its down to other unique circumstances, Toyota have to earn their place on the grid. |
||
|
|
__________________
Alonso: "McLaren and Williams are also great racing teams, but Ferrari is the biggest one that you can go to."
|
|
28 Feb 2002, 03:59 (Ref:224164)
|
#12 | ||
|
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,083
|
Yes the teams can let someone outside the 107% start (i.e all teams have to agree)
|
||
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Charity Karting Race Teams | Redracer77 | National & International Single Seaters | 138 | 14 Feb 2004 00:24 |
| Charity Karting Race Teams (as of 4.42pm - 2/2/04) | Redracer77 | National & International Single Seaters | 63 | 12 Feb 2004 16:51 |
| Qualify Still Faster Than Race? | frostblade | Formula One | 13 | 17 May 2003 03:25 |
| Drivers Swapping Teams Every Race (Merged) | steve_r | Formula One | 44 | 9 Oct 2002 20:58 |
Linear Mode
