[LM24 Race] How evil is Anthony Davidson? (THREAD CLOSED)

[gwyllion]

Collard is an extremely experienced endurance racer, who drove numerous times at Le Mans both in prototypes and GT cars. Clearly he did not expect that Davidson would overtake him in the Porsche curves. I can only repeat what Davidson said in http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/84435:

I ended up on the racing line, it was a passing move on the inside. The GT cars can make your life difficult there - they don't like you to pass them in the Porsche Curves - I know that because I was the same when I was in a GT car here. But they don't need to, we're so much faster and it's so easy to do, just stay on the outside.

Let make things clear.

1. I have no problem with the overtaking move (no contact = race incident), but the comments of Davidson on SpeedTV were very arrogant. For people who did not see the interview, check http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU70l_cQ2do#t=0m39
2. NightStalk3r literally said "he also said there was no contact, so surely Collard would have taken that same line and lost it on the marbles whether Davidson was there or not." I just wanted to point out that that suggestion is completely ridiculous! It is undebatable that Collard lost control of the Corvette because Davidson was on the inside.

[Dunlop Corner]

I don't really see what is so wrong about that Davidson interview. I have the same view of the incident as him. The GT cars don't like to be passed at that fast kink, and so stay in the middle of the road to warn off the prototypes. Standard etiquette when you catch a GT there, is to follow him through the kink and go on the outside around the long righthander. This is surely what Collard thought was about to happen. But Davidson went for it into the kink, and Collard discovered this too late to be able to adjust his line.

Just an unfortunate misunderstanding. Collard was about to setup the usual Porsche curve lapping but Davidson was in more of a hurry than usual. A misunderstanding, but not a mistake by Davidson in my opinion. I think Davidson was more at fault for putting Alesi off, but of course that did not destroy a car.

[Lola T70]

"They deserved it" was one of the first things he said to Speed!!!!!!!!!! Seems a stupid comment to me and not sure many agree with AD on that one.

Standard practice is that it is the car behinds responsibility to overtake cleanly and safely, and I can understand any GT car not wishing a Prototype car overtake there if that was the consequence.

I think it all adds up when you include the incident with the Ferrari, going off when coming into the pits and then the Corvette.

[teamnewmie]

Here is video of his interview on Speed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU70l_cQ2do&feature=related

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

"They deserved it" was one of the first things he said to Speed!!!!!!!!!! Seems a stupid comment to me and not sure many agree with AD on that one.

This exact wordings were a bit less blunt: "To be honest, it kind of serves them right."

[Lola T70]

So by that AD feels Collard deserved crashing out of the lead for wishing to not be overtaken into a 140 mph left hand bend which would potentially end up in him crashing.........and did.


hmmmmm, sorry but I cannot see anything in that interview that gave me any hint of compassion, either the words or the body language. And I am a AD fan.

[steve_r]

I can't believe there is 10 pages of this guff after an accident that did not even involve cars touching.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by steve_r

I can't believe there is 10 pages of this guff after an accident that did not even involve cars touching.

You seem to have missed the point. The action on the track is not the discussion point. The interviews by Davidson afterwards are. Again, watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU70l_cQ2do#t=0m39 and make up your mind yourself.

Also you have to see that overtaking of Corvette in its context. Davidson already drove into Alesi (see here and here) and later he got airborne on his inlap (see here). That is why people think his driving style was too aggressive.

[steve_r]

So all this is because he did not give a grovelling apology after not touching another car.

[chernaudi]

His driving tactics didn't help Peugeot win, that's for sure! He hit the AF Course Ferrari lapping it, which along with the alternator problem set him back, and I'll grant that there was little to no(most likely no) contact with the Corvette, but his agressive driving did him few favors, most of all the pit-in curb hopping. Would one expect a F1 car to survive that curb hop? Probably not, and the 908 doesn't have much more tollerance for that type of drving behavior.

Again, it's not the accident itself, it's how AD handled the aftermath.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by steve_r

So all this is because he did not give a grovelling apology after not touching another car.

That sums it up. The exact wording of his lack of apology was "it kind of serves them right".

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

His driving tactics didn't help Peugeot win, that's for sure! He hit the AF Course Ferrari lapping it, which along with the alternator problem set him back, and I'll grant that there was little to no(most likely no) contact with the Corvette, but his agressive driving did him few favors, most of all the pit-in curb hopping. Would one expect a F1 car to survive that curb hop? Probably not, and the 908 doesn't have much more tollerance for that type of drving behavior.

Again, it's not the accident itself, it's how AD handled the aftermath.

Ok... so the real issue is that he is an arrogant... xxxxx. Ok, fair enough. I would agree that not only his driving, but that of all of the Peugeot pilots was too aggressive, and too fast for what the cars could handle. They had a car that was superior on speed, and seemed to push it too hard.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

You seem to have missed the point. The action on the track is not the discussion point.

No, the discussion is about both. See above.

Maybe the actual incident has been put to bed because clear that it was just a racing incident or that someone could have been killed! One or the other.

Just watched the Speed and seen the interview. Frankly both drivers should be good enough to get through there in that situation. I was over the incident by the end of Sunday. I'm over the interview now. Racing drivers, tut.

Great picture of JH and AD. It shows people can move on. I have renewed respect for JH.

[Rennen]

Originally Posted by AndrewF31

If he ever races in slower cars and is leading his class or racing, period, he'll deserve the same treatment by a faster car.
Just because you're lapping another car, doesn't mean the other car needs to stop immediately and roll out the red carpet. Come on!
And only because this is a Peugeot, he wasn't black flagged. I wouldn't go as far to say as Eurosport said, to exclude him like Stuart Hall was, because Stuart had done this type of thing many times.

Shame these guys don't think before they talk, and shame their teams don't control these guys more. Those stupid interviews could have been avoided.

Errrr...But he has! As he said in tonites frank interview with Radio LeMans, he said when he drove the Prodrive Ferrari GT in 2003, he made darn sure he was never in the way of LMPs in the Porsche curves.

Stuart Hall on Eurosport said, you will get this with Prototypes and GTs together...it's racing! Actually the Stuart Hall disqualification, put greater strain on his two team mates at the time who had to do longer stints without him!

For so long, on TV we have seen team press officers having briefed their drivers after an incident. We all saw Vettels 'red mist' finger head pointing after his collision with Webber in Turkey, which cost his team a one, two finish and their championship lead, but the post race interviews with him and Webber were all sweetness and light! Is that what you really prefer to see? That was the second time Vettel had cost his team a win, does that make Vettel evil! Of course not, it's just the 'red mist' of racing!

[Rennen]

Actually, I think he said, in GT after looking in his mirrors for LMPs he drove a defence line through the Porsche Curves so they couldn't pass him there, and on this occassion the 64 car didn't do that, so he thought to pass was alright.

Whatever, the real issue here is the huge differential in cornering speeds and grip of a Prototype compared to a GT car, and the 'wash' they create.

The interview was to a driver who was, hot and tired after a 3 hours of '10 Tenths' driving, in which he thought he had done well to gain an entire lap, only to find the media baying for blood, over an incident to their favourite car!

However the Corvette retired with a blown motor, not because of that incident, so it wasn't going to win anyway, so it's just as disapointing as what happened to the PUGs! That's motor racing!

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Rennen

However the Corvette retired with a blown motor, not because of that incident, so it wasn't going to win anyway, so it's just as disapointing as what happened to the PUGs! That's motor racing!

So you know exactly the cause of the #64 Corvette engine failure and that it was not connected in anyway whatsoever to the 'incident'? Please do tell.






L.P.

[djb]

Originally Posted by Rennen

The interview was to a driver who was, hot and tired after a 3 hours of '10 Tenths' driving, in which he thought he had done well to gain an entire lap, only to find the media baying for blood, over an incident to their favourite car!

someone else brought this up some time earlier, and is a very valid point.

I would like to relate a similiar situation from a completely diff. sport that I have experienced that makes me have a fair mind on this incident.
For many years I used to participate in a two day cross-country skiing event (Nordic skiing). It would cover 5 sections per day, for about 80 klicks per day, through meandering trails in forests and open fields. While not someone who could do the whole thing, I still would challenge myself to doing the most I could, which always involved pacing oneself and not wasting any time anywhere (I would think of Lemans while skiing, a similiar mindset)
I used to race amateur motorcycle circuit racing, and have followed motorsport for 30 years, so I have a good memory for track layouts--I would remember these skiing sections from year to year, and in the downhill sections I would always strive to keep my momentum and speed up. I am not a overly strong skier so would relish the twisties to make up some time, but there were always slow skiers who would be braking allthe way down descents and/or taking up the whole bloody narrow track. In trying to keep a good rhythm and not to lose any little bit of speed, I sometimes had to yell "track" and pass by quickly a slowpoke, and have had to bail out into the woods on at least one occasion.
Because of this, I can relate to Davidson going hell for leather and not wanting to lose any momentum, yes it was a desperate situation with the other Pug failures, and even moreso, he had to make up time.

I really do believe that the GT cars have the onus to verify who is coming up behind them at the approach to the Porsche Curves, exactly because of the large grip and speed diffs. Could the vette have been more careful? I dont know. Could he have placed his car more defensively? Still dont know. Could simply be a timing thing that was unfortunate, no diff than me meeting someone on a narrow downhill round a corner in just the wrong spot.

well, there you go, another couch pt of view, but one that can relate.

cheers

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

So you know exactly the cause of the #64 Corvette engine failure and that it was not connected in anyway whatsoever to the 'incident'? Please do tell.

It looked pretty much like what had happened to the 63, only it was purely smoke out of the exhaust, there was a trail of fluid from the same exhaust of the 63.

[Webslinger]

All this mindless rhetoric is pathetic. All the whingers would have done well to listen to what Davidson had to say live on Radio Le Mans last night, 8pm UK time.

It brings to mind the old statement "Let he without sin..." But to compare a racing driver being paid to do his job, with the likes of Bundy and Hitler, shows just how out of touch some folk are with reality. Maybe a few sessions with a shrink need to be booked?

Remember a few basic facts. The Peugeot LMP1 was massively quicker than the GT2 cars. It was much quicker than even the other LMP's. It works both ways here - respect for another driver counts regardless of speed. Collard is experienced - so why not allow for a quicker car, just as much as punters expect a quicker car to allow for a slower one?

Anyone with racing experience knows what can happen when a quicker driver appears on track with a slower driver. I do not care if it is the leader of another class, because that just makes it worse. If a car is leading it suggests a driver in charge with ability and hence one who needs to use a bit of common sense. I've been in both slower and quicker machinery, and use of the word 'stubborn' would not describe some of the slower drivers I have had to try and pass - it would be a gross understatement. But on the opposite side of the coin I have always got out of the way of the quicker drivers. To my knowledge it has never happened - it is intelligent driving and it has served me well, idiots apart of course...

So, mirror check, think "Blo*dy hell, those lights are closing in VERY QUICKLY! I've got a good lead, but that car is closing in fast. Hmm... Porsche Curves coming up. He will catch me there for sure. What to do..?" Tell you what I would have done - I would not have played hard-ball and I would have made sure he got past OK. Where is the point in thinking "I'm ahead so he can wait..." As for the arguments that the Corvette driver did not know the Peugeot was there..?

You have a problem with what I have said then dig out the radio interview from last night and be prepared to refresh your opinion(s) - I did, but it takes a barve person to do so.

You want controversial? After watching what he did at Le Mans, following the receipt team orders to take risks and do what he had to do for a possible podium, Anthony Davidson is (arguably) one of the most talented drivers currently available to drive any car, and if your opinion differs from that, please don't bother responding with any childish commentary. It's just a personal an opinion, although I do not have to resort to slanderous or libellous comments about someone to express it.

[Lola T70]

I listened to Radio Le Mans but I also watched Speed TV live and saw his interview directly afterwards.

So I am sorry, all the reasoning that has been given does not excuse the opinion stated in the interview with Speed TV which showed a disregard for anything except him, and that is not the way to win Le Mans in my humble opinion. That is where I am disappointed in AD.

Easy to be apologetic after the hounds have rounded on you, harder to realise it yourself.

[porsche91722]

Just listened to the RLM interview, and it was good to hear Davidsons right of reply. My only problem with his answers were that he contradicted himself with some of his responses in relation to the Corvette incident. He has obviously had a bit of time to think through the whole scenario and somehow, justify it, in his own mind.
I think what has annoyed most people is the way he initially responded. Unfortunately, he cannot take back what was said in the interviews he did immediately after the incident and will have to accept the incoming flak.
On the flip side of the coin, has anyone noticed the irony in what happened at LM24 with Corvette, and the last lap incident at Laguna Seca they had with Flying Lizards last year. Lots of wild accusations from both sides, as to who was responsible etc, etc.

[Uncle]

I have always enjoyed a good race and the race drive Ant put in was fantastic .He said in his interview last night that whilst driving the pro drive ferrari he had eyes glued to his mirrors . Now put yourself in the corvette was he aware of the headlighted of the car gaining on him ? If so what was he thinking block him (he diodnt )or make room .If neather maybe he was (resting his brain for a moment ) Bet all of you RACERS have done that one . to the armchair critics think again carefully and enjoy .after more than 50 lemans I love it !!!!!!!!!1

[Lola T70]

Ant also said he blocked LMP's there when he was in a GT car, I presume for this exact reason.

I am just not sure if his drive was fast and furious but too full of red mist with not enough control when I think of Ferrari and pit lane incidents as well.

Look forward to seeing him back next year though

[JHamilton]

Originally Posted by Webslinger

All this mindless rhetoric is pathetic. All the whingers would have done well to listen to what Davidson had to say live on Radio Le Mans last night, 8pm UK time.

It brings to mind the old statement "Let he without sin..." But to compare a racing driver being paid to do his job, with the likes of Bundy and Hitler, shows just how out of touch some folk are with reality. Maybe a few sessions with a shrink need to be booked?

That hasn't happened? You need to re-read the thread too.

Remember a few basic facts. The Peugeot LMP1 was massively quicker than the GT2 cars. It was much quicker than even the other LMP's. It works both ways here - respect for another driver counts regardless of speed. Collard is experienced - so why not allow for a quicker car, just as much as punters expect a quicker car to allow for a slower one?

That's exactly the point. It's a two way street. The slower cars have the responsiblity of holding their line. They have as much right or more to the apex of the corner as they have much less downforce. They need to make room for faster cars when allowable. The protos have to make the pass safely.

You have a problem with what I have said then dig out the radio interview from last night and be prepared to refresh your opinion(s) - I did, but it takes a barve person to do so.

I did. Changes nothing. He still is at least partially responsible for the incident, made the initial comments on tv, and the pathetic "apology" on PLM.

You want controversial? After watching what he did at Le Mans, following the receipt team orders to take risks and do what he had to do for a possible podium, Anthony Davidson is (arguably) one of the most talented drivers currently available to drive any car, and if your opinion differs from that, please don't bother responding with any childish commentary. It's just a personal an opinion, although I do not have to resort to slanderous or libellous comments about someone to express it.

BBTL... Bowties Before The Lock

[Victor_RO]

Drivers who want/have to take risks through traffic to gain time take any half-chance or slight opening they are given by the car in front of them. And to be fast at Le Mans in a P1 car, you have to handle the traffic, and that sometimes implies taking risks and half-chances. There's a few seconds of onboard in "Truth in 24" where Allan McNish makes a pass in traffic towards the end of the Porsche Curves, and he takes to the grass to squeeze by a GT car.

Taking risks is a part of being a fast driver. And both Ant and Manu risked it by doing what they did in that corner, and this time it ended in tears. End of story.

Oh, and red mist and frustration = predilection to say a lot of things you shouldn't say.