morganabowen

To me, it appeared to be an error on Fernando for passing the opportunity to go into the pits and change the wing and maybe tires. I did not hear anything about Ferrari telling him to stay out

perfectlap

^Of F1 Cars.

I don't think your average F1 driver could trade places with your average WRC driver and do nearly as well in the other guy's car. There's no pretending in a Rally Car. That's why Kimi has made such a strong return.

the flyin' scotsman

I watched the race then rewatched after Seb came outta the pits for the last time.

all I know is Kimi didnt win

L8Apex

The Smiling Assassin

Let’s start with the focal point of all this, Sebastian Vettel. I will say simply this: one does not become a triple world champion by being a nice guy. The smiles, the laughter, the little jokes, the knowing winks to the press… it’s a game, a façade: a beautifully played one, but a front all the same. What we saw on Sunday was the clearest indication yet that Sebastian Vettel is a cold, calculated, ruthless operator. And brilliantly so.

It’s funny isn’t it? We laud Senna. We clapped and cheered and said “Bloody right, too,” when he fired back at an inquisitorial Jackie Stewart the immortal lines, “We are competing to win. And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver.”

The rest here:
http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com...ling-assassin/

TexasRider

While I am one of the biggest Senna fans, and Stewarts remarks are true, you have to keep in mind the preface remarks from Jackie Stewart.

While I have not seen the interview in a while it started off something like " You Senna have been in more CONTACT with other drivers in the last 10 races (or 6months), more than ANY other driver.. etc....." and Senna went to his remarks on going for the gap. Actually the way I remember it he said " I am surprised that you ask me these questions Stewart. You are a experienced driver........" something to that effect.

And while it was true that Senna had been "in contact" with other drivers it was also true that Stewart was bollicking him there. While Stewart did help improve and increase F1 racing safety, he wasnt the end all of all drivers, much less commentators.

This situation is different. Vettel went for a pass, on his teammate, maybe against the team, or not, but may have been ill advised anyway. If he makes it 4 WDC it will probably be Ok.

RajDatta

From crash.net

Alonso: We were just very unlucky
24 March 2013
Fernando Alonso: "It's easy to criticise this decision [to stay out], but at the time it seemed like the right one..."

Fernando Alonso reckons he was 'very unlucky' to have to retire from the Malaysian Grand Prix after early contact with Sebastian Vettel.

Alonso made a strong start and was up to second in his Ferrari F138 when he tagged the back of Vettel's Red Bull into turn 2. Although the Spaniard could continue and only lost a few places, the incident damaged his front wing.

However, rather than pit after the first lap, Ferrari opted to gamble and leave him out, a decision that backfired almost immediately, when the wing collapsed on the start-finish straight on the second lap, sending the two-time world champion out of the race and into retirement. It was a bitter blow, but Alonso insisted that the decision to stay out did seem like the right one at the time.

“Today, unfortunately, we were very unlucky. After making a good start, I touched with Vettel at the second corner: it was a surprise to find him there, almost stopped and I don't know what speed he was doing,” Alonso remarked.

“Despite the fact the car was damaged, it didn't seem to be too bad and, together with the team, we decided to keep going, because if we'd stopped immediately and then again on lap 3 or 4 to fit dry tyres, we would have dropped too far back and definitely lost the chance to finish up the front. It's easy to criticise this decision, but at the time it seemed like the right one.

“It was certainly a shame, because here we could have fought with the Red Bulls, but circumstances didn't help and apart from the wisdom of the decisions we took, bad luck really played its part, when you think how many off-track excursions there were in Australia without any consequence and even here when the cars first went out on track.

“Now we are already focusing on the coming races in China and Bahrain, where we hope to do better than last year, so that we arrive in Europe with as many points as possible”.

Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali and technical director, Pat Fry meanwhile both conceded that in hindsight staying out wasn't the smartest of moves.

“The contact between Alonso and Vettel at the second corner was an unfortunate episode: we knew the front wing was damaged but the car still seemed to be competitive and we decided to run the risk of staying out,” Fry explained. “We definitely could have played safe and called him in, but that way we would have ended up behind everyone on rain tyres and would have lost even more ground with the next stop to fit dry tyres. With hindsight, we can say the risk wasn't worthwhile.”

“Clearly today's result leaves a somewhat bitter taste in the mouth given the start positions we had secured in qualifying,” Domenicali continued. “As soon as Fernando collided with Vettel it was clear that his race would involve fighting his way up the order. At that time, we felt the front wing could hold out and on a track that was progressively drying out, we risked leaving him out. With hindsight, it did not work out, trying to avoid doing two stops in the space of just four laps.”

“Given the competitive performance level of our rivals, now the important thing is to turn the page: we must put this Sunday behind us and calmly analyse the positive and negative aspects, as we immediately turn our attention to the next race in China,” Domenicali concluded.

Here ya go..

RajDatta

Buxton only saw what he could see live from the pits. He was not listening to Ferrari radio. It was assumption on his part that the team was ready but Alonso opted to stay out.

Alonso cannot see his front wing. He has to rely on his team to tell him how bad the damage is. It was a team decision which involved Alonso as well, since he felt that the car was still competitive but he was nowhere in any position to decide to extremity of the damage.

That call had to come from Ferrari pits and they opted to keep him out, which he agreed upon.

How can Alonso make that call? Makes no sense.

333pg333

Just thought I'd put these here...

LuigiVampa

Let's compare - Senna deliberately crashed out Prost in 1990 to secure the world championship. There is a difference between being ultra competitive, to the point of being ruthless, but what Senna did in 1990 is comparable to what Vettel did. He didn't win because he was more aggressive - he basically cheated.

You want to brush someone close to the wall; close the door hard at a turn; edge someone off the track; that is hard racing and maybe drifts toward the dirty and dangerous side. But if you deliberately crash someone out or defy team orders to take advantage of a situation I think it is tantamount to cheating.

I hope the karma police catch up with Vettel. A REAL apology would make this right. "I'm a young guy and got carried away in the heat of the moment. I realize what I did was wrong and I make no excuses." Something like that. Instead he pretends he didn't understand the radio transmission. I didn't lose much respect for him for what he did - I lost respect for him how he handled it afterwards.

ltc

Vettel's journey on the path to the Dark Side is nearly complete.
Next stop, Ferrari, where he will replace Alonso at the side of Emperor Luca.

gums

Have to agree with Luigi on that.
But, don't forget that the Senna/Prost thing was building and raging for a long time, leading up to the incident. This new indiscretion is now setting the stage for more to come.
As stated previously, the ultimate expression of this was when Gilles paid the ultimate price for his conflict with Pironi, whom I will never forgive, even if he too is gone.

jbossolo

Returning the favor to Prost, who did the EXACT same thing the year before at Suzuka. Senna rejoined the race, won it, and was later DQ'd for missing a chicane, after Prost cried like a bitch to the race marshals. Don't leave out that little part of history, bro.

2BWise

There is an even closer comparison to Senna/Prost at the '89 San Marino GP. The team/drivers had an agreement that they could race to the first corner and who ever got there first would be unchallenged for the lead. The assumption by Prost was that Turn 1 was Tamburello, but Senna raced him thru Tamburello and passed him into the following left-hander. He went on to win the race.

It mirrors this situation in that team orders were directly defied for the sole purpose of winning. Is it morally questionable? Yes. Is it understandable? Yes. Would any of us feel good for winning this way? No. Would any of us feel good being beat this way? No. We all race (I assume, but there are some A-holes out there) with a similar concept of sportsmanship. Vettel mirrors Senna's attitude of win at all costs. And this is the contradiction I find amusing with Senna. Since he died on the track that mentality has become revered and even praised. Does anyone find it surprising that drivers attempt to emulate him. Schumacher was unquestionably dominant over his teammate. Alsonso went to Ferrari so he could be the unquestionable #1, and Vettel is simply asserting himself as the unquestioned #1 at RB. It is a mentality that, without a doubt, would have appeared at some point if not simply for the fact that the money goes to those that win. It was just seems that Senna was the first one to it. Vettel is known as having a strong F1 historical understanding, so does this surprise anyone. My bet, expect to see more of the same, and I expect it to come straight from Horner.

LuigiVampa

I don't think the two crashes are equal. I believe 1989 was a "racing incident" and 1990 was a deliberate crash. Most agree with that assessment but you are free to disagree.

I agree with this.

Cory M

All I know is it made the race a hell of a lot more interesting. I agree with Will Buxton's assessment, Vettel should have owned it and Nico should have passed Lewis too. If the race had ended in the typical parade we wouldn't even be talking about it now.