An illustration of why I have mixed feelings (sometimes concern, sometimes confusion) regarding Our Nige in the Stewards room is the incongruity between just two of the items that I had read. The first item, is one of the few full statements that seem to have come from the Stewards room. I'm not sure why I haven't seen more of these as it is precisely what I look for after every GP. The second is an item (not a great fan of the source I have to admit) containing comments that contradict the content of the first item. (Apologies for any repetition of other posts as I had to trawl back through my bookmarks and surfing history to find them).
Item 1) I found this here:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/06/13/button-escapes-penalties-hamilton-alonso-crashes/
Regarding the Hamilton collision, the stewards issued the following statement:
The Stewards have reviewed the Incident involving Car 3 (L. Hamilton) and Car 4 (J. Button) on their 7th lap of the race. The Stewards reviewed the lines of several cars, including the two cars involved, using multiple angles of video evidence over several laps, the speed traces of both drivers, the GPS tracking data from the cars and have heard the drivers and team representatives.
The Stewards concluded that:
1) Exiting Turn 13 there was a legitimate overtaking opportunity for Lewis Hamilton as his speed was greater than Jensen Button’s.
2) Both drivers took lines substantially similar to many of the other drivers, and did not move as far to the left as the preceding driver, Michael Schumacher. At the moment afte Hamilton moved to the left to pass, Button looked into his mirror. It appears from the position of Hamilton at that moment [and is confirmed by the drivers] that Button was unlikely to have seen Hamilton.
3) At the point of contact Button had not yet moved as far to the left of the track as he had on the previous lap, or that Schumacher had on that lap.
The Stewards have concluded that it was reasonable for Hamilton to believe that Button would have seen him and that he could have made the passing manoeuvre. Further, the Stewards have concluded that it is reasonable to believe that Button was not aware of Hamilton’s position to his left. Therefore, the Stewards decide that this was a “racing incident” and have taken no further action.
Regarding the Alonso collision, the stewards decided:
Car 5 [Alonso] was on an out lap having pitted. Car 4 [Button] appeared to be firmly established on the inside line prior to the entry of the corner and drove onto the kerb to avoid Car 5 on the outside.
In view of the conditions and the statements by both drivers and their team representatives, the Stewards decide that this was a “racing incident” and have taken no further action.
My note: Good decisions, I thought and like the way they seem to have gone about things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item 2) An extract from here:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...-crazy-risks-now-because-they-lack-respect.do
Those are not words Mansell would use about the performance of Button's McLaren team-mate Lewis Hamilton. He crashed out at Montreal after colliding with Button, leaving him questioning what Hamilton was up to.
"Jenson was lucky he did not have a rear suspension problem or a puncture as a result of the collision with Hamilton," Mansell says. "The fact that both of them are champions is not the issue. You always have rivalry in a team and there is pressure to do better than your team-mate."
Three-times champion Niki Lauda labelled Hamilton "completely mad" after the race and said that he fears the Briton's driving could lead to a death. "I hope it doesn't come to that but Hamilton has to learn to be patient," says Mansell, who emphasises this point by referring to what happened in Monaco two weeks ago.
Hamilton endured frustration in qualifying for that race as a crash by Sauber's Sergio Perez disrupted the session and prevented the McLaren man improving his time. To add to Hamilton's misery he was docked two places on the grid to ninth for cutting the chicane and he was then penalised twice in the race for colliding with Felipe Massa of Ferrari and Pastor Maldonado of Williams. Afterwards he had a rant at the stewards and escaped further penalties by apologising.
"You have to have a little bit of lady luck and there's no question Lewis had bad luck in qualifying," Mansell says. "I'm sure he would have been right up there at the front of the group but the accident happened and you have to accept it. But to force the issue in the manner he did in the race was unfortunate.
"He must learn you have to take your luck when it comes. When it goes against you, don't push it."
For Mansell, this shows a lack of respect for other drivers. He explains: "In our days drivers had a healthier respect for each other because they realised the dangers and they weren't so crazy in the car"
"When I started in Formula One in the late Seventies the circuit wasn't safe. Anywhere between two and six people a year were being killed. There were some races where several died. You knew it was a numbers game and you hoped your number wasn't up."
"There's no question the FIA [the sport's governing body] have done a wonderful amount of work for the safety of the drivers. The downside is that the drivers think they are bullet-proof. So they take far greater risks, they don't have as much respect for one another as they should. That's not great for the sport."
And Mansell feels that technology has radically changed motor racing.
"In our day the driver probably had more input into the car," he says. "We didn't have power steering or fully automated gearboxes. We didn't have all the technical whizzes that are on the car now, so we actually controlled the car far more than the drivers today. We could sometimes still do a job without the expertise of the engineers. Now the driver can't do a good job without them."
"We didn't have any simulators. We had to do it on the track all the time. Now they've got simulators for everything. And, if they have an accident or go off, then you just press a button, re-set and away you go again."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are just two examples. I'm not sure what to believe so I wonder, if those are his thoughts on some or most current drivers (that's not quite clear from the piece), just how many of the current grid can rely on his impartiality or otherwise?
Are the contradictions in the above examples of how Nigel is able to leave his opinion outside of the Stewards room or did the Stewards ignore his opinion? Personally, as a great fan of Mansell (in the days that I was a fan of someone) I rather hope that time will prove my cynicism to be wrong.
