Villeneuve versus Pironi 29 years ago...

[KekeTheKing]

Because this is an F1 forum. Because I've watched the race we're talking about several times with my own two eyes.

You do realize that you're talking about what "should" have happened, and I'm talking about what actually "did" happen.

What do you want me to say? You're right Ray, Pironi "should" have backed off and that Gilles "was" the faster man that day. Is that it? Because that's ultimately what I believe as well. But in my opinion, that's not what we've been discussing. That's not what actually happened in the race.

This exchange is certainly helping me to understand where you're coming from with some of your ideas regarding the current McLaren duo and their respective relationships within the team though. Lewis might do well to put you on his pit wall to keep an eye on things, because at this rate I wouldn't be surprised to see Marty Whitmarsh alongside Jense and Jess if they tie the knot.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

You do realize that you're talking about what "should" have happened, and I'm talking about what actually "did" happen.

What do you want me to say? You're right Ray, Pironi "should" have backed off and that Gilles "was" the faster man that day. Is that it? Because that's ultimately what I believe as well. But in my opinion, that's not what we've been discussing. That's not what actually happened in the race.

Well, to be fair, I have been discussing what "did" happen.

What actually happened is Pironi disregarded the fuel save instructions whereas Villeneuve didn't as his lap times suggested...until, that is, it was too late.

Marco Piccicini becoming best man at Pironi's wedding only weeks earlier is, indeed, a fact. Not a figment of my imagination. Ferrari was a political team. That's a fact that's been written about forever. That's not an opinion.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Hey, Keke, are we the only two to remember this event?

Perhaps you should change the header to Villenevue V Pironi (Imola '82) And Hamilton V Button (Turkey '10) OR "Save Fuel" And Other Intra-Team/1-2 Disputes to get the newer/younger guys interested in the debate! Hehe.

 

[KekeTheKing]

Marco Piccicini becoming best man at Pironi's wedding only weeks earlier is, indeed, a fact. Not a figment of my imagination. Ferrari was a political team. That's a fact that's been written about forever. That's not an opinion.

I'll let that be your final word. If you are going to believe that Mario PicciNini played any role in how fast Gilles could drive that day, then there is no point continuing this debate.

 

[KekeTheKing]

Hey, Keke, are we the only two to remember this event?

For sure not, but I hope they have enjoyed this Private Thread. I've got to step away for a bit though, so perhaps we can get some other voices in here.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

If you are going to believe that Mario PicciNini played any role in how fast Gilles could drive that day, then there is no point continuing this debate.

That's a loaded declaration, my friend. In theory, when you're asked to slow down - as Villeneuve was asked to (and did do so as borne out by lap times) - then, yes, you have to conclude that Piccinini did play a role in how fast Gilles actually drove that day. It's quite obvious that Gilles "could" have driven faster.that day..but pit instructions suggested he not do so. I don't see how anyone can dispute that. Cheers, Keke.

 

[KekeTheKing]

That's a loaded declaration, my friend. In theory, when you're asked to slow down - as Villeneuve was asked to (and did do so as borne out by lap times) - then, yes, you have to conclude that Piccinini did play a role in how fast Gilles actually drove that day. It's quite obvious that Gilles "could" have driven faster.that day..but pit instructions suggested he not do so. I don't see how anyone can dispute that. Cheers, Keke.

I find myself wondering why I wandered down this road with you Ray. First off, you don't need to preface every post with, My Friend, and finish it with Cheers, it's rather unnecessary and sounds a bit condescending. But that's just me.

Second, I never meant to criticize Gilles' driving but it appears you think I am. Trust me, I'm not.

There's no more need to go around in circles here. It should have been a banner day, and possibly year, for Ferrari, but it didn't play out that way.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Ok, Keke. I had (and have) no intention of being condescending in any way towards you or any other member here. On the contrary, you have my utmost respect. Shame we haven't had others posting in this thread.

Good evening!

 

[KekeTheKing]

I appreciate that Ray. Sorry about the implication.

You seem to be a strongly opinionated guy that likes to to get his point across, which, I understand, is the one of the main reasons we have great places like this to come and ramble on about motor sport. Your arrival has definitely livened things up a bit around here, and I will be intrigued by whatever brainstorm you have next, but I do not see these long debate threads becoming a usual feature of the Clip The Apex main forum.

Cheers!

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Keke, I've changed since coming over from 606 over on the BBC to the man I was before 606. There were a few mindless Wind Up Merchants on there that 'tainted me' (...I went from being extremely polite and fair-minded originally to being less than polite and less than fair-minded towards the end.) I believe i'm back to normal as I enjoy throwing in some humour...and I like to make people think and re-think.

 

[cider_and_toast]

As far as I understand what occured in that race in 1982, including what I've read in interviews with Villeneuve and various journalists after the race is that Villeneuve believed that the "Fuel / Slow" pit signs meant that both cars should slow and hold station. After he lost the lead to Pironi he then took it back and again tried to hold station until that last lap when again Pironi came by. You can tell by the look of Villeneuve on the podium that he thought there was no way that Pironi would have passed him on that final lap.

I think a clear parallel can be drawn not between Hamilton / Button but between Arnoux / Prost at France just a few races after the incident at Imola. There had apparently been a pre-race agreement that should Arnoux find himself ahead of Prost he (Arnoux) would give way in order to help Prost's title chances. Deep into the race and with Arnoux leading, he suddenly realised that he had a chance to win his home GP and all that pre-race chat went out of the window. If what I've read is correct, the Renault pit tried everything short of jumping out in front of Arnoux and pulling him in to get him to let Prost pass but to no avail. The net result was that Arnoux was in a new team the following year.

Also if I remember correctly, wasn't the Button / Hamilton issue in 2010 down to a SNAFU where one driver was told to go to fuel saving and the other didn't when in fact they were both meant to be told. Once Hamilton had re-taken Button and I would imagine a short, sharp exchange of words by all concerned on the team radios I think the situation was resolved.

 

[Il_leone]

Ferrari - Pironi - Villeneuve - I thought there was a pre agreement whoever led the last lap would win the race or so Gilles thought and could not believe Pironi did a double cross and was so unsporting and vowed never to speak to him

Renault - Arnoux - Prost less talked about as it was the home race they won with a French driver but was the death knell for Arnoux to move to Ferrari.

Mclaren - Senna - Prost a near repeat of Pironi - Villeneuve as they agreed whoever led after first corner will be the winner but Senna passed Prost on the restart and said it was a new race so the agreement was null

Mclaren- Hamilton - Button this was overshadowed by the Red Bulls colliding and the fact that it was resolved and the message got through that both drivers back off..but Mclaren were always the team the FIA loved punishing harder than any