|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
13 May 2002, 07:05 (Ref:284614) | #1 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 187
|
Mark Skaife - ...the fat
For those who are interested, and don't know already, Mark Skaife will be one of the panelists on the ABC sports show "The Fat" which is on at 9:30pm tonight (Monday).
BJ |
||
|
13 May 2002, 09:54 (Ref:284768) | #2 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,417
|
Re: Mark Skaife - ...the fat
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
BAZINGA! |
13 May 2002, 11:13 (Ref:284880) | #3 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 222
|
"The Fat" is to be renamed "The Fat Nose" in honour of tonight's guest.
|
||
__________________
"If you have a ten dollar head, then wear a ten dollar helmet!" - Frank Matich |
13 May 2002, 12:27 (Ref:284963) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,366
|
Well I'm not a huge fan of Skaife's. Part of that is his continued success in the wrong car. But that's just me. He did do a good job on a general entertainment show this evening though.
Even with the oblique reference to Moffat Bathurst "77 and the Austrian fiasco of last night. |
||
__________________
I am grateful that I am not as judgemental as all those censorious, self-righteous people around me. |
13 May 2002, 21:21 (Ref:285623) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
What was the gist of the reference to Bathurst 77? There is absolutely no comparison between the two - first stayed first and second stayed second - in Austria the race was rigged.
Last edited by RaceTime; 13 May 2002 at 21:22. |
||
|
13 May 2002, 22:15 (Ref:285686) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 1,632
|
Bugger - missed it.
I hope he didn't use any big words that those ball sport obsessed morons didn't understand. Like, sus-pen-sion, tel-em-et-ry, pet-rol.... |
||
|
13 May 2002, 22:19 (Ref:285691) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
rac-ing
sports-man-ship rigged - races |
||
|
14 May 2002, 09:07 (Ref:285969) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,417
|
Tony Squiers called him Australia's most succeful driver "Ever". What a lot of bull**** just like the rest of the show.
|
||
__________________
BAZINGA! |
15 May 2002, 04:31 (Ref:286929) | #9 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 248
|
What was the gist of the reference to Bathurst 77
Not sure, is that the year Brocky jumped into the other car and won the race? What a farce that year was |
||
__________________
"The most fun you can have with your pants on!" Possum Bourne. |
15 May 2002, 05:19 (Ref:286949) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 1,632
|
Brocky always gets the blame for that but if you watch the doco "Larry Perkins : Endurance Man" it was actually Larry's idea to hijack the other car.
I think 77 was the year the leading Falcon slowed down to allow his tema mate coming second to catch up for a formation finish accross the line. It's not really a valid comparison to the debacle that happenned in F1 on the weekend. |
||
|
15 May 2002, 05:20 (Ref:286950) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
Dunno - didn't he do that a couple of times?
Though 77 was the year Moffat and Bond did their one-two (but as I said - one stayed first and two stayed second - there was no 'Pull over and let me win' situation there. |
||
|
15 May 2002, 06:28 (Ref:286960) | #12 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
My understanding of the 77 situation was that Moffat had problems and Bond was told maintain station. In the aerial shots his car is actually seen to edge ahead on Conrod Straight before Moff took the line into Murrays for a narrow win.
|
|
15 May 2002, 06:44 (Ref:286963) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
Correct - Moffat was seen to be having what was believed to be brake problems.
However, the situation is still entirely different from last weekend. |
||
|
15 May 2002, 07:16 (Ref:286973) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,225
|
It wasn't that different. In both situations, team orders dictated that one car must win and the other must finish second. Moffat's car was apparently not in a healthy state while Bond's was, yet team orders stopped Bond from doing what would otherwise have been inevitable - passing Moffat for the win.
|
||
__________________
"Our traction control was kinda how much your last crash was still hurting you." - Kevin Schwantz |
15 May 2002, 07:26 (Ref:286977) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
Disagree - at Bathurst Moffat was already the leader - both of the team AND on the track. Sure he could have been passed but Moffat wasn't being TOLD to slow down.
At Austria, Barrichello was the race leader and was ordered to relinquish the lead despite having been quickest and best ALL weekend. |
||
|
15 May 2002, 07:31 (Ref:286981) | #16 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I always steer clear of Australian sports shows as usually the word 'sport' in the title refers to Football, cricket and a choice of golf and tennis. Usually motor racing gets a mention if someone has a big crash.
|
|
15 May 2002, 07:39 (Ref:286985) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
owever, before the last couple of laps the clear leader WAS Moffat - of that there is no dispute. Whether he could have finished or if he would have broken down is neither here nor there - he WAS the race leader and to the best of everyones knowledge he would have finished in that position.
Not so in Austria. There was no engine malady (that we yet know of), or any other mechanical problem that caused him to slow down the way he did. |
||
|
15 May 2002, 08:36 (Ref:287004) | #18 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,417
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
BAZINGA! |
15 May 2002, 08:56 (Ref:287018) | #19 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 1,632
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
15 May 2002, 10:22 (Ref:287085) | #20 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 934
|
Quote:
what do you call being ordered not to overtake your teamate???:confused: |
|||
|
15 May 2002, 10:56 (Ref:287107) | #21 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
said it before, and I'll say it again - in 77, the leading driver stayed in that position. There willalways be speculation as to wether Moffat slowed down or5 had mechanical problems that forced him to slow - either way - he slowed and Bond caught him.
In Austria at NO TIME did or was Schumacher in a position to challenge for the lead (neither was Bond IIRC). And that is the difference - the Falcon slowed and allowed the team mate to catch up. The Ferrari was TOLD to let the slower car pass (and yes, I know Scumacher set fastest lap - but look at WHEN he set it!). |
||
|
15 May 2002, 11:14 (Ref:287120) | #22 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 934
|
well then i must have told porkys for the last 25 years, 'cause this is the first i've heard of
A.. moffat not having a car problem B... bond not being in a position to challenge for the lead. if this is so, why did bond take the matter to court??? and as far as i know, bond was TOLD not to pass moffat |
||
|
15 May 2002, 11:56 (Ref:287172) | #23 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 5,449
|
OK let's rephrase slightly - were the mechanical problem bad enough to stop him?
I won;t deny Bond may have been told not to pass him. And as I undertsand it the court action was for payment for the race not for what happened on the track. |
||
|
16 May 2002, 00:55 (Ref:287693) | #24 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,043
|
From what i have heard the mechanical failure was not a terminal one, the car could still go, but at a reduced pace, meaning that Bond was much quicker at the end and was told to slow, as RT said, Bond took it to court because he wasn't being paid what he was told he would get for staying behind.
On a different kind of team order, how about the 1992 ATCC, all through the year Richards seemed to be giving a way to Skaife, and didn't Richards say on the Friday or Daturday of the last round at Oran Park, even though he was only 8 points behind, that the title was Skaife's. Neither of them is the same as in Austria though. |
||
__________________
"The Great Race" 22 November 1960 - 21 July 1999 |
16 May 2002, 00:55 (Ref:287694) | #25 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 222
|
The famous (infamous?) 1977 Bathurst win is really not the same thing. That was done for maximum marketing impact and not to "rig" a race. Moffat was in the lead although with a stricken car.
What we had in Austria was a team mate who had been quicker for most of the weekend and the race who ws told to move over at the last minute to give Mr. Number 1 the full points. I'm not sure which driver is more p***ed off about it, come to think of it. |
||
__________________
"If you have a ten dollar head, then wear a ten dollar helmet!" - Frank Matich |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
mark skaife xbox | bartman71 | Australasian Touring Cars. | 8 | 27 Jun 2004 10:11 |
Mark Skaife - OAM | RaceTime | Australasian Touring Cars. | 90 | 27 Jan 2004 10:03 |
The Mark Skaife Show | rpolinski | Australasian Touring Cars. | 38 | 24 Jun 2003 22:51 |
How much does Mark Skaife get Paid? | DNQ | Australasian Touring Cars. | 38 | 15 Nov 2002 10:59 |
mark skaife is boring me.... | gomick | Australasian Touring Cars. | 9 | 17 Jul 2001 11:50 |