steve_gus
|
| posted on 23/6/05 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
thats just doublespeak. Not attending the meeting and not voting was effectively a veto, (as all 10 must vote yes) which ferrari would know would stop
the chicane.
Its not even subtle - in fact abit of a childish tactic
atb
steve
PS
about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but 'good for
10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen.
[Edited on 23/6/05 by steve_gus]
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
|
|
gazza285
|
| posted on 23/6/05 at 10:59 PM |
|
|
"about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but
'good for 10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen."
No, of course not, That is why they didn't race.
Interview with Max Mosley here.
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 24/6/05 at 09:01 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
"about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but
'good for 10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen."
No, of course not, That is why they didn't race.
And that's what I said three pages ago. I was told on Sunday night that it was insurance and litigation that stopped them racing. The rest was
just a show, and a great deal of infighting and political blustering.
Syd.
|
|
|
