Skip to content

Discuss This Aggressive riding clampdown won't hurt MotoGP MotoGP

You are in... Forums > Discuss This > MotoGP > Aggressive riding clampdown won't hurt MotoGP

This is a discussion topic

This discussion topic is linked to an article on this site. You can navigate to the article by clicking on the article name in the first post.

Go to most recent reply

Anonymous

Joined:

Posts:

Matthew Birt  says:

Aggressive riding clampdown won't hurt MotoGP

A new penalty points system to clampdown on dangerous and aggressive riding across all three classes in the MotoGP world championship in 2013 won’t make the likes of Valentino Rossi or Cal Crutchlow think twice about making risky overtakes. That’s the opinion of Crutchlow’s Monster Yamaha Tech 3 team boss Herve Poncharal ahead of the new season, which will see a...

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 2 years ago (27 March 2013 13:46)

Post a message in MotoGP

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required

   

Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)

  1.  
  2.  
  3.  

Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 

Cancel
moto4

Joined:

Oct 12

Posts: 143

moto4 says:

on going...VFR

I'm sorry to keep on at this and I don't know you so may be I'm wrong but your view of the whole incident seems rather biased in favour of Rossi. To refute one point especially: since when has a rider whom is on and has never left the race track obliged or even sensible to move out of the way so a rider whom has left the track can rejoin and take the position? Once Rossi, in this case- but equally any rider doing so- left the track he is defacto out of the race. At that point HE must re-join the race track in a safe manner. This includes waiting for passing traffic to allow a gap, NOT barging his way back on and forcing others (Casey here) to have to change course or speed. You further argue that proper thing would be for Casey to pull back to allow Vale the overtake- WTF? This is racing! I appreciate your final comments and repeat them, this is obviously only my opinion and I find it endlessly fascinating to read others', including, of course, your own. I hope this doesn't come across as too argumentative but I couldn't think how else to phrase my thoughts:-)

Reply to this Topic
moto4

Joined:

Oct 12

Posts: 143

moto4 says:

differences

Where I believe the Corkscrew '08 incident differs to the Jerez '05 is that at Jerez there was a gap to go for, however firmly. At the corkscrew there was not without leaving the confines of the track... As DOOHANFAN said Casey was fair enough to admit his falling off was all his own fault but did claim one stupid thing, unfortunately, which was that he had lost (some?)respect for Rossi over the incident. A silly response but one probably made straight after the race where he will still be wound up with Rossi and himself, I guess.

Reply to this Topic
1986vfr750

Joined:

Apr 09

Posts: 478

1986vfr750 says:

moto

Yes i am a rossi fan, but also a motorcycle racing fan. I like pedroso, depuniet, bradl, edwards(ya ya i know),hayden. I am not a fan of but have respect for stoner and lorenzo. When i refered to " the proper thing to do", it was merely in response to doohans post where he mentioned that kevin swantz said it would have been smarter for casey to back off and let rossi careen across the track...then casey could bugger off into the sunset. I didnt mean to sound like casy had to move...it was more a case of "gentlemans" rules where it is better to allow a fellow racer back on the track than to force them to crash and in the case of bikes get seriously hurt. Not at the expense of sacrificing your own race of course...casey had room to move without sacrificing his own race but he "chose" to try to make rossi crash. Rossis "move" at the corkscrew was a mistake that he managed to save not an intentional move. Of course he took credit for it as it was an unbelievable save. My issue was more with caseytrying to make him crash by trying to block his return to the track when he didnt need to. Wanting a fellow rider to get hurt is a nasty bit of business in my humble opinion....but i respect your right to disagree with me...cheers mate. Hopefully we will agree sometimes too as i find your posts interesting and enjoy reading them

Reply to this Topic
doohanfan

Joined:

Jan 12

Posts: 1606

doohanfan says:

we probably should let this go

vfr lest less cordial discussion is precipitated.

From my point of view stoner the whole way from the previous corner did not want to cede position for the next corner, and couldn't take any line other than he did because rossi was on his outside. Eventually rossi tried to take the corner from his position outside stoner and went in too hot, partially losing the bike and slewing across the front of stoner. Whether stoner had enough time to pull back then I don't know, but I don't think so, although kevin schwantz who should know better than me seemed to think he did. He certainly reacted admirably quickly subsequently to avoid collision.

Bottom line for me is that neither was prepared to concede the corner, fairly understandably given the 2008 championship probably swung on the outcome at that corner alone, and rossi was prepared to run a fairly high risk of crashing rather than concede it, which is probably what pissed stoner off. It is also arguably what makes rossi great, as it did ayrton senna; I was a proust fan myself though:smile.  

I also don't think rossi  tries this on a rider of lesser quality such as barbera, or tony elias for that matter, neither of whom he would have trusted to have the skill or temperament to avoid a collision if things went wrong. 

[This Reply has been modified by the Author]

Reply to this Topic
Bultoboy

Joined:

Apr 11

Posts: 3343

Bultoboy says:

VFR

That has to be the most skewed opinion of that incident I've ever seen and to accuse Stoner of trying to make Rossi crash whilst rejoining the track is plain purile. As is the opinion that Stoner intimidated Rossi with the pass leading up to the corkscrew when you consider some of Rossi's history on track.

Rossi went into the corkscrew wildly and lost it, it's as simple as that. He rejoined in front of Stoner by virtue of straightlining a chicane. When he rejoined the track he was in front of Stoner - ie: his back wheel was in front of Stoner's front wheel. He didn't even know where Stoner was as he doesn't have eyes in the back of his head. Stoner was pretty well comitted to dealing with the corkscrew itself so how you manufacture that into trying to cause Rossi to crash I really don't know. The chances are he didn't know where Rossi was either with his eyes glued to the track in front of him and probably only saw him when he re-emerged on track.

Stoner had to swerve to avoid Rossi who rejoined the track in front of him. It was a racing incident, caused by Rossi losing it at the top of the corkskrew. Neither rider tried to take the other off but Rossi gained the lead at that point in the race from what was an illegal move - ie: he was off track. If the surface there was gravel he would have been off. You talk about a gentleman's agreement - the gentleman's agreement there would have been for Rossi to concede the position he had gained unfairly, if you want to talk about fair racing and gentlemanly conduct - but I doubt you do in that context.

If you want an example of one rider wanting to cause another to crash, maybe you should look at the headline picture of this article - Rossi took a line that wouldn't have got him around the corner quickly. If he and Gibernau  had taken the same lines they did into that corner, but Gibernau was behind Rossi, Rossi would have run wide and Gibernau would have come out of the corner easily in front. Rossi knocked Gibernau out of the way which helped him make the line through the corner - but that was ok because it was Rossi.

Reply to this Topic
pannyderosa

Joined:

Jan 13

Posts: 193

pannyderosa says:

?

doohanfan.Point well made.
bultoboy.move was not illegal....another boring rant from you.

racing incident all in the past.

Reply to this Topic
Bultoboy

Joined:

Apr 11

Posts: 3343

Bultoboy says:

Boring yet you still have to comment on it

If you're referring to LS, overtaking whilst off track is illegal - otherwise a rider could just cut out any chicane he wanted to overtake.

If you're referring to Jerez, you won't find the Jerez move in the book of racing etquette - how to overtake chapter. Look at the picture, Rossi is already trying to sit the bike up as he had no chance of making the corner. Gibernau being used as a berm got him around it.

Reply to this Topic
pannyderosa

Joined:

Jan 13

Posts: 193

pannyderosa says:

sorry but

If you care to check you will find the move at LS was not illegal.

Reply to this Topic
Bultoboy

Joined:

Apr 11

Posts: 3343

Bultoboy says:

So if a rider brakes too late for a chicane and rides past it, then rejoins in front of others who have negotiated the chicane, that's in order then is it? Since when has passing another rider whilst off the race track been legal?

You'll notice that's a question, not a statement

Are you going to say it wasn't illegal because he was in front when he went off track? It was the fact that he was in front that took him off track, he was not in control of the bike to keep it on track. Had he stayed on track he wouldn't have been in front.

Reply to this Topic
pannyderosa

Joined:

Jan 13

Posts: 193

pannyderosa says:

once again

If you care to check it was not classed as illegal.
It was a racing incident.

Reply to this Topic

Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale

 

It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle

Motorcycle pricing tool

New! Find used bike prices