...or rough justice?

Author

admin

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

… or rough justice?

Sir,

I have had time to read the analyses in the weekly specialist press and the national newspapers, and have replayed my video of the incident countless times. While I can see that, at first glance, Eddie Irvine appears to be 100 per cent culpable for the accident that provoked so much comment in Brazil, I wonder how many members of the FIA tribunal have ever been faced with a suddenly slowing object directly in front of them whilst travelling at around 200 mph?

A few years ago, it was mooted that former drivers should play a part whenever disciplinary action needed to be taken, yet I am not aware that there are any Stewarts, Brabhams, Rosbergs or even Prosts assisting the FIA in such matters. A lot of Irvine’s post-race comments seemed credible to me. I wonder whether the FIA is qualified to judge a driver’s evidence first-hand? It seems to me that his punishment was based on cumulative evidence, carried over from Suzuka. If that’s the case, the FIA should come clean and say so. I don’t recall any of the other drivers screaming for Irvine’s incarceration in the immediate aftermath. Could it be that they understood the situation better than those casting judgement? Chris Thorpe, Davenham,

Cheshire.