Quote:
John H said:
Quote:
Dr. Phil said:
John H, I dont think there is any rat anywhere to smell.
3 stops was probably the only viable option, since Hamilton was relatively light at the start, and he wouldnt be able to make it home on a full tank with (what was it?) 50 laps to go.
Then better to be light and fast.

He lost the race when he tried regaining the place from Alonso. That was a huge error of judgement.

As for Ecclestone's comments, I believe that is his opinion - and not necessarily a sign of foul play. Hamilton didnt get DQ'd by FIA or officials.
He tanked the GP all by himself.



I hear what you say Doc, but in fact, Alonso pitted before Hamilton so must have been lighter. The other bit I don't get is why they put LH out on soft tyres for a short stint, then bring him in again so soon? He'd just made an amazing pass and the 'softs' were hardly degraded when he re-pitted.

It's all a bit strange when you add the tyre debacle in China to the equation don't you think?



I agree with you. I does sound strange. I think the simple answer is that McL dont have a good enough team leader and race strategy.
The China incident was a kindergarten mistake - it simply should not happen in a professional F1 team.
Whatever or whoever is behind the Brazil strategy, it didnt work too well.

I agree with Hamilton, that this WAS a team effort. Trouble is, it was the combination of youthful inexperience/lack of cool and a teamleader with not enough vision and command to carry home a pretty nobrain task.

I cant see how this in anyway can be anything but lack of professionalism when it counted the most.
And I believe McL will have to take a long hard look at Ron Dennis for 2008.