This is why I watch F1 purely for entertainment and don't have a vested interest in a particular driver or team. The racing and drama surrounding the end of this race was awesome. Verstappen is a tool and Vettel needs to calm the hell down, but overall I am loving the drama.
Its like the WWE
Vettel should still be 3rd though after all of this. The first penalty on Max was the right one and the only one that needed to be made.
Last edited by RRocket; 10-31-2016 at 09:52 AM.
RTR
Big +1 to all that
On that first point, what track was it that they added a cone that the drivers had to go around if they went off track? They should have done that for T1.
I managed to watch this morning without seeing any spoilers (finally), and wow, was that exciting. Vettel should have been a bit calmer in regards to Whiting, but he was right. Vettel on Ric did not deserve a penalty, but that was fantastic driving by both of them to make it through that corner.
For the record, aren't penalties for collisions run through the stewards, not the race director?
Current: '94 MX-6 V6/5 • '72 240Z • '10 Mazda5
Past: '02 330i/5 • '85 RX-7 GSL-SE • '95 540i/6 • '95 525i/5 • '86 635CSi/5 • '88 JZA70 • '86 4K quattro • '85 RX-7 S
Wish list: Type 44 • Manta • Pre-'85 CGT • 405 Mi16 • SVX • W123 Coupe
I'm still confused as what is the exact role of a race steward compared to Charlie Whiting. Who's in command here, who makes the decision, and gives out the penalties?
Keep in mind that Fia don't really look into lap 1 incidents at the first few turns as it usually turns out into a chaotic mess. So there's a bit of leeway in giving out penalties. Secondly, the nature of this track with turns 1 to turn 3 being close to each other the drivers have a greater chance of missing their braking points at turn 1 and easily missing turn 2 and rejoining the track at turn 3. Consider the speeds they're coming from well over 360km/h. I think Fia should build a run off area/lane, so that drivers can join the track safely out of the harms way and without gaining an advantage. I'm not sure if this would be a good idea or not, but I think they should consider it. I think turn 6 at Spa has that.
I kept rewinding to Max and Vettel incident at turn 1 and in my view Max locked his brakes earlier than Hamilton did and it looks like he had enough area to rejoin the track before or exactly at turn 2 but he did not. I then looked at Ric's onboard shot and clearly he locked his brakes first and was skidding straight. Vettel gave plenty of room to him to even recover while bumping into him several times and I still don't understand how is it that Fia sees that as Vettel's fault for colliding/running/cutting into him and giving a senseless 10 sec penalty. What am I missing here that Fia sees it differently?
I will say that Sebastian has to cool down as he's become too grumpy nowadays. I think he should have been reprimanded for unsportmanship behaviour on team radio messages but surely not for that penalty.
They look into corner 1 incidents all the time. If Hamilton crashes into Bottas in turn 1, Bottas gets a penalty...
BMWs are fun in the snow too...
Current: '94 MX-6 V6/5 • '72 240Z • '10 Mazda5
Past: '02 330i/5 • '85 RX-7 GSL-SE • '95 540i/6 • '95 525i/5 • '86 635CSi/5 • '88 JZA70 • '86 4K quattro • '85 RX-7 S
Wish list: Type 44 • Manta • Pre-'85 CGT • 405 Mi16 • SVX • W123 Coupe
He did for sure but I think his speed was far too much to fuether slow down. Also, keep in mind of colder tyres. Anybody on pole position do lose heat in those tyres while waiting for the last man arriving to his grid position.
Highlight of the race right there.
- - - Updated - - -
I just re-watched the Vettel Riccardo squeeze, and honestly I'm not seeing anything dangerous. Vettel moves to the normal racing line, and Riccardo goes to the inside. Vettel then slowly squeezes him down to about mid track under braking, but never does he make a quick move down on Riccardo. It's something that Riccardo could easily see and react to.
From what I've read of the rule, it was to prevent the violent moves under braking that VER has been known to make. The driver making a dive can't really do anything at that point, and at best they usually end up with some massive flat spots.
The T1 transgressions were a bit too much for me. I can see when you are pushed/hit out and run out of racing room - ok, cut T2 like Rosberg did. But to just go "whoops, messed up my braking, I'll just straightline this! Corners are optional!!!" like Hammy and VER did - total crap.
There should be a 5 second time penalty everytime a car goes all 4 off the track unless there was contact that caused it. There used to be gravel traps for a reason, now that everything is paved, ok fine, but you go 4 off - you will suffer a time penalty. I guarantee no one is going to choose to do that unless they REALLY have no other option.
And that's another thing that's been bugging me for a while. All 4 wheels off the track limits. Austin GP was a clear example where FIA failed to penalize so many drivers that went off unless if they were in a battling position. I think Spa was another one and am sure there were more GP's too.
I think the rule should be pretty simple. White line around the entire exterior of the course. As long as 1 tire stays within the EXTERIOR edge of the white line, you're golden. Over once, warning (even it qualifying), over more gets you time penalties (loss of that lap in qualifying). Exceptions made for evasive action only when the stewards agree that it was warranted.
Good piece of journalism here - https://willthef1journo.wordpress.co...he-crossroads/
Also - http://www.pitpass.com/57760/FIA-to-...ttels-outburst
BBS RC041/BMW Style 29
Nah, a lot of illogical, rambling BS to me. He makes lots of claims that are illogical, like that it was 'ironic' that Vettel was given the penalty for the braking rule he pushed for (because the original Verstappen/Perez braking problem was a bit different), and also that it was ironic that he 'was handed the podium because of that same bureaucracy'. What a load of BS. Lots of British journalists tend to hear something that sounds great, like 'the penalty for Vettel being ironic', and even if it's completely BS, irrelevant, and illogical in the big picture they go with it just to sound smart.
F it, Vettel was 'given' 3rd for a reason (because in truth he took it, but was held back in 4th by cheating). Also, after the race Vettel's 3rd place was taken away completely unfairly. IMO he had every right to do ANYTHING to keep Ricciardo behind him (even illegal), and I suspect that underneath everything that's the real reason he did such an aggressive defensive move. Because he was wronged. Everything else is just semantics and disingenuous, empty talk for other motives than the truth.
I completely disagree with the overall message of the article too. There's nothing wrong with how the legality of moves are determined on paper, or pretty much anything lacking within the rules. The major issue is with applying the rules, how and when they're investigated, consistency in interpretation of the rules (actually just blatantly ignoring the rules at times, and then perverting them completely at other times) and above all looking at incidents within context.
Charlie Whiting and the current race steward system with a severe lack in responsibility and accountability has to go. And in Charlie and the steward-group's place we need people who are not British or at least not majority-British as there seems to be too much of a conflict of interest with so much of the governing body, media interest and teams being predominantly British. We need a system where they will react immediately, consistently from race to race, and regardless of the situation or who the drivers are. For this to happen those applying the rules need to be more accountable and have to answer to teams, and not just have these unappealable rulings. Their logic and interpretation has to be challenged by those who feel they are wronged, they must be allowed to use previous rulings as precedents, and there must be a consideration for the overall situation and consequences for those rulings. That will force the rulings to become more just, balanced and consistent.
If judgements are fair and proportionate, taking into account the overall situation, then drivers will still feel free to go for great moves and push the envelope if they feel like it. In addition to that it will also allow for drivers to drive a clean race without having to take into account shenanigans from drivers like Verstappen and Hamilton (or teamwork from Verstappen and Ricciardo) flouting the rules and getting away with it, which forces clean drivers to react in some way that they shouldn't have to, like for instance making similar illegal moves (for which they will of course be severely penalised, ridiculed and ostracised...). Or just getting beat up time after time without being at fault (like Räikkönen), and the sport suffering from that immensely. You see in a fair system if a driver tends to want to take it to the edge then they can: if they go over the edge they will be penalised accordingly so others don't suffer when they get it wrong, or if the opponent's race was affected irreversibly they will get justice from penalties to the offender that are hard enough in consequences. The drivers will still find taking it to the edge possible when they want to, and also keeping it clean if they feel that's the preferable approach. That happens when risk and reward(=penalty) are balanced.
First of all: Vettel's assessment of Charlie Whiting was spot on in the first place.
Second of all: That whole issue which is being talked about so much right now is not really about Vettel's language, it's about gossip queens wanting to make a lot of noise and have people listen to their babbling about that gossip.
How Vettel expressed himself over the radio doesn't matter one bit, especially after the race. Except for people who want to make something out of nothing.
Last edited by MagneZium; 11-01-2016 at 02:01 PM.
BMWs are fun in the snow too...
Everything I want to say has already been said. But I really enjoy Vettel's fiery, brain-blocked-by-adrenaline comments.
Charlie said that--
"Yeah?! Well I've got a message for Charlie F$%& OFF"
I love when he's on the podium as well because he's hilarious.
I'm curious about the reaction to Vettel's rant in the Italian press. I'm sure they're as livid as we are, and Vettel definitely showed "passion," an emotion which, stereotypically, they have an affinity for. Heh.
Current: '94 MX-6 V6/5 • '72 240Z • '10 Mazda5
Past: '02 330i/5 • '85 RX-7 GSL-SE • '95 540i/6 • '95 525i/5 • '86 635CSi/5 • '88 JZA70 • '86 4K quattro • '85 RX-7 S
Wish list: Type 44 • Manta • Pre-'85 CGT • 405 Mi16 • SVX • W123 Coupe
Believe it's safe to say that Charlie needs to cool it when an unapologetic Webber fan (me) firmly sides with Seb on substantially anything.
Unfornicatingreal.
.Originally Posted by http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/37835642
That's nothing new in itself, we knew that Vettel had apologised to Whiting, and later to Todt. It's a smart move since it was necessary to make sure there are no more BS penalties given to him.
It's not as if Vettel can do anything else, or that standing up for himself would be possible.
Last edited by MagneZium; 11-01-2016 at 06:45 PM.
BMWs are fun in the snow too...
+1
Honestly, I don't really care to hear that language, but I understand that by watching the races, I'm probably going to hear it (or the bleep, whatevs)
I wonder who owns the rights to the frequencies that the teams operate on. Back in GA, the team had to have a license for its frequency for race weekends. If the teams pay for that license, then it is a private conversation between 2 individuals, FIA can go pound sand. If the FIA pays for the license (or sets that up), then I could see something coming from it.
Vettel wouldn't have been put into the position to defend from Ricciardo if Max had given way like he should have. Vettel was also much nicer to Max when he drove alongside than I expected. Definitely wasn't the finger I was expecting to be presented.
Current: '94 MX-6 V6/5 • '72 240Z • '10 Mazda5
Past: '02 330i/5 • '85 RX-7 GSL-SE • '95 540i/6 • '95 525i/5 • '86 635CSi/5 • '88 JZA70 • '86 4K quattro • '85 RX-7 S
Wish list: Type 44 • Manta • Pre-'85 CGT • 405 Mi16 • SVX • W123 Coupe
The sequence of events must be evaluated, not the isolated incidents.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes."
-DNC
easy, curse in your native tongue....like they do in football.
F1 lost its appeal for me, all the rules and penalties are too arbitrary and inconsistent, even MotoGP is losing its appeal also, favouring the spanish riders.
e30 325i, the mighty 4 door granma mobile....Gone
e39 528i, 4 door sports tank
Not bothered by the drivers showing some emotion.
It's kind of refreshing actually.
Bookmarks