planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Sep 22, 2019 12:45 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3556
It's a question for which there is no right answer. Ultimately, we want to see passes decided on track not via penalty like in Canada - however at the same point we want to see drivers abide by the rules which have been put in there for both sportsmanship and driver safety, as well as to negate the difficulty of passing.

Leclerc's move was very much on the line - and it could have been argued either way. I don't think it's productive to use the logic 'if they had made contact, it would have been different' as essentially turns the game into a high speed game of chicken and will lead to more drivers colliding as neither gives an inch. Ultimately a lot of the time the stewards are in the position where the correct decision from a sporting perspective is at odds with the reception it will receive. Certainly there seems to be more negativity with a driver being forced to concede a place rather than a driver being unfairly prevented from passing even though they are essentially the same thing.

None of the individual things that Leclerc did was as bad as Vettel's block on Hamilton in Canada, however collectively I would argue he did more wrong. However as each thing was a distinctly different offence he never repeated the same offence twice to receive sanction. It does certainly seem that the black and white flag is a fairly toothless penalty.

Ultimately though, Ferrari winning at Monza is good for the sport, we've have 3 different teams win in the last 6 races and all six of them were fantastic entertainment - maybe the longest stretch of consecutive great races I can remember. Who would have thought it after France!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 12:46 pm
Posts: 784
Location: McKinney, TX
No way should Sainz have been punished for what was a very bad decision by Albon to attempt to pass around the outside of that corner---he was behind, and Sainz was on the racing line. At that speed, the trajectory of Sainz was always going to carry him to the rumble strip, which in turn made it appear that he forcefully ran Albon off the track, but I don't believe he did, he won the position prior to entry. Trying that pass on that corner was absolutely never going to work unless Sainz backed out of it entirely. Which he was never going to do while being in front.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15780
Cold Gin wrote:
No way should Sainz have been punished for what was a very bad decision by Albon to attempt to pass around the outside of that corner---he was behind, and Sainz was on the racing line. At that speed, the trajectory of Sainz was always going to carry him to the rumble strip, which in turn made it appear that he forcefully ran Albon off the track, but I don't believe he did, he won the position prior to entry. Trying that pass on that corner was absolutely never going to work unless Sainz backed out of it entirely. Which he was never going to do while being in front.


Albon wasn't trying to pass. It was Sainz making the overtaking move.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 927
F1 Racer wrote:
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think Leclerc could have done that ten more times and not get a penalty.

We've seen worse go unpenalised. It happens all the time in the midfield.


The Sainz crowd-off is about as worse as you will ever see, putting someone in the gravel and forcing them to lose a few extra places from cars close behind.


From another viewpoint, the chasing driver could've backed off


Correct. The chasing driver was Sainz, and apparently you shouldn't attempt a move into the Lesmos so I am not sure what he was trying to do by repassing Albon into that corner.


i thought Hamilton should not attempt a move on the outside for that turn.

there was a similar move Montoya made on Schumi in 2003 from 00:30. Schumi left him more room though but notice how it couldn't stick.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:10 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2865
mikeyg123 wrote:
Cold Gin wrote:
No way should Sainz have been punished for what was a very bad decision by Albon to attempt to pass around the outside of that corner---he was behind, and Sainz was on the racing line. At that speed, the trajectory of Sainz was always going to carry him to the rumble strip, which in turn made it appear that he forcefully ran Albon off the track, but I don't believe he did, he won the position prior to entry. Trying that pass on that corner was absolutely never going to work unless Sainz backed out of it entirely. Which he was never going to do while being in front.


Albon wasn't trying to pass. It was Sainz making the overtaking move.

Unless I'm mistaken, Sainz was already ahead of Albon in Lesmo One. In which case, I see no difference in his 'hanging out to dry' move to many others - which have not even been noted, let alone sanctioned - in the past.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3556
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think Leclerc could have done that ten more times and not get a penalty.

We've seen worse go unpenalised. It happens all the time in the midfield.


The Sainz crowd-off is about as worse as you will ever see, putting someone in the gravel and forcing them to lose a few extra places from cars close behind.


From another viewpoint, the chasing driver could've backed off


Correct. The chasing driver was Sainz, and apparently you shouldn't attempt a move into the Lesmos so I am not sure what he was trying to do by repassing Albon into that corner.


i thought Hamilton should not attempt a move on the outside for that turn.

there was a similar move Montoya made on Schumi in 2003 from 00:30. Schumi left him more room though but notice how it couldn't stick.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WVc8GFTcg4


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3360
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think Leclerc could have done that ten more times and not get a penalty.

We've seen worse go unpenalised. It happens all the time in the midfield.


The Sainz crowd-off is about as worse as you will ever see, putting someone in the gravel and forcing them to lose a few extra places from cars close behind.


From another viewpoint, the chasing driver could've backed off


Correct. The chasing driver was Sainz, and apparently you shouldn't attempt a move into the Lesmos so I am not sure what he was trying to do by repassing Albon into that corner.


i thought Hamilton should not attempt a move on the outside for that turn.

there was a similar move Montoya made on Schumi in 2003 from 00:30. Schumi left him more room though but notice how it couldn't stick.



I dont think Hamilton was making an overtaking attempt, he went to the outside as Leclerc went to the inside. Leclerc would have to take a tighter line into that chicane which can lead to mistakes or Hamilton getting closer out of the chicane. Leclerc decided to go back across the track and take the line he wanted.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 2503
F1 Racer wrote:
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think Leclerc could have done that ten more times and not get a penalty.

We've seen worse go unpenalised. It happens all the time in the midfield.


The Sainz crowd-off is about as worse as you will ever see, putting someone in the gravel and forcing them to lose a few extra places from cars close behind.


From another viewpoint, the chasing driver could've backed off


Correct. The chasing driver was Sainz, and apparently you shouldn't attempt a move into the Lesmos so I am not sure what he was trying to do by repassing Albon into that corner.


I don't know why it matters who was attacking and who was defending. Sainz was on the inside line and slightly ahead (I think) going into the corner. He was also well ahead of Albon on the outside (more importantly), and Albon had effectively lost the place midway through the corner.

_________________
"Always believe you will become the best, but never believe you have done so"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10279
Location: Ireland
Leclerc pushed the boundaries of what's allowed. I'd wager that a different driver would have copped penalty. However, I embrace the return of the black & white flag. I'd love to see more of it

There was nothing wrong with what Sainz did. Albon should never have placed his car on the outside at the Lesmos. A rookie mistake that he'll learn from

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 5:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 12:46 pm
Posts: 784
Location: McKinney, TX
mikeyg123 wrote:
Cold Gin wrote:
No way should Sainz have been punished for what was a very bad decision by Albon to attempt to pass around the outside of that corner---he was behind, and Sainz was on the racing line. At that speed, the trajectory of Sainz was always going to carry him to the rumble strip, which in turn made it appear that he forcefully ran Albon off the track, but I don't believe he did, he won the position prior to entry. Trying that pass on that corner was absolutely never going to work unless Sainz backed out of it entirely. Which he was never going to do while being in front.


Albon wasn't trying to pass. It was Sainz making the overtaking move.



Not sure what you are looking at---Sainz was ahead after passing Albon back prior to Lesmo1----for Albon to try and overtake around the outside there, after already being overtaken and not on the racing line, it was just not going to work. I don't mean to criticize him too much, he made a fabulous late-breaking attempt into the Variante del Roggia chicane, and he was in the heat of the moment. This is textbook example of a racing incident, which he could have avoided if he would have backed out a bit. In so doing, he may have had a chance to pass Sainz into Ascari if he would have been able to get a tow.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 5:07 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1350
Location: UK
mcdo wrote:
Leclerc pushed the boundaries of what's allowed. I'd wager that a different driver would have copped penalty. However, I embrace the return of the black & white flag. I'd love to see more of it


Why is that then, when subsequent infringements are dismissed, seems meaningless to me, its also open to abuse, infringe....all I'll get is a black and white flag?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:25 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:54 am
Posts: 154
If a driver isn’t off the track, unless all 4 wheels are outside the white lines, wouldn’t racing room only need to be enough space left, that allows part of a competitor car’s tyres to be in contact with this line- allowing for walls and obstacles, too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7267
Location: Michigan, USA
simonr23 wrote:
If a driver isn’t off the track, unless all 4 wheels are outside the white lines, wouldn’t racing room only need to be enough space left, that allows part of a competitor car’s tyres to be in contact with this line- allowing for walls and obstacles, too.

Does kinda seem like a double standard...

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 697
I think it's kind of a safety thing rather than a double standard. I think Palmer's column on bbc says all that needs to be said. Was a great little tussle between leclerc and Hamilton but I really do expect common sense to prevail in the drivers briefing and they will agree that you cant to that in the braking zone and the black and white flag isn't enough.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 927
Alienturnedhuman wrote:




help u embed the video.

there's a crucial difference here as Kimi was in front. This caused Vettel to be unable to challenge Hamilton into the corner. The outside isn't the ideal place for an overtake. Furthermore, it also wasn't a clean move.

I think we all know last year was the time when Kimi didn't help Vettel in the latter part of the season when Ferrari announced they weren't renewing his contract.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 927
Cold Gin wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Cold Gin wrote:
No way should Sainz have been punished for what was a very bad decision by Albon to attempt to pass around the outside of that corner---he was behind, and Sainz was on the racing line. At that speed, the trajectory of Sainz was always going to carry him to the rumble strip, which in turn made it appear that he forcefully ran Albon off the track, but I don't believe he did, he won the position prior to entry. Trying that pass on that corner was absolutely never going to work unless Sainz backed out of it entirely. Which he was never going to do while being in front.


Albon wasn't trying to pass. It was Sainz making the overtaking move.



Not sure what you are looking at---Sainz was ahead after passing Albon back prior to Lesmo1----for Albon to try and overtake around the outside there, after already being overtaken and not on the racing line, it was just not going to work. I don't mean to criticize him too much, he made a fabulous late-breaking attempt into the Variante del Roggia chicane, and he was in the heat of the moment. This is textbook example of a racing incident, which he could have avoided if he would have backed out a bit. In so doing, he may have had a chance to pass Sainz into Ascari if he would have been able to get a tow.


yes. see link. Sainz was ahead into the corner

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-ce3gPMsGc&t=319s

1:05 onwards


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3556
trento wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:




help u embed the video.

there's a crucial difference here as Kimi was in front. This caused Vettel to be unable to challenge Hamilton into the corner. The outside isn't the ideal place for an overtake. Furthermore, it also wasn't a clean move.

I think we all know last year was the time when Kimi didn't help Vettel in the latter part of the season when Ferrari announced they weren't renewing his contract.

Liberty don't let you embed videos, that's why I posted a link.

Overtaking on the inside is harder, that's why Leclerc defended the inside line. Doesn't make it impossible, and if it was impossible why did Charles crowd him off the track at the end? You can't defends an illegal move by saying "it doesn't matter because the overtake was never on"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3360
Good article by Jolyon Palmer

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/formula1/49629863

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15780
I'm kind of torn on the Leclerc/Hamilton thing.

One the one hand I don't think it was quite bad enough to be worth a penalty on the other hand I don't want drivers doing what Leclerc did in order to defend a position.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7795
Location: Belgium
simonr23 wrote:
If a driver isn’t off the track, unless all 4 wheels are outside the white lines, wouldn’t racing room only need to be enough space left, that allows part of a competitor car’s tyres to be in contact with this line- allowing for walls and obstacles, too.
That was Schumacher's rationale. In fact it turns a rule that describes when you are still technically on the track when running 'a bit' wide, into an excuse for running another competitor off the track. Despicable!

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10279
Location: Ireland
Option or Prime wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Leclerc pushed the boundaries of what's allowed. I'd wager that a different driver would have copped penalty. However, I embrace the return of the black & white flag. I'd love to see more of it


Why is that then, when subsequent infringements are dismissed, seems meaningless to me, its also open to abuse, infringe....all I'll get is a black and white flag?

Because is does what it says on the tin. You're taking the p!ss, you've had your warning, now don't do it again. It worked well for years before they started slapping time penalties on every bloody minor infringement

I don't know how long you've watched F1 but it didn't used to always be about penalties

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:04 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1350
Location: UK
mcdo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Leclerc pushed the boundaries of what's allowed. I'd wager that a different driver would have copped penalty. However, I embrace the return of the black & white flag. I'd love to see more of it


Why is that then, when subsequent infringements are dismissed, seems meaningless to me, its also open to abuse, infringe....all I'll get is a black and white flag?

Because is does what it says on the tin. You're taking the p!ss, you've had your warning, now don't do it again. It worked well for years before they started slapping time penalties on every bloody minor infringement

I don't know how long you've watched F1 but it didn't used to always be about penalties


A while, penalties increased when a certain German chap in a red car started forcing drivers of and calling it hard racing. To me the black and white flag just gives you 2 goes at 'moody driving' in an era when drivers often only get one chance at passing. I'm not convinced it even worked on its first outing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:21 pm
Posts: 2462
F1_Ernie wrote:


Very good article actually. Makes a good point about Masi inexplicably using contact as the decider of if someone should get a penalty or not, which is really a big can of worms.

At the end of the day we pretty much all know that leclerc probably should have got a penalty, if not for edging Hamilton off in the braking zone, if not for cutting the chicane, then surely for the dangerously late chop.

The problem is if they penalised Leclerc, it was have been everywhere like after Canada. Everyone would be complained the sport would be in "disrepute" and F1 would be "destroyed".

Stewards need to find their nuts and F1 fans should also look at themselves and recognise F1 is a real life sport, with rules, none scripted, and that there's no need to run crying "MAFIA" when your favoured team/driver gets correctly penalised for breaking those rules.

It is not down to the fans to decide the rules and it's not down to the drivers to adhere to rules that aren't being enforced.

All that's needed is consistency... Verstappen got a penalty just last year for a lesser offence and Hamilton got a drive through penalty for THIS
https://youtu.be/91cAStp3iFw


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm
Posts: 4118
Exediron wrote:
simonr23 wrote:
If a driver isn’t off the track, unless all 4 wheels are outside the white lines, wouldn’t racing room only need to be enough space left, that allows part of a competitor car’s tyres to be in contact with this line- allowing for walls and obstacles, too.

Does kinda seem like a double standard...


Yes. it's an odd point. If there had been tarmac off track rather than grass, something that is common at many circuits, I don't think Leclerc would have even got a warning flag.

_________________
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton]
My own Google Earth Motor Sport file. http://www.mediafire.com/?jzm1ieatytv
Follow me @asphalt_world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 927
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 2503
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

_________________
"Always believe you will become the best, but never believe you have done so"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3556
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6810
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...

The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15780
sandman1347 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...

The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


I completely disagree with this. I think we have for years seen things punished at the front that aren't even looked at it the midfield. It used to be a real bug bare of mine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 2503
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...


Yes, I'm well aware of that. To clarify by dangerous driving, I mean that I hope this means drivers will use forceful measures to defend their position because they know they'll only get a black and white flag for any 'dangerous' display of driving, such as Leclerc vs Hamilton on both of his occasions of defence.

_________________
"Always believe you will become the best, but never believe you have done so"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:51 pm 
Online

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1350
Location: UK
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.


That is exactly what will happen though. It already has happened already so there is your precedent.

If you think the stewarding is confused and inconsistent now how do you think i will be if they have another opt out device. Stewards have to make clear consistent decisions irrespective of who is driving the car and what circuit they are at.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6810
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
color=#000057] Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...[/color]

The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


I completely disagree with this. I think we have for years seen things punished at the front that aren't even looked at it the midfield. It used to be a real bug bare of mine.

I think that, broadly, I agree with you but within the context of our current time I do not. Especially in this specific case of a Ferrari driver hanging onto the lead against Hamilton and Mercedes. Had they penalized Leclerc, he would have lost the lead and Hamilton would have won the race. That wouldn't have been popular and the last time they applied the rules in such a situation, the backlash was ferocious. It wasn't just people saying that they wished that Vettel didn't get a penalty. It was drama queen stuff about how stewards are ruining racing and how F1 is in a state of disaster. No one wants that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 927
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Schumacher forever#1 wrote:
trento wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:

I don't get it. Palmer said Max's case in Austria was 'easier to defend', which means he was less wrong than Leclerc. Max wasn't even given any warning in Austria. I think it's black white flag is a good thing, allows more racing but yet reminding drivers to follow the rules.


I agree that I like the introduction of the black and white flag. However, I hope the FIA only use it for cases of doubt, and not allow drivers to have one shot of dangerous driving per race before getting a penalty.

Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...


cos it took Stroll out. so the consequence does matter. Consequence-based type of penalties is inevitable as it does hurt the other driver more.

For Vettel in Canada, the flag would be more suitable as nothing happened to Hamilton and at least gives them a chance to settle on track. Neutrals will always want to see races settled on track as much as possible rather than through a penalty so the flag is good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15780
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
color=#000057] Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...[/color]

The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


I completely disagree with this. I think we have for years seen things punished at the front that aren't even looked at it the midfield. It used to be a real bug bare of mine.

I think that, broadly, I agree with you but within the context of our current time I do not. Especially in this specific case of a Ferrari driver hanging onto the lead against Hamilton and Mercedes. Had they penalized Leclerc, he would have lost the lead and Hamilton would have won the race. That wouldn't have been popular and the last time they applied the rules in such a situation, the backlash was ferocious. It wasn't just people saying that they wished that Vettel didn't get a penalty. It was drama queen stuff about how stewards are ruining racing and how F1 is in a state of disaster. No one wants that.


I do think the stewards were very reticent to penalise Leclerc. I think had it happened in the midfield it wouldn't have even been looked at though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 8:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:21 pm
Posts: 2462
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
color=#000057] Well they didn't give Vettel the black and white flag, so it shows there is some limit...[/color]

The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


I completely disagree with this. I think we have for years seen things punished at the front that aren't even looked at it the midfield. It used to be a real bug bare of mine.

I think that, broadly, I agree with you but within the context of our current time I do not. Especially in this specific case of a Ferrari driver hanging onto the lead against Hamilton and Mercedes. Had they penalized Leclerc, he would have lost the lead and Hamilton would have won the race. That wouldn't have been popular and the last time they applied the rules in such a situation, the backlash was ferocious. It wasn't just people saying that they wished that Vettel didn't get a penalty. It was drama queen stuff about how stewards are ruining racing and how F1 is in a state of disaster. No one wants that.


I do think the stewards were very reticent to penalise Leclerc. I think had it happened in the midfield it wouldn't have even been looked at though.


Really? You think it wouldn't have been looked at? I think it would have been a penalty with no fuss. What are you basing it on that it wouldn't have been looked at?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7267
Location: Michigan, USA
FormulaFun wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I do think the stewards were very reticent to penalise Leclerc. I think had it happened in the midfield it wouldn't have even been looked at though.

Really? You think it wouldn't have been looked at? I think it would have been a penalty with no fuss. What are you basing it on that it wouldn't have been looked at?

The fact that moves at least as dodgy as that one happen literally every race in the midfield and almost never even get investigated?

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15780
FormulaFun wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
The limit, in this case, was based around the circumstance of the offender more so than the seriousness of the offense. Had Charles been out of the points and back in the field and done the same thing, he would have been much more likely to get a penalty for what he did. Ever since Canada, the stewards have it in their heads that it is their duty to improve "the show".


I completely disagree with this. I think we have for years seen things punished at the front that aren't even looked at it the midfield. It used to be a real bug bare of mine.

I think that, broadly, I agree with you but within the context of our current time I do not. Especially in this specific case of a Ferrari driver hanging onto the lead against Hamilton and Mercedes. Had they penalized Leclerc, he would have lost the lead and Hamilton would have won the race. That wouldn't have been popular and the last time they applied the rules in such a situation, the backlash was ferocious. It wasn't just people saying that they wished that Vettel didn't get a penalty. It was drama queen stuff about how stewards are ruining racing and how F1 is in a state of disaster. No one wants that.


I do think the stewards were very reticent to penalise Leclerc. I think had it happened in the midfield it wouldn't have even been looked at though.


Really? You think it wouldn't have been looked at? I think it would have been a penalty with no fuss. What are you basing it on that it wouldn't have been looked at?


Watching races and seeing things in the midfield equally as bad passing without comment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 12:46 pm
Posts: 784
Location: McKinney, TX
Because it was Ferrari in Monza there is no doubt in my eyes it had SOME factor in the stewards' decision. I don't think that is right, it should be binary and 100% objective, but we know the reality of the situation.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2183
Location: Miami, Florida
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
trento wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think Leclerc could have done that ten more times and not get a penalty.

We've seen worse go unpenalised. It happens all the time in the midfield.


The Sainz crowd-off is about as worse as you will ever see, putting someone in the gravel and forcing them to lose a few extra places from cars close behind.


From another viewpoint, the chasing driver could've backed off


Correct. The chasing driver was Sainz, and apparently you shouldn't attempt a move into the Lesmos so I am not sure what he was trying to do by repassing Albon into that corner.


i thought Hamilton should not attempt a move on the outside for that turn.

there was a similar move Montoya made on Schumi in 2003 from 00:30. Schumi left him more room though but notice how it couldn't stick.


If you pay closer attention here, the better lesson is that the inside driver CAN & SHOULD give space just as Michael does in order to give Montoya the proper amount of real estate to work with and then some. And even STILL he came out ahead after giving space. There is simply NO NEED for drivers to resort to bully tactics in order to fend off attacks. If they are as good as they think they are, they should ALWAYS keep it clean. It's one of the reasons I love Kimi so much. He'll push to the limits but never intentionally does anything that can be considered dirty. And it's likely why he doesn't have more wins. He's one of the hardest, most tenacious drivers in F1, but he's also one of the cleanest, and that's been true of him from day one.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VERSTAPPEN :: LECLERC :: BOTTAS :: VETTEL :: SAINZ :: NORRIS
KVYAT :: RAIKKONEN :: RUSSEL :: ALBON :: RICCIARDO :: HULKENBURG :: PEREZ
STROLL :: MAGNUSSEN :: GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: GIOVANAZZI :: KUBICA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6697
Location: Nebraska, USA
Cold Gin wrote:
Because it was Ferrari in Monza there is no doubt in my eyes it had SOME factor in the stewards' decision. I don't think that is right, it should be binary and 100% objective, but we know the reality of the situation.

Do we really know the reality?

No, we don't. We know that some suspect that Ferrari benefited by being on the home track when it came to the stewards in the minds of some people...ie, we do not know for sure that there was such an influence on the stewards decision, or lack thereof.

What we do know is that conspiracy theories are alive and well here.
;)

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: F1_Ernie, JamWalsh, Jezza13, jimmyj, JN23, lucifers, neek, simonr23, tootsie323, zack14 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group