FORMULA ONE - 2019

Streetwiseguy said:

I'm coming around.  My change in attitude came when I said to myself, "What if that was paved instead of grass?"  Blowing a chicane is always a problem.  Blow the Daytona bus stop. come to a full stop, then proceed.

Maybe the issue is defining what "off" is.  Two wheels?  Four?  Eyes of the steward? 

Lewis pushed him hard enough Seb made an off course excursion.  Give up the position, or get a time penalty.  The race result ends up the same either way.  In this case, I would surely stay ahead until the stewards made me give the spot up.  Other cases are a bit more obvious to everyone.

Lets explore Monaco.  If Max had managed to make the left after he pushed Lewis through the chicane, Lewis would have been obliged to give up the spot.  Would we have had this big discussion? (He asks, knowing full well the answer.)

(ignoring that Max pushed Hamilton off the track, physically)

The real answer is what does safe re-entry mean?  If that does not mean running another car off the road, would a spot have to be given up?  If the following car has to take evasive action to not crash right as the car is getting back on the track- yes, that would be a penalty.

  But it also raises the larger question- how much can you drive another car off the road?  If you prevent a car from taking a corner, is that ok?  Remember, Nico did that in Austria a few years ago...  

I get it.  You like the ruling.

I don't.

As stated before, I am a hammy fan and don't like vettel.

The ruling took a good race away.

How did Vettle gain an advantage and also cause Hamilton to have to hit the brakes to not run into him? Obiously the gap was smaller after his off than before.

I dislike Hamilton, I hate the over-dog in any fight. But you know that he would have forced more mistakes from Vettle and probably won the race without the FIA getting involved and ruining the show.

In reply to wvumtnbkr :

Ok, but grass or pavement have no bearing on the rule and it being applied.  Just pointing that out.  

Again, the rule is the rule- if you don't like it, appeal to the teams to have the rule changed.  

Rusnak_322 said:

How did Vettle gain an advantage and also cause Hamilton to have to hit the brakes to not run into him? Obiously the gap was smaller after his off than before.

I dislike Hamilton, I hate the over-dog in any fight. But you know that he would have forced more mistakes from Vettle and probably won the race without the FIA getting involved and ruining the show.

 

Right now, watching Vettel deal with the next few races will be interesting.  Can he bring it back together, will the cards fall all down, or is this a real turning point to making this a competitive season?  

The only relative data that we have as an example is Germany last year, and how the season came crumbling down after that.

A couple thoughts.  First, "leaving the track and gaining an advantage" doesn't apply here, that's basically used to mean you can't pass people (or prevent people from passing you, improve your qualifying time, etc) by going off-track.  The "track" is defined by the two white lines, and a car is off the track if all four wheels are on the wrong side of one of those lines.  That's all been covered fairly extensively the last few years because the push to improve safety by paving everything has meant it's now possible to gain a lot of advantage by doing it -- previously it was mostly grass/etc and going off-track was naturally slower. Vettel didn't gain an advantage by leaving the track, if he'd stayed on then he'd never have been passed, just like all the other laps.

It's pretty clear the re-entry was unsafe, because Hamilton had to avoid him.  So really the questions are about whether or not Vettel intended to re-enter the track unsafely, and then whether or not intent matters.

It's interesting to see that Rosberg feels that the penalty was justified. 

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144005/penalty-fully-deserved-for-vettel--nico-rosberg

In reply to codrus :

Here's Rosberg's streaming video talking about it- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gykAh22nbM

In the end of the day, the stewards' opinion on the matter is all that really matters. They made the decision and that is that. Perhaps, if the issue generates enough stink with fans (who am I kidding, they don't care about the fans, so maybe if the teams and drivers do not agree with the decision), then the rule set may be amended or revised in some way for next season so if a similar thing were to happen, the stewards might come to a different conclusion.

Just watched the race. 

BULLE36 M3 call. Stewards are bunch of Bob Costas. That was no "twitch" into the racing line, that was holding on to grip for dear life to keep from putting two cars in the wall. There was zero opportunity to slow down when your sliding on grass with slicks and wondering when they'll finally bite the tarmac. FWIW I'm not a fan of either driver nor team.

There would have been no penalty if he stuffed it in the wall (and therefore into Lewis) and we all would be saying "well there's no where else he could have gone". 

Actual footage of stewards deliberating: 

maschinenbau said:

There would have been no penalty if he stuffed it in the wall (and therefore into Lewis) and we all would be saying "well there's no where else he could have gone". 

It's not unusual for "Causing a collision" to yield a grid spot penalty in the following race.

In reply to maschinenbau :

The penalty in that case is self enforced.  You are parked in a steaming pile of titanium and carbon fiber.

Not a fan of the call.  
Not sure if they've the leeway to do this but not announcing the penalty until after the race would have at least kept Hammy interested in passing.
(sparing everyone a boring ending to the race)

I find it interesting, especially in this group, that no one's discussing what happens in the the official/stewart's meeting prior to a race.

 All drivers participating in the race go over what is/is not accepted with regards to rules. Details are discussed at length so as to not create any confusion regarding what a driver can get away with. They do it in the lower formulas all the way up to F1-every race. If you think Canada's close confines didn't bring this very issue to the forefront, you'd be kidding yourself.

  Why are the people who are in an uproar about the ruling, leaving out the fact that Vettel started applying the accelerator while he was still on the grass? You can clearly hear him doing so. Do you really think he was remembering the rules that were discuss prior to the race, or do you think he went directly to, "OH E36M3", "He's gonna pass, he's gonna pass".

 Yeah, he was worrying about the pass happening, so he got on the power to mitigate his mistake into turn 3 and salvage the position. We've all done what he's done; whether it was in an actual racing situation, or on our Playstations!

On the surface, Vettel made 3 very apparent mistakes;

- Made a driving mistake forcing himself off the road 

- Panicked , believing his 1.5 second gap was going to turn into a 3 +-second  deficit to Hamilton

- Ultimately didn't follow the rules

If he'd stayed out of the throttle while on the grass, the transition to asphalt would not have led to that second moment and he would have stayed off of the racing line. Instead, he was loose coming onto the asphalt and clearly pointing his car towards the racing line and that's why I think it was cut and dry for the Stewarts.

How do you know he gave it gas? He was off road for like 1 second. Is it because the engine reved up? If he held steady throttle and went on slick grass and lost traction, do you think that would have sounded the same? With the regenerative braking, if he lifted, it would be like applying only the rear brakes, something you probably don't want to do when in slick grass trying to regain control of the car. 

In reply to Rusnak_322 :

The stewards knew.  And given their decision, the observation that the rear wheels where under power makes sense.  Even if he held the pedal steady, that's still on vs. off.

Not sure why people keep bringing up the "grass" issue.  All that means is that he was not in control, and that just means it was not a safe re-entry to the track.  If that were paved, like so many other paved corners on the F1 calendar, there would be clear bumps and a clear path that all the drivers know to drive down if they go four off in that corner.  And had he ignored that, it would also have been a penalty.  That happens all the time, too.

Vettel made a mistake.  He has to deal with that.  The way he dealt with it tells me that he's not mentally in this game very well.  Which isn't a surprise at all.

Rusnak_322 said:

How do you know he gave it gas?

You know the stewards have access to all the telemetry from every car, right?

alfadriver said:

Vettel made a mistake.  He has to deal with that.  The way he dealt with it tells me that he's not mentally in this game very well.  Which isn't a surprise at all.

For me, that's the real crux of the issue and where Vettel is much weaker than Hamilton.  He was driving turn 3, lap 48 for over 20 laps.  There was no chance that he could have tried to pull out 5 seconds on Hamilton because he was driving a past car on a past turn.  I thought he was more like Magnussen than a 4x WDC.  As much as I really want to be a Vettel fan he just seems to let his short fuse get the better of him and winds up inducing so many of his own problems.  Hamilton can be a bit whiny at times but it seems like when it comes down to it he can buckle down and handle the pressure while he's behind the wheel.  Maybe I'm trying to say that he whines without coming undone while Vettel just falls apart?

That's why I was put off by the five seconds -- For the first time this year we were getting to see Lewis really exert pressure on Seb and with 20 laps to go they just called the fight and essentially declared a winner.  At that point, the only excitement in the front of the field was to see if LEC would be able to push hard enough to steal second from Seb.

I've been reflecting on this penalty for a day or so now, and I had a thought I wanted to run past the group.  I think the "spirit" of the safe re-entry rule is meant to apply to drivers who lose all momentum and might otherwise jut into a line of traffic at a very slow speed to avoid losing dozens of places after an incident.  At a DE you'd generally be watching for the corner workers and waiting for a signal that it's safe to rejoin.  The Vettel situation seems odd because he wasn't so much rejoining the track -- the end of his "incident" put him squarely in the middle of the track surface, so at that point he'd already re-entered the racing surface.  It seems odd to apply a rule meant for people well off the race pace to someone still going 100mph and barely recovered.

But the thing that started to bother me was that if Vettel hadn't that incident, his move would have been 100% legal.  Like let's say he just overcooked it, went way deep into the corner but stayed on track.  Hamilton was able to get alongside him but not complete the pass, and then Vettel squeezed him into the wall on corner exit until Hamilton had to lift out of it.  That happens on a regular basis in F1, and the commentators call it "good aggressive racing."  Rarely do those incidents go to the stewards.  Hamilton might have bitched on the radio but ultimately the stewards would have made a call based on how his front tire wasn't far enough alongside Vettel and therefore he wasn't entitled to racing room.  And in F1, "not entitled to racing room" means you can basically run people off the track.  Which, like I said, happens constantly.

My thought was basically, in a series that's notoriously difficult to overtake, is that what we want?  Would F1 be better if, say, the rule was that if any part of your bodywork was next to any part of another car's bodywork, both drivers are required to leave at least a car-width of track for the other?  If this were the rule, then Vettel's move would have been an instant penalty regardless of the preceding few seconds.  And, on top of that, maybe cars wouldn't need a 2 second delta to pass each other on most tracks.  Maybe if you could nose in and that meant the other driver had to effectively yield, the races would be a lot more interesting.  Less drama perhaps, but maybe we'd appreciate seeing races there were actually about racing and not about who could bully someone into yielding first.  Because at the end of the day, that's what happened -- Hamilton yielded because he had the sense not to allow an accident to happen.  If he'd stayed in it Vettel would have had a puncture, Hamilton would have had to pit for a new front wing, and it would have been declared a racing incident -- no fault to either driver, because nobody is actually required to leave racing room except for when the stewards feel like it.

Just a thought.

The drivers should be allowed to decide these things after the race like they used to.

In the alley behind the bar!

Mexico 2016.  Max got a time penalty, and Vettel moved into the podium.

https://youtu.be/BSS-guKXQJY

racerfink said:

Mexico 2016.  Max got a time penalty, and Vettel moved into the podium.

 

https://youtu.be/BSS-guKXQJY

Japan 2018, Max got a 5 second time penalty

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgOVofdZjv4

Also, it's interesting to hear Vettel's comments about what happened, especially since Max didn't even block him.  Whined and whined about it, got the penalty for cutting the corner, to give him a spot.  But when he's in the same position as Max, it's ok, and it just a racing incident.  Things like that are why I've never, ever been a fan of Vettel.  Well, except for his first race in Indy when he was subbing for Kubica- had no idea about his lack of character.

There was one a couple of years ago at COTA, as well.

In reply to Rusnak_322 :

How do I know-you could hear him applying the throttle! Regenerative braking while coasting? You realize regenerative braking only occurs at centain stages of the act of braking, right?

By your logic, you'd have regenerative braking while going around a turn and your differential couldn't do its job - you'd have a car that would fight you to turn, understeering at every occasion that you turn the steering wheel!  

alfadriver said:

In reply to Rusnak_322 :

The stewards knew.  And given their decision, the observation that the rear wheels where under power makes sense.  Even if he held the pedal steady, that's still on vs. off.

Not sure why people keep bringing up the "grass" issue.  All that means is that he was not in control, and that just means it was not a safe re-entry to the track.  If that were paved, like so many other paved corners on the F1 calendar, there would be clear bumps and a clear path that all the drivers know to drive down if they go four off in that corner.  And had he ignored that, it would also have been a penalty.  That happens all the time, too.

Vettel made a mistake.  He has to deal with that.  The way he dealt with it tells me that he's not mentally in this game very well.  Which isn't a surprise at all.

......and, ^^THIS!^^

 I'm starting to think that people who watch racing need to become literate in racing.  They need to see what happens in the Steward's meeting. They need better access to the rules. We watch football and know all of the rules and when the ref gets it wrong, they'll hear about it!

 I remember having an argument with a Rosberg fan who was angry at the Austria GP 2016 move that caused him to lose the race.  I talked about the "racing line" and the fact Rosberg left it and made no attempt to return to it, which is why he was penalized.  We went back and forth only to find out that he didn't know each track has a "racing line"!!! 

After qualifying I figured the race win was going to be dependent on Ferrari and Vettel not screwing up. During the race I was upset at the penalty. 

Now I realize Vettle just made ANOTHER mistake that lead to the penalty and him not winning the race. It would have been awesome if he put his head down and drove quick laps to extend his lead which was 3.3 seconds when the penalty was announced. Some drivers have shown the ability to drive amazing fast laps when they feel they've been penalized unfairly. Sadly Vettel does not have that ability.