Anybody else sick and tired of penalties?

I have just about HAD it with penalties. I understand there is SOME need to police safe racing practices, but it seems that in more recent history, just about EVERY weekend is marred by news from one or more racing series with someone losing their pole position, win, or other achievement through some sort of penalty, and that often times AFTER the race was run, and the results were published.

Enough already. Racers will race, and there will be incidents, but when in the world was it suddenly decided that with every touch of a wheel, there has to be a "guilty" one who needs to be penalized? Come on!! It often totally skews the races and championships based on subjective stewards' whims.

If somebody is OBVIOUSLY reckless on a continuous basis, endangering his peers, and causing mayhem, then book him, but else, for Pete's sake, just effing let them race!

And don't even get me started on these idiotic engine/gearbox change penalties!!!

Edited by maximilian, 01 July 2012 - 16:14.

My problem with penalties is how inconsitently they are apllied.

If you're a Hamilton, Maldonado or Schumacher fan I understand you're sick and tired of penalties.

However, I'm an Alonso fan, therefore I don't have any problem with penalties.

You are absolutely right Maximilian, this is too much. Penalties should only be applied when someone does something wrong on purpose to gain any advantage, not for racing incidents.

Yes I am, their use and effectiveness have been dumbed down by both inconsistency and frequency. Drivers just seem to take it and I find it sad.

In F1 in particular, how drivers are immediately on the radio to their teams having a moan tells us enough of the sorry state at least F1 is in regarding penalties. They're more afraid of officialdom post-incident than whatever the incident itself may bring and that is wrong.

Some penalties and associated inconsistencies do not make sense to me whatsoever, and yes, I am Schumacher's fan. Through his life some penalties were really juicy ones. Essential equipment change requires grid suspension? Overtaking wavering Hill on a formation lap (instead ramming him) is a crime? Then the famous JV accident that was turned into political farce and public stunt, just as noise over Monaco’s parking, and some of the others that were nothing more IMO, but personal complacency on part of some officials. Vettel's saga is similar; take the one with “big” gap to a SC is a crime requiring punishment…

Edited by Sakae, 01 July 2012 - 17:06.

If you're a Hamilton, Maldonado or Schumacher fan I understand you're sick and tired of penalties.

However, I'm an Alonso fan, therefore I don't have any problem with penalties.

Really?

http://forum.ferrari...hread.php?t=839

Really?

http://forum.ferrari...hread.php?t=839

Totally.

No, I´m not sick of penalties.

I´d be sick of stupid penalties or stupid moves getting away without one. And the standards of stewards have only raised since I started following the sport, so I´m quite satisfied.

Me.
Take the penalty imposed on Bautista for his crash on the first corner of the first lap in Assen this weekend. Look, if you can´t race, then what are these guys doing on the grid in the first place? He screwed up, granted, but he´s a human, not God, and as such he is allowed to make a mistake. He´s trying to execute at the absolute limit. Hey, some times the limit is exceeded and **** happens. That´s racing. What do the suits expect? Perfection?

Yeah - I turn the television off if no-one has scored in extra time; penalties are just a lottery...

Talk about an overreaction. It's not like every single result is disputed by a penalty.

Schumi was unlucky to finally be fast right after a penalty but that's just how it happened.

Edited by BigCHrome, 01 July 2012 - 19:42.

I agree that it has gone too far. Professional drivers are humans and make mistakes like the rest of us. Some incidents do deserve a look at by the stewards (such as the Vergne / Kovalainen incident last weekend) but personally I don't want penalties handed out to drivers who make a slightly clumsy move on someone. Maybe my memory is lying to me but I don't remember so many penalties being handed out for collisions 10 years ago.

Yeah - I turn the television off if no-one has scored in extra time; penalties are just a lottery...

...and England always lose!

One problem is the nature of penalties. Driver A punts off Driver B, and gets a 10 place grid penalty. Whereas the innocent Driver B loses his entire race. Surely in those circumstances it would be fairer to ban Driver A for a race at least? The punishment never fits the crime.

One problem is the nature of penalties. Driver A punts off Driver B, and gets a 10 place grid penalty. Whereas the innocent Driver B loses his entire race. Surely in those circumstances it would be fairer to ban Driver A for a race at least? The punishment never fits the crime.

If Driver A finishes 101h, he get a 20s penalty.

One problem is the nature of penalties. Driver A punts off Driver B, and gets a 10 place grid penalty. Whereas the innocent Driver B loses his entire race. Surely in those circumstances it would be fairer to ban Driver A for a race at least? The punishment never fits the crime.

I can't help but feel sorry for the guy who's had his race ruined through no fault of his own.

Edited by bub, 01 July 2012 - 23:47.

I can live with the penalties. What i can't live with is the constant accusations of bias stewarding or bias from the FIA whenever someone doesn't like the penalty. It seems to happen a lot from fans of one driver in particular.
The stewards are sometimes too inconsistent in their rulings but claiming bias is ridiculous.

Haven't there always been plenty of penalties though? Before the days of drive-through penalties and grid spot demotions there were still plenty of time additions, or being forced to start at the back and such things. It's just that we tend to forget when it happened to the likes of Eric Bernard and Gianni Morbidelli (picked off the top of my head). Can you imagine the outcry on here if there was a repeat of Gerhard Berger's 1 minute penalty for a false start in Canada 1990?

Haven't there always been plenty of penalties though? Before the days of drive-through penalties and grid spot demotions there were still plenty of time additions, or being forced to start at the back and such things. It's just that we tend to forget when it happened to the likes of Eric Bernard and Gianni Morbidelli (picked off the top of my head). Can you imagine the outcry on here if there was a repeat of Gerhard Berger's 1 minute penalty for a false start in Canada 1990?

And there is this old saying "The law isn't fair". This applies to any set of rules. Plus these days, more cameras means more chances to find out what happened. When there were less cameras they could afford to be a bit more relaxed about applying penalties.

IMO the issues aren't the penalties, but the exposure of the race with several replies of an incident from several angles and fan expectations. George Orwell's "Big brother is watching you" comes to mind, but the real question is, who is playing into the hands of big brother?

IIRC it was Niki Lauda who commented when MS did his customary chop, that in their time they did that too, but there were less cameras to pick these things up, so there was no outcry and demands for penalties. And if there was, there was no Internet.

The first time I'd seen an on track penalty applied for a collision in F1 was Schumacher colliding with Montoya in Malaysia 2002.... and yet it was Montoya who got the penalty! Even from the beginning, the penalty was incorrectly adjudicated.

Edited by Zippel, 01 July 2012 - 23:34.

You are absolutely right Maximilian, this is too much. Penalties should only be applied when someone does something wrong on purpose to gain any advantage, not for racing incidents.

Intent really shouldn't matter. Of course, if somebody does something on purpose, it should be taken into consideration and the penalty should be more severe as a result, but it shouldn't be the determining factor of whether a penalty gets applied or not. 99% of accidents are unintentional. Thats why they're called 'accidents'. It doesn't mean that somebody isn't at fault, though. Having the threat of penalty over a driver's head goes a long way in enforcing a certain "This is open-wheel racing and I need to be careful" attitude thats necessary in this sport.

You could argue about the inconsistency of the penalties dealt out, but I'm perfectly fine with the amount of them being applied in general. I think its a necessity.

Here is a list of knee jerk threads of late.

Knee jerk to Schumacher's stuck DRS "ban DRS"
Knee jerk to safety car in valencia "ban safety car"
Knee jerk to penalties "ban penalties"

-----------

F1 has moved to a much better system where an ex driver is the steward, as opposed to the older system which resulted in so many farcical penalties. Please lets just try to live with it, its a fair system as opposed to what you propose.

we should distinguish between penalties for on-track driver behaviour, and penalties for breaches of the technical regulations such as engine or gearbox changes.

unacceptable behaviour on-track should be penalised on-track, but i agree that we are seeing too much good racing being ruined by penalties from breaches of technical regulations.

Some penalties and associated inconsistencies do not make sense to me whatsoever, and yes, I am Schumacher's fan. Through his life some penalties were really juicy ones.

Why did Schumi do things wrong then?

How about:
Not ramming Hill
Not ramming Villenueve
Not parking at Casino square during qualifying (parking the Enzo for a latte the week before is fine, can't see the need to park during a red hot qually session!)

These would have helped slightly.

;)

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 02 July 2012 - 04:43.

Stewards (and onlookers) must possess divine powers to claim, that they can distinguish intentional act from unintentional one. That’s the downfall of humans playing God. How many times in history (prior DNA) forensics let us down in cases involving capital punishment? Point is, in time allotted, and methods available to race officials, I would ban altogether judgment regarding driver’s intention, and limit this aspect merely to a simple direct question, what were his intention, and unless there is a direct admission from a driver, intentions must be disregarded from any judgment rendered upon the case. Senna admitted ramming Prost, Schumacher has not (to my knowledge) provided the same information, and who is to say otherwise? Mine is not a popular opinion in racing community, but I view events following Jerez as permanent black mark in history and witness more of human vindictiveness, than simply effort to treat subject matter objectively within context of racing.

actually Lewis and Micheal are men of old times Their moves was normal in 90's, now their moves are penalized generally also safety is exaggerated for me in drivers' overtakings

Agree 100%.

Greg Murphy agrees with you, 5 minute penalty was a little harsh



On the whole I agree with the author. Too many for utterly trivial stuff. Let the boys sort it out themselves - makes for some bitter rivalries and some decent spats.

Why did Schumi do things wrong then?

;)

I didn't see anything wrong on what Schumacher did. Some acts were merely less effective than others, but he is the one who was evaluating results, and that is all what counts.

Edited by Sakae, 02 July 2012 - 10:54.

I will be very dissapointed if Spain was last penalty for Lewis in this year.

Absolutely in favor of penalties and more policing. Sport should be sport and not where the dirtiest drivers win out. Just look at false starts how this is basically eradicated due to monitoring and inevitable penalties, not because drivers are more sporting about jumping the gun than before.

If we want drivers to drive at the limit, an ivinsible line which is constantly moving due to ambient conditions of the race, one better get also adjusted to the idea that more venturous drivers like Michael, and like Vettel will on occassion inadverently cross it.

FiA IMO was never prepared and capable of reading the extreme events correctly, and more guessing than qualified judgement seems to take place frequently, yet I welcome drivers who constantly search for race potential, and thus diferentiate themselves from others. Unfortunately this time around Hembery made sure that he handicaps excellence, and exchanges distinction with mediocricy; backmarkers are no more backmarkers, and stewards of the race now can breath with relieve, because in slow motion it's all clear for them. Should they get bored, they can write even more restrictions to make their careers secured, and long ones.

Edited by Sakae, 02 July 2012 - 12:24.

Not if they are justified, which on most occasions they probably are.

I am, one of the reasons I don't watch anymore. Why can't we go back to 20 years ago, when drivers being penalised was the exception rather than the rule? F1 was healthier as a sport without the constant interfering from stewards.

We used to have less penalties.

Then drivers started winning championships by crashing into their opponents.

So now we have a lot of penalties. You know who to blame.

I didn't see anything wrong on what Schumacher did. Some acts were merely less effective than others, but he is the one who was evaluating results, and that is all what counts.

You believe that Schumacher has never done anything wrong? Come on, taking out Villenveuve was as deliberate as it gets, if we go with your suggestion and only punish drivers if they admit they did it then we'll see drivers getting away with anything.

I am, one of the reasons I don't watch anymore. Why can't we go back to 20 years ago, when drivers being penalised was the exception rather than the rule? F1 was healthier as a sport without the constant interfering from stewards.

Because driving standards have declined over time, as the sport has become more safer and younger drivers saw some of the older ones using far too aggressive tactics.

If you're a Hamilton, Maldonado or Schumacher fan I understand you're sick and tired of penalties.

However, I'm an Alonso fan, therefore I don't have any problem with penalties.

Only Alonso fans can be objective? Very intelligent line of reasoning there. You just wait though, the season isn't over..

We used to have less penalties.

Has anyone actually produced any statistics for the perceived increase in penalties?

If you're a Hamilton, Maldonado or Schumacher fan I understand you're sick and tired of penalties.

However, I'm an Alonso fan, therefore I don't have any problem with penalties.

I wonder how you would feel if someone rammed Fernando off the track and cost him the title...especially if it was let's say, a Prost V Senna scenario...

If you're a Hamilton, Maldonado or Schumacher fan I understand you're sick and tired of penalties.

However, I'm an Alonso fan, therefore I don't have any problem with penalties.

I wonder how you would feel if someone rammed Fernando off the track and cost him the title...especially if it was let's say, a Prost V Senna scenario...

Or if Fernando rammed someone off the track to cost them the title, and then getting a penalty for it...

Post race penalties is part of the sport and always has been. F1 is not a TV program or made for TV, it's the other way round. So naturally once the broadcast is over things are still subject to change based on the regulations. I agree that sometimes they're handed out inconsistently or too easily, but post-race penalties just need to be accepted by the modern breed of F1 fans, who have grown up on a diet of reality TV and such...

Post race penalties is part of the sport and always has been. F1 is not a TV program or made for TV, it's the other way round. So naturally once the broadcast is over things are still subject to change based on the regulations. I agree that sometimes they're handed out inconsistently or too easily, but post-race penalties just need to be accepted by the modern breed of F1 fans, who have grown up on a diet of reality TV and such...

So how many post-race penalties were there in, say, 1964?

I'm sick and tired.
Of people complaining.

In the beginning...... there were no penalties, only danger. People played the game and enjoyed one another's (brief) company.

Then there was a driver who considered himself at the right hand of God...... and He decided He had the right to exact his own penalty in the field of play. Until He found he wasn't immortal after all. And many worshipped Him and would hear no evil about Him.

Then there was a driver who decided He was the new arbiter of right and wrong..... and He was always right. When He was allowed to do as He saw fit, the "authorities" only chose to make a play of "penalising" him, lest they incense his religious followers. At this time it became behoven of the authorities to take control over the kingdom of increasing lawlessness, and punish people mightily. And the emperor would set himself up as judge and jury and executioner, and the people were afraid.

Until one day the emperor was found with no clothes. And he was replaced by one of great wisdom and experience, but many claimed he would be on the side of the mighty redcoats in all matters of adjudication. But the new emperor removed himself from the judgement seat and installed a jury of experienced men of good standing.

And the penalties which had been numerous and frivolous became numerous and reasoned. But judgement was never harsh and usually fair but men chose to test the laws at every moment, and chaos continued to exist, but only on occasions. Order had been restored but then some said "you're unfair". And their followers made protests at every turn and appealed to the unseen Gods of the internet. And much debate ensued.

AND THAT"S WHERE WE ARE TODAY. A potted history going back to the fabulous fifties when men were almost to a one, honourable.

Fortunately we have not seen too many of the real skulduggery acts started in the 90s by the one who put himself above all or his imitator who saw he could get away with it. The last really, really bad one was inflicted on Barrichallo in 2010 and it went without serious censure. This leads me to believe that the penalties are too uniform - that is, minor misdemeanours get minor penalties and major misdemeanours also get minor penalties. So I'd like to see some of the minor ones, like clumsiness of a minor scale go with a very minor penalty. Stop-Go penalties in the modern competitive scene are harsh as you can go from podium position to out of the points just for a wheel banging. At the other end of the scale I would like to see that occasional deliberate act of native evil punished by a one or two race ban.

Edited by Muz Bee, 02 July 2012 - 23:50.

I'm sick and tired.
Of people complaining.

+1

I have just about HAD it with penalties. I understand there is SOME need to police safe racing practices, but it seems that in more recent history, just about EVERY weekend is marred by news from one or more racing series with someone losing their pole position, win, or other achievement through some sort of penalty, and that often times AFTER the race was run, and the results were published.

Enough already. Racers will race, and there will be incidents, but when in the world was it suddenly decided that with every touch of a wheel, there has to be a "guilty" one who needs to be penalized? Come on!! It often totally skews the races and championships based on subjective stewards' whims.

If somebody is OBVIOUSLY reckless on a continuous basis, endangering his peers, and causing mayhem, then book him, but else, for Pete's sake, just effing let them race!

And don't even get me started on these idiotic engine/gearbox change penalties!!!

Yep. Penalties are handed out WAY too haphazardly these days. More often than not, they are over simply racing incidents as well. It's getting that ridiculous that drivers will be afraid to have a go for fear of being slapped with a penalty if it doesn't come off and that's not what F1 needs.

The first time I'd seen an on track penalty applied for a collision in F1 was Schumacher colliding with Montoya in Malaysia 2002.... and yet it was Montoya who got the penalty! Even from the beginning, the penalty was incorrectly adjudicated.

I remember that like it was yesterday. I was so pissed when it happened and I was a fan of both drivers. Still stands out to me as one of the most moronic penalties ever handed out.

Also, to those who say "but there's always been penalties!" this is true, however they are now handed out far more often for occurences that would have just been deemed as racing incidents back in the day.

So how many post-race penalties were there in, say, 1964?

Peter Revson was Disqualified from Spa for recieving a push start.

There are some who do believe they have to govern others. It is an oppressive, and ill-founded condition, as most of time the same group refuses to let others govern them. Whole supervisory system requires overhaul from ground up, as it is all rotten with self-righteous attitude, IMO.

Edited by Sakae, 03 July 2012 - 04:51.