Perez Hulkenberg incident

It seems to me, that the McLaren-team is always the first to go crying at race-control after losing a fight on the track. And it also seems to me, that race-control very often decides in favour for McLaren...

 

Well that's a new one.  Tinfoil hats all round chaps.

Team communication with Charlie is not broadcast, so...

It's cases like this that should explain why Mosley didn't want Whiting making on the fly "advice" judgements. And it's stupidity by the teams that they insist on those.

Hulkenberg should never have been instructed to give the place to Perez (give not give back, Perez never had it). Sauber should have simply let the matter go to stewards.

It's cases like this that should explain why Mosley didn't want Whiting making on the fly "advice" judgements. And it's stupidity by the teams that they insist on those.

 

Hulkenberg should never have been instructed to give the place to Perez (give not give back, Perez never had it). Sauber should have simply let the matter go to stewards.

With the risk of a DQ for ignoring stewards decisions. We all know what wonders that did for Schumachers 1994 WDC campaign, f.e. I would have liked Sauber to have ignored those orders too btw, it was a very stupid call with someone barreling down the inside, forcing someone offtrack and reaping the benefits of it with complaining.

I just don't like this 'crackdown' by the stewards.  They're doing it in all the wrong places and being far too strict on following the 'letter of the law'.  Some reasonable leniency is badly needed again.

Funny story. I wasn't really able to follow this race closely, but I did see this particular fight live and I thought it was nice racing even though there was no overtake.

Then later I saw Perez infront of Hulkenberg and I thought I must have missed the pass. Only later I found out about this 'incident' and wondered what happened. So earlier in this thread I asked for the footage because I wanted to see it. Now I found it on YouTube just to realize it was the fight I saw.

Freaking ridiculous. It's so pathetic how this crowding drivers of the circuit is allowed, and to make it worse the driver who got pushed wide is penalized for it. Doesn't leave me much hope in stewarding.

Why is there a kerb anyway? Just make the track wider, then they will shove it in the wall if they do the same thing. I don't like it from the race layout that there are kerbs in the middle of the road. A proper street circuit should have these as few as possible.

Edited by SenorSjon, 23 September 2013 - 10:19.

Why is there a kerb anyway? Just make the track wider, then they will shove it in the wall if they do the same thing. I don't like it from the race layout that there are kerbs in the middle of the road. A proper street circuit should have these as few as possible.

Good point.

Grosjean got a similar penalty at hungaroring. it doesn't really matter if hulk was defending or not, these guys nowadays say you can't go 4 wheels outside of the track because you are gaining an advantage.

I don't like the system either but that's it

Sauber should have simply let the matter go to stewards.

Funny story. I wasn't really able to follow this race closely, but I did see this particular fight live and I thought it was nice racing even though there was no overtake.

 

Yeah that's how I understood it too... there was no overtake because Hulkenberg was always in front.... so why give the position?

these guys nowadays say you can't go 4 wheels outside of the track because you are gaining an advantage.

Which is incredibly flawed. Argh!

Yeah that's how I understood it too... there was no overtake because Hulkenberg was always in front.... so why give the position?

I almost wonder if Charlie Whiting (I presume redreni is right about who gave the call) literally didn't realise that and presumed Hulkenberg was making an overtake that didn't stick. Rather than being punted off-track and so having to gift a place to the guy who did it. Sounds mad but it's the only explanation I can think of for such a shocking decision.

I would really like to see an FIA explanation for this one.

When was the last time there was a thread on a stewarding decision that didn't result in a huge argument and two entrenched positions?

Is it because neither driver has a massive fanbase here?  Or because it looked to be obviously such a strange decision?

Edited by trogggy, 23 September 2013 - 12:34.

Yeah that's how I understood it too... there was no overtake because Hulkenberg was always in front.... so why give the position?

Because Perez successfully pushed him off the track, which the stewards now recognize as a valid overtaking technique. 

Never seen such a marasmic order by race control.

its a shame you can force someone off track, and then have them have to give up the place.

imo the rule should be, unless you leave a cars width, then **** off with your bitching, its your own damn fault, you shouldnt gain a place by forcing someone offtrack, or defend a place by doing it.

That is how it has been for a long time.  The only difference is that now, there is pavement everywhere instead of grass.  Used to be you pushed the other driver to the edge of the track and he had to decide to go into the grass and slow down, or to hit the brakes and stay on the tarmac and slow down.  Either way, the driver on the outside was slowing down, and the driver on the inside got in front.  Now The options are stay on the racing surface and slow down, there by giving up position, or go off track and keep the throttle down, possibly keeping you in front.  In the first, you are definitely losing the position, in th latter, you might keep it.  Obviously the second is the better option. 

What is interestign to me is what happened at the next corner.  They were side by side entering the corner, and Hulkenberg pushed Perez to the outside, but there was a wall, so Perez hit the brakes to stay on the track.  Amazing how drivers can stay on the track when it is the more beneficial option. 

Like I said, ditch the kerbs there (and other places). Those PaulRicard like runoffs everywhere are spoiling the fun. If Hulk braked, so should Perez because then you had a collision and Perez would have got a penalty. Funny how this goes.

That is how it has been for a long time.  The only difference is that now, there is pavement everywhere instead of grass.  Used to be you pushed the other driver to the edge of the track and he had to decide to go into the grass and slow down, or to hit the brakes and stay on the tarmac and slow down.  Either way, the driver on the outside was slowing down, and the driver on the inside got in front.  Now The options are stay on the racing surface and slow down, there by giving up position, or go off track and keep the throttle down, possibly keeping you in front.  In the first, you are definitely losing the position, in th latter, you might keep it.  Obviously the second is the better option. 

 

What is interestign to me is what happened at the next corner.  They were side by side entering the corner, and Hulkenberg pushed Perez to the outside, but there was a wall, so Perez hit the brakes to stay on the track.  Amazing how drivers can stay on the track when it is the more beneficial option. 

OK, but if Hulk hadn't had the option to go off the road, Perez wouldn't have pushed him so wide. If there had been a wall there, Hulk would have chosen to collide with Perez rather than collide with a wall, and Perez would have known that.

It seems to me that it's a legitimate rule that you can't get an advantage from putting all four wheels off the track, but like any rule, there are some who try to exploit it, so you need to refine the rule to deal with them.

In Hungary Grosjean went off the track, but he wasn't pushed off by Massa, so the penalty was valid. In this case, Hulk clearly was pushed off (apparently with actual contact), so he shouldn't have had a penalty.

If there had been a wall there, it's Perez who would have behaved differently, not Hulk.

OK, but if Hulk hadn't had the option to go off the road, Perez wouldn't have pushed him so wide. If there had been a wall there, Hulk would have chosen to collide with Perez rather than collide with a wall, and Perez would have known that.

 

It seems to me that it's a legitimate rule that you can't get an advantage from putting all four wheels off the track, but like any rule, there are some who try to exploit it, so you need to refine the rule to deal with them.

 

In Hungary Grosjean went off the track, but he wasn't pushed off by Massa, so the penalty was valid. In this case, Hulk clearly was pushed off (apparently with actual contact), so he shouldn't have had a penalty.

 

If there had been a wall there, it's Perez who would have behaved differently, not Hulk.

Had Grosjean not gone slightly over the white lines then there might well have been a collision.

That penalty was wrong, as was the instruction for Hulk to give up his place.

OK, but if Hulk hadn't had the option to go off the road, Perez wouldn't have pushed him so wide. If there had been a wall there, Hulk would have chosen to collide with Perez rather than collide with a wall, and Perez would have known that.

 

It seems to me that it's a legitimate rule that you can't get an advantage from putting all four wheels off the track, but like any rule, there are some who try to exploit it, so you need to refine the rule to deal with them.

 

In Hungary Grosjean went off the track, but he wasn't pushed off by Massa, so the penalty was valid. In this case, Hulk clearly was pushed off (apparently with actual contact), so he shouldn't have had a penalty.

 

If there had been a wall there, it's Perez who would have behaved differently, not Hulk.

Grosjean was ahead going into the corner and specifically went a bit wide because he thought if he didn't, Massa was going to hit him, which he probably would have.  I don't really think that's something we need to punish. 

You also don't know how Perez would have acted if there was a wall there.  I might be able to give the benefit of the doubt to some, but not him. 

Edited by Seanspeed, 23 September 2013 - 14:13.

Im a McLaren fan, and I wasnt expecting the place back. So while I'm not going to complain, I do have to chalk it up as a bonus from a bad stewarding decision.

Grosjean was ahead going into the corner and specifically went a bit wide because he thought if he didn't, Massa was going to hit him, which he probably would have.  I don't really think that's something we need to punish. 

 

You also don't know how Perez would have acted if there was a wall there.  I might be able to give the benefit of the doubt to some, but not him. 

I agree that the penalty on Grosjean was a bit harsh, and that's why a lot of people at the time thought that it was the Button incident which was being punished. But the decision was defensible. Romain must have suspected, when he started the move, that he wasn't going to be able to finish it without leaving the track.

As far as Perez is concerned, I don't think he's dumb. As long as he's allowed to benefit from pushing the boundaries, that's what he'll do.

OK, but if Hulk hadn't had the option to go off the road, Perez wouldn't have pushed him so wide. If there had been a wall there, Hulk would have chosen to collide with Perez rather than collide with a wall, and Perez would have known that.

But the wall wasn't there, and both drivers knew it.  If there is runoff, both drivers are willing to be more aggressive, both attacking and defending.  Put a wall there, and both drivers would have behaved differently. 

Personally, I think that if any part of a car is alongside another, the inside drive should leave 1 car width on the outside, regardless of whether there is wall, tarmac or grass on the outside.  I don't think that forcing a driver off track to complete a pass is good racing, but the FIA seems to be OK with it.  At least they are being consistent.  Consitently wrong, in my opinion, but consistent. 

Edited by Frank Tuesday, 23 September 2013 - 15:33.

But the wall wasn't there, and both drivers knew it.  If there is runoff, both drivers are willing to be more aggressive, both attacking and defending.  Put a wall there, and both drivers would have behaved differently. 

Personally, I think that if any part of a car is alongside another, the inside drive should leave 1 car width on the outside, regardless of whether there is wall, tarmac or grass on the outside.  I don't think that forcing a driver off track to complete a pass is good racing, but the FIA seems to be OK with it.  At least they are being consistent.  Consitently wrong, in my opinion, but consistent. 

They did penalise Perez in Belgium after he left Grosjean no room.

I'm past trying to understand how the stewards come to their conclusions. In some cases, or even many, it is a different rule book race by race and not because of track differences.

Edited by DS27, 23 September 2013 - 19:50.

The steward should be fired, I've never seen such a poor decision. I mean REALLY, where was he supposed to go ffs. Just unbelievable. 

OK, but if Hulk hadn't had the option to go off the road, Perez wouldn't have pushed him so wide. If there had been a wall there, Hulk would have chosen to collide with Perez rather than collide with a wall, and Perez would have known that.

I don't think it was as calculated. In the video you can see the oversteering as DanardiF1 pointed out. It doesn't make the decision any more disastrous, but I don't think Perez was going all or nothing there.

The fun thing,like people already said,is that if Hulk really tried to make the corner the result would be Perez crashing to him and Perez for sure would be penalised.

But he avoided the crash and he got the penalty.

Crazy.

Edited by Boxerevo, 23 September 2013 - 22:54.

I agree that the penalty on Grosjean was a bit harsh, and that's why a lot of people at the time thought that it was the Button incident which was being punished. But the decision was defensible. Romain must have suspected, when he started the move, that he wasn't going to be able to finish it without leaving the track.

 

As far as Perez is concerned, I don't think he's dumb. As long as he's allowed to benefit from pushing the boundaries, that's what he'll do.

I don't think drivers are that mindful in the heat of the moment.  Grosjean avoided contact and wasn't about to give up his position because of being ran off.  Simple as that.  Don't think he was thinking of any possible repercussions of his actions at the time.  He even specifically said that he wasn't aware that he drove all the way off-track.  You make it sound like it was some conscious decision of his to cheat or something.

And as far as Perez is concerned, I would consider being reckless 'being dumb'.  That sort of driving relies too much on the other driver giving way.  Its a risky gamble. 

It seems to me, that the McLaren-team is always the first to go crying at race-control after losing a fight on the track. And it also seems to me, that race-control very often decides in favour for McLaren...

 

I was a fan of Perez last season and really was looking forward for his performance at McLaren, but until now he only showed some stupid moves, when he gets himself in pointless fights with various drivers even his teammate.

What like in Spa where Perez was correctly penalised for pushing Grosjean off the track? If you only complain when you're right things tend to go your way by default.

Im a McLaren fan, and I wasnt expecting the place back. So while I'm not going to complain, I do have to chalk it up as a bonus from a bad stewarding decision.

It shouldn't matter, if its not correct then you should complain. 

I don't think drivers are that mindful in the heat of the moment.  Grosjean avoided contact and wasn't about to give up his position because of being ran off.  Simple as that.  Don't think he was thinking of any possible repercussions of his actions at the time.  He even specifically said that he wasn't aware that he drove all the way off-track.  You make it sound like it was some conscious decision of his to cheat or something.

 

And as far as Perez is concerned, I would consider being reckless 'being dumb'.  That sort of driving relies too much on the other driver giving way.  Its a risky gamble. 

OK, maybe I explained myself badly. I agree that Grosjean wasn't very mindful, he saw a chance and went for it. But the stewards would have asked themselves 'Was it reasonable for him to think he could overtake in that situation without going off track?' and I can see why they decided it wasn't reasonable.

In the case of Perez, he's made a number of fairly reckless moves, and most of them have turned out pretty well for him. So why shouldn't he carry on, especially if the stewards (or Whiting) keep on rewarding him, as they did in this case, and also when racing Alonso in Monaco?

its worth pointing out you cant always brake to get out of a situation, specialy with open wheel cars where there wheels are interlocked, thats not going to end well, and i dont think leaving competitors a space is that hard, i mean nascar drivers do it nearly 99% of the time, so do people on iracing.

we need good driving standards, and a race control that nots stupid.

It shouldn't matter, if its not correct then you should complain. 

Registering the fact I thought it was incorrect is enough given complaining wont change anything:)

Looking at the video again, if Perez hadn't collided with the Hulk, in my view there's a fair chance the Hulk would still have gone off the circuit, in which case I'd have been the first to argue that he's kept a position by exceeding the track limits and he should have to give up the position. But obviously that can't apply if Perez makes sure the Hulk runs off the circuit by hitting him...

OK, maybe I explained myself badly. I agree that Grosjean wasn't very mindful, he saw a chance and went for it. But the stewards would have asked themselves 'Was it reasonable for him to think he could overtake in that situation without going off track?' and I can see why they decided it wasn't reasonable.

 

In the case of Perez, he's made a number of fairly reckless moves, and most of them have turned out pretty well for him. So why shouldn't he carry on, especially if the stewards (or Whiting) keep on rewarding him, as they did in this case, and also when racing Alonso in Monaco?

I disagree again in the case of Grosjean.  Going off-track wasn't his only hope to overtake.  If Massa hadn't ran him off, he would have had the position without having to go off-track.  He was reacting to another driver about to hit him.  That's not something we should punish drivers for.

And with Perez, he shouldn't carry on gambling with his moves because the nature of gambling is that you don't always win.  It also makes him look like a bonehead to everyone watching, isn't going to lead to a more mature mentality and could very well cost other drivers their races on top of his own.  I think that's plenty of reasons for him to quit what he's doing.  Accept that he's gotten lucky so far and not push his luck further.