44 replies to this topic

[pud0007]

having sat and tried to make sense of the stewards at the last GP, giving alonso and lewis 20 sec penalties when are we going to get consistant and fair dessions on incicdents that happen in the races
i cant see how lewis gets a 20 sec penalty for doing nothing and that at the australian GP massa was deemed not to have done nothing wrong in blocking jenson for a few laps, surley if massa was in his right to do what he was doing how could lewis be deemed guilty of moving to block alonso
would love to hear the thoughts of others on the inconsistancy of the stewards, it wont be long before we have cars racing in lanes and calling it GP scalectrics

[D-Type]

I can't see how this can be classed as History or Nostagia. Is it on the wrong forum?

[Allan Lupton]

Duncan is right, but for me that is a return to the better-ordered penalty system of the past.

At least the awarding of simple time penalties can be done (and undone) after due deliberation.
The modern habit of using a pit lane transit as a penalty device seems to mean they decide too quickly and of course it cannot be undone. It is also of variable effect depending on what legitimate pit lane activities happen to be being conducted at the time and the presence or absence of racing traffic at the exit.

Edited by Allan Lupton, 13 April 2011 - 11:26.

[Barry Boor]

BTW, it's SCALEXTRIC, not scalectrics.

[Sharman]

BTW, it's SCALEXTRIC, not scalectrics.

We've got scaleinsects on our lemon tree

[jcbc3]

So what do one do, if one wants to have a discussion with serious and level headed motorsport enthusiasts (i.e. TNF members) about a current event, but don't want to go to the cesspool that is the Racing Comments?

(I have an opinion about the thread subject but will not make my comments until we have a consensus of the appropriateness of such discussion on this board).

[Red Socks]

Duncan is right, but for me that is a return to the better-ordered penalty system of the past.

At least the awarding of simple time penalties can be done (and undone) after due deliberation.
The modern habit of using a pit lane transit as a penalty device seems to mean they decide too quickly and of course it cannot be undone. It is also of variable effect depending on what legitimate pit lane activities happen to be being conducted at the time and the presence or absence of racing traffic at the exit.

Hear hear and in the context of historic events like the Spa 6hours I always consider the CofC decision to award stop /go penalties outrageously unfair. No stop/ go penalty imposes the same punishment as the next in the context of overtaking done or to come for one example.
Time penalties awarded during or after the race are the fairest system,.

[cheapracer]

Time penalties awarded during or after the race are the fairest system,.

+1. Lets them decide who exactly to punish as well ie: the team or the driver depending on the circumstances and unforseen evidence. But it also must be removable, it seems no one in power wants to lower their ego's once a penalty has been applied.

So what do one do, if one wants to have a discussion with serious and level headed motorsport enthusiasts (i.e. TNF members) about a current event, but don't want to go to the cesspool that is the Racing Comments?

Sure but then whats to stop the Cesspoolee's making there way here? Best not.

Edited by cheapracer, 13 April 2011 - 13:39.

[Bauble]

As long as it is Hammy, I don't care what penalty is applied, or what forum it appears in!

Bigotted, Biased bauble

Edited by Bauble, 13 April 2011 - 14:24.

[kayemod]

Not sure this is the right place for a discussion of this kind, but a good appraisal of the Hamilton/Alonso penalties in Jow Saward's blog.

http://joesaward.wor...ittle-analysis/

I commend it to the House.

[Barry Boor]

Had these penalties been applied back at Dijon when Gilles and Rene had some fun I imagine their race times would have extended into Monday!

[Frank S]

So what do one do, if one wants to have a discussion with serious and level headed motorsport enthusiasts (i.e. TNF members) about a current event, but don't want to go to the cesspool that is the Racing Comments?

(I have an opinion about the thread subject but will not make my comments until we have a consensus of the appropriateness of such discussion on this board).

In another focused forum I frequent the answer is to place [OT] at the front of a new thread's name. Those who prefer not to follow Off-Topic threads simply ignore; participants pitch in at their discretion.

I like to read about honorable racing drivers of any generation, and enjoy feelings of superiority when the actions of whinging teams are highlighted.

[Twin Window]

Chaps, I've altered this thread's title in order that the topic can widened-up and thus become more appropriate for TNF.

Whenever the subject of dodgy descisions by stewards is broached I always think first of Jacky Ickx red-flagging the 1984 Monaco GP thus ensuring a win for Prost. I'm not suggesting he was 'cheating', but I was there and from memory it had stopped raining...

[Kpy]

Whenever the subject of dodgy descisions by stewards is broached I always think first of Jacky Ickx red-flagging the 1984 Monaco GP thus ensuring a win for Prost. I'm not suggesting he was 'cheating', but I was there and from memory it had stopped raining...

Funny thing memory.
I just had a look at the video of the point at which the red and chequered flags were being shown as Prost came to the line.
It was chucking it down in stair rods.
However James Hunt had just voiced the opinion that there was no reason to stop the race.
For anyone with the new "Senna" film on DVD the Monaco action is at about 6 min. into the film.

[Lee Nicolle]

Duncan is right, but for me that is a return to the better-ordered penalty system of the past.

At least the awarding of simple time penalties can be done (and undone) after due deliberation.
The modern habit of using a pit lane transit as a penalty device seems to mean they decide too quickly and of course it cannot be undone. It is also of variable effect depending on what legitimate pit lane activities happen to be being conducted at the time and the presence or absence of racing traffic at the exit.

But that is not 'visual' for TV viewers. Unforunatly the 'sport' went out of motorsport 15 years ago. One of the reasons I quit because you are guilty by judge of fact who often does no have his 'facts' right. These days stop goes are used to'even' up the racing

[Lee Nicolle]

Funny thing memory.
I just had a look at the video of the point at which the red and chequered flags were being shown as Prost came to the line.
It was chucking it down in stair rods.
However James Hunt had just voiced the opinion that there was no reason to stop the race.
For anyone with the new "Senna" film on DVD the Monaco action is at about 6 min. into the film.

From watching it on TV I do know I am glad I was not out there in it but the decision was unfair to Senna. Jackie was blamed but I think it is a stewards decision to red flag a race?

[LittleChris]

The modern habit of using a pit lane transit as a penalty device seems to mean they decide too quickly and of course it cannot be undone.

Not a pit lane penalty as such but how about the 1974 British GP when Lauda made a late pit stop only to find the exit blocked as Scheckter crossed the line to win. Lauda finished 9th ie out of the points but on appeal to the governing body was given 5th place and 2 points. I take it that it's no longer possible for this to happen ?

[Tim Murray]

Jackie was blamed but I think it is a stewards decision to red flag a race?

Not in this case. FISA issued a statement which was very critical of Ickx and the Monaco organisers, highlighting what they considered to be breaches of the rules in the way the race stoppage was handled. It contained the following:

The decision to stop the race on the 31st lap was taken by the Clerk of the Course and the organisers alone.

The International Stewards of the Meeting designated by the FISA, Mr John Corsmit (Netherlands) and Mr Ronald Frost (New Zealand), were never consulted.

[D-Type]

Ironically, if the race had been allowed to continue, if Senna had passed Prost and if Bellof had failed to catch them then Prost would have come away with 6 points instead of 4 1/2. At the end of the season he would have had 1 point more than Lauda instead of 1/2 a point behind. The fickle finger of fate.

What was it that Keke said? It was something like "If my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle"

[fbarrett]

If you are fed up with F1 penalties, you might consider NASCAR, where no driver is ever penalized! Miscreants are simply invited to the "NASCAR trailer" for a stern talking to and put on suspension for a brief period of time, which in the end seems to mean absolutely nothing.

Frank

[Stephen W]

Whenever the subject of dodgy descisions by stewards is broached I always think first of Jacky Ickx red-flagging the 1984 Monaco GP thus ensuring a win for Prost. I'm not suggesting he was 'cheating', but I was there and from memory it had stopped raining...

I don't think that Prost gesticulating to the people at the start could be construed as "cheating" but may be considered as "trying to influence the judges".

Ironically, if the race had been allowed to continue, if Senna had passed Prost and if Bellof had failed to catch them then Prost would have come away with 6 points instead of 4 1/2. At the end of the season he would have had 1 point more than Lauda instead of 1/2 a point behind. The fickle finger of fate.

What was it that Keke said? It was something like "If my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle"

Love the irony of Prost being hoisted by his own petard (or should it be canard?)

As for the Keke quote, it is far older than the fabulous Finn!

Now back to the subject; surely the problem is that there are different 'judges' at each GP. Should the governing body not select say THREE ex-GP drivers and that they should be the judging panel at ALL races?

Edited by Stephen W, 14 April 2011 - 09:35.

[cheapracer]

In accordance with the new title...

2002 Bathurst and Greg Murphy.

Murphy came into the pits for a schedualed fuel stop and stayed in the car and watched his signalman. The flagman said "go" so Murphy went - the car was still being refueled and the mistake was of the signalman.

Now in my mind that was in no way Murphy's fault but that of the team of course, Murohy just sat there encased in his wraparound raceseat and with full face helmet on totally reliant on his signalman - that Bathurst race was also a round of the Driver's Championship and Team's Championship.

The shock came through from the stewards that Murphy had been awarded a 5 MINUTE stop and go - 5 minutes, bloody hell. He actually had time to go to the toilet.

Of course it destroyed his race chance and damaged his championship score. In my mind this was a clear case of the Team's problem and nothing to do with the driver and as such the Team should have been penalized (fine, loss of Team Champ points etc) after the race and let Murphy get on with his things.

Edited by cheapracer, 14 April 2011 - 12:23.

[f1steveuk]

Controversial penalties, I would have the words Tyrrell, lead shot, no points etc on the tip of my tongue!! I thought that sucked hugely!!

[elansprint72]

I would rather read about golf here than "F1". I have absolutely no interest whatever in golf, by the way.

I think this tread is more than "off topic". It is the thin end of a kettle of worms.

[h4887]

I would rather read about golf here than "F1". I have absolutely no interest whatever in golf, by the way.

I think this tread is more than "off topic". It is the thin end of a kettle of worms.

I've heard of the Diet of Worms, but not the kettle. Perhaps it's one of those bizarre collective nouns that people like making up?

[delta44]

Had these penalties been applied back at Dijon when Gilles and Rene had some fun I imagine their race times would have extended into Monday!

Happy days Barry. Happy days.Just think if they had all the camera's going back then like now.

[Giraffe]

The shock came through from the stewards

Of course it destroyed his race chance and damaged his championship score.

Why does this remind me of a current controversy elsewhere involving bookings, red cards & penalties? When humans are forced to make 'on the spot' decisions in critical situations when not always fully informed and without the time to give it due consideration............

Edited by Giraffe, 14 April 2011 - 20:24.

[elansprint72]

I've heard of the Diet of Worms, but not the kettle. Perhaps it's one of those bizarre collective nouns that people like making up?

I think that your riposte is something of a red canard.

If ever a thread cried out for derailing...

[Giraffe]

If ever a thread cried out for derailing...

It sort of started badly, and then fell away............................

[ryan86]

I always found it ludicrous that Rosberg and Kubica took about 10 laps to be penalised for their pit stops in Singapore. Probably some paperwork and what not to get it, but that was ridiculous. If I can see watching the race that something is factually illegal, not an opinion, why does it take the team in race control so long?

Also I believe that in the 2007 Brazilian GP, stewards were asked to find a way to make the illegal BMW's and Rosberg legal due to the result it would have on the championship.

[Giraffe]

Told yer.............

[kayemod]

If ever a thread cried out for derailing...

Are those the gears I had on my bike ?

[elansprint72]

Told yer.............

... and some stony ground flew over my head... which fits neatly in with kayemod's comment too.... did I ever tell you about my six months as a professional racing cyclist in Europe?

[ensign14]

Ironically, if the race had been allowed to continue, if Senna had passed Prost and if Bellof had failed to catch them then Prost would have come away with 6 points instead of 4 1/2. At the end of the season he would have had 1 point more than Lauda instead of 1/2 a point behind. The fickle finger of fate.

Even if Bellof had caught and passed them both, it would have made no difference - Tyrrell was slung out of the championship for opposing Balestre.

Unless it would have been too embarrassing for the FIA to exclude the Monaco GP winner months after the event.

[elansprint72]

This is why we should not let them in.

You might want to click on that blue bit above. My advice is to ignore it and skip to the next thread.

Edited by elansprint72, 14 April 2011 - 21:53.

[Allan Lupton]

This is why we should not let them in.

You might want to click on that blue bit above. My advice is to ignore it and skip to the next thread.

Canst explain how Sorry, but you do not have permission to use this feature. If you are not logged in, you may do so using the form below if available. helps me understand?

[Tim Murray]

It's a Paddock Club thread - you have to be a member to read it. I shouldn't worry, though - it has absolutely no relevance to this thread.

[kayemod]

I shouldn't worry, though - it has absolutely no relevance to this thread.

Or anything else as far as I can see.

I rarely visit The Paddock Club, something about not wanting to join any club that would have me as a member...

[Stephen W]

I think this tread is more than "off topic". It is the thin end of a kettle of worms.

I've heard of the Diet of Worms, but not the kettle. Perhaps it's one of those bizarre collective nouns that people like making up?

Surely a "kettle of worms" occurs when the Police round up a lot of worms and keep them penned in?

[LB]

This is why we should not let them in.

You might want to click on that blue bit above. My advice is to ignore it and skip to the next thread.

What on earth has a thread about the proper order of calculating equations got to do with this one? Also its in the Paddock Club something that the starter of this thread does not have access to as he has not posted enough on the site to be granted said access. There are many on this site that actively participate in the PC and TNF. Now if you had brought up something from readers comments?

As for Monaco 1984 - Bellof was disqualified later in the season anyway, Senna's car was actually damaged after bouncing it all over the kerbs in the chicane, he could see his right front wheel moving backward and forward under braking. Anything could have happened in the 30 laps or so it would have gone on. Oh and it was raining harder for definate you can see it in the video of the race. Having said all that what happened was wrong.

[Giraffe]

It is the thin end of a kettle of worms.

I've heard of the Diet of Worms, but not the kettle.

I think he meant to say someone's on a diet of cans

[D-Type]

What on earth has a thread about the proper order of calculating equations got to do with this one? Also its in the Paddock Club something that the starter of this thread does not have access to as he has not posted enough on the site to be granted said access. There are many on this site that actively participate in the PC and TNF. Now if you had brought up something from readers comments?

As for Monaco 1984 - Bellof was disqualified later in the season anyway, Senna's car was actually damaged after bouncing it all over the kerbs in the chicane, he could see his right front wheel moving backward and forward under braking. Anything could have happened in the 30 laps or so it would have gone on. Oh and it was raining harder for definate you can see it in the video of the race. Having said all that what happened was wrong.

Why?
The Clerk of the Course, Jacky Ickx, decided to stop the race on safety grounds. Would you still say that the decision was wrong if someone had been killed? (I know it's that word "if" again). At the time, with the knowledge available to him, he made the judgement. It is not for us to criticise his decision 25 years later. we weren't there. We don't know the race regulations at the time. We don't apprecuiate the difference in the split of responsibility then and now. The organising clubs had far more autonomy than now. The CSI sporting regulations were far less rigorously defined then. Wev don't know the guidelines whether written or unwritten that Ickx and the ACM were working to.

We all know the Senna (and Senna fan) propensity for assuming conspiracies. Yes, Jacky Ickx was a Porsche driver for many years but surely it is a long stretch of the imagination to assume that because the TAG -financed and TAG-branded engine in the McLaren had been designed by Porsche then Ickx would favour them on his own initiative. Would Porsche executives have wanted Ickx to stop the race. And even if they did, would they have been able to contact him to pressurise him into doing so? I can't see it.

The other Senna hypothesis that because Ickx and Prost were both native French speakers, Ickx would have favoured Prost doesn't even merit consideration.

Edited by D-Type, 15 April 2011 - 14:11.

[ensign14]

Why?
The Clerk of the Course, Jacky Ickx, decided to stop the race on safety grounds. Would you still say that the decision was wrong if someone had been killed? (I know it's that word "if" again).

If the weather had stopped deteriorating, the question would have been whether it should have been started in the first place, not about it not being stopped earlier.

[Ibsey]

Just to throw a couple more examples into the ring;

Monza 2006 - where Alonso 'allegdely' blocked Massa in qualifying, depsite being around 1.5 seconds up the road from the Ferrari. Conveniently this helped the other Ferrari of M. Schumacher's championship.

Malaysia 1999 - Where the Ferrari bargeboard was found to be illegal (& Ross Brawn even admitted it was). Yet despite Ferrari being excluded initially, they were later reinstated. I don't suppose this had anything to do with the FIA wanting to still keep the championship alive?

[Fatgadget]

As long as it is Hammy, I don't care what penalty is applied, or what forum it appears in!

Bigotted, Biased bauble

Hopefully you didnt kick teh cat or flung the telly out teh window today eh!