73 replies to this topic

[KnucklesAgain]

In what's IMHO one of the biggest news on Autosport in a long time, Derek Warwick revealed at the FOTA Fan's Forum that FIA is discussing changes to the penalty system.

the validity of the current regulations had been discussed during a recent meeting of the stewards' council in Paris, and that "a few changes might be coming" as a result.

"We had a council meeting in Paris which I headed with Charlie [Whiting] and came away with some good ideas."

. Though

Whether anything can come of them and they can be introduced, I don't know - this is all a new process, we didn't use to have these meetings. Charlie will go away, analyse it and make recommendations. There might be a few changes coming along in the next few months or year.

Warwick thinks that the drive throughs are too harsh for some offenses and not harsh enough for others - it seems he'd like to have finer granularity. He also mentions that due to different pit lane lengths the drive through has different weight at different circuits.

"Is a drive through at Canada, where you lose about 15s, the same as one at somewhere like Abu Dhabi for example?"

Warwick also defended having a rotating panel of stewards, saying that the impartiality of the panel is beyond question regardless of who is on it.

"I can look back this year and think certain penalties have been too strong or too weak," he admitted. "If I step back I don't agree with some decisions, but that's because I don't have all the facts. I thought Schumacher should have been banned [following his move on Rubens Barrichello at Hungary 2010] but that wasn't the vote of the stewards. We haven't got all the facts. In the stewards room we have. We have all the angles, all the data and can make a more correct judgement."

I say bring it on but do it right, in a manner that is comprehensible to drivers and fans.

Edit: typos

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 04 July 2012 - 09:38.

[launcher]

F1 did not need this crazy over regulation for many decades, so why does it need it now? Did they give these kind of penalties prior to 2000? I don't recall it. Accidents happen its the nature of the sport, just let them race!!

[BigCHrome]

I don't think it will stop idiots like Maldonado from screwing other drivers.

[engel]

F1 did not need this crazy over regulation for many decades, so why does it need it now? Did they give these kind of penalties prior to 2000? I don't recall it. Accidents happen its the nature of the sport, just let them race!!

in the old days they may not have had penalties, but the idea of a driver taking another driver out of a race on purpose was unthinkable. Motorsports hasn't been a "gentleman's" sport in a long time, it stands to reason more regulation came into play

[launcher]

in the old days they may not have had penalties, but the idea of a driver taking another driver out of a race on purpose was unthinkable. Motorsports hasn't been a "gentleman's" sport in a long time, it stands to reason more regulation came into play

The worst case of taking someone out deliberately was Senna vs Prost 1990 and I dont recall any penalty. I don't mind penalties for extreme deliberate fouls like this, but we have gone way too far, and every turn of the wheel and touch is being regulated now its insane and not needed. The point of F1 is entertainment and the show, everyone in the paddock always raves about that, yet they are doing their best to strangle them with regulations.

[ayali]

In what's IMHO one of the biggest news on Autosport in a long time,

Me thinks Autosport is making more of a big deal of this than it actually is
New stewards meeting and they came up with some ideas for fine tuning penalties
Chances are Todt will put the suggestions in his desk drawer and that will be the end of it
current system works just fine for me
Warwick otoh

[launcher]

There should only be 2 rules to enforce on track racing.

1. Intentional fouls
2. Excessive weaving/changes of direction.

That's all you need. Although it sounds like they are creating an encyclopaedia of regulations.

[Lazy]

in the old days they may not have had penalties, but the idea of a driver taking another driver out of a race on purpose was unthinkable. Motorsports hasn't been a "gentleman's" sport in a long time, it stands to reason more regulation came into play

Indeed, thanks in good part to Senna and Schumacher.

Ofc we need penalties and recklessness is just as much an issue as intentional fouls.

The penalties need to be applied consistently and whether or not an accident is caused or position gained.

Good drivers are effectively penalised by losing time and places avoiding accidents with reckless drivers.

[Clatter]

My first thought when seeing the title was "Again". How many overhauls have we had the last few years?

[Fastcake]

First up, get some professional stewards in, rather than FIA committee members who fancy a day out twice a year. Next, be willing to use black flags more - next time someone does something catastrophically stupid and gets disqualified for it no one will do it again. That certainly applies to the GP2 lot as well. Keep the barging into each other to get by to touring cars.

[PayasYouRace]

Not just black flags. What ever happened to the black and white diagonal flag? Has the FIA forgotten about it? It's only purpose is to warn drivers of unsportsmanlike behaviour. I can't think of a single time it's ever been used in F1.

[KnucklesAgain]

My first thought when seeing the title was "Again". How many overhauls have we had the last few years?

Only patch jobs, no structured overhauls.

[ayali]

Only patch jobs, no structured overhauls.

But the overhaul is just an Autosport invention
Warwick is only talking about "a few changes" and tweaking
and chances are that those proposals will be ignored

[TheWilliamzer]

I guess they'll create some new Maldo/Hammy specific rules.

Seriously, I think this is going to hold F1 back even further. The stewards wants drivers but the spectators wants racers.

[KnucklesAgain]

But the overhaul is just an Autosport invention
Warwick is only talking about "a few changes" and tweaking
and chances are that those proposals will be ignored

OK, that's true. Well I'm hoping .....

[bongofury]

Would it be feasible to have the same stewards at every race? This might at least bring some consistency.

[Jon83]

Where there is a short pit-lane, make it a stop and go. That is what they did at Silverstone last season and no doubt this if necessary.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

Where there is a short pit-lane, make it a stop and go. That is what they did at Silverstone last season and no doubt this if necessary.

I think that was more because (from memory, so I may be wrong) they found that it'd be quicker doing a drive through than taking the last couple of corners at normal racing speed. However, as I said, I may be wrong.

[smitten]

I'm fairly certain that any changes will not be about improving the sport but improving the show. The fundamental problem remains consistency in judgements.

[robefc]

Where there is a short pit-lane, make it a stop and go. That is what they did at Silverstone last season and no doubt this if necessary.

But they they don't have the option of a stop and go penalty at tracks with short pit lanes...(or rather stop and go and drive through wil be the same).

[Fastcake]

But they they don't have the option of a stop and go penalty at tracks with short pit lanes...(or rather stop and go and drive through wil be the same).

Yes they do, they simply make it a larger penalty - say 15/20 seconds.

[Seanspeed]

I'm fairly certain that any changes will not be about improving the sport but improving the show. The fundamental problem remains consistency in judgements.

I agree with the last sentence, but if you read the article, they specifically mention 'weighting' penalties a bit better. Has nothing to do with 'the show'.

[robefc]

Yes they do, they simply make it a larger penalty - say 15/20 seconds.

Good point!

[HP]

Edd Straw wrote an article available in Autosport plus, where he makes an excellent point.

He suggests that the biggest issue with penalties as it is, is the lack of transparency.

And I agree. When the FIA published their reasoning behind certain decisions, including evidence not available on TV, then it was easy to understand how they came up to their decisions. That was most helpful. Not that I'd expect to agree every time, but it's easier to appreciate the stewards decisions.

[katmen]

1.no more after the race please!
2.everything should be concluded, decided, punished before checkered flag!
3.write quality penal code!
4.made public why was penalty imposed! every sentencing has why? section, it leads to consistency
5.please hire good lawyers to write the rules, make them public and discussed in public before finalizing!
6.made English compulsory language in all communication on races, mo more italian radios....
7.same rulebook for all fomulae, track racing
8. use time penalties as n x slowest pit time from last year or 5 s stop and go penalty as minimal penalty
9. unsafe release means automatic dsq, fines are useless

[HP]

I'm fairly certain that any changes will not be about improving the sport but improving the show. The fundamental problem remains consistency in judgements.

No case is the same, that's why transparency IMO is more helpful.

Consistency means different things to different people, in the article I mentioned in the previous post, there is a run down from the last race, why different people became different penalties. The reasoning behind them IMO is consistent, the penalties appear not. Hence transparency helps people to understand (and even educate them) .

[Clatter]

Edd Straw wrote an article available in Autosport plus, where he makes an excellent point.

He suggests that the biggest issue with penalties as it is, is the lack of transparency.

And I agree. When the FIA published their reasoning behind certain decisions, including evidence not available on TV, then it was easy to understand how they came up to their decisions. That was most helpful. Not that I'd expect to agree every time, but it's easier to appreciate the stewards decisions.

That and consistency.

The stuff that gets printed on the FIA media centre tells us nothing about how the stewards arrived at their decisions.

[PayasYouRace]

1.no more after the race please!

What if the incident is on the last lap? Sometimes that can't be helped.

2.everything should be concluded, decided, punished before checkered flag!

Meaning if you break the rules on the last lap you can get away with it? That's not very fair.

3.write quality penal code!

Easier said than done. Do you think that's not what the FIA have been trying to do?

4.made public why was penalty imposed! every sentencing has why? section, it leads to consistency

I agree.

5.please hire good lawyers to write the rules, make them public and discussed in public before finalizing!

Sounds like a lot of red tape and needless expense.

6.made English compulsory language in all communication on races, mo more italian radios....

No. Not all drivers/engineers have English as their first language and may prefer their own language, especially in a high stress environment.

7.same rulebook for all fomulae, track racing

I agree, but I think that's what we have for the most part.

8. use time penalties as n x slowest pit time from last year or 5 s stop and go penalty as minimal penalty

Seems fair.

9. unsafe release means automatic dsq, fines are useless

A bit harsh don't you think? Why not a drive-though/stop-and-go?

[HP]

That and consistency.

Cases that have been explained are actually consistent but still get different penalties. And quite frankly, I am happy that this happens in real life as well.

A simple case, What if you have 2 similar incidents, but one was just a human mistake, and the other was a willful decision to cause an incident. If it can be proven one incident was premeditated, the other not, there should be different penalties, even if the actual incident looked the same and results were the same.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

1.no more after the race please! Some have to be after the race. Plus what about technical penalties?
2.everything should be concluded, decided, punished before checkered flag! How could it be if it's in the last few laps?
4.made public why was penalty imposed! every sentencing has why? section, it leads to consistency Agreed, tell us why you came to that decision, eg what did the telemetry/team radio tell you about the incident
5.please hire good lawyers to write the rules, make them public and discussed in public before finalizing! Lawyers? Really? Sorry, but lawyers to write the rules for penalties in motorsport because of collisions is just never going to happen in my opinion
6.made English compulsory language in all communication on races, mo more italian radios....They're entitled to use whatever language they like. No different to a team saying something on the radio and the driver knowing it's merely a code to try and fool others
7.same rulebook for all fomulae, track racing In terms of penalties I guess you mean, and yep, probably makes sense
9. unsafe release means automatic dsq, fines are useless Way too harsh DQ'ing someone for something which may not even lead to any contact and isn't overly dangerous, when for causing a large collision you may only get a grid penalty at the next race. Plus you may release a car that bit too early, it has a wheel loose, and the driver retires later that lap, but it's still an unsafe release due to the fact the wheel could fall off in the pits, yet the driver has already been penalised by having to retire

Edited by HuddersfieldTerrier1986, 04 July 2012 - 13:29.

[Clatter]

Cases that have been explained are actually consistent but still get different penalties. And quite frankly, I am happy that this happens in real life as well.

A simple case, What if you have 2 similar incidents, but one was just a human mistake, and the other was a willful decision to cause an incident. If it can be proven one incident was premeditated, the other not, there should be different penalties, even if the actual incident looked the same and results were the same.

But those incidents are not the same even though they might look similar. However if there is no transparency we would not know as we are not given access to the evidence.

[katmen]

[quote name='PayasYouRace' date='Jul 4 2012, 15:16' post='5802245']
What if the incident is on the last lap? Sometimes that can't be helped.

made rapid sentencing and flag use mentioned before



Meaning if you break the rules on the last lap you can get away with it? That's not very fair.

no you will not get away it should be rapid as red card issuing in football



Easier said than done. Do you think that's not what the FIA have been trying to do?

I dont see they try...

I agree.



Sounds like a lot of red tape and needless expense.

Why expense? good lawyer make it pro bono,


No. Not all drivers/engineers have English as their first language and may prefer their own language, especially in a high stress environment.

Excuse me but i am non native english speaker, but if i want to get a job i have to be good in english also in stress situations

I agree, but I think that's what we have for the most part.



Seems fair.



A bit harsh don't you think? Why not a drive-though/stop-and-go

not harsh, this is avoidable completely and has the biggest potential for catastrophic ending in this time formulae

[katmen]

HuddersfieldTerrier1986 Posted Today, 15:27

QUOTE (katmen @ Jul 4 2012, 14:09)
1.no more after the race please! Some have to be after the race. Plus what about technical penalties?
mentioned above, technical penalties should be imposed after scrutineering

2.everything should be concluded, decided, punished before checkered flag! How could it be if it's in the last few laps?
above post
4.made public why was penalty imposed! every sentencing has why? section, it leads to consistency Agreed, tell us why you came to that decision, eg what did the telemetry/team radio tell you about the incident
5.please hire good lawyers to write the rules, make them public and discussed in public before finalizing! Lawyers? Really? Sorry, but lawyers to write the rules for penalties in motorsport because of collisions is just never going to happen in my opinion
the basic construction of rules should be made by lawyer added by responses from drivers, public etc.

6.made English compulsory language in all communication on races, mo more italian radios....They're entitled to use whatever language they like. No different to a team saying something on the radio and the driver knowing it's merely a code to try and fool others
made it punishable
7.same rulebook for all fomulae, track racing In terms of penalties I guess you mean, and yep, probably makes sense
yes young drivers should be schooled early
9. unsafe release means automatic dsq, fines are useless Way too harsh DQ'ing someone for something which may not even lead to any contact and isn't overly dangerous, when for causing a large collision you may only get a grid penalty at the next race. Plus you may release a car that bit too early, it has a wheel loose, and the driver retires later that lap, but it's still an unsafe release due to the fact the wheel could fall off in the pits, yet the driver has already been penalised by having to retire
see my above post

[PayasYouRace]

made rapid sentencing and flag use mentioned before



no you will not get away it should be rapid as red card issuing in football

How could that possibly work? In football those things work because play is stopped to issue penalties. In F1 you can't stop the race for every minor incident. If it's on the last lap there simply isn't time to investigate the incident and apply a penalty.

I dont see they try...

What do you see? Are they just sitting round doing nothing or do you think they're intentionally making things difficult for themselves.

Why expense? good lawyer make it pro bono,

Yeah. Let's leave the lawyers out of this. The FIA aren't in the business of law, but of sporting rules and regulations.

Excuse me but i am non native english speaker, but if i want to get a job i have to be good in english also in stress situations

That has little to do with letting people within the same team use whatever language they please. It would add nothing. How would you regulate that anyway? Drive though/DQ for not speaking English? Don't be silly.

not harsh, this is avoidable completely and has the biggest potential for catastrophic ending in this time formulae

It's extremely harsh. Releasing a car into the pits can often be a matter of split-second judgement. DQ a car for that kind of mistake is unfair in the extreme. Just a drive-though or stop-and-go or even giving the place back seems much fairer.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

6.made English compulsory language in all communication on races, mo more italian radios....They're entitled to use whatever language they like. No different to a team saying something on the radio and the driver knowing it's merely a code to try and fool others
made it punishable

That's 1 of the most ridiculous things I've read on here. Punish them for not speaking English or for using a codeword for example to fool others? Sorry, but that's absolute lunacy in my opinion, even if the punishment is just a fine.

[KnucklesAgain]

7.same rulebook for all fomulae, track racing

Does not seem to make sense to me as car types are fundamentally different and allow for different driving, which [edit] in turn [/edit] should be allowed to reflect the car type. E.g. a bit of sideways contact is no big deal in closed-wheel racing, but needs to be closely watched in open-wheel series.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 04 July 2012 - 16:52.

[joshb]

What happened to last year's "3 reprimands and you get a penalty" system?

[KnucklesAgain]

What happened to last year's "3 reprimands and you get a penalty" system?

Nobody knows

[PNSD]

Another issue with penalties is that for the most part they need to be dished out before the race is over, to prevent any issue of results that are changed, significantly altering things and the show that the veiwer, spectator saw.

Therefore, sometimes decisions are made without the full knowledge of the incident, or even some decisions can be rushed. Theres even been times when the stewards have had no time to hand a penalty before the race finished, and/or had to make quick decisions on others.

[ayali]

What happened to last year's "3 reprimands and you get a penalty" system?

Nobody knows

That's because nobody reads the regulations, it's all there and for all to see.

18.2 Any driver who receives three reprimands in the same Championship season will, upon the
imposition of the third, be given a ten grid place penalty at that Event. If the third reprimand is
imposed following an Incident during a race the ten grid place penalty will be applied at the
driver’s next Event.
The ten grid place penalty will only be imposed if at least two of the reprimands were imposed
for a driving infringement.

F1 must be the sport with the least informed fans regulation-wise
We even get silly threads like "why wasn't Alonso penalized when he parked his car because Lewis was too?"
when the answer is easy to find for anyone who can navigate to the FiA website

So perhaps nobody received 3 reprimands (with at least 2 of them driving infringements) yet?

[KnucklesAgain]

That's because nobody reads the regulations, it's all there and for all to see.



F1 must be the sport with the least informed fans regulation-wise
We even get silly threads like "why wasn't Alonso penalized when he parked his car because Lewis was too?"
when the answer is easy to find for anyone who can navigate to the FiA website

So perhaps nobody received 3 reprimands (with at least 2 of them driving infringements) yet?

I know that's in the regulations, what I meant is that it seems to be dead law. It's like the footie regulations stating that the second yellow card in a match means a red card, and then never actually showing a yellow card.

Edit: grammar

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 04 July 2012 - 19:13.

[ayali]

I know that's in the regulations, what I meant is that it seems to be dead law. It's like the footie regulations stating that the second yellow card in a match means a red card, and then never actually showing a yellow card.

Edit: grammar

But it isn't dead law because reprimands have been given. Only thing is nobody has received 3

here's an overview of the penalties in 2012
also the stewards docs can be found after the race in the FiA media centre

[pinkypants]

I think I like the Autosport article more than what he actually says... a little bit of sensationalism to spice a non story up.

Edited by pinkypants, 04 July 2012 - 19:21.

[ayali]

I think I like the Autosport article more than what he actually says... a little bit of sensationalism to spice a non story up.

Exactly

Warwick said the stewards made a few suggestions, Charlie will lead those to the appropriate FiA people
and then they may or may not do something with it

Nowhere an overhaul was mentioned that is just Autosport hyping the story
You'd think that with the British GP imminent they would have had enough proper stories to run

[midgrid]

Not just black flags. What ever happened to the black and white diagonal flag? Has the FIA forgotten about it? It's only purpose is to warn drivers of unsportsmanlike behaviour. I can't think of a single time it's ever been used in F1.

Wasn't Hamilton shown this flag for weaving in Malaysia two years ago?

[PayasYouRace]

Wasn't Hamilton shown this flag for weaving in Malaysia two years ago?

Was he? I can't remember.

[Doughnut King]

Weren't the penalties far harsher in 1994?

I seem to remember Irvine being banned for several races.

[midgrid]

Was he? I can't remember.

I've just checked, and yes he was. It's the only time in recent history that I can remember it being shown.

[oetzi]

I've just checked, and yes he was. It's the only time in recent history that I can remember it being shown.

Is that a good or a bad thing?

[KnucklesAgain]

But it isn't dead law because reprimands have been given. Only thing is nobody has received 3

here's an overview of the penalties in 2012
also the stewards docs can be found after the race in the FiA media centre

If reprimands are given so infrequently (because they usually use the drive-throughs instead) that nobody ever receives three, then I consider the regulation that receiving 3 reprimands has consequences to be in practice dead law.