Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Consistency from the stewards?


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#1 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 09 September 2012 - 13:46

This keeps happening, and it seems like they sometimes only care about incidents involving "important" people.

Incident 1: Di Resta leaves absolutely no space for Senna on the outside, pushes him onto grass and he misses the corner completely.
Result: No investigation, no penalty, no need for Di Resta to let Senna pass.

Incident 2: Vettel leaves more space on the outside than Di Resta, but forces Alonso out in the gravel. The incident is shown about 10 times on TV.
Result: Investigation, penalized with a drive-through.

You either punish both or none. Not one.

Edited by Alx09, 10 September 2012 - 11:46.


Advertisement

#2 PapaD

PapaD
  • Member

  • 39 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 09 September 2012 - 13:50

And so begins the whining again...........

Di Resta didn't get punished because, being perfectly frank, no one cares about Senna and his race is inconsequential compared to the battle at the front.

If you've watched Formula 1 for more than five minutes you will realise this has always happened and always will.

#3 Topsu

Topsu
  • Member

  • 758 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 09 September 2012 - 13:51

Money talks.

#4 Deluxx

Deluxx
  • Member

  • 2,142 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 09 September 2012 - 14:20

And so begins the whining again...........

Di Resta didn't get punished because, being perfectly frank, no one cares about Senna and his race is inconsequential compared to the battle at the front.

If you've watched Formula 1 for more than five minutes you will realise this has always happened and always will.


Unfortunately, this ^

#5 joshb

joshb
  • Member

  • 3,247 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:26

This keeps happening, and it seems like they sometimes only care about incidents involving "important" people.

Incident 1: Di Resta leaves absolutely no space for Senna on the outside, pushes him onto grass and he misses the corner completely.
Result: No investigation, no penalty, no need for Di Resta to let Senna pass.

Incident 2: Vettel leaves more space on the outside than Di Resta, but pushes Alonso out in the gravel. The incident is shown about 10 times on TV.
Result: Is punished with a drive through after pressure from Ferrari.

You either punish both or none. Not one.


Spot on, i was going to say the same, but have only just had a chance to come on here.
Senna/di Resta are fighting over midfield positions, so lets ignore them but Vettel running Alonso out wide, hell, you can't do that to a Ferrari, in Italy. Let's hang him. Poor show

#6 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:00

Notwithstanding that it is massively annnoying, I actually find interesting superficiality of some arguments from the same group of people when they were defending Button's move couple of races ago, and now, in inverse setting, Alonso's. They will pull out micrometer to "prove" from measuring TV screen that cases aren't the same, or even similar. Excuses and blame game lives on, as it is with any other kind of sport, but whether this is good for racing spirit is another matter, and to tell us all "be carefull out there" while racing 300 klicks on the clock is even more entertaining. I used to think that I had enough when this was going on with Schumacher, and my interest declined for a while in several instances, being sick of politics and nacionalism. Now the same feeling is occassionally returning.

Edited by Sakae, 10 September 2012 - 10:19.


#7 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 2,657 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:12

As a Williams fan, I don't think di Resta should be penalised. It was rather an over-optimistic move from Senna. Di Resta didn't force him to run out of the track. He closed the outside line when Senna's front wing was still behind his rear wheels. What is not allowed is fo force other car to run out of the track when a part of that car is next to your car. From what I've seen from Bruno onboard, it was not the case there.

#8 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,771 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:14

Consistency? There's no such beast in F1.
It's not suitable to Bernie and all those who stage the show. No wonder that F1 unlike professional football for example, uses amateur referees. Sometimes totally inadequate people.

#9 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,447 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:29

Consistency? There's plenty of consistency by the stewards. They consistently see the difference between a championship contender cynically barging the championship leader off the road in a 150mph corner and two young drivers getting a little clumsy whilst fighting for a corner. Pity some on this forum can't develop the same consistency.

#10 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,318 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:33

As a Williams fan, I don't think di Resta should be penalised. It was rather an over-optimistic move from Senna. Di Resta didn't force him to run out of the track. He closed the outside line when Senna's front wing was still behind his rear wheels. What is not allowed is fo force other car to run out of the track when a part of that car is next to your car. From what I've seen from Bruno onboard, it was not the case there.

I agree with you here, Senna was behind and got caught out under braking when he could have foreseen di Resta was going to come back to the racing line.

#11 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,771 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:38

I agree with you here, Senna was behind and got caught out under braking when he could have foreseen di Resta was going to come back to the racing line.

The more then this applies to Alonso with his incomparably greater experience to foresee the trajectory of Vettel's car.

Consistency? There's plenty of consistency by the stewards. They consistently see the difference between a championship contender cynically barging the championship leader off the road in a 150mph corner and two young drivers getting a little clumsy whilst fighting for a corner. Pity some on this forum can't develop the same consistency.

Well, your post is just a good confirmation of what I said. What are different standards to different drivers if not absolute inconsistency?

Edited by sharo, 10 September 2012 - 10:40.


#12 Piif

Piif
  • Member

  • 576 posts
  • Joined: September 02

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:42

It was Ferraris home race, of course the judges are biased.

At Monza, of the three judges one was italian and one from Spain. 'Nuff said.

#13 1Devil1

1Devil1
  • Member

  • 2,575 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:53

Consistency? There's no such beast in F1.
It's not suitable to Bernie and all those who stage the show. No wonder that F1 unlike professional football for example, uses amateur referees. Sometimes totally inadequate people.


I liked that point! In no other sports stewards are biased as in formula one. Damon Hill to judge an incident with Michael Schumacher? A spanish and italian steward at the italian grand prix to judge a situation between Vettel and a Ferrari driver? There will always be a shadow of a doubt if you still have those constellation.

In football referees of the top nation often have to go home early in the ending stages.



#14 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,250 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 10 September 2012 - 10:58

Can someone remind me whether the incident between DiResta and Senna was ever under review by the stewards. I don't recall seeing any on-screen message as I did with the Vettel/Alonso incident.

#15 SteSteSte

SteSteSte
  • Member

  • 67 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:05

Can someone remind me whether the incident between DiResta and Senna was ever under review by the stewards. I don't recall seeing any on-screen message as I did with the Vettel/Alonso incident.



AFAIK it wasnt investigated, I didnt see anything to suggest it was either

#16 imightbewrong

imightbewrong
  • Member

  • 264 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:06

Quoting Axis of Oversteer:

"After Bahrein, when Nico Rosberg forced Hamilton to complete a pass beyond the circuit boundaries and lated Alonso to have to lift to avoid going off track, the FIA issued very clear guidelines"

"The leading driver can choose his line up until the driver behind brings any part of his car beside the leading car's rear wheels: at that moment the driver ahead is obliged to leave one car width of space. Vettel's penalty was correct as Alonso front wing was well beyond the Red Bull's rear tires."

"There is no doubt, Connelly and I had prepared a powerpoint presentation after Bahrain that showed drivers all possible scenarios and consequences. Drivers know how they should behave."

There was a question about the incident between Senna and Di Resta which did not result in a penalty to which Pirro replies:

"There was no double standard, TV pictures showed how Senna was already on the grass when he started the overtaking maneuver. As the Brazilian was beyond the white line it was he who was taking the extra risk and Di Resta was under no obligation to leave him room as he had the right to his line into the corner."



#17 Suntrek

Suntrek
  • Member

  • 1,781 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:09

Can someone remind me whether the incident between DiResta and Senna was ever under review by the stewards. I don't recall seeing any on-screen message as I did with the Vettel/Alonso incident.


No it wasn't. All stewards' investigations, whether they lead to a penalty or not are to be found here.

http://www.fia.com/e...nformation.aspx

#18 Suntrek

Suntrek
  • Member

  • 1,781 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:11

It was Ferraris home race, of course the judges are biased.

At Monza, of the three judges one was italian and one from Spain. 'Nuff said.


So, even Charlie Whiting is biased? Remember he is the one who refers any incidents to the stewards. In the case of Senna/di Resta he didn't. 'Nuff said.

Edited by Suntrek, 10 September 2012 - 11:12.


#19 slu

slu
  • New Member

  • 18 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:24

On the Senna/diresta incident: Fia clarified the rule on defending moves earlier this year - if after you have defended and move back to the racing line - you have to leave one car width of track.
DiResta did not do that - and should thus have been penalized ; where Senna is placed is not relevant.

Edited by slu, 10 September 2012 - 11:24.


Advertisement

#20 sailor

sailor
  • Member

  • 585 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 11:39

Notwithstanding that it is massively annnoying, I actually find interesting superficiality of some arguments from the same group of people when they were defending Button's move couple of races ago, and now, in inverse setting, Alonso's. They will pull out micrometer to "prove" from measuring TV screen that cases aren't the same, or even similar. Excuses and blame game lives on, as it is with any other kind of sport, but whether this is good for racing spirit is another matter, and to tell us all "be carefull out there" while racing 300 klicks on the clock is even more entertaining. I used to think that I had enough when this was going on with Schumacher, and my interest declined for a while in several instances, being sick of politics and nacionalism. Now the same feeling is occassionally returning.


This.

Especially the part with Button running Vettel off track and Vettel being penalised for that too.

To the usual suspects : Dont bother replying with different corner different standards because all corners are different and not every move is exactly similar .

But there is no clear definition of what constitutes a move and what is a corner and where are you supposed to leave room.

This of course is in addition to an exact similar move by Alonso at the same place in 2011 but since everyone is haggling over how there was a bit more room
So we let it slip.

Stewarding is what will decide this year's title and ultimately the sport will suffer

#21 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,676 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 12:06

I think Di-Resta should have taken a penalty but that doesn't lessen the fact that Vettel got what he deserved yesterday (I know some seem desperate to whip up FIA pro-Ferrari hysteria)

#22 Alexandros

Alexandros
  • Member

  • 948 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 12:48

Can anyone check whether Vettel left room for Kimi, in the exit of corner 1, just after the start? I think Vettel was on the left and then moved all the way to the right, squeezing Kimi on the kerb - and then I didn't see how it evolved.



#23 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 572 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:16

And so begins the whining again...........

Di Resta didn't get punished because, being perfectly frank, no one cares about Senna and his race is inconsequential compared to the battle at the front.

If you've watched Formula 1 for more than five minutes you will realise this has always happened and always will.


I agree, but that doesn't make it right just because it has "always happened". In the past drivers dying "always happened", and thankfully that has changed.

#24 Gilles12

Gilles12
  • Member

  • 853 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:26

It's not the attempt to secure peace with England by marrying King Henry VII's daughter, or the accession of James as King of Scotland, that make me mad.

It's more all the "French and Roman Catholic connections" which I find infuriating!!!

When is it going to end?

#25 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 796 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:34

Simple solution.

Permanent stewards that travel to each and every race would nullify a lot of issues that we have.

Get rid of the "special guest star" stewards, that lead to inconsistencies.



#26 encircled

encircled
  • Member

  • 772 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:37

What do you guys think of Alonso's move on di Resta during the 1st lap?

Posted Image

#27 DaddyCool

DaddyCool
  • Member

  • 351 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:42

This whole thing started back around ~2007 when stewards/FIA decided that every collision needs to be penalized. Since that penalty spree things are getting worse and worse.

I long for the good old days when apart from the occasional wing loss, drivers raced fair and square and the term "racing incident" existed.

/endrant

#28 kraduk

kraduk
  • Member

  • 243 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:46

What do you guys think of Alonso's move on di Resta during the 1st lap?

Posted Image


normal rules dont apply at the start, however im not sure where the start is deemed to end

#29 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,318 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:52

After turn 1.

#30 Mila

Mila
  • Member

  • 5,691 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:56

well-spotted, encircled. coming out of the chicane, FA was all the way over, driver's right.

#31 kraduk

kraduk
  • Member

  • 243 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 10 September 2012 - 13:58

After turn 1.


how does that work with a chicane though, and a double one like at monza?

#32 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 634 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 10 September 2012 - 14:05

This whole thing started back around ~2007 when stewards/FIA decided that every collision needs to be penalized. Since that penalty spree things are getting worse and worse.

I long for the good old days when apart from the occasional wing loss, drivers raced fair and square and the term "racing incident" existed.

/endrant

I totally agree with you. But it started earlier, didn't it? Remember Montoya's penalty at Sepang in 2002:

#33 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 14:07

Is none existent.

#34 Frank Tuesday

Frank Tuesday
  • Member

  • 883 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 10 September 2012 - 14:14

I think there are a couple of things that must be part of fair stewarding.

1) You're punishing the incident, not what effect the incident has on the race.
2) It cannot matter who the drivers are.

I don't know how the stewarding system works now, but I imagine that the stewards know the effect on the race, and who the drivers are. I think the stewards should not be allowed to watch the race. They are in a room with no access to F1 media/data. When they are referred an incident, they only see the incident, and all details of the car and driver are whited out. All the stewards would see is the white outline of the two cars, and they would have to make their decision based upon that. The two cars could be Hamilton v. Massa, Kovalainen v. Pic, or Alonso v. Karthikeyan.

This is a quickly thrown together example of what the stewards would see.
Posted Image

In the above example, they would only see from just before the attempted pass of Car 2 (right) by Car 1 (left) The only thing that matters is whether Car 1 forced Car 2 off the track in violation of the regulation. Nothing else is required. They don't get to know if Car 2 passed Car 1 immediately, or soon after. They don't get to know if Car 2 crashed out as a result. They don't get to know if Car 1 retired due to an unrelated technical problem. The same with last week in Belgium. They would only get to see up until the point that Hamilton went off track. They would not get to see the resultant crash that took out other drivers.

Edited by Frank Tuesday, 10 September 2012 - 14:16.


#35 encircled

encircled
  • Member

  • 772 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 10 September 2012 - 14:37

After turn 1.

Is this a written rule? I could not find it in the FIA regulations.

#36 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 15:28

I think there are a couple of things that must be part of fair stewarding.

1) You're punishing the incident, not what effect the incident has on the race.
2) It cannot matter who the drivers are.

I don't know how the stewarding system works now, but I imagine that the stewards know the effect on the race, and who the drivers are. I think the stewards should not be allowed to watch the race. They are in a room with no access to F1 media/data. When they are referred an incident, they only see the incident, and all details of the car and driver are whited out. All the stewards would see is the white outline of the two cars, and they would have to make their decision based upon that. The two cars could be Hamilton v. Massa, Kovalainen v. Pic, or Alonso v. Karthikeyan.

This is a quickly thrown together example of what the stewards would see.
Posted Image

In the above example, they would only see from just before the attempted pass of Car 2 (right) by Car 1 (left) The only thing that matters is whether Car 1 forced Car 2 off the track in violation of the regulation. Nothing else is required. They don't get to know if Car 2 passed Car 1 immediately, or soon after. They don't get to know if Car 2 crashed out as a result. They don't get to know if Car 1 retired due to an unrelated technical problem. The same with last week in Belgium. They would only get to see up until the point that Hamilton went off track. They would not get to see the resultant crash that took out other drivers.

Very true point you make in above.

I would add, that I think a lot of unnecessary arguments go into "how much space" between cars was, or should have been. Better and higher priority question under revised rules by Whiting in my opinion is accurate determination about rights of a leading car (to a full track, or must leave a space), which is not being sufficiently examined in those discussions, and stewards of the race aren't helping by simply throwing a book on someone, without any justification how did they arrive to their conclusion. I am of course reffering to determination whether overtaking is in straight line, or in banking, and at what location both cars were at ground zero.

Edited by Sakae, 10 September 2012 - 15:30.


#37 Red17

Red17
  • Member

  • 3,307 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 10 September 2012 - 15:57

It's odd that the Diresta incident was not reviewed. The portuguese broadcast made it sounds like it was looked into but the argument was that «there was no part of the car ocupying the space».
That said I find such interpretation could lead to the clearance of some over optimistic dive bombs where the driver literally parks the park in a hairpin. An overtake implies that you get the whole car across, not just the tip toe.

#38 panzani

panzani
  • Member

  • 18,589 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 16:25

Actually I think the comparison should be made with the very same move on the very same place one year ago — it happens one year ago it was Alonso who gave no room to Vettel, though.

And that is, certainly, consistent, isn't it?  ;)

Edited by panzani, 10 September 2012 - 16:25.


#39 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 16:37

Actually I think the comparison should be made with the very same move on the very same place one year ago — it happens one year ago it was Alonso who gave no room to Vettel, though.

And that is, certainly, consistent, isn't it?;)

Consistent yes, but you need to check Whiting's rule book with clarifications every week at least twice, just to keep up with changes.

Edited by Sakae, 10 September 2012 - 16:47.


Advertisement

#40 Cenotaph

Cenotaph
  • Member

  • 2,316 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 10 September 2012 - 16:40

normal rules dont apply at the start, however im not sure where the start is deemed to end

Grosjean might have something to say about that.

#41 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 707 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 September 2012 - 18:02

Two solutions:

1. Free-for-all - no penalties at all
2. Non-human analysis and verdict - a computer system whose decision is final

Other than that you will never get acurate, unbiased and consistent decisions

#42 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 18:15

More perfect rules you want, more complex wording that is hard to comprehend and accurately applied comes of it. Occassionally I think if FiA would just tell them go there, drive like hell, and do not kill yourselves, that would be pretty much all what needs to be said.

#43 panzani

panzani
  • Member

  • 18,589 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 10 September 2012 - 18:26

Well, Sakae, I am still waiting for FIA's take on Dick Dastardly trying to get Vettel out of the race just before he pitted on Spa-Francorchamps, swerving like mad...  ;)

#44 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,639 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 10 September 2012 - 18:27

well if alonso got away with squeezing di resta, then growjohns race ban for doing pretty much the same thing, is just a tad inconsistant.



#45 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 23 April 2013 - 16:27

Wow, have you seen this?
Stewards told to be lenient in ‘secret’ F1 meeting

Here...

#46 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,762 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 23 April 2013 - 16:38

Wow, have you seen this?
Stewards told to be lenient in ‘secret’ F1 meeting

Here...


Thanks, that explains a few things I've observed so far this season. Kinda unfairly benefits the likes of Maldonado while punishing Kimi, Fernando, etc. AMuS is usually very reliable.

Edited by boldhakka, 23 April 2013 - 16:38.


#47 BoschKurve

BoschKurve
  • Member

  • 1,153 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 23 April 2013 - 16:43

Wow, have you seen this?
Stewards told to be lenient in ‘secret’ F1 meeting

Here...


If that is in fact true, I am ok with it.

The penalties have been out of control for a few years now, and are obviously inconsistent all the way around. Not everything needs to be reviewed or even penalized for that matter.

#48 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 23 April 2013 - 16:53

I am sort of OK with that as well, but it appears I have to re-learn all from ground zero what's allowable, and what's not. It raises also a question, how and why did we get to 2012 level in the first place? Was there also a "secret" meeting in previous winter, or was it Button's never-ending radio calls to his pit-wall that set the tone? I would like to tell FiA, that jerking fans like yo-yo string is not as much fun as they might think.

#49 V3TT3L

V3TT3L
  • Member

  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 23 April 2013 - 17:08

NASCAR Marshalling in F1 :rolleyes:

F1 is a scam :evil:

Vettel was punished in Italy and Abu Dhabi last year while charging for WDC.

However there were no punishments in Button/Perez and Perez/Alonso incidents.
Both Ferrari and McLaren have heavy investments comming from the Arabic Peninsula.
It's everybody against Vettel and RBR... including half of RBR.



#50 Xeriks

Xeriks
  • Member

  • 852 posts
  • Joined: February 13

Posted 23 April 2013 - 17:15

NASCAR Marshalling in F1 :rolleyes:

F1 is a scam :evil:

Vettel was punished in Italy and Abu Dhabi last year while charging for WDC.

However there were no punishments in Button/Perez and Perez/Alonso incidents.
Both Ferrari and McLaren have heavy investments comming from the Arabic Peninsula.
It's everybody against Vettel and RBR... including half of RBR.

No white text? this post is a joke right? please say it is.