61 replies to this topic

[Raelene]

Im sick of these "incidents will be investigatrd after the race". It seems to be getting worse and worse. Make the call during the race where if a driver gets a penalty he has some chance to make places back. Yes they will get it wrong sometimes but id rather that than grid penalties nezt race

[FastnLoud]

Agree, they must not have time

[Raelene]

I wanted to post this after last race..today again they qait til aftwe the race.

[MaccaMerc]

I believe part of the problems is that they cannot access the car Telemetry data until after the race, with the problems they are having with the telemetry systems.

Edit: Edited it so it actually makes sense.

Edited by MaccaMerc, 21 April 2013 - 14:49.

[mangeliiito]

Yeah, some races I can understand, when the drivers crash into each other every other lap. But today it wasn't any big accidents. If they "didn't have time" today they seriously should consider hiring some more stewards who ca watch the race while the others make an decision.

[smitten]

I believe part of the problems is that they cannot access the car Telemetry until after the race, with the problems with the systems that they are having.

I though it was so both drivers could put their accounts of the incident forward.

[Raelene]

Maccamerc...ahyes you cld be right..hopefully that is the reason and it will get sorted

[Raelene]

Smitten...never been a problem in the past..even before they had driver stewards ive been watching iver 30 years and it has never been as bad as now

[Seanspeed]

"This race is entertaining, we'll do it later."

[Fastcake]

Im sick of these "incidents will be investigatrd after the race". It seems to be getting worse and worse. Make the call during the race where if a driver gets a penalty he has some chance to make places back. Yes they will get it wrong sometimes but id rather that than grid penalties nezt race

I'll rather they make the right decision post-race, than be forced to come to a possibly rushed and incomplete conclusion. A driver knows if they are under investigation so has the opportunity to do something about it, just like a driver that gets a drive-through. The only time the stewards hand out grid penalties for the next race is when the driver in question retires so can't be given a time penalty. Last weeks penalties for Webber and Gutierrez wouldn't of been any different as they had both retired anyway.

[smitten]

Smitten...never been a problem in the past..even before they had driver stewards ive been watching iver 30 years and it has never been as bad as now

Only becasue the internet dissects every minute detail of an incident. In days of yore, you'd see it on the telly, maybe with one replay, and decide who was to blame and then dismiss the whole thing as racing. The air also smelt fresher, and the grass was greener, and the days were longer.....

[Nonesuch]

I agree. Either it's bad enough to penalize on the spot, or it should be left to the drivers to sort out on track.

[chrcol]

either its due to the ECU problems or they incompetant.

[F.M.]

Almost all incidents are investigated after the race, no matter at what point during the race it happens.

Is this simply down to the teams lobbying for this because a 3-5 place grid drop is nowadays much less an issue than getting a drive-through during a race, or what?
I think the stewards should be more than qualified to judge an incident (bar a few) instead of having to hear the drivers first.

[study]

Heard nothing about Webber.

I think its a easy option to investigate after the race.

[TomNokoe]

Webber got a reprimand

[taran]

It is a culmination of things IMO. In the past, there was only a limited data available and thus stewards would have to make a judgment call based on their experience. And occasionally they got it wrong but once a penalty has been served, the victim's race has been ruined.

With multiple tv angles, telemetry and whatnot available, it is easier to take the time to study the data, perhaps hear the driver's views and then make a ruling. The side effect is indeed that the penalty might not be very harsh but surely that is better than ruining someone's race by mistake?

[Sakae]

Webber got a reprimand

Is the rule of three (or whatever the number was) of reprimands per certain period before they hit you still (or already?) in effect?

Edited by Sakae, 21 April 2013 - 18:12.

[Spamilton]

Mark always gets away with it. XD

[TomNokoe]

Is the rule of three (or whatever the number was) of reprimands per certain period before they hit you still (or already?) in effect?

should be. is that his 1st?

[study]

I think its still in effect.

Did they get a reprimand for the yellow flag last week?

[Victor_RO]

Is the rule of three (or whatever the number was) of reprimands per certain period before they hit you still (or already?) in effect?

Yes it is, three reprimands = grid penalty.

[Sakae]

Thank you; just an another items on race engineer's checklist.

[artista]

I think its still in effect.

Did they get a reprimand for the yellow flag last week?

No, they didn't get reprimanded. Official decision was 'no further action'.

[Bleu]

I believe Sutil is the only other driver with a reprimand so far this season.

[Sakae]

I'll rather they make the right decision post-race, than be forced to come to a possibly rushed and incomplete conclusion. A driver knows if they are under investigation so has the opportunity to do something about it, just like a driver that gets a drive-through. The only time the stewards hand out grid penalties for the next race is when the driver in question retires so can't be given a time penalty. Last weeks penalties for Webber and Gutierrez wouldn't of been any different as they had both retired anyway.

As much as I would like quick decisions myself, I do tolerate delays. I could imagine that Stewards are busy with the race, and have not much time for knee-jerk penalties besides something very obvious and undisputed, even as therein lies occasionally danger of misjudgment. Moreover, it is better to check for precedencies, driver's record, etc. If a delay induces consistency and accuracy, then that perhaps should not be a problem.

[MightyMoose]

We had 2 topics basically saying the same thing... 1 titled Stewards has been merged with this one, please continue.

Thanks
MM

[Lord Snooty]

Only becasue the internet dissects every minute detail of an incident. In days of yore, you'd see it on the telly, maybe with one replay, and decide who was to blame and then dismiss the whole thing as racing. The air also smelt fresher, and the grass was greener, and the days were longer.....

Agree with this completely. Its the law of unintended consequences as applied to technological improvements in broadcast media....



P.s.

Also, in those splendid days of yore, music was better, beer was stronger, girls were prettier and I was a devastatingly handsome young stud; how different to today!!

[yoyogetfunky]

Agree with this completely. Its the law of unintended consequences as applied to technological improvements in broadcast media....



P.s.

Also, in those splendid days of yore, music was better, beer was stronger, girls were prettier and I was a devastatingly handsome young stud; how different to today!!

Youre probably still a handsome stud for the ones that like your kind

[plumtree]

They have real-time telemetry from cars. I'm not sure if it's not working due to the ongoing ECU issue though.

http://www.formula1....2/12/14169.html
"Finally, as of this(2012) summer, we can now obtain real-time telemetry from the cars. That’s really useful as we can overlay telemetry information from an incident with data from previous laps, so we can tell if a driver has done something like failing to back off under yellow flags."

[BRG]

Perhaps those criticising the stewards would tell us how they would review telemetry and view several camera angles of an incident and reach a conclusion, all whilst continuing to watch the race for any further incidents? Perhaps the stewards should be women, who can famously multi-task? An F1 opening for Susie, Danica et al?

[Buttoneer]

If the stewards review an incident in haste, and dish out a drive-through or black flag this cannot be appealed. Punishment is meted out and affects the rest of the race for everyone out there. If there's any suggestion that this might just be a racing incident then it's best to leave it until afterwards.

If there's a very clear case for attributing blame, then they should definitely do so.

However, neither of these situations is well served by 'investigating after the race' so I have taken this to mean that it has been looked at briefly but is in the too difficult/too contentious column rather than 'no really, we're not even going to review the video until afterwards'.

[PayasYouRace]

I'd rather see the correct decision than a rushed decision. If an incident isn't clear cut then I'd rather any penalty be given after all the data has been seen. It's better than dodgy penalties. Was it Bourdais and Massa at Fuji that springs to mind?

[noikeee]

Perhaps those criticising the stewards would tell us how they would review telemetry and view several camera angles of an incident and reach a conclusion, all whilst continuing to watch the race for any further incidents?

Thank you, this is what I was coming in to say.

[sergeym]

One problem is penalty during the race, like DT is irreversible. No matter what, driver's race is ruined and the best he can hope for is an apology from stewards.

Edited by sergeym, 22 April 2013 - 13:46.

[smitten]

If there's a very clear case for attributing blame, then they should definitely do so.

And if there isn't a very clear case, why should we (as an audience) be expecting retrospective penalties for something which used to be a racing incident?

[Buttoneer]

I'm not sure what the thrust of your question is. If it's not clear cut, I believe it is reasonable that the stewards take time to gather all the information, including statements from the drivers, which means that the decision has to wait. If it is a racing incident, there will be no further action.

We (as an audience) don't see a drivers race ruined over a hasty decision.

[smitten]

I'm not sure what the thrust of your question is.

I meant that if it is not clear cut should we still be looking for somebody to blame after the race? If it is not clear cut then nobody is clearly to blame and clearly no punishment is necessary.
Few sports have the rules to change the result retrospectively.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

Doesn't help that 20 second penalties are sometimes given instead of a drive through, when at some tracks the drive through is less than 20 seconds time spent in the pitlane (Bahrain yesterday would've been a good example actually), so getting a post race 20 second penalty can actually be more of a punishment that it should've been.

[Fastcake]

I meant that if it is not clear cut should we still be looking for somebody to blame after the race? If it is not clear cut then nobody is clearly to blame and clearly no punishment is necessary.
Few sports have the rules to change the result retrospectively.

That's some flawed logic there. Just because it isn't clear from watching replays, it doesn't mean no one is at fault and no punishment should be required. And every sport has rules that can change the result retrospectively.

Doesn't help that 20 second penalties are sometimes given instead of a drive through, when at some tracks the drive through is less than 20 seconds time spent in the pitlane (Bahrain yesterday would've been a good example actually), so getting a post race 20 second penalty can actually be more of a punishment that it should've been.

True, it's something that might need looking at. At the new Silverstone they have been giving out stop/go penalties to compensate for a drive-through actually costing very little time, so there is precedent to tailor the time penalties for individual circuits.

[smitten]

That's some flawed logic there. Just because it isn't clear from watching replays, it doesn't mean no one is at fault and no punishment should be required. And every sport has rules that can change the result retrospectively.

That's some flawed comprehension right there. Somebody being at fault and somebody clearly being at fault are two different things.

[Fastcake]

That's some flawed comprehension right there. Somebody being at fault and somebody clearly being at fault are two different things.

So what's your point? If it's clear, a punishment can be given during the race. If it's not, a punishment can be given afterwards.

[smitten]

So what's your point?

My point is that if it is not clear enough to be given during the race, then no penalty is deserved.

[Buttoneer]

I meant that if it is not clear cut should we still be looking for somebody to blame after the race? If it is not clear cut then nobody is clearly to blame and clearly no punishment is necessary.
Few sports have the rules to change the result retrospectively.

I suppose that we could just look at the number of steward-worthy incidents in any given year and consider that the occasional wrongful punishment is worthwhile collateral damage to escape from this deferred punishment regime we seem to have in 2013.

What about those who did something punishable but who then retired themselves either as a result of the incident or because of a technical issue? Are we OK that they 'get away with it'?

[smitten]

I suppose that we could just look at the number of steward-worthy incidents in any given year and consider that the occasional wrongful punishment is worthwhile collateral damage to escape from this deferred punishment regime we seem to have in 2013.

My argument is if it is not clear (in the minds of the stewards) then no punishment should be given and therefore there will be no collateral damage. I would like to see the stats, but it seems we have a lot more penalities than we had pre-2005ish.

What about those who did something punishable but who then retired themselves either as a result of the incident or because of a technical issue? Are we OK that they 'get away with it'?

I think as fans we have adopted the concept that punishments have to be made. We wouldn't countenance a football match starting with a penalty for an unpunished foul from a previous game, would we?

[Buttoneer]

My argument is if it is not clear (in the minds of the stewards) then no punishment should be given and therefore there will be no collateral damage. I would like to see the stats, but it seems we have a lot more penalities than we had pre-2005ish.

You're essentially questioning how far the stewards need to look into an incident before deciding that it is or is not punishable. Discounting the idea that telemetry, engineering inspection or interview might reveal something which ought to be taken into account when handing out punishment. I am saying this policy would definitely result in miscarriage of justice occasionally and that this would be collateral damage and asking if we're OK with that.

The problem with F1 is that not everything is clear.

[ForeverF1]

My argument is if it is not clear (in the minds of the stewards) then no punishment should be given and therefore there will be no collateral damage. I would like to see the stats, but it seems we have a lot more penalities than we had pre-2005ish.



I think as fans we have adopted the concept that punishments have to be made. We wouldn't countenance a football match starting with a penalty for an unpunished foul from a previous game, would we?

Red and Yellow cards bring anything to mind?

[smitten]

You're essentially questioning how far the stewards need to look into an incident before deciding that it is or is not punishable. Discounting the idea that telemetry, engineering inspection or interview might reveal something which ought to be taken into account when handing out punishment. I am saying this policy would definitely result in miscarriage of justice occasionally and that this would be collateral damage and asking if we're OK with that.

The problem with F1 is that not everything is clear.

And in most cases neither driver is entirely to blame (honourable exceptions of course). My point is that telemetry inclines us to punish a driver who is 50.00000001% to blame because "somebody has to pay" instead of saying "on balance they were both as bad as each other".

Red and Yellow cards bring anything to mind?

The team isn't limited to 10 players for the next match though... Or docked a goal.

[Fastcake]

My point is that if it is not clear enough to be given during the race, then no penalty is deserved.

Why is no penalty deserved? As Buttoneer said, telemetry and interviewing drivers can reveal things a simple television replay cannot.

And in most cases neither driver is entirely to blame (honourable exceptions of course). My point is that telemetry inclines us to punish a driver who is 50.00000001% to blame because "somebody has to pay" instead of saying "on balance they were both as bad as each other".

Can you prove that?

[Buttoneer]

And in most cases neither driver is entirely to blame (honourable exceptions of course). My point is that telemetry inclines us to punish a driver who is 50.00000001% to blame because "somebody has to pay" instead of saying "on balance they were both as bad as each other".

I think we see enough of the bold to know that the underlined isn't happening all the time. It does here, of course, because there is always someone calling for a drive-through, ban or death penalty on every incident, but we cannot know the stewards feel pressure to punish just because a matter has been reported to them for consideration.

Of course there is no perfect system, but for my money even if a deferred decision creates punishment where a snap decision would not I would rather that any decision were made with as much information as possible to hand.