Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

The fact that someone got hit by the tyre shouldn't affect the fine.


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:03

I can understand that some people are asking for a RBR race ban, but I was actually shocked by Ted Kravitz saying that he thinks RBR will get a "big fine" or "reduction of WCC" points.

To put todays incident into perspective:

Button 2013 Malaysia :

Van der Garde 2013 Spain :

Caterham have been fined €10,000 (£8,460) for sending Giedo van der Garde onto the track with a loose wheel.

The team warned Van der Garde his wheel was loose after the pit stop and told him to drive back to the pits. The wheel fell off shortly afterwards.

When Rosberg's wheel hit a Williams mechanic in 2010 the fine was 100.000$

The International Automobile Federation (FIA) recorded a serious funds increase in recent grands prix, as it has raised a minimum of $200,000 following the German and Hungarian races. If the $100,000 fine to Ferrari for their alleged team orders at Hockenheim is a well known fact, the other $100,000 were raised from Renault and Mercedes GP in Hungary.

The safety car on Lap 18 of the Sunday race triggered several pit lane incidents, as the majority of the racers stopped by the pits to complete their first and only tire change of the day. It was then that Nico Rosberg's car lost its rear right hand tire, which traveled on its own down the pit lane and hit a Williams-Cosworth mechanic before stalling.


So, why should the fine for RBR be any higher? Because the tyre actually hit someone ? Because it was "graphic" ? Because we saw the guy suffer?

Advertisement

#2 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:08

There should not be any people on the pit lane without fireproof overalls and a helmet. This stuff happens and no it just happened to hit someone. It should not affect the penalty.

#3 SamH123

SamH123
  • Member

  • 2,952 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:11

Agree.. Reminds of when they in part justified Grosjean's race ban by saying he took out 'championship contenders'

Surely it is not much to ask to punish the actual offence rather what went down afterwards.. but I suppose it is kind of in 'respect' to the guy who got hurt?

Edited by SamH123, 07 July 2013 - 15:12.


#4 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 21,814 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:15

I can see both sides.

I mean, if you get into a car accident and nobody dies, you're just charged with reckless driving or whatever.

But if you get into a car accident and somebody dies, you're charged with manslaughter.

Sometimes, the severity of the consequences of your actions should be taken into account. I cant quite figure whether this would be one of those times are not. How is that sort of thing decided?

#5 Fudce

Fudce
  • Member

  • 310 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:18

It shouldn't. I agree.

However, it will.



The FIA stewards have shown time and time again that the penalise the outcome of an incident, not the incident itself.

If it was up to me, I would put a harsh penalty on this, but I would also have penalised Webber hard in China for driving around in an unsafe car. Also penalise all unsafe releases heavily even if there was no colission. If it was within a certain zone, it's unsafe release.


We have rules, they should enforce the rules, not the outcome.

#6 KateLM

KateLM
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:18

Isn't the fact that they've already had a fine for a similar incident this season another reason for a harsher punishment? Not saying I'd want one, but it goes against them.

#7 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:19

I can see both sides.

I mean, if you get into a car accident and nobody dies, you're just charged with reckless driving or whatever.

But if you get into a car accident and somebody dies, you're charged with manslaughter.

Sometimes, the severity of the consequences of your actions should be taken into account. I cant quite figure whether this would be one of those times are not. How is that sort of thing decided?

You are mixing up alot of things. Guess the word you are looking for is: intention.

#8 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:21

The fine should be worse if the tyre comes away from the car at speed, but it shouldn't matter if it happens to hit anyone or not. So Button's unsafe released in Malaysia last year and Silverstone the year before should be punished less harshly because Button made no attempt to do a lap and get back to the pits (a la Van Der Garde) and stopped before the wheel could get away from him and hurt somebody.

In my view the punishments should be: a reprimand if you stop before the wheel comes away, a drive-through or grid-penalty and a hefty fine if the wheel comes off, and a black flag if you're still running or a race ban if you're not for trying to get back to pits with an unnattached wheel.

What is not good enough is to give a drive-through that is then negated by the daft and unfair safety car rules, as this undermines the deterrant effect of the penalty.

#9 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:25

I can see both sides.

I mean, if you get into a car accident and nobody dies, you're just charged with reckless driving or whatever.

But if you get into a car accident and somebody dies, you're charged with manslaughter.

Sometimes, the severity of the consequences of your actions should be taken into account. I cant quite figure whether this would be one of those times are not. How is that sort of thing decided?


Agreed, people seem split between those two approaches, both work in the long run but I personally think it is more consistent and fair in the short run to charge someone for his actions alone and not for the results of those actions. Should be noted this works both ways.

#10 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:30

Renault got $100000 fine and two suspended race bans after their tire came off in 2009 without hitting anyone.

Edited by fabr68, 07 July 2013 - 15:30.


#11 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:33

In real life punishment should fit the outcome, but not in racing.

#12 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:35

Renault got $100000 fine and two suspended race bans after their tire came off in 2009 without hitting anyone.

because ... :

1. that the competitor knowingly released car no. 7 from the pit stop position without one of the retaining devices for the wheel nuts being securely in position, this being an indication that the wheel nut itself may not have been properly secured,
2. being aware of this failed to take any action to prevent the car from leaving the pit lane,
3. failed to inform the driver of this problem or to advise him to take appropriate action given the circumstances, even though the driver contacted the team by radio believing he had a puncture,
4. this resulted in a heavy car part detaching at Turn 5 and the wheel itself detaching at Turn 9.

Offence: Breach of article 23.1.i and Article 3.2 of the 2009 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations.


Edited by Realyn, 07 July 2013 - 15:35.


#13 fabr68

fabr68
  • Member

  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:35

I can understand that some people are asking for a RBR race ban, but I was actually shocked by Ted Kravitz saying that he thinks RBR will get a "big fine" or "reduction of WCC" points.

To put todays incident into perspective:

Button 2013 Malaysia :

Van der Garde 2013 Spain :


When Rosberg's wheel hit a Williams mechanic in 2010 the fine was 100.000$



So, why should the fine for RBR be any higher? Because the tyre actually hit someone ? Because it was "graphic" ? Because we saw the guy suffer?


If you shoot a gun in the middle of a street and nobody is hit, you may be taken to jail and then released next day after paying a fine. But if that bullet hits someone you are in for a much longer time even if you did not mean to hit anyone.

#14 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:38

If you shoot a gun in the middle of a street and nobody is hit, you may be taken to jail and then released next day after paying a fine. But if that bullet hits someone you are in for a much longer time even if you did not mean to hit anyone.

Luckily this is not the case in the country I live in.

edit: Also, you missed the point of the OP.

Edited by Realyn, 07 July 2013 - 15:40.


#15 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:39

That's not quite the same fabr68. Your exampe would be closer to comparing an incident at during a race and during a private test.

#16 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 24,873 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:41

David Croft @CroftyF1
€30,000 Euro fine for Red Bull for Mark Webber unsafe release, news just out

#17 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:43

In real life punishment should fit the outcome, but not in racing.


What's your reasoning behind that? I want to know because I am really interested in such things, have been wondering myself. Maybe in "real life" as you call it we have to accept people in general are very simple minded, also values get formed at an very early age and a outcome based punishment is easier to understand by simple minded people and kids - explaining action based punishment might actually be confusing and do harm even if it is fairer in each separate case.

#18 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 13,534 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:44

You are mixing up alot of things. Guess the word you are looking for is: intention.


I don't agree, there is no intention in Sean's analogy nor in the events today.

#19 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 13,534 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:47

In real life punishment should fit the outcome, but not in racing.


Ok so if I try to murder you but balls it up my punishment should be zero as there's no harmful outcome? But if I accidentally drop a banana skin on the ground and you slip, hit your head and die I should get life imprisonement?

Advertisement

#20 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 8,479 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:49

David Croft @CroftyF1
€30,000 Euro fine for Red Bull for Mark Webber unsafe release, news just out

sounds appropriate punishment.


#21 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 13,534 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:51

No. for the first one you'd get attempted murder, which last time I checked doesn't get you zero in prison, and on the 2nd one, you'd get manslaughter, or maybe not even that, which doesn't automatically get you life either.


Thanks but I was asking Gorma's view according to his/her post, not looking for the actual answer! :)

#22 Realyn

Realyn
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:54

I don't agree, there is no intention in Sean's analogy nor in the events today.

Like robefc said there is quite the difference between "getting into a car accident" and "attempted murder"/"manslaughter". Some examples in here are completly out of context.

For germany: http://dejure.org/ge...e/StGB/227.html

Grievous bodily harm resulting in death gets you atleast 3 years in prison. In minor cases 1 to 10 years.

People are acting like everything is either murder or it isn't.

edit: My point being, if you get into a car accident and someone dies you aren't charged with manslaughter every single time. Manslaughter and murder must have some kind of intention. Again, speaking for Germany here.
While getting into a car crash with the result of someone dieing would be "Negligent homicide" in most cases.

Edited by Realyn, 07 July 2013 - 16:01.


#23 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:03

What's your reasoning behind that? I want to know because I am really interested in such things, have been wondering myself. Maybe in "real life" as you call it we have to accept people in general are very simple minded, also values get formed at an very early age and a outcome based punishment is easier to understand by simple minded people and kids - explaining action based punishment might actually be confusing and do harm even if it is fairer in each separate case.

My reasoning is that people make bad choices and stupid things all of the time. Intention should be a major factor in the punishment. That is why we have manslaughter and multiple degrees of murder. A death by neglicence and a death by premeditated murder should not have the same punishment even if the end result is the same. I also agree with you. People are simple minded. Punishing someone for attempted murder in the same way as committing a murder it is not the way to go. What's next? Punishing someone for thinking about attempting a murder?

#24 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 13,534 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:05

My reasoning is that people make bad choices and stupid things all of the time. Intention should be a major factor in the punishment. That is why we have manslaughter and multiple degrees of murder. A death by neglicence and a death by premeditated murder should not have the same punishment even if the end result is the same. I also agree with you. People are simple minded. Punishing someone for attempted murder in the same way as committing a murder it is not the way to go. What's next? Punishing someone for thinking about attempting a murder?


Nice post, that's not what I understood from your original post at all.

You should check out Kevin Bridge's stand up routine about attempted murder though, gist is they should get a longer sentence for being incompetent!

Edited by robefc, 07 July 2013 - 16:06.


#25 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:09

Nice post, that's not what I understood from your original post at all.

Well maybe my original post was to simplified.


You should check out Kevin Bridge's stand up routine about attempted murder though, gist is they should get a longer sentence for being incompetent!

:D

#26 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 7,032 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:12

€30,000.... A nice round figure! RBR must be gutted to get such a huge fine.... :D

#27 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:15

It's no only about intention, it's also about predictable consequences. What happened today was not a freak accident. The pit lane was packed. It was inevitable that if a wheel came off a car at that speed somebody would be hit. Did Red Bull intend for the wheel to come off? No. Did they intend for the cameraman to be hit? Certainly not. Was it a predictable consequence of giving Webber the signal to depart when the left-rear gun man had not signalled that he was done? Yes, inasmuch as it is predicatble that if you release a car without the wheel nut fastened, the wheel may come off in the pitane and hit somebody. Red Bull are responsible for the predicable consequences of their actions, which is why they've been fined.

In my view they should also get a 10 place grid drop for the next race because, although they served a drive-through, owing to the ridiculous and defective safety car rules, it had no effect.

#28 ElDictatore

ElDictatore
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:24

It shouldn't. I agree.

However, it will.



The FIA stewards have shown time and time again that the penalise the outcome of an incident, not the incident itself.

If it was up to me, I would put a harsh penalty on this, but I would also have penalised Webber hard in China for driving around in an unsafe car. Also penalise all unsafe releases heavily even if there was no colission. If it was within a certain zone, it's unsafe release.


We have rules, they should enforce the rules, not the outcome.


This. It's ok if RBR get a high penalty but so should everyone else. But it will get some serious controversy. Like in buttons case. They tyre didn't fall off yet and people might say that this wasn't that dangerous, etc. etc.
So not an easy rule i would say

#29 KateLM

KateLM
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:29

It's no only about intention, it's also about predictable consequences. What happened today was not a freak accident. The pit lane was packed. It was inevitable that if a wheel came off a car at that speed somebody would be hit. Did Red Bull intend for the wheel to come off? No. Did they intend for the cameraman to be hit? Certainly not. Was it a predictable consequence of giving Webber the signal to depart when the left-rear gun man had not signalled that he was done? Yes, inasmuch as it is predicatble that if you release a car without the wheel nut fastened, the wheel may come off in the pitane and hit somebody. Red Bull are responsible for the predicable consequences of their actions, which is why they've been fined.

In my view they should also get a 10 place grid drop for the next race because, although they served a drive-through, owing to the ridiculous and defective safety car rules, it had no effect.

No, they didn't. And rules are rules, no one cares when it's a backmarker who gets a lap back.

Fines I think are flawed because they can be crippling for one team but almost meaningless for another. Even if it's the same figure, it's not the same punishment. But I've never liked drivers getting time penalties for unsafe releases or wheels coming off when they haven't done anything wrong. The best way to punish team mishaps I think would be docking WCC points, but I can't see that happening anytime soon.

#30 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:28

No, they didn't. And rules are rules, no one cares when it's a backmarker who gets a lap back.

Fines I think are flawed because they can be crippling for one team but almost meaningless for another. Even if it's the same figure, it's not the same punishment. But I've never liked drivers getting time penalties for unsafe releases or wheels coming off when they haven't done anything wrong. The best way to punish team mishaps I think would be docking WCC points, but I can't see that happening anytime soon.


Just realised on watching the highlights that there was no penalty at all for this. I watched most of the race on RTL but missed part of the middle of it - it just never occurred to me that the standard penalty of a drive-through might not have been immediately applied. It's outrageous. There's no way you can let that go with no sporting penalty.

I totally disagree with the idea of protecting the driver from being penalised for team errors. What if this had happened to Alonso or Vettel in Brazil last year? The WCC was decided; all anyone cared about was the drivers' title. So if you were to penalise either team with a WCC points deduction it would have been equivalent to no penalty at all. The team suffer for driver errors and the driver suffers for team errors, and there is no reason why it should be any different for rules infractions. Crew chief makes an unsafe release - driver loses a good result. Is it fair? Of course it is, just as much as if a centre-forward scores a hat-trick but his team's goalkeeper lets in four bad goals, the team deservedly loses.

#31 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 21,814 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:31

You are mixing up alot of things. Guess the word you are looking for is: intention.

I don't think I am. We are talking about accidents here.

#32 mlsnoopy

mlsnoopy
  • Member

  • 2,356 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:50

Maybe FIA should introduce minimum time that the car should be stationery. Let's say 5s. So that these things will stop happening. Lets be honest the number of miss fitted wheels in the last few years is high.

#33 Zippel

Zippel
  • Member

  • 1,145 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 08 July 2013 - 01:12

Maybe FIA should introduce minimum time that the car should be stationery. Let's say 5s. So that these things will stop happening. Lets be honest the number of miss fitted wheels in the last few years is high.


Don't see how that would change things. Webber was stationary for longer than 5 seconds.

#34 charly0418

charly0418
  • Member

  • 3,289 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 08 July 2013 - 01:42

Given all the Gp2 and gp3 I've seen this year, stewarding decisions have been based on consequence, not the action itself.

:well:

#35 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 08 July 2013 - 02:31

The situation should be treated as if someone got killed, because someone could have.

30,000 euros is a pittance.

Not to mention, the poor cameraman himself: what does he get out of this? A lifetime of injuries?


It was obvious when the pitstops became sub-second critical an accident was going to happen. Again, humans fail. We got rid of refueling, and in place of not having an actual refueling issue we have a bunch of really close calls, mechanics getting injured, and now this.

Oh well.







#36 Jackmancer

Jackmancer
  • Member

  • 3,226 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 08 July 2013 - 04:38

The severity of the act should come into play.

Driving through a red light is a small fine, but if you'd drive a man to death you'd get a bigger penalty.

Monica Selles stabbing for instance was punished way to little, to put it in sports perspective.

#37 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 July 2013 - 11:22

The best way to punish team mishaps I think would be docking WCC points, but I can't see that happening anytime soon.

No it would not be. A team is a team, the driver included. The team should be punished as a whole. WCC points don't matter as much as WDC points. For example Ferrari would happily give away all of their WCC points if it meant they would win the WDC.

#38 g1n

g1n
  • Member

  • 894 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 08 July 2013 - 11:38

No it would not be. A team is a team, the driver included. The team should be punished as a whole. WCC points don't matter as much as WDC points. For example Ferrari would happily give away all of their WCC points if it meant they would win the WDC.


Then why would some (all?) Ferrari road cars have the number of WCC's they have won stamped on the dashboard?

#39 sergeym

sergeym
  • Member

  • 610 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:53

Don't see how that would change things. Webber was stationary for longer than 5 seconds.


Part of the problem is team is under pressure to perform pit stop as soon as possible (under 3s for top teams)... This pressure can lead to mistakes like letting driver go, before one wheel is properly attached. By mandating minimum pit stop time this pressure can be eliminated.

Edited by sergeym, 08 July 2013 - 13:55.