98 replies to this topic

[Victor]

There was a very dangerous moment when Bianchi's car crossed the track backwards. However, it rolled to a (seems to me) safe position on the side of the road.
Why was there a safety car affecting the race? And why did it stay so long on the track?

[Gilles4Ever]

SC was out before Bianchi's car had crossed the track (170mph at that point). It stayed out to let Webber catch up to the pack as is usual

[HaydenFan]

The car was not in a safe spot before it rolled. And a loose car rolling down the track was just a bad thing altogether, whether it went into a spot away from traffic, it was a car without a driver.

[tagy22]

Better to put out the safety car immediately rather than wait and see where a rolling car ends up.

[Kelateboy]

A nice call by race control.

[Clatter]

There was a very dangerous moment when Bianchi's car crossed the track backwards. However, it rolled to a (seems to me) safe position on the side of the road.
Why was there a safety car affecting the race? And why did it stay so long on the track?

I honestly cannot understand how anyone can be stupid enough to even ask this question.

[redreni]

There was a very dangerous moment when Bianchi's car crossed the track backwards. However, it rolled to a (seems to me) safe position on the side of the road.
Why was there a safety car affecting the race? And why did it stay so long on the track?

It was called as soon as the tractor was sent out to recover the car. It stayed out so long because (a) the recovery took longer than it should have because of the car rolling across the track and the tractor having to await permission to cross the track and drive against the traffic to fetch it, which was only granted one the cars had formed up in a line providing an extended period of safety for the marshals to work.

The safety car then stayed out for a further period of time after the track was clear in order to intentionally give a totally unfair advantage to Red Bull and Mark Webber, which more than negated the penalty they had been given for their earlier unsafe release. Once Webber had unlapped himself, the race continued to be suspended for a further two laps so that he could get back nearly all the time he had lost in the unsafe release incident and subsequent penalty. So we can all be satisfied that the extra delay was in a good cause, I guess...

[ryan86]

The fact there was a Safety Car was the right, that it was out half a dozen or so laps for incident that was cleared up in 1 minute was ridiculous.

[SpaMaster]

I can understand deploying the safety car, but it is ridiculous to let it stay for so long. If the idea is to let Webber catch the SC train, it is just stupid. In that case, instead of letting him unlap, they should have just asked him to slide back. What a waste of two laps just because you want to unlap a lapped car and get it to the back of the field on same lap. Pure non-sense. They better have some other reason for it.

[Realyn]

The SC was deployed the moment the car began to roll downhill. I don't understand your question.

[Gilles4Ever]

I can understand deploying the safety car, but it is ridiculous to let it stay for so long. If the idea is to let Webber catch the SC train, it is just stupid. In that case, instead of letting him unlap, they should have just asked him to slide back. What a waste of two laps just because you want to unlap a lapped car and get it to the back of the field on same lap. Pure non-sense. They better have some other reason for it.

no other reason, them's the rules

[nosecone]

A car rolling over the track isn't good and thus it was the correct decision by the race control. Maybe the decision was taken even before bianchi's car stopped... The safety car ensured safety for driver, visitors and marshalls. If there was no SC and something bad had happened everybody would scream "why was there no SC?".

At the one side we complain about a lack of safety (e.g. at pit stops and tyres) but on the other side we don't want to have any SC

And if the SC has deployed it has to stay out until all cars are lined up in the correct order behind the SC. That is the rule

BTW, Webber was pushing like hell to reach the end of the queue, he drove only 0.2s slower than the fastest lap at this time... very safe

Edited by nosecone, 07 July 2013 - 16:16.

[Jyllenberg]

SC was perfect and only solution in that situation. I would've called SC immediatelly when Bianchis car stopped.

That place is dangerous and there was people around Marussia car without any cover.

[RockyRaccoon68]

The thing that annoys me about the SC these days is that by the time the snake has formed the incident is usually cleared and then we have a number of pointless laps while the lapped cars catch up. I understand a big part of the SC's purpose is to bunch the cars up but that seems to take so long!

[Barabas]

It really was the simplest of calls, the car was in a dangerous spot to start with and when it started rolling down the hill it was even more clear a SC was called for.

If people don't understand that well really

Shame it took a long time for the SC to disappear but alas that's the rules nowadays

[ThadGreen]

Well it's like this, Bernie has been talking to the folks at NASCAR about how to make F1 more exciting and more appealing and NASCAR told him you need to do two things - bunch up the cars more near the end of the race so you have more exciting finishes and do something to stop that Vettel boy from winning all the time even if you have to start disqualifying his car. Bernie has got the bunching up part done as can be seen from the last two races so next it would seem he'll focus on Vettel.

[DutchQuicksilver]

SC was out before Bianchi's car had crossed the track (170mph at that point). It stayed out to let Webber catch up to the pack as is usual

Which I think is an unfair rule. Every SC helps the lapped cars alone. In stead of letting lapped cars overtake, they should just say that the lapped cars should drop back if they are between the leaders. I mean, that's why the rule was made in the first place, to get them out of the way from the leading pack.

[Gilles4Ever]

Which I think is an unfair rule. Every SC helps the lapped cars alone. In stead of letting lapped cars overtake, they should just say that the lapped cars should drop back if they are between the leaders. I mean, that's why the rule was made in the first place, to get them out of the way from the leading pack.

Agree 100%
Not only do you not give a lap car a free lap it could all be accomplished in half a lap

[Paul084]

They should of called the safety car as soon as Bianchi stopped as he was in a very dangerous position, the stricken car rolling down the hill just looked farcical (though I don't know what you could of done to prevent it).

Edited by Paul084, 07 July 2013 - 17:08.

[robefc]

Which I think is an unfair rule. Every SC helps the lapped cars alone. In stead of letting lapped cars overtake, they should just say that the lapped cars should drop back if they are between the leaders. I mean, that's why the rule was made in the first place, to get them out of the way from the leading pack.

I wrote a post about why should lapped cars get the gift of beng unlapped and the time to get back round to the back of the pack. But then I thought, well all cars get the benefit of catching up with the leader so it would be unfair to deny that to just those cars that are lapped. I am sure they don't always do this though.

I agree letting them slide backwards would be easier but I suspect more confusing and difficult to organise.

Edited by robefc, 07 July 2013 - 17:09.

[redreni]

I can understand deploying the safety car, but it is ridiculous to let it stay for so long. If the idea is to let Webber catch the SC train, it is just stupid. In that case, instead of letting him unlap, they should have just asked him to slide back. [...]

What, and pretend he'd done a lap more than he had? I suppose that would be no more unfair than what they actually did. But why not say if you've got the fastest car and you're a lap down due to your own cock-up it's your problem, and we will no longer arbitrarily penalise the rest of the field for one car's mistake just because the safety car has come out?

[redreni]

Which I think is an unfair rule. Every SC helps the lapped cars alone. In stead of letting lapped cars overtake, they should just say that the lapped cars should drop back if they are between the leaders. I mean, that's why the rule was made in the first place, to get them out of the way from the leading pack.

That's also unfair. What's the problem with there being lapped cars between the leaders? If there were lapped cars between the leaders before the SC, where exactly is the problem? Why should a car that was previously 10s behind the guy ahead with two backmarkers between them, get the right to have the backmarkers cleared out of the way so he can have a free overtaking opportunity? What's wrong with a bit of sporting integrity and fairness and a bit less of the Super Mario mentality?

[rolf123]

It was a good call. As soon as everyone noticed it was rolling backwards onto the circuit, issue it immediately.

You can't wait to see if it crosses. Who's to know that it might roll back into the track either before or after reaching the other side of it. Wait and lives could be claimed.

For once, the show car came out properly.

[BoschKurve]

Call me old fashioned, but I liked when parked cars were left wherever they happened to stop.

I get that Bianchi's car rolling back was a huge problem as far as safety goes, but really, just leave it on top of the Allianz sign and continue racing. F1 is too risk averse to silly things. That they didn't stop last week's race with all those tire failures, yet continue to trot safety cars out for the most idiotic things, is getting to be overkill. Cars parked against the armco at Monaco was thrilling in itself.

[Realyn]

just leave it on top of the Allianz sign and continue racing.

I'll keep repeating myself ... the SC was deployed when the car first started rolling and not when it stood on top of the Allianz sign.

Do you expect them to undo the SC deployment at that point?

[BoschKurve]

I'll keep repeating myself ... the SC was deployed when the car first started rolling and not when it stood on top of the Allianz sign.

Do you expect them to undo the SC deployment at that point?

What was the safety car going to do? How far away are the pits from where the car rolled? LOL

Double yellow flags would have been quite sufficient.

[wingwalker]

It was a a good decision by race control, it's just turned out looking a bit silly because car rolled itself into a very convenient place recovery-wise hence erasing the need for SC. But while it's out, it's out, lapped cars need to repass etc.

Edited by wingwalker, 07 July 2013 - 17:41.

[Clatter]

What was the safety car going to do? How far away are the pits from where the car rolled? LOL

Double yellow flags would have been quite sufficient.

All said with hindsight, but when the car started rolling no one could be sure where it was going to end up. The SC call was the right one.

[BoschKurve]

All said with hindsight, but when the car started rolling no one could be sure where it was going to end up. The SC call was the right one.

In your opinion it was the right call.

[Szoelloe]

In your opinion it was the right call.;)

In mine too.

[Realyn]

In your opinion it was the right call.;)

Looks like the majority in this thread agrees with you hum.

[Vepe1995]

That's also unfair. What's the problem with there being lapped cars between the leaders? If there were lapped cars between the leaders before the SC, where exactly is the problem? Why should a car that was previously 10s behind the guy ahead with two backmarkers between them, get the right to have the backmarkers cleared out of the way so he can have a free overtaking opportunity? What's wrong with a bit of sporting integrity and fairness and a bit less of the Super Mario mentality?

They are making the SC to be as fair (or, least unfair) for everyone. Most think of the 'clearing' of backmarkers only from the leading group's viewpoint and ignore the backmarkers'.

A simplified example:

Team A and B haven't scored points whole season, when in the last race there's a massive crash that takes out half the field, so 11 cars remain. SC is deployed near the end and the driver of Team A is 10th and driver of Team B is 11th, but he was lapped. The gap between them was 4 seconds and the gap between the leader and 2nd placed driver was 10 seconds when SC was deployed.

Some people say, that it's unfair to move Driver B to the end, because it means that the leader lost 10 seconds and the car between him and 2nd placed driver. But tell me, how it's not unfair to leave Driver B where he is, thus making the gap between him and Driver A grow from 4 seconds to over a minute?

[wingwalker]

Jesus, you have an huge object moving out of everyone's control on the god-damn track, right on the racing line even. How is this not enough for a SC?

[Realyn]

They are making the SC to be as fair (or, least unfair) for everyone. Most think of the 'clearing' of backmarkers only from the leading group's viewpoint and ignore the backmarkers'.

A simplified example:

Team A and B haven't scored points whole season, when in the last race there's a massive crash that takes out half the field, so 11 cars remain. SC is deployed near the end and the driver of Team A is 10th and driver of Team B is 11th, but he was lapped. The gap between them was 4 seconds and the gap between the leader and 2nd placed driver was 10 seconds when SC was deployed.

Some people say, that it's unfair to move Driver B to the end, because it means that the leader lost 10 seconds and the car between him and 2nd placed driver. But tell me, how it's not unfair to leave Driver B where he is, thus making the gap between him and Driver A grow from 4 seconds to over a minute?

Another example: We are driving a hypothetical race on the Nordschleife. Driver A is 8:30 minutes ahead of Driver B who just got lapped. How is it fair that Driver B is allowed to unlap himself ?

Oh and I think the rule is fine the way it is. Just saying that your example kinda lacks logic because you can make it sound just as bad for Driver A.

Edited by Realyn, 07 July 2013 - 17:51.

[Vepe1995]

Another example: We are driving a hypothetical race on the Nordschleife. Driver A is 8:30 minutes ahead of Driver B who just got lapped. How is it fair that Driver B is allowed to unlap himself ?

Oh and I think the rule is fine the way it is. Just saying that your example kinda lacks logic because you can make it sound just as bad for Driver A.

Well, maybe it wasn't a very good example, but anyway, the point was that when criticizing the SC-rule, or any other rule, you shouldn't only think of how it affects one group.

[BoschKurve]

Looks like the majority in this thread agrees with you hum.

Subjective opinions shouldn't always be accepted as gospel.

[Jackmancer]

The fact there was a Safety Car was the right, that it was out half a dozen or so laps for incident that was cleared up in 1 minute was ridiculous.

I agree. All those millions of viewers have to wait for Webber to catch up. Meh. Why? It doesn't make sense to give him the lap back even.

[Clatter]

Jesus, you have an huge object moving out of everyone's control on the god-damn track, right on the racing line even. How is this not enough for a SC?

I think some are only watching for the crashes.

[artista]

I agree. All those millions of viewers have to wait for Webber to catch up. Meh. Why? It doesn't make sense to give him the lap back even.

The rule was brought back after certain top drivers complained about those slow lapped back-markers between them and the race-leader, which meant they couldn't attack the race-leader and win the races as they really deserved.
I suppose, they forgot to ask for the rule to be non-applicable in case of the lapped car being a Red Bull

[Jon83]

The right call but once again, the SC was out for too long and we have this nonsensical rule that lapped cars should be allowed to unlap themselves which saw Webber was already up a few places by the end of the pit straight on the restart.

Let them unlap themselves if they must but I think the restart should happen before the cars make it to the back of the pack (granted in some cases that may be difficult to control)

[fabr68]

I thought it was ridiculous to reward Red Bull by letting Webber unlap himself and actually score points after their infraction in the pitlane.

The FIA is sending the wrong message with this.

[nosecone]

I thought it was ridiculous to reward Red Bull by letting Webber unlap himself and actually score points after their infraction in the pitlane.

The FIA is sending the wrong message with this.

I agree.

RB was a lap down due to their own fault which has also endangered others.
But the rules say that lapped cars may pass.

Maybe its time to change that, but then people will complain if their favourite is impeded by lapped cars.

Some will say it was the teams fault and not Webbers, thus Webber doesn't deserve a penalty, but F1 is a team sport.

Now they'll get a fine ( i guess 50,000Dollar) which wont really hurt anyone at RB. Maybe they should penalise unsafe releases while the race...
A few thousand dollar fine will not hurt any of the teams which spend 100Million$ a year.

new rule:

lapped, likeable drivers whose team has never done anything bad may overtake if over 2/3 of the autosport forum users voted for letting him unlap himself

Edited by nosecone, 07 July 2013 - 19:03.

[artista]

I thought it was ridiculous to reward Red Bull by letting Webber unlap himself and actually score points after their infraction in the pitlane.

The FIA is sending the wrong message with this.

How does it work then? If Alguersuari is lapped and is in front of Alonso, what means Alonso can't attack Webber on the re-start, it's not fair the lapped cars are not allowed to unlap themselves because it favours Webber.
But if it's Webber the one who has to unlap himself after changing the rule...

Guys, you really can't have it both ways.

[Clatter]

The right call but once again, the SC was out for too long and we have this nonsensical rule that lapped cars should be allowed to unlap themselves which saw Webber was already up a few places by the end of the pit straight on the restart.

Let them unlap themselves if they must but I think the restart should happen before the cars make it to the back of the pack (granted in some cases that may be difficult to control)

I'm fairly sure that at Silverstone the SC came in before the lapped cars caught up with the pack. They don't need to be given anymore than 20-30 seconds to get up the road. That would get them out of the way for the restart and not give them an excessive advantage from the SC.

[Kobasmashi]

I think the safety car was definitely the right call, as said we had no way of knowing that the polystyrene would stop the car. But the rules are dumb about it, 5 odd laps for this was ridiculous. What I don't get is, they did away with the unlapping-under-safety-car rule in about 2009, I think, and then it came back in 2012 (I think). I don't see why we needed it back.

[KateLM]

Yeah, I can understand objecting to the rule on the grounds that it drags on a SC period and cars a lap behind shouldn't get it back. But there seems to be a lot of objection specifically related to it being a Red Bull who could then gain places rather than a backmarker who'd just get left behind after the restart. You can't have one rule for one car or circumstance and one for another. And you can't just pick and choose a time to decide you don't like the rule either.

There are worse things to get wound up about, I think. If the backmarkers hadn't been allowed to unlap themselves in Silverstone then Webber and Red Bull might have got the win with an extra lap to get Rosberg. So, you know, swings and roundabouts.

[SpaMaster]

Yes, I don't see any need why they should wait for the unlapped cars to be bunched back. They don't even need to unlap, I say. Let them restart with whatever unlapped cars they may have. It is all artificial anyway wanting all the lead-lap cars to engage in a battle forced by SC. They all would anyway had to get around the 'to-be-unlapped' car in normal race circumstance.

[EthanM]

I think the safety car was definitely the right call, as said we had no way of knowing that the polystyrene would stop the car. But the rules are dumb about it, 5 odd laps for this was ridiculous. What I don't get is, they did away with the unlapping-under-safety-car rule in about 2009, I think, and then it came back in 2012 (I think). I don't see why we needed it back.

it came back because having backmarkers among the frontrunners at the restart ruined "the show". Search back a couple of years and there were people whining because their driver was "stuck" behind Caterham at a restart and they were screaming from the rooftops how unfair it was and how their driver was robbed.

[mnmracer]

5 fewer laps behind the Safety Car and everyone would have changed their strategy. Simply saying "Kimi would have overtaken Vettel in those extra laps" is overly simplistic.

[TheThirdTenor1]

Yes, I don't see any need why they should wait for the unlapped cars to be bunched back. They don't even need to unlap, I say. Let them restart with whatever unlapped cars they may have. It is all artificial anyway wanting all the lead-lap cars to engage in a battle forced by SC. They all would anyway had to get around the 'to-be-unlapped' car in normal race circumstance.

try thinking of it from the backmarkers POV. They can potentially lose over a minute to a guy they were previously only a few seconds behind.