55 replies to this topic

[AustinF1]

http://www1.skysport...over-team-radio

 

He says he pulled off the pass and went off after. 

 

IMHO he only made it past because he went too fast to stay on track on exit.

[Group B]

IMHO YHO is correct.

[NexusIcon]

Ditto.

[Afterburner]

This was discussed at length on NBC Sports, in which it was concluded that he gained a negligible advantage by going off-track there. I generally tend to agree with that, so I consider the penalty questionable at best, ill-judged at worst. Just my opinion.

One thing that's for certain is that Danny Ric, in my opinion, speaks his mind even more so than Webber does. Looking forward to seeing him in a Red Bull next year.

[AustinF1]

High-fives all around then. 

 

He was very put off. I don't get it at all.

[PayasYouRace]

If that had been grass or gravel he would not have kept the position. Penalty justified IMO.

[SpartanChas]

He went off the track to complete a move, deserved a penalty unless you start going down the road of trying to figure out an arbitrary border between what is gaining an advantage and what isn't. The team should have told him to give the place back based on what we've seen so far this season with Grosjean at Hungary and Gutierréz at Spa.

I'm sure I wasn't the only one that saw the penalty coming a mile off.

[bub]

Fair penalty imo. He should have given the position back or his team should have instructed him to. 

[Skinnyguy]

I agree with the penalty. He ended up front because he overshoot the corner. They entered side by side, one of them kept it on track and the other didn´t. The one who didn´t ended up in front.

 

The other guy (dont remember who was up against him) adapted his speed and compromised his line to give him room, he didn´t adapt his speed and compromised his line enough to stay on the black stuff. And by a healthy margin too.

[redreni]

Anyone know what he said on the team radio?

He has no case. I personally find it very surprising Ricciardo didn‘t realise at the time that there was no way he could get away with keeping the place. Moreover I find it incredible that STR didn‘t call Whiting, who would have undoubtedly told them to give the place back. A completely avoidable penalty for them.

[AustinF1]

This was discussed at length on NBC Sports, in which it was concluded that he gained a negligible advantage by going off-track there. I generally tend to agree with that, so I consider the penalty questionable at best, ill-judged at worst. Just my opinion.

One thing that's for certain is that Danny Ric, in my opinion, speaks his mind even more so than Webber does. Looking forward to seeing him in a Red Bull next year.

It seemed to me like they were impressed that he didn't get himself killed and were congratulating him on that.

[redreni]

This was discussed at length on NBC Sports, in which it was concluded that he gained a negligible advantage by going off-track there. I generally tend to agree with that, so I consider the penalty questionable at best, ill-judged at worst. Just my opinion.One thing that's for certain is that Danny Ric, in my opinion, speaks his mind even more so than Webber does. Looking forward to seeing him in a Red Bull next year.

First, you‘re not allowed to go off and gain an advantage even if it‘s negligible. Second, even if he gets the passing move more or less done before the turn-in for 130R, the only way the stewards can be sure that Ricciardo was clean through and secure in his position is if he turns into 130R and negotiates the corner within the track limits. Otherwise we‘re left asking if he could have made that move without the late turn-in and the consequent trip across the run-off. In order to decide that he could still have made the move stick and taken 130R properly, you have to give him the benefit of the doubt. But the benefit of the doubt shouldn‘t and doesn‘t go to a car that has left the track.

[EthanM]

if you go into a corner too hot and need to run outside the track to make the corner you are getting an advantage. If it was a wall instead of a runoff you wouldn't be going wide would you? You 'd be breaking, and the guy behind would be overtaking you.

 

Although it is very very very very difficult to strictly apply this. But IMO applying it whenever there is any type of close battle is correct.

[Jon83]

Correct penalty IMO, especially when you look at some of the ones dished out recently (even without them this was fairly clear-cut)

 

As was rightly pointed out earlier in the thread, if there was gravel on that side of the white line his race probably would have ended.

[GhostR]

Correct penalty in my mind. I watched the race on reply and was really hoping he'd give the place back immediately at the chicane. He and the team threw away good points today I think. They probably kept him out a bit long on his first set, but all in all they probably picked exactly the right strategy and Dan was making it work until his first set went off. Even then, I think he was still in a great position to take points until wasting the opportunity with the penalty.

[swerved]

Anyone know what he said on the team radio?

He has no case. I personally find it very surprising Ricciardo didn‘t realise at the time that there was no way he could get away with keeping the place. Moreover I find it incredible that STR didn‘t call Whiting, who would have undoubtedly told them to give the place back. A completely avoidable penalty for them.

 

Haven't seen a transcript or heard his comments but according to Kravitz he was "furious, livid, and effing and blinding all over the place"

 

The penalty was deserved, it was a bit of an amateurish lunge.

[Atreiu]

If that had been grass or gravel he would not have kept the position. Penalty justified IMO.

 

Spot on.

[SPBHM]

I was surprised he didn't give the place back immediately... going outside should always be slower, since this is not the case... the asphalt is there for safety, not to go fast, drivers should lift the throttle at least when they do these mistakes... well, it was the right call.

[baddog]

"the asphalt is there for safety, not to go fast,"

 

The end

[SteF1an]

Anyone know what he said on the team radio?

He has no case. I personally find it very surprising Ricciardo didn‘t realise at the time that there was no way he could get away with keeping the place. Moreover I find it incredible that STR didn‘t call Whiting, who would have undoubtedly told them to give the place back. A completely avoidable penalty for them.

Ricciardo's team-radio:
Ricciardo: "Before I go off and kill somebody was (the penalty) for the move in turn 15?"
team: "Yes."
Ricciardo: "Unbelievable."

[Les]

If that had been grass or gravel he would not have kept the position. Penalty justified IMO.

 

Although I can sympathise with Daniel, overall I'd agree with you. These big tarmac run-offs at Spoon and 130R really do take away something. Sure if the alternative is having a car go airborne and  slam into the barrier at 130R then I guess it has to stay. The sooner they come up with some sort of electronic system where a car loses a certain amount of power for say 10 secs if it has all 4 wheels out of the track the better. 

[F1ultimate]

If that had been grass or gravel he would not have kept the position. Penalty justified IMO.

 

Ditto. He should kiss the asphalt because had it not been there, he would have DNFd.

[rhukkas]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

Edited by rhukkas, 13 October 2013 - 21:15.

[Nitropower]

Funny Ricciardo. If he went out it's because he was going too fast and braked much too late, so all in all he went off the track to complete an overtaking manoeuvre ->> give back position immediately and try again next chance.

[joshb]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

He won't be ahead of Vettel too often hopefully to get Multi-21... such a misunderstood term!

[ensign14]

Simple question for Ricciardo is if he didn't need to go off, why did he go off.

[Lee Nicolle]

There is a thread on here about Alonso going off track at the last event. Maybe Daniel and the Alonso supporters should read it!

[icecream]

driver given penalty. gets upset.

[F1ultimate]

The big question is why the team didn't tell him to give the position back? Hell even DC said, right after the overtake, that Daniel might get a penalty. It was a no brainer.

[Morbus]

To

 

Ditto. He should kiss the asphalt because had it not been there, he would have DNFd.

And so would everyone that was outside the while lines at any time during the grand prix, and you don't see them handing penalties for these.

 

Stop pretending this was about cutting the corner, or going off the track or anything. Riccardo cut the corner, indeed, but he was handed the penalty because he did it too close to an overtake he had just completed. That's what's being discussed here.

 

In my opinion, the penalty was totally unfair, just as it was unfair to penalize Grosjean in Hungary, because it was a completely harmless off and didn't gain him any time, not during the overtake, not after the overtake. It was any stupid call from the stewards.

 

It doesn't hanger be because F1 has always been the enemy of the stewards and the stewards have always been the enemy of F1. They are a cancer and should all be sacked and prosecuted for their farces. It's been going on for decades.

[icecream]

is there any online footage of the move and his little excursion? 

[BillBald]

I think there's a definite grey area where the driver being overtaken doesn't leave enough room, and the overtaker has to go off-track to avoid a collision.

 

You need some co-operation to overtake around the outside, and in the 'old days' (before the tarmac run-offs) you would normally get that, otherwise there would be a crash.

 

I had another look at the incident to check that Ricciardo wasn't forced off by Sutil, but it's very clear in this case, Sutil lifted or braked and allowed Ricciardo to overtake, so Ric could actually have turned in slightly earlier than he did. Probably he wasn't expecting Sutil to concede the corner quite so easily.

 

A definite penalty. Did anyone interview Ric or was he getting angry in private?

[Thomas99]

I think there's a definite grey area where the driver being overtaken doesn't leave enough room, and the overtaker has to go off-track to avoid a collision.

 

You need some co-operation to overtake around the outside, and in the 'old days' (before the tarmac run-offs) you would normally get that, otherwise there would be a crash.

 

I had another look at the incident to check that Ricciardo wasn't forced off by Sutil, but it's very clear in this case, Sutil lifted or braked and allowed Ricciardo to overtake, so Ric could actually have turned in slightly earlier than he did. Probably he wasn't expecting Sutil to concede the corner quite so easily.

 

A definite penalty. Did anyone interview Ric or was he getting angry in private?

 

 

He got angry over the radio.

I'm not sure if I like that he's showing a bit of fire or I dislike his lack of good guy image.

[Brother Fox]

One thing Torro Rosso are consistent at is management/strategy ineptitude.

 

You would have to be very lucky to get away with that, they should have told him hand it back after seeing the replays.

[jstrains]

Is there a video of this situation anywhere?

[PassWind]

Yeah it was clear that Daniel intended to lose control of the car after he passed another just to make a pass stick, I am tipping he wanted to turn the corner just as he wanted the car too, then we have the "well if there was a wall there he wouldn't have attempted the pass brigade so not possible to pass there" which of course is blatantly untrue as many drivers have done so in the past and came to premature ends of a racing career. That has somewhat been fixed thank god by making circuits that don't kill you when you risk all.

The decision should have solely been based on intent, was there intent to make the pass using a high speed off on the 130R Yes or No?

It was judged as a yes which I probably guess Daniel disagrees with, maybe they should of checked his underwear post race, they may have got further clarification of the intent right there and then and the reason why Daniel though it a strange decision along with people in arm chairs not understanding how he felt about it at the time.

Ballsy move got stung for it both by the stewards and the track, decision expected, agreeable to the penalty, wouldn't have phased me if they didn't. Reasonable reaction given what happened, I can't imagine the physiological reaction to nearly going right off there basically flat in a F1 car, but I guess it would excite some pucker factor in the lower lumbar region. So all round some decent entertainment wouldn't you say? Without even having to sacrifice a Lion so all is good with the world.

[Shambolic]

The decision should have solely been based on intent, was there intent to make the pass using a high speed off on the 130R Yes or No?

 

What?

 

What!

 

What!?

 

The intent doesn't always reflect the amount of grip, or talent.

 

The guy overcooked it going into a fast corner, whilst/ just after passing someone. Had he have not gone in too fast, he'd have almost certainly not have passed said someone. He gained an advantage through either deliberately or accidentally carrying excess speed.

 

Perhaps the forthcoming RB drive has him practicing his god given rights to do as he wants when the lights go out.

[garoidb]

The decision should have solely been based on intent, was there intent to make the pass using a high speed off on the 130R Yes or No?

 

Good grief! What sort of logic is that?

[Diablobb81]

I don't understand why drivers sometimes try and force their luck. In this situation it was pretty clear that the sensible thing to do was to give the place back. Why argue and risk a penalty?

[Lights]

"But after that, I ran wide onto the grass, which lost me a bit of time."

 

Really now. Is that what happened Ric, you overtook Sutil, but when you went wide afterwards you thought "that lost me a bit of time"?

[froggy22]

Said it in the Ricciardo, he should of given the place back straight away, it's clearly a debatable pass. An avoidable penalty.

[GregAU]

The way the rules are now it was a reasonable penalty but the way the whole system is implemented is stupid and short sighted in my opinion.

 

Should DR have given the position back "just in case" he received a penalty for it?

The answer is probably yes BUT:

 

Why does an incident like this need to be deemed as "under investigation"?  Surely this means that the Stewards need time to look at it and decide if an unfair advantage was gained correct?

So if the Stewards need to investigate then what is a driver supposed to do?

 

So the decision is "you've been given a drive through penalty for gaining an unfair advantage that you could not be 100 percent sure would attract a penalty until we have told you"...and "if you had of handed the position back it would have been fine but you'd never have known if you broke a rule".

 

It's the stupidest logic I've ever heard of.

 

There needs to be a hard and fast rule eg:  Overtake then leave the track in x amount of time, then hand the position back.

OR

The stewards investigate immediately and advise to hand the position back.

 

Giving a drive through and ruining a drivers race for something they would have not been 100 percent sure was wrong until they had been penalised is the wrong way to do it.

[baddog]

The decision should have solely been based on intent, was there intent to make the pass using a high speed off on the 130R Yes or No?
 

So if someone TRIES to make a pass in a chicane stick but fails and drives right through it they should keep the place? 

 

NO-ONE wants unsafe barriers and injuries back (and it is distasteful and inappropriate to suggest they do).. but the replacement of traps with large runoffs indeed raises the issue of people using that extra runoff to get away with errors and bad moves multiple times every race, and the line HAS to be drawn. Obviously an intentional pass off he track is a no-brainer but one where the driver passed and failed to make it stick without going off is an appropriate situation for the stewards to use discretion. If the mistake came after the overtake and was unrelated to it then the pass should be allowed.. if made during the overtake or because of it then it should be given back.

[Kelateboy]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

 

Ecstatic I would imagine.

[apoka]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

 

He should be happy in that case, because it means that Vettel got a team order to stay behind him.

[AustinF1]

The decision should have solely been based on intent, was there intent to make the pass using a high speed off on the 130R Yes or No?

Edited by AustinF1, 16 October 2013 - 05:18.

[Melchiot]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

 

 

you dont even know what that means

[Kelateboy]

I thought it was an easy call for the stewards, even though they did take a bit of time to come to a decision.

 

Can't imagine why his engineer did not advise him to give up his position. 

[Andy35]

What would have happened if Dan had got passed on the straight just before the corner but left  braking too late so still went off the track ? That would also be gaining an advantage? But would it be penalised?

[RosannaG]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

 

Are you sure you did not want to say "multi 12"?