Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Should teams have to foot the bill for repairs to other teams cars damaged by their drivers?


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#1 Wiggy

Wiggy
  • Member

  • 450 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:12

Yesterday Raikkone trashed his Ferrari, and in the ensuing carnage he damaged the Marussia and Williams.

Should the team of the car driven by the driver who is at fault foot the bill to repair the cars damaged through no fault of the other drivers?

Maldonados big smash at spa for example, he caused thousands of pounds of damage that the teams had to foot the bill for... Should lotus have paid for all that? He trashed their races and left them with damages to pay for.

They could have the stewards decide who is at fault for determining who is to cough up.

F1 is expensive enough without having to pay for your Williams to be rebuilt because Kimi decides to get fruity with the barriers...

Advertisement

#2 Kraken

Kraken
  • Member

  • 822 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:16

Not sure about F1 but I've often thought that in club racing when another driver has been determined to be at fault enough to be excluded and/or have their license endorsed they should be charged for repairs to the cars they've taken out.

 

I've seen too many people give up the sport because they couldn't afford the repairs after some nutter with a big bank balance wiped them out.



#3 masa90

masa90
  • Member

  • 179 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:17

No. What a silly thread. Would just result in chaos since already way too many situations cause questionable decisions, imagine money directly transferring in between.



#4 Retrofly

Retrofly
  • Member

  • 582 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:17

Nope.

It's part of racing.

 

(Sez the guy who took someone out in a Club Motorcycle Road Race) :blush:



#5 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:19

Full-heartedly agree with you on this one Wiggle!



#6 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:20

Nope.

It's part of racing.

 

(Sez the guy who took someone out in a Club Motorcycle Road Race) :blush:

But F1 is expensive racing. Much more than other series. So... shall I kick it up a notch and say the driver himself has got to pay for big damage?



#7 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,695 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:26

I suspect if you add it all up you will probably find it equals itself out over time.

 

Still it's not something I think we need to concern ourselves with. If the teams want to do something between themselves then they can make their own arrangements. It doesn't need the rule makers to get involved. There are much larger issues they need to be concerned with.



#8 John Player

John Player
  • Member

  • 455 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:30

Alex Tagliani agrees



#9 JHSingo

JHSingo
  • Member

  • 1,390 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:32

No. It's racing, not a road traffic incident.

 

I'd fear in that case scenario that drivers wouldn't be allowed to really race each other, because teams would be reminding them "where there's blame there's a claim"

 

If teams don't want the cost that comes with repairing accident damage, the risk of going racing, go do something else.



#10 ollebompa

ollebompa
  • Member

  • 724 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:32

Spa was Grosjean.



#11 swerved

swerved
  • Member

  • 3,689 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:35

No.



#12 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,938 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:38

You were listening to Simon Mayo tonight on BBC Radio 2, weren't you Wiggy?  

 

It all balances out over time.  As we saw yesterday when a blameless Maldonado was savaged by Guterriez.



#13 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 278 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 07 July 2014 - 18:39

No, it couldn't be feasible.

 

What happens when a Caterham wipes out a leading car - and all of a sudden has to pay the bill for repairs that cost more than the annual running costs of their own team :rotfl:

 

If you drive your road car on a track day with trackday insurance, your cover will only pay for repairs to YOUR car - even if you write somebody else off through 100% your fault. You go racing with a car that YOU can afford to fix regardless of the circumstances.

 

Not to mention all of the "racing incident" crashes where blame is unclear.



#14 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,079 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:04

God, no.



#15 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,107 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:15

But F1 is expensive racing. Much more than other series. So... shall I kick it up a notch and say the driver himself has got to pay for big damage?

 

Then you'd have clauses written in driver's contracts saying it is the team's responsibility to pay. Then team would take legal action against each other to debate what the price of a new wing and uprights would cost (because you know the costs of damaged parts will skyrocket), and no money would ever exchange hands. 

 

If you crash, you have to pay for the parts yourself. You assume the risk by deciding to race. Whether the car costs tens of millions for F1, or a $5,000 F500 club car. 



#16 rooksby

rooksby
  • Member

  • 75 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:17

No, it couldn't be feasible.

 

What happens when a Caterham wipes out a leading car - and all of a sudden has to pay the bill for repairs that cost more than the annual running costs of their own team :rotfl:

 

The carbon fibre on leading cars costs much the same as on everyone else's car. Radiators, wheels and suspension arms contain roughly the same materials, whether leading or trailing. The gross difference in team budgets is not raw material, it is how many people you employ to conceive, test and design the component and then how many employed to more rapidly build it.

 

Not to mention all of the "racing incident" crashes where blame is unclear.

 

Well when the blame is unclear, everyone pays their own repairs. When the blame is clear, as reported by race stewards, then the guilty party pays. It wouldn't be the most complex system that F1 has conceived.



#17 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,079 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:22

It would add plenty of unecessary complexity.

Stewards can barely apply the rule book and, for example, decide what is in and out of the track. Imagine having their decisions suddenly burdened with this kind of responsability.


Edited by Atreiu, 07 July 2014 - 20:26.


#18 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 278 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:25

The carbon fibre on leading cars costs much the same as on everyone else's car. Radiators, wheels and suspension arms contain roughly the same materials, whether leading or trailing. The gross difference in team budgets is not raw material, it is how many people you employ to conceive, test and design the component and then how many employed to more rapidly build it.

 

 

Well when the blame is unclear, everyone pays their own repairs. When the blame is clear, as reported by race stewards, then the guilty party pays. It wouldn't be the most complex system that F1 has conceived.

 

I was being somewhat sarcastic with the Caterham/lead car damage cost thingy. However it still may apply to a 1vsMany type crash.

 

If everyone is responsible for their own costs only, it means each time can turn up to a GP expecting at worse, to repair/replace two cars at maximum. If a poorer team wipes out half of the grid in a T1 accident - that might put them in serious financial trouble, which most are already in anyway :|

 

Using your same logic though, the carbon fibre/component cost of a crash in most cases is insignificant to the cost of losing championship points or positions - so why bother?



#19 SpartanChas

SpartanChas
  • Member

  • 793 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:28

You were listening to Simon Mayo tonight on BBC Radio 2, weren't you Wiggy?  

 

It all balances out over time.  As we saw yesterday when a blameless Maldonado was savaged by Guterriez.

 

What I thought too!

 

As far as I know the teams have always been responsible for their own cars and nobody else's. Why change it?



Advertisement

#20 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,107 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:29

The carbon fibre on leading cars costs much the same as on everyone else's car. Radiators, wheels and suspension arms contain roughly the same materials, whether leading or trailing. The gross difference in team budgets is not raw material, it is how many people you employ to conceive, test and design the component and then how many employed to more rapidly build it.

 

But you'd have prices beyond material and personal. It'd have to be based around a market value. In F1, what would a wing off a Red Bull or Mercedes go for if F1 was customer based compared to a Caterham or Marussia wing? 

 

Also, what would deem damage? You break an endplate off, who is to say the wing is destroyed and needed to be pitched? A team could say they need to scrap the entire wing, instead of just building another endplate or element to replace. 

 

Prices would just become arguments. Would just not work. Maybe if a spec car was used, yes, with the same bits and pieces used by every team, it could be allowed. But even then, like said, you would be punishing lower funded teams who might have had to push and risk their car (and others) to get a better result. 



#21 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,925 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:32

Teams would hire Maldonado and a very good lawyer, and open a new savings account.



#22 rooksby

rooksby
  • Member

  • 75 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:40

Using your same logic though, the carbon fibre/component cost of a crash in most cases is insignificant to the cost of losing championship points or positions - so why bother?

 

Why bother? I am perhaps old fashioned, I simply like the idea of actions being balanced with consequences.

 

If it is 'hard to say' or 'one of those things', then we easily let it slide. If it was someone behaving in a grossly irresponsible fashion which inflicted not inconsequential financial costs on otherwise innocent parties, then they should be required to be brought to account for their actions.

 

There's precious little cosmic justice in a cold empty uncaring universe - the merest couple of lines added to the sporting regs would see the guilty brought to account, the incompetent made an unaffordable luxury, and perhaps a general up-notch in the consideration given by drivers to those whom they share the track with.



#23 Fonzey

Fonzey
  • Member

  • 278 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 07 July 2014 - 20:54

Why bother? I am perhaps old fashioned, I simply like the idea of actions being balanced with consequences.

 

If it is 'hard to say' or 'one of those things', then we easily let it slide. If it was someone behaving in a grossly irresponsible fashion which inflicted not inconsequential financial costs on otherwise innocent parties, then they should be required to be brought to account for their actions.

 

There's precious little cosmic justice in a cold empty uncaring universe - the merest couple of lines added to the sporting regs would see the guilty brought to account, the incompetent made an unaffordable luxury, and perhaps a general up-notch in the consideration given by drivers to those whom they share the track with.

 

There's a reason why no form of amateur or professional motorsport (that I'm aware of) operates with a "road car mentality". People are on the track taking risks, by the very nature of the activity. Sometimes it is obvious that a crash has been caused due to gross neglect or even due to aggression which should be punished heavily, but where do you draw the line and who makes the decision, because it's not always obvious!

 

Again, using my one to many argument - was it Kobayashi who had a break failure in T1 at Aus? WHAT IF he had have wiped out 10 more cars? Not that unimaginable. It may have been neglect of an engineer/mechanic, or it may just have been "one of those things".

 

Or are you suggesting that teams only get billed if the maneuver was deemed as reckless? There's a fine line between reckless and brilliant in motorsport, I can think of many overtakes that were hailed as the best moves of the year/race/decade/whatever which could easily have ended in an "Airplane Crash" as Mr Brundle would describe it.



#24 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 21:22

No. Motorsport is dangerous ... you are present at your own risk.



#25 NoSanityClause

NoSanityClause
  • Member

  • 686 posts
  • Joined: May 14

Posted 07 July 2014 - 22:23

Should boxers pay each other's medical bills?



#26 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,819 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 July 2014 - 22:28

Does Autosport pay "Wiggy" to start threads?



#27 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 07 July 2014 - 22:37

Then you'd have clauses written in driver's contracts saying it is the team's responsibility to pay. Then team would take legal action against each other to debate what the price of a new wing and uprights would cost (because you know the costs of damaged parts will skyrocket), and no money would ever exchange hands. 

 

If you crash, you have to pay for the parts yourself. You assume the risk by deciding to race. Whether the car costs tens of millions for F1, or a $5,000 F500 club car. 

Since we are almost in a spec-series already, why would this be a problem? :rotfl:

 

(Fair point though)



#28 Longtimefan

Longtimefan
  • Member

  • 3,170 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 July 2014 - 22:39

Nope, that would open a huge can of worms.



#29 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,107 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 07 July 2014 - 22:47

Should boxers pay each other's medical bills?

 

Was thinking that too. It would set a precedent that would go beyond motorsport. 



#30 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 1,226 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 July 2014 - 23:03

The legal bills would bankrupt the whole sport.



#31 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,630 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 07 July 2014 - 23:18

No racing's racing and accidents do happen....and anyway you'd get into less rich teams chickening out of racing because they couldn't afford to be found responsible for crashes....that's nae good!  :)



#32 Seano

Seano
  • Member

  • 299 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 07 July 2014 - 23:50

Ludicrous idea.

 

If you can't afford it, do both yourself and all of competitors a favour and stay in your garage at home - you have no place on track.

 

Seano



#33 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 2,231 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 July 2014 - 00:02

No way too much grey area.

 

Incidents even themselves out over time, best to just let teams fix their own cars, less fighting between teams etc over whose fault an incident is.



#34 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,548 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 08 July 2014 - 00:13

No...

 

There would be shady businesses going on.



#35 hittheapex

hittheapex
  • Member

  • 452 posts
  • Joined: July 14

Posted 08 July 2014 - 02:36

I don't want to see yet more stewarding in F1, although I can't agree with all that Lauda said on the weekend, I do agree that F1 is becoming over regulated.

 

I think the teams can police themselves best on this one. Sure, there will be the odd crash such as what happened on Sunday, but in cases of serial offenders who can't keep the car in one piece, the teams can fire the driver when the collisions aren't offset by any kind of gain, or in the extreme case of Yuji Ide, the FIA may revoke a superlicence.

 

Romain Grosjean for example, was always a driver with potential but getting involved in too many collisions. In spite of the potential that Boullier et al knew was there, Grosjean came close to losing his seat.

 

Going back further, Massa was clearly quick in 2002 but too ragged, was sent away for a year out testing Ferraris and came back a considerably maturer and capable driver.


Edited by hittheapex, 08 July 2014 - 02:37.


#36 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,768 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 July 2014 - 04:12

A guy hit me in a basketball game, tore my knee - should be pay my medical bills and loss of income/lifestyle?

 

Two years later, guy tripped me and I tore my shoulder - should he pay?

 

You understand in a competitive field there is an element of risk you willing take on.

 

Can't afford it? Don't play.



#37 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,319 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 08 July 2014 - 04:28

It's a part of motorsports.



#38 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 7,265 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 July 2014 - 04:38

Yesterday Raikkone trashed his Ferrari, and in the ensuing carnage he damaged the Marussia and Williams.

Should the team of the car driven by the driver who is at fault foot the bill to repair the cars damaged through no fault of the other drivers?

Maldonados big smash at spa for example, he caused thousands of pounds of damage that the teams had to foot the bill for... Should lotus have paid for all that? He trashed their races and left them with damages to pay for.

They could have the stewards decide who is at fault for determining who is to cough up.

F1 is expensive enough without having to pay for your Williams to be rebuilt because Kimi decides to get fruity with the barriers...

 

The teams figure that into the budget, just the same as we figure insurance.



#39 turssi

turssi
  • Member

  • 1,561 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 08 July 2014 - 05:32

No, but might prove a good tool for getting big insurance companies to come in as sponsors :-)

Advertisement

#40 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,707 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 July 2014 - 05:54

I think winning teams should pay damages to non winning teams since they are preventing them from getting prize money.



#41 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 08 July 2014 - 08:52

There's a difference between damage and damages, mate.



#42 Richard T

Richard T
  • Member

  • 1,296 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 08 July 2014 - 09:29

You got to be prepared for the consequences. Otherwise you should not be motor racing

#43 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,707 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 July 2014 - 09:30

There's a difference between damage and damages, mate.

Wasn't the whole discussion about teams paying damages (compensation) for the damage they've caused to other teams or am I missing something?

#44 Kraken

Kraken
  • Member

  • 822 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 July 2014 - 10:13

Then you'd have clauses written in driver's contracts saying it is the team's responsibility to pay. Then team would take legal action against each other to debate what the price of a new wing and uprights would cost (because you know the costs of damaged parts will skyrocket), and no money would ever exchange hands. 

 

If you crash, you have to pay for the parts yourself. You assume the risk by deciding to race. Whether the car costs tens of millions for F1, or a $5,000 F500 club car. 

Fair enough in a racing situation but what about when your club car is written off for the third time in a year because of drivers who drive flat out under yellow flags or deliberately take another driver out so their mate can win the race? Seen both happen on more than one occasion. Banning the driver doesn't help the guy who has a wrecked car and no money left.

 

Motorsport shouldn't just be for those with deep pockets. I've raced for many years on a tiny budget in series which don't seem to attract the nutters but others aren't so fortunate. When I started racing I assumed that all the other people on the track would obey the rules.



#45 Arska

Arska
  • Member

  • 747 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:52

Should boxers pay each other's medical bills?

 

The idea of boxing is to hurt your opponent enough to win the match. The idea of racing (at least in F1) isn't to wreck your opponents, in fact it's against the rules. Is there an analogy I'm missing?



#46 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,707 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 July 2014 - 11:59

The idea of boxing is to hurt your opponent enough to win the match. The idea of racing (at least in F1) isn't to wreck your opponents, in fact it's against the rules. Is there an analogy I'm missing?

Rubbing is racing. 

 



#47 KiloWatt

KiloWatt
  • Member

  • 1,218 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 08 July 2014 - 16:05

I would think that just having to pay your own bill (and driver safety) would be enough reason not have a crash - not to mention other teams' bills.

 

I can see the intent of the suggestion is pure and it is intended that this suggestion may lead to teams taking more responsibility for damage to their competitors.  But let's not forget the world we're living in.  It's going to lead to drivers being even more cautious and teams hesitating even further on taking risks.

 

After all, I've never went  :clap:  after a new rule was made.  I don't think many others have either.



#48 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 08 July 2014 - 18:11

The no win, no fee lawyers will be rubbing their hands over this idea - a whole new business opportunity for Claims Direct and their ilk.

#49 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,938 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 08 July 2014 - 18:36

"Have YOU been in an accident that wasn't your fault?"

 

"Is your name Felipe?"

 

"Were you in south Northamptonshire last Sunday?"

 

Contact us and if you are very lucky, there will still be something left for you after our fees have gobbled up most of the compensation. Ring us on 999 0000 to get an completely biased opinion on your case.  BernieClaims are waiting for your call.



#50 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 2,130 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 08 July 2014 - 19:05

Yesterday Raikkone trashed his Ferrari, and in the ensuing carnage he damaged the Marussia and Williams.

Should the team of the car driven by the driver who is at fault foot the bill to repair the cars damaged through no fault of the other drivers?

Maldonados big smash at spa for example, he caused thousands of pounds of damage that the teams had to foot the bill for... Should lotus have paid for all that? He trashed their races and left them with damages to pay for.

They could have the stewards decide who is at fault for determining who is to cough up.

F1 is expensive enough without having to pay for your Williams to be rebuilt because Kimi decides to get fruity with the barriers...

Come on now, we know Maldonado crashes a lot, but you can't blame him for that.  :lol:

 

He was still driving for Williams at that time.