Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Should Alonso have gotten a penalty from shortcutting the chicane during the final laps?


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

Poll: Should Alonso have gotten a penalty from shortcutting the chicane during the final laps? (225 member(s) have cast votes)

Should Alonso have gotten a penalty from shortcutting the chicane during the final laps?

  1. Yes (30 votes [13.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.33%

  2. No (195 votes [86.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 86.67%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 August

August
  • Member

  • 3,277 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 15:59

Surprised to see no thread about this incident. I don't think Lewis would've gotten past anyway in that place so you can't say Alonso kept his position only by shortcutting the chicane. But, that was a mistake under pressure, he should've got to pay for his mistake. He may not have gotten any advantage but when you go out of the track, you should lose time, what of course doesn't happen with the tarmac runoffs.

 

I think he should've let HAM & RIC past or got a 5sec post-race penalty.



Advertisement

#2 chrcol

chrcol
  • Member

  • 3,554 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:00

no unlike rosberg, alonso lifted.  He made an effort to minimise any advantage.


Edited by chrcol, 27 July 2014 - 16:01.


#3 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 33,568 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:02

Nope, shorter chicane and he lifted

#4 aray

aray
  • Member

  • 5,796 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:03

he did it once,a genuine mistake...if he did it lap after lap(like Kimi in Spa 2009 and he got away with that)a penalty should have been in order...



#5 RAGE12463

RAGE12463
  • Member

  • 177 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:03

Uh they mentioned several how he lifted. To add a 5 sec penalty after that is asinine

#6 Dalin80

Dalin80
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:03

While the stupid decision from Spa 08 still stings me I'm going to say no, a mistake made once with no dramatic effect. If alonso had cut a couple or stretched the track boundaries like silverstone on the other hand...



#7 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Member

  • 7,911 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:05

Nope, he lifted as you're supposed to do.

 

Although speaking of penalties, unsafe releases apparently don't apply to McLaren drivers.



#8 NoSanityClause

NoSanityClause
  • Member

  • 1,390 posts
  • Joined: May 14

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:06

No, as mentioned, he did exactly the right thing in these cases, he lifted. 



#9 jcpower13

jcpower13
  • Member

  • 891 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:06

Nope, he lifted, unlike Mr. Rosberg in Canada who floored it.



#10 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:07

Let's not repeat the joke of Spa 2008.

#11 HoldenRT

HoldenRT
  • Member

  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:07

Grey area.. but no.



#12 kimister

kimister
  • Member

  • 2,979 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:08

No, not necessary for this occasion.



#13 jestaudio

jestaudio
  • Member

  • 2,059 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:09

Just make it cost if you cut a chicane,  humps, gravel etc.



#14 johnnyw

johnnyw
  • Member

  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:10

Probably not. But dunno how & if he actually lifted at all, he was 3 tenths faster on that lap than Hamilton unlike in previous laps where he was slower ;)


Edited by johnnyw, 27 July 2014 - 16:12.


#15 Raelene

Raelene
  • Member

  • 5,342 posts
  • Joined: April 99

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:14

I liked his clever thinking by lifting the hand off the wheel. Little nod to Charlie to show he wasn't gaining an adavtage

#16 Briz

Briz
  • Member

  • 453 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:16

In the context of modern Formula 1 and it's rules, it was going to be a surprise if he got a penalty.



#17 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:19

Not only did he lift, the precedent was set in Canada. It's really annoying that these threads keep popping up just because it's Lewis.



#18 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 14,226 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:19

There should be req

no unlike rosberg, alonso lifted.  He made an effort to minimise any advantage.

The problem is there is still a massive advantage to deciding early that you can't make a chicane compared to having to go all out on the brakes to make the corner. Lifting off so that it took the same amount of time as properly taking the corner is the wrong benchmark. You should have to lift off such that you are significantly slower than taking the proper line.

Personally I reckon there should be a thick red line across the insides of chicanes. The drivers should be told this is an imaginary wall. If it was a real wall, they'd have to retire with a broken car. Fortunately for them, that would be unsafe so they won't be retiring form the race. But any and every time they cross that (no exceptions), they have to lift off and slow down to 30mph.

Suddenly we'd see a lot less of drivers cutting chicanes (and hence threads likes these). Instead you see drivers who make mistakes having to go all out to still make the chicane, compromising their exit speed and losing places down the next straight.

#19 garoidb

garoidb
  • Member

  • 8,400 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:20

Nope, he lifted as you're supposed to do.

 

Although speaking of penalties, unsafe releases apparently don't apply to McLaren drivers.

 

Yeah, I was sure Button would attract a penalty.



Advertisement

#20 f1RacingForever

f1RacingForever
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:24

There should be req
The problem is there is still a massive advantage to deciding early that you can't make a chicane compared to having to go all out on the brakes to make the corner. Lifting off so that it took the same amount of time as properly taking the corner is the wrong benchmark. You should have to lift off such that you are significantly slower than taking the proper line.

Personally I reckon there should be a thick red line across the insides of chicanes. The drivers should be told this is an imaginary wall. If it was a real wall, they'd have to retire with a broken car. Fortunately for them, that would be unsafe so they won't be retiring form the race. But any and every time they cross that (no exceptions), they have to lift off and slow down to 30mph.

Suddenly we'd see a lot less of drivers cutting chicanes (and hence threads likes these). Instead you see drivers who make mistakes having to go all out to still make the chicane, compromising their exit speed and losing places down the next straight.

That's very complicated. Who's to say how much a driver would have lost if he had slowed right down and taken the corner? Big gray area there.



#21 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:27

Probably not. But dunno how & if he actually lifted at all, he was 3 tenths faster on that lap than Hamilton unlike in previous laps where he was slower ;)

Agree. It's too subjective to determine if he lifted or not to decide to apply a penalty. He braked too late and/or his tyres were too shot and he could not make the corner. Thing is had he braked normally and made the turn properly, LH would've probably been able to overtake him right then. Visually the advantage gained was clear and lifting (if it was actually done) doesn't compensate for the advantage gained, especially in a circuit like HR.



#22 August

August
  • Member

  • 3,277 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:31

There should be req
The problem is there is still a massive advantage to deciding early that you can't make a chicane compared to having to go all out on the brakes to make the corner. Lifting off so that it took the same amount of time as properly taking the corner is the wrong benchmark. You should have to lift off such that you are significantly slower than taking the proper line.

Personally I reckon there should be a thick red line across the insides of chicanes. The drivers should be told this is an imaginary wall. If it was a real wall, they'd have to retire with a broken car. Fortunately for them, that would be unsafe so they won't be retiring form the race. But any and every time they cross that (no exceptions), they have to lift off and slow down to 30mph.

Suddenly we'd see a lot less of drivers cutting chicanes (and hence threads likes these). Instead you see drivers who make mistakes having to go all out to still make the chicane, compromising their exit speed and losing places down the next straight.

 

Or paint there a rejoin route which one must follow or otherwise get a penalty.



#23 Ev0d3vil

Ev0d3vil
  • Member

  • 3,849 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:34

He raised his hand after cutting the chicane. Kinda like footballers kicking the ball out of play. if you get what i mean.



#24 PoleMan

PoleMan
  • Member

  • 1,563 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:35

Surprised to see no thread about this incident. I don't think Lewis would've gotten past anyway in that place so you can't say Alonso kept his position only by shortcutting the chicane. But, that was a mistake under pressure, he should've got to pay for his mistake. He may not have gotten any advantage but when you go out of the track, you should lose time, what of course doesn't happen with the tarmac runoffs.

 

I think he should've let HAM & RIC past or got a 5sec post-race penalty.

Thanks for including a poll which is allowing you to get instant feedback on how people's views differ from yours.   ;)



#25 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,870 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:35

Under the current situation in F1, I'd say no penalty was needed, for two reasons:

 

1) It was the first time it happened.

3) He was in front, stayed in front, and was not involved in an active overtaking manoeuvre.

 

However, this also gets back to the old 'if there was gravel'-argument. Yes, if there had been gravel, he'd probably have lost two places, perhaps damaged his car, and maybe even been forced to retire. On the other hand, had there been gravel, the drivers would probably be taking less risks, and the incident would never have taken place. Impossible to prove, of course, so it's probably best to stick to the current situation F1 finds itself in which, like it or not, has a lot of tarmac run-offs.


Edited by Nonesuch, 27 July 2014 - 16:36.


#26 P123

P123
  • Member

  • 23,879 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:36

No, it was the first time and he did lift. Hamilton still had the DRS so no harm done.

#27 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:40

No, it had no direct influence on the pecking order, but he did it deliberately, the sneaky sob.



#28 masa90

masa90
  • Member

  • 2,031 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:43

Nah, he cutted corner yes but he slowed down later.

 

Well thought to stretch the rules but they allow it so no complaints.



#29 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 2,541 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:49

Under the current situation in F1, I'd say no penalty was needed, for two reasons:

 

1) It was the first time it happened.

3) He was in front, stayed in front, and was not involved in an active overtaking manoeuvre.

 

However, this also gets back to the old 'if there was gravel'-argument. Yes, if there had been gravel, he'd probably have lost two places, perhaps damaged his car, and maybe even been forced to retire. On the other hand, had there been gravel, the drivers would probably be taking less risks, and the incident would never have taken place. Impossible to prove, of course, so it's probably best to stick to the current situation F1 finds itself in which, like it or not, has a lot of tarmac run-offs.

Ok, shouldn't that be the most objective measure in the decision to penalize? If the tarmac run-offs are mainly for the safety of the drivers, at least care should be taken in that they don't artificially modify the race. In the absence of actual grass or gravel (sighh) an automatic penalty is the closest thing. Grass and gravel don't care if the driver is having a great race or not, officials do.



#30 chrcol

chrcol
  • Member

  • 3,554 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:52

There should be req
The problem is there is still a massive advantage to deciding early that you can't make a chicane compared to having to go all out on the brakes to make the corner. Lifting off so that it took the same amount of time as properly taking the corner is the wrong benchmark. You should have to lift off such that you are significantly slower than taking the proper line.

Personally I reckon there should be a thick red line across the insides of chicanes. The drivers should be told this is an imaginary wall. If it was a real wall, they'd have to retire with a broken car. Fortunately for them, that would be unsafe so they won't be retiring form the race. But any and every time they cross that (no exceptions), they have to lift off and slow down to 30mph.

Suddenly we'd see a lot less of drivers cutting chicanes (and hence threads likes these). Instead you see drivers who make mistakes having to go all out to still make the chicane, compromising their exit speed and losing places down the next straight.

 

Well we have the DRS which has some kind of remote control system, your idea could work something like this.

 

Sensors along edge of track, or at least just at chicanes.

 

If car passes over sensor some kind of device is moved that adds drag and the ECU locks gear changing for 15 seconds as a penalty.  Suddenly drivers stop cutting chicanes :)

 

In alonso's case tho he seems to rarely cut chicanes hence my no vote, some drivers do it more than others.
 



#31 Kristian

Kristian
  • Member

  • 4,365 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 27 July 2014 - 16:59

No. He made a mistake, it wasn't defending against an imminent overtake at that corner, and he gave time back. If he had a penalty it would have been a joke tbh. 



#32 HuddersfieldTerrier1986

HuddersfieldTerrier1986
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 17:01

To suggest he should've let Hamilton or Ricciardo past or got a 5 second penalty is total lunacy. As for suggesting the 'red line/imaginary wall/have to slow down to 30mph' idea, sorry, that's lunacy too, far too much of a penalty for what could be a minor lock up and not gaining any sort of advantage, lasting or not. Absolutely no reason for some of the ridiculously harsh penalties being suggested.



#33 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 14,226 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 27 July 2014 - 17:22

But he did gain gain massive advantage - by opting not to take a hugely compromised line through the chicane. If he had done so he might have lost a tiny fraction of a second, several seconds, flat spotted his tyres or stuck it in the wall. We don't know what would have happened but whatever outcome it was, it would have been THE fair and natural outcome.

The penalty for cutting the chicane is meant to be harsh because it's meant to put the drivers in the mindset that they must always try to make the corner the best they can. Cutting should always be a worse option available by a clear margin.

So had the red line rule existed, we wouldn't be here discussing Alonso's slowdown penalty because he would never have opted to cut the chicane. He'd have made the corner one way or the other and we'd be discussing the outcome of that.

#34 HuddersfieldTerrier1986

HuddersfieldTerrier1986
  • Member

  • 2,721 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 17:31

Sorry but you're being absolutely ridiculous. What if a driver is forced off track? What if a driver makes a minor mistake? What if the driver gets caught out by a wet track on dry tyres? Sorry but you're being ridiculous. He did NOT gain a massive advantage. Maybe you'd have preferred him to not cut the chicane and end up crashing into another car because of him having to slow down so much and turn in to still make the corner that he'd have potentially crashed into another driver? I don't mean to come across as so harsh but I really can't believe you're suggesting the sort of penalties you are (which are so harsh it's not even funny, it's basically saying "you made a very small error/you were nudged off track, now suffer massively for no actual reason"). He didn't gain an advantage, therefore he wasn't penalised, and there's absolutely no reason for your completely ludicrous penalty solution to even be suggested. I'm not sure whether you're suggesting it because you're a Hamilton fan, because you were drunk before posting it or what, but it's such a stupid idea that quite frankly it's the sort of fruitloop nutcase idea I'd expect Bernie or the teams to come up with, as they regularly come up with rules that are beyond ridiculous.


Edited by HuddersfieldTerrier1986, 27 July 2014 - 17:34.


#35 Longtimefan

Longtimefan
  • Member

  • 3,170 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 27 July 2014 - 17:32

No, of course not, he lifted.

#36 August

August
  • Member

  • 3,277 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 17:45

Just to make it clear, my opinion has nothing to do with the drivers but how you aren't penalized for shortcutting. And by being penalized, I meant the time you lose when you leave the track. On modern circuits, you don't anymore get penalized by the runoff, you just need to lift off enough for stewards to accept that.

 

Obviously a penalty would've been hars even though 5sec penalty or something like that would've been small compared to Vergne's penalty points for leaving the track.

 

I think something should be done to discourage leaving the track, and when you must leave the track, you should lose time.



#37 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 18:40

I voted no but it isnt because he lifted. HAM was clearly quicker and closed on ALO with or without ALO lifting. The reason I voted no is because these things happen and no driver should be penalized for one such occurrence.

 

Many drivers went wide on T4, so either you make rules that any going off track would be penalized or work out a system. The current system seems to take the view that doing it repeatedly would get you into trouble, so be it.



#38 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 5,341 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 18:46

Thank goodness the OP isn't a steward when he is advocating penalties like this. 

 

It was a mistake which he didn't gain an advantage from. 



#39 ZZei

ZZei
  • Member

  • 614 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 19:18

May sound harsh but I think some kind of penalty wouldnt be out of the line. After all, he was fighting for position, whether hamilton was trying to make a move or not to me is irrelevant. This is F1, and the track limits should be respected especially when fighting for position. The way I see it he was forced into mistake and thus he should pay the price for it. He might have lifted but he still gained quite a good amount of space between him and hamilton. The only question is what would be the right punisment for this. Letting the car behind move ahead wouldnt be too harsh I think. This isnt of course the first time this has happened, for example in canada people did it quite often and to me it just doesnt seem right you can get away with mistakes that easily.



Advertisement

#40 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 3,143 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 19:32

No.

#41 dgduris

dgduris
  • Member

  • 251 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 27 July 2014 - 19:36

Hamilton is a fast driver - who is totally being undone by his near psychotic inability to control his feelings.



#42 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 12,129 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 27 July 2014 - 19:41

Nope, he lifted, unlike Mr. Rosberg in Canada who floored it.

 

Check your facts.
 



#43 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 20:56

You could argue that a driver going off and rejoining in that manner should be forced to lose time or track position, but that isn't the rule. The rule is you can't gain a lasting advantage. Alonso gained a modest time advantage but then he backed off, so it wasn't a lasting advantage. Everyone understands that this is within the rules, which is why it wasn't investigated and few people have questioned it.

I thought Hamilton's radio call was interesting. If you're going to paraphrase the regulations like "Fernando gained an advantage" it helps if you quote the current regulations rather than last year's. Because the phrase is "lasting advantage" and the trouble is, Hamilton couldn't really use thephrase because it was very clear that no lasting advantage was gained.

Edited by redreni, 27 July 2014 - 20:59.


#44 garagetinkerer

garagetinkerer
  • Member

  • 3,620 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 27 July 2014 - 21:06

Nope, he lifted as you're supposed to do.

 

Although speaking of penalties, unsafe releases apparently don't apply to McLaren drivers.

:rotfl: :up:

 

Forgot to mention... we should point it out next time someone says FIArrari is out to get them :p

 

 

Hamilton is a fast driver - who is totally being undone by his near psychotic inability to control his feelings.

Around here, you're just courting trouble with an opinion such as this.


Edited by garagetinkerer, 27 July 2014 - 21:09.


#45 TurboF1

TurboF1
  • Member

  • 748 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 July 2014 - 21:16

Massive no. He didn't gain a lasting advantage, just an honest mistake. Hell, it wouldve benefited "my" driver Lewis if he was penalized, but enough of these silly penalties! They're RACING for christs sake. **** happens sometimes, not every incident warrants a penalty. It was fine. 



#46 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 21,814 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 27 July 2014 - 21:20

Would have been harsh. Don't really feel he gained much of an advantage. Maybe a few tenths, half a second at most? They weren't in a part of the track where overtaking was possible, so I don't think it robbed anybody of an opportunity or anything. Alonso was a fair bit slower at that point and was caught right back up quickly enough.

#47 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 17,232 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 27 July 2014 - 21:21

Absolutely not.
It was a whole different issue from Nico at Canada.

#48 RockyRaccoon68

RockyRaccoon68
  • Member

  • 1,606 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 July 2014 - 21:46

This isn't even close to being similar to the Rosberg incident in Canada!



#49 Burtros

Burtros
  • Member

  • 3,266 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 27 July 2014 - 22:24

No. Not for the first mistake at a Chicane where no advantage is gained from doing so. The current policy in this area is established and not in need of change IMO.

 

We need less penalties, not more.


Edited by Burtros, 27 July 2014 - 22:24.


#50 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 4,653 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 27 July 2014 - 22:40

There's no way he should have been given a penalty in the context of current F1 and how penalties are handed out. It would have been an inconsistency.

However, it is also unacceptable to me that this sort of thing happens. Obviously he gained an advantage. He didn't gain an advantage relative to taking the corner the normal way, but he gained time relative to the mistake he made. For example, if it wasn't a chicane and he'd just gone wide round a corner, he would have lost more time. Also, if he'd made a real effort to go round the chicane on a poor line he would have lost more time. Or if he'd missed the chicane, reversed and done the corner properly, he'd have lost more time. So yes, he gained an advantage.

But what do we do about such things? I don't like the idea of penalties because it's really just a mistake (as opposed to "cheating") and the track should sort it out. So there's the gravel argument, and there's also the argument that cuttable chicanes should be eliminated wherever possible. I don't think all these chicanes in F1 are necessary. They only need to exist to slow cars down in the run up to a corner that otherwise wouldn't have a big enough run-off to be safe. And they can be redesigned to make them less likely to be cut.

Another solution is to have a penalty lane somewhere round the track - like a mini pitlane, but where drivers go wide of the actual circuit through this lane and it costs them a few seconds, but less than a drive-through. Going through this would be an automatic consequence of cutting a chicane - no adjudication should be necessary. It could even just be seen as another route round the track. You can either drive the "normal" line, or cut the chicane and go through the penalty lane - the latter would always be designed to take longer. Although having said that, it would be very unsatisfactory if, say, Hamilton had passed Alonso by cutting the chicane and then stayed ahead through the penalty lane because he's stretched out enough of a gap. So the penalty lane would ideally be very near to the chicane and also enough of a detour to make sure it never paid to cut the chicane.

Edited by PlatenGlass, 27 July 2014 - 22:43.