Ferrari "offering" to give Perez' spot back
#1
Posted 26 May 2013 - 20:52
Advertisement
#2
Posted 26 May 2013 - 20:54
Which is fine, I would think. And fair.
Edited by Seanspeed, 26 May 2013 - 20:54.
#3
Posted 26 May 2013 - 20:59
Ferrari offered and they were told that the stewards have the final saying so I guess nothing to really look into.
#4
Posted 26 May 2013 - 20:59
#5
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:06
That makes sense, too.The 'offer' had to do something with Ferrari wanting to give the place back to Perez under safety car conditions, which the stewards accepted and thereby Ferrari avoided the risk that other drivers behind would try to attack Alonso if he gave the place back to Perez in a racing situation.
#6
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:09
Had Alonso run several laps after the incident not giving the place back. The Stewards would have either contact Ferrari to tell Alonso to give the place back or handed a driver through penalty.
We have seen this before when teams are contacted and ask their drivers to give places back.
#7
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:18
IMO Perez never gained a place to lose, he just barged by. Alonso was avoiding a collisionI think this whole radio discussion happened because Alonso did not have time to give the place back, as the red flags came right after cutting the chicane.
Had Alonso run several laps after the incident not giving the place back. The Stewards would have either contact Ferrari to tell Alonso to give the place back or handed a driver through penalty.
We have seen this before when teams are contacted and ask their drivers to give places back.
#8
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:22
#9
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:30
#10
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:35
And Domenicalli once again shows he is unable to defend Ferrari interests.
#11
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:35
Yea, I cringe a bit at the wording of 'giving a place back' when Perez was never actually ahead, but whatever. Charlie had decided at that point and to fight it would have just meant a drive-through.
As Brundle oft-says though, failing to lose a place by cutting a chicane can be as bad as gaining one.
#12
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:38
This should not have been allowed IMO, it's not in the rule book.The 'offer' had to do something with Ferrari wanting to give the place back to Perez under safety car conditions, which the stewards accepted and thereby Ferrari avoided the risk that other drivers behind would try to attack Alonso if he gave the place back to Perez in a racing situation.
#13
Posted 26 May 2013 - 21:40
Yea, I cringe a bit at the wording of 'giving a place back' when Perez was never actually ahead, but whatever. Charlie had decided at that point and to fight it would have just meant a drive-through.
I think McLaren went to ask Charlie, but he has not the final word. If Ferrari would't decide to give Perez place stewards would investigate that (probably). In that case Ferrari wanted to lose one place than risk of loosing all points, or risk Perez getting mad by that and crashing into Alonso.
Edited by ArkZ, 26 May 2013 - 21:45.
#14
Posted 26 May 2013 - 22:03
Point of order, and all that, and I'm sure you already know the difference, but Charlie simply reports incidents to the Stewards who are the final arbiters. Charlie doesn't 'fight' anything.Yea, I cringe a bit at the wording of 'giving a place back' when Perez was never actually ahead, but whatever. Charlie had decided at that point and to fight it would have just meant a drive-through.
I think what Ferrari did was simple pragmatism of the sort which ultimately wins you world championships when those few points lost from a drive-through matter the most.
#15
Posted 27 May 2013 - 00:59
Almost hate to start a thread like this because I really don't give two shits either way who wins in F1, I just hope for a good race, but was it just me or were the radio transmissions we heard from Ferrari during the red flag kinda strange? Normally with incidents like that we hear radio shots with the engineer saying something like "The Stewards/Charlie/whoever have told us we need to give the spot back", but the Ferrari transmissions were all about taking offers to the stewards and trying to make a deal. Am I missing something? How can a team make offers to the stewards? Surely they just go to the officials and await judgement? Dunno what that was all about, but I was pretty tired during the race so I might've been reading it all wrong.
...the only message that would have made sense to hear from Ferrari should have been...
"OK Nando here it is, we'll go to the Stewarts and offer to give back the position And do a drive-through, plus, we'll throw in Massa, Domanicali and LDM, if we can get Checo back"
#16
Posted 27 May 2013 - 01:01
Also Perez is a lunatic as seen in his other moves in the race.
#17
Posted 27 May 2013 - 01:50
I thought they keep radio messages short and concise during racing so the driver isn't distracted, but if he's cruising around behind a SC or waiting out a Red Flag they can talk much more.
#18
Posted 27 May 2013 - 01:59
#19
Posted 27 May 2013 - 04:47
Advertisement
#20
Posted 27 May 2013 - 07:56
This.The 'offer' had to do something with Ferrari wanting to give the place back to Perez under safety car conditions, which the stewards accepted and thereby Ferrari avoided the risk that other drivers behind would try to attack Alonso if he gave the place back to Perez in a racing situation.
Your pro-Ferrari bias is sickening.Point of order, and all that, and I'm sure you already know the difference, but Charlie simply reports incidents to the Stewards who are the final arbiters. Charlie doesn't 'fight' anything.
I think what Ferrari did was simple pragmatism of the sort which ultimately wins you world championships when those few points lost from a drive-through matter the most.
Just kidding. You're right. I'm no Ferrari fan but they handled the situation very well.
#21
Posted 27 May 2013 - 08:30
, we'll go to the Stewarts
Jackie and Paul making the decisions now?
#22
Posted 27 May 2013 - 10:05
I heard Martin Whitmarsh talking during the red-flag period and I can't remember whether Ted Kravitz asked him if he expected Alonso to just disappear.
#23
Posted 27 May 2013 - 11:31
HOWEVER had Fred had the inclination, he could also have stayed on the brakes, let Perez go and made the chicane. So he only stayed ahead by cutting the chicane.
For me it's a really borderline one, 50-50. Totally subjective.
Once the decision was made, Ferrari just didn't want to get a drive through, they made this offer which was accepted and didn't lose out. Assuming the original decision is correct they handled it well.
#24
Posted 27 May 2013 - 11:52
In my heart of hearts I don't think Perez was past, he simply got enough along side to stop Fred from turning in.
HOWEVER had Fred had the inclination, he could also have stayed on the brakes, let Perez go and made the chicane. So he only stayed ahead by cutting the chicane.
For me it's a really borderline one, 50-50. Totally subjective.
Once the decision was made, Ferrari just didn't want to get a drive through, they made this offer which was accepted and didn't lose out. Assuming the original decision is correct they handled it well.
I think by the time Alonso realised Perez was that close, he had two options. Crash and potentially see both of them out of the race or cut the chicane and live another day.
It was a fairly late move by Perez IIRC. Had they been side-by-side going down into the chicane then fine. But that was never the case.
As you say, subjective stuff though.
#25
Posted 27 May 2013 - 18:28
I think by the time Alonso realised Perez was that close, he had two options. Crash and potentially see both of them out of the race or cut the chicane and live another day.
It was a fairly late move by Perez IIRC. Had they been side-by-side going down into the chicane then fine. But that was never the case.
As you say, subjective stuff though.
It doesn't mater what you ,Fernando or Ferrari thinks of the move when the stewards decide you have to give up the place you do it or you get a drive through penalty.