4 replies to this topic

[FordFan]

Every time a driver takes another car out of the race, there is all this discussion about whether or not it is a 'racing incident' or something else - the implication being that if it's a racing incident, then no one is to blame.

But, what is the other option, really? That the driver intentionally took him out? That never happens (in F1 anyway). All these wrecks happen 'while racing'. Why is RB's hit(s) on Ralf racing incidents while Jos' was not? Surely, Jos was not trying to hit Montoya. He was just trying to let him by without letting Fisichella get to close - and screwed up. They both seemed equally unnecessary. Apparently, though, a lot is made of this distinction, since fines and the like seem be handed out or not based on whether an accident is a racing incident or not.

The point is, I don't know what the hell a racing incident is (or what the alternatives are), so I would appreciate if someone would explain it to me (in a way that isn't just excuse-making for their favorite driver).

[Bruce]

A "Racing accident" is an accident in which the driver who is obviously to blame cannot be for political or other reasons, thus, to keep the accident blamesless, we have a nice "sweep under the carpet" phrase like "racing accident".

;);););););)

[Williams]

To me a "racing incident" means something that happened as a result of the close quarters "racing" between two vehicles, in which the accident occured simply because the probabilities of of something going wrong were very high, e.g. an overtaking maneuver on a wet track. This would typically involve a minor screwup on the part of one driver or another, which could be expected to occur even amongst competent drivers in the given situation.

I would suppose that "racing incidents" are not penalized because both drivers have entered into the situation voluntarily as competitors, and may the best man win. Non-"racing incidents" would be penalized generally because a driver behaved in a way prejudicial to the competetion without having a proper stake in it, (e.g. a backmarker being lapped attempts to race a front-runner and accidently takes him out).

My silly definition aside, the term "racing" incident seems appropriate when comparing the Verstappen/JPM and RB/RS incidents. RB and RS were "racing" at time of their incident, whilst JPM was lapping Verstappen at the time of their entanglement (i.e. "not racing") and therefore RB/RS can be covered under the term "racing incident", while Verstappen/JPM cannot. Therefore the penalty to Verstappen and not RB.

IMHO

[gerry nassar]

Ferrari involved = Racing incident:rolleyes:

[Williams]

Ferrari involved = Racing incident

Or what he said ;)