Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Romain Grosjean Vs the stewards [retitled]


  • Please log in to reply
370 replies to this topic

#1 SamH123

SamH123
  • Member

  • 2,952 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:12

#f1 Grosjean could be excluded from P3 on grid as floor flexed more than allowed. It's with the stewards now @AllanMcNish among them

This would be sad...

Edit: NO penalty because flexing issue was due to bottoming at a corner. Fuss over :)

Edit2: This thread is now also about Grosjean's incidents during the race

Edited by SamH123, 28 July 2013 - 20:16.


Advertisement

#2 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,172 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:18

Any other sources? Would be a pity, as RoGro's been dynamite all weekend.

#3 SamH123

SamH123
  • Member

  • 2,952 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:20

All the reputable journalists on Twitter have confirmed it some way or other.

New tweet though:

Ian Parkes ā€@ianparkesf1 6m
Argument from Lotus re Grosjean floor is he hit a kerb so resulting in greater degree of reflection. Over to the stewards.

Seems an interesting one

#4 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,677 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:21

Any other sources? Would be a pity, as RoGro's been dynamite all weekend.

There is already an article on the issue here in Autosport
http://www.autosport...t.php/id/109036

#5 Menace

Menace
  • Member

  • 12,799 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:22

All the reputable journalists on Twitter have confirmed it some way or other.

New tweet though:

Ian Parkes ā€@ianparkesf1 6m
Argument from Lotus re Grosjean floor is he hit a kerb so resulting in greater degree of reflection. Over to the stewards.

Seems an interesting one


Its the only feasible argument they have... it's up to the stewards now. If they don't see obvious damage he might be DQ'd. :cry: That would be a shame after such a great effort!

#6 Niceone

Niceone
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:23

Wasn't there this one Brazilian GP in past where 5 out of 6 top cars had illegal floor after the race, but none of them were excluded, because they determined that it was caused by track?

#7 sv401

sv401
  • Member

  • 757 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:26

Any other sources? Would be a pity, as RoGro's been dynamite all weekend.


Now, imagine the uproar if this happened to Webber. :D

#8 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,172 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:28

There is already an article on the issue here in Autosport
http://www.autosport...t.php/id/109036

Thanks. :) I don't visit anything on Autosport other than the forums.

Wasn't there this one Brazilian GP in past where 5 out of 6 top cars had illegal floor after the race, but none of them were excluded, because they determined that it was caused by track?

I think you're remembering the 2007 race, in which many of the cars running just outside the podium had discrepancies regarding fuel temperature, but the result was apparently left alone because it would alter the outcome of the championship.

#9 Brawn BGP 001

Brawn BGP 001
  • Member

  • 5,948 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:30

Wasn't there this one Brazilian GP in past where 5 out of 6 top cars had illegal floor after the race, but none of them were excluded, because they determined that it was caused by track?

2000 wasn't it? DC was the only one DQ'd.

Edited by Brawn BGP 001, 27 July 2013 - 17:30.


#10 SilentKiller

SilentKiller
  • Member

  • 656 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:30

Official FIA Report

Posted Image

#11 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:33

Its the only feasible argument they have... it's up to the stewards now. If they don't see obvious damage he might be DQ'd. :cry: That would be a shame after such a great effort!


All they have to do is check KR's car? If both car's are the same, It's DQ, if only RG's and they find signs of damage, change the floor and get on with it? RG doesn't deserve this, the guy is just pulling his xxxt together, now this. He was impessive the whole weekend.

#12 Niceone

Niceone
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:33

I think you're remembering the 2007 race, in which many of the cars running just outside the podium had discrepancies regarding fuel temperature, but the result was apparently left alone because it would alter the outcome of the championship.

Happened before this. Issue was that they had floorboard that was showing too much wear.

Ps. They weren't excluded in 2007 because those measurements were too inaccurate and potential benefit would have been tiny; even in complete race distance.

#13 Niceone

Niceone
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:35

2000 wasn't it? DC was the only one DQ'd.

And he was DQ'd because of illegal front wing.

#14 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 10,024 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:38

No DSQ for Grosjean.

Edited by Massa, 27 July 2013 - 17:39.


#15 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:39

It would be sad if he got excluded. Lotus does everything to destroy Gro's confidence, and again giving a position (for the fourth f**** straight time!!!) to their overrated golden child. :down:

#16 goingthedistance

goingthedistance
  • RC Forum Host

  • 4,471 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:39

Tobias GrĆ¼ner F1 ā€@tgruener 10s
#F1 Support-pillar of front splitter got damaged when he drove over kerbs. So probably no penalty for @RGrosjean.

#17 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 10,024 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:39

I think other team will not be happy about this.

#18 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:39

I bet Vettel will be happy. Damn shame, I was looking forward to seeing how RG could start just behind SV. In all seriousness though, he did a fantastic job and doesn't deserve this.

#19 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,172 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:40

Official FIA Report

Posted Image

Thanks for the picture. :up:

Happened before this. Issue was that they had floorboard that was showing too much wear.

Ps. They weren't excluded in 2007 because those measurements were too inaccurate and potential benefit would have been tiny; even in complete race distance.

That's right. Feels like so long ago already. :drunk:

Advertisement

#20 micktosin

micktosin
  • Member

  • 1,027 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:40

#No penalty as confrimed of bbc. Goodnews for romain and lotus.

#21 Lord Snooty

Lord Snooty
  • Member

  • 938 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:40

Just heard on tv that no penalty for RG. No link but apparently no penalty.

#22 SealTheDiffuser

SealTheDiffuser
  • Member

  • 2,416 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:40

Tobias GrĆ¼ner F1 ā€@tgruener 10s
#F1 Support-pillar of front splitter got damaged when he drove over kerbs. So probably no penalty for @RGrosjean.


pbp?

#23 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 44,645 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:41

And he was DQ'd because of illegal front wing.


He was DQ'd because the wing was too low having suffered damage during the race. Sometimes they allow damage as an excuse sometimes they don't.


#24 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:43

It would be sad if he got excluded. Lotus does everything to destroy Gro's confidence, and again giving a position (for the fourth f**** straight time!!!) to their overrated golden child. :down:


Shut up, itĀ“s enough of a blow if it finally costs him his slot, we donĀ“t need to read stupid conspiracies as extra pain.

I have hope heĀ“ll be allowed to keep it if itĀ“s deemed as on-track damage. Lotus always run their cars VERY low and it might be just that, the car hitting something hard.

#25 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:43

#No penalty as confrimed of bbc. Goodnews for romain and lotus.


:up:


#26 artista

artista
  • RC Forum Host

  • 5,677 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:44

It would be sad if he got excluded. Lotus does everything to destroy Gro's confidence, and again giving a position (for the fourth f**** straight time!!!) to their overrated golden child. :down:

How is this, did they put a gun on Grosjean's head to force him to drive over the kerbs and damage his very own floor?

#27 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 33,568 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:45

Lotus set the car up, they decide how low they want to run the car. Or am I missing something?

#28 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:46

I would be happy if no penalty is given for him. Interesting stuff though, Vettel and Hamilton also had problems with the floor test, did any other drivers have been investigated?

Edited by GiancarloF1, 27 July 2013 - 17:47.


#29 skywing

skywing
  • Member

  • 706 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:46

I would be happy if no penalty is given for him. Interesting stuff though, Vettel and Hamilton also had problems with the floor test, did any other drivers other have been investigated?

How about reading the statement?

#30 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:47

How is this, did they put a gun on Grosjean's head to force him to drive over the kerbs and damage his very own floor?


Well, they did screw him in Spain, Canada, Britain and Germany, no matter what happened today. But it's offtopic, sorry for my knee jerk reactions.

#31 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:47

I would be happy if no penalty is given for him. Interesting stuff though, Vettel and Hamilton also had problems with the floor test, did any other drivers other have been investigated?


they didn't


#32 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 11,790 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:48

It would be sad if he got excluded. Lotus does everything to destroy Gro's confidence, and again giving a position (for the fourth f**** straight time!!!) to their overrated golden child. :down:


WTF? GRO is lucky to be in a team who believes in his long-term potential and gave him lots of chances (and they may be right to do so). Had he been in TR or most other teams he would have long been out of a drive

#33 Lopek

Lopek
  • Member

  • 271 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:49

Bad decision imo. Just because the car gained an advantage due to damage does not mean it did not gain an unfair advantage. Grosjean caused the damage.

An advantage is an advantage whether caused by accidental or intentional breaking of the rules. Having varying stewards deciding which rule violation is ok is a recipe for a farce.

And what happens now if a team designs a floor stay that breaks easily under compression to intentionally cause this "problem" and gain an advantage?


#34 PerfectMan

PerfectMan
  • New Member

  • 18 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:49

Seems like you don't really have to follow the rules if you got a Renault in the back.

#35 superdelphinus

superdelphinus
  • Member

  • 3,175 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:50

Nah from that I took it that the test is carried out on the top 3 cars, as per the regs

#36 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:51

It would be sad if he got excluded. Lotus does everything to destroy Gro's confidence, and again giving a position (for the fourth f**** straight time!!!) to their overrated golden child. :down:


If you replaced the word Grosjean with Webber, it would remind me a standard karne post.:p

#37 GiancarloF1

GiancarloF1
  • Member

  • 925 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:52

they didn't


Sorry, didn't read it carefully.

#38 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 11,790 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:55

Bad decision imo. Just because the car gained an advantage due to damage does not mean it did not gain an unfair advantage. Grosjean caused the damage.

An advantage is an advantage whether caused by accidental or intentional breaking of the rules. Having varying stewards deciding which rule violation is ok is a recipe for a farce.

And what happens now if a team designs a floor stay that breaks easily under compression to intentionally cause this "problem" and gain an advantage?


How do you know it was an advantage?

#39 Lopek

Lopek
  • Member

  • 271 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:58

How do you know it was an advantage?

:rolleyes:

Advertisement

#40 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 10,024 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:58

How do you know it was an advantage?


If i remember well, Schumacher at Spa 94 was DQ because his floor was not conform with the rules, because of a spin during the race no ? Why now there is a change ? I don't think Grosjean merit a penalty, but if the floor was not conform with the rules, he has to be DQ, no matter the cause, right ?

#41 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:58

Bad decision imo. Just because the car gained an advantage due to damage does not mean it did not gain an unfair advantage. Grosjean caused the damage.

An advantage is an advantage whether caused by accidental or intentional breaking of the rules. Having varying stewards deciding which rule violation is ok is a recipe for a farce.

And what happens now if a team designs a floor stay that breaks easily under compression to intentionally cause this "problem" and gain an advantage?

You really don't have a clue, don't you?

How about not gaining an advantage at all from a broken floor?

#42 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 33,568 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:01

After 70 laps tomorrow, what's to say it won't happen again? Will he be let off again? Surely the only way for Lotus to prevent it is to break parc-ferme, and they don't seem to be doing that, so I'm confused as to where they can go from here.

#43 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 11,790 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:02

:rolleyes:


What's with the :rolleyes: ? You based your argument on having an advantage, as if it is given that he had one.

If i remember well, Schumacher at Spa 94 was DQ because his floor was not conform with the rules, because of a spin during the race no ? Why now there is a change ? I don't think Grosjean merit a penalty, but if the floor was not conform with the rules, he has to be DQ, no matter the cause, right ?


Because that was incompetent FIA trying to get back at Benetton. Otherwise, I think it's long-standing practice that if you are illegal because of damage it usually does not count. Like when you are underweight because you lost parts. Otherwise everyone who breaks his FW or suspension, or has a tyre failure, would have to be DQ'ed for violating ground clearance regulations.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 27 July 2013 - 18:02.


#44 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:04

If i remember well, Schumacher at Spa 94 was DQ because his floor was not conform with the rules, because of a spin during the race no ? Why now there is a change ? I don't think Grosjean merit a penalty, but if the floor was not conform with the rules, he has to be DQ, no matter the cause, right ?

Not right. There have always been a lot of cases of cars that are damaged during Q resulting in non-conformity with the rules. They are always allowed to be repaired, and the only penalties in those cases are for a gearbox changes etc.

#45 Lopek

Lopek
  • Member

  • 271 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:04

You really don't have a clue, don't you?

How about not gaining an advantage at all from a broken floor?

Yeah, they just do the floor deflection test for giggles as having a floor flexing down under load has no advantage at all. :rolleyes:

And ultimately whether he gained and advantage or not is irrelevant. If a car fails a technical test it should be penalised. Otherwise there is no point doing the tests & having technical regulations.

#46 aray

aray
  • Member

  • 5,796 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:05

Bad decision imo. Just because the car gained an advantage due to damage does not mean it did not gain an unfair advantage. Grosjean caused the damage.

An advantage is an advantage whether caused by accidental or intentional breaking of the rules. Having varying stewards deciding which rule violation is ok is a recipe for a farce.

And what happens now if a team designs a floor stay that breaks easily under compression to intentionally cause this "problem" and gain an advantage?

how do you know it is a advantage.?..he could well lose 2 tenth from it...

#47 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:07

After 70 laps tomorrow, what's to say it won't happen again? Will he be let off again? Surely the only way for Lotus to prevent it is to break parc-ferme, and they don't seem to be doing that, so I'm confused as to where they can go from here.

In case of any kind of Q damage, repair in parc ferme is allowed under FIA supervision after consulting the stewards.

It's the same story with Mark Webber: his KERS failure is allowed to be repaired overnight as well.

Edited by scheivlak, 27 July 2013 - 18:09.


#48 Szoelloe

Szoelloe
  • Member

  • 7,054 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:08

After 70 laps tomorrow, what's to say it won't happen again? Will he be let off again? Surely the only way for Lotus to prevent it is to break parc-ferme, and they don't seem to be doing that, so I'm confused as to where they can go from here.


What? A broken splitter for lap after lap over the kerbs that broke it, on the Hungaroring? Do you really think the car would finish the race? Peole are assuming this was an advantage. It's not.


#49 jstrains

jstrains
  • Member

  • 3,219 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:10

Posted Image

#50 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,473 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 27 July 2013 - 18:13

And ultimately whether he gained and advantage or not is irrelevant.

Indeed, whether he gained and advantage or not is irrelevant.
The crucial thing if it's because of some kind of damage during Q. If so, no penalty will be applied.
If that isnĀ“t the case, DQ.