55 replies to this topic

[Wander]

What would have happened if Dan had got passed on the straight just before the corner but left  braking too late so still went off the track ? That would also be gaining an advantage? But would it be penalised?

 

Not unless he took the position back with that.

 

You are allowed to make a mistake, obviously. Drivers go through chicanes without being penalised as long as they don't overtake people like that. Here it's not a corner being cut, but extended, but the rules treat it just the same.

Edited by Wander, 16 October 2013 - 06:53.

[PassWind]

So if someone TRIES to make a pass in a chicane stick but fails and drives right through it they should keep the place? 
 
NO-ONE wants unsafe barriers and injuries back (and it is distasteful and inappropriate to suggest they do).. but the replacement of traps with large runoffs indeed raises the issue of people using that extra runoff to get away with errors and bad moves multiple times every race, and the line HAS to be drawn. Obviously an intentional pass off he track is a no-brainer but one where the driver passed and failed to make it stick without going off is an appropriate situation for the stewards to use discretion. If the mistake came after the overtake and was unrelated to it then the pass should be allowed.. if made during the overtake or because of it then it should be given back.

  

What would have happened if Dan had got passed on the straight just before the corner but left  braking too late so still went off the track ? That would also be gaining an advantage? But would it be penalised?

Yeah completely agree with you and where Andy makes the point given how early into 130R he was past I wouldn't have been surprised if they OK'd it as well. Was the pass complete? Did the driver get an advantage going the longer way around the circuit, while trying to regain control of the car after it? Obviously it was decided he did, no problems from me but I can see Daniels point of view as well.

For the others who asked was I serious or not, please connect all of the sentences in the post and contextualize it before coming to an opinion based on a single line of text.

[redreni]

God knows how he will react when he hears the words "multi 21" uttered through his radio next year

Well since Vettel will get car number 1 again next year, "multi21" would be an instruction for Vettel to hold station behind Ricciardo, or possibly to let Ricciardo through and then hold station. I‘m not expecting to hear that particular instruction coming from Horner ever again after the way he was slapped down for attempting to impose such an order in Malaysia. And if we do hear it, I‘d expect Ricciardo to have the common sense to realise the race is still on, since these things mean nothing to Vettel. But then again, I‘d have expected him to have the common sense to realise he would have to cede position to Sutil in Japan, so maybe common sense isn‘t something we can necessarily expect from him.

Could be an interesting year next year...

[redreni]

I think there's a definite grey area where the driver being overtaken doesn't leave enough room, and the overtaker has to go off-track to avoid a collision.
 
You need some co-operation to overtake around the outside, and in the 'old days' (before the tarmac run-offs) you would normally get that, otherwise there would be a crash.
 
I had another look at the incident to check that Ricciardo wasn't forced off by Sutil, but it's very clear in this case, Sutil lifted or braked and allowed Ricciardo to overtake, so Ric could actually have turned in slightly earlier than he did. Probably he wasn't expecting Sutil to concede the corner quite so easily.
 
A definite penalty. Did anyone interview Ric or was he getting angry in private?

I agree it‘s often hard to tell, when a driver fails to make an outside-line pass within the track limits, whether that‘s because the defending driver is more prepared to force his rival onto the run-off than he would have been, in previous years, to force his rival onto the grass or gravel knowing there would be a massive accident. But you have to remember that, when there were no tarmac run-offs, some of the "brave" outside-line passing attempts we now see wouldn‘t have been attempted at all. If you want to blame the other car for the fact that you went off, it has to be clear that the other guy ran you wide and failed to give you the space demanded by accepted racing etiquette. In my vieew the benefit of any doubt should go to the car that stays on the track.

In this case I really don‘t think it‘s possible to make the case the case that Sutil was to blame for Ricciardo going off.

[redreni]

The way the rules are now it was a reasonable penalty but the way the whole system is implemented is stupid and short sighted in my opinion.
 
Should DR have given the position back "just in case" he received a penalty for it?
The answer is probably yes BUT:
 
Why does an incident like this need to be deemed as "under investigation"?  Surely this means that the Stewards need time to look at it and decide if an unfair advantage was gained correct?
So if the Stewards need to investigate then what is a driver supposed to do?
 
So the decision is "you've been given a drive through penalty for gaining an unfair advantage that you could not be 100 percent sure would attract a penalty until we have told you"...and "if you had of handed the position back it would have been fine but you'd never have known if you broke a rule".
 
It's the stupidest logic I've ever heard of.
 
There needs to be a hard and fast rule eg:  Overtake then leave the track in x amount of time, then hand the position back.
OR
The stewards investigate immediately and advise to hand the position back.
 
Giving a drive through and ruining a drivers race for something they would have not been 100 percent sure was wrong until they had been penalised is the wrong way to do it.

The way the rules are now it was a reasonable penalty but the way the whole system is implemented is stupid and short sighted in my opinion.
 
Should DR have given the position back "just in case" he received a penalty for it?
The answer is probably yes BUT:
 
Why does an incident like this need to be deemed as "under investigation"?  Surely this means that the Stewards need time to look at it and decide if an unfair advantage was gained correct?
So if the Stewards need to investigate then what is a driver supposed to do?
 
So the decision is "you've been given a drive through penalty for gaining an unfair advantage that you could not be 100 percent sure would attract a penalty until we have told you"...and "if you had of handed the position back it would have been fine but you'd never have known if you broke a rule".
 
It's the stupidest logic I've ever heard of.
 
There needs to be a hard and fast rule eg:  Overtake then leave the track in x amount of time, then hand the position back.
OR
The stewards investigate immediately and advise to hand the position back.
 
Giving a drive through and ruining a drivers race for something they would have not been 100 percent sure was wrong until they had been penalised is the wrong way to do it.

That‘s F1 for you. There are three rulebooks, and when you include the apendices, two of them would break your foot if you dropped them. And it is the teams‘ responsibility to ensure they comply. When you‘re in a grey area of interpretation, it‘s up to you to decide how far you want to push it. In a situation like this, you can avoid the risk of a drivethrough by giving up one place. It‘sa a dilema for the competitor. The stewards just need to do their best to make consistent, predictable decisions. That‘s all they can do. The decision we‘re talking about was entirely predictable and predicted by most people who saw the incident. It came as no surprise to anybody except STR and Ricciardo.

[Kelateboy]

What would have happened if Dan had got passed on the straight just before the corner but left  braking too late so still went off the track ? That would also be gaining an advantage? But would it be penalised?

 

Hockenheim 2012 - Vettel on Button. Post race drive through penalty (20s time penalty) for Vettel.