68 replies to this topic

[Jovanotti]

So I and many others wondered about this in the race thread - should have Bottas been penalised for holding up Verstappen and Vettel behind the Safety Car?

 

Imo these rules from the sporting regulations do apply:

Quote

 

39.5 No car may be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person at any time whilst the safety car is deployed. This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

 

39.7 All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car no more than ten car lengths apart.

 

This was the gap as seen on TV:

Spoiler

 

Checking with Google maps, this results in an approximate distance of 130 m.

Spoiler

 

So unless the Mercedes is 13 m long (which it isn't, although I had to check first), this is a slam dunk penalty for Bottas. Thoughts?

Edited by Jovanotti, 26 May 2019 - 16:00.

[f1paul]

Yes, Bottas should have got a penalty as that should not be allowed IMO. BUT, the problems are the rules. 

 

Quote

 

39.5 No car may be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person at any time whilst the safety car is deployed. This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

What is "unnecessarily slowly" - there is no number on this thing. It should be, you have to stay within, say 3 seconds of your delta, but the rules are pretty vague.

[f1paul]

Quote

 

39.7 All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car no more than ten car lengths apart.

The leaders weren't behind the SC yet so this rule does not apply to the Bottas incident.

[PayasYouRace]

f1paul, on 26 May 2019 - 16:02, said:

The leaders weren't behind the SC yet so this rule does not apply to the Bottas incident.

 

I think that might be what saved them in this case.

 

I was suspecting that perhaps the stewards were distracted by Red Bull's unsafe release. But as you point out the cars were not yet in the safety car queue, so as long as nobody exceeded their delta, then there's actually no problem.

[f1paul]

PayasYouRace, on 26 May 2019 - 16:04, said:

I think that might be what saved them in this case.

 

I was suspecting that perhaps the stewards were distracted by Red Bull's unsafe release. But as you point out the cars were not yet in the safety car queue, so as long as nobody exceeded their delta, then there's actually no problem.

Precisely, the only thing you could penalise Bottas for is the "unnecessarily slowly" part but this is vague and wide open to interpretation, the rules are not clear enough. 

[bibliophagos]

I think it's a loophole in the rules that should be closed. Suppose his happens when they're 1 and 2 and a vsc is called. The number 2 (probably Bottas) could slow down to a crawl, let the number 1 make a pitstop without pressure and just drive away into the sunset before the other cars have even reached the pits. It's very unsporting to say the least and it should be prohibited.

[anyeis]

Bottas did a Spa Kimi

[Jovanotti]

The problem is that Hamilton has been penalised under the exact same scenario in Bahrain 2017. But well, we all know about the inconsistent stewarding...the rules should definitely be clearer.

 

anyeis, on 26 May 2019 - 16:12, said:

Bottas did a Spa Kimi

I thought back then it was a thing explicitly allowed to do and had been ruled prohibited afterwards.

Edited by Jovanotti, 26 May 2019 - 16:14.

[ArrowsLivery]

Yes, Bottas should've gotten a penalty. 

[Lights]

He should've had a penalty if they'd want to apply consistency based on Hamilton's penalty in Bahrain 2017.

[f1paul]

Also Sirotkin got a penalty for the same thing last year at the French GP too. So no consistency at all.

[f1paul]

In here: https://www.fia.com/...g-information-6

 

The Stewards, having received a report from the Race Director, have considered the following matter and determine the following:
No / Driver 35 - Sergey Sirotkin Competitor Williams Martini Racing Time 16:17 Session Race Fact Car 35 drove unnecessarily slowly behind the safety car. Offence Breach of Article 39.5 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations. Decision 5 second time penalty (2 penalty points awarded, 5 points in total for the 12 month period) Reason The Stewards reviewed video, team radio communications and GPS data.  Car 35 was instructed to stack behind Car 18 and to go “plus 8”.  The driver of Car 35 then slowed significantly creating a large gap behind Car 18, by driving unnecessarily slowly. All Competitors are hereby reminded of their right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, as set out in the International Sporting Code and related regulations, including the time limits for such appeals.

Garry Connelly Enzo Spano
Yannick Dalmas Jean-Marie Krempff

[Yamamoto]

Jovanotti, on 26 May 2019 - 16:12, said:

The problem is that Hamilton has been penalised under the exact same scenario in Bahrain 2017. But well, we all know about the inconsistent stewarding...the rules should definitely be clearer.

 

I thought back then it was a thing explicitly allowed to do and had been ruled prohibited afterwards.

 

You're correct as I recall it; the rule was changed after that race, Fisichella was subsequently penalised in China for the same thing.

[Clatter]

f1paul, on 26 May 2019 - 21:02, said:

In here: https://www.fia.com/...g-information-6

 

The Stewards, having received a report from the Race Director, have considered the following matter and determine the following:
No / Driver 35 - Sergey Sirotkin Competitor Williams Martini Racing Time 16:17 Session Race Fact Car 35 drove unnecessarily slowly behind the safety car. Offence Breach of Article 39.5 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations. Decision 5 second time penalty (2 penalty points awarded, 5 points in total for the 12 month period) Reason The Stewards reviewed video, team radio communications and GPS data.  Car 35 was instructed to stack behind Car 18 and to go “plus 8”.  The driver of Car 35 then slowed significantly creating a large gap behind Car 18, by driving unnecessarily slowly. All Competitors are hereby reminded of their right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, as set out in the International Sporting Code and related regulations, including the time limits for such appeals.

Garry Connelly Enzo Spano
Yannick Dalmas Jean-Marie Krempff

 

Not the same offence though as they were not behind the safety car at the point they all pitted.

[Nonesuch]

Jovanotti, on 26 May 2019 - 15:57, said:

So unless the Mercedes is 13 m long (which it isn't, although I had to check first), this is a slam dunk penalty for Bottas. Thoughts?

 

In this case it's probably going to depend on the FIA race director's instructions as to what he considers to be 'unnecessary'. A proper race director would put the kibosh on these lame practises, but this is F1.

 

Not that they tend to care about the car lengths either, but hey. Half the time F1 has a safety car there's cars all over the track doing their own thing, it's a bit of a joke.

[redreni]

There's no rule to prevent a driver who would otherwise have to stack in pit lane from slowing down in order to impede those behind him. This saves his clutch, as it means he doesn't have to stop, start, stop again and start again in the pit lane. He can just roll into his box as his teammate is leaving. More importantly, slowing down on the in-lap ensures cars that were running immediately behind you are delayed on their way to their box by dint of not being allowed to overtake you, so they don't gain track position on you. If you drive to the deltas on the way in and then have to stop behind your teammate, you're losing time against those who came in behind you and got serviced without having to wait.

 

Personally I don't like to see it, but I recognise it does help mitigate the penalty of being behind your teammate on the road and so having to stack in the pits.

[Zoe]

Like in:

 

Personally I don't like cheating, but it helps mitigate deficencies of having a weaker configuration and so not coming first....

[PayasYouRace]

redreni, on 29 May 2019 - 01:19, said:

There's no rule to prevent a driver who would otherwise have to stack in pit lane from slowing down in order to impede those behind him. This saves his clutch, as it means he doesn't have to stop, start, stop again and start again in the pit lane. He can just roll into his box as his teammate is leaving. More importantly, slowing down on the in-lap ensures cars that were running immediately behind you are delayed on their way to their box by dint of not being allowed to overtake you, so they don't gain track position on you. If you drive to the deltas on the way in and then have to stop behind your teammate, you're losing time against those who came in behind you and got serviced without having to wait.

 

Personally I don't like to see it, but I recognise it does help mitigate the penalty of being behind your teammate on the road and so having to stack in the pits.

 

There are rules, and they're quoted in the first posts of this very thread.

[Bleu]

Times from lap 11 (pitting lap for top four). Majority of this was driven with delta time, which slowed them down. Later in the race pit lap times were mostly around 1.35, with Gasly doing 1.33,363 on the lap he pitted for new tyres in FL charge.

 

Hamilton 1.49,838

Bottas 1.57,134

Verstappen 1.55,101

Vettel 1.54,374
 

[Thatfastguy]

Bottas should have been penalised 100%. Not only was his behaviour very unsportive, it was also dangerous. How the stewards let that go is beyond me.

Edited by Thatfastguy, 29 May 2019 - 06:54.

[player1s]

They should have a rule where you have to stay within 3-8meters of the car in front at all times during SC. This also counts for the SC itself so no dropping half a track down on the SC and then slam the gas.

[Augurk]

redreni, on 29 May 2019 - 01:19, said:

There's no rule to prevent a driver who would otherwise have to stack in pit lane from slowing down in order to impede those behind him. This saves his clutch, as it means he doesn't have to stop, start, stop again and start again in the pit lane. He can just roll into his box as his teammate is leaving. More importantly, slowing down on the in-lap ensures cars that were running immediately behind you are delayed on their way to their box by dint of not being allowed to overtake you, so they don't gain track position on you. If you drive to the deltas on the way in and then have to stop behind your teammate, you're losing time against those who came in behind you and got serviced without having to wait.

Personally I don't like to see it, but I recognise it does help mitigate the penalty of being behind your teammate on the road and so having to stack in the pits.

So why did Bottas have to stack behind Hamilton? That was just a team choice. He could've driven on to lead the race.

There was nothing forcing Mercedes to do a double pit stop, rather they were compelled by competitive reasons and impedes two other drivers while doing so.

Edited by Augurk, 29 May 2019 - 06:58.

[Bleu]

player1s, on 29 May 2019 - 06:57, said:

They should have a rule where you have to stay within 3-8meters of the car in front at all times during SC. This also counts for the SC itself so no dropping half a track down on the SC and then slam the gas.

 

While Bottas did slow, this cannot be applied until the field is bunched up. Because they can't punish driver for being too far away when the SC is called.

[Jovanotti]

Bleu, on 29 May 2019 - 07:41, said:

While Bottas did slow, this cannot be applied until the field is bunched up. Because they can't punish driver for being too far away when the SC is called.

Then let's just say that if you are inside the 10 car lengths when the SC is called, you have to adhere to this limit, if you're not you should not drop back more than let's say 10% of the distance you had to the car in front. It's not rocket science.

Edited by Jovanotti, 29 May 2019 - 07:49.

[Kershy]

Thatfastguy, on 29 May 2019 - 06:52, said:

Bottas should have been penalised 100%. Not only was his behaviour very unsportive, it was also dangerous. How the stewards let that go is beyond me.

The rule doesn’t apply as they weren’t behind the safety car as mentioned repeatedly, possibly a loophole but not a illegal. And it definitely isn’t more dangerous to go slow under safety car conditions.

[messy]

No, by the letter of the rules they didn't do anything wrong did they?

But still, it infuriates me. As if they needed to do it anyway, when they're waltzing every race.

[Lights]

Bleu, on 29 May 2019 - 07:41, said:

While Bottas did slow, this cannot be applied until the field is bunched up. Because they can't punish driver for being too far away when the SC is called.

Where they bunched up in Bahrain 2017 when Hamilton was penalized? Because I thought they weren't. I still don't see the difference between these cases.

[jacdaniel]

I think its time to move on from this now.

It was a douche move from Bottas that screwed Max's race.
The pit lane drama wouldn't have happened without Bottas doing this.

 

Max got his penalty and lost his podium.

In some ways, it was karma that Bottas suffered too. 

 

Onto Canada.

[ANF]

Has anybody seen the onboard footage from Bottas? Do we know where and why he slowed down?

Leclerc had been shedding tyre debris all over the track from the exit of the tunnel: https://youtu.be/1gXPKK9E0eo?t=248

There was an awful lot of debris before Tabac, as shown by long-time F1 photographer Mark Sutton: https://www.instagra.../p/Bx-PcPgh_ty/

Since the SC boards were out there could have been marshals on the track, as Pérez learned at pit exit a few minutes later.

Can it – and should it – be ruled out that Bottas slowed down for safety reasons? Was the car "driven unnecessarily slowly" or was it simply going slower than Hamilton and the SC delta time?

[Lights]

ANF, on 29 May 2019 - 09:32, said:

Can it – and should it – be ruled out that Bottas slowed down for safety reasons?

Yes. Because it all happened behind Bottas.

[ANF]

Lights, on 29 May 2019 - 09:37, said:

Yes. Because it all happened behind Bottas.

What happened behind Bottas?

[Ivanhoe]

The mess caused by Leclerc. Bottas was 1 second behind Lewis in lap 10, hard to envisage a situation where Bottas had to slow down for a marshall or another safety reason, while Hamilton could just cruise on.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 29 May 2019 - 09:48.

[ANF]

Ivanhoe, on 29 May 2019 - 09:46, said:

The mess caused by Leclerc. Bottas was 1 second behind Lewis in lap 10, hard to envisage a situation where Bottas had to slow down for a marshall or another safety reason, while Hamilton could just cruise on.

I'm not sure I follow. The leaders had just started lap 10 when Leclerc (on lap 9) had the puncture. The safety car boards didn't come out until the leaders were on lap 11, so Bottas had to drive through the field of tyre debris twice.

Anyway, I think it's fair to assume that Bottas slowed down for tactical reasons: as Bleu pointed out above, Hamilton's lap 11 was a 1:49.8 while Bottas was a 1:57.1. Even if he lost a couple of seconds in the pit lane he was still five seconds slower on that lap and that's a lot.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure it is right to penalize a driver for slowing down too much under SC conditions in Monaco.

[Clatter]

ANF, on 29 May 2019 - 10:18, said:

I'm not sure I follow. The leaders had just started lap 10 when Leclerc (on lap 9) had the puncture. The safety car boards didn't come out until the leaders were on lap 11, so Bottas had to drive through the field of tyre debris twice.

Anyway, I think it's fair to assume that Bottas slowed down for tactical reasons: as Bleu pointed out above, Hamilton's lap 11 was a 1:49.8 while Bottas was a 1:57.1. Even if he lost a couple of seconds in the pit lane he was still five seconds slower on that lap and that's a lot.

Nevertheless, I'm not sure it is right to penalize a driver for slowing down too much under SC conditions in Monaco.

 

I don't believe it should matter where the circuit is, the same rules apply.

[Baddoer]

I guess stewards were looking elsewhere and no team protested it. Red Bull was busy talking Max out, Ferrari would gained nothing, rest didn't care.

[SilverArrow31]

Hamilton was also going ridiculously fast under safety car conditions, that was the first thing I noticed and wondered why he was going so fast... then I saw Bottas going so slow and got the picture.

[SilverArrow31]

Ivanhoe, on 29 May 2019 - 10:28, said:

Doubt they told Lewis to push under a SC, a lap of 1:50 isn't really ridiculously fast also, most drivers were in the range of 1:45, so Bottas was just dead slow.

 

 

I just meant the last third of the lap where he was going through the swimming pool section, he was going at race speed into the pits, he probably backed off earlier in the lap before he got the message.

Edited by SilverArrow31, 29 May 2019 - 10:34.

[Ivanhoe]

You are right, just deleted my post, Hamilton was fast and looking at the timing information even Bottas wasn't really slow with a 1:57 lap. Ricciardo, Magnussen and Perez (the others that pitted in lap 11) did a lap in the 2:05 range. The ones doing 1:45's didn't pit an that lap. So penalizing Bottas for driving too slowly would be stretching it, given that other drivers were even slower.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 29 May 2019 - 10:38.

[Clatter]

Ivanhoe, on 29 May 2019 - 10:36, said:

You are right, just deleted my post, Hamilton was fast and looking at the timing information even Bottas wasn't really slow with a 1:57 lap. Ricciardo, Magnussen and Perez (the others that pitted in lap 11) did a lap in the 2:05 range. The ones doing 1:45's didn't pit an that lap. So penalizing Bottas for driving too slowly would be stretching it, given that other drivers were even slower.

 

Its not about driving too slowly per se, its about the reasons for doing it.

Edited by Clatter, 29 May 2019 - 12:14.

[Ivanhoe]

Clatter, on 29 May 2019 - 12:13, said:

Its not about driving too slowly per se, its about the reasons for doing it.

Don’t have a problem with that tbh, unless we don’t want double pit stops in F1 I’m perfectly fine with driving slower under SC to achieve that. There is a rule that it is not permitted to drive unnecessary slow (I would think that’s a safety measure). As long as Bottas was not breaching that rule (and apparently he wasn’t looking at the times of other drivers), I have no problem with him driving slowly to make the double pitstop possible. I also don’t think Max and Vettel piling up behind Bottas was because Bottas drove slow, they were under SC so all driving slower anyway and would always be on Bottas tail to gain as much as possible in the pit.

Edited by Ivanhoe, 29 May 2019 - 12:49.

[Clatter]

Ivanhoe, on 29 May 2019 - 12:36, said:

Don’t have a problem with that tbh, unless we don’t want double pit stops in F1 I’m perfectly fine with driving slower under SC to achieve that. There is a rule that it is not permitted to drive unnecessary slow (I would think that’s a safety measure). As long as Bottas was not breaching that rule (and apparently he wasn’t looking at the times of other drivers), I have no problem with him driving slowly to make the double pitstop possible. I also don’t think Max and Vettel piling up behind Bottas was because Bottas drove slow, they were under SC so all driving slower anyway and would always be on Bottas tail to gain as much as possible in the pit.

 

I think backing up the pack in that manner is wrong, and has been penalised previously. It's the inconsistency of the decision making that bothers me more.

[Augurk]

Ivanhoe, on 29 May 2019 - 12:36, said:

Don’t have a problem with that tbh, unless we don’t want double pit stops in F1 I’m perfectly fine with driving slower under SC to achieve that. There is a rule that it is not permitted to drive unnecessary slow (I would think that’s a safety measure). As long as Bottas was not breaching that rule (and apparently he wasn’t looking at the times of other drivers), I have no problem with him driving slowly to make the double pitstop possible. I also don’t think Max and Vettel piling up behind Bottas was because Bottas drove slow, they were under SC so all driving slower anyway and would always be on Bottas tail to gain as much as possible in the pit.

Are you sure those laptime deltas aren't because the SC signs didn't come up until the leaders were partly into lap 11, whilst all other cars drove a full lap under the SC track state?

And it's not only the driving slowly, it's that the gap with Hamilton suddenly increased massively, whilst the gap behind stayed the same. If you don't put a limit on this type of behaviour, theoretically it could get as bad as a car driving so slowly it'll allow the car in front to pit and get a lap advantage on his competitors. I know I'm taking it into the extremes here, but allowing this type of behavior you have to consider the precedent.

[Ivanhoe]

Augurk, on 29 May 2019 - 12:44, said:

Are you sure those laptime deltas aren't because the SC signs didn't come up until the leaders were partly into lap 11, whilst all other cars drove a full lap under the SC track state?

Fair point. That could be true.

[Ivanhoe]

Augurk, on 29 May 2019 - 12:44, said:

If you don't put a limit on this type of behaviour, theoretically it could get as bad as a car driving so slowly it'll allow the car in front to pit and get a lap advantage on his competitors. I know I'm taking it into the extremes here, but allowing this type of behavior you have to consider the precedent.

Not sure how that theory would work as the leading car isn’t allowed to overtake?

[Myrvold]

Augurk, on 29 May 2019 - 12:44, said:

And it's not only the driving slowly, it's that the gap with Hamilton suddenly increased massively, whilst the gap behind stayed the same. If you don't put a limit on this type of behaviour, theoretically it could get as bad as a car driving so slowly it'll allow the car in front to pit and get a lap advantage on his competitors. I know I'm taking it into the extremes here, but allowing this type of behavior you have to consider the precedent.

Then you'd have to go below the delta and then it is hard to argue your way out of a going to slow penalty.

[ExFlagMan]

Just close the pit lane exit - except for a short window after the end of train passes it and the problem disappears - simples.

[redreni]

Augurk, on 29 May 2019 - 06:57, said:

So why did Bottas have to stack behind Hamilton? That was just a team choice. He could've driven on to lead the race.

There was nothing forcing Mercedes to do a double pit stop, rather they were compelled by competitive reasons and impedes two other drivers while doing so.

 

I agree entirely, the team could choose whether Bottas pitted on that lap. But once the decision was made, Bottas would have to stack if he didn't slow down on the in-lap.

 

If the FIA were to clamp down on this, drivers who are running behind their teammates on the road would often lose several positions each time there was a SC. I don't see how that would be fairer than the situation as it is now.

[redreni]

PayasYouRace, on 29 May 2019 - 05:36, said:

There are rules, and they're quoted in the first posts of this very thread.

 

Right, there are rules, but as far as I can see, they don't prevent you from slowing down on the in-lap.

 

The phrase "unnecessarily slowly" is, admittedly, open to interpretation, but this exact same thing has happened in Monaco before and hasn't attracted a penalty.

 

For me, it's clear that the FIA doesn't regard losing 2 or 3 seconds on an in-lap relative to the delta, in order to avoid stacking, as "driving unnecessarily slowly". Nor does the rule about keeping within 10 car's lengths come into play until the cars have formed up behind the SC.

[Clatter]

redreni, on 29 May 2019 - 13:49, said:

I agree entirely, the team could choose whether Bottas pitted on that lap. But once the decision was made, Bottas would have to stack if he didn't slow down on the in-lap.

 

If the FIA were to clamp down on this, drivers who are running behind their teammates on the road would often lose several positions each time there was a SC. I don't see how that would be fairer than the situation as it is now.

 

That's just bad luck on the teammate, it in no way justifies screwing over the other drivers.

[redreni]

Clatter, on 29 May 2019 - 13:55, said:

That's just bad luck on the teammate, it in no way justifies screwing over the other drivers.

 

But you don't need justification to screw over other drivers if the rules allow you to screw over other drivers.