130 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

In light of Chase Carey saying how races will still go ahead even if drivers become infected (because teams should have reserve drivers he means), do you think this is reasonable?

 

His comments for context are here:

 

“An individual having been found with a positive infection will not lead to a cancellation of a race,” says Carey. “We encourage teams to have procedures in place so if an individual has to be put in quarantine, we have the ability to quarantine them at a hotel and to replace that individual.

“Some things we’d have to talk through and work through. The array of ‘what ifs’ are too wide to play out every one of them, but a team not being able to race wouldn’t cancel the race. I don’t think I could sit here and lay out the consequences. But we will have a procedure in place that finding infection will not lead to a cancellation. If a driver has an infection, [teams have] reserve drivers available.

“We wouldn’t be going forward if we were not highly confident we have necessary procedures and expertise and capabilities to provide a safe environment and manage whatever issues arrive.”

https://www.formula1...e1vEHGNZRR.html

[Risil]

Provided it's safe to quarantine an affected driver and replace with a reserve, then I think they have to do that. Cancelled races that could still go ahead would be a terrible own goal. 

 

However I think it might be wise for F1 to cover their bases by emphasizing the team nature of the sport and making the constructors' championship more prominent in their marketing and communications. In a short season the WDC could well be decided by who stays infection-free for every race. That would be a rubbish outcome for producing a coherent and meaningful championship. But if Mercedes clinched the constructors' championship due to the heroic stand-in efforts of [checks Wikipedia] Stoffel Vandoorne and Esteban Gutierrez, that would be a pretty cool story to tell, and sort of reminiscent of the early days of F1 when it was an 8 race championship and a driver knew that their car would be unsuitable for some of them and they'd break down in half.

[Beri]

No Grand Prix has ever been cancelled over a driver being infected with a virus. Why start now? Precautions are taken and if they are being met, the chance is virtually none. So the chance of infecting other drivers is so small, it would be ridiculous to pull the plug.

Yet, for safety and public opinion.. I could see a Grand Prix being cancelled if such thing will happen. Not that I think it should happen.

[Lights]

Show goes on. Drivers have been ill before and not been able to race due to it, or they have been racing with a flu. Massa was replaced by Di Resta at Hungary in 2017. 

 

After Melbourne, cancelling another race with everything in place to run, they might as well call of the season then. Then what was all the effort for.

[sgtkate]

If the procedures they've put in place to keep the teams safe work as they plan then the risks of continuing to run a race are minimal and I fully support Liberties approach here. However, as Risil points out, the WDC could end up being decided by an illness rather than ability as with fewer races the impact of missing one becomes much greater.

 

Would the timing of a positive test cause a different decision though? If a driver tests positive before a race weekend then the odds of the virus being in the paddock are next to zero so as long as that driver stays away for that weekend everything carries on as normal. But what if the drivers get a positive test during the GP weekend, say on the Friday during FP? What now? High chance of the virus having already spread. Entire team would need to quarantine. Bigger problem. I hope they have incredibly good track and trace protocols in place to identify if there is any contact between different team members as well.

[Risil]

It's probably a bit late now but I wonder if they could make a dropped scores rule for the WDC like in the old days. So if there are 8 races, perhaps only the best 6 scores would count.

[Marklar]

No, alone for the reason that it could be abused (e.g. Driver X leads the championship before the last race and intentionally infects himself), but boy, would it suck if it ddcides the WDC

[SophieB]

Provided it's safe to quarantine an affected driver and replace with a reserve, then I think they have to do that. Cancelled races that could still go ahead would be a terrible own goal. 

 

However I think it might be wise for F1 to cover their bases by emphasizing the team nature of the sport and making the constructors' championship more prominent in their marketing and communications. In a short season the WDC could well be decided by who stays infection-free for every race. That would be a rubbish outcome for producing a coherent and meaningful championship. But if Mercedes clinched the constructors' championship due to the heroic stand-in efforts of [checks Wikipedia] Stoffel Vandoorne and Esteban Gutierrez, that would be a pretty cool story to tell, and sort of reminiscent of the early days of F1 when it was an 8 race championship and a driver knew that their car would be unsuitable for some of them and they'd break down in half.

 

This occurred to me, especially as, unlike the cases of 'well, we've not cancelled races when drivers got sick before...' , it's entirely possible that the hypothetical driver is asymptomatic throughout, so in effect is denied the chance to compete despite feeling entirely well and indeed never developing symptoms.  I guess it would just have to be one of those things but it would look bad.

[SophieB]

No, alone for the reason that it could be abused (e.g. Driver X leads the championship before the last race and intentionally infects himself), but boy, would it suck if it ddcides the WDC

 

This also occurred to me but would anyone actually do this? Seems rather like Russian roulette.

[PayasYouRace]

No, alone for the reason that it could be abused (e.g. Driver X leads the championship before the last race and intentionally infects himself), but boy, would it suck if it ddcides the WDC

 

Who are you and what have you done with the real, sensible Marklar?

[goldenboy]

Nope.

[ANF]

So if an F1 individual tests positive, only that individual will be put in quarantine?

[PayasYouRace]

What's NASCAR's policy right now, seeing as they're racing?

[Marklar]

So if an F1 individual tests positive, only that individual will be put in quarantine?

This will open a can of worms but the real answer to this is that it will be decided on case-by-case basis. The local health office in Spielberg could deem putting the individual in question in quarantine, the one in Budapest the closest people to them (like Melbourne did), Silverstone might put the whole team in quarantine, and Barcelona might put the whole paddock in.

F1 will not be the ones to decide that.

Edited by Marklar, 03 June 2020 - 10:17.

[sgtkate]

No, alone for the reason that it could be abused (e.g. Driver X leads the championship before the last race and intentionally infects himself), but boy, would it suck if it ddcides the WDC

I don't understand why this would matter. If only 6 out of 8 scores count and a driver is leading the championship by less than a win worth of points and they haven't won every single race then by not competing in the final race they risk a rival grabbing the points needed to jump them. And if they are leading by more than a win then they'd win regardless of the outcome of the final race so why risk getting infected to get out of it? What have I missed?

[Marklar]

I don't understand why this would matter. If only 6 out of 8 scores count and a driver is leading the championship by less than a win worth of points and they haven't won every single race then by not competing in the final race they risk a rival grabbing the points needed to jump them. And if they are leading by more than a win then they'd win regardless of the outcome of the final race so why risk getting infected to get out of it? What have I missed?

When was it decided that we have dropped results?

[sgtkate]

When was it decided that we have dropped results?

Wasn't that what you replied to? That a solution to a driver sick could be that only the best 6 scores out of 8 rounds would count...

[PayasYouRace]

Wasn't that what you replied to? That a solution to a driver sick could be that only the best 6 scores out of 8 rounds would count...

 

I think that was just Risil's suggestion, and Marklar wasn't replying to it, as he didn't quote it.

[Risil]

I don't (yet) have the power to unilaterally alter the sporting regulations. No one is planning a 1980s style dropped scores championship, I just think it might be a wise move.

[ANF]

This will open a can of worms but the real answer to this is that it will be decided on case-by-case basis. The local health office in Spielberg could deem putting the individual in question in quarantine, the one in Budapest the closest people to them (like Melbourne did), Silverstone might put the whole team in quarantine, and Barcelona might put the whole paddock in.

F1 will not be the ones to decide that.

Wow.

[Marklar]

Wasn't that what you replied to? That a solution to a driver sick could be that only the best 6 scores out of 8 rounds would count...

I'm not sure how that would prevent the scenario I outlined. We are specifically talking about how a driver knowing that it can cancel a race and thus benefits himself could infect himself. If he knows that his sickness wont cancel the race of course he wouldnt do it.

Using drop results is actually a argument in favour of *not* cancelling races.

Of course we are going deep into conspiracy territories here, but a football club in Germany was actually accused of this since they are last in the championship and many cases could end up in the season to be declared void.

I think that was just Risil's suggestion, and Marklar wasn't replying to it, as he didn't quote it.

yeah, i was just replying to the thread question at that point xD

Edited by Marklar, 03 June 2020 - 10:42.

[PayasYouRace]

I don't (yet) have the power to unilaterally alter the sporting regulations. No one is planning a 1980s style dropped scores championship, I just think it might be a wise move.

 

Can we try to get you that power?

 

Of course, I've been calling for dropped scores to return for years, because it discourages settling for lower points positions.

[sgtkate]

I think that was just Risil's suggestion, and Marklar wasn't replying to it, as he didn't quote it.

Oooooooooooohhhhhhhh. Yeah that makes sense now.

[sgtkate]

I'm not sure how that would prevent the scenario I outlined. We are specifically talking about how a driver knowing that it can cancel a race and thus benefits himself could infect himself. If he knows that his sickness wont cancel the race of course he wouldnt do it.

Using drop results is actually a argument in favour of *not* cancelling races.

Of course we are going deep into conspiracy territories here, but a football club in Germany was actually accused of this since they are last in the championship and many cases could end up in the season to be declared void.

yeah, i was just replying to the thread question at that point xD

Yes, i totally got the wrong end of the sick there...I thought you were against dropping a score if the driver couldn't compete. We are in agreement on the potential 'tactics' that could be used to get a GP cancelled.

[Gareth]

It's probably a bit late now but I wonder if they could make a dropped scores rule for the WDC like in the old days. So if there are 8 races, perhaps only the best 6 scores would count.

I like this idea, but a bit difficult to implement when you're unsure of what the actual number of races will be.

 

I probably also like this idea because I liked the dropped scores approach anyway. Incentivises risk taking, which is much more fun.

[F1matt]

I can imagine the arguments on this forum in years to come if we have drivers missing certain events due to illness ( or key engineers for that matter) skewed results from reverse grid races with DTM style manufacturer calls from the pitwall. It will be all out war!

[Collombin]

totally got the wrong end of the sick

Brilliant - please tell me you meant that.

[Clatter]

No Grand Prix has ever been cancelled over a driver being infected with a virus. Why start now? Precautions are taken and if they are being met, the chance is virtually none. So the chance of infecting other drivers is so small, it would be ridiculous to pull the plug.

Yet, for safety and public opinion.. I could see a Grand Prix being cancelled if such thing will happen. Not that I think it should happen.

Because this is different to any virus they have had to deal with in the past. You only seem to be concerned about other drivers, but they also interact with many other team members.

[Clatter]

Are they talking about a driver being found infected over the course of a GP weekend, or away from the track? If it's the latter then yes they should carry on with a reserve driver, just as they would normally. If its the former, then that opens up a different can of worms. They would likely have interacted with a number of people who could now be infected as well.

Edited by Clatter, 03 June 2020 - 11:30.

[as65p]

Regarding the infected driver personally, no, the GP should'nt be cancelled. Races have never been canceled because some drivers were ill, or indeed had any other matters preventing them from racing.

 

Regarding the specific wider implications of a Corona infection it's obviously a bit more complicated. As I understand it, at the time of a positive test of one person it's still impossible to determine how many people that person might already have infected in the week or so before his positive test. That makes it really hard (if not impossible) to decide upon approriate measures at the time of a single positve test.

[Peat]

Drop Scores is a good shout. 

Other than that, you could nominate a stand-in driver to score points for you.your car number. Could be a good opportunity for reserve drivers but the purists would soil their under garments again. 

[as65p]

This also occurred to me but would anyone actually do this? Seems rather like Russian roulette.

 Or like competing in 350 km/h rockets with 19 other maniacs? 

 

Risk is the core business of racing. I wouldn't deem it impossible that some would judge that particular risk worth taking, especially as the drivers due to age, fitness level and possibilites for 1st class treatment are very unlikely to suffer terminally from the disease.

 

I mean, just recently Helmut Marko entertained the idea to intentionally infect his drivers to be over and done with the matter!

[SophieB]

 Or like competing in 350 km/h rockets with 19 other maniacs? 

 

Risk is the core business of racing. I wouldn't deem it impossible that some would judge that particular risk worth taking, especially as the drivers due to age, fitness level and possibilites for 1st class treatment are very unlikely to suffer terminally from the disease.

 

I mean, just recently Helmut Marko entertained the idea to intentionally infect his drivers to be over and done with the matter!

 

I don't think just because someone allows risk in the form of piloting one of the world's most advanced vehicles at high speed that this necessarily means they are also willing to risk death or long term organ damage from a novel disease that is poorly understood and with no idea about any longterm health effects.

[Gareth]

Show goes on. Drivers have been ill before and not been able to race due to it, or they have been racing with a flu. Massa was replaced by Di Resta at Hungary in 2017. 

Overall I agree with this.

 

This one is different to the usual, for various reasons, but overall if they're going to hold a season against this backdrop then I think this is the way it needs to be.

 

It may end up affecting the WDC, but there's enough "weirdness" affecting it anyway (double headers, possible reverse grid qualy, messed up calendar etc) that it's going to be a year with a bit of an asterix next to it whatever happens.

 

Just got to crack on, enjoy the racing and whatever results come will come - if it helps people come to terms with the idea that sport doesn't always produce the most "deserving" winner, then maybe it's a good thing.

[noikeee]

I think it'd be worse if a team member caught it than a driver. How much social distancing is there on the garages and motorhome? I suspect the drivers get nicer bigger rooms with plenty of spacing.

My point is a mechanic getting it, would possibly be more likely to cause a serious outbreak in the paddock than a driver.

Edited by noikeee, 03 June 2020 - 11:53.

[Beri]

Because this is different to any virus they have had to deal with in the past. You only seem to be concerned about other drivers, but they also interact with many other team members.

 

Well it is a similar virus as we have seen before. But never on this scale. So there is a difference indeed.

Yet, the question at hand is "Should F1 races be scrapped if a driver tests positive?". To which my answer is simply no. Even if other team members are infected.

[pdac]

So if an F1 individual tests positive, only that individual will be put in quarantine?

 

What F1 should do in that situation is what they have agreed to do with governments and authorities in order to get their exemptions or whatever is applicable to everyone in the country/region at the time. If that means putting everyone into quarantine, then that's what they should (and must) do. But if they are not required to do this, then there is no reason for them to not carry on without said individual.

[sgtkate]

Brilliant - please tell me you meant that.

I want to go back and correct it, but now realise I can't because of internet rules. Dammit.

[Spillage]

I don't see how it's practical or necessary to cancel races, so I'm going to say no. If there's a widespread outbreak in the paddock then a cancellation may be necessary however.

[Chillimeister]

Everyone is well aware  that Liberty is keen not to say probably near desperate to complete their 15/16 races and they don't want anything derailing that objective. But if an individual tests positive then most countries would require all their contacts to quarantine themselves for 14 days too. Maybe the F1 biosphere will be exempt from those rules but I'd like to think  sensible and appropriate actions would be taken in a positive test scenario. Letting the reserve drivers race would allow something to broadcast but doesn't address the health aspects  that I can see.

[Marklar]

You have to keep in mind here that everyone will get tested multiple times per week and well in advance. So even if somebody is found positive it's likely that you can keep the amount of people quarantined very small without risking an outbreak.

Unlike Melbourne, where they would have played Russian Roulette had they continued.

But again, I hope Liberty talked this over with all health authorities. I have strong doubts that they all will apply the same standards, they often dont even do this within the same country

[ExFlagMan]

You have to keep in mind here that everyone will get tested multiple times per week and well in advance. 

 

Does that 'everyone' include those marshals working in the paddocks and/or pit lanes - or that just another elephant in the room.

[Marklar]

Does that 'everyone' include those marshals working in the paddocks and/or pit lanes - or that just another elephant in the room.

As far as I am aware, yes.

 

Well it is a similar virus as we have seen before. But never on this scale. So there is a difference indeed.

Yet, the question at hand is "Should F1 races be scrapped if a driver tests positive?". To which my answer is simply no. Even if other team members are infected.

The problem with this virus is that you can't take part if you have it. While with a normal flu - even if you are actually way more sick - you can, and most drivers do. And since there is a reasonable chance that you can catch it without doing anything wrong it does feel like a pretty unfair and huge variable thrown in. But then again, we are long passed the point of being able to prioritise a fair championship, so eh.

Dropped points are probably the best solution suggested so far - hence why it wont happen 

[Clatter]

Well it is a similar virus as we have seen before. But never on this scale. So there is a difference indeed.
Yet, the question at hand is "Should F1 races be scrapped if a driver tests positive?". To which my answer is simply no. Even if other team members are infected.

Seems you want to put the races ahead of people's safety. If they get to a stage where multiple team members are getting infected, then that could spell the end of any more racing this season, as clearly the quarantine procedures they are supposedly bringing in will be failing.

[Chillimeister]

 

Dropped points are probably the best solution suggested so far - hence why it wont happen 

 

I don't know. If a scenario arose where, through dropped scores, half a dozen drivers could still win the championship at the very last race ...

 

I won't be the one to suggest it to Chase though.

[Myrvold]

I think it'd be worse if a team member caught it than a driver. How much social distancing is there on the garages and motorhome? I suspect the drivers get nicer bigger rooms with plenty of spacing.

My point is a mechanic getting it, would possibly be more likely to cause a serious outbreak in the paddock than a driver.

Also, this might lead to a situation with two healthy drivers, but not a crew to run 2 cars.

[Piif]

If someone gets the flu or something else, they don't stop the show. They shouldn't for this either.

[cpbell]

Can we try to get you that power?

 

Of course, I've been calling for dropped scores to return for years, because it discourages settling for lower points positions.

I think that, as live broadcast coverage became near-universal, it was dropped as it was felt to be confusing the the casual viewer, in particular in the final race or so. 

[PayasYouRace]

I like this idea, but a bit difficult to implement when you're unsure of what the actual number of races will be.

 

I probably also like this idea because I liked the dropped scores approach anyway. Incentivises risk taking, which is much more fun.

 

The easiest way to get around that is to use the system from back in the eighties. It wasn't a fixed number of dropped scored, but it was defined as half the races plus 5. If you define it mathematically again, then you can adapt easier.

[PayasYouRace]

I think that, as live broadcast coverage became near-universal, it was dropped as it was felt to be confusing the the casual viewer, in particular in the final race or so. 

 

Of course today, with live championship points displayed on on screen graphics, it can help those mathematically challenged viewers to keep up.