96 replies to this topic

[ensign14]

Sorry for bringing this in here, but I was trying to think of other examples when the FIA ignored the rules of the sport to engineer a particular result - and can’t think of one. This was worse than NASCAR giving The Call whenever it needed a boost.

Has there ever been anything as bad as what Michael Masi did to hand the world title - as debased an epithet as it could ever be - to his blue eyed boy? Maybe when NASCAR added some races when Kiekhafer wanted the title for Tim Flock and as a result Herb Thomas was nearly killed?

[Ray Bell]

Maybe the FIA don't want Mercedes-Benz around any more?

 

How relevant, then, would this sign be today?

 

[Vitesse2]

The 1939 European Championship says 'Hi'.

[Dipster]

I have the feeling that a lot of the problems and controversy with rule interpretations this past year is based purely on engineering a spectacle. All based on getting more spectators thus, ultimately, more income.  I do not like it and fail to understand where the word sport has its place in this business.. 

[lustigson]

I'd be surprised if this was something deliberate. Utter incompetence, maybe, but deliberate?

[guiporsche]

Yes, Singapore 2008. The results of that race should have been annulled, any points given deducted, and Felipe Massa should have accordingly been given the 2008 Drivers World Championship. Had Piquet Jr. not crashed on purpose, the unfolding and outcome of that race would have been completely different. But we will never know.

Of course, nowadays British journalists and British media, always careful to push a certain narrative about their national champion as the best of all times, the one who unlike Senna, Prost, or Schumacher always won without any kind of controversy (certain articles by M. Hughes come to mind), continue to pretend that nothing ever happened, that in 2008 the best driver won anyways... 

[Michael Ferner]

Incompetence? It was perfect! I'm sure the race director is in for a very BIG raise, he engineered the perfect championship decider: two drivers going into the last race even on points, and then into the LAST LAP basically side by side - you can't top that. Of couse, it has nothing to do with sport any longer, but let's face it, that's hardly new for F1. Let the fanboys cry foul, alternating from weekend to weekend, even from lap to lap - ratings will rise'n'rise...

[ensign14]

Ratings will not necessarily rise - nascar made that mistake by dumbing down for the Great Unwashed, losing the hardcore fans, and seeing the Great Unwashed instead prefer YouTube.

[AJCee]

To my mind it’s more about the spectacle now and not the sport. I wasn’t happy when safety cars were introduced. If the track is dangerous then stop the cars and restart. Times on aggregate like they used to be. That should surely appeal to the current organisers as cars could change position after the restart without the tiresome business of overtaking. It isn’t sporting to annul the efforts in one part of a race just to bunch the field up again. Should a football/rugby/hockey match 3-0 at half time reset to 1-0 when they restart?
But it won’t ever change back and I know that.

N.B. For purposes of integrity of analogy, rugby match 21-0 resetting to 7-0😀

Edited by AJCee, 13 December 2021 - 11:00.

[Michael Ferner]

Should a football/rugby/hockey match 3-0 at half time reset to 1-0 when they restart?

 

Don't forget that the mandatory pit stops are like football/rugby/hockey teams rolling a dice at half time to add to their score!

[Sterzo]

Sorry for bringing this in here, but I was trying to think of other examples when the FIA ignored the rules of the sport to engineer a particular result

They didn't yesterday.

 

Shambles? Yes. Deliberate attempt to rig the result? Of course not.

[Charlieman]

I'd be surprised if this was something deliberate. Utter incompetence, maybe, but deliberate?

The 2005 US GP (Indianapolis) race circumstances lead me likewise to conclude incompetence rather than intent.

[absinthedude]

I think it is vital that the FIA immediately clarifies whether or not the race director or any other officials has the right to invent new rules or changes to established rules and procedures on the fly during a race. What we saw yesterday was contrived for TV, a "Hollywood ending" if you will. It leaves a sour taste in the mouth, not because the wrong man won (arguably the right man won) but because of how it was done. 

 

I guess Barney Oldfield's allegedly fixed races in the early part of the twentieth century count? Though mention those on the RC forum and nobody has a clue what you're talking about. Most of the inhabitants can't remember before 2005 and assume anything prior to then is of no importance anyway.

[Colbul1]

I was asked yesterday, as that last lap played out, by a friend who I had talked into watching the race "is this a show like the WWE wrestling?"  As my heart sank I responded with "no, this is just a farcical businesses call".  And sadly the 2nd one of the season, lest we forget the 'race' at Spa...

[lustigson]

The 2005 US GP (Indianapolis) race circumstances lead me likewise to conclude incompetence rather than intent.

 

Indeed. 

 

And perhaps — this may sound weird — it's even a matter of honest mistakes. 

[john winfield]

Sorry for bringing this in here, but I was trying to think of other examples when the FIA ignored the rules of the sport to engineer a particular result - and can’t think of one. 

 

1973, Canadian GP.  Allocating a car at random for the safety car to pick up, then deeming that car to be the leader. Go Howden!.....so nearly Williams' first GP winner. 

 

 

Yesterday was soul-destroying wasn't it? Not because I'm a devoted Lewis Hamilton fan - he's a great driver, as is the astonishing, if slightly rasher Max Verstappen. It was the artificiality of the season conclusion.

 

When the Grand Prix pace car/safety car was introduced back in 1973 it was done with good intentions. It wasn't perfect, and the Canadian farrago showed how tricky its use could be, given the limited technology.  Today's technology, when deployed for safety reasons, is a huge improvement, allowing for example control of pitlane speeds, and the (chiefly uncontroversial?)  use of the 'Virtual Safety Car'. This latter option is much fairer to those teams and drivers who, at a particular point in a race, have worked hard to be in the leading positions. It avoids the unfair, artificial bunching of cars, bunching that is superficially exciting for the casual fan, but fundamentally unsatisfying for anyone who enjoys seeing races won on merit.

 

I don't know whether Michael Masi blundered yesterday, whether he created some contrived drama, or whether he engineered a desired result. Given that it was deemed safe for marshals to work on Latifi's Williams while cars passed at safety car speeds, why couldn't a virtual safety car have been used, at 'real' safety car speed, substantially slower than the standard vsc? Sadly, I suppose the answer is obvious.  The race organisers wanted the artificial drama of a close restart. 

[Michael Ferner]

As an aside, and to perhaps make this thread more significant in a TNF environment, when was the position "Race Director" introduced to F1? A quick google search does not provide a direct answer, but suggests 1997 with Charlie Whiting - only, I'm sure that during my time (roughly until 2001) I never heard that expression. A quick check of the Autocourse yearbook and it does not appear to have been mentioned. Anyone know for sure, from memory or (better still) period sources?

[john winfield]

As an aside, and to perhaps make this thread more significant in a TNF environment, when was the position "Race Director" introduced to F1? A quick google search does not provide a direct answer, but suggests 1997 with Charlie Whiting - only, I'm sure that during my time (roughly until 2001) I never heard that expression. A quick check of the Autocourse yearbook and it does not appear to have been mentioned. Anyone know for sure, from memory or (better still) period sources?

 

Race Director as opposed to Clerk of the Course? Or were there other titles/roles that you recall pre-2001?  I'm a bit foggy about this one.

[Charlieman]

Given that it was deemed safe for marshals to work on Latifi's Williams while cars passed at safety car speeds, why couldn't a virtual safety car have been used, at 'real' safety car speed, substantially slower than the standard vsc? 

 

That would have created a similar scenario to the one where some cars were allowed to unlap before the safety car was released. It would have been changing the rules on the fly. OTOH we've all seen the marshals at Monaco (GP and historique) perform miracles whilst cars pass by at reduced speed.

Edited by Charlieman, 13 December 2021 - 12:39.

[Stephen W]

Over the past five or six years the regulations governing F1 have become more and more contradictory. Never mind the ridiculous DRS concept there are too many rules within the regs that are open to interpretation. I don't think this is deliberate just an accumulation of ignorance.

 

IF Mercedes decide to remain in F1 I wouldn't be too surprised to see Hamilton & Russell dominate after they have "issues" in pre-season testing.

 

On another note I have never subscribed to SKY so was looking forward to hearing Brundle again - what a disappointment! 

[FLB]

As an aside, and to perhaps make this thread more significant in a TNF environment, when was the position "Race Director" introduced to F1? A quick google search does not provide a direct answer, but suggests 1997 with Charlie Whiting - only, I'm sure that during my time (roughly until 2001) I never heard that expression. A quick check of the Autocourse yearbook and it does not appear to have been mentioned. Anyone know for sure, from memory or (better still) period sources?

Until when was Derek Ongaro with the FISA/FIA? His role was Official Starter, but I think he had a role to play in safety and track inspection?

 

Would that have made him the equivalent position?

[john winfield]

That would have created a similar scenario to the one where some cars were allowed to unlap before the safety car was released. It would have been changing the rules on the fly. OTOH we've all seen the marshals at Monaco (GP and historique) perform miracles whilst cars pass by at reduced speed.

 

Sorry Charlie, I didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean Masi should have opted for this yesterday, I meant a 'super-slow' VSC should be available as a routine option for the Race Director at any race.

 

Sorry, I know this isn't really TNF, but Grand Prix racing, its history, present and future, is important to many of us. And Racing Comments can be a bit crazy!  

[uechtel]

That the use of a so-called "safety car" makes the wrong man win has happened many times before. Or other "random" effects like choosing between red flag and/or the use of a pace car, opening and closing of the pit lane (Gasly/Sainz at Monza last year) etc.. Usually this gets appreciated by the audience for making the races and/or the championship more "interesting". Before yesterday I have heard an read a lot of comments celebrating the current season as one of the best and most thrilling ever. Now the only difference is that yesterday it happened on the last lap of the last and decisive race of the season...

[uechtel]

Today's technology, when deployed for safety reasons, is a huge improvement, allowing for example control of pitlane speeds, and the (chiefly uncontroversial?)  use of the 'Virtual Safety Car'. This latter option is much fairer to those teams and drivers who, at a particular point in a race, have worked hard to be in the leading positions. It avoids the unfair, artificial bunching of cars, bunching that is superficially exciting for the casual fan, but fundamentally unsatisfying for anyone who enjoys seeing races won on merit.

 

I always wonder why it isn´t possible to install a kind of limiter in each car which limits the speed at for example 80 km/h and can be activated by one central button operated by the race organisation?

[68targa]

All a bit of a mess really.  Michael Masi was trying to please everyone and tripped over himself.  I think there is a rule that stipulates a safety car must be used if there is a JCB etc removing a damaged car. If the marshals can push it away then a virtual  safety car is used.   Something I did not like was the constant lobbying  from team principals to the race director.  I heard that Mercedes had brought along their own lawyer for this race, just in case !    Such is the state of modern F1 racing.

 

I wonder what DSJ would make of it all ?

[john winfield]

That the use of a so-called "safety car" makes the wrong man win has happened many times before. Or other "random" effects like choosing between red flag and/or the use of a pace car, opening and closing of the pit lane (Gasly/Sainz at Monza last year) etc.. Usually this gets appreciated by the audience for making the races and/or the championship more "interesting". Before yesterday I have heard an read a lot of comments celebrating the current season as one of the best and most thrilling ever. Now the only difference is that yesterday it happened on the last lap of the last and decisive race of the season...

That the use of a so-called "safety car" makes the wrong man win has happened many times before.    -     Yes, it can't be right, in a sporting sense.

 

Or other "random" effects like choosing between red flag and/or the use of a pace car    -    I know what you mean, and if it sometimes feels random then we've lost confidence in Race Direction.  Sometimes the Red Flag must be used: blocked track, too much debris, serious injuries etc.

 

Usually this gets appreciated by the audience for making the races and/or the championship more "interesting".      -      I don't pretend that I haven't enjoyed this sometimes, which must indicate that I'm no longer really interested in current F1, or it's usually rather boring.  Or both.

 

Before yesterday I have heard an read a lot of comments celebrating the current season as one of the best and most thrilling ever.    -    there are some very poor analysts out there!  To be fair, the points position was close, obviously, and the two top drivers, and their cars, were evenly matched. 

 

Now the only difference is that yesterday it happened on the last lap of the last and decisive race of the season...   -    Agreed, but in a way that's quite important.  Having hyped up this 'best, most thrilling season ever', and attracted new viewers for the climax, the artificiality of the final laps led to reactions similar to Colbul's friend's above.  The sport we love/once loved risks becoming a laughing stock.  I have spent forty years trying to convince my wife that the 1960s/1970s professional wrestling she used to watch was artificial and rigged.  I think she might be about to get her own back.    

 

Edit. Hopefully my reference to 1960s/1970s wrestling keeps the post in TNF territory.  I'm sure Mick McManus once raced celebrity Escorts at Brands......

Edited by john winfield, 13 December 2021 - 14:29.

[JacnGille]

 

 

On another note I have never subscribed to SKY so was looking forward to hearing Brundle again - what a disappointment! 

We get the Sky feed here in the States. I lost all respect for Martin when he commented on the first lap incident, claiming it to be a fair move that was legal in every racing series in the world. {Maybe not exact words} I'm not aware of any series that allows a driver to force another off track.

[Tom Glowacki]

Was the famous NASCAR French driver Debris, whose late race problems, "on the track", led to so many caution laps, racing at Abu Dhabi?

Edited by Tom Glowacki, 13 December 2021 - 14:50.

[ensign14]

They didn't yesterday.

 

Shambles? Yes. Deliberate attempt to rig the result? Of course not.

How was it not a deliberate attempt to rig the result?  Did anyone think Hamilton on worn tyres could keep Verstappen on fresh behind him if Verstappen were on his tail at the start of the lap?  Of course not.  Indeed that's basically what Horner said to Masi.  So Masi ignored the rules and brought Verstappen onto Hamilton's tail.  It was 1,000% a fix and I think it counts as being fraudulent.

[Michael Ferner]

Race Director as opposed to Clerk of the Course? Or were there other titles/roles that you recall pre-2001?  I'm a bit foggy about this one.

 

Yes, as opposed to. I mean, a Race Director is more likely to feel the need to take his role literally, i.e. to direct the race, unlike a clerk of whatever. I think that is a distinctive, even decisive difference in title, even if it is meant to be effectively the same. As a Race Director, Michael Masi proved a genius; as C-o-C, not so much.

[Juan Mac Mahon]

I'm sad today.  I was perplexed and furious yesterday, I cannot believe what I was watching ...  But today I'm just sad.
The only place I read deep and sensible comments on what happened yesterday is here, from people who valued and treasured the good things from the past.
That's no good.

 

What happened yesterday was not the first time, of course.

Today I remember the 1976 season finale, starting a race in appaling conditions because Mr. Ecclestone signed a contract to broadcast live that race: Lazarus vs. The English Happy Playboy.

 

I don't know, every time I see this, I feel another nail is hammered in the coffin of the Sport I grew up enjoying.
If this happened in the maximum level of the Sport, the FIA most valued jewel, what's left for the entry level formulas?

I think I'm getting older.       

[Michael Ferner]

Did anyone think Hamilton on worn tyres could keep Verstappen on fresh behind him if Verstappen were on his tail at the start of the lap?  

 

No, of course not. That's like asking Sergio Perez to try and keep Hammy from overtaking on fresh tyres for a full lap. Oh, wait...

[ensign14]

 

What happened yesterday was not the first time, of course.

Today I remember the 1976 season finale, starting a race in appaling conditions because Mr. Ecclestone signed a contract to broadcast live that race: Lazarus vs. The English Happy Playboy.

 

And as it turned out that race was perfectly safe - and an absolute belter.

 

Sometimes one has to trust the people who are there because they are the best in the world.

[sabrejet]

Rules of the sport? It's F1, not sport.

[Doug Nye]

Aah well - so it's back to near-Brooklands practises then - a season's laurels to be decided by ... a 1-lap 3.2-mile HANDICAP sprint.     

 

Either Mr Masi's continued employment might be in jeopardy for 2022 - or the game's owners at Liberty will be overjoyed that his actions ended the 'boring' run of Hamilton/Mercedes domination - an entirely new additional audience has been engaged - and that, above all, there is a charismatic, characterful and youthful new World Champion.

 

If Mercedes-AMG have a case, does the overall Mercedes-Benz board view this matter as being sufficiently important to risk brand-damage from pursuing a partisan legalistic campaign to correct it - bound to be viewed by many as sour-grapes - however justified it might be?  

 

Red Bull's reflex final pit stop for Verstappen was in fact laudable - their one chance to pull the fat from the fire. After their cause had looked totally lost - it worked - but only when aided by some troublingly helpful factors... 

 

But c'est la vie.  It's only a game. Nobody has died.  And so to serious matters... 

 

We lost the first Ashes test-match, again.    

 

DCN

[john aston]

It's pantomime  season , nobody died  , a great driver won , another great driver came second and it made great TV . People still argue about who won the 1973 Canadian Grand Prix - plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose ( We speak of little else in Thirsk. ) 

[Michael Ferner]

Since this is now 'officially' modern day nostalgia*, and history fresh from the printers so to speak, I made the sacrifice to watch the whole event (there's little enjoyment for me nowadays in watching those so-called 'races' ) and can only say, what's the fuzz about? Those ARE the rules, and Lewis for one accepted his defeat graciously and without demur, as befitting a great champion. Watching the 'race' unfold, the one thing I didn't understand is why Mercedes did not change tyres during the VSC - it probably lost them the win. Other than that, those final laps were certainly very unusual, and turned out to be a lucky break for RBR and Max, but I've been told many times how lucky Lewis has been this season, and indeed yet again yesterday on the first lap, so 'what goes around' is all that can be said. Nothing to see here, just move on...

 

 

 

* It's being discussed on TNF, so it must be

[Emery0323]

 ...(there's little enjoyment for me nowadays in watching those so-called 'races' ) and can only say, what's the fuzz about? ...

My sentiments exactly, unfortunately.

 

As an American, what strikes me about the outcome yesterday is how "Americanized" F1 has become in recent years:  

 

-The two lead cars being bunched up behind the safety car??  The outrage!    American racing (Indy, NASCAR) has had that ever since I started watching,  many decades ago.

 

- Timing the restart to have one full-blown racing lap rather than end the race (and the WDC) under a yellow flag?  More outrage.   I can recall seeing some US racing series finishing major races on yellow flags, and it wasn't very satisfying.   What if a WDC or IRL or other major series championship were decided by a finish under yellow?

 

The interesting thing is I find US racing series more competitive and engaging to watch, for the most part.   

 

I guess that's my unsophisticated, colonial preferences showing through - Let the flaming begin.

 

 

 

But c'est la vie.  It's only a game. Nobody has died.  And so to serious matters... 

...

 

DCN

My sentiments exactly!   Professional Sports is ultimately done for fun and entertainment that people will pay to see.

 

 

 

 

[opplock]

It's pantomime  season , nobody died  , a great driver won , another great driver came second and it made great TV . People still argue about who won the 1973 Canadian Grand Prix - plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose ( We speak of little else in Thirsk. ) 

 

Hear, hear. Just another small step on the Nascarification of F1. Is this a record, something becoming nostalgia on the same day? 

 

For the 1st 25 years of my life rugby writers in NZ and Wales would regularly slag each other off re differing opinions on a game played in Llanelli (I think) in1905. They're probably still doing so but I moved to a land where rugby is a minority religion and no-one other than refugees from the valleys cares. I wonder whether people will still be arguing whether Revson, Fittipaldi or Ganley won the 73 Canadian GP in 2090. 

 

I doubt somehow that Michael Masi's effigy will be burnt at Lewes or Edenbridge next Guy Fawkes night. 

[Dave Ware]

I lost a lot of my interest and respect for F1 back when Prost and Senna were indulging in their Suzuka shenanigains.  '89 and '90, I think..  But that was two drivers acting like spoiled brats to each other.  If, as at Abu Dhabi,  the adults in the room - the Race Director, Stewards, rule makers, whoever - can't stick to their own rules, then they might as well trot out the elephants, trapeze artists, etc. 

 

To get back to the original question, I certainly can't think of an ending this bad or nearly this bad.  Or even in the same ballpark.  Granted, I wasn't paying much attention in '08 so I don't know all the details of that season's final race. 

 

If you go back far enough, you don't have all this overbearing stewarding and hindsight-examination of every damn little thing that happens on track.  And you don't have the suffocating rules. So I think there's not a long timeframe for this kind of stuff to have happened. 

 

At any rate, there are some fine races on YouTube - '65 Monaco, '71 Monza, and certainly others. 

[Myhinpaa]

I'd hoped not to see this subject on TNF, it's plenty about it on Racing Comment, and possibly even on dreaded The Paddock Club. (?)

 

But what about Lewis Hamilton's "luck" at Imola when he slid off into the gravel and damages his wing.

Very conveniently George Russell* and Valtteri Bottas have a coming together and the Safety Car comes out.

During which time Hamilton can pit for fresh tyres, get a new front wing and unlap himself, finishing second at the finish.

 

Maybe RBR should dispute that decision now...... https://youtu.be/ds0BC8RDJ5o?t=221

 

*George Russell who will join Mercedes next year, and was very upset over what happened in Abu Dhabi in the closing stages.

 

Toto Wolf obviously think he should be race director, as well! https://youtu.be/EmCxv7G_whQ  Michael Masi thinks not!   

 

I hope Mercedes decides not to appeal, while sadly knowing that it's unrealistic to hope for any show of graciousness in defeat.

[john winfield]

 I wonder whether people will still be arguing whether Revson, Fittipaldi or Ganley won the 73 Canadian GP in 2090. 

 

 

Jackie Oliver won, in the Shadow. And my lawyer will leap into action should anyone say otherwise. 

 

 

Edit. 

Myhinpaa, the 'dreaded' Paddock Club isn't really so bad.  All sorts of interesting things are discussed, often in quite a civil manner!  Come over and talk literature, film, philosophy, politics, cricket. Post a picture of your dog or your cat. Or your baby.  It can be less argumentative than a TNF thread on Maserati chassis numbers.

Edited by john winfield, 13 December 2021 - 21:08.

[Michael Ferner]

Nah, Regazzoni won - he was the only one who was not overtaken by any other driver!

[john winfield]

Nah, Regazzoni won - he was the only one who was not overtaken by any other driver!

 

Poor Clay, nobody bothered to tell him he was out of a drive. But, in retrospect, leaving BRM for Ferrari didn't work out too badly!

 

 

Edit.  I've just been re-reading Andy Marriott's Motor Sport report of the 1973 Canadian race. What fun!  So many good performances, including those of Regazzoni's erstwhile team-mates Lauda and Beltoise.

Edited by john winfield, 13 December 2021 - 21:37.

[ensign14]

Since this is now 'officially' modern day nostalgia*, and history fresh from the printers so to speak, I made the sacrifice to watch the whole event (there's little enjoyment for me nowadays in watching those so-called 'races' ) and can only say, what's the fuzz about? Those ARE the rules...

The point is...those are NOT the rules...the rules state that "any" lapped car may pass to go back to the lead lap, not "some"...and that the race re-starts only once they are all lined up behind the leader, and Masi did not wait for that as that would have required one more lap, i.e. the final one.

 

That's the "did this ever happen before?" thing.  Not a misinterpretation of something that happened on track or of a technical device, but a deliberate flouting of the rules by the referee.  I recall Dean Delamont nodded BlackJack's bobtail through as a British GP entry as a 2.2l because its 1.8l was too small for the formula, but that was to give a hard-trying Aussie a bit of a boost, knowing he was not going to threaten the top half.

[dwh43scale]

Declan Brennan, who some may know from Midweek Motorsport, posted this last night "I decided to give F1 another go today, then race control decided to contrive the ending for clicks and that's me done with it again. It needs to decide if it is racing or an entertainment product."

 

I've not watched a GP live for a long time - partly due to being at motorsport events with my camera / partly because the current cars / DRS / focus on personality (the Netflix effect) is not for me. But hey, it was live and free on Channel 4 in the UK and there was no racing to go and watch.

 

Dex puts it very well. For me, it all felt, well, contrived.

 

​Now I know there has been (or perhaps we thought there were) team decisions taken by Toyota to decide the winner at Le Mans in recent years, but this seems to be at a different level and orchestrated by Race Control for "the show". We'll probably never know whether it was cock up or conspiracy - but I suspect I won't be alone in getting at least some of my motorsport fix from other series next year ...

 

My first Grand Prix were as a small boy in short trousers in the sixties. We have come a long way ...

Edited by dwh43scale, 13 December 2021 - 21:46.

[cpbell]

Sorry for bringing this in here, but I was trying to think of other examples when the FIA ignored the rules of the sport to engineer a particular result - and can’t think of one. This was worse than NASCAR giving The Call whenever it needed a boost.

Has there ever been anything as bad as what Michael Masi did to hand the world title - as debased an epithet as it could ever be - to his blue eyed boy? Maybe when NASCAR added some races when Kiekhafer wanted the title for Tim Flock and as a result Herb Thomas was nearly killed?

Please don't pollute TNF with this sort of nonsense.

[uechtel]

 

 

Or other "random" effects like choosing between red flag and/or the use of a pace car    -    I know what you mean, and if it sometimes feels random then we've lost confidence in Race Direction.  Sometimes the Red Flag must be used: blocked track, too much debris, serious injuries etc.

 

 

To me it appears always random, when the result of a race is determined by influences that are outside of the control of the drivers, even when it is nominally within the rules.

 

And even with a red flag, it would be possible and much fairer to send the cars out again onto the track in the time intervals which they had when the race had been interrupted.

 

 

 

 

Before yesterday I have heard an read a lot of comments celebrating the current season as one of the best and most thrilling ever.    -    there are some very poor analysts out there!  To be fair, the points position was close, obviously, and the two top drivers, and their cars, were evenly matched. 

 

 

Indeed. So it wouldn´t really have needed all this nonsense to artificially affect the outcome of the races from the outside. And even IF there is a dominant driver or team, shouldn´t it really be the idea of a sport, that the one who is best should take the win?


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now the only difference is that yesterday it happened on the last lap of the last and decisive race of the season...   -    Agreed, but in a way that's quite important.  Having hyped up this 'best, most thrilling season ever', and attracted new viewers for the climax, the artificiality of the final laps led to reactions similar to Colbul's friend's above.  The sport we love/once loved risks becoming a laughing stock.  I have spent forty years trying to convince my wife that the 1960s/1970s professional wrestling she used to watch was artificial and rigged.  I think she might be about to get her own back.    

 

Here I can not agree with you. For the rules it can not matter whether you are in a decisive point in the championship or not. The only thing is, that in such moments it really gets evident whether they are sound or stupid. But if Verstappen had won the race at Bahrain in such a way and these would have been the decisive points this wouldn´t have made the result anything better or fairer.

 

Edited by uechtel, 13 December 2021 - 23:18.

[uechtel]

Sorry for bringing this in here, but I was trying to think of other examples when the FIA ignored the rules of the sport to engineer a particular result - and can’t think of one. This was worse than NASCAR giving The Call whenever it needed a boost.

Has there ever been anything as bad as what Michael Masi did to hand the world title - as debased an epithet as it could ever be - to his blue eyed boy? Maybe when NASCAR added some races when Kiekhafer wanted the title for Tim Flock and as a result Herb Thomas was nearly killed?

And back to the original question, how about Suzuka 1989? Senna was disqualified for using the official emergency exit to the chicane...

Edited by uechtel, 13 December 2021 - 23:26.

[ensign14]

Which led to Piquet winding Senna up brilliantly the next year...