93 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

We have a protest!

 

@ChrisMedlandF1

Aston Martin has protested the qualifying results in China

 

I *think* it relates to Carlos Sainz stopping on track but still being allowed to compete in the rest of the session #F1 #ChineseGP

 

@ChrisMedlandF1

It does. Alleged breach of Article 39.6 of the Sporting Regulations which states:

 

"Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session."

 

#F1 #ChineseGP

[Diablobb81]

Cue endless debate about what "stops" means.

[MissingApex]

I still can’t get my head around the fact that when you cause a red flag, you can still proceed in qualifying.

[Gambelli]

This seems pretty weak, he got back under his own steam, any time a driver spins they more often than not come to a 'stop' before continuing...

[IrvTheSwerve]

I still can’t get my head around the fact that when you cause a red flag, you can still proceed in qualifying.

It’s not the driver’s fault if race control deem it a red flag.

 

If he got back to the pits under his own steam then there’s absolutely nothing to see here, IMO.

[SophieB]

Cue endless debate about what "stops" means.

As so often happens, I suspect the first response in a thread nails it.

[Laster]

That surely won't stand. We've seen cars come to a stop in qualifying before and continue on without it being a problem. It wasn't a case of him needing a push start or towed back to the garage. He came back unaided. If this protest stood then if someone spun and their car came to a stop they would be out of qualifying despite them just needing a moment to get back going again.

[AlexPrime]

With Carlos I think you start to feel the edge of panic about not having a race seat for next year. Very aggressive in sprint and this mistake in qualifying...

[Laster]

He's got one with Audi if he wants it. It's more a matter of the quality of the seat he can get, rather than whether he'll have one.

[sportyskells]

here we go again Aston martin are prostesting

[PilgrimsDrop]

With Carlos I think you start to feel the edge of panic about not having a race seat for next year. Very aggressive in sprint and this mistake in qualifying...

 

Whatever you're smoking maybe it's time to quit. The whole paddock, bar Ferrari, is wanting his signature on a contract... he'll race next year and many years to come. 

[JimmyClark]

To me the red flag was the same as when there's debris on track to be cleared (as they needed to fix the conveyor in this case) - nothing to do with Sainz stopping. No marshalls touched his car as far as I know.

If the FIA were sensible they'd throw this protest out immediately, but we all know they aren't.

[NotAPineapple]

The red flag is irrelevant to the protest though.

[Ruusperi]

If this protest stood then if someone spun and their car came to a stop they would be out of qualifying despite them just needing a moment to get back going again.

Indeed. Or when running wide on a street circuit, they have stop, then find the reverse gear which can take a while. If we have a trigger-happy race director who brings out the red flag immediately, then what can you do?

[JimmyClark]

The red flag is irrelevant to the protest though.

I don't think it is, as if there was no red flag then I doubt protesting would have crossed their mind. Otherwise any driver who spins and stops before rejoining could be protested...

[pdac]

That surely won't stand. We've seen cars come to a stop in qualifying before and continue on without it being a problem. It wasn't a case of him needing a push start or towed back to the garage. He came back unaided. If this protest stood then if someone spun and their car came to a stop they would be out of qualifying despite them just needing a moment to get back going again.

 

Ah, but they have to look at the rule. As always, they have written the rule badly (not defining that is meant by "stop"). Someone needs to clarify that now. It's rather akin to the no movable aero rule (there's always some degree of movement, but the rule doesn't take that into account).

[baddog]

Its essentially always been understood and applied as 'stopped' means 'unable to get back to the pits unassisted'

Stop playing silly buggers.

[ConsiderAndGo]

AMR know they’re getting rinsed by Ferrari tomorrow 😂

There was no assistance. No chance of a penalty, surely.

So if you spin off onto tarmac, stop for 15 seconds taking it out of neutral, and move again, you’re banned from continuing?

Edited by ConsiderAndGo, 20 April 2024 - 10:28.

[RedRabbit]

They have been hit with some absurd penalties this year, so this is probably as much about getting a conversation going about applying some common sense going forward.

[ANF]

here we go again Aston martin are prostesting

Oh. https://www.motorspo...crash/10601131/

The FIA has announced that Aston Martin has lodged a protest of the qualifying results over Article 39.6 of the F1 sporting regulations, which states: “Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint qualifying session shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session.”

The FIA race control messages stated that Sainz had stopped on track during the red flag period, before he was able to fire up his Ferrari and return to the pits.

The rule is in place to stop drivers getting assistance from marshals or recovery vehicles to potentially rejoin the session under a red flag, but doesn’t cover the eventuality of a driver being able to continue under their own power.

Edited by ANF, 20 April 2024 - 10:38.

[PayasYouRace]

I think this is rather weak from Aston. The rule has only every applied to cars that have not been able to return to the pits unaided. Under Aston's interpretation, anyone who spins in qualifying would then be out of qualifying.

[PayasYouRace]

With Carlos I think you start to feel the edge of panic about not having a race seat for next year. Very aggressive in sprint and this mistake in qualifying...

 

Or just someone with nothing to lose giving it their all.

[cjm321190]

He got going under his own power so is ok.

[Muppetmad]

As unpopular as it would be, I think AM have a case here. Race control stated that Sainz was stopped on track. The question now is if race control wishes to "correct the record", so to speak, and say they were mistaken in making that statement.

[PayasYouRace]

As unpopular as it would be, I think AM have a case here. Race control stated that Sainz was stopped on track. The question now is if race control wishes to "correct the record", so to speak, and say they were mistaken in making that statement.

 

So Race Control said that? They might say that about any car that spins.

[baddog]

As unpopular as it would be, I think AM have a case here. Race control stated that Sainz was stopped on track. The question now is if race control wishes to "correct the record", so to speak, and say they were mistaken in making that statement.

 

Race control say a lot of things.. and sometime correct those things when new information arises.

[Muppetmad]

So Race Control said that? They might say that about any car that spins.

I'm following ANF's post above, quoting Motorsport.com: "The FIA race control messages stated that Sainz had stopped on track during the red flag period, before he was able to fire up his Ferrari and return to the pits".

[pdac]

So Race Control said that? They might say that about any car that spins.

 

Yes, but it ties in with the wording of the rule.

[jcbc3]

They did with Lando's lap yesterday, so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

As unpopular as it would be, I think AM have a case here. Race control stated that Sainz was stopped on track. The question now is if race control wishes to "correct the record", so to speak, and say they were mistaken in making that statement.

[Muppetmad]

Race control say a lot of things.. and sometime correct those things when new information arises.

I agree, and that's what this will hinge on, I think. If race control insists it was correct to have deemed that Sainz had stopped, then AM's protest will surely succeed.

[PayasYouRace]

I agree, and that's what this will hinge on, I think. If race control insists it was correct to have deemed that Sainz had stopped, then AM's protest will surely succeed.

 

I don't see why Race Control pointing it out like that makes any difference.

[ANF]

Cue endless debate about what "stops" means.

While we're at it: What does "on the track" mean?

Article 39.6:
"Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session."

On the other hand, Article 33.3:
"Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the Race Director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track."

[Muppetmad]

I don't see why Race Control pointing it out like that makes any difference.

Race control messages are effectively the "record" of the session, observing and stating on-track realities: the session has begun, the session has ended, red flag, so on. If race control deemed Sainz to have stopped (and wish to stand by that statement), that will surely be key for the stewards in making a decision on this.

[ArnageWRC]

AM moaning about something else.......like night following day.....

[PayasYouRace]

While we're at it: What does "on the track" mean?

Article 39.6:
"Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session."

On the other hand, Article 33.3:
"Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the Race Director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track."

 

If we're going to get into the weeds, that's a good point.

[Sash1]

Is the pits part of the track? Potentially dq all of them. Popcorn!

[PayasYouRace]

Is the pits part of the track? Potentially dq all of them. Popcorn!

 

The pits are part of the track.

[Showty]

The pits are part of the track.

Dq them all!

[pdac]

The pits are part of the track.

 
There are some instances in the Sporting Regulations that suggest it might not be ...
 
 

3.13.1 3.4
All persons concerned in any way with an entered car or present in any other capacity whatsoever in the paddock, pit lane, or track must wear an appropriate pass at all times.
 
4.12.5 55.5
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.
 
4.13.3 56.3
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 VSC procedure is in use. This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.
 
5.11.4 26.16
Animals, except those which may have been expressly authorised by the FIA for use by security services, are forbidden on the track, in the pit lane, in the paddock or in any spectator area.

 

These all suggest that the "pit lane" is a separate entity from "the track".

 

EDIT:

The article numbers were from the 2022 regs. I've updated to use the 2024 article numbers.

Edited by pdac, 20 April 2024 - 12:03.

[sportyskells]

when will we find out the news as its a bit late in china?

[southernstars]

I actually don't mind Aston lodging a protest here. They obviously stand to gain if ruled in favour but ultimately, the main thing will be that this will clarify the rule.

[AlexPrime]

Whatever you're smoking maybe it's time to quit. The whole paddock, bar Ferrari, is wanting his signature on a contract... he'll race next year and many years to come. 

I am not so sure, as RBR seem to be close to resigning Checo and AM will probably keep Lance. So you are left with Mercedes and Audi. Neither looks particularly promising.

[TomNokoe]

Complete non event. The timing screen records a driver "STOP" if they don't pass a sector checkpoint in a prescribed amount of time. Sometimes it happens if a driver is extremely slow on a cool down lap. It's a completely arbitrary software setting.

Sainz clearly wasn't stopped, because he got back to the pits. He didn't receive outside assistance nor did he exit the car. Silly protest.

[Baddoer]

Good. FIA should prove they are earning money for something.

[New Britain]

Oh. https://www.motorspo...crash/10601131/

The FIA has announced that Aston Martin has lodged a protest of the qualifying results over Article 39.6 of the F1 sporting regulations, which states: “Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint qualifying session shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session.”

The FIA race control messages stated that Sainz had stopped on track during the red flag period, before he was able to fire up his Ferrari and return to the pits.

The rule is in place to stop drivers getting assistance from marshals or recovery vehicles to potentially rejoin the session under a red flag, but doesn’t cover the eventuality of a driver being able to continue under their own power.

Should the rule be changed to cover the eventuality that the driver, through his own error, has caused sufficient damage to the barrier, etc. that a red flag was necessary to make good?

[Joseki]

A lot of people are saying it's "silly" and "no case" but 2 hours and 20 minutes passed since the start of the meeting and there is still no decision.

Edited by Joseki, 20 April 2024 - 12:22.

[Muppetmad]

If the message was indeed the product of an automated system, as TomNokoe suggests, then AM's case becomes weaker. I imagine there will be some effort to tighten up the wording of the regulations after this.

[kosmos]

when will we find out the news as its a bit late in china?

 

 

Tomorrow after the race most likely

[pdac]

While we're at it: What does "on the track" mean?

Article 39.6:
"Any driver whose car stops on the track during the qualifying session or the sprint shootout will not be permitted to take any further part in that session."

On the other hand, Article 33.3:
"Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the Race Director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track."

 

Article 39.6 refers to a car that STOPS on track. Article 33.3 refers to a car LEAVING the track. But if the TRACK is considered to be the bit between the white lines, then the counter argument would be that the car did not stop on the track and only stopped once it had left the track.

 

Again, it just shows how sloppy the FIA are at defining the terms that they use to word the rules. Someone gets paid for this rubbish.

[Muppetmad]

Agreed. I'm amazed they don't have a lawyer on retainer to point out all these holes and help them with the language of the regulations.