247 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

@PHortonF1

Five of the top 10 finishers remain under investigation:

 

Norris, Russell, Tsunoda, Lawson - Start infringement

Russell, Hamilton - Tyre pressures

 

#F1 #BrazilGP
 

 

The Merc tyre thing is obviously not relevant in this topic but what happened here?

[P123]

 

@PHortonF1

Five of the top 10 finishers remain under investigation:

 

Norris, Russell, Tsunoda, Lawson - Start infringement

Russell, Hamilton - Tyre pressures

 

#F1 #BrazilGP
 

 

The Merc tyre thing is obviously not relevant in this topic but what happened here?

 

 

Changed pressures with the tyres still fitted.  The tyres have to be off the car. 

[SophieB]

Changed pressures with the tyres still fitted.  The tyres have to be off the car. 

I meant what happened in the incident I started the thread for

[Myrvold]

So. On the Skypad, it was shown that Alpine felt like "the leaders did wrong" but that they decided to follow them. Still the same lights etc.

 

I honestly wonder how the stewards will decide which drivers did something wrong, who didn't and where is the "just following the cars ahead" get out of penalty line.

[krea]

Starting under yellow should be a DSQ 

[Myrvold]

Starting under yellow should be a DSQ 

 

Then, should (almost?) everyone except Sainz be DQ'd?

[RaceBoyer]

It's good the outcome of this has no bearing on the Championship now.

[JimmyClark]

If there's no safety or competitive implications then I don't think a harsh penalty is warranted. But I feel I'm in a tiny minority on here in the forum!

It was a weird situation so I think "benefit of the doubt" should be given to the drivers involved, and reminders of the regulations brought up at the next briefing.

[SophieB]

So. On the Skypad, it was shown that Alpine felt like "the leaders did wrong" but that they decided to follow them. Still the same lights etc.

 

I honestly wonder how the stewards will decide which drivers did something wrong, who didn't and where is the "just following the cars ahead" get out of penalty line.

Yes, that was interesting. It was clear they knew it was wrong but also that the took a view it wasn’t reasonable to remain in place if others were going. 

[JeanAlesi27]

Just listened to Lando's radio.   There was no messages from the team instructing Lando to remain stationary or to leave his grid spot..  I would have thought he would have had one either way..

Very strange.

[MikeTekRacing]

Just listened to Lando's radio. There was no messages from the team instructing Lando to remain stationary or to leave his grid spot.. I would have thought he would have had one either way..
Very strange.

Aren’t they forbidden?

[DJH63]

DSQ for Mercs, chunky penalty for Norris for just going when not allowed to and creating the issue.

[Autodromo]

In the end, didn't EVERYONE go around?  Therefore EVERYONE went under the same condition.

[JeanAlesi27]

If there's no safety or competitive implications then I don't think a harsh penalty is warranted. But I feel I'm in a tiny minority on here in the forum!

It was a weird situation so I think "benefit of the doubt" should be given to the drivers involved, and reminders of the regulations brought up at the next briefing.

 

The penalty should be monetary.  A large fine.

[JeanAlesi27]

Aren’t they forbidden?

 

Forbidden from what?  Informing the driver to hold station on an aborted start?   Never heard of such a thing.. 

[Stephane]

If there's no safety or competitive implications then I don't think a harsh penalty is warranted. But I feel I'm in a tiny minority on here in the forum!

It was a weird situation so I think "benefit of the doubt" should be given to the drivers involved, and reminders of the regulations brought up at the next briefing.

We lost a racing lap because of it. So competitive implication is there

[BoDarvelle]

Aren’t they forbidden?

Ocon asked his engineer if he should stay where he is and was told yes.

[JimmyClark]

We lost a racing lap because of it. So competitive implication is there

That's still not a strong case for a harsh penalty. By that logic, stroll should be penalised too.

[BoDarvelle]

If there's no safety or competitive implications then I don't think a harsh penalty is warranted. But I feel I'm in a tiny minority on here in the forum!

It was a weird situation so I think "benefit of the doubt" should be given to the drivers involved, and reminders of the regulations brought up at the next briefing.

 

People/equipment could be on the track. Just because there wasn't, which the drivers had no idea of while taking off, there shouldn't be a heavy penalty?

[JimmyClark]

People/equipment could be on the track. Just because there wasn't, which the drivers had no idea of while taking off, there shouldn't be a heavy penalty?

The speeds were so slow it's clearly not an issue. The teams stand aside for the original formation lap. Again, I think common sense needs to be applied.

[Stephane]

Did Norris explained why he left the grid ?

[Myrvold]

Yes, that was interesting. It was clear they knew it was wrong but also that the took a view it wasn’t reasonable to remain in place if others were going. 

 

I still wonder where the limit will be, and why "doing what others do" is an excuse.

[Myrvold]

Did Norris explained why he left the grid ?

 

He just said he would be going to the stewards.

[Baddoer]

Any news?

[BoDarvelle]

The speeds were so slow it's clearly not an issue. The teams stand aside for the original formation lap. Again, I think common sense needs to be applied.

 

The speeds were so slow the commentators were shocked at how quickly Norris was coming back around to the grid.

 

Yeah, they weren't going slow. And like I said, they had zero idea what the cause of the aborted start was, yet decided it was a good idea to go for a drive with no signal to move.

[Red5ive]

Nobody gained/nobody lost so not sure what the point of a penalty is for.

 

surely you only penalise someone for gaining an advantage or disadvantaging someone else.

Edited by Red5ive, 03 November 2024 - 19:08.

[LolaB0860]

Any news?

 

Maybe in 6 hours or something

[JimmyClark]

The speeds were so slow the commentators were shocked at how quickly Norris was coming back around to the grid.

Yeah, they weren't going slow. And like I said, they had zero idea what the cause of the aborted start was, yet decided it was a good idea to go for a drive with no signal to move.

Because half of them had stopped, naturally Lando will catch up. Everyone was quite confused.

But nobody was competitively disadvantaged.
And nobody's safety was compromised.

As said upthread, this is classic fining territory than anything sporting.

[Analog]

Yellow lights are not red, but they are definitely not green. This will not be easy for the stewards because I do not think this exact situation is in the rule book. Yet some drivers waited, possibly putting themselves in a disadvantage.

[Deeq]

Nobody gained/nobody lost so not sure what the point of a penalty is for.

surely you only penalise someone for gaining an advantage or disadvantaging someone else.

Not really..pit lane speeding by 1km/hr gets you a penalty, violating track limits even if you are slower gets your lap deleted etc.

[garoidb]

The penalty should be monetary.  A large fine.

 

I'm not arguing for a sporting penalty, but I dislike the issuing of large fines to drivers. What is it supposed to signify? The amount won't matter to the driver or team, in most cases, but why should F1 be able to fine you huge amounts for something innocuous you accidentally did in a race (i.e. not real reckless endangerment of pit crew etc)? It's a bad look. It makes F1 look filthy rich and it comes across as an attempt to look like they took something seriously. I would prefer some sort of warning or reprimand, or extra training. 

Edited by garoidb, 03 November 2024 - 19:20.

[krea]

Then, should (almost?) everyone except Sainz be DQ'd?

 

They have noted four drivers with Norris started that mess. 

[ensign14]

Maybe they should change the procedures then, if they're confusing.  Just start the race under the show car if Stroll is in a dangerous position.  How long did it actually take to get going after that?  Nearly an hour?  (Felt like it)

[DW46]

Just give them all 10s and move on. 🤷‍♂️

[Myrvold]

Not really..pit lane speeding by 1km/hr gets you a penalty,

 

Except if you speed three different times in the pit during recon laps. Then the team(!) picks up a 100EUR fine.

 

They have noted four drivers with Norris started that mess. 

 

That I know. Ocon is not one of them. He still went while the lights were yellow etc. 

[pacificquay]

A jump start in the race, essentially starting under red, is only a 5s penalty these days, so I can’t logically see it being more than that 

[TennisUK]

Looked like an error on the part of the front 5, but as everyone else did it too, I doubt they can penalise anyone in isolation- maybe a fine for the first 5?

 

Very weird thing to have happened.

[DamonHillOfBeans]

Simply following everyone else isn't an excuse, even if there was massive confusion.

As Karun said in commentary, you don't get out of a speeding penalty just because everyone else was speeding too.

It was a clown show, but any sanction needs to be consistent for all who broke the rules. I don't understand why only 4 drivers are under investigation.

[P123]

Those under investigation for the start did seem to be the cars that went off first, without any hesitation.

[balmybaldwin]

Aren’t they forbidden?

Don't think so there was a rule about it in the past. if it is then Ocon, and verstappen at least were chattering to engineers about it.

Edited by balmybaldwin, 03 November 2024 - 19:43.

[Analog]

AI, after draining 3-4 nuclear plants, said this:

"In Formula 1, if a driver starts the formation lap before the green light is shown, it is generally considered a false start. The penalty for this can vary, depending on the specific circumstances and how strictly the stewards interpret the rules."

[Myrvold]

Don't think so there was a rule about it in the past. if it is then Ocon, and verstappen at least were chattering to engineers about it.

 

There was something about "driving without assistance" which, in an effort to stop live driver coaching, also meant that being told... virtually anything by the team on the formation lap or on the grid was not allowed.

[Fastcake]

Maybe they should change the procedures then, if they're confusing. Just start the race under the show car if Stroll is in a dangerous position. How long did it actually take to get going after that? Nearly an hour? (Felt like it)

Yes, it does seem like a situation where if one person does it punish them, but if everyone does it there’s a bigger issue with the procedures.

As we saw with the confusion over how the grid would be set absent a qualifying session, the regulations are clearly deficient across the board.

[DW46]

If all the drivers don’t get the rules maybe the rules are unclear.

[PrinceBira]

If all the drivers don’t get the rules maybe the rules are unclear.

But some drivers clearly were aware?

[DW46]

But some drivers clearly were aware?

Than they should have held position.

[Analog]

Than they should have held position.

Some did.

[Myrvold]

But some drivers clearly were aware?

 

Ye, I'm not sure the rules are that unclear. I mean, the whole "all cars should return to the grid" is a bit "but we are already here, is it 1 more lap and then return?" if you really really want to try to find any doubt.

 

Anyway, that doesn't change that everyone(?) went while the lights were yellow and the sign said aborted start.

[Ste678]

Why do those things always take ages to decide?
I mean it happened right at the start of the race...

[DW46]

Some did.

So the ones who didn’t leave their grid slot should be not penalised, this isn’t a complex issue in the slightest.