Formula 1 2019

[ess1uk]

Well that was an entertaining qualifying

 

[Mike Storey]

5 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Oh come on! Surely no one actually believes the the practice sessions count for anything?!!

 

Maybe, but Vettel now has pole. And Bottas threw it by trying too hard. So perhaps, sometimes, they do.

 

[Hobby]

And hamilton knows which tyres dont work very well... Thats all practice is for, finding out what works and what doesn't. If anyone believes anything else then they've been taken in by the hype to sell more tv time.

[Sidecar Racer]

 

Oooh err , that was fun .

[gwrrob]

2 minutes ago, Sidecar Racer said:

 

Oooh err , that was fun .

 

Toys thrown out of pram.

[37114]

Wow, what a race. I doubt we have heard the end of that one...

[Darius43]

I have every sympathy for Vettel in this instance.   There is too much regulation now that destroys the racing.  If they want more people to follow this sport then this is a step backwards.

 

Darius

[Jol Wilkinson]

Regulation on safety grounds is a good thing, although this result will always be open to debate. Complaining about the regulations affecting Ferrari adversely is inappropriate given that they have the unique right to veto any rule changes they don't like.

 

 

[Darius43]

10 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Regulation on safety grounds is a good thing, although this result will always be open to debate. Complaining about the regulations affecting Ferrari adversely is inappropriate given that they have the unique right to veto any rule changes they don't like.

 

 

 

Actually I’m a Lewis fan.  My point is that the regulations, or more correctly the interpretation of the regulations, in the specific instance, is spoiling the sport. At the end of the day it’s a bad decision by the stewards in my opinion, and that of a number of F1 commentators.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Darius43

[Pete the Elaner]

There are 2 sides to this decision.

We want to see racing, & this robbed us of that.

or

In some corners, leaving the track would lose you a few seconds. In others, you would either get stuck in a gravel trap or hit a wall, both of which would end the driver's race. These automatically penalise the driver for leaving the track.

It is really fair to drive straight back on & impede the driver immediately behind you?

 

I believe that apart from being forced off to avoid a collision (which was not the case here), drivers should always be penalised for leaving the track regardless. I think this should be a hard rule enforced rigidly for anyone who leaves the track except to avoid a collision.

[MarkC]

Very true. Hamilton had yet again forced Vettel into making an error, and it was fortunate for Vettel that his escape route was onto grass. To then come back onto the track as he did - by his own admission he didn't even see Hamilton - could not go unpenalised

[Pete the Elaner]

Actually Vettel said he could see Hamilton but his car was out of control so had no choice but to use that part of the track.

[MarkC]

1 hour ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Actually Vettel said he could see Hamilton but his car was out of control so had no choice but to use that part of the track.

Not initially, according to the reports in the Telegraph, which was why I commented. In any case, having looked at an aerial photo of the chicane, by going straight across the grass instead of going through the chicane itself, Vettel gained an advantage. As I understand it, according to the rules he should have yielded track position to Hamilton, who had been in a position to get past, because of that.

[Oldddudders]

Pirro, who is getting it in the neck for this decision, is of course Italian. The stewards are not famous for finding against Ferrari. Vettel was wrong to expect to cut Lewis off as he came back on, and even more wrong "bringing the sport into disrepute" in changing the 1 and 2 boards like a spoilt child. This season he has been shown up by the mercurial Leclerc, and yesterday cracked under pressure. Sadly he displays the same attitude we saw from Schumacher when things went badly. 

[mudmagnet]

Clearly Vettel made a mistake under pressure from Hamilton. At other circuits he may well have spun or into gravel or hit the barrier. He does seem to desend a little into "red mist", like Schumacher did at times and make wrong decisions.  Suspect he kept the power on, loosing grip across the grass and having much less control. If Hamilton had not reacted,  then they would have crashed. I think that because Vettel made a mistake and possibly gained an advantage then a penalty is correct. The Ferrari appeal will not have been helped by Vettel action with the boards.

 

[micklner]

Having watched the highlights, totally correct decision. Vettel is becoming an embarrassment to Ferrari, they should be taking action against him as well, totally unprofessional behaviour  at the end of the race.. Cant see him being there next year, maybe even earlier.

[Pete the Elaner]

7 hours ago, MarkC said:

Not initially, according to the reports in the Telegraph.

I wasn't going from any 2nd hand news reports.

The radio comms between Vettel & the team were played on TV. He clearly said "I saw him but I had nowhere else to go".

[ejstubbs]

8 hours ago, MarkC said:

by going straight across the grass instead of going through the chicane itself, Vettel gained an advantage.   As I understand it, according to the rules he should have yielded track position to Hamilton, who had been in a position to get past, because of that.

 

I think that argument is the wrong way round.  Vettel was in front, so hardly needed to gain an advantage.  He then made a mistake which caused him to leave the track involuntarily - he didn't do it deliberately to try to increase his lead, or to pass Hamilton (if Hamilton had been in front).  Having left the track due to an error he was entitled to try to get back on, but it's the way that he did that which apparently led to the penalty.  That's what the stewards said on the day: he was penalised for rejoining the track unsafely.  Whether the FIA will come up with a different argument when they hear Ferrari's appeal we shall have to wait and see (I believe they do have some history of changing the reason for a penalty after reviewing an appeal).

 

I doubt many drivers would argue that going across the grass is likely to gain much of an advantage.  It's not like cutting across tarmac (or whatever they make the track surfaces of these days) like Verstappen did at the US GP in 2017 when deliberately trying, and succeeding, in passing Raikkonen.  Vettel himself said that his control was degraded by having gone across the grass, which was why he was unable to keep out of Hamilton's way.  (On the other hand, saying that Hamilton could have gone up his inside is pretty weak: I doubt Hamilton had much chance to adjust his line at that point, or indeed any desire to do so, given that there was a car on his inside which he could be pretty sure would be right on or beyond the ragged edge of control.)

Given the location, with walls close to the track on both sides, and the surface on the inside of the turn being grass, I doubt either driver could have done much different without crashing.  So I'm in two minds (if not more) about whether the penalty was justified.  I don't think Vettel did it deliberately, but it did have a detrimental outcome from Hamilton's perspective.  I can understand Vettel being miffed at being penalised for something he couldn't really avoid doing (although, arguably, he could have avoided making the mistake in the first place...) but if the outcome was judged as being unfair to the other driver then, equally, Hamilton could have felt hard done by (and clearly did, in the heat of the moment, based on his radio comms to the pits).

 

[An analogy could be a bowler overstepping the line in cricket.  You'r entitled to push as close as possible, but if you get it wrong that's deemed an unfair advantage even if you didn't mean to do it and you get penalised with a no ball.  Or a long jumper overstepping the board: on 99.999% of occasions it's an error, not deliberately trying to cheat, but it still voids the jump.]

 

I do think that if Vettel had made a similar mistake at a different point on the track with a tarmac runoff and more room, the outcome on the track would likely have been different - and if not then the justification for a penalty might have been more clear-cut.

Edited June 10, 2019 by ejstubbs

[iak]

Once more, "The German" had cracked under pressure and reacted dangerously without any regard for the consequences.

Sadly, his continued misdemeanors and bleating just make him look all the more ridiculous as time goes on. The incident could have resulted in a big accident and then what?

Vettel has become an embarrassment for Ferrari; in Leclerc they have a diamond with which to move forwards. I hope the FIA clobber Vettel after his antics, post-race. We do not need childish, immature behavior frankly!

 

[woodenhead]

Looking at it purely from a visual perspective I would say it wa 50/50 whether or not it was a calculated attempt to block Hamilton when he came back onto the track.

 

But perhaps with the aid of telemetry the marshals know more about how controlled his exit from the grass was.

 

I do feel a little sorry for Vettel unless the telemetry shows otherwise.

 

[Jol Wilkinson]

Having now looked at C4's F1 Highlights programme, my initial reaction was that SB was rather harshly judged. However, I then looked at Autosport's website which gives a more in depth analysis of the reasons for the Steward's decision.

 

https://www.autosport.com/

 

 

[Andrew P]

When I watched it last night, I thought at first it was going to be Hamilton that was going to loose his front wing and be the looser.

But the more repays I saw, the more it looked almost DELIBERATE to close the door, which under normal racing would have been acceptable, but not coming at it from that angle off the grass.

 

FIA Decision = correct.

Vettel's behaviour moving the boards = iffy?

Language about blind man = TOTALY unacceptable.

Saying to the crowd, don't boo or blame Lewis = something I've never seen or heard in him before.

Should he be reprimanded by the Team = YES, as once again he has cracked under pressure.

Will it drag on with another inquiry = I HOPE NOT.

[ejstubbs]

5 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Looking at it purely from a visual perspective I would say it wa 50/50 whether or not it was a calculated attempt to block Hamilton when he came back onto the track.

 

But that's not what he was penalised for, according to the stewards: it was the unsafe way in which he rejoined the track.  And Vettel's plea in mitigation - which makes some sense in that context - was that he didn't have any choice, due to the configuration of the track in that location.

 

4 minutes ago, Andrew P said:

But the more repays I saw, the more it looked almost DELIBERATE to close the door, which under normal racing would have been acceptable, but not coming at it from that angle off the grass.

 

Which stirs up memories of of Schumey and Damon Hill's coming together in Aus.  Though the circumstances are different in many respects.

[Andrew P]

BREAKING NEWS.

VETTEL TO STEP DOWN AT SUMMER BREAK.

 

Well it's only a wild prediction from me, heheh.

[MarkC]

15 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

 

 

Which stirs up memories of of Schumey and Damon Hill's coming together in Aus.  Though the circumstances are different in many respects.

Oh, definitely. That was a truly cynical dodgem car manoeuvre. This one was inattention after making an error under pressure. It was what he did afterwards that made things worse. Petulant brat springs to mind.

Edited June 10, 2019 by MarkC
amending tryping eror...