Formula 1 2021

[Brian D]

Felt actually sick at the end. LH 12 seconds ahead then disaster. Was the race director inept or was there an agenda? Even a once famous knighted former Scottish champ quoted as time for a change of F1 world champ. Makes you wonder about a conspiracy theory. 

Disgraceful race management at the very least. 

[didcot]

7 minutes ago, Brian D said:

Felt actually sick at the end

Yes, my eldest and I felt the same. Having been pacing up and down for the last 10 laps. He was close to tears.

Had it been a fair fight to the end then things would be different. 

[Grovenor]

Comes back to what a fair few said last week, the pitting for tyres on a safety car or red flag should be disallowed. Only allow pitting when really racing.

[LNERandBR]

Pitting under the Safety Car has been a 'thing' for years. Verstappen would have had fresher tyres for a restart even if he hadn't pitted.

 

One thing that confuses me, do we know why Perez retired?

[black and decker boy]

3 minutes ago, LNERandBR said:

Pitting under the Safety Car has been a 'thing' for years. Verstappen would have had fresher tyres for a restart even if he hadn't pitted.

 

One thing that confuses me, do we know why Perez retired?

Part of the deal between RB & FIA to let Max win and give constructors to MB?

 

#conspiracy central 

[Merseycider]

Perhaps I'm the only person in the UK who actually witnessed the crash that led to the safety car. Surely the safety car wasn't a disputable rule interpretation, not a rhetorical question, fact. At that point LH was leading and when the race resumed all LH had to do was to stay ahead for ONE lap. Facts. But wait, oh no, JV not only legally but spectacularly overtook  LH to take the win.

 

I strongly suspect that not a single one of the discontented would have raised a whisper if LH had stayed in front to take the win.  So just how would that have tightened up the awful regulations and decision making that everybody's now so expert in interpreting?  After all these are the same regulations that nobody felt particularly bothered about when LH was winning. I smell bad loser only marginally diluted by an ocean of hypocrisy.

 

Listening to all the noise one might as well argue that the crash was pre-determined to manipulate JV chances of winning. But in reality that's all it did, offer a chance not certainty, and the result was actually decided on the track.

 

Just saying.

 

 

[Geep7]

Something my wife has just mentioned, and I hadn't thought about. What about Carlos Sainz? If they had let the other lapped cars go, could he have challenge for 2nd place? Could Ferrari have had ground to complain as well? (They obviously didn't though)

[EddieB]

3 minutes ago, Merseycider said:

Perhaps I'm the only person in the UK who actually witnessed the crash that led to the safety car. Surely the safety car wasn't a disputable rule interpretation, not a rhetorical question, fact. At that point LH was leading and when the race resumed all LH had to do was to stay ahead for ONE lap. Facts. But wait, oh no, JV not only legally but spectacularly overtook  LH to take the win.

 

I strongly suspect that not a single one of the discontented would have raised a whisper if LH had stayed in front to take the win.  So just how would that have tightened up the awful regulations and decision making that everybody's now so expert in interpreting?  After all these are the same regulations that nobody felt particularly bothered about when LH was winning. I smell bad loser only marginally diluted by an ocean of hypocrisy.

 

Listening to all the noise one might as well argue that the crash was pre-determined to manipulate JV chances of winning. But in reality that's all it did, offer a chance not certainty, and the result was actually decided on the track.

 

Just saying.

 

 

No, the response to the crash unleashed a sequence of events and decisions that meant that any advantage gained through the race was overturned and the race handed over to the driver in second place.  I would feel just as cheated if the order of those drivers were reversed - that Lewis had been gifted a victory unfairly.

 

Oh, it’s MV, not JV by the way.  I guess you don’t watch many grands prices.

[chris p bacon]

7 minutes ago, Merseycider said:

But wait, oh no, JV not only legally but spectacularly overtook  LH to take the win.

I thought RB just changed the tyres, I didn't realised they'd stuck MV's father in the drivers seat.

[Geep7]

5 minutes ago, Merseycider said:

Perhaps I'm the only person in the UK who actually witnessed the crash that led to the safety car. Surely the safety car wasn't a disputable rule interpretation, not a rhetorical question, fact. At that point LH was leading and when the race resumed all LH had to do was to stay ahead for ONE lap. Facts. But wait, oh no, JV not only legally but spectacularly overtook  LH to take the win.

 

I strongly suspect that not a single one of the discontented would have raised a whisper if LH had stayed in front to take the win.  So just how would that have tightened up the awful regulations and decision making that everybody's now so expert in interpreting?  After all these are the same regulations that nobody felt particularly bothered about when LH was winning. I smell bad loser only marginally diluted by an ocean of hypocrisy.

 

Listening to all the noise one might as well argue that the crash was pre-determined to manipulate JV chances of winning. But in reality that's all it did, offer a chance not certainty, and the result was actually decided on the track.

 

Just saying.

 

 

I think the problem is, that had Lewis been on equal tyres, and Max had won by passing Lewis on the restart, it would have been OK.

 

The problem is that Max being on 1 lap old fresh tyres compared to Lewis's old hard's makes it look like favouritism, and forgone conclusion, whether the decision was made to let them race or not for the last lap.

 

Yes, of course there should have been a safety car, that is not in dispute. It's the way the safety car restart was handled, and whether it was done properly. The FIA stewards have ruled that the FIA was correct in applying these rules, but that is essentially them saying they were right. MB have every right and should be taking this to the international court....

[LNERandBR]

4 minutes ago, Merseycider said:

Perhaps I'm the only person in the UK who actually witnessed the crash that led to the safety car. Surely the safety car wasn't a disputable rule interpretation, not a rhetorical question, fact. At that point LH was leading and when the race resumed all LH had to do was to stay ahead for ONE lap. Facts. But wait, oh no, JV not only legally but spectacularly overtook  LH to take the win.

 

I strongly suspect that not a single one of the discontented would have raised a whisper if LH had stayed in front to take the win.  So just how would that have tightened up the awful regulations and decision making that everybody's now so expert in interpreting?  After all these are the same regulations that nobody felt particularly bothered about when LH was winning. I smell bad loser only marginally diluted by an ocean of hypocrisy.

 

Listening to all the noise one might as well argue that the crash was pre-determined to manipulate JV chances of winning. But in reality that's all it did, offer a chance not certainty, and the result was actually decided on the track.

 

Just saying.

 

 

 

The Safety Car coming out was 100% the correct call. That's not what has people upset here.

 

It's the way that the race was restarted in such a slapdash and confusing way which has gotten people upset. The same processes and procedures should be followed, in exactly the same way every time. Here, they weren't so if feels manufactured in an attempt to 'improve the show'.

 

As soon as the crash happened I knew Lewis was in trouble. Then Max pitted and I thought 'oh that's it now he'll get past now with better tyres'. 

 

If all the normal Safety Car processes had been followed, with the lapped cars going though and rejoining the rear of the pack, then Lewis fans, myself included there, would still be upset because Lewis lost. But, I'm sure they'd agree that it was fair racing. 

Right now, it just feels like decisions were made to manufacture the outcome. If there wasn't enough time for all the correct processes then that's as much in the laps of the racing gods as the Crash and Safety Car coming out. 

 

[black and decker boy]

10 minutes ago, Geep7 said:

I think the problem is, that had Lewis been on equal tyres, and Max had won by passing Lewis on the restart, it would have been OK.

 

The problem is that Max being on 1 lap old fresh tyres compared to Lewis's old hard's makes it look like favouritism, and forgone conclusion, whether the decision was made to let them race or not for the last lap.

 

Yes, of course there should have been a safety car, that is not in dispute. It's the way the safety car restart was handled, and whether it was done properly. The FIA stewards have ruled that the FIA was correct in applying these rules, but that is essentially them saying they were right. MB have every right and should be taking this to the international court....

Indeed. The story of today is that the FIA Stewards have investigated the FIA Stewards and found no care to answer by the FIA Stewards in the way they rewrote the written rules of the FIA

 

  No one disputes the need for a safety car. 
 

many are confused by who “jv” was in the race mind you!!!

[EddieB]

Conspiracy alert. 

 

I guess it was a genuine accident and just a strange coincidence that Queen Latifi happened to hit the barriers with around five laps to go - a scenario that Masi had discussed pre-race with the Sky Commentary Team. 

 

Knowing that it would use up almost all the remaining race laps to clear the Williams under a full safety car, a red flag would have neutralised the race and prevented any driver from gaining an advantage.  At that stage of the race it was the only fair decision.  However Masi had already indicated that he had no intention of deploying anything other than a safety car - having already briefed Sky what he planned to should that exact circumstance play out.

 

It would be too obvious for a team-mate to have crashed (à la Piquet, Singapore 2008, perhaps my reference in the week was too oblique), when there's an obliging never-likely further down in the paddock.

 

A well executed plan.  Hannibal Smith would have been proud.

[Merseycider]

23 minutes ago, EddieB said:

No, the response to the crash unleashed a sequence of events and decisions that meant that any advantage gained through the race was overturned and the race handed over to the driver in second place.  I would feel just as cheated if the order of those drivers were reversed - that Lewis had been gifted a victory unfairly.

 

Oh, it’s MV, not JV by the way.  I guess you don’t watch many grands prices.

 

[PhilH]

What I am struggling to understand is why anybody would take F1 seriously at present, it’s a circus, a complete farce.

[LNERandBR]

17 minutes ago, PhilH said:

What I am struggling to understand is why anybody would take F1 seriously at present, it’s a circus, a complete farce.

 

I think the biggest problem is you have no idea what's going to happen anymore if even Safety Car periods can be changed on the fly to suit the spectacle. 

 

To be honest, I don't even care that Verstappen won now. All I'm worried about is more random changes to the Race Direction just because one Team Principal asked for it.

[gismorail]

Whatever happens in the coming weeks and any possible court proceedings I reckon LH would not accept any change to the Championship outcome and hopefully Mercedes would only be looking to get a serious change and clarity to the rules and how they are implemented. 
There is no doubt in my mind that the powers that be from the start of this season have been determined to make sure MV wins the drivers championship this year to stop the Mercedes and LH domination. 
The corruption within the sport is obvious for all to see and the fact that there seems to be no shame and no attempt to cover it up . 
There is no way that today’s events can be good for the motorsport world and I do wonder if some of sponsors will be considering their involvement on ethical grounds. 

[RedgateModels]

15 minutes ago, gismorail said:

Whatever happens in the coming weeks and any possible court proceedings I reckon LH would not accept any change to the Championship outcome and hopefully Mercedes would only be looking to get a serious change and clarity to the rules and how they are implemented. 
There is no doubt in my mind that the powers that be from the start of this season have been determined to make sure MV wins the drivers championship this year to stop the Mercedes and LH domination. 
The corruption within the sport is obvious for all to see and the fact that there seems to be no shame and no attempt to cover it up . 
There is no way that today’s events can be good for the motorsport world and I do wonder if some of sponsors will be considering their involvement on ethical grounds. 

yep, I’m outta here. 

[jcredfer]

11 minutes ago, gismorail said:

Whatever happens in the coming weeks and any possible court proceedings I reckon LH would not accept any change to the Championship outcome and hopefully Mercedes would only be looking to get a serious change and clarity to the rules and how they are implemented. 
There is no doubt in my mind that the powers that be from the start of this season have been determined to make sure MV wins the drivers championship this year to stop the Mercedes and LH domination. 
The corruption within the sport is obvious for all to see and the fact that there seems to be no shame and no attempt to cover it up . 
There is no way that today’s events can be good for the motorsport world and I do wonder if some of sponsors will be considering their involvement on ethical grounds. 

 

Many might wish, too, however there is little hope for anyone holding their breath in anticipation.

 

 

[Merseycider]

Apologies for JV.  I have watched so many 'Grand Prices' that I remember Max's dad racing. In those days they were called Grands Prix.

 

If LHs tyres are an important factor then was he somehow not allowed to pit, change tyres and re-take the position at the front? That's not a wind-up, I genuinely don't understand how if it was OK for the second place driver to do that and re-gain his place then why would that not have applied to LH?

 

Does anybody want to admit that all they actually cared about was winning, the rules stuff is just bluff & bluster because your tribe should have won. Like I said not one eyelid would have batted in the LH camp about the rules if LH has just stayed ahead for one lap. Same as footy, ooh ref that's a shocker when it's awarded against you, not a peep when you get a dodgy decision in your favour, just a wry shrug knowing that you got away with one. Difference, nobody talks about court cases over decisions made by officials on the footy pitch because ultimately it's entertainment, isn't it?

 

I have been mightily entertained by F1 for THIS entire season. Frankly the last time anything came close inevitably involved Michael Schumacher (although Ralf was a bonus entertainment package, but ultimately disappointing like a coffee Revel), both of whom remind me of Max. Back to the point, F1 had become about as far from entertainment as you could get, track position at the front only ever changing via clever tyre and pit stop strategies, where's the racing? This season, now there's the racing.

 

I was very impressed with how Lewis handled things immediately after the race, took it like a pro. Sets a good example.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2021 by Merseycider
Silliness

[gismorail]

3 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

Many might wish, too, however there is little hope for anyone holding their breath in anticipation.

 

 

I’m afraid you are probably right 

[LNERandBR]

@Merseycider if Lewis pitted and Max didn't then Lewis would have been behind Max. There wasn't enough time for Lewis to come in, change tyres and get back out.

 

RB meanwhile had a big enough gap to the cars behind that they could pit without issue.

 

If Lewis had come in, Max would have stayed out to take the track position. Thats the advantage of being the one doing the chasing. You can react to what your opponent does.

 

It wasn't clear that the race would restart. So Merc made the best decision they could and based that decision on the normal restart processes.

 

Almost certainly, if the roles were reversed, you'd now have Red Bull lodging protests and appeals. Meanwhile all the Verstappen fans would be just as upset.

[Merseycider]

10 minutes ago, LNERandBR said:

@Merseycider if Lewis pitted and Max didn't then Lewis would have been behind Max. There wasn't enough time for Lewis to come in, change tyres and get back out.

 

RB meanwhile had a big enough gap to the cars behind that they could pit without issue.

 

If Lewis had come in, Max would have stayed out to take the track position. Thats the advantage of being the one doing the chasing. You can react to what your opponent does.

 

It wasn't clear that the race would restart. So Merc made the best decision they could and based that decision on the normal restart processes.

 

Almost certainly, if the roles were reversed, you'd now have Red Bull lodging protests and appeals. Meanwhile all the Verstappen fans would be just as upset.

 

Thanks LNER and BR. Great explanation, appreciated.

[LNERandBR]

Sometimes the problem with F1 is it gets too complicated when it comes to pit stops and time loss.

 

It's more complicated when it comes to time then Rallying and thats all based on times 

[Dunsignalling]

The simple fact i that, had the normal Safety Car procedures been followed, it would have still been out at the end of the race. 

 

Its premature withdrawal was purely engineered to prevent that happening and ensure that cars passed the chequered flag at race speed.

 

My own opinion is that the race should have been red-flagged as soon as Latifi binned his car rather than the safety car being deployed, but the race director had specifically ruled that out in advance, having seen pretty much the exact scenario in his crystal ball...

 

That the championship outcome was effectively tainted by the rule-bending necessary to achieve that is an incidental that all involved will be keen to consign to history asap.

 

However, The Mercedes team's ineptitude in not pitting LH ahead of MV during either incident allowed RB to outsmart them tactically, by no means for the first time this season. 

 

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

 

John   

Edited December 13, 2021 by Dunsignalling