Mexico 2016

[The Black Knight]

Hypothetical as none of us have heard all their team radio sessions. Who I'd blame here are literally the guys behind the selection of team radio. In media there is a term "gatekeepers" and this time the production team filter just failed. How Vettel behaved is purely his own mess to sort out.

It's time for Charlie to retire.

I'll rest my case

The broadcasters are entitled to broadcast whatever they want. It's not like the drivers aren't aware they may be broadcast so blaming them broadcasters is a mute point.

Wasn't Max ordered to give the place back by his engineer?

No, he was told he might have to give it back. He never received confirmation so was correct to retain the position. I still think he should have got 3rd spot. Does anyone not remember Rosberg in Canada two years ago doing the same thing when Lewis was about to over take him?

One of the big problems remain here, and that is that there is no consistency. Personally, I think they should be free to race like they were 20 years ago, bump wheels do whatever they want. The problem is that the sport has been introducing these rules at random without any real thorough foresight. They have been reactive rather than proactive about everything that happens.

If you are going to have a set of rules defined for a sport then fine, define them well and stick to them throughout the year 100% but if you're not then don't bother with them and just leave the guys race. It's the same old nonsense as track limits. There was none of that rubbish 20 years ago and the racing was great.

[The Black Knight]

Anyway, word on the wire is that the FIA have launched a probe into Vettel's abuse of Charlie and it's looking likely he'll get a race ban or two for it. Fingers crossed that he does. This sort of behavior can't be tolerated or allowed to creep into the sport.

[Franky]

The broadcasters are entitled to broadcast whatever they want. It's not like the drivers aren't aware they may be broadcast so blaming them broadcasters is a mute point.

If a news outlet would publish an extremely graphic photo, you'd blame the photographer?

If F1 wants to be a "family TV sport show" then the production team are the ones who are the censors/gatekeepers.

[Bagwan]

If a news outlet would publish an extremely graphic photo, you'd blame the photographer?

If F1 wants to be a "family TV sport show" then the production team are the ones who are the censors/gatekeepers.

And those censors bleeped the appropriate words in the outburst , giving all those families watching , the perfect teaching moment for the kids .
To have him penalized for his abusive and foul language is perfectly placed to complete the idea that the act was unacceptable and that self-control is paramount .

These guys are heroes , and will suffer if they don't act the part .

[Bagwan]

It was clear actually, there was an announcement from race control that the incident would be investigated after the race.

According to JA , there was , indeed , a directive from race control for Max to give the place back .
It was only unclear to us , as I suggested , Andy .

[Pechito37]

BAH!
They only looked at this fully ,(except sainz pushing off Alonso, though they said it was at turn one. On the 2nd straight lads!)
Hamilton cut across for no reason, should have gave it back,
everything else was BS.
and Vettel, CALM THE HAM DOWN!

[Nitrodaze]

[url]

16) Defensive manoeuvres
16.1 Article 27.5 of the Sporting Regulations states that “ … no car may be driven … in a manner which could be potentially dangerous to other drivers…”, furthermore, Article 27.8 prohibits any manoeuvre “ … liable to hinder other drivers, such as … any abnormal change of direction”.

The thing about rules is someone has to interpret them for each situation that arise. The problem with this particular rule is that it is too vague hence may be subject to varying interpretations. The essential act of racing is to drive as fast as you can and to do your utmost to keep other drivers behind you. Even at the best of times, keeping other driver behind is effectively hindering those drivers trying to pass. And such defensive action may on occasions cause other drivers to stray of the track.

What l am getting at is, if we were to take this new rule literally, there would be no racing but an orderly fast procession. The rule was introduced to prevent last minute defensive change of direction which causes a following driver to take evasive action to prevent a collision. When a decision which is not in this particular vein is derived from the new rule, it clearly shows a lazy interpretation of the rules.

Ricciado's attempt to lever an overtake on Vettel was prospective and would have only worked if the driver in front assisted the overtake. Vettel is not Bottas, a hard nose racer like him would not tolerate that sort of move. Deep down, Ricciado knew that overtake was not really on. Not at that corner anyway.

The main problem with the decision was it looked fickle and lacking of thorough deliberation [rushed]. It was simply the worst showing of stewardship in recent years.

[The Black Knight]

If a news outlet would publish an extremely graphic photo, you'd blame the photographer?

If F1 wants to be a "family TV sport show" then the production team are the ones who are the censors/gatekeepers.

The commentary from Vettel on Sunday was beeped out for the onlooking audience. In football, players have gotten banned this year for abusing the referee. Not all of these incidents have or need to be on TV for them to get punished. Whether they are broadcast or not, they still deserve punishment.

And the broadcasts on Sunday were beeped out anyway to lessen the impact on the viewing audience. The viewers are entitled to know what is going on but, likewise, they are also entitled to watch a motor race without listening to expletives from frustrated drivers.

[AndyL]

According to JA , there was , indeed , a directive from race control for Max to give the place back .
It was only unclear to us , as I suggested , Andy .

"This website understands that Red Bull was told by the FIA stewards that Verstappen should give the place to Vettel – a message which Ferrari heard and relayed to its driver. This message to Vettel was heard by TV audiences but was thought to refer to an informal message to Verstappen from his race engineer soon after the incident."

That's at odds with the official race control announcement that was put on screen saying the incident would be investigated after the race, which was a very clear statement. And is also the usual practice for incidents in the last 5 laps. I wonder who has told that website that the stewards made such a decision during the race.

[AndyL]

Having reviewed the stewards' decisions (http://www.fia.com/events/fia-formul...information-19) and the sporting regulations, I think Alex Kalinauckas writing on the James Allen site either understood wrongly, or at least did not accurately describe the situation.

There is no stewards' decision requiring Max to give the place back, only a decision to impose a 5 second time penalty, which is in line with the announcement that the incident would be investigated after the race.

Fact: Car 33 left the track in turn 1, gaining a lasting advantage.
Offence: Breach of Article 27.4 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations.
Decision: 5 Second Time Penalty imposed after the race in accordance with Article 38.3 (5 seconds added to elapsed race time)
(1 penalty points awarded, 4 points total for the 12 month period)

Which is not surprising, because there is no provision in the rules for the stewards to instruct a driver to give a place back. Only this:

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.

So it may be that Charlie gave Red Bull the option to give the place back, in order to avoid a penalty; or advised them that they would receive a penalty after the race if they did not do so. But it's not something that can be ordered or imposed by the stewards. If Ferrari told Vettel that Verstappen had to give the place back on track, they were wrong.

I don't think there is any lack of clarity, except perhaps emerging from PR desks at Maranello and Milton Keynes.