I wonder how long Gasly will be in that Red Bull cockpit. One lap and six positions behind his team-mate in a potential race winning car is downright embarrassing, as were his pathetic attempts to get past Räikkönen.
Printable View
I wonder how long Gasly will be in that Red Bull cockpit. One lap and six positions behind his team-mate in a potential race winning car is downright embarrassing, as were his pathetic attempts to get past Räikkönen.
I doubt Karun said that, if he did, it probably would be an indication of why he never won a race in F1. It is a fight, to give in so easily would have attracted criticism from us the armchair experts, the media and Ferrari the team. Besides, Verstapenn had not got the job done. He had to shunt Leclrec off the track to cement the lead.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
I think the current stewards are shite, they should be sent home to tend the garden. Their decision was inconsistent and politically correct. The stewards have made a mockery of themselves and F1. I am not impressed with them at all. Now the rest of the season is open to fanciful decisions based on how politically correct the decision is or what the media has to say about it. Maybe they should sack the lot of them and put the sky F1 team in their place. They may have their heads in the cloud but they are at least consistent.
You have it right. Consistency from the stewards is the most important part of their job. Otherwise no one ever knows what is OK and what isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
I watched the overtake (won’t call it an incident) a few times and I can’t believe it even reached the stewards to be honest. Hard but fair racing and thankfully the stewards didn’t cock this one up.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Given the late turn in and apex (from Verstapenn's on board camera), I have to disagree. He failed to give reasonable racing room to Bottas. Late braking on an inside line is fine and will get you another position in many cases. But you can't just push another car off the track in doing so.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Masi said that they would do almost anything to keep the podium as it stood , barring technical infringement .
Rosberg got penalized , apparently because he turned his head to see his opponent coming from the left a few years back .
Max didn't look , so wasn't .
Max said he didn't turn left at all , to hold Charles wide , didn't open the steering , but he actually did , just a hair at one point .
Even if he didn't , what he did do was go straight , with another guy right beside him , entering a turn .
I love "hard racing" , with the Gilles/Rene-Dijon scrap being my ultimate favourite episode in the entire history of F1 .
But , this one sure looked to me to be a very clear breach of the modern rule book .
Max was not out of control , and had there been a wall there it would have been ugly .
He was inside , but not ahead .
Should reluctance to change an official result be taken into consideration at all ?
If you watched the F3 and F2 races, you may have noticed that there were loads of side by side battles through that same corner with no incident. Why Verstapenn is unable to do the same baffles me. Verstapenn has a poor record when it comes to hard wheel to wheel battles. They all tend to end in a crash. Hence, he is still a loose cannon in these situations. It is an aspect of his racecraft that he still needs to improve. His unnecessary crash with Ocon last year in similar circumstance would be an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
The stewards chose the lesser of two evils really, there was no acceptable decision to be made whichever way they could have chosen to go. Hence, the decision not to penalize Verstapenn was good for racing and what was needed for F1 at this time. But it is not without consequences. While l agree that the decision was the right one under the circumstances, it does not mean that l condone the actions of Verstapenn. Nor do l agree that he got away without a reprimand and a warning for an action that was at least 75% his fault. Hard fighting on Lecerc's part is portrayed by some as taking a risk, which amount to a share of some of the fault for the crash. They forget that he was not given the requisite cars width to prevent a collision. The more an argument for Verstapenn is attempted, the more clear it becomes that he carries a lion's share of the fault.
The decision now indicates that it is OK to bump an attacking car off the track as long as the culprit has the racing line at the time of the incident. It redefines the threshold of culpability in favor of the car with the slightest nose ahead and on the racing line. Unfortunately, this would kill hard racing at corners. Drivers are now inherently advised to back off if they are side by side but slightly behind in a fight going into a corner. How this makes for good racing is yet to be understood, but it clearly means that the car with the slenderest of nose ahead approaching the corner is blameless for whatever happens to the other car due to whatever action they may take in the corner. This includes shunting the other car off the track.
It might turn out to be an exciting element to future racing, especially for those that are missing seeing incidents in F1. We shall see more cars being knocked off track at corners in the future, until a fatality forces the stewards to revisit their decision.
The Verstapenn-Leclerc incident has overshadowed the fact that HONDA has finally won a race since their turbulent return to F1. Mclaren may be kicking themselve as they take the bitter pill of this event. It could have been a Mclaren on the podium, some may say. But l don't think that would have been the case. The Mclaren chassis is not as good as the Redbull chassis for a start.
Whatever the case, it must be a relief and a special occasion at the Honda factory this last weekend. Their hard work has not gone without notice in the face of previous brutal open criticisms and to some extent mockery. Now we begin to see signs that the car giant has set their sight on the leading pair; Mercedes and Ferrari with determination and intent.
Honda's success is also a blow to Renault, who is without a team with a chassis which is as good as the Redbull chassis. Hence, are lacking the level of information that is now available to Honda. From the engine manufacturers battle perspective, Renault is losing ground in the powertrain battle and reputation as well, especially with the poor showing of its recent engine upgrade that failed to show any impression on the opposition. That said, the Renault in the Mclaren is showing good pace but not enough to bother the Honda shod Redbull cars. But comfortably ahead of the Torro Rosso cars with the Honda engine. This may be due to chassis superiority more than engine superiority.
CONGRATULATIONS HONDA!
As I said I didn’t see it as an incident. I thought it was a good overtake .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I should correct - he tweeted it rather than stated it live. How many F1 races have you won? If success in motorsport is a barometer by which opinions are condisered valid, I doubt yours would be as valid as Karun’s. On a side note, I also always felt Karun was a very underrated driver.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
And the Sky F1 team? Honestly? Oh dear.
The Stewards decision is consistent and it is correct. There are plenty of cases in the past they have got it wrong but, I am sure glad they are finally getting them right this year. To be fair, I think the Stewards have been very consistent this year.
Here is the FIA transcript of the incident which aligns with my take on it, although if anything I think it was Charles obligation to back out, not Verstappen’s.
Quote:
“Car 33 [Verstappen] sought to overtake car 16 [Leclerc] at Turn 3 on lap 69 by out-braking car 16. When doing so, car 33 was alongside car 16 on the entry of the corner and was in full control of the car while attempting the overtaking move on the inside of car 16.
“However, both car 33 and car 16 proceeded to negotiate the corner alongside each other but there was clearly insufficient space for both cars to do so. Shortly after the late apex, while exiting the corner, there was contact between the two cars.
“In the totality of the circumstances, we did not consider that either driver was wholly or predominantly to blame for the incident. We consider that this is a racing incident.
It is nice to hear your firm position on this one. I shall quote this post of yours to you in the near future. And yea, l would be crap at racing F1 cars which is why l do what l do. And f*cking rich at doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Michael Masi is not up to it. He's just going to make a bigger problem for everyone later on.
The irony is that if it wasn't for Verstappen's cheap shot thuggery (He braked not to make the apex of the corner, but to cut Leclerc off), you might've seen the second edition of such a scrap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Spot on , mate .Quote:
Originally Posted by journeyman racer
As Leclerc said , Max would likely have passed him anyway , so he wasn't angry about the loss , but about the way he lost .
I agree with him , too .
Masi called for the review , but wanted the results kept .
You miss the point, A good overtake would be one where there was a clean pass with the opposition helpless to defend but on track doing his level best. That would be the definition of hard and fair racing. What we saw was hard and dirty racing. I loved the hard bit, just not sure about the dirty bit. So you and l have very different view of what fair racing is about. But you are entitled to your opinion as am l.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
That is exactly what l thought as well. Leclerc tyres were gone and Verstapenn had fresher tyres. It was a matter of time, hence he did not need to muscle his way pass, he just needed to take his time to make a clean overtake without putting his car and both drivers at risk. That said, Verstapenn drove a majestic race. He was simply brilliant and a pleasure to watch. Hence, the criticism is not anti-verstapenn but an observation of those rough elements of his approach to racing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I like the aggressive drivers who aren’t afraid to close the door and I felt Max orchestrated the move perfectly to give Charles only two choices, back out or go off track. All the great champions have done this throughout their careers and I think Verstappen is showing the much needed ruthless streak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Charles only had the one choice , as he was right beside him .Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Max , though , had the choice to turn in earlier , and allow a car's width , as per the rules .
Absolutely correct. He was going to make the pass anyway and didn't need to bang wheels to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
You know what they say, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. When Verstapenn gets a similar treatment in the future, l hope he keeps his trap shut.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Incorrect. Charles could have conceded the corner he had clearly lost and tried to have a run at Max down the straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I’m sure glad none of the posters here whinging on about wheel banging are not in the Stewards room.
He won’t because he’s an F1 driver and they all turn into children when a decisions or moves go against them. These guys are young too and have grown up being told how great they are so being magnanimous is often a skill that is lacking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Good to see some racing after a long period of the sport being exceptionally dull. Not going to criticise it, more of it please.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I really don't respect any driver that concedes a fight when the other driver has not had the job done completely. I doubt Verstapenn would have any respect for Leclerc if he had conceded and not forced him to have to force him off the track.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
And you really fail to understand the discussion. Nobody is disputing the decision of the stewards here. The only points made are there should have been a warning to Verstapenn for forcing Leclerc of the track. Because failing to do so would legitimize forcing opponents cars off the track in similar circumstance in the future. Your argument that it was ok for Verstapenn to force Leclerc off the track is noted. But we all agree that the decision to allow Verstapenn to keep the win was the right thing. Where we seem to disagree is that the incident in question was questionable and needed at least a warning to prevent other drivers from thinking it is OK to do so in the future.
Whether it's riding the kerbs and knocking Sainz out of the race in Bahrain, or completely missing the apex and barging Leclerc off last weekend (Or passing guys off track limits). Verstappen is a dirty driver who can't make genuine passing manoeuvres.
While I get henners and TBK have some sort of perception of what "racing" is (As if to say that "racing" is some sort of boxing match", when it isn't?). Both have demonstrated little appreciation of what "driving" is. TBK's suggestion of Leclerc backing off is not consistent with someone who likes "hard racing".
I think it's fair to say that a genuine, clean passing manoeuvre would be one where a guy passes another, and the overtaken driver can immediately pass back, only that he can't. Leclerc could easily have blasted ahead of Verstappen exiting the corner, but was shoved off by a guy who did not have control of the inertia of his car. anthropomorphize
They stewards should have a focus on clean driving. If they did, the great drivers would shine. But people have this perception that "racing" is akin to "fighting", when it isn't.
A weakness of a lot of fans, and in particular the stewards, is that they "anthropomorphise" car racing. Yes, there's a drivers in there having controlling the car. But instead of focusing on what the driver is doing, they should be focusing on what the cars are doing - Should the car be there and doing that? Yes, no, maybe.
But instead you get idiots like Masi focusing on what the driver does, and going to huge lengths to justify himself "When Verstappen late apexed. Vettel moved his head.." All he's doing is making himself look like a fool, and making it difficult for myself and others later on.
People might brush this off now. But there'll be other incidents later on. And they're just going to turn themselves in a knot.
Here lies the only real similarity to the Canada , Vettel/Hamilton situation .Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Lewis backed out , seeing a driver careening across the track into his path , wisely judging that he would be risking too much , asserting his right to a car width outside of Seb .
Whereas , Charles didn't back out , seeing his rival in full control , without any sign of lock-up , judged that , by the rules , he was entitled to space for his car outside of the Red Bull .
Taking the wider line while staying level with your opponent is the only way to counter the inside dive .
If he gets there first , you do back out , but if you are level with him you have a right to space .
If he's sliding through , you back out and try to get inside him .
Charles had that option , it's true , but the best option against a guy under control is to try to compromise your competitor's line by keeping him tighter into the corner .
And , by the way , I would have been happy to see the wheel banging if it left both cars on track .
I think the thought process was different between Lewis and Charles because in Canada there was a wall to be squeezed into and Lewis wasn’t going to risk that whereas in Austria it was worth the risk staying on the outside as there was a nice big run-off area. LeClerc made the mistake of assuming he could crash knowing or thinking the rules were on his side but the incident was judged differently. Verstappen is ruthless much like champions like Schumacher, Vettel, Rosberg, Hamilton etc who have all squeezed opponents off the track and put them in positions where they can make the decision to crash if not. Sometimes that mentality works and other times it falls foul of the stewards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I think the sport needs some on track drama at the moment as it’s in a sorry state. It wouldn’t have bothered me if Verstappen had be penalised to be honest, I was just glad we saw a race where Mercedes didn’t win.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well , my friend , we are much closer to being in total agreement than I had previously thought .Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
You're absolutely right that the series needs some drama .
It's these incidents that draw people back to sites like this .
It's these debates that make it fun , although sometimes a little frustrating .
This incident seemed pretty clear to me , whereas the Hamilton one had a little more nuance to it .
Hamilton was never fully alongside Vettel in Canada , but it was judged as him having been forced off , and , fair enough . He had been forced off .
The issue I see with the two different scenarios comes from finding an out of control opponent compared to an in control one on the inside .
When they deemed that Vettel had regained control , stating he had looked in his mirrors before moving towards the wall , they used it to determine it was deliberate , and thus worthy of penalty .
They said Max had not looked over at Charles , and thus , since he didn't see him coming , he was not guilty of forcing him off track .
But , he was never out of control .
Whilst Charles was going for a move to squeeze Max inward , and tighter , Max deliberately took a line which left no room for a guy right beside him .
And , I believe that since he was even with him , Charles likely would have done the same thing even if there was a wall there .
But , with a wall there , I believe Max would have acted very differently , as his car would have been far more at risk .
I don't really care if Merc wins , actually , but I want to see them have to work harder to pull it off .
Max's move was less than smart for two reasons. First, as has been said earlier in this thread, he could have received a penalty for the contact. Second, and more important, any wheel to wheel contact carries risk to both cars. Should there have been damage to his car Max could be kicking himself as Bottas took an undeserved win from him. He reminds me a lot of (over here in NA) Paul Tracy in his younger days - fast but reckless. Perhaps he will mature with time.
The sad thing is the focus on the overtake has overshadowed the fact Honda power won a race in F1 too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Remember the famous incident between Pastor Maldonado and Lewis Hamilton at European GP 2012? Pastor Maldonado was given a penalty for the collision caused by unsafe reentry. However, I always thought that Lewis shouldn't have pushed Maldonado off the race track the way he did to begin with. However, it does seem like the stewards are consistent in the way that neither Hamilton nor Verstappen got a penalty for this. Check this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJe7GI9C7vU
I'm going to have a go at that.
Hamilton is leading. He's on the inside. He's turning as normal into that corner, making the apex. He had no obligation to Maldonado as he was doing nothing out of the ordinary.
Maldonado was attempting a move on the outside. He had been momentarily ahead. but nothing definitive or with authority. There was no reasonable opportunity to pass Hamilton exiting the corner. He drove off the track and rejoined without consideration.
Leclerc was ahead. He stayed wide intentionally and didn't do anything to unfairly impede Verstappen.
Verstappen braked particularly later than normal. This act was not in the normal course of events. He had not attempted to make the apex of the kerb, and had done so to intentionally impede Leclerc. He hadn't had control of the inertia of his car or consideration for Leclerc.
Maldonado was belligerent. Verstappen was negligent.
Or maybe it's the other way around?
Well that race delivered the unexpected now didn't it?
Qually was just all over the place with crashes and mistakes. Leclerc reigns supreme through the chaos, Max is third on the grid, KMag is in FIFTH place in a Haas, Lando right behind him, both Alfa's in Q3, and though not mighty enough to take pole Mercedes are still solidly in the game.
Then the lights go out, and the whole game changes as Max drops like a rock, along with everyone else gaining or losing all around him. By the end of lap 1 the only car in the same position they started was Leclerc, still in front. The entire field shuffled behind him with big losers and big gainers.
From that point on, there was action on track for more or less the entire race. The tire strategy came into play, some struggled to hold positions, and some were bold in gaining them. Along the way there was both some great defending and some great passes. Plenty of "guess the line" tactics throughout, and drivers showing how it can be done from the front defending, and from behind attacking. Kimi showed his experience defending against Gasly in a very superior car. Seb comes along and shows just how quick one of the faster cars can get into that mix. Ricciardo, though a terrible strategy IMO, holds off attacking drivers on tires that are 40+ laps into the race. Even as the last pit stops took place, the field was still moving around, and now fresh vs old tires kept things moving. The movers up front were Seb and Max, and they were making some for some clean and exciting racing.
The charge Max made was strong, and those fresh tires were really working. He was watching the lines, figuring out the drivers we was overtaking, and making it work. Max vs Seb was great on the part of both drivers. Bottas made it a little too easy, but really Max was so late on the brakes that the position was already gone. Then the charge to catch Leclerc.
And then IMO, Max blew it. He lost his composure he had in all the previous passes, and even the start of the fight with Leclerc. Lap 68 was more great attacking by Max, and defending by Charles. But the pass that happened just showed me that Max is still capable of losing his calm and playing dirty. Up until that point he did everything right, and there is no doubt in my mind that he could have made a clean pass on Leclerc, just like he did with everyone else. But instead he chose to force a bad line, the same one that failed in the previous lap, but instead went in deep enough to bump his opponent off track. The delay in the decision, the controversy over penalties, etc... all of his own doing if you ask me.
But apparently Formula 1 is boring anyway. :laugh:
It was clear that on the second contact between Leclerc and Verstapenn, there was considerable force from the Redbull on the Ferrari.