Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 72
  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    To the right of the left
    Posts
    3,746
    Like
    3
    Liked 137 Times in 108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    The Stewards are different in most races but this is not the same situation as Canada and I am surprised by the amount of seasoned F1 fans that honestly believe this deserved a penalty.

    Canada was a slam dunk penalty that had to be dished out. People simply didn't like its impact and thus they threw the toys out of the pram.

    Drawing similarities between here and Canada is total false equivalence. Max was had the racing line and he was 100% entitled to take it.

    A better similarity would be to equate it to football. If I challenge for the ball, and I get the ball, but follow through on the player it’s not a foul because I got the ball. Here Max got the ball (the racing line) and simply followed through. LeClerc could have avoided it just as easily as the player being challenged could have pulled or jumped out of the challenge.
    Have you ever raced on track? A clean pass means that you leave the over taken car just enough room to remain on the course. That did not happen here.
    "Old roats am jake mit goats."
    -- Smokey Stover

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    To the right of the left
    Posts
    3,746
    Like
    3
    Liked 137 Times in 108 Posts
    just to be clear, I wouldn't have taken the win away, but a several grid place penalty for the next race would be in order. That contact could have easily resulted in one of the cars on it's roll cage.
    "Old roats am jake mit goats."
    -- Smokey Stover

  3. Likes: truefan72 (30th June 2019)
  4. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,649
    Like
    0
    Liked 392 Times in 317 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    The Stewards are different in most races but this is not the same situation as Canada and I am surprised by the amount of seasoned F1 fans that honestly believe this deserved a penalty.

    Canada was a slam dunk penalty that had to be dished out. People simply didn't like its impact and thus they threw the toys out of the pram.

    Drawing similarities between here and Canada is total false equivalence. Max was had the racing line and he was 100% entitled to take it.

    A better similarity would be to equate it to football. If I challenge for the ball, and I get the ball, but follow through on the player it’s not a foul because I got the ball. Here Max got the ball (the racing line) and simply followed through. LeClerc could have avoided it just as easily as the player being challenged could have pulled or jumped out of the challenge.
    If you read my post carefully, you will not find anywhere a statement suggesting penalty is deserved. But simply that a penalty is applicable should the stewards wish to impose one. But l also indicated that discretion is open to the stewards should they wish to prevent a repeat of taking a win away from the proper race winner once again. My post was aimed at showing how hard they have made the situation and why it has become a lottery now they have ruled for Verstapenn.

    Not all the stewards are changed for each race, there are elements of the stewarding team that are permanent or are frequently present. On the matter of similarity, similarity is not the issue here, if it was, Riciado and/or Hamilton should have got a warning. On the face of cold evidence, it would be hard to argue a solid case in defense of Verstapenn, his actions could easily be ruled an infraction of the rules. But in the spirit of pure racing, the right decision was taken. Hard racing should not be punished. It was reminiscent of the Hamilton-Rosberg fights of a few years past.

    Starter's suggestion of a grid drop at the next race would have at least calmed the critics and Ferrari to an extent.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 1st July 2019 at 17:30.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  5. #34
    Senior Member truefan72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    5,416
    Like
    863
    Liked 260 Times in 193 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    Luckily the Stewards decided not to destroy racing snd Max keeps the win. Amazing drive from him. He’s showing all the hallmarks of one of the greats. F1’s future is bright.
    ok so we can now establish the strong arming you opponent off the track to gain the position is ok. Just as long as we are all on the same page. I recall alonso getting a penalty for the exact move in silverstone a few years ago and in 2016 Rosberg was handed 10s penalty and two penalty points after collision with Hamilton on the last lap and was lucky to keep his 4th position. so now we know those werent' p[enalties after all right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    I heard Brundle say Verstapenn was entitle to that move as he had the racing line. Which l quite disagree, having the racing line is not an entitlement to shunt other cars off the grid. It was clear that on the second contact between Leclerc and Verstapenn, there was considerable force from the Redbull on the Ferrari. Clear enough to show that it caused the Ferrari to be forced off the track. There is also the argument that Verstapenn should have given Leclerc a cars width at that corner, which he didn't. But you can also argue the he was already on the racing line, hence has no obligation to yield the racing line which Leclerc was seeking to take from him at that corner.

    Before Canada, this is one occasion that many would call hard racing but certainly not fair racing. But it is the sort of winning that we love to see in F1. But the rule book also frowns at contact that forces another car off the track and in another instance demand that both drivers must give each other a cars width while fighting for position through a corner. If the stewards are to maintain the consistency that has carried through to Hamilton via Ricciado, l fail to see how they would not penalized Verstapenn. This ruling is equally as controversial as the Vettel incident, as this is another occasion where a race win shall be taken away from another driver that has won the race on merit and has received the trophy through a formal ceremony. It is also at the home track of the Redbull; which incidentally is the reason that the ceremony appear to be performed quickly before the stewards had time to conclude their result; which places even further pressure on the very awkward situation.

    Yes, this is a rulling that would attract stiff criticism whichever way the stewards decide to rule. If they rule this as a racing incident, they would be accused of inconsistency and anti-Ferrrari prejudice. If they rule against the Redbull, they would be adding one more disgruntled powerful team to a growing list of discontented recipients of the stewards decision. Like Ferrari before, they would be said to be killing the sport with rules.

    The fact remains, once a precedent has been set, the stewards have to follow through with it, else they become a morkery to the sport.
    Well politics won out at the end of the day tbh. it was a great race anyway. Even rosberg in his vlog admits that max was guilty of mischief on that last corner and that he deserves a penalty. It would have been an unpopular decision, but the right one. deliberately running your opponent off the track to take the lead was rewarded and it would really be interesting to read their reasoning. But here is the summary. Dutch fans, RBR home race, scared about overturning a race victory. I can guarantee you that if this was grosjean on perez, he would have been called in for a drive through or 10s penalty. lol
    you can't argue with results

  6. #35
    Senior Member truefan72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    5,416
    Like
    863
    Liked 260 Times in 193 Posts
    on a side note, If Ferrari had put leclerc and vettel on mediums for Q2, then leclerc would have ran away with this win. The kid looked unbeatable for 69 of 71 laps and the fact that his tires degraded to the point where the pass was on is as much about another ferrar strategy blunder as it was verstappen's brilliant drive.
    you can't argue with results

  7. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,474
    Like
    53
    Liked 360 Times in 276 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Starter View Post
    Have you ever raced on track? A clean pass means that you leave the over taken car just enough room to remain on the course. That did not happen here.
    Yes, internationally.

    Both drivers were driving into a wedge. The overtake was done before they touched, LeClerc simply didn’t want to concede. That’s racing. As Vettel stated afterwards, this is not kindergarten.

  8. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,474
    Like
    53
    Liked 360 Times in 276 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by truefan72 View Post
    ok so we can now establish the strong arming you opponent off the track to gain the position is ok. Just as long as we are all on the same page. I recall alonso getting a penalty for the exact move in silverstone a few years ago and in 2016 Rosberg was handed 10s penalty and two penalty points after collision with Hamilton on the last lap and was lucky to keep his 4th position. so now we know those werent' p[enalties after all right?

    Well politics won out at the end of the day tbh. it was a great race anyway. Even rosberg in his vlog admits that max was guilty of mischief on that last corner and that he deserves a penalty. It would have been an unpopular decision, but the right one. deliberately running your opponent off the track to take the lead was rewarded and it would really be interesting to read their reasoning. But here is the summary. Dutch fans, RBR home race, scared about overturning a race victory. I can guarantee you that if this was grosjean on perez, he would have been called in for a drive through or 10s penalty. lol
    The Hamilton-Rosberg incident you refer to was also completely different because Hamilton had given Rosberg bundles of room to get around the corner and he didn’t take it. Hamilton had to turn in at some point and Rosberg paid a deserved price for his driving (or lack of it). If you believe Hamilton was at fault here then LeClerc was definitely at fault for the collision here as he was also on the outside of the corner, just as Hamilton was.

    I don’t recall and Alonso incident at Silverstone that was the exact same moveas this. Have you a link?

  9. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,474
    Like
    53
    Liked 360 Times in 276 Posts
    Karun Chandhok gives an accurate assessment

    Here’s my view... Back in the day, the driver on the outside would have to back out and realise when he’s been beaten. Now, they can keep going, knowing that they can use the asphalt run off and then hope that the argument about “being squeezed off” wins in the stewards room....
    That’s what LeClerc did.

  10. #39
    Senior Member journeyman racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,044
    Like
    242
    Liked 122 Times in 93 Posts
    Not only do I disagree with TBK. He's wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    Yes, internationally.

    Both drivers were driving into a wedge. The overtake was done before they touched, LeClerc simply didn’t want to concede. That’s racing. As Vettel stated afterwards, this is not kindergarten.
    Both drivers were not driving into a wedge. Leclerc was because Verstappen missed the apex of the turn and did not have control of the inertia of his car. closed him off.

    The overtake was not done and was still in the process of happening. Verstappen may've need til t3 to finally complete it.

    Leclerc did not want to concede, and nor should he. As Verstappen was ahead at the point of contact, he was in the process of passing Verstappen on the straight or into t3. But was impeded by Verstappen who did not account for the inertia of his car.

    It's not kindergarten. But F1/racing is not boxing either.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    A better similarity would be to equate it to football. If I challenge for the ball, and I get the ball, but follow through on the player it’s not a foul because I got the ball. Here Max got the ball (the racing line) and simply followed through. LeClerc could have avoided it just as easily as the player being challenged could have pulled or jumped out of the challenge.
    The ball is not the "racing line". The position is (1st/2nd place...). There's actually no such thing as a "racing" line. If there is, it's the whole track.

    To use your analogy. Verstappen did not challenge for the ball. He attacked the player first (Hence he was nowhere near the apex), then got the ball.

    What Verstappen did would be like corralling Leclerc halfway up the straight (Schumacher style). It's just it was at the beginning of the straight.

    Karun Chandhok is wrong as Leclerc was not done. He was in the process of taking a faster exit of t2 (choosing a wider entry). Not only had Leclerc done that the previous lap. He'd actually been doing it throughout the race even when on his own. I saw it often and initially thought he made an error. But he was doing it deliberately.
    Last edited by journeyman racer; 1st July 2019 at 08:41.

  11. Likes: truefan72 (1st July 2019)
  12. #40
    Senior Member journeyman racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,044
    Like
    242
    Liked 122 Times in 93 Posts
    It's like with racing on ovals. T2 in Austria is a sharp right hander, and ovals are a long continuous turn even if they're referred to as two turns.

    In oval racing, It's common to see the lead car take the high line entering the turn and stay there throughout. If a trailing car get them on the inside, then fine. But the trailing car can't ride up high exiting the t2 and encroach the car they're passing that's on that outside line.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •