f1 (japan) - choked.....

[devilgas]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

i'm also interested in the use of the red and white strip at the end of the pit wall and then the exit of the pit lane as a valid part of the race track for overtaking. brundle mentioned nanny state for this instance, but surely from a safety aspect it's a valid point?
if (if's are great aren't they?) a car had been exiting the pits at that moment, that car would've been doing 80-100 mph as it was just beyond the limit line. the overtaking car on the other hand is doing about 190mph. neither can see each other due to the pit wall. a bit of t-cut would be needed to polish those scrapes out.
imo, only cars that are exiting the pits should be on that bit of track.

[JSR]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

In this race I'm only really interested in the Mass/Bourdais incident. Nobody has yet explained why or how Bourdais landed the penalty when most of us think it was completely the other way around. The Stewards and the FIA need to be much more pro-active in explaining their decisions.

The trouble is that we don't see all that the Stewards see, I agree with you there.

It's like the Hamilton SPA incident. As soon as he made the manoeuvre, I shouted at the TV saying "he didn't let up enough, he'll get a penalty for keeping the advantage of cutting across the chicane". But no one said anything, no commentators, no fans, no viewers, nothing.

I presumed I'd not seen what I'd seen and let it go. I put that one behind me and looked ahead to the next race. Then the penalty came in and I felt reassured that I had seen what I'd seen. But then the commentators and UK fans were up in arms, on the verge of starting riots because the stewards had "robbed" Hamilton. The Ferrari conspiracy-theorists were out in droves.

Then, in the build up to the next race, suddenly the commentators were saying that the penalty was justified. Everyone in the pits (except McLaren and the Hamilton fan-club) said that Hamilton had done wrong and that the Stewards had called it right and the penalty was just.

My point being that views and opinions change, whether we (the viewer) see the "evidence" or not. Yes, it looked to us like Bourdais was blameless - but, then, just as many people claimed that Hamilton was blameless in SPA. The Stewards made the right call in Spa, and just maybe they made the right call this time.

[Ian]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

The trouble is that we don't see all that the Stewards see, I agree with you there.

It's like the Hamilton SPA incident. As soon as he made the manoeuvre, I shouted at the TV saying "he didn't let up enough, he'll get a penalty for keeping the advantage of cutting across the chicane". But no one said anything, no commentators, no fans, no viewers, nothing.

I presumed I'd not seen what I'd seen and let it go. I put that one behind me and looked ahead to the next race. Then the penalty came in and I felt reassured that I had seen what I'd seen. But then the commentators and UK fans were up in arms, on the verge of starting riots because the stewards had "robbed" Hamilton. The Ferrari conspiracy-theorists were out in droves.

Then, in the build up to the next race, suddenly the commentators were saying that the penalty was justified. Everyone in the pits (except McLaren and the Hamilton fan-club) said that Hamilton had done wrong and that the Stewards had called it right and the penalty was just.

My point being that views and opinions change, whether we (the viewer) see the "evidence" or not. Yes, it looked to us like Bourdais was blameless - but, then, just as many people claimed that Hamilton was blameless in SPA. The Stewards made the right call in Spa, and just maybe they made the right call this time.

Well, the stewards in the Spa incident justified their decision by quoting the rule book - having to clarify the rule along the way (some might say reinventing the rule), many commentators came up with examples - notably where Schumacher and Ferrari got away without a penalty under what you might consider similar but worse offences - reinforcing the conspircy theory that Ferrari get away with more. And in any case, the penalty far outweighed the offence in Spa. At least Hamilton tried to comply by giving the place back to Raikkonen. He earned the win and was robbed of it by the stewards. A much more appropriate sanction would have been a grid penalty at the next race.

I don't agree that the commentators agreed with the Spa result. Some pointed out the mysterious 'clarification' of the rule about having to wait an extra corner self-justifying the stewards, but I think all felt the sanction that lost Hamilton a skilfully and hard-earned win, was wrong.

Should we just sit back and let such controversies wash over us and not question things like this? One might as well not watch the races any more, surely?

Ian

[Ian]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

The trouble is that we don't see all that the Stewards see, I agree with you there.

It's like the Hamilton SPA incident. As soon as he made the manoeuvre, I shouted at the TV saying "he didn't let up enough, he'll get a penalty for keeping the advantage of cutting across the chicane". But no one said anything, no commentators, no fans, no viewers, nothing.

I presumed I'd not seen what I'd seen and let it go. I put that one behind me and looked ahead to the next race. Then the penalty came in and I felt reassured that I had seen what I'd seen. But then the commentators and UK fans were up in arms, on the verge of starting riots because the stewards had "robbed" Hamilton. The Ferrari conspiracy-theorists were out in droves.

Then, in the build up to the next race, suddenly the commentators were saying that the penalty was justified. Everyone in the pits (except McLaren and the Hamilton fan-club) said that Hamilton had done wrong and that the Stewards had called it right and the penalty was just.

My point being that views and opinions change, whether we (the viewer) see the "evidence" or not. Yes, it looked to us like Bourdais was blameless - but, then, just as many people claimed that Hamilton was blameless in SPA. The Stewards made the right call in Spa, and just maybe they made the right call this time.

Out of interest, coming back to the Bourdais/Massa incident - do you have an opinion on what happened?

Ian

[JSR]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

Well, the stewards in the Spa incident justified their decision by quoting the rule book - having to clarify the rule along the way (some might say reinventing the rule), many commentators came up with examples - notably where Schumacher and Ferrari got away without a penalty under what you might consider similar but worse offences - reinforcing the conspircy theory that Ferrari get away with more. And in any case, the penalty far outweighed the offence in Spa. At least Hamilton tried to comply by giving the place back to Raikkonen. He earned the win and was robbed of it by the stewards. A much more appropriate sanction would have been a grid penalty at the next race.

I don't agree that the commentators agreed with the Spa result. Some pointed out the mysterious 'clarification' of the rule about having to wait an extra corner self-justifying the stewards, but I think all felt the sanction that lost Hamilton a skilfully and hard-earned win, was wrong.

Certainly your opinion of the incident is as valid as anyone else's. I happen to disagree. At the very moment Hamilton made the move, I said to the TV "he's supposed to wait for the next corner". I don't know where I knew that rule from, and couldn't point to it anywhere, but it turned out to be correct and in the rulebook. The penalty was a drive-through, for which there wasn't enough time, so he was penalised the length of time a drive-through would have taken - 25s. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

You are correct that the commentators came up with examples. The ITV commentators came up with two, in fact. One which enforced the rules (involving Alonso) and one which broke the rules (Schumacher). However, after that moment, the justification was "if Schumacher can get away with it, so should Hamilton" - never again was the Alonso incident mentioned. No one ever said "Alonso didn't get away with it, so neither should Hamilton". No because that wouldn't have favoured Hamilton and it might have lessened the claims of favoritism and conspiracies in Ferrari's favour.

Do two wrongs make a right? Because someone got away with it the past, should everyone be allowed to get away with it in the future? Should they throwaway the rulebook and let the more reckless drivers turn F1 into a demolition derby?

The rule was there, the rule was broken, the penalty was given and no amount of claiming "Hamilton was robbed" is going to make anyone rewrite the rulebook.

The ITV commentators did change their views. Initially they vehemently disagreed with the penalty but, as more people (teams and drivers) came out of the woodwork to agree with it, so the commentators changed.

Should we just sit back and let such controversies wash over us and not question things like this? One might as well not watch the races any more, surely?

What's making me turn off is that, everytime there's an incident that either directly or indirectly affects Hamilton, the UK commentators and UK forums are awash with people claiming Hamilton was robbed and that the Stewards are blind.

I'll be over-the-moon if Hamilton wins - or if anyone else wins - but no one should win by breaking the rules. Stewards are there to ensure rules are not broken and to claim the Stewards are wrong every time they disagree with what we think is just creating controversy where there is none.

If rules are there, rules are there. It's as simple as that.

Out of interest, coming back to the Bourdais/Massa incident - do you have an opinion on what happened?

My opinion is earlier in the thread for all to see. No, I don't agree that Bourdais should have been penalised but that doesn't mean I think that Massa should have been penalised. I just think it was a racing incident in which, at the time, both drivers thought they'd make the corner ahead of the other - Bourdais because he was in front but driving slower, Massa because he was up to race speed but behind. Both cars got to the same part of the race track at the same time. Not the first time that's happened and, short of putting yellow flags around the pit straight or set a racing speed limit of 50mph, it won't be the last.

That doesn't mean my opinion is right and I'm content that the stewards made the right call because they know more than I do.

[Ian]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

My opinion is earlier in the thread for all to see. No, I don't agree that Bourdais should have been penalised but that doesn't mean I think that Massa should have been penalised. I just think it was a racing incident in which, at the time, both drivers thought they'd make the corner ahead of the other - Bourdais because he was in front but driving slower, Massa because he was up to race speed but behind. Both cars got to the same part of the race track at the same time. Not the first time that's happened and, short of putting yellow flags around the pit straight or set a racing speed limit of 50mph, it won't be the last.

That doesn't mean my opinion is right and I'm content that the stewards made the right call because they know more than I do.

The problem is that other drivers have been penalised for less than what Massa did to Bourdais, so why did Bourdais get a penalty?

My feeling is that there are too many penalties being imposed and there is not enough consistency - by far. Maybe someone should statistically analyse the incidents and penalties, but I would be the last to be surprised if the stats favoured Ferrari.

Ian

[JSR]

Re: f1 (japan) - choked.....

The problem is that other drivers have been penalised for less than what Massa did to Bourdais, so why did Bourdais get a penalty?

My feeling is that there are too many penalties being imposed and there is not enough consistency - by far. Maybe someone should statistically analyse the incidents and penalties, but I would be the last to be surprised if the stats favoured Ferrari.

Ian

I had a similar "feeling" last year when I felt that it seemed as though Hamilton got away with murder. He got away with no end of incidents that others got penalised for.

But I accept that it was just a feeling and that no amount of me feeling that it was all biased in favour of Hamilton makes it so. I learned from my misassessment and so I hold the same view today when it may appear that one team is favoured over another.

Ultimately, I'm pleased that we've had so many different race winners this year. Plenty of new faces and young drivers are coming right up to the front (including Bourdais). If this continues, next year should be a very good year indeed.