Do you agree with the steward's decision today? *** Spoilers *** | Page 8 | FerrariChat

Do you agree with the steward's decision today? *** Spoilers ***

Discussion in 'F1' started by Natkingcolebasket69, Jun 9, 2019.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Oengus

    Oengus F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed Silver Subscribed

    the days of racing have left F1, its all about the poll position nowadays.
     
    william likes this.
  2. P.Singhof

    P.Singhof F1 Rookie

    Apr 19, 2006
    4,810
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Full Name:
    Peter Singhof
    Which of the drivers in post 170 is ambassador for Ferrari??? So it is about 100-3 in drivers opinion but you feel backed by Nico and Keke Rosberg... again: hahahaha
     
    csmjr91090 and daytona355 like this.
  3. TonyL

    TonyL F1 Rookie

    Sep 27, 2007
    3,811
    Norfolk - UK
    Full Name:
    Tony
    Was the penalty wrong, in my opinion in the spirit of racing, then Yes it was. Why?

    SV and LH engaged in a split second tussle for a position on the track.

    Unfortunately rules are rules and the regulations have to be administered and dealt with, that’s where the problem occurs. So.

    The 2019 Sporting Regulations give total authority to the stewards to look at really anything they deem an incident:

    2019 Sporting Regulations


    38) INCIDENTS DURING THE RACE



    38.1 The race director may report any on‐track incident or suspected breach of these Sporting
    Regulations or the Code (an “Incident”) to the stewards. After review it shall be at the
    discretion of the stewards to decide whether or not to proceed with an investigation.
    The stewards may also investigate an Incident noted by themselves.


    The appendix to those regulations give brief but specific requirements of drivers code which the stewards have to enforce, highlighted in bold below.

    APPENDIX L TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPORTING CODE


    2b Overtaking, according to the
    circumstances, may be carried out on either
    the right or the left.
    A driver may not deliberately leave the track
    without justifiable reason.
    More than one change of direction to defend
    a position is not permitted.
    Any driver moving back towards the racing
    line, having earlier defended his position off
    line, should leave at least one car width
    between his own car and the edge of the
    track on the approach to the corner.

    However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other
    drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car
    beyond the edge of the track or any other
    abnormal change of direction, are strictly
    prohibited. Any driver who appears guilty of
    any of the above offences will be reported to
    the Stewards.



    2c Drivers must use the track at all times. For
    the avoidance of doubt, the white lines
    defining the track edges are considered to
    be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
    Should a car leave the track for any reason,
    and without prejudice to 2(d) below, the
    driver may rejoin.
    However, this may only be done when it is
    safe to do so and without gaining any
    advantage. A driver will be judged to have
    left the track if no part of the car remains in
    contact with the track.


    2d Causing a collision, repetition of serious
    mistakes or the appearance of a lack of
    control over the car (such as leaving the
    track) will be reported to the Stewards and
    may entail the imposition of penalties
    up to
    and including the exclusion of any driver
    concerned.


    I don’t really see what area SF can appeal against these, except,

    1. that he did not change direction (more than once) to crowd out LH

    2. He did not leave at least one cars width and therefore crowded out the other driver

    3. He did re-join safely (car was under control)

    4. He did lack control and this caused into leave the track in the first place
    I call that a draw and therefore in that context, the stewards should have let them get on with it.
     
    WPOZZZ and Oengus like this.
  4. werewolf

    werewolf F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Dec 29, 2007
    11,022
    Full Name:
    goodbye
    Fair enough!

    Instead of just agreeing with just Nico, Keke AND Palmer, i may also agree with Hill who said "In my personal view he (Vettel) could have left more room" ... and maybe i'll agree with Chilton who said "I can see it both ways".

    But then there's still those pesky sporting regulations, as they exist today ... :(
     
    DF1 and william like this.
  5. furoni

    furoni F1 World Champ

    Jun 6, 2011
    13,609
    Vila Verde
    Full Name:
    Pedro Braga Soares
    British drivers are the best source to make up your mind, lolololo, just don't ask Nigel!
     
  6. dflett

    dflett Formula 3

    Jun 24, 2005
    1,603
    NY
    Full Name:
    David
    I think it's hard not to agree with him. He is correct on almost all points. The stewards made a mistake, the driver's should have been left to race, Vettels number board antics were entertaining (but churlish), the crowd was wrong to boo Hamilton and Vettel was right to point this out and finally, significantly... that both championships are already over after 7 races.
     
    uhn2000 and crinoid like this.
  7. spirot

    spirot F1 World Champ

    Dec 12, 2005
    14,501
    Atlanta
    Full Name:
    Tom Spiro
    No Bias here. Both are world Champions, but when someone like Mario Andretti speaks up - you have to listen. Both Keke and Nico together could not out drive Andretti... who this very day is out driving an old Indy car 8/10ths..... It was a bad call, plain and simple. Vettel has made lots of mistakes - true. I don't know what is going on with him but clearly the car does not suit him like the Red Bull did ... and he does not have the ability to fix it... and the converse is true with Hamilton. He's benefiting from a superior car... and add in good driving and he's getting the reward. All of that has nothing to do with poor stewarding, and a bad decision. Now the FIA will not do what is right and this will cause F-1 to continue to be a farce...

    I wish they could just dust off the cars from 1995 and use those all over again.
     
  8. spirot

    spirot F1 World Champ

    Dec 12, 2005
    14,501
    Atlanta
    Full Name:
    Tom Spiro

    I pulled out my FIA rule book FY19... and you have the right section, however I think the highlighted section is if you did it deliberately... and the other section is if you demonstrate repeated loss of control... ( is one time out of 70 laps a repeated demonstration of loss of control? ) In my opinion it was a momentary loss, and the driver did not gain any advantage... at all. That is the part that really matters to me ... if he actually gained an advantage - other than wrecking? I cant see anyone saying - "nope you left the track at speed all 4 off, and were heading to the wall - you should have crashed and therefore you have an advantage on the car following. if that is so - I should have won a couple of races last year easily.
     
    csmjr91090 and daytona355 like this.
  9. Surfah

    Surfah F1 Rookie

    Dec 20, 2011
    3,135
    +++1
     
    Caeruleus11, werewolf and william like this.
  10. Oengus

    Oengus F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed Silver Subscribed

    I agree, unfortunately replays are ruining most sports, hockey especially with the review of the offside replay.
     
    TonyL likes this.
  11. DeSoto

    DeSoto F1 Veteran

    Nov 26, 2003
    7,482
    Ross Brawn explains the problem:

    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/brawn-stewards-penalties-vettel-canada/4464320/

    Translation: "it´s your fault, you don´t understand us". But I think that something is ****ed up in the system when the boss has to clarify that the stewards are not corrupt. From the article:

    “Having said that, I would emphatically add is that there is nothing sinister about a decision like this. You might agree with it or not, but none of those who take on the role of steward each weekend has a hidden agenda and fans can be certain of that.”

    FWIW, I don´t think that the stewards are biased, their decisions are just too random to be biased.
     
  12. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,655
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    I agree mate, they are just incompetent, biased, scared of Mercedes and completely incapable of understanding and applying the regulations in the spirit in which they are meant. This weekend, as very often, the wrong decision was made, the only difference is that this time everyone in the world bar a few dyed in the wool Elton fans can see where they went wrong
     
    stavura and classic308 like this.
  13. crinoid

    crinoid F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 2, 2005
    9,414
    Full Name:
    LaCrinoid
    And remember this is the guy who made that Mercedes team and help write the rules of the sport that are benefiting that Mercedes team.
     
    stavura and daytona355 like this.
  14. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,655
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak

    Absolutely.... they know something is wrong when their supervisor comes out and gives interviews trying to deflect the criticism. I met Ross Brawn, Ferrari version, and he was a very stoic and intelligent man. The new version is a very politically sensitive and watered down one, who would not be recognisable by his previous incarnations
     
    crinoid likes this.
  15. Jacob Potts

    Jacob Potts Formula Junior

    Dec 11, 2008
    352
    Pueblo, CO
    Full Name:
    Jacob Potts
    werewolf likes this.
  16. DeSoto

    DeSoto F1 Veteran

    Nov 26, 2003
    7,482
    #191 DeSoto, Jun 11, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2019
    Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta. That's Latin for "they're full of **** and they know it".
     
    daytona355 likes this.
  17. Hocakes

    Hocakes Formula Junior

    Apr 24, 2010
    451
    FL
    You don't have to be sinister to be incompetent.

     
  18. TonyL

    TonyL F1 Rookie

    Sep 27, 2007
    3,811
    Norfolk - UK
    Full Name:
    Tony
    if only "momentary" was in the wording. I don't disagree with the point you are making either but -

    "the appearance of a lack of control over the car (such as leaving the track) will be reported to the Stewards and may entail the imposition of penalties"

    is quite specific and covers several excursions or just one.
     
  19. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,655
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    Agreed in principle, BUT, the stewards do not apply penalties where the car did not hit anything, was gathered back up, and was able to continue. Causing another car to crash is one thing, but causing one to gently tap the brakes whilst making his own rather hopeful and optimistic move towards an ever closing gap?, not really the spirit of the rules to be penalised ever before. If it was, I suspect we could all name dozens of occasions where races would be won or lost with additional penalties, and the number of questionable ones where Elton hasn’t been penalised and under your rules above, if interpreted your way, he would have been, he would have totted up his penalty points most years and had at least a one race ban, being known for the kamikaze lunge (particularly on Nico) as he is!
     
    Nortonious likes this.
  20. TonyL

    TonyL F1 Rookie

    Sep 27, 2007
    3,811
    Norfolk - UK
    Full Name:
    Tony
    Totally agree which is what I was trying to emphasise by the highlighting the rules, they are for reference but they are not "my" rules :)
    Best
    Tony
     
  21. daytona355

    daytona355 F1 World Champ
    BANNED

    Mar 25, 2009
    12,655
    London
    Full Name:
    Sid Korshak
    Sorry Tony, I thought afterwards when I reread it and a few before it, and it was too late to change mine! I had a wierd feeling as I wrote it that we had been in agreement for days on this, but you know me, gob first, brain second! Forza Ferrari
     
    TonyL likes this.
  22. TonyL

    TonyL F1 Rookie

    Sep 27, 2007
    3,811
    Norfolk - UK
    Full Name:
    Tony
    No problem Sid, I took what you was saying in good faith. The problem is that the rules are rather sketchy and open to all kinds of interpretation, the stewards are selected to adjudicate on those rules and are rather boxed into a corner. If they hadn't given SV a time penalty then Toto would have been screaming foul play. Like you I want to see fairness in the sport and feel SV was hard done by, looking at all the infringements during the whole episode I would call it a draw and they should have decided on favouring the lead driver trying to recover from a error.

    In my book they considered only part of the "incident" from SV leaving the track to re-joining it. At full (video) speed the whole thing was over in under three seconds which is amazing really. I was just looking at the Gilles Villeneuve v Rene Arnoux "incident many years ago and thought how the hell could those two have got away with that today! That's a part of F1 racing that has been stripped out of the sport because of how much is at stake.
     
    daytona355 likes this.
  23. ago car nut

    ago car nut F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Aug 29, 2008
    5,246
    Madison Ohio
    Full Name:
    David A.
    Maybe correct decision according to stupid rules? The time penalty was too severe!
     
  24. spirot

    spirot F1 World Champ

    Dec 12, 2005
    14,501
    Atlanta
    Full Name:
    Tom Spiro
    Great point... today both Arnoux and Villeneuve would have been banned from racing.... impeding a fellow driver and driving in a dangerous way....
     
    TonyL likes this.
  25. spirot

    spirot F1 World Champ

    Dec 12, 2005
    14,501
    Atlanta
    Full Name:
    Tom Spiro
    If a penalty is needed - then a 1 place grid drop on the next race.... OR investigate after the race - hear from both drivers and then make the decision...
     
    TonyL likes this.

Share This Page