|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Yesterday, 15:19 (Ref:4232006) | #101 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,981
|
Quote:
revisiting the Austrian GP incident this year...a bit of a dive bomb by Norris but Max also moved under braking/forced Norris wide and created contact and as a result took the penalty for it. did either driver learn anything from that? Max still drives like a bully and Norris continues to leave himself hanging on the outside when he doesn't have to. i assume out of frustration because he would have taken Max on the next DRS straight. i would argue that the best way to fight Max/bully in this situation would have been to use the brain a bit more? |
|||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
Yesterday, 15:31 (Ref:4232008) | #102 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,108
|
Max penalty was ineffective because the damaged caused to Landos car cost Lando more than the penalty did Max. Of course Max didn't learn anything from that - he extended his championship lead.
|
|
|
Yesterday, 15:52 (Ref:4232010) | #103 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,981
|
Quote:
so i challenge the assertion that a 'higher standard' set of rules would have afforded Norris more room for that corner. imo he was too late to that corner. certainly too late to use this as an example of improving the rules. Quote:
|
||||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
Yesterday, 16:04 (Ref:4232011) | #104 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,108
|
Quote:
The rules should not allow you to defend your position by taking a line which means neither car can make the corner. Quote:
And yes - if every time Max is forced to go wheel to wheel, we either have a crash, or a penalty applied in a manner which causes the main talking point to be the incident, then it is absolutely a metric for change as it proves the rule is not fit for purpose. And regarding the standards - once again - if a French F4 driver drove another car off the circuit, they would be criticized and penalized. Yet here we are, discussing yet another Formula 1 Grand Prix, the supposedly highest standard of motor racing in the entire world, debating on if running cars off the road is acceptable, and who should or should not be penalized in a now semi-regular occurrence, because of the exact wording of a rule book, and the outcome from a steward who has not driven a race car in almost 3 decades. |
|||
|
Yesterday, 17:57 (Ref:4232020) | #105 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 342
|
Quote:
You can only punish the action, not the consequence. Don't forget at Austria both cars had punctures for a small amount of contact. Verstappen was rightly punished for the contact, but the consequence was out of his hands. It was pure bad luck that Norris had to retire. |
||
|
Yesterday, 19:20 (Ref:4232026) | #106 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 11,108
|
Quote:
Quote:
- The FIA has never punished the action and not consequence, at any point in its history. It'd be great if it did. - The consequences of Max's actions were completely in his hands. He drove into another car. - Luck was not the cause of Norris retirement. Being driven into by Max was. |
|||
|
Yesterday, 19:32 (Ref:4232027) | #107 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,981
|
imo the Austria incident is a far better example upon which to justify amending the rules of engagement as you suggest than the Austin incident.
|
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
Yesterday, 21:18 (Ref:4232032) | #108 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,515
|
Quote:
It is in the interpretation of the rules and the mindset in which they are interpreted and enforced. There is enough provision in the rules as they stand to deal effectively with the situations we saw on Sunday. It is the mindset under which some people are operating that creates the problems. When outsiders like fans/supporters/forums get involved in debating the wording they are being quite legalistic about the wording. But the wording will not change the mindset of the judges (stewards) who will still try to enforce the ruleset in a legalistic manner. |
|||
|
Today, 00:59 (Ref:4232036) | #109 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,161
|
Quote:
Apologies for the long remainder of this post as I wanted to post what I think is the pertinent rules here. This comes from "CHAPTER IV - CODE OF DRIVING CONDUCT ON CIRCUITS" of "International Sporting Code: Appendix L - International Driver’s licenses, medical examinations, driver’s equipment and conduct". I left out sections 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as those cover signals, and dealing with stopped cars, pit entry and exit. There are also sections in the regular sporting regulations that govern things like how to perform starts, various flavors of safety car period, red flags, media commitments, etc. All of those are not relevant to this topic. Quote:
I am not going to argue that Lando's pass should have been legal, but I think much of the driving style that Max is being called out for is explicitly called out here (2.b - pushing other cars off track and 2.c - lasting advantage gained and even 2.d for grievous examples) for being referred to the stewards. And I think there is little room for the stewards to not penalize. I think the stewards are using a set of guidelines that may not actually fully follow the rules or intent set by the rules for the stewards to act when appropriate. The "let them race" stance can't be extended into infinity in such as way that blatant and likely unsporting like actions are ignored and/or repeatedly allowed. Richard |
|||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
Today, 02:53 (Ref:4232039) | #110 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,664
|
Quote:
I understand what you and Teretonga mean about the stewards taking a legalistic approach to making decisions generally, including on driving standards but to me, that's what stewards always do. The vast majority of them that I've dealt with over the years have in fact been lawyers. Bear in mind that many of their decisions can be subject to appeal, and in that environment, it is only natural that they'd take a more legalistic view. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
Today, 03:00 (Ref:4232040) | #111 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,515
|
Quote:
Poor decisions are always poor descensions, and time doesn't change their flavor. |
|||
|
Today, 03:17 (Ref:4232041) | #112 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,664
|
Quote:
I just can't see the way stewards doing what they do ever changing - has been the same for as long as I've been around or in the sport, and that's been 50 odd years at this stage (bloody hell, scary to type that - I must be getting "old"). |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
Today, 03:47 (Ref:4232042) | #113 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,161
|
Quote:
With that lead, I was able to find that a prior version was published in 2022 and, as you say, a newer version exists. This article talks about the 2024 update to be included in 2025 ISC. https://www.fia.com/news/fia-drivers...-championships I broadly assume this is the draft you mention. I also broadly assume it is not in use and that the 2022 guidelines are what are in use today in F1 (layered on top of the 2024 ISC) and that everyone else is just using the 2024 ISC. Lets look at the 2022 document https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...guidelines.pdf I will copy-n-paste some content here to help people along as the FIA site has been painfully slow for me today including sometimes failing to load. The document is very small and clearly meant to be a clarification against what is current in the ISC document (which is pretty vague). The document is short and worth reading as it hits a few items. Anyhow, below is the content pertaining to overtaking on the outside... Quote:
1. Positioning the overtaking car a "significant portion" alongside seems to be fully a responsibility of the overtaking car. 2. The overtaking car must be capable of making the corner. That sounds logical right? But... there is nothing that says the defending car must be able to make the corner. Therefore the defending car can always effectively prevent the overtaking car from being appropriately alongside by mirroring the overtaking cars depth into the corner and relative position. This can be done even to the point of going off the circuit. If done right, this should prevent any outside passing. Edit: Ugh, actually it DOES require the defending car to be capable of remaining on the circuit. So I don't know what the stewards were thinking. Regardless, smarter and more experienced people than myself could work out the appropriate way to address this. I think the 2022 guidelines above clearly don't cover all necessary situation. And I wonder if the 2024 work does or not. Richard Last edited by Richard C; Today at 03:55. |
|||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
Today, 04:56 (Ref:4232044) | #114 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,936
|
I sincerely believe at this moment that Verstapen should be slammed against the wall like Hamilton did in Silverstone 2021, to lower his arrogance, I suppose Norris would never do this but I would sincerely love him to do it!!!!
excuse me for my bad english.... |
||
|
Today, 07:38 (Ref:4232047) | #115 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,515
|
Quote:
There is no reason to have what we are currently experiencing. It can all be done much better than this and to an equally robust or higher level of outcome and performance if the right people are in charge of it. |
|||
|
Today, 08:31 (Ref:4232049) | #116 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,939
|
Quote:
I believe that this part, in particular, is why the McLaren pitwall team felt that it was totally unnecessary to tell Norris that he needed to hand the place back. |
|||
|
Today, 08:38 (Ref:4232050) | #117 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,277
|
Taking a very very broad look at the current problem, as it stands, it may be with referring to Rugby Union's TMO (television match official).
In all top level sport now there are infinite amounts of infinitesimally detailed data/telemetry, endless slow motion/close up/even 3D video feeds, all of which can allow incredibly close analysis of an incident or event. This is all great, except it removes something from the analysis - the humans involved. Going back to the TMO, they may ask or be asked to look into a collision between two players but they always, *always* run it in real speed from multiple angles alongside the slow mo detail. That gives them a far better impression of intent, mitigation and outcome than just looking at the small detail. Maybe we've simply got too much data being presented? It should be easy to look at a piece of TV footage and decide that a driver was playing silly beggars. Brake traces etc aren't always relevant. And yes, I have some small experience of stewarding (rather than marshalling) at UK club championship level, where we don't have instant access to all the data in the universe. |
|
|
Today, 11:47 (Ref:4232060) | #118 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,852
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
Today, 13:25 (Ref:4232068) | #119 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,455
|
He was.
My view of this incident is to compare it with lots of incidents where both cars run off track onto the grass. In that instance, they rejoin the track and continue in whatever order they got back on. The only difference here is it's not grass. Had Max been able to stay on track, then Norris may not overtake whilst off track. If both cars are off track then they continue in the order they rejoined, and Lando rejoined first probably because he was actually in control and Max was lairing it up the inside because he only needed to stop Lando overtaking. And then comparing to Austria before the collision when Max had a problem with Lando chucking it up the inside and unable to stop. In the end the two things I dislike in this are inconsistency and hypocrasy. |
||
__________________
Bill Bryson: It is no longer permitted to be stupid and slow. You must choose one or the other. |
Today, 13:47 (Ref:4232070) | #120 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,664
|
Quote:
Sorry to be so blunt and accept that English is not your first language but desire for violence / injury and death threats from Argentinian "fans" of Indycar driver Agustin Canapino were roundly condemned and what you have said here also should be condemned - I'm happy to be the first (or maybe only) person to do so. Unacceptable. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
Today, 14:09 (Ref:4232074) | #121 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,687
|
Villeneuve vs Arnoux at Dijon 1979 should be the golden standard.
Each driver should give room to any car on their sides, no matter who overtakes whom. |
||
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed! by NaBUrean Prodooktionz naburu38.itch.io |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Paging Dr. Austin, Paging Dr. Austin....enemas needed STAT | stretch51 | IRL Indycar Series | 1 | 5 Apr 2002 00:41 |
Movie File: Lap of Hallet Oklahoma in Austin Healey 100/6 | KC | Motorsport History | 1 | 8 Nov 2001 17:39 |