Penalties and their effectiveness.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

chilli, there is a penalty to the team that kicks a ball over the line because the opposing team then gets control of the ball; that's the penalty. In soccer, a team will be given a free kick if the opposing team member handles the ball, even if it was unintentional.

There are loads of rules in all forms of sport for even the most minor of infractions; just for example, if a sprinter strays out of his lane by just a few millimetres, he or she will be automatically disqualified, even if he/she doesn't impede a fellow competitor.

well yes and in fairness thats exactly my point!

there needs to be loads of rules precisely because not every infraction/cheating is the same as every other form of infraction/cheating!

this has to be true otherwise there would only ever need be one penalty for everything.

and i am certainly not saying that there should be no penalties. rather i simply think the punishment should fit the crime.

and to that point...

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Bj, I would suggest that the drivers get only one warning and the next time, even if it happens at a different part of the circuit, the driver is given an automatic drive through. If further transgressions happen, the driver has to take a stop and go at the end of the pits without stopping at their garage for tyres for say 10 seconds and that stop time increases if it happens again.

If the track limit abuse happens on the penultimate or last lap, then a time equivalent of a drive through, or stop and go, to be added to the finishing time of the driver.

I would like to think that the team bosses would stop their drivers abusing limits after they see just one driver from any of the teams receiving this penalty.

this would be a reasonable, progressive, and incremental extension to the system currently in place. to me that makes sense.

also, i love you guys!

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard C

Challenge accepted. This should be easy.

Just do small loops on and off the circuit right at the start finish timing loop and ignore the rest of the circuit. Your lap times will be very small and you should win a race in just minutes. You are technically going out of bounds by not following the majority of the circuit.

yes for sure, if that was happening then i would have no choice but to change my mind!

well played sir!

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

and i am certainly not saying that there should be no penalties. rather i simply think the punishment should fit the crime.

I think most of us agree 100% with that. But this isn't an occasional issue. It is happening more and more often and is beginning to blight the sport (not just in F1). The drivers are unwilling to learn from their warnings and 5 second penalties, they seem to be willing to take the risk. To use the criminal term, they're recidivists. Do it once and a warning should be sufficient, do it 2, 3, 4 or more times and you're basically saying either that 'I am physically incapable of keeping my car within the white lines' (yeah right...) or 'Sod your penalties, I'm going to drive the same way as I do every lap and keep my fingers crossed it doesn't happen'. These are super skilled drivers at what is regarded as the pinnacle of the sport, they should be capable (and should want to) comply with the rules and the current approach by some (not necessarily all) is actually very damaging. Apply some draconian penalties, disqualify the worst offenders and the chances are they'll suddenly remember that they're supposed to drive on the tarmac.... Sometimes you have to do something dramatic instead of something feeble to stop a problem.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

also, i love you guys!

Group hug!

Richard

[chillibowl]

but surely doing something dramatic also carries with it a risk of doing damage to the sport.

it would be easy for me to say one is clearly worse than the other but in reality we wont know until someone decides to pull on that particular thread.

my immediate concern would be what if it doesnt work? what if drivers say its still worth the risk to push the boundaries?

where do you go next then? go more extreme?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but surely doing something dramatic also carries with it a risk of doing damage to the sport.

it would be easy for me to say one is clearly worse than the other but in reality we wont know until someone decides to pull on that particular thread.

my immediate concern would be what if it doesnt work? what if drivers say its still worth the risk to push the boundaries?

where do you go next then? go more extreme?

I would like to think that the team bosses would take sufficient action to rein in that attitude, because, in reality, it would affect them as well. Assuming something drastic as I suggested would possibly or maybe probably deny them points in the championship, and points mean money from FOM.

So the teams really can't afford their drivers to go off piste, so to say.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but surely doing something dramatic also carries with it a risk of doing damage to the sport.

it would be easy for me to say one is clearly worse than the other but in reality we wont know until someone decides to pull on that particular thread.

my immediate concern would be what if it doesnt work? what if drivers say its still worth the risk to push the boundaries?

where do you go next then? go more extreme?

Two disqualifications and I reckon the problem would be largely solved overnight. Leave it and the problem sullies the sport for as long as you do. IMO, doing nothing is far worse for the sport as the situation now is actually embarrassing.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

but surely doing something dramatic also carries with it a risk of doing damage to the sport.

it would be easy for me to say one is clearly worse than the other but in reality we wont know until someone decides to pull on that particular thread.

my immediate concern would be what if it doesnt work? what if drivers say its still worth the risk to push the boundaries?

where do you go next then? go more extreme?

The only way to find out if doing something dramatic carries with it a risk of doing damage to the sport, is by trying it out. Leaving things as they are is not addressing the situation, which I feel is more damaging to the sport.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I would like to think that the team bosses would take sufficient action to rein in that attitude, because, in reality, it would affect them as well. Assuming something drastic as I suggested would possibly or maybe probably deny them points in the championship, and points mean money from FOM.

So the teams really can't afford their drivers to go off piste, so to say.

i see the logic of what you are saying but still remain resistant to the notion of employing more aggressive punishments to get there.

good behaviour should be encouraged and to Aysedasi's earlier point, they should all want to comply with the rules (agreed - the correct mindset for those honestly engaging in fair competition) and if this is also about getting the teams to apply the right standards on their drivers then negative punishments are not the only or always the most effective way to go.

why not also consider positive reinforcement as an option to encourage good behaviour. instead of always taking away, reward teams and drivers who finish multiple races/and entire season with a clean sheet whether thats with financial bonuses, more windtunnel/CFD time, more testing type benefits.

i guess from an organizational behaviour point of view/how best to change a culture i am more of a carrot then a stick person.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i see the logic of what you are saying but still remain resistant to the notion of employing more aggressive punishments to get there.

good behaviour should be encouraged and to Aysedasi's earlier point, they should all want to comply with the rules (agreed - the correct mindset for those honestly engaging in fair competition) and if this is also about getting the teams to apply the right standards on their drivers then negative punishments are not the only or always the most effective way to go.

why not also consider positive reinforcement as an option to encourage good behaviour. instead of always taking away, reward teams and drivers who finish multiple races/and entire season with a clean sheet whether thats with financial bonuses, more windtunnel/CFD time, more testing type benefits.

i guess from an organizational behaviour point of view/how best to change a culture i am more of a carrot then a stick person.

I respect your opinion of course, but I don't believe it addresses the problem which is specifically driver related. I love carrots, but the right place for them is in a stew, not in the highest level of motorsport....

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Leave it and the problem sullies the sport for as long as you do.

well thats harsh!

[Aysedasi]

I didn't mean you personally....

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I didn't mean you personally....

Haha I know. Was just having a bit of fun with it.

[TrapezeArtist]

Having not been here for a few days I've just read through an awful lot of posts. It's too late to reply to most of them I'd like to, so I'll just respond to one issue here.

I agree that penalties need to be more severe to make a proper deterrent, but they don't need to be ramped up for multiple infractions (which is where comments about disqualification and bans has come from). If the penalty is a drive-through, that probably amounts to about 15 seconds at most tracks. So four penalties (about the most I can imagine happening) would be a loss of one minute. That would probably be enough to drop about ten places, so would be a total loss of points. That should be enough to concentrate minds without getting silly.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Having not been here for a few days I've just read through an awful lot of posts. It's too late to reply to most of them I'd like to, so I'll just respond to one issue here.

I agree that penalties need to be more severe to make a proper deterrent, but they don't need to be ramped up for multiple infractions (which is where comments about disqualification and bans has come from). If the penalty is a drive-through, that probably amounts to about 15 seconds at most tracks. So four penalties (about the most I can imagine happening) would be a loss of one minute. That would probably be enough to drop about ten places, so would be a total loss of points. That should be enough to concentrate minds without getting silly.

I can see the argument for a incremental progression of violations as it allows maybe the first (or first few) infractions to be both painful, but not totally destructive to the race. But I also think it should be a relatively simple progress. And I also think there should always be a catch all adjustment that can be made by the stewards to deal with unanticipated or unique situation that may happen during an event.

Richard

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Richard C

And I also think there should always be a catch all adjustment that can be made by the stewards to deal with unanticipated or unique situation that may happen during an event.

Richard

Some discretion is necessary to avoid penalising drivers who have been pushed off or who have gone off-track to avoid something worse. However that discretion needs to follow strict guidelines. We can all remember back to the end of 2021 when Massi stretched discretion to the point of making it up as he went along. I'm not sure discretion needs to extend to increasing penalties, provided the standard penalty is worse than the absolute maximum advantage than could possibly be gained from a transgression.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Some discretion is necessary to avoid penalising drivers who have been pushed off or who have gone off-track to avoid something worse. However that discretion needs to follow strict guidelines. We can all remember back to the end of 2021 when Massi stretched discretion to the point of making it up as he went along. I'm not sure discretion needs to extend to increasing penalties, provided the standard penalty is worse than the absolute maximum advantage than could possibly be gained from a transgression.

Yes, I believe that the only mitigating factor should be where the driver has taken avoiding action.

The problem I foresee with leaving it up to those who impose the penalty is how can you possibly calculate the absolute maximum advantage that could be gained from a transgression. Let's say driver B has been holding up driver A for a number of laps meaning that other drivers are stretching their lead over driver B. Finally, driver A manages to overtake driver B but in so doing exceeds track limits. Driver then proceeds to catch up to those in front.

Do you then say , "Well that's 10 seconds penalty because he's got by driver B" or do you wait until the end of the race because having made that pass, driver A then goes on to overtake all the other cars and takes the flag in first place?

This is, in reality, the discussions that have taken place here and elsewhere about penalties for causing incidents involving other cars. In other words, should there be a predetermined penalty for causing a collision, or should those in charge have to calculate what penalty should be given when taking in to account any detriment to others involved?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by peterelise

The reason they can do it at Monaco is that the physical barrier is visible from where they sit whereas the painted line is not. Why is anyone surprised they go over a painted line, in some cases by millimetres, when they can’t see the line as they get nearer to it? I get that there is a large element of risk v reward so drivers will take much more risk with a painted line track limit than they will with a barrier but even when there was real risk of qualifying being ruined, we still saw lots of extremely capable drivers go over the limit by a tiny amount.

That's a lazy lazy bs excuse, magically on the same circuits once it rains they all seem to be able to stay on the non painted stuff. Stop with the they can't see it nonsense, it's just sheer utter garbage.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Yes, I believe that the only mitigating factor should be where the driver has taken avoiding action.

The problem I foresee with leaving it up to those who impose the penalty is how can you possibly calculate the absolute maximum advantage that could be gained from a transgression. Let's say driver B has been holding up driver A for a number of laps meaning that other drivers are stretching their lead over driver B. Finally, driver A manages to overtake driver B but in so doing exceeds track limits. Driver then proceeds to catch up to those in front.

Do you then say , "Well that's 10 seconds penalty because he's got by driver B" or do you wait until the end of the race because having made that pass, driver A then goes on to overtake all the other cars and takes the flag in first place?

This is, in reality, the discussions that have taken place here and elsewhere about penalties for causing incidents involving other cars. In other words, should there be a predetermined penalty for causing a collision, or should those in charge have to calculate what penalty should be given when taking in to account any detriment to others involved?

My default position would be a drive-through for every track limits transgression (no warnings). That would probably be about a 15 second penalty at most tracks. The driver would receive an indication (flag + radio message to team) and then must take the penalty on the next lap.

A driving standards official would quickly review the incident and signal the penalty, or cancel it if the driver was pushed off or was avoiding a collision.

The above would cover all incidents about from in the last two laps. In that case a time penalty would have to be applied after the race.

If a driver fails to take his penalty immediately, it becomes a 10 second stop-and-go and increments up another 10 seconds for every further lap missed.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

My default position would be a drive-through for every track limits transgression (no warnings). That would probably be about a 15 second penalty at most tracks. The driver would receive an indication (flag + radio message to team) and then must take the penalty on the next lap.

A driving standards official would quickly review the incident and signal the penalty, or cancel it if the driver was pushed off or was avoiding a collision.

The above would cover all incidents about from in the last two laps. In that case a time penalty would have to be applied after the race.

If a driver fails to take his penalty immediately, it becomes a 10 second stop-and-go and increments up another 10 seconds for every further lap missed.

In principle I really like this suggestion, it's clean, quick & effective. The only potential drawback is that it's going to need human intervention by the driving standards official but really the FIA need to grow a pair and employ a person (or persons) who is capable of making this decision in the time allowed and then everyone (teams included) has to accept the decision.

[steve_r]

It's strange everyone wants more penalties.

But I think I am standing alone here judging by this thread.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by steve_r

It's strange everyone wants more penalties.

But I think I am standing alone here judging by this thread.

Actually, I don't think that that is quite accurate. What I think we all want is the threat of a penalty to be sufficiently onerous that the drivers will adhere to track limits.

Just as many speeding motorist might well keep to the speed limits if the penalty was, say, the loss of your licence for a month for each mile per hour over the limit; it would certainly concentrate the mind and stop speeding. I don't advocate this, by the way, but it might well stop some of the morons on the roads up here in Yorkshire!

[steve_r]

I think that there is nothing wrong with track limits penalties in many situations. But if the track layout means that 1200 penalties would be applied over a weekend, then something needs to change beyond giving endless simple time penalties. You could either relax the rules for that particular set of corners or preferably introduce physical changes to the track in order to discourage or penalise someone running wide.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by steve_r

I think that there is nothing wrong with track limits penalties in many situations. But if the track layout means that 1200 penalties would be applied over a weekend, then something needs to change beyond giving endless simple time penalties. You could either relax the rules for that particular set of corners or preferably introduce physical changes to the track in order to discourage or penalise someone running wide.

The argument against that is that there were some drivers that were quite able to negotiate the circuit without abusing the track limits. The problem is that circuits are constantly being altered to make corners and bends easier to negotiate, and tracks wider. All that then happens is that drivers seek to take advantage of the alterations, pushing the boundaries and just abusing the new track limits.

It's just a vicious circle.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by steve_r

It's strange everyone wants more penalties.

I don't think "more" penalties is anyone's goal. For me and maybe others, we want more impactfull and timely consequences so than there will be fewer offenses and therefore fewer penalties. As as been discussed ad nauseam, it's clear that the drivers are able to stay within boundaries when incentivized to do so. Such as high curbs, walls, slick paint when wet, grass, etc.

At the end of the day, we all just want to see everyone race, stay within the rules and not see penalties play a significant role in race outcomes. Some of us don't want to dumb down the sport by just giving up and not enforcing track limits or making the tracks so wide there are effectively no limits.

Richard