Poll: Official 2025 British Grand Prix Race Thread - Silverstone Circuit, Northamptonshire - Race 12/24

[sidimmu]

Oscar came out of no where in terrible conditions.

Oscar was the leading car, safety car announced it was going back in, therefore Oscar becomes the safety car and can dictate the pace. Max would have got the exact same message in his ears, so why was he continuing to accelerate?

The timing of his braking is the actual problem, but thats only down to the safety car period ending.

10s is extremely unfair one you look at a wider picture and not just with blinkered views of Norris' closest championship rival.
Cars reversed, a lot of these comments would be different based on their preference and biased views on certain drivers. Nothing new here, happens every week in these threads.

 

[Dup]

seems to be some passport favouritism here....

Also so very typical by the FIA, there is a tolerance and an acceptable rate, but we are going to leave this up to the stewards to decide the tolerance each weekend.
Pathetic.

I don't think so. In Russells case he was struggling to make space becasue the Safety Car was going so slow. He did not appear to peel off and start racing. From Max's POV yesterday, he cannot see the Safety Car (at least from the camera) and likely assumes Oscar has resumed racing. Oscars braking was also much faster. The speed of the gear changes between the examples is the biggest example of this.

Add in the visibility issues with drivers wanting to keep temperature as much as possible and you can see why Oscar was penalised as it did result in Max very nearly taking both of them out quite innocently. I don't agree with the penalty, but I can see why they gave it based on the above. I love Lando and want him to win but Oscar would have likely won despite Lando picking up the pace in the later stages.


The penalty did crack Oscar though and he started making mistakes on track. A bit of red mist we hadn't seen yet. We still have a long way to go. Lots of teams with points and lots to play for. It's interesting "for sure".

 

[sidimmu]

rom Max's POV yesterday, he cannot see the Safety Car (at least from the camera) and likely assumes Oscar has resumed racing.

Why's that Oscars fault?

The speed of the gear changes between the examples is the biggest example of this.

So it dont matter how fast you change up, but it matters how fast you change down now?

Again the real problem is:

there is a tolerance and an acceptable rate, but we are going to leave this up to the stewards to decide the tolerance each weekend.

Max very nearly taking both of them out quite innocently.

WOuld argue against that, he got the same message of safety car ending and knows the pack is going to bunch up as Oscar is now the pace controller. You telling me a 4 time champ is not aware of that? unlikely.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Oscar was the leading car, safety car announced it was going back in, therefore Oscar becomes the safety car and can dictate the pace. Max would have got the exact same message in his ears, so why was he continuing to accelerate?

The timing of his braking is the actual problem, but thats only down to the safety car period ending.

10s is extremely unfair one you look at a wider picture and not just with blinkered views of Norris' closest championship rival.
Cars reversed, a lot of these comments would be different based on their preference and biased views on certain drivers. Nothing new here, happens every week in these threads.

It was a joke of a penalty, but then I’d expect nothing less from the Liberty media era of F1. As was the SC decision following a few drops of rain.

 

[Dup]

Why's that Oscars fault?


So it dont matter how fast you change up, but it matters how fast you change down now?

Again the real problem is:



WOuld argue against that, he got the same message of safety car ending and knows the pack is going to bunch up as Oscar is now the pace controller. You telling me a 4 time champ is not aware of that? unlikely.

It's really simple.

He didn't bunch up though, he sped off generating a ton of spray then anchored on. Max couldn't see and nearly hit him.

This happened twice as aggressively than the Russell example and in awful conditions. The conditions count here more than anything as visibility is what caused the near miss. I think any driver behind would have had the same misfortune, not just Max.


I don't agree with the penalty as I said. But I can see why they came to that conclusion and why it makes sense. I don't think it was malicious, I think Oscar is better than that, but it looks really bad in context and malicious or it was too harsh for the conditions. 5s I could maybe agree with but still feel it was an innocent action.

 

[sidimmu]

He didn't bunch up though, he sped off generating a ton of spray then anchored on

He went to catch up to the safety car before he went 10 car lengths and as he caught up he got the message "safety car in this lap", meaning he now controls the pace and needs to let the SC go off by itself so he can then choose to restart the race again.

Max couldn't see and nearly hit him.

Not Oscars fault.

I think any driver behind would have had the same misfortune, not just Max.

Max would have got the exact same message in his ears, so why was he continuing to accelerate?

4 time champ doesnt know that the new leader post SC would typically slow down to control the pack?

I don't agree with the penalty as I said. But I can see why they came to that conclusion and why it makes sense. I don't think it was malicious, I think Oscar is better than that, but it looks really bad in context and malicious or it was too harsh for the conditions. 5s I could maybe agree with but still feel it was an innocent action.

Agreed, 10s is too too much for such an offense.

As I stated, passport favouritism appears to be the case here.

 

[Kenai]

Oscar was the leading car, safety car announced it was going back in, therefore Oscar becomes the safety car and can dictate the pace.

But crucially is not allowed to engage in erratic braking or acceleration - braking quickly from 135mph to 32mph in the middle of the straight is about as textbook a definition of erratic braking as you can get at the point of taking over from the safety car, before you even factor the conditions in.

 

[sidimmu]

But crucially is not allowed to engage in erratic braking or acceleration - braking quickly from 135mph to 32mph in the middle of the straight is about as textbook a definition of erratic braking as you can get at the point of taking over from the safety car, before you even factor the conditions in.

Was it erratic though?

He went to catch up to the safety car before he went 10 car lengths and as he caught up he got the message "safety car in this lap", meaning he now controls the pace and needs to let the SC go off by itself so he can then choose to restart the race again.

 

[Kenai]

Was it erratic though?

Yes, absolutely, it is far in excess of the expected braking from a car attempting to slow the pack down as it takes up the duties of the safety car. All made worse by doing it in conditions with appalling visibility.

 

[AlphariusOmegan]

the main issue is the speed at which Oscar decelerated, any driver behind will know that the lead car is controlling the pace when the SC ending message comes through so when you see the car in front suddenly speed up you will not think "i'll just hold back as he might brake again"... every single driver will speed up so that they don't get left behind.

 

[Armageus]

Hulkenberg thought that Piastri braking was an issue:

“You caused a bit of… I almost went off. Almost into the back of Lance [Stroll] and Pierre [Gasly],” said the German, who was running fifth at the time.

Candid F1 cooldown room chat explains why Oscar Piastri’s penalty is justifiable

Oscar Piastri lost the British GP after being penalised for braking 'erratically' behind the safety car.

www.crash.net

Whilst I don't agree with the penalty (I think 5 seconds would have been more appropriate if anything) imo it did constitute erratic driving especially given the conditions.

 

[sidimmu]

he main issue is the speed at which Oscar decelerated,

Disagree, the real issue is that:

there is a tolerance and an acceptable rate, but we are going to leave this up to the stewards to decide the tolerance each weekend

 

[Jono8]

The main issue with what he did I guess was the visibility.

It was pretty stupid to brake so hard when there was so much spray and on such a wet track.

He may have gotten away with it on a dry circuit.

I do think 5 secs would be more appropriate though, considering Max only got 10 for deliberately crashing into Russell.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Disagree, the real issue is that:

Depending on their mood at the time and how close they want to keep the championship.

When you look at the telemetry the driver who did it differently on that lap was Max, who floored it and took over a second to react, making it look far worse than it was. Never would have been a penalty otherwise.

5s would have been fine and actually would have spiced up the end of the race. You get 10s for literally punting other drivers off the track!

 

[UTmaniac]

I do think that they should introduce a rule saying everyone must pit at the end of their current lap for wet tyres when a safety car period is initiated when it's raining, to help clear the standing water before they commence racing again. It's then up to drivers/teams to decide when to replace those full wet tyres once the safety car period has ended.

Perhaps even for VSC too.

 

[wildman]

Depending on their mood at the time and how close they want to keep the championship.

When you look at the telemetry the driver who did it differently on that lap was Max, who floored it and took over a second to react, making it look far worse than it was. Never would have been a penalty otherwise.

5s would have been fine and actually would have spiced up the end of the race. You get 10s for literally punting other drivers off the track!

its piastri's telemetary that nailed him not Max's. He declerated from well over 100MPH to just over 30MPH on a soaking wet track to which the stewards when they analysed the telemetary decided was eratic and thus penalised him acordingly. If he went from 130 to say 60/70 we wouldn't be having this conversation and he still would have won the race most likely.

 

[sidimmu]

How many times do people need to write "100mph to 30mph means hes wrong" without taking any additional context into account?

If he went from 130 to say 60/70 we wouldn't be having this conversation and he still would have won the race most likely.

Is that a guarantee? If so, how?

FIA have not confirmed what their tolerances is, so would love to know how you do?

 

[mjt]

Best race of the season for sure. Hopefully Spa next will also liven things up.
Shame Ham couldn't get onto the podium with that ****box of a Ferrari, but happy for Hulk!
Haven't read through the thread since the end of the race, but is it just me or did the McLaren boys ignore him on the podium? Bit of a shame, but my accountant has more charm than than Piastro & Norris...

 

[sidimmu]

did the McLaren boys ignore him on the podium?

Both ignored Hulk on the podium which is quite ****** from all parties involved.

Compare that to how Gasly was received on his first victory or Norris getting his first podium and very different actions from other drivers.

The fact you had Max, Lewis, Charles and others ready to see Nico once he got out his car showed us all who really cares for him and follow the sport.

 

[Stumble Bum]

I still can't believe people are trying to argue the penalty. It's a penalty for erratic driving under a safety car all day long. It could easily have caused an accident. Several drivers had to take evasive action due to the rapid braking with very limited visibility. There was zero reason to do what he did. You guys need to get over it and take your blinkers off, just because you didn't like the outcome. I wonder how defensive you lot would be if it were a certain other driver getting a 10-second penalty for this?