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

Rate the G race out of ten

  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
sidimmu said:
How many times do people need to write "100mph to 30mph means hes wrong" without taking any additional context into account?
Click to expand...
@Stumble Bum ??

Stumble Bum said:
I wonder how defensive you lot would be if it were a certain other driver getting a 10-second penalty for this?
Click to expand...
If a certain driver that rhymes with Tax got a 10s penalty for this, there would be users arguing for full DSQ instead as their level of being biased is way above others.

But we are here again...
sidimmu said:
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.
Click to expand...

Stumble Bum said:
You guys need to get over it and take your blinkers off,
Click to expand...
Or to some others, you need to take your blinkers off.
 
Last edited:
The stewards were already looking into the same thing he did a few laps earlier during the previous safety car ending period, so they need to let it go. THE RACE has a decent analysis of it..
 
Look, at the end of the day, in rain, under safety car, braking so hard in under 2 seconds you lose 100mph + off your speed, is hard braking - even by F1 standards, I'm guessing a lot of you have not seen these cars braking, they are insane on the brakes - he over braked, there is no 'wiggle' room here - its double at least our other reference point on this topic.

Why are so many going out of their way to explain it away? Even Piastri supporters say he deserved something - 10s was fair - max got 10 for hitting Russell AND points on his license.
 
Last edited:
Combat squirrel said:
Even Piastri supporters say he deserved something
Click to expand...
Deserved something, no one has said 10s is fair considering what else you can get 10s for.
Dont forget the users in here calling for a race ban for Max for his issue with George, when all he got was a 10s penalty and points yes, but thats a very very different incident that has actually resulted in a collision.

Inconsistencies with approach and stewards. Does not help when the FIA do not set a hard boundary.

Combat squirrel said:
I'm guessing a lot of you have not seen these cars braking
Click to expand...
Was sat at the end of the second straight and hairpin at Abu Dhabi in December just gone.

Combat squirrel said:
no 'wiggle' room here
Click to expand...
FIA rules state differently though, comes down to steward decision as there is no reference points for what is hard braking or erratic braking. Its left to the stewards to decide as they please.
 
My 2p for what it is worth is that the Piastri "brake-gate" moment was a little naughty.

I'm not sure if he intentionally meant to brake so hard and slow down so much but my understanding of the rules is you can't be erratic. He sped up and then braked so hard he almost stopped.

I like Piastri and I think he has a shot at the WDC, but it was a silly move.

I'm personally surprised he got away so lightly.

He is lucky Max didn't rear end him and end both their races, and he is lucky he only got a 10s penalty (again in my view).

I think the similar Russell incident was marginal. But the Piastri incident was a slam dunk and went too far. Whether it was intentional or not, the stewards need to warn off such behaviour for future.as next time it could end up in an accident.
 
The stewards were very clear on what is hard or erratic braking:

"The Stewards reviewed positioning/marshalling system data, video, telemetry, teamradio and in-car video evidence.When the clerk of the course had declared that the safety car was coming in that lap and the lights were extinguished, Car 81 suddenly braked hard (59.2 psi of brakepressure) and reduced speed in the middle of the straight between T14 and T15, from218 kph to 52 kph, resulting in Car 1 having to take evasive action to avoid a collision.This momentarily resulted in Car 1 unavoidably overtaking Car 81, a position which he gave back immediately.Article 55.15 of the FIA Sporting Regulations required Car 81 to proceed at a pacewhich involved no erratic braking nor any other manoeuvre which is likely to endanger other drivers from the point at which the lights on the safety car are turned off.What Car 81 did was clearly a breach of that article. In accordance with the penaltyguidelines, we imposed a 10 second time penalty to Car 81."

I don't think anyone here can make a decision based upon what they saw from their armchair.
 
Last edited:
Just checked the calendar, unusual three weeks break and then Spa a month earlier than usual!
 
KiNgPiN83 said:
I mean, at worst this event has now solidified the rules and there will be no ambiguity going forward? Right guys? Right?!?...
Click to expand...
Since the FIA's stance on it is that they do not set a hard boundary on this and its the stewards decision each weekend.
I suspect consistency is not going to be seen any time soon.
I respect the optimism though!
 
Last edited:
KiNgPiN83 said:
I mean, at worst this event has now solidified the rules and there will be no ambiguity going forward? Right guys? Right?!?...
Click to expand...

Max will full on brake check someone next race and cause a collision, and the driver that goes into the back of him will get a race ban.
 
Perhaps those who disagree with the stewards decisions should take up watching football where at least they can shout at the referee.
Unfortunately some will always be in disagreement with any decision based upon their own favouritism, or obvious dislike of a driver.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom