Poll: Official 2025 Italian Grand Prix Race Thread - Autodromo Nazionale di Monza - Race 16/24

Race score

  • Total voters
    69
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
jaybee said:
A mistake? The wheel gun didn't work. It happens.
The priority was the team getting 2/3 which they still had so didn't have to interfere with drivers champ.
Click to expand...

There would have been a lot of fallout from the drivers had they not intervened
 
Mr Jack said:
They say that the driver on the inside being overtaken needs to leave space for the other driver not that they need to jam the anchors so that the overtaking driver can sweep to the inside as if they aren't there. Just a terrible decision from the Stewards and yet another bit of shoddy driving from Sainz.
Click to expand...

If it has been established from points A and B below, that an overtaking driver has priority, it is the responsibility of the defending driver to avoid a collision or forcing off the overtaking driver.
Click to expand...

In this case, point B established the car overtaking had priority. Like it or not, it's a very simple and clear statement, so as per the guidelines, it was Bearmans responsibility to make sure they didn't crash, they did, he gets the penalty.

This is what happens when you try to write such prescriptive rules, they don't make sense in every circumstance they end up being applied to.
 
So next race - Lando is leading - gets a puncture, comes out behind Oscar .... Are the team going to tell Oscar to give the place back as it's just "bad luck" for Lando?

No chance.

Pitstops are part of the race - mistakes are made - that's racing. To suggest that Lando "deserved" to get the place back seems massively lopsided in a team sport.

The points were safe in 2nd/3rd.
 
Kenai said:
In this case, point B established the car overtaking had priority. Like it or not, it's a very simple and clear statement, so as per the guidelines, it was Bearmans responsibility to make sure they didn't crash, they did, he gets the penalty.

This is what happens when you try to write such prescriptive rules, they don't make sense in every circumstance they end up being applied to.
Click to expand...
I just hope that Williams and Sainz give up their review of last week’s incident between Lawson and themselves. Because going by this, Sainz 100% deserved his penalty and his points. Something tells me they won’t. ;)
 
imtoooldforthis said:
The worst thing about that strategy from McLaren was that they weren't even pressured into it, they could have just cruised to the same result on the Hards, but instead they actively chose to make things way more sweaty for themselves than things needed to be... all in the hope that Lando would somehow pull back a 18 second gap in 6 laps on the soft lololol.
Click to expand...

If Sainz's collision with Bearman had worked out just a tiny bit differently then their strategy would have given McLaren the win. By going long they put themselves in a position to turn a safety car into a win. It didn't happen, but it also cost them nothing. They weren't catching Max on hards either.

andy_mk3 said:
Rookie of the year imho.
Click to expand...

He's having a great season but Bortoleto is the more impressive rookie. Hadjar has been better than the rookie in the other seat, whereas Bortoleto has equalled one of the most experienced drivers on the grid, and out-qualified a driver with a reputation for being a Saturday specialist in the process. Both have shown great maturity for their age, and I'm not knocking Hadjar here, but it's a lot easier to look good when all you've got to do is beat a demoralised Liam Lawson.
 
booyaka said:
So next race - Lando is leading - gets a puncture, comes out behind Oscar .... Are the team going to tell Oscar to give the place back as it's just "bad luck" for Lando?

The points were safe in 2nd/3rd.
Click to expand...

Not the same thing as lando was told to pit 2nd to help Oscar he could have rejected it , if he pitted first which he should have and it happened that's different
 
Last edited:
Kenai said:
In this case, point B established the car overtaking had priority. Like it or not, it's a very simple and clear statement, so as per the guidelines, it was Bearmans responsibility to make sure they didn't crash, they did, he gets the penalty.
Click to expand...

What are point A and B? Where are you quoting from?
 
jaybee said:
The situation was simply bad luck. A wheel gun can malfunction at anytime. Oscar can not be penalised for that it's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Instead of Lando taking his pit preference and getting the 'undercut', he gave that up to allow Oscar to have the undercut instead, this made the difference to Lando coming out behind, it was also made very clear before Lando agreed to it that there would be NO undercut. Why do you keep ignoring that?
 
Stumble Bum said:
Instead of Lando taking his pit preference and getting the 'undercut', he gave that up to allow Oscar to have the undercut instead, this made the difference to Lando coming out behind, it was also made very clear before Lando agreed to it that there would be NO undercut. Why do you keep ignoring that?
Click to expand...
Because it's irrelevant as I said.
 
Stumble Bum said:
You saying it's irrelevant does not make it irrelevant. It is a fact of the situation.
Click to expand...
But you can apply this to anything. Last week you could say Piastri should have retired after Lando's DNF to make it "fair". When is F1 fair? It's out of control sometimes. Championships are won and lost on luck. Abhu Dhabi 21? Lewis's engine failure against Nico. Senna and Prost crashing etc.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom