British Grand Prix 2016, Silverstone - Race 10/21

So if his gearbox was indeed broken will he have to take a penalty next race? Or is it not actually broken? Jeez, this stuff is so complicated sometimes and it really doesn't need to be.
 
muon said:
Well they told him that one of the settings was wrong and it wasn't anything he did. But they couldn't tell him how to fix it.

My interpretation here is that they could tell Rosberg the 7th gear is broken.

But he was stupid enough to ask what he should do about that, and they were stupid enough to tell him.
Click to expand...
Thanks, so basically they said no to Lewis and yes to Rosberg, that's what I thought.
 
Glaucus said:
with that punishment might as well throw the rule out, everyone with issues is now going to give advice its worth 10 seconds.
Click to expand...

So is your objection that the punishment should be worse? What determines a fair punishment?

It was originally introduced to stop drivers getting coached and optimising lap times. I can't see how any amount of coaching can advantage a driver by 10 seconds (beyond where there is a genuine issue, for something the rule wasn't introduced).

Psi Jay said:
Thanks, so basically they said no to Lewis and yes to Rosberg, that's what I thought.
Click to expand...

The difference is that Hamilton's issue isn't something would damage the car. They probably felt they could justify it in Rosberg's case.
 
Last edited:
At least it had some kind of impact, but if 10 seconds is going to the cost of coaching your driver on the radio, it'll be interesting to see how much it gets abused going forward.
 
Skeeter said:
This isn't driver coaching. Its instructions on settings to avoid retirement's or mechanical issues.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This isn't why the rule was introduced.

Matteh said:
At least it had some kind of impact, but if 10 seconds is going to the cost of coaching your driver on the radio, it'll be interesting to see how much it gets abused going forward.
Click to expand...

Coaching isn't going to gain you 10 seconds. You would have to be a crap driver to begin with.
 
Last edited:
I expect to see at least one driver asking for help while stating that it will cost him more than 10 seconds if they don't. They already directly make comments towards Charlie on the radio.
 
In the case of Lewis and Kimi in Baku, I wonder what difference it would have made to their races if the teams had been immediately able to give them solutions to their issues - would it have been worth it to take a 10 second hit?

I guess the other issue is, because there is no fixed penalty for this, who is to say that the next time it happens the punishment is consistent? There is nothing to stop the stewards at that race handing out something completely different is there?
 
muon said:
So is your objection that the punishment should be worse? What determines a fair punishment?

It was originally introduced to stop drivers getting coached and optimising lap times. I can't see how any amount of coaching can advantage a driver by 10 seconds (beyond where there is a genuine issue, for something the rule wasn't introduced)..
Click to expand...

it would likely have been a DNF or lsing 3 seconds a lap till the end of the race, therefore this punihsment makes it well worth breaking the rule for any team with such issues.

and no the rules are very clear, it wasnt implamented just to stop coaching, if that was the case, it wouldnt be infront of the stewards anyway. the rule includes far more than coaching. however wrong everyone thinks the rule is, it exists.
 
Glaucus said:
it would likely have been a DNF or lsing 3 seconds a lap till the end of the race, therefore this punihsment makes it well worth breaking the rule for any team with such issues.

and no the rules are very clear, it wasnt implamented just to stop coaching, if that was the case, it wouldnt be infront of the stewards anyway. the rule includes far more than coaching. however wrong everyone thinks the rule is, it exists.
Click to expand...

It is a blanket rule only because they were afraid that teams would simply code language or use reliability as an excuse to circumvent coaching rules. E.g. Failing to manage tyres, brakes properly, taking a certain line.

Was that really the case for either Hamilton or Rosberg? No I don't think so. Some common sense needs to apply. A 10 second penalty stops coaching whilst allowing a team to take action where a reliability comes up.

I of course would prefer no penalty for reliability issues, but the rules would need to change for that.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
So your happy this rule is enforced because it exists, but don't care that the track limits rule isn't?

Your about as consistent as a...err...hmm...
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

so how many drive throughs did you want today?

this is motorsport, it has never been an issue in any series. as 99% of time you don't gain an advantage.

where you do gain an advantage its poor track design which is getting worse due to safety concerns.

muon said:
It is a blanket rule only because they were afraid that teams would simply code language or use reliability as an excuse to circumvent coaching rules. E.g. Failing to manage tyres, brakes properly, taking a certain line.

Was that really the case for either Hamilton or Rosberg? No I don't think so. Some common sense needs to apply. A 10 second penalty stops coaching whilst allowing a team to take action where a reliability comes up.

I of course would prefer no penalty for reliability issues, but the rules would need to change for that.
Click to expand...
no its not, the other year when first brought in, it was far less strict. there's a huge list what can and cant be said. this has been banned specifically. nothing to do with codes or anything else. for some reason they want to ban this.
 
I'd love it if the appeal happens and the FIA increase the penalty to 25 seconds, moving Rosberg to 4th.

I think 10 seconds was far too lenient, just like the penalty dished out at Austria.

Lewis may look right back in it in terms of championship points right now, but there are strong odds he is going to get several grid penalties for changing multiple engine parts in the second half of the season, in theory gifting Rosberg several wins and at least 7 points.
 
Apparently the sporting regs don't actually permit an appeal under the relevant article that they have charged Mercedes with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom