Poll: Canadian Grand Prix 2019, Montréal - Race 7/21

Rate the 2019 Canadian Grand Prix out of ten

  • Total voters
    96
Status
Not open for further replies.
lucarocks92 said:
Yeah ultimately he is to blame for making the error, after last season I wanted to see him sacked because he's not world champion material at Ferrari.

I still think it was a very harsh punishment this time around and as much as I don't like him I thought it was the wrong decision in my opinion
Click to expand...

I don't like it either. Its sets a precedent of over regulation of what little on track racing remains. It isn't like it even matters for the championship battle since those two aren't battling in reality. Should have just left it alone. It frustrates me more that time and time again a car can catch another car, then just gets stuck in the turbulent air.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Says who? Link??
Click to expand...

Tom Kristensen mentioned it a few years ago when interviewed, although a bit of quick googling just now suggests that they do now get some basic telemetry fed through to them in real time but they still rely mostly on video to make decisions in order to keep things quick during the race. You can't comprehensively analyse telemetry data mid race, its too time consuming... hence why its utilised mostly for post race decisions.
 
neckbeardthethird said:
Tom Kristensen mentioned it a few years ago when interviewed, although a bit of quick googling just now suggests that they do now get some basic telemetry fed through to them in real time but they still rely mostly on video to make decisions in order to keep things quick during the race. You can't comprehensively analyse telemetry data mid race, its too time consuming... hence why its utilised mostly for post race decisions.
Click to expand...
Well they used it now. the timed pen took a while for the stewards to give
 
jonneymendoza said:
Well they used it now. the timed pen took a while for the stewards to give
Click to expand...

Reckon that was more to do with them trying to decide whether it was worth alienating its fanbase or not, seems it was :p

By the rules it was a pretty obvious penalty regardless of telemetry, you don't need telemetry to see that it was a dangerous re-entry, by definition it was as Hamilton had to get on the brakes whilst on the racing line... questions was if it was intentional or not but im note even sure if intent is a factor when applying a penalty like this ? surely unsafe re-entry is unsafe regardless of intent ?

It's just harsh because from what I've seen the real penalty here is 'forcing another driver off track' because without that the re-entry onto the track wouldn't have been classed as dangerous, and 'forcing another driver off track' is something which is applied very inconsistently in this sport so I can understand Vettels annoyance.

Having said all that if he doesn't screw up then he doesn't get a penalty...
 
Apone70 said:
He left the track and caused Hamilton to brake when he rejoined, its clear cut.
Click to expand...

Rossi~ said:
I'm staying relatively neutral on the subject, as I don't have the data that the teams and stewards have.

If Vettel's telemetry data shows that he lifted sufficiently and steered accordingly in order to keep it together safely, then it should be a racing incident and I think the 5 second penalty is harsh. However, if the telemetry data shows very much the opposite, then I'd be fine with the steward's response.
Click to expand...

drunkenmaster said:
Why do people say this. Incidents are deemed racing incidents when one party isn't found entirely or the majority to blame.... in what way wasn't the entire incident caused by Vettel? What part in it did Hamilton have?

When someone locks up, completely unintentionally, but hits someone or causes them to go off the track and lose a position, it's still your fault, it was your actions that caused it not the other guy. It literally can't be a 'racing incident', if Vettel is completely to blame for the incident when Hamilton did nothing even close to wrong.
Click to expand...


Ricciardo about Vettels penalty:

"If he pulls a little further to the left, he'll spin. When he brakes on the grass, he'll spin too. There was not much room for Lewis but still enough.I had an identical situation with Lewis in 2016 Monte Carlo. He had to go through the emergency exit and almost pushed me into the wall on his return. With me it was tighter than now with him. He didn't get a penalty. That was a good thing. It was a hard racing."
 
Flibster said:
Well the Italian press have decided who to blame.

Vettel.

Calling him weak and blaming him for cracking under pressure.
Click to expand...

Interesting given the Italian TV painted him as the victim yesterday. Even though Ferrari will be gutted by the stewards decision and feel its unfair someone high up is going to be thinking 'his mistake has cost us another win'... that's what Vettel needs to be worrying about.
 
neckbeardthethird said:
Having said all that if he doesn't screw up then he doesn't get a penalty...
Click to expand...

Something Hamilton learned a long time ago and Vettel still hasn't. If you want to stay out of trouble and finish a race, if you want to stay out of circumstances where you get penalised for breaking the rules, then don't make mistakes, don't be where the problems are, don't cause the errors that get you penalties.
 
jaybee said:
I'm really beginning to dislike this aggressive blocking and late moves to defend as well. A lot of drivers are getting away with moving twice. Did anyone see how late Ricciardo moved when Bottas had a jump on him down the back straight? Nearly caused a big accident. It's basically cheating when you move in that way as a method to cause your opponent to heavily lift to avoid collision.
Click to expand...

I only caught a glimpse of it whilst watching the highlights. It definitely seemed to me like an unfair move by RIC, but I didn't have a chance to rewatch and get a better look.

The Ferrari power unit is looking absolutely phenomenal. Amazing how they managed to gain about 0.4s-0.5s over the Mercedes in sector 3 in qualifying.

Anyone have any insight as to where are this extra power is coming from?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The_Abyss said:
Well, I've certainly been at the front of the queue to poke a bit of fun at Ferrari and Vettel's many **** ups over the past couple of years, but I think that Vettel has been very unfortunate to have this decision go against him. I'm sure there will be plenty saying 'look at the steering wheel' but for me he was just regaining control. He didn't maximise traction and keep the line towards the wall, he regained control and then straightened.

Vettel changing the position stand signs around was hilarious!

Sadly, it has all masked another pretty **** poor race. Two in a row for Montreal.
Click to expand...

That was my initial view last night. Never mind what it looks like, the telemetry says that Vettel made the deliberate move. I stand by my original view that Vettel was unfortunate to get the penalty. That's hard racing, and some examples of that have been provided in this thread since. The speed difference between the two was not enormous or dangerous.

Question: if Vettel was, as it now turns out, in control of his car would this not have been better argued as his one move to defend? We all know how this goes with the stewards - one team pushes the stewards to investigate, either directly or via the race director and then both the teams put their cases forward frantically during the race. If they need the driver, they decide after the race but clearly in this case the video and telemetry was a slam dunk.
 
Flibster said:
Well the Italian press have decided who to blame.

Vettel.

Calling him weak and blaming him for cracking under pressure.
Click to expand...

That's the root cause of the whole sequence. Vettel gets a corner wrong under pressure from Hamilton. If that didn't happen, there would be no unsafe rejoining the track, no blocking another car off the track. Vettel's lack of judgement continues by not giving back the place so he had a chance to retake it, then spending the whole time bitching on the radio instead of stretching the lead to above five seconds to nullify the penalty.

Once again Hamilton is there to capitalise on another driver's mistake. He wins championships because he makes the minimum of mistakes, and he's always, relentlessly there to grab the points.
 
neckbeardthethird said:
Interesting given the Italian TV painted him as the victim yesterday. Even though Ferrari will be gutted by the stewards decision and feel its unfair someone high up is going to be thinking 'his mistake has cost us another win'... that's what Vettel needs to be worrying about.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what Vettel is/was worried about! Why did you think he was going on with his puerile shenanigans, stopping way down the paddock, having to be told to go to the podium, moving the 1st place marker, saying how the 'world is not right' and how he was robbed etc. This is all to deflect from the simple fact that this all happened because of his mistake and actually the fault squarely lies on his shoulders for giving the stewards a decision (which was correct) to make in the first place.
 
Absolutely ridiculous penalty. Car was unbalanced driving over 100mph at speed over a kerb, on grass and then for good measure, another kerb on re-entry. Critically unbalanced rear end, huge amount of oversteer, countered with steering lock to the right, car caught and straightened out at the same time Hamilton saw an opportunity to get past but ultimately the door was then closed.

Never a penalty.

These agree...

62167456_10211241647595510_4486051292942172160_n.jpg
 
Only just managed to catch up watching the race today. Just wow!

Vettel really is hilarious though, loved him moving the position sign. I don't think he particularly spat his dummy out, he just reacted as expected, it was an unfair decision.

Did anyone else see RB manage a 1.8s pit stop? It didn't seem to be mentioned by the C4 commentators. Incredible work if correct!
 
SpartaK said:
Ricciardo about Vettels penalty:

"If he pulls a little further to the left, he'll spin. When he brakes on the grass, he'll spin too. There was not much room for Lewis but still enough.I had an identical situation with Lewis in 2016 Monte Carlo. He had to go through the emergency exit and almost pushed me into the wall on his return. With me it was tighter than now with him. He didn't get a penalty. That was a good thing. It was a hard racing."
Click to expand...

Yeah, Ricciardo is being a bit of a **** here. THe Monaco situation wasn't remotely close let alone identical. Hamilton left him well over a cars width in Monaco, you could have driver a current wider car through the gap he had let alone the old cars. Vettel ended up both absolutely pushing Hamilton off the track (the white line) but was drifting further and if Hamilton didn't back out would have been put in the wall.
 
SpartaK said:
Ricciardo about Vettels penalty:

"If he pulls a little further to the left, he'll spin. When he brakes on the grass, he'll spin too. There was not much room for Lewis but still enough.I had an identical situation with Lewis in 2016 Monte Carlo. He had to go through the emergency exit and almost pushed me into the wall on his return. With me it was tighter than now with him. He didn't get a penalty. That was a good thing. It was a hard racing."
Click to expand...
Ricciardo would say that though wouldn't he. Everyone has opinions on it but i agree with the stewards as do the majority of people.
 
smr said:
Absolutely ridiculous penalty. Car was unbalanced driving over 100mph at speed over a kerb, on grass and then for good measure, another kerb on re-entry. Critically unbalanced rear end, huge amount of oversteer, countered with steering lock to the right, car caught and straightened out at the same time Hamilton saw an opportunity to get past but ultimately the door was then closed.

Never a penalty.

These agree...

62167456_10211241647595510_4486051292942172160_n.jpg
Click to expand...
They should be complaining about the rule then, not the application of it.

Rule broken > consequence. Simple.

No doubt people will blindingly stand by their views to save face but it’s clear as day to anyone who can view the incident without emotion that a rule was broken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom