1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

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

Discussion in 'Motorsport' started by Shimmy, Jun 5, 2019.

?

Rate the 2019 Canadian Grand Prix out of ten

  1. 1

    10.4%
  2. 2

    4.2%
  3. 3

    4.2%
  4. 4

    7.3%
  5. 5

    12.5%
  6. 6

    27.1%
  7. 7

    19.8%
  8. 8

    11.5%
  9. 9

    1.0%
  10. 10

    2.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Steampunk

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 1, 2013

    Posts: 6,119

    It comes down to that first rule of "race on the track". A driver that cuts off the circuit either deliberately or due to a failure of their skill or car should not benefit (or fail to lose a benefit). In the old days there would have been a gravel trap that would have penalised the driver. They were removed for safety reasons, and to allow a driver to continue in the race despite making a mistake.

    We shouldn't be in a position where a driver can leave the track, cut a corner, and still keep a place they would otherwise lose if they'd followed the track as everyone else has to. That's actually against racing fairly, and removes the penalty that keeps drivers on the track. Those penalties were only introduced when gravel traps were removed, and I'm sure that drivers don't want gravel traps coming back instead.
     
  2. SDK^

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 18,180

    Location: Midlands

    Fair enough if they had been fighting for position before the corner, but Hamilton was 1+ seconds behind, so Vettel gained no advantage, he lost time which was the penalty for running off.

    Unless your view is that; when a driver goes off track they need to let any drivers behind who are within 5 Secs(?) go by?
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
  3. mmj_uk

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 26, 2003

    Posts: 22,732

    Another byproduct of the ultra safety is that drivers are not afraid to be 100% on the limit all of the time knowing that any mistake or loss of traction will mean they just run wide and rejoin with hardly any time lost, rather than retire like the old days. So you've got all drivers on the limit all of the time which I'm sure hinders overtaking/racing. Back in the day drivers would have had their sights on just not losing the car and finishing the race, so there would have been periods during a race where individual drivers would have felt that they couldn't risk pushing as much as they wanted to and would be overtaken by drivers who in that moment were comfortable being on the limit.

    TLDR F1 has been dumbed down too much, it's basically the extreme opposite of Isle of Man TT at this point where the drivers get paid massive amounts to be 99% safe.
     
  4. mmj_uk

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 26, 2003

    Posts: 22,732

    He forced Hamilton to brake who otherwise would have flown past him it was simple as that really, Hamilton would have been past if he hadn't been blocked because he was carrying much more speed.
     
  5. Steampunk

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 1, 2013

    Posts: 6,119

    Hamilton would have had that place on momentum and the corner exit speed except he braked to avoid the big accident. What did Vettel do to avoid the accident he would have caused? As per the stewards investigation, Vetel checked where Hamilton was, then pushed him out towards the wall to stay in front, instead of staying to the left in an attempt to rejoin safely. If there had been a wall or gravel trap on that corner that Vetel failed to make, then he would have been out of the race or much further back.
     
  6. CaptainRAVE

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Nov 21, 2004

    Posts: 30,605

  7. justbeats

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 3,293

    Location: Shropshire

  8. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,238

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    I cannot see why Ferrari continue to indulge Vettel in such a way. There's no chance that Lauda or Wolff would have allowed things to go this far.
     
  9. CaptainRAVE

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Nov 21, 2004

    Posts: 30,605

    It just makes his behaviour and consequently his driving worse. They would have been better off drawing a line under it and attacking this weekend. As it is it stinks of desperation from the lot of them and deflection from the real issues.
     
  10. kitfit1

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 24, 2003

    Posts: 3,184

    Location: Stourport-On-Severn

    This is being lodged under "The Right to Review" rule. Unless Ferrari and Vettel come up with some new evidence that wasn't available to the stewards at the time and is actually relevant to the incident, it will be thrown out anyway.
    Having watched the incident loads of times now myself, the stewards had no option but to do what they did. When you look at the in car footage from Vettel's car, as he comes back on track he straightens the steering wheel, turns his head to the right looking in the mirror and then slowly turns the steering wheel to the right. At that point he is then running Hamilton into the barrier. That's why he got the penalty, he did it deliberately and the footage is proof of that. It isn't the first time he's done it either and i doubt it'll be the last.
     
  11. justbeats

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 3,293

    Location: Shropshire

    I don't know either. Having a contract regards regards Leclerc (if there is one) is one thing, but going along with and basically supporting his tantrums is another.

    This is the fundamental problem with modern day Ferrari, they seem incapable of using their mistakes as lessons.

    I don't think the result can be changed anyway so this is all pointless. It's been a while since I consulted the rules but a penalty given during a race can't be overturned, or something like that, as the stewards decision is final.

    Edit: 14.2 of the sporting conduct, "A review has no effect on the execution of the original decision of the stewards when they have given a ruling."

    The only thing they can gain is face, for want of a better term.
     
  12. ajf

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 30, 2006

    Posts: 2,826

    Location: Worcestershire, UK

    Yeah, I’ve been wondering why they are persisting in taking this so far, given that they can’t, or at least shouldn’t (we are talking Ferrari) get it overturned.
    I guess maybe to get a ‘clarification’ of the rules for the future?
     
  13. Flibster

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 30,900

    Ferrari have lost their bid to have the Canadian penalty reviewed.

    [​IMG]

    So their 'overwhelming new evidence' consisted of:
    Karun Chandhok on the sky pad...

    Wow.... :rolleyes:
     
  14. Spunkey

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 13,779

    Location: The land of milk & beans

    Yeah that made me lol. You know you've got a weak case if you're resorting to pundits.
     
  15. Flibster

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 30,900

    But... But but but... it was overwhelming new evidence...

    We know that, Ferrari said so...

    :D :D
     
  16. Steampunk

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 1, 2013

    Posts: 6,119

    Ferrari proving again that their judgement is questionable. They should have drawn a line under it and moved on, instead they dragged the issue to this race, and again look clueless by bringing a silly review request, with laughable "new evidence", and still getting denied. All they've done is remind us how they screwed up at the last race, and how weak Vettel is. Now he's got the whole team going "wah, wah, it's not fair". Again.
     
  17. CaptainRAVE

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Nov 21, 2004

    Posts: 30,605

    Haha. Hahahaha. What an absolute bunch of jokers.
     
  18. 4K8KW10

    Soldato

    Joined: Sep 2, 2017

    Posts: 5,822

    The new regulations made F1 very unpleasant to watch. They can't punish the drivers who are already punished by the poor luck and are close to hitting the walls.
    It makes zero sense. Imagine a driver who hits another and that second driver loses control, goes through the grass and then enters the track again and hits a third driver.
    The stewards are so stupid that they will punish the second one even though he had zero control over the situation and it wasn't intentional.
    I think it was a normal racing incident which should have been dismissed by the stewards.


    Letter of the law
    Spirit of the law
    Spirit of the competition

     
  19. jonneymendoza

    Capodecina

    Joined: Apr 7, 2008

    Posts: 14,538

    It was proven that he did deliberately tried to stop Hamilton from overtaking....
     
  20. 4K8KW10

    Soldato

    Joined: Sep 2, 2017

    Posts: 5,822

    Even if true, which is unproven because you can't rely any steward anymore, I will ask you - isn't this the goal in racing for all the drivers? To prevent the driver behind from overtaking?!@
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.