Malaysian Grand Prix 2014, Kuala Lumpur - Race 2/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Caporegime
It's an entirely reasonable penalty. The fact is that any in-race penalty is pretty much a slap on the wrist - the driver's race is likely ruined by the wheel problem and, in any case, a 10s stop-and-go doesn't make difference if you're outside the points anyway. It's more symbolic than anything else.
A 10 place grid penalty has real sting and is the kind of punishment this kind of serious infraction deserves.
That is the penalty. It's in the rules that an unsafe release gives you a 10 second stop and a 10 place grid penalty in the next race. It can't be clearer than that.
I presume because if you're in a poor (or lucky) position, a ten second penalty might not actually affect your race that much. The punishment would not actually penalise breaking the rule. Losing ten places off your start in the next race does.
For something that shouldn't happen and can be hugely dangerous (a loose wheel can carry massive energy), all the teams agreed to this rule and the associated punishment. It was made that way because too many teams are still failing to do safe releases, so the punishment is deliberately harsh.
If teams only do safe releases (as they should) then it won't be a problem for them.
I'm actually surprised RBR only got a warning for having people without the correct safety gear working on Ricciardo's retrieved car. Someone gets knocked down in a helmet, they just bump their heads and carry on. Without a helmet, it's a hospital visit and potentially fatal.
Last edited:
So go with a grid drop and don't bother with the stop go.
I don't care what the actual punishment is, that's not what I have an issue with so I don't know why you're explaining to me how a stop go penalty doesn't work?
It just needs to be one singular punishment, having in race and post race punishments for the same incident is stupid. One or the other, not both. It's completely pointless.
I don't care what the actual punishment is, that's not what I have an issue with so I don't know why you're explaining to me how a stop go penalty doesn't work?
It just needs to be one singular punishment, having in race and post race punishments for the same incident is stupid. One or the other, not both. It's completely pointless.
So if RBR (with all their wheels done up correctly) does an unsafe release into the path of another car, and a car coming down the pitlane crashes into the wall to avoid it, the RBR car should be allowed to carry on with no penalties, to win that race, and then suffer only the grid positions penalty the next race?
So instead of having a set, known punishment, you want the stewards to start making judgements about what's fair or proportionate in different circumstances? Then we go back to the times of inconsistent and differing punishments at different races.
Last edited:
Soldato
Who else sent their car out with a wheel loose?
In the past a mechanic was injured by a loose wheel. I think the punishment is tough but Red Bull were the only ones who I saw do this today so it isn't them being signaled out unfairly.
With the new cars it is going to take a lot of races before we see the reliability and clockwork pitstops of last season. Mid year we will all be back too normal.
If the 'offense' can have such a wildly varying potential impact from 'virtually nothing' to 'other cars crash and out the race' then yes the penalty absolutely should be variable.
This shouldn't necessarily mean that we have to have complete nonsense as a result, merely a sensible scale of reactions based on severity of the incident.
I just don't see the need for double penalties like that, trying to play 'catch all' resulting in a punishment that's going to affect different teams differently anyway.
You either have in race penalties and accept that it's confined to within the race and set appropriately (resulting in a DQ if necessary for something as dangerous as causing an actual crash) or say it's always going to be retrospective.
You've misread that.
He meant 'Red Bull only got reprimanded' not 'Only Red Bull got a reprimand'.
This shouldn't necessarily mean that we have to have complete nonsense as a result, merely a sensible scale of reactions based on severity of the incident.
I just don't see the need for double penalties like that, trying to play 'catch all' resulting in a punishment that's going to affect different teams differently anyway.
You either have in race penalties and accept that it's confined to within the race and set appropriately (resulting in a DQ if necessary for something as dangerous as causing an actual crash) or say it's always going to be retrospective.
You've misread that.
He meant 'Red Bull only got reprimanded' not 'Only Red Bull got a reprimand'.
This is what they did in the past, and there were massive complaints about the variability of the punishments from race to race. The punishments are deliberately severe to stop teams trying it on in the hope the variability of the punishments makes it more attractive to risk breaking the rules.
I know you think it's too severe, but all the teams disagree with you as they all signed on for this penalty for an unsafe release.
I haven't said 'too severe' once, that's not my opinion at all. Are you actually reading my posts? I'd happily see more severe punishments, DQs, constructor points penalties (including negatives that translate to fine end of season if necessary for back markers)
I don't like the application of punishments in and out of the race. Either in, or out. That's all. Trying to capture both and still ending up with a punishment that will be of virtually no consequence to a back marker team is a complete fail in itself.
The teams all signed up for double points on the last race too but that doesn't mean it's a brilliant idea either does it?
The solution to massive variability of penalties is to define a more rigid scale, not just pick a set pair of punishments for every incident whether it's slightly dangerous or nearly kills someone.
I don't like the application of punishments in and out of the race. Either in, or out. That's all. Trying to capture both and still ending up with a punishment that will be of virtually no consequence to a back marker team is a complete fail in itself.
The teams all signed up for double points on the last race too but that doesn't mean it's a brilliant idea either does it?
The solution to massive variability of penalties is to define a more rigid scale, not just pick a set pair of punishments for every incident whether it's slightly dangerous or nearly kills someone.
Why? It's like points and a fine on a road licence. I don't see why you're trying to split the two parts of the same punishment. There is only one punishment, and it takes the form of 10 seconds penalty and 10 places at the next grid. It's what everyone gets for breaking the same rule. Okay, you don't like it, but that just a personal preference for no apparent reason. It's already been explained to you several times why the punishment takes this form.
It's happened previously where punishments have been given that don't actually create any sort of inconvenience for the team/driver. This format does so in a way that isn't open to claims of favouritism of inconsistency.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 412
At first i thought it was a racing incident, but i watched the start at to me it looked like there were 3 cars abreast with bianchi on the inside. He tried to crowd the others to the outside but ended up cutting his rear tire on the front wing. This send him barreling into maldonado, unlucky for him.
I seem to have a totally different opinion to most people and I'm loving these past two races though. Plenty to talk and read about the cutting edge technology involved, and there's been plenty of side by side wheel action. I also noticed today that i approved of DRS, used to be a devout opposer to it but it worked a charm in putting drivers into a position to attack rather than overtake and get a couple car lengths ahead before the braking phase. May still be "artificial" but it still requires some driver skill to complete the pass.
Oh, I understand what you're saying, it just makes no sense and puts us back where we all were last year - complaining about unjust and variable punishments given for the last few years of F1.
Last edited:
It needn't do though, that's purely an assumption you're putting in place to try and make this current idea seem better than it is. It doesn't have to be a polar opposite choice.
If you understand what i'm saying, i've no idea why you felt the need to try and explain how a stop go penalty doesn't work or claim that I think this punishment is 'too severe' when I said nothing of the sort.
There are plenty of ways to avoid inconsistency without this nonsense 'in race' and 'post race' combi-penalty that still will never affect everyone equally.
Do it with constructor point penalties (with financial implications for negative tallies, to catch back markers) for example - no favouritism, doesn't ruin race spectacles, doesn't **** up the drivers season, doesn't ruin other races before they even start. That's just one example off the back of 5 minutes thinking.
Once again, the drivers are part of the team and should be punished along with the rest of the team. They don't get let off just because they are the front man. Everyone knows the rules and punishments in advance, if they don't break the rules then they won't get punished.
I don't see it as ruining other races before they start. I see it as a deserved punishment that increases the consequences for doing something dangerous.
It also benefits other teams/drivers who didn't break the rules, and makes it very unattractive for teams to try it on just on the off chance they get a slight benefit.
Last edited:
What a boring race, watched it live instead of the highlights.. Wish I hadn't bothered, the same crap from last year but worse factoring in the awful noise and look of the cars.
Replace the dominant combo of Vettel & RB from last year to the so far dominant combo of Hamilton/Rosberg & Mercedes this year.
Moto GP is more interesting to watch than the shower of crap F1 currently offers.
Replace the dominant combo of Vettel & RB from last year to the so far dominant combo of Hamilton/Rosberg & Mercedes this year.
Moto GP is more interesting to watch than the shower of crap F1 currently offers.
OK, drivers points then (which cascade to constructor). That's solved that issue, the team and driver have suffered a severe penalty and the rest of the season's racing can carry on without interference.
Whilst you're never going to get a penalty that will completely fairly impact every team on the grid, not only does this needlessly try and span the penalty across two different races but it will virtually never impact Marussia or Caterham anyway for example, whilst would potentially destroy a title challengers season. Spectacular fail all round.
Whilst you're never going to get a penalty that will completely fairly impact every team on the grid, not only does this needlessly try and span the penalty across two different races but it will virtually never impact Marussia or Caterham anyway for example, whilst would potentially destroy a title challengers season. Spectacular fail all round.
Not as much as if they'd killed someone with a loose wheel, as they nearly did several times in the last few years. That's why it's such a harsh punishment. Any potential title challenger that loses out because of it doesn't deserve to win the title if they do it by breaking the rules.
Really, your objections seem to boil down to "I don't like it", but we're only at this point because previous methods just didn't work, and all the teams agreed to try something more draconian.
Caporegime
I haven't seen it since the race so maybe so.
I agree; it's looking good. The only problem is the dominance at the front.
It's not especially harsh though really is it? A stop go and grid drop isn't much beyond the grid drop you get from changing an engine or something. Not exactly a harsh reaction to potentially killing people.
You still don't seem to be understanding that my objection has absolutely nothing to do with feeling it is 'too harsh'. I can write it in capitals or different colours if it would help drill it home?
I don't think it is too harsh. If anything, it's probably not harsh enough. I do however, think it is a stupid application and does little to solve any of the perceived problems from before.
If you think it's all just because 'I don't like it' though, then we might as well leave it there because you're clearly not reading or not comprehending what i'm saying to you.