The F1 thread

Running around and stuff.
User avatar
DjchunKfunK
Bar Staff
Posts: 878
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 9:02 am

Re: The F1 thread

Post by DjchunKfunK » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:04 am

I think Jolyon spells it out pretty well in the first section of this article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/48583803

User avatar
Wrathbone
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:08 am

Re: The F1 thread

Post by Wrathbone » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:14 am

Yeah... I disagree with him. :lol:

User avatar
Drarok
Posts: 219
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:12 pm

Re: The F1 thread

Post by Drarok » Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:22 am

Wrathbone wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:19 am
If Vettel had gone round the corner normally, I think the odds of Hamilton getting the overtake at that point are highly dubious. The fact that Hamilton saw an opportunity to overtake suggests to me that Vettel lost time rather than gained time.
Right. Vettel lost time, Hamilton had the opportunity to overtake, and if not for Vettel veering over to the right would have passed. Vettel left the track, and should have lost position, but didn't. A penalty was applied which corrected that.

User avatar
Wrathbone
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:08 am

Re: The F1 thread

Post by Wrathbone » Mon Jun 17, 2019 12:03 pm

A penalty was applied which over-corrected something which Vettel did not have full control over. I maintain the rule, if applied by the spirit rather than the letter, does not apply here. But perhaps the bigger problem is that the minimum penalty the stewards could have applied was the 5 seconds he got, which is a huge amount of time in many circumstances. If they'd had the option to simply make Vettel give up the position, it would have allowed him the chance to re-take it and not been overkill.

Whatever way I look at it, it was a shitshow. F1 can and should do better.

User avatar
Drarok
Posts: 219
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2018 10:12 pm

Re: The F1 thread

Post by Drarok » Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:08 pm

"Vettel did not have full control over"

So, a dangerous re-joining of the track, then? 😬

User avatar
Wrathbone
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:08 am

Re: The F1 thread

Post by Wrathbone » Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:19 pm

Yes, but the purpose of the rule is to prevent intentional dangerous rejoining of the track. Imagine, for example, that Vettel had been sent across that corner as a result of someone else driving into him - should he still be penalised then? By your logic it was a dangerous re-joining of the track so he should be. Vettel's mistake was his fault, but this specific rule shouldn't apply here because he did not have full control in how the car re-joined the track. I'd go as far as arguing that even by the letter of the rule, "re-joining" implies an active decision to drive onto the track as opposed to being forced onto the track accidentally as a result of an incident. Intent is everything in this.

Post Reply