Motorsport Page 1173

  • brokenkey 10 Jun 2019 22:21:41 10,255 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 18 years ago
    Autosport story on the penalty is interesting

    https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/143996/vettel-steering-inputs-key-to-fia-penalty-decision
  • DangerousDave_87 10 Jun 2019 22:23:30 6,310 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    In regards to my comment about 2005, obviously 2001 , 2002 and 2004 were really poor seasons, but they were for other reasons.
  • up_the_ante 10 Jun 2019 23:42:34 1,096 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    brokenkey wrote:
    Autosport story on the penalty is interesting

    https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/143996/vettel-steering-inputs-key-to-fia-penalty-decision
    Damn that pesky data showing up. What happened to the good old days when you could make a mistake and then block your opponent so it didn't matter? ;-)
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 00:19:29 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    What telemetry does not show is how that car feels under Vettel in that moment that lead him to produce those inputs on the wheel. His tyres had just collected grass, marbles and whatever else and you could see his car was desperately trying to regain traction.

    Whatever you think of the penalty and the interpretation of the rules, the one thing that's almost certain is that his actions were in an effort to not bin his car into a wall and in all probability collect Hamilton's at the same time, not some pre-meditated decision made in a thousandth of a second to block another car.

    If they want to play the 'letter of the law but not the spirit of the law' card, fine. If they are penalising him for a deliberate effort to force another driver off the track, they are dead wrong.
  • up_the_ante 11 Jun 2019 01:23:16 1,096 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Only Sebastian knows how stable the car was and whether he could have safely stayed further left or not. I think any driver on the grid would have done the same and gone on the path of least resistance while the car settles down, with the added bonus of blocking any potential pass.
  • monkman76 11 Jun 2019 07:14:50 14,894 posts
    Seen 26 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Yeah, my issue with that Autosport article is that it assumes he only needed one correction for oversteer. But the car was still wobbling around as he rejoined the circuit so the second time he steered right could also have been to avoid spinning.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 08:08:41 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I think it's the reason so many drivers are in agreement on this one. They know exactly what it feels like coming back off the grass and they know there was very little else Seb could have done differently in that situation. It was literally either that exact set of decisions or a spin into the wall.

    Now if they want to call that an unfair advantage then that's one thing, but deducing from a bunch of 1's and 0's on a screen that he did what he did deliberately shows a real disconnect between the guys stewarding the race and what is actually happening on the track over the space of fractions of a second.
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 09:09:35 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    SolidSCB wrote:
    I think it's the reason so many drivers are in agreement on this one. They know exactly what it feels like coming back off the grass and they know there was very little else Seb could have done differently in that situation. It was literally either that exact set of decisions or a spin into the wall.
    How do you know all this with such certainty?

    Listen to his engine note as he leaves the grass at 23 seconds, his revs are already climbing and one thing's for sure, more revs does not equal more directional control in this type of situation. In the overhead at 29 seconds you see his car getting more out of shape, not less as a result of the throttle input.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqhX-ZzPhzo
  • damagedinc 11 Jun 2019 09:16:29 2,695 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Well nico rosberg and Mark priestly on their channels both agree it's a stone wall penalty with the current rules. Doesn't matter if vettel was in control or not.

    However whether long term the rules need to change to allow drivers to push to the limit without pens is another matter.

    Bottom line for me after the dust has settled. Yes it's crap we missed out on a battle In the closing stages, yes I wanted vettel to win because it would finely mix things up a bit. You can't ignore the fact vettel fucked up yet another encounter with Lewis. He simply can't cope with the pressure, if he hadn't messed up the corner he wouldn't have gone off and the whole thing wouldn't have happened.

    Put simply vettel is at fault and only has himself to blame
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 09:25:24 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    gang_of_bitches wrote:
    SolidSCB wrote:
    I think it's the reason so many drivers are in agreement on this one. They know exactly what it feels like coming back off the grass and they know there was very little else Seb could have done differently in that situation. It was literally either that exact set of decisions or a spin into the wall.
    How do you know all this with such certainty?

    Listen to his engine note as he leaves the grass at 23 seconds, his revs are already climbing and one thing's for sure, more revs does not equal more directional control in this type of situation. In the overhead at 29 seconds you see his car getting more out of shape, not less as a result of the throttle input.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqhX-ZzPhzo
    How do you know the opposite?

    Again, this is one of the very few controversial incidents where the vast majority of drivers are landing on one side of the fence, and that's purely because they can identify how a car would feel under that specific set of circumstances and recognise the inputs he made. His primary focus was not losing the back end of the car on tyres that had collected all sorts of shit. Yes, it was his mistake but that's a separate issue. Whether it was a penalty or not is also a separate issue.
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 09:28:44 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    I don't know the opposite but I've at least presented an argument for my point of view which you've not addressed or presented an alternative interpretation of.
  • monkman76 11 Jun 2019 09:39:31 14,894 posts
    Seen 26 seconds ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    On the balance of probability I think that Vettel was just trying to control the car rather than impede Hamilton unfairly. However, with the rules as they currently are, the penalty was at worst a little harsh but not unreasonable, and certainly not meriting the post-race pantomime. It strikes me that if the roles had been reversed and Hamilton had behaved like Seb did after the race, many of the denizens of this thread would be crucifying him for it.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 09:53:52 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to drive a Formula 1 car so I think my opinion counts for very little. What I do know is that we are constantly reminded that these cars are ridiculously temperamental, especially where grip is concerned. All season long we have heard about the tyres this year having a ridiculously narrow operating window and how most of the teams, especially Ferrari, have had trouble keeping them in that window and switching the tyres on. Now couple that with them being covered in grass, marbles and whatever other rubbish he collected off the track and racing line, and I think it's worth giving him the benefit of the doubt that he probably wasn't in an ideal situation in terms of grip or traction, and just wanted to get out of the situation any way he could.

    The 'if that was Hamilton' point is a fair one, but I also think that works both ways. I'm sure there would be a lot more 'racing incident' type comments if the roles were reversed. But again, this isn't really about Hamilton as he was just kinda there.

    Ultimately I think the letter of the law was followed, but I don't think they've been followed in the spirit they were intended to be used.
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 10:00:21 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    But you do accept that putting an accelerating force through, as you say tyres with already compromised grip, will further compromise lateral control right?

    And this is the crux of my point, no acceleration and while I'd still have my suspicions given Vettel's previous I'd be unhappy about the imposition of a penalty.

    Edited by gang_of_bitches at 10:15:36 11-06-2019
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 10:28:55 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I think he did what he needed to do to keep his car pointing in the right direction, that's it. This is a guy who has had countless spins over the last 12 months and I think his primary focus was on avoiding that same situation happening again, not blocking another car.
  • Graxlar_v3 11 Jun 2019 10:33:44 7,617 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @SolidSCB isnít that an unsafe return then?
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 10:44:56 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    SolidSCB wrote:
    I think he did what he needed to do to keep his car pointing in the right direction, that's it. This is a guy who has had countless spins over the last 12 months and I think his primary focus was on avoiding that same situation happening again, not blocking another car.
    I'm sorry I can't let this go. Watch the video, his car is heading in a straight, safe direction until the moment he adds throttle when moving from grass to tarmac causing the back of the car to step out to the right, that is the point where he makes the error of judgement. If he'd coasted he'd have lost the place for sure but it would have been a safe re-entry.
  • up_the_ante 11 Jun 2019 11:10:25 1,096 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    4 seconds of action and the internet can argue for days about it, yet the stewards get a few minutes and then get crucified by half the supporters either way. Saying that, Iíd rather be a steward than a football referee any day of the week.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 11:23:12 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Graxlar_v3 wrote:
    @SolidSCB isnít that an unsafe return then?
    Like I said, it's the letter of the law. The question is what he could have done differently, which I would argue (and most other drivers seem to agree) is not a right lot. That's where I think the spirit that the law was originally intended hasn't really been given much thought. He was recovering his car on instinct to stay in the race.
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 11:48:21 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    SolidSCB wrote:
    Like I said, it's the letter of the law. The question is what he could have done differently, which I would argue (and most other drivers seem to agree) is not a right lot. That's where I think the spirit that the law was originally intended hasn't really been given much thought. He was recovering his car on instinct to stay in the race.
    Argh!!!

    I've said what he could do differently- Not hit the accelerator as he rejoins the track.

    Recovering your car on instinct to stay in the race is not the spirit of the law. Not potentially causing an accident by trying to stay in the race is precisely what the law is for.

    IMO the problem here is Vettel's instinct was to stay ahead of Hamilton, not to avoid an accident and I'm fine with that, that should be a racer's instinct. Unfortunately though it is against the rules because apparently drivers getting injured or even killed isn't ok anymore (though I think few race fans in their heart of hearts could deny that the danger of something terrible happening added to the spectacle) and as such the penalty was not only correct to the letter but the spirit of the law.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 12:01:05 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's quite obviously not as simple as that, otherwise everyone would be saying it.
  • superdelphinus 11 Jun 2019 12:42:50 10,087 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    The main thing is that it would never have happened if vettel didnít regularly crack under pressure. The chain of causation happened with him, not the penalty.
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 13:02:53 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    SolidSCB wrote:
    It's quite obviously not as simple as that, otherwise everyone would be saying it.
    But it's sufficiently simple that you can be sure he couldn't do anything else?

    I'm talking about incontravertable physics here. A force on a tyre in one direction ie. forwards through acceleration compromises its ability to grip in another ie. laterally.
  • askew 11 Jun 2019 13:42:03 19,730 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    This is like 12 Angry Men.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 13:47:24 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Coasting and trying to get back up to speed more slowly (and that's if we're saying he didn't spin out trying it that way, easier said than done) would have been far more dangerous than attempting to keep more momentum. The geography of a narrow street circuit, that section in particular and the half-blind nature of the pretty quick turns 3&4 doesn't lend itself to safely spending 5 seconds fart arsing around in the middle of the road with another car following closely.

    If this had gone down on a more modern circuit with a wider track, an actual run off area and no walls right next to the road I think you would be well within your rights to ask why he did what he did. But he recovered as best he could within the context of the situation.
  • Singularity 11 Jun 2019 14:29:54 3,154 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    He was looking in his mirror from before changing the attitude of the car. He was trying to block Hamilton. I'm sure every one of us has done it in a racing game - cock up, try to protect the position.
  • up_the_ante 11 Jun 2019 14:32:42 1,096 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Singularity wrote:
    He was looking in his mirror from before changing the attitude of the car. He was trying to block Hamilton. I'm sure every one of us has done it in a racing game - cock up, try to protect the position.
    I only do it with CPU cars 😀
  • up_the_ante 11 Jun 2019 14:32:42 1,096 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Singularity wrote:
    He was looking in his mirror from before changing the attitude of the car. He was trying to block Hamilton. I'm sure every one of us has done it in a racing game - cock up, try to protect the position.
    I only do it with CPU cars 😀
  • gang_of_bitches 11 Jun 2019 16:17:54 5,707 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 14 years ago
    askew wrote:
    This is like 12 Angry Men.
    Now let's get some chairs and recreate the hallway, I mean corner.

    /Dons white suit and air of detached superiority.
  • SolidSCB 11 Jun 2019 16:59:58 11,400 posts
    Seen 52 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Singularity wrote:
    He was looking in his mirror from before changing the attitude of the car. He was trying to block Hamilton. I'm sure every one of us has done it in a racing game - cock up, try to protect the position.
    He only looked in the mirror after the door was closed and he'd corrected the car. The fault lies with Vettel for the initial mistake but this idea that it was Schmacher on Villeneuve or something is silly.
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.