Discussion:
Crash Verstappen
Add Reply
Heron
2019-06-30 15:47:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Edmund
2019-06-30 23:10:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)

Edmund
t***@gmail.com
2019-07-01 00:03:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Edmund
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Thank you for the anecdotal evidence.
And the smiley face.
Dan the Man
2019-07-01 00:48:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Edmund
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Edmund
It looked they banged wheels before VER drifted out a bit. Fair pass, good call not to change the outcome.

Dan
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:50:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Edmund
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Edmund
It looked they banged wheels before VER drifted out a bit. Fair pass, good call not to change the outcome.
Dan
The standard is and always has been that the overtaking driver needs to
complete the pass cleanly, and whatever else you may want to say about
it, contact isn't... ...passing cleanly.

Yes: once the overtaking car gets to a certain position, the driver
being overtaken is obliged to leave room as well, but Verstappen left
Leclerc no room on the outside.

How can it be a penalty two races ago for Vettel not to leave Hamilton
room on the track while fighting for control, and then not be a penalty
this last race when Verstappen had control?
News
2019-07-01 16:54:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Edmund
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Edmund
It looked they banged wheels before VER drifted out a bit. Fair pass,
good call not to change the outcome.
Dan
The standard is and always has been that the overtaking driver needs to
complete the pass cleanly, and whatever else you may want to say about
it, contact isn't... ...passing cleanly.
Yes: once the overtaking car gets to a certain position, the driver
being overtaken is obliged to leave room as well, but Verstappen left
Leclerc no room on the outside.
How can it be a penalty two races ago for Vettel not to leave Hamilton
room on the track while fighting for control, and then not be a penalty
this last race when Verstappen had control?
Because... Ferraris
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 17:19:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by News
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Edmund
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Edmund
It looked they banged wheels before VER drifted out a bit. Fair pass,
good call not to change the outcome.
Dan
The standard is and always has been that the overtaking driver needs
to complete the pass cleanly, and whatever else you may want to say
about it, contact isn't... ...passing cleanly.
Yes: once the overtaking car gets to a certain position, the driver
being overtaken is obliged to leave room as well, but Verstappen left
Leclerc no room on the outside.
How can it be a penalty two races ago for Vettel not to leave Hamilton
room on the track while fighting for control, and then not be a
penalty this last race when Verstappen had control?
Because... Ferraris
Of course [smacks forehead]!
Dan the Man
2019-07-02 12:10:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dan the Man
Post by Edmund
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
Yes, I think there was one race last year although it could have been
the year before :-)
Edmund
It looked they banged wheels before VER drifted out a bit. Fair pass, good call not to change the outcome.
Dan
The standard is and always has been that the overtaking driver needs to
complete the pass cleanly, and whatever else you may want to say about
it, contact isn't... ...passing cleanly.
Yes: once the overtaking car gets to a certain position, the driver
being overtaken is obliged to leave room as well, but Verstappen left
Leclerc no room on the outside.
How can it be a penalty two races ago for Vettel not to leave Hamilton
room on the track while fighting for control, and then not be a penalty
this last race when Verstappen had control?
I don't disagree about VET, he got hosed. The stewards overreacted.
~misfit~
2019-07-01 01:25:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for interpretation are ignored for
this race.

Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage - a slam-dunk penalty - or at
least it would have been up until the recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to
the masses.

If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the steering a bit when he was
alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to for car control. The only reason to do that was to push
Leclerc off the track.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
t***@gmail.com
2019-07-01 02:21:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for interpretation are ignored for
this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage - a slam-dunk penalty - or at
least it would have been up until the recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to
the masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the steering a bit when he was
alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to for car control. The only reason to do that was to push
Leclerc off the track.
Pirated Sky from F1's number one crybaby.
Bigbird
2019-07-01 06:41:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.

Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.

I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.

(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
t***@gmail.com
2019-07-01 06:57:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Yes, like when the Germans were attacking you.
larkim
2019-07-01 09:55:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.

Worth a listen, and also to hear praise for the race director in trying to
help the media out with understanding the decision.
~misfit~
2019-07-01 10:24:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Yeah they're wimping out. They could have made that same ruling w/r/t Vettel and Hamilton in Canada
if they'd wanted. This is Liberty pressuring the FIA to stop alienating their paying customers.

Again Peter Windsor agrees with my take

Post by larkim
Worth a listen, and also to hear praise for the race director in trying to
help the media out with understanding the decision.
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying 'read the f'kin' rulebook'
something's rotten...

IMO of course.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
larkim
2019-07-01 13:54:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Yeah they're wimping out. They could have made that same ruling w/r/t Vettel and Hamilton in Canada
if they'd wanted. This is Liberty pressuring the FIA to stop alienating their paying customers.
Without wishing to re-open Canada, I think it is fair to say that the
incident was certainly "wholly or predominantly caused by one driver".

I quite like Pedro De La Rosa's take on yesterday:-
"Let's not forget though that the driver on the outside can and should back
off at one point, but obviously with asphalt run offs no one does"

That's the choice Leclerc could have made. Once he'd ceded the inside to
Verstappen, with Verstappen not steaming in with all four wheels locked up,
Verstappen had the corner won - and therefore had at least a 60:40 claim
on ownership of the rights to determine his line.

Leclerc could arguably see where Max was heading and make adjustments to it,
which he would have done had the outside of the corner been a wall or been
a deep gravel trap. But because it was tarmac he took the risk that he
could keep his foot in.

At the time, I though Max should have been punished. I've changed my mind!
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:59:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Yeah they're wimping out. They could have made that same ruling w/r/t Vettel and Hamilton in Canada
if they'd wanted. This is Liberty pressuring the FIA to stop alienating their paying customers.
Without wishing to re-open Canada, I think it is fair to say that the
incident was certainly "wholly or predominantly caused by one driver".
I quite like Pedro De La Rosa's take on yesterday:-
"Let's not forget though that the driver on the outside can and should back
off at one point, but obviously with asphalt run offs no one does"
That's the choice Leclerc could have made. Once he'd ceded the inside to
Verstappen, with Verstappen not steaming in with all four wheels locked up,
Verstappen had the corner won - and therefore had at least a 60:40 claim
on ownership of the rights to determine his line.
No. You are utterly wrong on this point.

You don't get the right to determine your line until you are CLEAR AHEAD.

That's in the rule book.
Post by larkim
Leclerc could arguably see where Max was heading and make adjustments to it,
which he would have done had the outside of the corner been a wall or been
a deep gravel trap. But because it was tarmac he took the risk that he
could keep his foot in.
At the time, I though Max should have been punished. I've changed my mind!
~misfit~
2019-07-02 00:47:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Yeah they're wimping out. They could have made that same ruling w/r/t Vettel and Hamilton in Canada
if they'd wanted. This is Liberty pressuring the FIA to stop alienating their paying customers.
Without wishing to re-open Canada, I think it is fair to say that the
incident was certainly "wholly or predominantly caused by one driver".
I quite like Pedro De La Rosa's take on yesterday:-
"Let's not forget though that the driver on the outside can and should back
off at one point, but obviously with asphalt run offs no one does"
I would agree with that if there was only a little bit of overlap and/or the driver on the inside
isn't in complete control. However when the drivers are completely side-by-side (as evidenced by
the tyre-to-tyre contact) and both have control of their cars then neither is obliged to back out
and both should give the other racing room.
Post by larkim
That's the choice Leclerc could have made. Once he'd ceded the inside to
Verstappen, with Verstappen not steaming in with all four wheels locked up,
Verstappen had the corner won - and therefore had at least a 60:40 claim
on ownership of the rights to determine his line.
But Verstappen didn't 'have the corner won' - watch the previous lap. Leclerc would have had better
traction out of the corner (as he was straighter) and Verstappen would have been left behind. Both
drivers knew it (as it had just happened 70 seconds ago) and Verstappen chose to push Leclerc off
the track so that he could keep the lead.
Post by larkim
Leclerc could arguably see where Max was heading and make adjustments to it,
which he would have done had the outside of the corner been a wall or been
a deep gravel trap. But because it was tarmac he took the risk that he
could keep his foot in.
He did make adjustments. He allowed Verstappen all of the track except one cars width on the
outside. The fact that Verstappen chose to deny him that racing room (while under complete control
of the car and running side-by-side) meant he should have been penalised.
Post by larkim
At the time, I though Max should have been punished. I've changed my mind!
Your first instinct was the right one IMO.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
Alan Baker
2019-07-02 20:07:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision.  Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner.  So given that both drivers
contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Yeah they're wimping out. They could have made that same ruling w/r/t
Vettel and Hamilton in Canada
if they'd wanted. This is Liberty pressuring the FIA to stop
alienating their paying customers.
Without wishing to re-open Canada, I think it is fair to say that the
incident was certainly "wholly or predominantly caused by one driver".
I quite like Pedro De La Rosa's take on yesterday:-
"Let's not forget though that the driver on the outside can and should back
off at one point, but obviously with asphalt run offs no one does"
I would agree with that if there was only a little bit of overlap and/or
the driver on the inside isn't in complete control. However when the
drivers are completely side-by-side (as evidenced by the tyre-to-tyre
contact) and both have control of their cars then neither is obliged to
back out and both should give the other racing room.
In point of fact, the onus is on the overtaking driver to do so cleanly.

He can't be denied room on the inside, but he's not allow to force the
car he is overtaking to go wide.
Post by ~misfit~
Post by larkim
That's the choice Leclerc could have made.  Once he'd ceded the inside to
Verstappen, with Verstappen not steaming in with all four wheels locked up,
Verstappen had the corner won - and therefore had at least a 60:40 claim
on ownership of the rights to determine his line.
But Verstappen didn't 'have the corner won' - watch the previous lap.
Leclerc would have had better traction out of the corner (as he was
straighter) and Verstappen would have been left behind. Both drivers
knew it (as it had just happened 70 seconds ago) and Verstappen chose to
push Leclerc off the track so that he could keep the lead.
Post by larkim
Leclerc could arguably see where Max was heading and make adjustments to it,
which he would have done had the outside of the corner been a wall or been
a deep gravel trap.  But because it was tarmac he took the risk that he
could keep his foot in.
He did make adjustments. He allowed Verstappen all of the track except
one cars width on the outside. The fact that Verstappen chose to deny
him that racing room (while under complete control of the car and
running side-by-side) meant he should have been penalised.
For whatever reason (I think I heard the reason during qualifying but I
can't recall it), all the drivers were avoiding driving all the way to
the inside of turn 3, and clearly Verstappen didn't want to drive there
while trying the overtake... ...but because he was the overtaking
driver, that wasn't supposed to be a choice he was allowed to make.

The situation is that the driver being overtaken must leave a width for
the overtaking driver... ...but he need not leave anymore than that,
whereas the overtaking driver is ONLY entitled to the room that the
driver he is trying to overtake allows him.

Verstappen's "he turned in on me" complaint only holds water if
Verstappen is already all the way to the right.
geoff
2019-07-02 20:21:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
In point of fact, the onus is on the overtaking driver to do so cleanly.
He can't be denied room on the inside, but he's not allow to force the
car he is overtaking to go wide.
And given that VER had opted for the inside line, I would have expected
him to be attempting to head for the apex of the curve, not swinging out
wide.

geoff
Alan Baker
2019-07-02 20:27:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by Alan Baker
In point of fact, the onus is on the overtaking driver to do so cleanly.
He can't be denied room on the inside, but he's not allow to force the
car he is overtaking to go wide.
And given that VER had opted for the inside line, I would have expected
him to be attempting to head for the apex of the curve, not swinging out
As I said, pretty much all the drivers weren't using the last 3/4 of a
car width at the apex of turn 3.

There is only one reason for that on a race course: it's a slower way
around. While I don't know the specific reason it was slower (stated
during the qualifying or practice broadcast if I recall, but I can't
remember what they said), it doesn't matter to the rules of overtaking.

The driver being overtaken is obliged to leave you enough room to stay
on the track once the overtaking driver has established an overlap (said
overlap must come BEFORE the car ahead turns in for the corner), but
that is all he must do: leave barely enough room.

The overtaking driver doesn't get to push the car he is trying to
overtake out wide just because he doesn't like the line that he has been
left.
geoff
2019-07-01 22:52:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying 'read
the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the
line' in several places.

geoff
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 23:07:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying
'read the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the
line' in several places.
Which is an excellent argument for changing the rule book.
~misfit~
2019-07-02 05:06:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying 'read the f'kin' rulebook'
something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell the drivers and teams if
they're going to ping them for 4 wheels over the line and if so in which corners and how many
warnings they're going to get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
geoff
2019-07-02 05:14:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying
'read the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the
line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell the
drivers and teams if they're going to ping them for 4 wheels over the
line and if so in which corners and how many warnings they're going to
get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
Guess it is relevant wrt penalties as to whether not that crossing of
the line is gratuitous (as in achieving a higher cornering speed, pre or
post), or as the result of an actual error or on-track situation.

Becomes a bit of a gray area...

geoff
Bigbird
2019-07-02 08:56:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just
saying 'read the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels
over the line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell
the drivers and teams if they're going to ping them for 4 wheels
over the line and if so in which corners and how many warnings
they're going to get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
Guess it is relevant wrt penalties as to whether not that crossing of
the line is gratuitous (as in achieving a higher cornering speed, pre
or post), or as the result of an actual error or on-track situation.
Becomes a bit of a gray area...
More so when you consider that while going outside the lines may be an
error on that lap the lack of any penalty, whether caused by the track
layout or awarded, permits the driver to push the limits and benefit on
all the other laps.

Ideally there would be a natural penalty caused by the track layout
that would inflict a small penalty for errors of that kind and not need
the stewards getting involved.
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Alan Baker
2019-07-02 19:46:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just
saying 'read the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels
over the line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell
the drivers and teams if they're going to ping them for 4 wheels
over the line and if so in which corners and how many warnings
they're going to get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
Guess it is relevant wrt penalties as to whether not that crossing of
the line is gratuitous (as in achieving a higher cornering speed, pre
or post), or as the result of an actual error or on-track situation.
Becomes a bit of a gray area...
More so when you consider that while going outside the lines may be an
error on that lap the lack of any penalty, whether caused by the track
layout or awarded, permits the driver to push the limits and benefit on
all the other laps.
Ideally there would be a natural penalty caused by the track layout
that would inflict a small penalty for errors of that kind and not need
the stewards getting involved.
Ideally, there should be multiple car widths of track beyond the track
limit, and the first car width beyond the limit (or perhaps half a car
width beyond the limit THEN a full width) should be much lower traction
than normal, forcing any car which exceeds the limit with all four
wheels to slide wider still.

Then just add a rejoin bollard/pylon—even multiple ones you need to
slalom through, and you have a penalty you can adjust to penalize 4
wheels off.
Brian Lawrence
2019-07-02 07:56:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by geoff
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying
'read the f'kin' rulebook' something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the
line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell the
drivers and teams if they're going to ping them for 4 wheels over the
line and if so in which corners and how many warnings they're going to
get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
I don't think the stewards are involved in making that decision or
attend the drivers meeting. Those tasks would be done by the Race
Director, now Michael Masi, who would also inform the stewards of his
decisions.
~misfit~
2019-07-02 22:48:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
When you have to help the media understand instead of just saying 'read the f'kin' rulebook'
something's rotten...
IMO of course.
If you RTFRB everybody would have had penalties for '4 wheels over the line' in several places.
geoff
Usually that's discussed at the drivers meeting - the stewards tell the drivers and teams if
they're going to ping them for 4 wheels over the line and if so in which corners and how many
warnings they're going to get. Yeah I know ... I didn't write the rules.
I don't think the stewards are involved in making that decision or attend the drivers meeting.
Those tasks would be done by the Race Director, now Michael Masi, who would also inform the
stewards of his decisions.
You're right of course. I can only claim that by 'stewards' I meant their boss. ;)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:55:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
--
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Autosport podcast review had a decent summary of why the stewards came to
this decision. Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Leclerc had
contributed to the situation by making choices to position his car in such
a way that his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with
Max at the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.
Except that Leclerc was in no way obligated to give up the corner and
was entitled to room around the outside.
Post by larkim
Worth a listen, and also to hear praise for the race director in trying to
help the media out with understanding the decision.
Let me rewrite your paragraph.. ...a little:

'Broadly they concluded that to a degree, Hamilton had contributed to
the situation by making choices to position his car in such a way that
his chosen course of action put him on a collision course with Seb at
the exit of the corner. So given that both drivers contributed to it
they were unable to punish just one.'
~misfit~
2019-07-01 10:18:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
Just when I was thinking Max had matured into a decent driver he's made me reconsider - not that
it's relevant to anyone else I suppose.
Post by Bigbird
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
I haven't been watching F2 but I Have been watching F3 (as there are two New Zealanders in the
series this year).

FWIW my opinion is that F1 could maybe relax the power unit / suspension / electronics rules (so
there's still innovation and differences) but clamp down on dirty aero so that cars can follow closely.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:56:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
Just when I was thinking Max had matured into a decent driver he's made
me reconsider - not that it's relevant to anyone else I suppose.
Sorry, but this had nothing to do with maturity.

He should have been required to give back the place because as the
overtaking driver, he failed in his obligation to pass cleanly, but any
driver in that field would have tried that overtake.
t***@gmail.com
2019-07-03 05:22:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Just when I was thinking Max had matured into a decent driver he's made me reconsider - not that it's relevant to anyone else I suppose.
Yup. Not from a pirating crybaby.

Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:52:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
It's actually fairly simple:

When making an inside, late-braking pass, the overtaking driver is
allowed room on the inside once he gets up to a certain position
alongside the other car...

...but the other car still gets room on the outside.
Post by Bigbird
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
It's certainly not consistent with the Vettel penalty.
Post by Bigbird
(Note how much fun F1 could be if the cars could race a bit more like
that without one having to have a huge advantage. Again F2 makes F1
look a bit dull; they have ten cars able to run within 4 seconds of the
leader.)
Edmund
2019-07-02 10:30:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Bigbird
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage -
a slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the
recent uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the
masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to
for car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off
the track.
Unfortunately it has long been allowed for drivers to run the outside
car out of road on the exit. Sometimes it is clear they have a claim on
the corner other times it appears a very unfair tactic to me.
When making an inside, late-braking pass, the overtaking driver is
allowed room on the inside once he gets up to a certain position
alongside the other car...
...but the other car still gets room on the outside.
Post by Bigbird
Verstappen tried it the fair way on the previous lap and it didn't work.
I find the rules inconsistently applied but the ruling consistent with
what has been permitted previously.
It's certainly not consistent with the Vettel penalty.
Stewards decisions are remarkably consistent in inconsistency.
Although if one take into account that certain drivers are allowed
a lot more then others, it becomes a bid more consistent.
Both Max and another not to be named "team player" are allowed
more then other divers and they both use that advantage.

If they can push someone of track without all too obvious bad intentions
they most certainly will do so, and that is exactly what happened here
again.

Edmund
Alan Baker
2019-07-01 16:47:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Heron
Since MV's foray into F1, has he ever once raced
without hitting another car or causing a collision?
So these tighter rules which were supposed to not leave room for
interpretation are ignored for this race.
Verstappen forced another car off the track and gained an advantage - a
slam-dunk penalty - or at least it would have been up until the recent
uproar. What we are seeing the the FIA bowing down to the masses.
If you look at a replay it's obvious that Verstappen opened up the
steering a bit when he was alongside Leclerc when he didn't have to for
car control. The only reason to do that was to push Leclerc off the track.
And exactly how do you know from watching on television what Verstappen
had to do for car control?
Loading...