2019 Canadian Grand Prix Race Thread

[Dollarman]

I woke up at 6.30am and checked my phone to see the result and was surprised to see that Hamilton had won the race, and then saw the Vettel penalty etc. I went back to bed, woke up a few hours later and checked the video of it as I wanted to reserve judgement until I'd seen video evidence. After seeing the evidence, the stewards were 100% correct in handing out a penalty to Vettel. Vettel goes off, rejoins (middle of the track) and then veers to the Right as he sees Hamilton going down the Right side of him.

a) Vettel lost control of the car

b) Vettel did not rejoin the track safely

c) Vettel moved to block/defend in a dangerous manner that if Hamilton had not hit the hammer, would have resulted in a major accident for both of them.

.

100%
About as simple as it looked really.
The only thing I may have an issue with is the nature of the penalty. I believe the team should have been instructed to give the place back ASAP.
Make an unsafe entry/ dangerous driving mistake in the heat of the moment and you're at the mercy of a stewards decision. All the pantomime after the race made for good TV I guess but deep down, Vettel knew exactly what he did.

[Lojik]

Ok there's nothing he could have done to control the car but he did gain an advantage from going off the track i.e. failed to loose a place. He could have give the place to LH then tried to repass. I think Ferrari have lost a bit of their tactical savvie in this reguard, rather than await a Merc appeal they should have been straight on the phone asking 'are we ok? Does he need to let Lewis go?'
Brundle's analysis post race was prerty much right 'yeah it is a fairy cakes result and yes it spoilt the race but those are the rules.'
I wonder what Hill's take is, as it's effectively a non contact version of what Schumacher did to him in Melbourme.

The gaining an advantage point is a good point, but apparently this was not mentioned in the stewards report of the incident so was not a factor in their decision (according to autosport). Personally I think penalising for gainaing an advantage would have been a little more understandable, but they didn't so we are left with the unsatissfactory dangerous rejoining of the track.

It's such a shame that this incident has marred what was otherwise an absorbing race.

[Badgeronimous]

How big a mistake was it by Vettel? The rear of the car stepped out unexpectedly, probably as a result of the aero wash from the backmakers in front doing something unprectable to his cars balance. I don't think there is a great deal a driver can do there.

Vettels thought process is going to be entirely on keeping that out the wall. Thats the bit that hurts.

I don't think he is back in control of that until he is about 2/3rds of the way across the track on re-entering. Maybe then his thoughts change to where is Hamilton. I don't think he is really thinking about Hamilton until he knows thats not in the wall.

As for the penalty, I think it's harsh in the context of the incident but probably correct by the rules. My issue isn't with the penalty but rather the totally inconsistent way penalties are applied. I don't think Vettel did anything wrong or different to what anyone else would have done.

Sharp a cookie as he is, he isn't thinking of all the eventualities in the 1 second of thinking time he has. He is simply trying to stay out of the wall.

[Chunky]

Spa 2008. It's taken a long time for Hamilton to get back the win that the stewards stole for Ferrari.

I've not seen any cockpit footage or telemetry yet, but unless Vettel kept his foot in and/or steered right it's a very unfair penalty, even if it's the rules.

How this compares with Vestappen in Monaco risking wiping out a bus load of pit crew and ruining Bottas' race but getting the same 5 second penalty makes my snot fizz.

.

.

[smiddlehurst]

Oh boy... emotive one this and I think it'd be a lot less controversial if, say, it was a backmarker doing the same thing and almost wiping out Vettel into the wall. Probably the right application of the letter of the law but highlights the inconsistency in F1 as a major issue once again.

Now that said... IMO there should be an additional penalty coming for bringing the sport into disrepute. Nothing to do with the incident or the radio chatter afterwards (that's heat of the moment, adrenaline flowing stuff and the broadcaster chooses what we get to hear) but everything after the flag dropped was disgraceful. Dumping the car in pit lane as far from where it should be as possible, refusing to do the podium, moving the #1 sign.... that'd be dodgy enough coming from a rookie but a 4 time world champion representing the biggest team in the sport? Then it's compounded by Ferrari appealing an on-track decision. Rightly or wrongly once a penalty is enforced during the race then that's it, you live with it. Same in every other sport I can think of. If there's long term consequences (e.g. a ban from future events) then yes, those can be appealed but not something that had a fundamental impact on what happened during that event. If that's reversed then F1 dies overnight, we wouldn't get final results of a race until the podium of the next! It's a very sad day when Premier League football managers are looking like consummate professionals in comparison to Ferrari yet here we are.

[mikeyg123]

Oh boy... emotive one this and I think it'd be a lot less controversial if, say, it was a backmarker doing the same thing and almost wiping out Vettel into the wall. Probably the right application of the letter of the law but highlights the inconsistency in F1 as a major issue once again.

Now that said... IMO there should be an additional penalty coming for bringing the sport into disrepute. Nothing to do with the incident or the radio chatter afterwards (that's heat of the moment, adrenaline flowing stuff and the broadcaster chooses what we get to hear) but everything after the flag dropped was disgraceful. Dumping the car in pit lane as far from where it should be as possible, refusing to do the podium, moving the #1 sign.... that'd be dodgy enough coming from a rookie but a 4 time world champion representing the biggest team in the sport? Then it's compounded by Ferrari appealing an on-track decision. Rightly or wrongly once a penalty is enforced during the race then that's it, you live with it. Same in every other sport I can think of. If there's long term consequences (e.g. a ban from future events) then yes, those can be appealed but not something that had a fundamental impact on what happened during that event. If that's reversed then F1 dies overnight, we wouldn't get final results of a race until the podium of the next! It's a very sad day when Premier League football managers are looking like consummate professionals in comparison to Ferrari yet here we are.

I think you have to accept people are human. I don't see much wrong with Vettel showing some humanity in this case.

[tootsie323]

Oh boy... emotive one this and I think it'd be a lot less controversial if, say, it was a backmarker doing the same thing and almost wiping out Vettel into the wall. Probably the right application of the letter of the law but highlights the inconsistency in F1 as a major issue once again.

Now that said... IMO there should be an additional penalty coming for bringing the sport into disrepute. Nothing to do with the incident or the radio chatter afterwards (that's heat of the moment, adrenaline flowing stuff and the broadcaster chooses what we get to hear) but everything after the flag dropped was disgraceful. Dumping the car in pit lane as far from where it should be as possible, refusing to do the podium, moving the #1 sign.... that'd be dodgy enough coming from a rookie but a 4 time world champion representing the biggest team in the sport? Then it's compounded by Ferrari appealing an on-track decision. Rightly or wrongly once a penalty is enforced during the race then that's it, you live with it. Same in every other sport I can think of. If there's long term consequences (e.g. a ban from future events) then yes, those can be appealed but not something that had a fundamental impact on what happened during that event. If that's reversed then F1 dies overnight, we wouldn't get final results of a race until the podium of the next! It's a very sad day when Premier League football managers are looking like consummate professionals in comparison to Ferrari yet here we are.

Didn't he park at that end so that he could go straight to the stewards and put his case across? As far as the number swapping goes, I thought that was hilarious - a piece of publicity genius.

[mikeyg123]

Oh boy... emotive one this and I think it'd be a lot less controversial if, say, it was a backmarker doing the same thing and almost wiping out Vettel into the wall. Probably the right application of the letter of the law but highlights the inconsistency in F1 as a major issue once again.

Now that said... IMO there should be an additional penalty coming for bringing the sport into disrepute. Nothing to do with the incident or the radio chatter afterwards (that's heat of the moment, adrenaline flowing stuff and the broadcaster chooses what we get to hear) but everything after the flag dropped was disgraceful. Dumping the car in pit lane as far from where it should be as possible, refusing to do the podium, moving the #1 sign.... that'd be dodgy enough coming from a rookie but a 4 time world champion representing the biggest team in the sport? Then it's compounded by Ferrari appealing an on-track decision. Rightly or wrongly once a penalty is enforced during the race then that's it, you live with it. Same in every other sport I can think of. If there's long term consequences (e.g. a ban from future events) then yes, those can be appealed but not something that had a fundamental impact on what happened during that event. If that's reversed then F1 dies overnight, we wouldn't get final results of a race until the podium of the next! It's a very sad day when Premier League football managers are looking like consummate professionals in comparison to Ferrari yet here we are.

Didn't he park at that end so that he could go straight to the stewards and put his case across? As far as the number swapping goes, I thought that was hilarious - a piece of publicity genius.

Yes, I don't see what F1 looses from that.

[theARE]

I'm sure others have made he same comparison, but if you overlay this incident onto the chicane in Monoco after they go through the tunnel & down the hill - if Vettel had cut the chicane there, re-entered the track and squeezed Hamilton into the wall to retain his position it'd have been a penalty & nobody would have questioned it

So is "the grass was slippery" an excuse to avoid a penalty?

Do track layout & conditions affect the application of the rules?

It was definitely harsh, there really wasn't much Vettel could do - maybe he could have stayed on the grass, let Hamilton go & then re-entered, but at that speed & on that surface he probably would have spun the car across the track had he tried it

I can see it both ways

[Badgeronimous]

The number swapping, childish and petty as it is, gives the sport an iconic moment.

Tbh, the only thing the FIA could do to make this worse is overturn the decision to issue the penalty!

[angrypirate]

I'm sure others have made he same comparison, but if you overlay this incident onto the chicane in Monoco after they go through the tunnel & down the hill - if Vettel had cut the chicane there, re-entered the track and squeezed Hamilton into the wall to retain his position it'd have been a penalty & nobody would have questioned it

So is "the grass was slippery" an excuse to avoid a penalty?

Do track layout & conditions affect the application of the rules?

It was definitely harsh, there really wasn't much Vettel could do - maybe he could have stayed on the grass, let Hamilton go & then re-entered, but at that speed & on that surface he probably would have spun the car across the track had he tried it

I can see it both ways

Listening to Vettels onboard, he got on the power as soon as he rejoined the track and pretty much aimed the car to close any gap. Had he chosen to, he could have left a cars width but he know he would have been a sitting duck. However these guys dont have time to think - they just drive. And pretty much every driver would have instinctively closed that gap. In Charlie's days, I imagine Ferrari would have been advised by Charlie to let Hamilton pass to avoid a penalty. At least that way he may have had a chance to pass him down the back straight to retake 1st. Taking the penalty consigned him to 2nd.

[Badgeronimous]

I'm sure others have made he same comparison, but if you overlay this incident onto the chicane in Monoco after they go through the tunnel & down the hill - if Vettel had cut the chicane there, re-entered the track and squeezed Hamilton into the wall to retain his position it'd have been a penalty & nobody would have questioned it

So is "the grass was slippery" an excuse to avoid a penalty?

Do track layout & conditions affect the application of the rules?

It was definitely harsh, there really wasn't much Vettel could do - maybe he could have stayed on the grass, let Hamilton go & then re-entered, but at that speed & on that surface he probably would have spun the car across the track had he tried it

I can see it both ways

Cutting the chicane at Monaco, you have far more control and enter the track with relatively clean tyres in comparision by virtue of driving over tarmac.

With a mid engine car, at that sort of speed, all you can do is go staight when on grass. Any throttle or steering movement and it will spin. Vettel enters the track, on a car still travelling at speed, on a sub optimal line, slightly out of control with dirty tyres. He still has to make the corner or else he is in the wall, and he has maybe 6m to do so once all 4 wheels are on the asphalt.

I firmly believe that Vettel is 100% thinking about not hitting the wall (if he did both Hamilton and him would likely be out of the race), rather than squeezing Hamilton.

[dpastern]

Even worse is Vettel's unsportsmanlike behaviour after the race in the parc ferme. He should get a 1 race DSQ for bringing the sport into disrepute, but sadly, there are no such rules handling disrepute/bad behaviour in the FIA rule book (pretty much the ONLY international sport that doesn't have rules to cover this sort of disgusting behaviour).

If that's your idea of 'disgusting behaviour', give your head a wobble. I bet you're great fun to hang around with!

The only thing bringing this sport into disrepute is the complete inconsistency in the stewards' decisions in situations like this.

Yesterday was a complete embarassment to F1. But hey, I guess it has provided a talking point to what has been an absolutely dull as dish water season.

It's not my idea of disgusting behaviour, it IS disgusting behaviour. Anyone with any common sense and a decent sense of manners and morals would instantly recognise this. But hey, I guess too many people lack manners and morals these days right?

[Lojik]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

[dpastern]

To those continuing to defend Vettel's in race actions, answer this very simple question - if you're on a public road, and someone did this to you, and you had to slam on the brakes to avoid running into them, would you be happy? Would you be hoping there was a police office who saw the incident and booked the offending driver?

Vettel clearly had an opportunity to lift off the throttle and didn't. He went off track at speed and came back on track at speed.

Quite logically, the only person to blame for this incident is Vettel himself for cracking under pressure and making a mistake.

[angrypirate]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

Pretty damming if true. Just goes to show how thorough the stewards are.

[dpastern]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

that "second" steering input from Vettel is clearly evident from the onboard footage that I've seen from his car. You see him look in his Right rear wing mirror and then move sharply to the Right. The move was deliberate and calculated and utterly deserving of said penalty.

[mikeyg123]

To those continuing to defend Vettel's in race actions, answer this very simple question - if you're on a public road, and someone did this to you, and you had to slam on the brakes to avoid running into them, would you be happy? Would you be hoping there was a police office who saw the incident and booked the offending driver?

Vettel clearly had an opportunity to lift off the throttle and didn't. He went off track at speed and came back on track at speed.

Quite logically, the only person to blame for this incident is Vettel himself for cracking under pressure and making a mistake.

This line of argument makes no sense. Drivers do many things on a race track that would not be acceptable on a public road.

[MistaVega23]

Even worse is Vettel's unsportsmanlike behaviour after the race in the parc ferme. He should get a 1 race DSQ for bringing the sport into disrepute, but sadly, there are no such rules handling disrepute/bad behaviour in the FIA rule book (pretty much the ONLY international sport that doesn't have rules to cover this sort of disgusting behaviour).

If that's your idea of 'disgusting behaviour', give your head a wobble. I bet you're great fun to hang around with!

The only thing bringing this sport into disrepute is the complete inconsistency in the stewards' decisions in situations like this.

Yesterday was a complete embarassment to F1. But hey, I guess it has provided a talking point to what has been an absolutely dull as dish water season.

It's not my idea of disgusting behaviour, it IS disgusting behaviour. Anyone with any common sense and a decent sense of manners and morals would instantly recognise this. But hey, I guess too many people lack manners and morals these days right?

If you want to argue morals, then Vettel has every right to be aggrieved.

I for one enjoyed his actions after the race. People are all too quick to moan that today's drivers are too PR-controlled so yesterday was a breath of fresh air, even if for the wrong reasons. It was great for the fans and he made himself the moral victor all round. If he had just parked up in parc ferme, congratulated Lewis and sprayed champagne on the podium people will still be criticising him for being too nice. But you don't become a 4 x WDC by being sportsmanlike and well-mannered ALL the time.

The only embarrassment was, as others have said, the stewarding.

[MistaVega23]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

that "second" steering input from Vettel is clearly evident from the onboard footage that I've seen from his car. You see him look in his Right rear wing mirror and then move sharply to the Right. The move was deliberate and calculated and utterly deserving of said penalty.

In that case, Ferrari should be taking more of the flak for not clarifying with the stewards whether to give the place to Lewis. Vettel had more than enough pace to pass the Mercedes, given Hamilton's hairpin issues and the Ferrari's straightline speed.

If they had instructed Vettel to let him by, we would have had a good end to the race and even if Vettel had still finished second then it would solely be down to his error. Unfortunately, the loss is now because of the stewards. Shame.

[dpastern]

To those continuing to defend Vettel's in race actions, answer this very simple question - if you're on a public road, and someone did this to you, and you had to slam on the brakes to avoid running into them, would you be happy? Would you be hoping there was a police office who saw the incident and booked the offending driver?

Vettel clearly had an opportunity to lift off the throttle and didn't. He went off track at speed and came back on track at speed.

Quite logically, the only person to blame for this incident is Vettel himself for cracking under pressure and making a mistake.

This line of argument makes no sense. Drivers do many things on a race track that would not be acceptable on a public road.

It makes perfect sense - running off the road and then back onto it without care for cars behind you is just plain dangerous - on a public road, or on a race track. That's not a difficult concept to understand, why are so many people on here (and elsewhere) having this issue? Perhaps some internal bias (Vettel, Ferrari fan, Mercedes or Hamilton hater?).

[dpastern]

Even worse is Vettel's unsportsmanlike behaviour after the race in the parc ferme. He should get a 1 race DSQ for bringing the sport into disrepute, but sadly, there are no such rules handling disrepute/bad behaviour in the FIA rule book (pretty much the ONLY international sport that doesn't have rules to cover this sort of disgusting behaviour).

If that's your idea of 'disgusting behaviour', give your head a wobble. I bet you're great fun to hang around with!

The only thing bringing this sport into disrepute is the complete inconsistency in the stewards' decisions in situations like this.

Yesterday was a complete embarassment to F1. But hey, I guess it has provided a talking point to what has been an absolutely dull as dish water season.

It's not my idea of disgusting behaviour, it IS disgusting behaviour. Anyone with any common sense and a decent sense of manners and morals would instantly recognise this. But hey, I guess too many people lack manners and morals these days right?

If you want to argue morals, then Vettel has every right to be aggrieved.

I for one enjoyed his actions after the race. People are all too quick to moan that today's drivers are too PR-controlled so yesterday was a breath of fresh air, even if for the wrong reasons. It was great for the fans and he made himself the moral victor all round. If he had just parked up in parc ferme, congratulated Lewis and sprayed champagne on the podium people will still be criticising him for being too nice. But you don't become a 4 x WDC by being sportsmanlike and well-mannered ALL the time.

The only embarrassment was, as others have said, the stewarding.

As someone who has played various competitive sports for most of his adult life, Vettel's actions after the race were childish, immature and showed an utter disrespect for the stewards, other drivers, other teams, and the rules. Vettel had a massive hissy fit post race and it was not professional, and it was not a good example for younger people entering the sport (or any sport for that matter).

On a personal note, I've been in Vettel's shoes - playing competitive grade squash years ago against a team that blatantly cheated at refereeing. I lost my temper and stormed off and got a district warning for my behaviour as well as a warning that if it happened again I'd be banned from playing for the venue that I represented. I should have just bitten my tongue, but it got to me after the 5th or 6th deliberate dud decision from the referee and his impish "F you" grin. Did I deserve my warning? Yup, I sure did. So, I can see Seb's point of view, but his post race actions were not good and were not a good example to younger people entering the sport. PERIOD.

[sidders]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

Don't think he has an argument after reading this. Vettel only has himself to blame

[matzy]

Would there be this controversy if the penalty related to "gaining an advantage by leaving the track"?

I mean, he left the track and gained an advantage by effectively blocking a faster car (that remained on the track).

He had insufficient control, IMHO, to ever safely return to the track, but dont penalise him for that - he was a passenger and lucky to not end up in the wall.

If you have to penalise him, do it for retaining a position he would have lost if he hadnt have had the good fortune to end up blocking a faster car (i.e. gaining an advantage by leaving the track).

Ultimately, Vettel got lucky. I think the penalty was an attempt to negate that luck - but it doesnt sit comfortably with me (a Hamilton fan).

[Junglist]

Not the ending to the race we had hoped for and even as a Hamilton fan it wasn't a race worth celebrating the victory of but job done and a nice points lead over his nearest competitor.

What is it about Vettel making mistakes and cracking under pressure when Hamilton is near him? Lewis is living rent free in Sebastians head at the moment. Whenever he is near he has him cracked. Seb is lucky that he didn't slide across and collect Hamilton because imagine the heat he'd be catching for making yet another mistake. As it happens people are no focusing on the stewards and not his driving. He came out of this one unscathed and if anything looking like the victim

[Black_Flag_11]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

that "second" steering input from Vettel is clearly evident from the onboard footage that I've seen from his car. You see him look in his Right rear wing mirror and then move sharply to the Right. The move was deliberate and calculated and utterly deserving of said penalty.

Wow, if that's the reason the penalty is even more ridiculous than I thought. I took it as a hardline interpretation of the rules but if they're trying to say he deliberately drove right after rejoining that's hilarious. He clearly loses the back end over the curb as he rejoins and turns into the slide. Not doing so would have seen him and Hamilton in the wall together, what a safe re-entry that would have been eh.

I'm not sure if 5 second penalties can be overturned but if that's the stewards reasoning I think Ferrari could make a good case for it.

[MistaVega23]

Even worse is Vettel's unsportsmanlike behaviour after the race in the parc ferme. He should get a 1 race DSQ for bringing the sport into disrepute, but sadly, there are no such rules handling disrepute/bad behaviour in the FIA rule book (pretty much the ONLY international sport that doesn't have rules to cover this sort of disgusting behaviour).

If that's your idea of 'disgusting behaviour', give your head a wobble. I bet you're great fun to hang around with!

The only thing bringing this sport into disrepute is the complete inconsistency in the stewards' decisions in situations like this.

Yesterday was a complete embarassment to F1. But hey, I guess it has provided a talking point to what has been an absolutely dull as dish water season.

It's not my idea of disgusting behaviour, it IS disgusting behaviour. Anyone with any common sense and a decent sense of manners and morals would instantly recognise this. But hey, I guess too many people lack manners and morals these days right?

If you want to argue morals, then Vettel has every right to be aggrieved.

I for one enjoyed his actions after the race. People are all too quick to moan that today's drivers are too PR-controlled so yesterday was a breath of fresh air, even if for the wrong reasons. It was great for the fans and he made himself the moral victor all round. If he had just parked up in parc ferme, congratulated Lewis and sprayed champagne on the podium people will still be criticising him for being too nice. But you don't become a 4 x WDC by being sportsmanlike and well-mannered ALL the time.

The only embarrassment was, as others have said, the stewarding.

As someone who has played various competitive sports for most of his adult life, Vettel's actions after the race were childish, immature and showed an utter disrespect for the stewards, other drivers, other teams, and the rules. Vettel had a massive hissy fit post race and it was not professional, and it was not a good example for younger people entering the sport (or any sport for that matter).

On a personal note, I've been in Vettel's shoes - playing competitive grade squash years ago against a team that blatantly cheated at refereeing. I lost my temper and stormed off and got a district warning for my behaviour as well as a warning that if it happened again I'd be banned from playing for the venue that I represented. I should have just bitten my tongue, but it got to me after the 5th or 6th deliberate dud decision from the referee and his impish "F you" grin. Did I deserve my warning? Yup, I sure did. So, I can see Seb's point of view, but his post race actions were not good and were not a good example to younger people entering the sport. PERIOD.

I'm sure most of us can say we've been hard done by in one sport or another during our lives. How you react to it is dependent on the circumstances.

These are elite sportsmen. Masters of their craft. Not just driving for themselves but for the people in the garage and the factory back home. It means so much more and to have it taken away from you - rightly or wrongly - will invoke an instantaneous reaction. Vettel's "F-you" rant to Charlie and Max's shove on Ocon are worse incidents that spring to mind, but Vettel's actions yesterday were pure drama, pure theatre. He knew the fans were siding with him and he whipped them up into a frenzy. It worked.

[mikeyg123]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

[AravJ]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

that "second" steering input from Vettel is clearly evident from the onboard footage that I've seen from his car. You see him look in his Right rear wing mirror and then move sharply to the Right. The move was deliberate and calculated and utterly deserving of said penalty.

Wow, if that's the reason the penalty is even more ridiculous than I thought. I took it as a hardline interpretation of the rules but if they're trying to say he deliberately drove right after rejoining that's hilarious. He clearly loses the back end over the curb as he rejoins and turns into the slide. Not doing so would have seen him and Hamilton in the wall together, what a safe re-entry that would have been eh.

I'm not sure if 5 second penalties can be overturned but if that's the stewards reasoning I think Ferrari could make a good case for it.

yeah, stewards are getting themselves into a knot trying to rationalize the indefensible.
i too would have accepted the hard line, but they inconsistent at that too so........i guess they had to come up with something else

[tootsie323]

Some further information on how the stewards made their decision is detailed in this article:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14399 ... y-decision

Basically says that the decision was mostly based on his steering inputs after gaining back control of the car. Still don't like the penalty but it's interesting further insight.

that "second" steering input from Vettel is clearly evident from the onboard footage that I've seen from his car. You see him look in his Right rear wing mirror and then move sharply to the Right. The move was deliberate and calculated and utterly deserving of said penalty.

The argument of intent puzzles me. Regardless of intent, his actions in re-joining the circuit impeded a driver already on the circuit. 'I didn't mean to' will not hold much water. This comes from someone who called Pants when the decision was made at the time. I still don't like it but I understand why it was made.

[Huw]

This high risk; I haven’t seen the race (holidaying in the Scottish Highlands) and have read just a couple of reports on the iPhone, so......
One key job of a racing driver is to pressure the fellow in front into a mistake. Hamilton did that - to a driver well known to succumb to pressure.
So notwithstanding the labyrinthine rules that plague today’s version of F1, wasn’t justice - in an wholistic sense - done?

[Rockie]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Jolyon Palmer

[Covalent]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Nope. If even the Sky team disagree with the penalty it must really take a special kind of Lewis love to agree with it.

[Rockie]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Nope. If even the Sky team disagree with the penalty it must really take a special kind of Lewis love to agree with it.

You have not seen Palmer's comment?

[Covalent]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Nope. If even the Sky team disagree with the penalty it must really take a special kind of Lewis love to agree with it.

You have not seen Palmer's comment?

Nope.

[shoot999]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Jolyon Palmer

Jolyon Palmer? Isn't he the guy you all wheeled out last race to prove the case that Hamiltons Monaco race was just meh; and nothing special?

[BMWSauber84]

Has anyone found someone who has driven an F1 car competitively who agrees with the penalty yet?

Jolyon Palmer

He said competitively. Jolyon Palmer was never competitive.

[Laz_T800]

My opinion on the penalty?
For me it's entirely based on what Seb did as he rejoined the track.
If he floored the gas and caused the back end to snap out he deserves the penalty.
If he was coasting back and it snapped on him I'd suggest that the penalty was harsh, as in my opinion he was doing everything he could to rejoin safely.
Unless we see the data it is impossible to be 100% certain.

[Fiki]

This high risk; I haven’t seen the race (holidaying in the Scottish Highlands) and have read just a couple of reports on the iPhone, so......
One key job of a racing driver is to pressure the fellow in front into a mistake. Hamilton did that - to a driver well known to succumb to pressure.
So notwithstanding the labyrinthine rules that plague today’s version of F1, wasn’t justice - in an wholistic sense - done?

I'm still not sure what to make of intent either. I can't say I can see it in the footage (yet?).

Apart from what I wrote last night (about being summoned to see the stewards and therefore not decapitating the fantastic racing that was going on), there's something else that puzzles me. This is what the Sporting Regulations say also:

At the absolute discretion of the race director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track.

I don't recall having heard an intervention by the race director, have I missed something?

[Johnson]

This is the first time an incident like this has been punished. There is no consistency. Hamilton did worse at Monaco 2016 and got away scott-free.

You are talking 3 years ago.
Clearly too many incidents like this have happened and stewards are starting to penalize acting like this.
In past years we've seen a lot of unsafe releases and driving in box go without penalty, but Max was penalized for unsafe driving in the box recently, wasn't he.
It's always like this with things like that not only in this sport. Some unclean practices go without penalty for some time until they start to become a habit for some players or too many and the penalties start to come.
Vettel was long overdue for his.

You keep repeating this like a parrot, yet prior to today, Vettel has never even been investigated for dangerously rejoining the circuit. What exactly is overdue?

Put away the red tinted glasses, Vettel has caused a lot of collisions lately with similar maneuvers - pushing drivers, closing and cutting them, and if not for Hamilton reacting fast there this was going to be another collision.
Verstappen did something similar in Suzuka last year, was even less dangerous and he got penalized, so why would Vettel not be penalized now?

You haven’t answered my question: when has Vettel ever rejoined the circuit dangerously before?

I’ve already answered your Verstappen argument. Learn how to read.

If you read the rules, they make no distinction between the Vettel and Verstappen moves.

Intent is not mentioned in the rules. Should it be? Yes it should.
Also whether the driver had complete control or not, is not mentioned. Should it be? Yes it should.

So, in essence and when applying the rules, the Verstappen and Vettel moves are near identical. Yes, Vettel has mitigating circumstances but the rules make no allowance for that. You should have issue with the rules rather than the stewards.

Both drivers rejoined the track and crowded a car out, which is against the current rules. The rules do need changing in light of this incident though.

Auto sports headline sums it up perfectly, “How F1 boxed itself into Canada penalty own goal
Few agreed with the penalty that cost Sebastian Vettel Canadian Grand Prix victory. By the letter of Formula 1 law, it was justified - but that only served to show how inflexible regulations are damaging the championship”