Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules

Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty

As per the rules, the penalty is correct and justified
29
29%
As per the rules, the penalty is correct, but it seems harsh and shouldn't have been awarded
12
12%
As per the rules, the penalty is correct. It seems harsh but it's consistent and that's what has been asked for
25
25%
Penalty not justified at all, Vettel had no way to comply with what the rules state
29
29%
Problem is the rules, not the stewards
4
4%
 
Total votes: 99

jono794
Posts: 641
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:00 am
Location: Running wide at Bergwerk

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by jono794 »

Leaving the rules aside for a moment, how many people here still think "The Pass" by Zanardi at Laguna Seca in '96 was a legit move? He was the attacking driver, but he left the track and impeded his opponent upon rejoining. It's actually a fairly similar incident all things considered.
"Guys I'm coming in, I'm having too much grip"
- Chanoch Nissany

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10203
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Covalent »

Option or Prime wrote:The problem is Blake that everyone piled in and now even if it were proved, (perhaps by the second video) that Vettel had an element of control I don't think anyone would change their minds. Impartiality is a victim here.

Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical. There are other forums who are critical of Vettel and look how the vote has evolved on this site. Its not empirical to say the consensus is this based on the writers personal bibliography.

Finally stastically there will always be twice as many Ferrari fans as Mercedes fans who think Ferrari are right whatever the issue. Why? Because numerically there are twice as many Red ones as Silver ones!

Making sweeping statements is hugely misleading.

Percentage of F1 fans

1 Ferrari 31.9%
2 Mercedes 16.2%
3 McLaren 15.8%
4 Red Bull Racing 14.1%
5 Williams 5%
It said "Overwhelming consensus from racers on Vettel penalty" so your whole post is irrelevant.

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3322
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by tootsie323 »

It was deemed a penalty. To me, it could just have easily been deemed a racing incident. I'd have probably shrugged my shoulders and accepted either verdict.
The penalty was given for rejoining the circuit unsafely and forcing another car off the track. That, I assume, goes on the basis that either Vettel was still struggling to regain control when he impeded Hamilton or that it's a two-part incident in that he did regain control on the circuit and instinctively squeezed Hamilton to protect his position.
If it's the former, that's understandable. One might ask what else could he do an I agree. However, it doesn't change the fact that Hamilton was impeded as a result of it. Again, I'd not have had an issue if it had been written off as a racing incident.
If it's the latter, I understand the part about forcing another driver off the circuit - the regulations do include a section on deliberately crowding another driver - but that doesn't exactly explain the unsafe rejoin for me, as it would imply that he was back under control before he impeded Hamilton.
Anyway, a penalty was given. Could have just as easily have not, in my view. I'm sure it won't be the last contentious call that I see. Bring on France.
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

Option or Prime
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Option or Prime »

Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:The problem is Blake that everyone piled in and now even if it were proved, (perhaps by the second video) that Vettel had an element of control I don't think anyone would change their minds. Impartiality is a victim here.

Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical. There are other forums who are critical of Vettel and look how the vote has evolved on this site. Its not empirical to say the consensus is this based on the writers personal bibliography.

Finally stastically there will always be twice as many Ferrari fans as Mercedes fans who think Ferrari are right whatever the issue. Why? Because numerically there are twice as many Red ones as Silver ones!

Making sweeping statements is hugely misleading.

Percentage of F1 fans

1 Ferrari 31.9%
2 Mercedes 16.2%
3 McLaren 15.8%
4 Red Bull Racing 14.1%
5 Williams 5%
It said "Overwhelming consensus from racers on Vettel penalty" so your whole post is irrelevant.
Overwhelming means nothing, it just an opinion.

Post therefore reinstated.

Sorry you cant dismiss facts like that even if you don't like implication.

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

jono794 wrote:Leaving the rules aside for a moment, how many people here still think "The Pass" by Zanardi at Laguna Seca in '96 was a legit move? He was the attacking driver, but he left the track and impeded his opponent upon rejoining. It's actually a fairly similar incident all things considered.
I couldn't believe my eyes when this happened, but if the rules were similar to those of the FIA, then as spectacular as it was, the overtake never happened. Perhaps someone familiar with the Indycar rules can throw some light on the subject, because I would still like to know why that result was allowed to stand.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
JN23 wrote:Ferrari are requesting a review of Vettel's penalty from Canada. I'd be interested to know what the 'new significant evidence' is that wasn't available at the time.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... gp-penalty
I can think of some evidence that wasn't available between the time of the incident and the stewards' verdict.
What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
JN23 wrote:Ferrari are requesting a review of Vettel's penalty from Canada. I'd be interested to know what the 'new significant evidence' is that wasn't available at the time.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... gp-penalty
I can think of some evidence that wasn't available between the time of the incident and the stewards' verdict.
What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
I don't need access to such things; and obviously I'm only guessing myself. But Ferrari have data from the car that wasn't available to the stewards at the time. It is not entirely impossible that their data contradicts the conclusions reached by the stewards, surely?
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:I could respect the stewards decision if they were actually able to give an alternative option to what Vettel did. I mean, if a cars goes straight off at the hairpin in Canada, spins around and simply drives back on blocking another car, the option would have been to have waited for the other car to pass. This simply was not the case with Vettel. Yes, he went off and yes he came back on causing LH to have to slow. I just don't know how she could have taken a different line due to the barrier or how he could have slowed significantly due to being on grass. So, whilst we can all speculate about different possibilities, what to the actual stewards think he should have done?
I think you have ignored the stewards investigation completely with this response. He could have kept off the racing line but he didn't. It's when you buy the whole story that Vettel was completely out of control until the point where he blocked Hamilton that you are missing the point.
For what it's worth, there is no rule that says Vettel had to stay off the racing line.
I believe he does if another car is already on the racing line otherwise there is actually no such thing as an unsafe entry back on to the track?
There is only one mention of the racing line in the rules, and it doesn't apply here.
And as I already pointed out, the rule concerning re-joining speaks of when to rejoin, it doesn't actually say the re-joining driver has to do so in a safe manner, whatever that is supposed to mean.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
JN23 wrote:Ferrari are requesting a review of Vettel's penalty from Canada. I'd be interested to know what the 'new significant evidence' is that wasn't available at the time.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... gp-penalty
I can think of some evidence that wasn't available between the time of the incident and the stewards' verdict.
What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

mikeyg123
Posts: 18470
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by mikeyg123 »

Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Fiki wrote: I can think of some evidence that wasn't available between the time of the incident and the stewards' verdict.
What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
But that was never an "in race" penalty.

I don't believe any penalty that could be taken in the race can be changed after the race for obvious reasons.

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote: Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
But that was never an "in race" penalty.

I don't believe any penalty that could be taken in the race can be changed after the race for obvious reasons.
Point taken. And you are right about the in-race penalty, but it does rather illustrate the point of having to be extremely careful with handing them out in the first place. Depending on how the review goes, I don't see any alteration doing justice to Hamilton. Tricky business.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Option or Prime
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Option or Prime »

Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote: Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
But that was never an "in race" penalty.

I don't believe any penalty that could be taken in the race can be changed after the race for obvious reasons.
Point taken. And you are right about the in-race penalty, but it does rather illustrate the point of having to be extremely careful with handing them out in the first place. Depending on how the review goes, I don't see any alteration doing justice to Hamilton. Tricky business.
Does it matter?

Seems to me to be an exercise in stewarding procedure, even if the decision is reversed it will have zero impact on the WDC, might bruise Hamilton's ego a bit.

Thing is we probably won't have to wait long for the next Vettel error on track, it's a set pattern with his driving now. If we get a repeat outburst even Ferrari fans will spot the reality of the situation. There is a limit to how much you can distract.

mikeyg123
Posts: 18470
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by mikeyg123 »

Option or Prime wrote:
Fiki wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote: Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
But that was never an "in race" penalty.

I don't believe any penalty that could be taken in the race can be changed after the race for obvious reasons.
Point taken. And you are right about the in-race penalty, but it does rather illustrate the point of having to be extremely careful with handing them out in the first place. Depending on how the review goes, I don't see any alteration doing justice to Hamilton. Tricky business.
Does it matter?

Seems to me to be an exercise in stewarding procedure, even if the decision is reversed it will have zero impact on the WDC, might bruise Hamilton's ego a bit.

Thing is we probably won't have to wait long for the next Vettel error on track, it's a set pattern with his driving now. If we get a repeat outburst even Ferrari fans will spot the reality of the situation. There is a limit to how much you can distract.
Of course it matters.

Firstly, If Vettel had pitted he would have had to wait 5 seconds and take the penalty then. At that point it would be unrecoverable.

Secondly, it stopped Hamilton attacking Vettel in the race. Giving Vettel his 5 seconds back would not be a neutral decision.

Option or Prime
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Option or Prime »

Yes, I get that and it matters in the context of the Canadian Grand Prix but it just seems a huge amount of emotional energy has been invested in this one incident. French first practice is 72 hours away, time to refocus for both drivers perhaps. We seem to have forgotten Renault's resurgence given that the next one is in their back yard.

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

Option or Prime wrote:Yes, I get that and it matters in the context of the Canadian Grand Prix but it just seems a huge amount of emotional energy has been invested in this one incident. French first practice is 72 hours away, time to refocus for both drivers perhaps. We seem to have forgotten Renault's resurgence given that the next one is in their back yard.
I'm sure the drivers are already past this. They've had much worse incidents in the past and they have coped just fine!

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3322
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by tootsie323 »

Fiki wrote:
jono794 wrote:Leaving the rules aside for a moment, how many people here still think "The Pass" by Zanardi at Laguna Seca in '96 was a legit move? He was the attacking driver, but he left the track and impeded his opponent upon rejoining. It's actually a fairly similar incident all things considered.
I couldn't believe my eyes when this happened, but if the rules were similar to those of the FIA, then as spectacular as it was, the overtake never happened. Perhaps someone familiar with the Indycar rules can throw some light on the subject, because I would still like to know why that result was allowed to stand.
It was 1996. Would the powers-that-be let that slide in 2019?
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
JN23 wrote:Ferrari are requesting a review of Vettel's penalty from Canada. I'd be interested to know what the 'new significant evidence' is that wasn't available at the time.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... gp-penalty
I can think of some evidence that wasn't available between the time of the incident and the stewards' verdict.
What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
I don't need access to such things; and obviously I'm only guessing myself. But Ferrari have data from the car that wasn't available to the stewards at the time. It is not entirely impossible that their data contradicts the conclusions reached by the stewards, surely?
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:I could respect the stewards decision if they were actually able to give an alternative option to what Vettel did. I mean, if a cars goes straight off at the hairpin in Canada, spins around and simply drives back on blocking another car, the option would have been to have waited for the other car to pass. This simply was not the case with Vettel. Yes, he went off and yes he came back on causing LH to have to slow. I just don't know how she could have taken a different line due to the barrier or how he could have slowed significantly due to being on grass. So, whilst we can all speculate about different possibilities, what to the actual stewards think he should have done?
I think you have ignored the stewards investigation completely with this response. He could have kept off the racing line but he didn't. It's when you buy the whole story that Vettel was completely out of control until the point where he blocked Hamilton that you are missing the point.
For what it's worth, there is no rule that says Vettel had to stay off the racing line.
I believe he does if another car is already on the racing line otherwise there is actually no such thing as an unsafe entry back on to the track?
There is only one mention of the racing line in the rules, and it doesn't apply here.
And as I already pointed out, the rule concerning re-joining speaks of when to rejoin, it doesn't actually say the re-joining driver has to do so in a safe manner, whatever that is supposed to mean.
I would question that you would know exactly what the stewards had access to and if the rules don't state that a driver has to rejoin in a safe manner then there is simple no such rule but then again there must be, I'm not sure what rules you might have been reading?
Last edited by pokerman on Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote: What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote: What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
Not an appeal, a 'right of review'. Then "Under the terms of the FIA's International Sporting Code, 'the stewards shall have the sole discretion to determine if a significant and relevant new element exists' ahead of any full review hearing.".

I doubt they will change anything, but maybe get the license points off Vettel if they prove that the unsafe entry was down to not having 100% control of the car. He still impeded Hamilton, so I'd expect that to hold.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10203
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Covalent »

Option or Prime wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:The problem is Blake that everyone piled in and now even if it were proved, (perhaps by the second video) that Vettel had an element of control I don't think anyone would change their minds. Impartiality is a victim here.

Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical. There are other forums who are critical of Vettel and look how the vote has evolved on this site. Its not empirical to say the consensus is this based on the writers personal bibliography.

Finally stastically there will always be twice as many Ferrari fans as Mercedes fans who think Ferrari are right whatever the issue. Why? Because numerically there are twice as many Red ones as Silver ones!

Making sweeping statements is hugely misleading.

Percentage of F1 fans

1 Ferrari 31.9%
2 Mercedes 16.2%
3 McLaren 15.8%
4 Red Bull Racing 14.1%
5 Williams 5%
It said "Overwhelming consensus from racers on Vettel penalty" so your whole post is irrelevant.
Overwhelming means nothing, it just an opinion.

Post therefore reinstated.

Sorry you cant dismiss facts like that even if you don't like implication.
What on earth are you on about?
You said "Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical" when nobody said they do, and then you go on hacking away on that straw man. Which teams the fans support has got nothing to do with what the overwhelming majority of racers think of the penalty, which the article is about.

BTW "overwhelming" is not an opinion, it means by definition "very great in amount".
Maybe we should have cleared up whether you might be misunderstanding the word first?

Laz_T800
Posts: 779
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 7:11 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Laz_T800 »

Image

Vettel looked back in control at this point.
Clearly he should have left Hamilton room on the track.
Slam dunk penalty.

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
JN23 wrote: What would that be?
Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote: Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
Not an appeal, a 'right of review'. Then "Under the terms of the FIA's International Sporting Code, 'the stewards shall have the sole discretion to determine if a significant and relevant new element exists' ahead of any full review hearing.".

I doubt they will change anything, but maybe get the license points off Vettel if they prove that the unsafe entry was down to not having 100% control of the car. He still impeded Hamilton, so I'd expect that to hold.
Bearing in mind the stewards decision was based on Vettel having full control of his car then it would have to be a total climb down by them, the last time that Ferrari tried to appeal a decision it was viewed that Ferrari were unable to being anything extra to the table, I venture that will be the case again but Ferrari have to be viewed as being the wronged party backed up by public opinion, maybe they are hoping that will apply some pressure onto the outcome?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Laz_T800 wrote:Image

Vettel looked back in control at this point.
Clearly he should have left Hamilton room on the track.
Slam dunk penalty.
That's exactly how the stewards viewed it.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote: Yeah that would be interesting given that Fiki has no access to such things.
Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Option or Prime
Posts: 2037
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Option or Prime »

Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:The problem is Blake that everyone piled in and now even if it were proved, (perhaps by the second video) that Vettel had an element of control I don't think anyone would change their minds. Impartiality is a victim here.

Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical. There are other forums who are critical of Vettel and look how the vote has evolved on this site. Its not empirical to say the consensus is this based on the writers personal bibliography.

Finally stastically there will always be twice as many Ferrari fans as Mercedes fans who think Ferrari are right whatever the issue. Why? Because numerically there are twice as many Red ones as Silver ones!

Making sweeping statements is hugely misleading.

Percentage of F1 fans

1 Ferrari 31.9%
2 Mercedes 16.2%
3 McLaren 15.8%
4 Red Bull Racing 14.1%
5 Williams 5%
It said "Overwhelming consensus from racers on Vettel penalty" so your whole post is irrelevant.
Overwhelming means nothing, it just an opinion.

Post therefore reinstated.

Sorry you cant dismiss facts like that even if you don't like implication.
What on earth are you on about?
You said "Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical" when nobody said they do, and then you go on hacking away on that straw man. Which teams the fans support has got nothing to do with what the overwhelming majority of racers think of the penalty, which the article is about.

BTW "overwhelming" is not an opinion, it means by definition "very great in amount".
Maybe we should have cleared up whether you might be misunderstanding the word first?
Sorry, but you have got the wrong end of the stick. Check the post, I was responding to the original post:
Lt. Drebin wrote:I don't know guys how much you follow the social media but F1 is immensely ridiculed right now on the different platforms because of this farcical Vettel penalty.
It doesn't state racers, the response did, but I didn't quote that.

My point is that social media is nebulous and unquantifiable, if its discussing F1 the distribution of fans and the responses out there is proportional to the allegiance of those fans. Shouting loudly on social media is about leverage it cant be trusted.

To address your point though about racers, that too can be seen as incorrect. It is all about how you present it. You are a senior poster on here so you must have seen how things get manipulated.

The racers who posted 'could be seen as irrelevant'......bear with me. Many of them raced in a completely different era, they are not judging the incident by today's stewards interpretations, todays safety culture or todays commercial market. They may well have an outdated and innacurate view of the incident.

Its up to us to look at the responses and decide impartially. That is difficult for some on here as they are passionate fans who might find it hard to accept there team/driver has dropped the ball.

You could saw that the 'overwhelming consensus of racers' with recent experience of todays race culture think the penalty was correct. Perfectly true since Palmer and Rosberg are recently retired and Andretti et al were of a different age.

Thats what I'm on about. If I wasn't clear then I apologise for not being more accurate, it wasn't my intention to provoke a response but blanket statements can cloud the facts and we have to lift the blanket sometimes.

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote: Fiki never claimed access to such things, what a weird claim Poker...

Only that he can think of evidence that may have not been available at the time. I can't think of any, so maybe Fiki can give us an answer
I see from a new Autosport article I wasn't far wrong: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14419 ... ari-review
I also see that Ferrari more or less follow one of my points made last week; namely that the driver(s) in question weren't spoken to when deciding the penalty. To a certain extent, this also has a bearing on whether we want to risk making a mistake in handing out a penalty during the race on insufficient grounds, and also risk having an incorrect podium ceremony. During the Olympic Games medals are sometimes handed out the day following a competition, and even then they sometimes get it wrong - although for different reasons than breaches of the direct sporting rules.

For those still wondering whether a stewards' ruling can't be changed; Vettel's penalty for clattering into the back of Webber's car a decade ago was reviewed within days, and altered.
The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
:D I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5215
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Asphalt_World »

Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
Instagram @simply_italian_cars

FormulaFun
Posts: 2786
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 3:21 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by FormulaFun »

Asphalt_World wrote:Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
This appeal to authority nonsense is so ridiculous. Not all these so called authority figures agree. Some say penalty some say not.

You do realise that the stewards who made the decision have all the information? It's not just a few zealots on a forum.asking for a penalty... Most people here agree that the penalty was acceptable, ex-drivers too and the stewards

User avatar
Black_Flag_11
Posts: 8072
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Black_Flag_11 »

FormulaFun wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
This appeal to authority nonsense is so ridiculous. Not all these so called authority figures agree. Some say penalty some say not.

You do realise that the stewards who made the decision have all the information? It's not just a few zealots on a forum.asking for a penalty... Most people here agree that the penalty was acceptable, ex-drivers too and the stewards
Ex drivers is clearly false, the majority of ex drivers that have spoken out on the issue have said it shouldn't be a penalty as well I'm sure you know.

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote: The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
:D I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

FormulaFun wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
This appeal to authority nonsense is so ridiculous. Not all these so called authority figures agree. Some say penalty some say not.

You do realise that the stewards who made the decision have all the information? It's not just a few zealots on a forum.asking for a penalty... Most people here agree that the penalty was acceptable, ex-drivers too and the stewards
Apparently not!

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10203
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Covalent »

Option or Prime wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:The problem is Blake that everyone piled in and now even if it were proved, (perhaps by the second video) that Vettel had an element of control I don't think anyone would change their minds. Impartiality is a victim here.

Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical. There are other forums who are critical of Vettel and look how the vote has evolved on this site. Its not empirical to say the consensus is this based on the writers personal bibliography.

Finally stastically there will always be twice as many Ferrari fans as Mercedes fans who think Ferrari are right whatever the issue. Why? Because numerically there are twice as many Red ones as Silver ones!

Making sweeping statements is hugely misleading.

Percentage of F1 fans

1 Ferrari 31.9%
2 Mercedes 16.2%
3 McLaren 15.8%
4 Red Bull Racing 14.1%
5 Williams 5%
It said "Overwhelming consensus from racers on Vettel penalty" so your whole post is irrelevant.
Overwhelming means nothing, it just an opinion.

Post therefore reinstated.

Sorry you cant dismiss facts like that even if you don't like implication.
What on earth are you on about?
You said "Its not true that the "overwhelming consensus" thinks the penalty is farcical" when nobody said they do, and then you go on hacking away on that straw man. Which teams the fans support has got nothing to do with what the overwhelming majority of racers think of the penalty, which the article is about.

BTW "overwhelming" is not an opinion, it means by definition "very great in amount".
Maybe we should have cleared up whether you might be misunderstanding the word first?
Sorry, but you have got the wrong end of the stick. Check the post, I was responding to the original post:
Lt. Drebin wrote:I don't know guys how much you follow the social media but F1 is immensely ridiculed right now on the different platforms because of this farcical Vettel penalty.
It doesn't state racers, the response did, but I didn't quote that.

My point is that social media is nebulous and unquantifiable, if its discussing F1 the distribution of fans and the responses out there is proportional to the allegiance of those fans. Shouting loudly on social media is about leverage it cant be trusted.

To address your point though about racers, that too can be seen as incorrect. It is all about how you present it. You are a senior poster on here so you must have seen how things get manipulated.

The racers who posted 'could be seen as irrelevant'......bear with me. Many of them raced in a completely different era, they are not judging the incident by today's stewards interpretations, todays safety culture or todays commercial market. They may well have an outdated and innacurate view of the incident.

Its up to us to look at the responses and decide impartially. That is difficult for some on here as they are passionate fans who might find it hard to accept there team/driver has dropped the ball.

You could saw that the 'overwhelming consensus of racers' with recent experience of todays race culture think the penalty was correct. Perfectly true since Palmer and Rosberg are recently retired and Andretti et al were of a different age.

Thats what I'm on about. If I wasn't clear then I apologise for not being more accurate, it wasn't my intention to provoke a response but blanket statements can cloud the facts and we have to lift the blanket sometimes.
Well you wrote "overwhelming consensus" with even the quotation marks and the only reference to the overwhelming consensus had thus far been to the article about overwhelming consensus within the racer community.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10203
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Covalent »

pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote: The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
:D I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Indeed, e.g. there's a certain member that was trying to sweep the Hamilton Ricciardo Monaco incident under the carpet yet is now advocating for the Vettel penalty page after page..

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Siao7 wrote:
FormulaFun wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
This appeal to authority nonsense is so ridiculous. Not all these so called authority figures agree. Some say penalty some say not.

You do realise that the stewards who made the decision have all the information? It's not just a few zealots on a forum.asking for a penalty... Most people here agree that the penalty was acceptable, ex-drivers too and the stewards
Apparently not!
From what I'm reading that doesn't exactly include extra telemetry, more like things that Hamilton was 1.7s behind when Vettel cut the chicane so Hamilton in fact gained time, which is not true because Hamilton was within DRS range, and the positioning of Vettel's car was not quite as wide as his previous lap but what that has to do with Hamilton having to take avoiding action I don't know?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36363
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by pokerman »

Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote: People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Indeed, e.g. there's a certain member that was trying to sweep the Hamilton Ricciardo Monaco incident under the carpet yet is now advocating for the Vettel penalty page after page..
No that's been discussed in detail along with the Verstappen Kimi incident.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
FormulaFun wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:Blimey, we really are more knowledgeable about how to drive an F1 car than the majority of ex F1 drivers who have commented on this issue.
This appeal to authority nonsense is so ridiculous. Not all these so called authority figures agree. Some say penalty some say not.

You do realise that the stewards who made the decision have all the information? It's not just a few zealots on a forum.asking for a penalty... Most people here agree that the penalty was acceptable, ex-drivers too and the stewards
Apparently not!
From what I'm reading that doesn't exactly include extra telemetry, more like things that Hamilton was 1.7s behind when Vettel cut the chicane so Hamilton in fact gained time, which is not true because Hamilton was within DRS range, and the positioning of Vettel's car was not quite as wide as his previous lap but what that has to do with Hamilton having to take avoiding action I don't know?
Let's wait and see, you do not know what they have in their sleeve, no one does outside Ferrari so I am not sure what you read and where. I would not imagine Ferrari being so stupid as to bring this timing thing up compared to crowding another car as it is unrelated. Then again we have seen a lot in F1!

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote: The Olympic games lasts weeks so there is no need for people to rush off home after an event, just because Ferrari are launching an appeal doesn't mean they are going to win they didn't the last time they appealed a penalty.
I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
:D I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Of course I was interested in the Verstappen/Räikkönen incident, Kimi being one of the few drivers who interest me. At the time I believe I felt the penalty was correct, but I don't seem to have reacted to it on the race thread. Verstappen causing an accident with Vettel was a discussion I entered into. (Fully Verstappen's fault in my view.)

I'm not sure where you got the idea I believe the stewards had no right to penalise a driver until they have interviewed him after the race. That is not my point of view; the stewards definitely have the right to act as they have. I'm sure you will have read that I emphasize respect for the stewards' verdicts.

The two incidents are only superficially similar. Those who believe they are near-identical and consequently the recent Vettel penalty is explained and can only result in a penalty should consider things more carefully.
In Japan the driver error led to the incident, while in Canada controlling a loss of control led to it. In the steward reports of both incidents, this distinction isn't made, which surprises me. Which is also why I'm interested in what Ferrari will use in their defence of Vettel.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:I may be wrong, but I believe every event requires a ticket. So, just because you had tickets for an event at the Olympics, that doesn't mean you will have tickets for an event the following day if that is when the medals are being awarded.
:D I can understand people wanting to get on their way home soon after the race, but I don't subscribe to the view that the podium ceremony is more important than a correct result to the race. And if Francorchamps is anything to go by, staying at the track for a while longer is preferable to being stuck in traffic jams for hours. (Provided you stock up on drinks and food before the stalls close.)
People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Of course I was interested in the Verstappen/Räikkönen incident, Kimi being one of the few drivers who interest me. At the time I believe I felt the penalty was correct, but I don't seem to have reacted to it on the race thread. Verstappen causing an accident with Vettel was a discussion I entered into. (Fully Verstappen's fault in my view.)

I'm not sure where you got the idea I believe the stewards had no right to penalise a driver until they have interviewed him after the race. That is not my point of view; the stewards definitely have the right to act as they have. I'm sure you will have read that I emphasize respect for the stewards' verdicts.

The two incidents are only superficially similar. Those who believe they are near-identical and consequently the recent Vettel penalty is explained and can only result in a penalty should consider things more carefully.
In Japan the driver error led to the incident, while in Canada controlling a loss of control led to it. In the steward reports of both incidents, this distinction isn't made, which surprises me. Which is also why I'm interested in what Ferrari will use in their defence of Vettel.
Sorry to barge in, but isn't a loss of control essentially an error?

Fiki
Posts: 8131
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Fiki »

Siao7 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:People don't buy tickets for the awards ceremonies though and you have multiple award ceremonies which take about 5 minutes

The F1 podium ceremony is very much part of the event along with interviews, you can't be specific about the rights of drivers depending on were they finish, there might be an incident between 3rd and 4th place driver so we get into the realms of multiple delays.

Verstappen for instance should have been interviewed at Monaco because it was viewed that he deliberately squeezed Bottas in the pitlane causing a collision, strange that this conversation didn't take place after that race?
Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Of course I was interested in the Verstappen/Räikkönen incident, Kimi being one of the few drivers who interest me. At the time I believe I felt the penalty was correct, but I don't seem to have reacted to it on the race thread. Verstappen causing an accident with Vettel was a discussion I entered into. (Fully Verstappen's fault in my view.)

I'm not sure where you got the idea I believe the stewards had no right to penalise a driver until they have interviewed him after the race. That is not my point of view; the stewards definitely have the right to act as they have. I'm sure you will have read that I emphasize respect for the stewards' verdicts.

The two incidents are only superficially similar. Those who believe they are near-identical and consequently the recent Vettel penalty is explained and can only result in a penalty should consider things more carefully.
In Japan the driver error led to the incident, while in Canada controlling a loss of control led to it. In the steward reports of both incidents, this distinction isn't made, which surprises me. Which is also why I'm interested in what Ferrari will use in their defence of Vettel.
Sorry to barge in, but isn't a loss of control essentially an error?
That depends. The oversteer moment may or may not have been because of driver error, in that it wasn't an error of Vettel's if the backmarker's car led to it. Going over the grass is what caused loss of control, leading to the amount of track needed to regain control.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Siao7
Posts: 8970
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am

Re: Canada 2019: Vettel Penalty Uberthread (merged)

Post by Siao7 »

Fiki wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:Race fans don't buy tickets for the podium ceremony either. At Francorchamps, you wouldn't even be able to get to the podium area via the track in time, if you wanted to get there from most of the grandstands. But if there were a delay for the stewards' investigations, perhaps.... :D And a few years ago I was in the grandstand between the finish line and La Source, so I could see the drivers in the distance, plus the TV screen. But once Martin Brundle started interviewing the drivers, a helicopter kept flying up and down the finish straight. So I couldn't even understand what was said, even through the PA system. The fans at home could, I'm sure.
Still, none of all this changes my view that a correct result is what is needed, and if that takes some time, so be it.

I didn't really follow the Verstappen Monaco incident, but if I were a driver who had been investigated and given a penalty that was incorrect in my view, I would go and see the stewards afterwards, yes. I don't know what Max thought, or whether he cared. But going to see them instead of being summoned would make for a nice change, wouldn't you think?
I take your point with that, the podium presentation and interviews are really more important for the tv audience.

You had no views on the Verstappen incident because perhaps you were not really that interested but that would fall in this remit of yours that the stewards had no right to penalise him until they had interviewed him after the race.

It kind of doesn't surprise that people are only really interested in certain incidents being dealt with in a certain way that may be more important to them for one reason or another.
Of course I was interested in the Verstappen/Räikkönen incident, Kimi being one of the few drivers who interest me. At the time I believe I felt the penalty was correct, but I don't seem to have reacted to it on the race thread. Verstappen causing an accident with Vettel was a discussion I entered into. (Fully Verstappen's fault in my view.)

I'm not sure where you got the idea I believe the stewards had no right to penalise a driver until they have interviewed him after the race. That is not my point of view; the stewards definitely have the right to act as they have. I'm sure you will have read that I emphasize respect for the stewards' verdicts.

The two incidents are only superficially similar. Those who believe they are near-identical and consequently the recent Vettel penalty is explained and can only result in a penalty should consider things more carefully.
In Japan the driver error led to the incident, while in Canada controlling a loss of control led to it. In the steward reports of both incidents, this distinction isn't made, which surprises me. Which is also why I'm interested in what Ferrari will use in their defence of Vettel.
Sorry to barge in, but isn't a loss of control essentially an error?
That depends. The oversteer moment may or may not have been because of driver error, in that it wasn't an error of Vettel's if the backmarker's car led to it. Going over the grass is what caused loss of control, leading to the amount of track needed to regain control.
I see, I forgot the backmarker's involvement. It is however the very first incident, the crowding is the real issue and I can't see (at the moment) how they will escape this.

Post Reply