Alot easier when you already have 7 championships and are rightly talked about one of the greatest of all time. If that was early years Hamilton he'd of gone off on one.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
F1 Racing
- Thread starter Tony Manx
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 21,589
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Yeah I loved the season, really got me back into the sport when I had been drifting.
Big problems though.
Big problems though.
The season overall has been good, despite what has been said I think stewards have done a stirling job think whilst I've disagreed with decisions the only thing they did not get consistent was Sao Paolo (and it didn't effect the result or championship).
I think Masi as race director is the major problem. As one friend said there's no way Whiting would of made this level of cock ups he may of not even allowed the farce of Spa to go ahead.
I really hope the new formula shakes up the grid and McClaren can be awesome again.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2010
- Messages
- 21,589
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Yeah fair, I could always at least see the reasoning if I didn't quite agree.
Hoping for a strong Ferrari myself!
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2008
- Messages
- 100,021,394
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Literally the first season I've paid more than a passing interest to
Just had a thought is Masi wanted racing he should of red flagged it. Nobody would of called that much into question. And under the admittedly stupid red flag rules at least Hamilton wouldn't of been crippled through no fault of his own.
Yeah they said on the bbc text commentary that probably would have been the fairest solution. However Masi made the SC decision then realised it you spoil the end and for some reason decided Max had to have a chance to overtake.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 12,218
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
That's just so mind boggling though. You either let all the lapped cars through and Verstappen closes behind Hamilton or you let none through and Verstappen has to get past once the safety car pulls in. There is no provision to allow just 1 car to change their position behind the SC and none of the others. I'll be surprised if it stands, there is nothing to make it even close to legal, it was a fully illegal restart. There is no 50/50, no room for interpretation, it was blatantly making up a new rule to benefit 1 driver specifically.
I imagine the rules are vague enough to allow the race director to make the decision. The issue for me is there is no real precedent as far as I know. It's completely inconsistent with previous decisions and the ultimately the decision to let just the cars in front of Max through, especially after RB complained, and then end the safety car was completely biased towards Max. It gave him everything and Hamilton nothing.
Yeah saw it after my thought think it's conclusion most people will get to. Could of had 4-5 laps under it as well.
If they actually followed the procedures it was either finish behind SC (by allowing all lapped vehicles to pass) or 1 lap behind all the lapped guys. Neither of which was fair to Max really who can't be blamed at all for taking his chance (or Latifi). Masi is one to blame for completely compromising Lewis.
Really love watching close seasons and didn't want to see it end in controversy.
I slightly disagree, RB would have known there was a chance of finishing the race under the safety car. It was the risk they took and not unfair on Max, just unlucky. I don't think anyone had the decision that was made on the cards and that was completely unfair on Hamilton.
It'll stand there might be a protest but it'll stand. Masi might be moved on is the only thing that will happen. If a season gets decided by the courts F1 will be in huge problem fornthe sport and its intergrity. There's probably proviso to allow to race director discretion in applying the restart.
It's why Prost wasn't DSQ'd post Japan or punished after finishing when knocking Senna out.
Fair enough to finish under SC would of been unlucky not unfair. It wouldn't of been great for the sport though so in dunerstand why they didn't want to do it.
I can understand from an entertainment pov, but in doing so they've created more controversy and undermined the sport. There will also be many people (whether rightly or wrongly) who will see this as a ***le won unfairly and underserved. That doesn't create a good image either.
I entirely agree all I'm pointing out is they actually got to the worst decision when there were better ones out there that didn't break their rulebook. Apparently the rulebook (not people are digging) states unlapped cars are to given a full lap (to get sufficient distance ahead so front runner don't run into them). So it still should of finished under the SC.
Like I said I hate it but a red flag would of been entirely withing the rules. Given equal footing and allowed for racing. Masi ended up completely comprimising the race.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2014
- Messages
- 4,542
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
**** all will come of it but both reasonable protests.
FIA have broken their own rules pretty blatantly here, it's a bad look for Massi
So the two rules are one not allowing all cars (rules state any) to pass under safety car. Think that'll get scrubbed.
The other is Verstappen overtaking under safety car, technically happened but space was taken back. So will get scrubbed as well.
The first one will be the one mainly argued as its a language issue.
The other is Verstappen overtaking under safety car, technically happened but space was taken back. So will get scrubbed as well.
The first one will be the one mainly argued as its a language issue.
So according to the BBC this is rule regarding the safety car and lapped cars.
Article 39.12 of sporting regs says: "If clerk of the course considers it safe to do so, and the message "LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE" has been sent to all teams, any cars that have been lapped by leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car."
"Unless clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap."
For me it's pretty clear that every lapped car was required to pass and they hadn't and that the SC should have come in on the next lap, aka the final lap. I imagine there are other rules or maybe even more to this article that negates some of it, but purely based on what's written here they did a big naughty.
I also imagine is this goes to any neutral arbiter they will have to decide on the reasons for not following procedure correctly. I don't think they were biased and wanted Max to win, but they did want a race at the end. However, as I said, they had to know that this favoured Max heavily.
Article 39.12 of sporting regs says: "If clerk of the course considers it safe to do so, and the message "LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE" has been sent to all teams, any cars that have been lapped by leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car."
"Unless clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap."
For me it's pretty clear that every lapped car was required to pass and they hadn't and that the SC should have come in on the next lap, aka the final lap. I imagine there are other rules or maybe even more to this article that negates some of it, but purely based on what's written here they did a big naughty.
I also imagine is this goes to any neutral arbiter they will have to decide on the reasons for not following procedure correctly. I don't think they were biased and wanted Max to win, but they did want a race at the end. However, as I said, they had to know that this favoured Max heavily.
Whether any means all is complicated. I'm no legal expert but I interpret language for software and in my spare time baord game. Any allows for discretion usually.
The fact the SC was bought in the same lap is a clear infringement to enforcing their rules as written. So question is whether discretion is written elsewhere which I would be surprised if it wasn't.
The fact the SC was bought in the same lap is a clear infringement to enforcing their rules as written. So question is whether discretion is written elsewhere which I would be surprised if it wasn't.
