Grand Prix Rejects

Except that Maldonado's move let Schumacher get onto the podium.

And I think Maldonado and Hamilton were equally at fault for that one. It was a racing incident, nothing more.

Captain Hammer wrote:And I think Maldonado and Hamilton were equally at fault for that one. It was a racing incident, nothing more.

Agreed. Hamilton was defending far too hard for someone whose rear tyres were shot to bits and Pastor was simply being Pastor. Which is what makes watching him so much fun because you simply have no idea what he'll do next

That being said, Nigella does have a point as without Pastor's blunder, Williams will have, in all likelyhood, overtaken Sauber in the constructors championship. Instead, Force India are now within a point of overtaking the Grove squad and are probably the better team overall to boot.

Both the BBC director and F1 director annoyed me yesterday. The F1 guy pulled away from great action to focus on the front and as for the BBC, well, look guys I know what Vettel looks like I dont need to see him explaining his retirement when I should be watching the action.

To be fair though perhaps both TV teams were caught unaware by how action-packed the race was

CoopsII wrote:Both the BBC director and F1 director annoyed me yesterday. The F1 guy pulled away from great action to focus on the front and as for the BBC, well, look guys I know what Vettel looks like I dont need to see him explaining his retirement when I should be watching the action.

To be fair though perhaps both TV teams were caught unaware by how action-packed the race was

Agreed.

Having been forced to watch the BBC coverage (as the Sky re-run clashed with the England game), I'd like to throw in a dishonourable mention to Gary Anderson. I had no idea what he was talking about for the entire race!

I nominate Vergne.

3rd: F1 Rejects forum members - everyone who thought we'd have a procession, myself included: never we've been so wrong. In this case however, being wrong is good!
2nd: Williams drivers - lucky to have scored a point (Maldonado's post-race penalty promoted Senna to 10th) after all the crashing and bashing...
1st: Toro Rosso - both drivers outqualified by Kovalainen, and ruined Caterham's race when they had their best shot ever at their first point! Also that move of Vergne on Kovalainen... the latter described it very appropriately as a "rookie error". Are you serious you dumped Alguersuari and Buemi for these two?

I agree with Priceless above for the 1st and 2nd ...

2nd Williams Drivers. After Monaco a point was raised that they had been awarded ROTR for 50% of the races so far, and still the same things are happening. It seems as if Senna has no
spatial awareness - he must be averaging 1 collision per race, mostly whilst being overtaken by cars on fresher rubber. And as for Maldonado - seriously, apart from all of Spain (right now)
and Venezuela, how can anyone like this guy? What he lacks in thought processes and patience, he makes up for with (far too much) aggression, and very little remorse.

1st Toro Rosso Drivers. Pretty much all the reasons have already been discussed. They were outqualified by Heikki and hit a Caterham each. Did they not think that the Caterham drivers
were worthy of being in front of them? Both moves seemed unneccesary and ruined Petrov's chance at points (or at least a new best finish for the team) - and it's likely that Vergne's
causing of the Safety Car led to Vettel's failure (though whether that is actually a bad thing is subjective) ...

Thinking about my nomination further, it actually opens rather an interesting loophole in the rules. Now let's say that the season where Arrows were collapsing was taking place in 2012, and that they didn't have enough funds or engine mileage to start the race. Rather than deliberately DNQing as they did back then, they could save even more by not entering qualifying by claiming that both drivers, haven eaten the same food, both contracted food poisoning, and therefore neither could take part on the Saturday. Judging by what happened to Glock, both cars would be excused and there would be absolutely no penalty in not taking part, even though, behind the scenes, the team had no intention of taking part anyway. Heck, I imagine that this trick would have gone down well at Andrea Moda... And officially, the FIA couldn't even accuse the team of bringing the sport into disrepute - it would not have been the team's fault if both drivers 'coincidently' fell ill on the same weekend at the same time!

madmark1974 wrote:It seems as if Senna has no spatial awareness

I only saw it as it happened but I thought Senna was pretty blameless, I couldnt see why he was given the drive through? Kobayashi hit him from behind afterall.

CoopsII wrote:

madmark1974 wrote:It seems as if Senna has no spatial awareness

I only saw it as it happened but I thought Senna was pretty blameless, I couldnt see why he was given the drive through? Kobayashi hit him from behind afterall.

Same, I too only saw it live, but it seemed to me as if Senna took his racing line while Kobayashi only had his front wing alongside. And it has often been reported how poor the view from the wing mirrors are on F1 cars...

dr-baker wrote:

CoopsII wrote:

madmark1974 wrote:It seems as if Senna has no spatial awareness

I only saw it as it happened but I thought Senna was pretty blameless, I couldnt see why he was given the drive through? Kobayashi hit him from behind afterall.

Same, I too only saw it live, but it seemed to me as if Senna took his racing line while Kobayashi only had his front wing alongside. And it has often been reported how poor the view from the wing mirrors are on F1 cars...

Probably fair enough for this particular collision, but he does seem to get into 'incidents' at every race, especially at the start. Looking at the cumulative effect, there seem to have been too many
for them all to be someone else's fault ...

Hence my nomination for both the Williams drivers - it was kind of a following-on-from-previous-rejectful-antics nomination. They don't seem to learn from their many mistakes.

As much as I hate to admit it, the crash with Senna was Kobayashi's fault.

eurobrun wrote:As much as I hate to admit it, the crash with Senna was Kobayashi's fault.

I think with both of Kamui's incidents, a gap did exist, just not for very long, certainly not the length of time it needed for a car to pass through anyway ...

I'm changing by bronze nomination from Button to Maldonado now I've seen the incident further. Why?

It was reminiscent two similar incidents I'd seen in the recent past (Lewis/Kimi Spa 08 with Lewis in the Kimi role this time) and Kubica/Alonso, Silverstone 2010 (with Lewis in Robert's role there) - where the driver trying to overtake was pushed to the outside at a chicane.

Maldonado had a whole run-off area the size of a supermarket car park to go across and rejoin, if he had rejioned in front of Hamilton he'd have had to let him back through but he still had a lap and a half to do it. Instead he tries to make the corner coming in from a really acute angle which was always going to result in a crash - don't know where Hamilton could go to avoid it.

I think a driver has a right to be defending really hard that close to the end of the race (early on is a different matter), but surely Maldonado could have got past if he'd waited a bit longer? Kimi got past cleanly the lap before after all.

I don't blame Senna for his part in the Kobayashi collision though.

On another note, I've just seen the Autosport's ratings out of 10, and Jean-Eric Vergne got a big fat zero!!

madmark1974 wrote:It seems as if Senna has no spatial awareness

You're only just learning this now?

1. Jean-Eric Vergne

2. Pastor Maldonado

madmark1974 wrote:And as for Maldonado - seriously, apart from all of Spain (right now) and Venezuela, how can anyone like this guy? What he lacks in thought processes and patience, he makes up for with (far too much) aggression, and very little remorse.

I don't particularly like him, but i'm grateful to him for breaking the Williams no-win run that lasted years. And he's entertaining on track, F1 does need some idiots, which is exactly what Williams are providing us, and Toro Rosso.

redbulljack14 wrote:F1 does need some idiots, which is exactly what Williams are providing us, and Toro Rosso.

I agree with you on all aspects - though I do like Ricciardo.

1. Maldonado - no explaination needed
2. Toro Rosso - no explaination needed

madmark1974 wrote:

redbulljack14 wrote:F1 does need some idiots, which is exactly what Williams are providing us, and Toro Rosso.

I agree with you on all aspects - though I do like Ricciardo.

I like Ricciardo too, he's a ridiculously cheerful guy, but he's not that good.

Also, I forgot to mention HRT, who for some reason have Karthikeyan.

madmark1974 wrote:

eurobrun wrote:As much as I hate to admit it, the crash with Senna was Kobayashi's fault.

I think with both of Kamui's incidents, a gap did exist, just not for very long, certainly not the length of time it needed for a car to pass through anyway ...

The problem with Senna is that he left the door open long enough for Kamui to stick his nose in, and then he shut the door. It was always an optimistic move for Kobayashi, but Senna really should've been more on the ball in deciding that he wanted to defend the place.

OK, official decision time!

Tough one, this. So many candidates, so many incidents. So many silly incidents, indeed ...

Let me start with those I ruled out. I called Petrov and Ricciardo as a racing incident. I thought Senna was hard-done by with his penalty for moving across Kobayashi. Sure, he may have been a sitting duck in terms of pace, but he was entitled to move back onto the racing line. It's not like he chopped Kobayashi in a straight line. The fact that he tagged Kamui's front wing shows that the Sauber wasn't anywhere near alongside. Another racing incident, I thought.

But ah, the Sushi Chef's Son from Amagasaki. That incident with Massa was unnecessary. On several occasions during the race, different drivers showed how they could fairly run an opponent out of space (or indeed generously give them racing room) without getting the elbows out. Kamui positively rammed into Felipe.

But then again, it was mid-race, mid-pack, on a safety car restart. A bit of red mist is understandable. The red mist is not so excusable at the end of the race when there are big points at stake. Enter Pastor Maldonado. I must say I can't see what Hamilton did wrong. Yes his tyres are shot, yes he has points on the line and a championship to think about - but the latter reason is as much a reason to keep defending as it is to give the place up. Those 3 points between 3rd and 4th could make the difference in a year like this. Plus you would have thought he was gone on the run from the bridge, down the DRS zone, into that corner - and yet he had pretty much held the Williams off. Who says he couldn't have miraculously done it for another lap and a half? He had done exactly what he needed to do to get Maldonado to back down. Pastor did two inexcusable things. Firstly, he threw away yet more big points for Williams. 15 here, 8 in Melbourne, potentially a few in Monaco - he could have been on more points than Grosjean by now. Secondly, clipping Hamilton from being fully off the track was just plain illegal.

But hey, given how many ROTRs he's collected in the last 10 races, Pastor's an easy target. As far as illegality goes, hello Jean-Eric Vergne. This isn't a video game, y'know. That was just plain dangerous - not to mention driving back to the pits too quickly, on top of another dismal qualifying effort. But there were two mitigating factors. One, yes Vergne swerved but Kovalainen didn't entirely help matters as once again the curse of the curved Valencia straights struck. His trajectory - following the normal racing line rather than the profile of the track - was taking him towards the Toro Rosso anyway. Two, Vergne's lunacy actually helped make a great race in the end. Without him, such was the field spread that even the different strategies and fading Pirellis wouldn't have created half as good a race as we ended up getting.

Plus in the end I can't help but think that, in a season as close as this, where in so many races we've seen pack racing, there are bound to be more examples of daft wheelbanging which will surely earn ROTR awards.

So I've gone for something different, and awarded it to alternators. I mean, mechanical DNFs are rare enough these days. But usually they're hydraulic failures, with the occasional bung gearbox or dud set of brakes thrown in (yes HRT I'm thinking about you). But alternators? When was the last time anyone retired with alternator failure? And not one but two alternator failures? Knocking out a guy who would have won, and another who could have won? In terms of a "what the?" factor, nothing beats the humble alternator this time around, and that is exactly what the ROTR award is all about.

P.S. As well as putting up a picture of an alternator on the F1 Rejects main page, check out the "featured picture" as well ... and a flashback to a test which probably all of us have forgotten about ...

eytl wrote:So I've gone for something different, and awarded it to alternators.

That's one less thing I have to worry about for Predicament Predictions then

Wizzie wrote:

eytl wrote:So I've gone for something different, and awarded it to alternators.

That's one less thing I have to worry about for Predicament Predictions then

I really like these obscure ROTR's.

Having got 0/10 for his rating on the Autosport website, Jean-Eric Vergne can count himself VERY lucky 2 alternators failed.

James1978 wrote:Having got 0/10 for his rating on the Autosport website, Jean-Eric Vergne can count himself VERY lucky 2 alternators failed.

I don't check Autosport that often anymore, has anyone else got 0/10 this season.

eurobrun wrote:

James1978 wrote:Having got 0/10 for his rating on the Autosport website, Jean-Eric Vergne can count himself VERY lucky 2 alternators failed.

I don't check Autosport that often anymore, has anyone else got 0/10 this season.

I can't confirm for definite but I highly doubt it since I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it.

No doubt about it. . .

Toro Rosso for ruining a possible Caterham point. . .(i said possible)
Maldonado he is a good driver but hes to reckless and dumb.
Button - what is up with your car?
Massa - I get he was unlucky but Petrov overtaking him back was pretty funny.

Interesting choice of ROTR. I'd have thought that the F1 Rejects Forums community (bar Klon) were steaming their way towards ROTR with our appalling predictions.

East Londoner wrote:Interesting choice of ROTR. I'd have thought that the F1 Rejects Forums community (bar Klon) were steaming their way towards ROTR with our appalling predictions.

This, this all the way. Although I find the choice more underwhelming then anything.

eytl wrote:When was the last time anyone retired with alternator failure?

To answer your question, Kimi Räikkönen, lap 9 of the 2007 Spanish GP.

tzerof1 wrote:

eytl wrote:When was the last time anyone retired with alternator failure?

To answer your question, Kimi Räikkönen, lap 9 of the 2007 Spanish GP.

And he went on to win the championship that year, which I hope isn't an omen as I don't want either Vettel or GRSJN to win.

Maldonado- thats 5th and a 3rd thrown down the drain by this fool.

Senna- he is just so anodyne, what a terrible insipid choice of driver. Sutil or Petrov would be doing better, possibly even Liuzzi.

jackanderton wrote:Maldonado- thats 5th and a 3rd thrown down the drain by this fool.

Senna- he is just so anodyne, what a terrible insipid choice of driver. Sutil or Petrov would be doing better, possibly even Liuzzi.

Petrov would have been perfect for Williams, a pay driver with talent.

If Maldonado had the maturity of Alonso, and closed out those results, the gulf in performance on paper between the two would be as much as it looks on screen.

Even Heidfeld, Alguersuari, etc.

I wonder if Felipe Massa might drive for Williams next year at this rate....

With a 5th in Australia and a 3rd at Valencia, Maldonado would be 6th in the WDC with 54 points. Both were there to have, The idiot!

redbulljack14 wrote:

jackanderton wrote:Maldonado- thats 5th and a 3rd thrown down the drain by this fool.

Senna- he is just so anodyne, what a terrible insipid choice of driver. Sutil or Petrov would be doing better, possibly even Liuzzi.

Petrov would have been perfect for Williams, a pay driver with talent.

Yeah, but I think that would've conflicted with Maldonado - I think Petrov's sponsored by Gazprom, and that might've been seen as a conflict of interest with PDVSA. I think Maldonado also has more money with him, but Petrov probably would've made up for that by actually finishing races where he should've.

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

redbulljack14 wrote:

jackanderton wrote:Maldonado- thats 5th and a 3rd thrown down the drain by this fool.

Senna- he is just so anodyne, what a terrible insipid choice of driver. Sutil or Petrov would be doing better, possibly even Liuzzi.

Petrov would have been perfect for Williams, a pay driver with talent.

Yeah, but I think that would've conflicted with Maldonado - I think Petrov's sponsored by Gazprom, and that might've been seen as a conflict of interest with PDVSA. I think Maldonado also has more money with him, but Petrov probably would've made up for that by actually finishing races where he should've.

Yeah I guess you're right.

Sutil would have been a good option, although it would give Williams negative publicity.

Liuzzi would be doing better than Senna in my opinion, and would have finally unrejectified himself.

redbulljack14 wrote:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:

redbulljack14 wrote:
Petrov would have been perfect for Williams, a pay driver with talent.

Yeah, but I think that would've conflicted with Maldonado - I think Petrov's sponsored by Gazprom, and that might've been seen as a conflict of interest with PDVSA. I think Maldonado also has more money with him, but Petrov probably would've made up for that by actually finishing races where he should've.

Yeah I guess you're right.

Sutil would have been a good option, although it would give Williams negative publicity.

Liuzzi would be doing better than Senna in my opinion, and would have finally unrejectified himself.

If Sutil wasn't stupid enough to glass Eric Lux, he would be Maldonado's teammate right now. Full stop, new paragraph.

Wizzie wrote:If Sutil wasn't stupid enough to glass Eric Lux, he would be Maldonado's teammate right now. Full stop, new paragraph.

No, he would not. It is now obvious that money was always going to be the decisive factor in that decision and Senna would always have more than Sutil and Barrichello combined for that matter. If anything, Sutil getting jailed for glassing was just about the perfect excuse for Williams to not even bother looking at Sutil.