Grand Prix Rejects

Whoops....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/sebastian-vettel-disqualified-azerbaijan-grand-10730391

It ain't over until...

EDIT - Looks like The Mirror jumped the gun as the article has now been changed #fakenews

CoopsII wrote:Whoops....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/sebastian-vettel-disqualified-azerbaijan-grand-10730391

It ain't over until...

EDIT - Looks like The Mirror jumped the gun as the article has now been changed #fakenews

Given the comments that Paul Gutjahr, who was one of the stewards that weekend, has made - that they chose the 10 second stop and go because "we did not want to interfere in the championship too much" - it sounds as if the FIA have decided to take the same attitude as well.

mario wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Whoops....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/sebastian-vettel-disqualified-azerbaijan-grand-10730391

It ain't over until...

EDIT - Looks like The Mirror jumped the gun as the article has now been changed #fakenews

Given the comments that Paul Gutjahr, who was one of the stewards that weekend, has made - that they chose the 10 second stop and go because "we did not want to interfere in the championship too much" - it sounds as if the FIA have decided to take the same attitude as well.

And going by that logic, they may as well award points to championship contenders when their engines go up in smoke...

The decision of a 10 second stop/go on its own is one I can live with whether or not I personally agree with it, but this kind of reasoning has to stop. Holding front runners to a different standard such as this just because they have the most points sets a poor example.

mario wrote:Given the comments that Paul Gutjahr, who was one of the stewards that weekend, has made - that they chose the 10 second stop and go because "we did not want to interfere in the championship too much" - it sounds as if the FIA have decided to take the same attitude as well.

Well, fair enough then. I agree with him anyway, I want the season to be exciting and newsworthy and all this stuff certainly fuels that (plus I find it preferable to the Rosberg/Hamilton as the new Prost/Senna yawnathon).

Simtek wrote:

mario wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Whoops....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/sebastian-vettel-disqualified-azerbaijan-grand-10730391

It ain't over until...

EDIT - Looks like The Mirror jumped the gun as the article has now been changed #fakenews

Given the comments that Paul Gutjahr, who was one of the stewards that weekend, has made - that they chose the 10 second stop and go because "we did not want to interfere in the championship too much" - it sounds as if the FIA have decided to take the same attitude as well.

And going by that logic, they may as well award points to championship contenders when their engines go up in smoke...

The decision of a 10 second stop/go on its own is one I can live with whether or not I personally agree with it, but this kind of reasoning has to stop. Holding front runners to a different standard such as this just because they have the most points sets a poor example.

I have to agree with that reasoning - it is reminiscent of the 2012 Belgian GP and the sense that Grosjean was only treated that harshly because he crashed into Alonso, who was leading the WDC at the time.

In retrospect, I think that temporary ban might have been beneficial in as much as it forced Grosjean to reassess his outlook on racing and draw on external support that he had previously rejected - but the way in which it came about still set a bad precedent.

I have heard some fans arguing that "well, it would be bad for the championship if Vettel was penalised", but it is something that sits ill with me - driver popularity and commercial importance, or status within the WDC, shouldn't be being taken into account as a reason to "adjust" a penalty because you fear that the commercial owners might not like it.

mario wrote:

Simtek wrote:And going by that logic, they may as well award points to championship contenders when their engines go up in smoke...

The decision of a 10 second stop/go on its own is one I can live with whether or not I personally agree with it, but this kind of reasoning has to stop. Holding front runners to a different standard such as this just because they have the most points sets a poor example.

I have to agree with that reasoning - it is reminiscent of the 2012 Belgian GP and the sense that Grosjean was only treated that harshly because he crashed into Alonso, who was leading the WDC at the time.

In retrospect, I think that temporary ban might have been beneficial in as much as it forced Grosjean to reassess his outlook on racing and draw on external support that he had previously rejected - but the way in which it came about still set a bad precedent.

I have heard some fans arguing that "well, it would be bad for the championship if Vettel was penalised", but it is something that sits ill with me - driver popularity and commercial importance, or status within the WDC, shouldn't be being taken into account as a reason to "adjust" a penalty because you fear that the commercial owners might not like it.

It is the worst decision they could have taken. They could have either punished Vettel further with a DSQ (the correct decision in my book) or not investigated at all. They came out looking weaker than if they hadn't investigated which at least would have had the guts of backing their stewards. Anyway, FIA are now seen as tolerant for this type of unsafe unsporting behavior which is ironic given that Todt likes to portray himself as a paramount of road safety. He is well in line with good old Louis XVI like french leaders tradition...

DanielPT wrote:FIA are now seen as tolerant for this type of unsafe unsporting behavior .

Unsporting maybe but it wasn't unsafe though, was it? Not at that speed.

CoopsII wrote:

DanielPT wrote:FIA are now seen as tolerant for this type of unsafe unsporting behavior .

Unsporting maybe but it wasn't unsafe though, was it? Not at that speed.

Well, both cars could have had internal suspension damage that could have caused an allmighty crash at the end of the straight, with (possibly) catastrophic consequences, only because of that touch...

It didn't happened, but it could have happened with ease

AdrianBelmonte_ wrote:Well, both cars could have had internal suspension damage that could have caused an allmighty crash at the end of the straight, with (possibly) catastrophic consequences, only because of that touch...

It didn't happened, but it could have happened with ease

It's possible and a good point but so many things occur in a race that could and do result in car failures that policing it must be damn near impossible. Or depressingly draconian.

CoopsII wrote:

AdrianBelmonte_ wrote:Well, both cars could have had internal suspension damage that could have caused an allmighty crash at the end of the straight, with (possibly) catastrophic consequences, only because of that touch...

It didn't happened, but it could have happened with ease

It's possible and a good point but so many things occur in a race that could and do result in car failures that policing it must be damn near impossible. Or depressingly draconian.

While I do agree that it is near impossible to police all that can originate car failures, there are certain things, like this one, that are not only easy to police but also its occurrences can be easily avoidable.

DanielPT wrote:While I do agree that it is near impossible to police all that can originate car failures, there are certain things, like this one, that are not only easy to police but also its occurrences can be easily avoidable.

But I think you always see stuff like this when passions run high and you can't take the passion out of sport, not at this level anyway.

I've had to remind a couple of colleagues that Vettel hasn't 'gotten away' with it as he has been punished, clearly not enough for lots of people but then it comes down to what the point of punishment is? If it's to correct behaviour then, if he has any sense, and Vettel doesn't barge into another car at walking pace again (and I'm still not convinced he intended to hit him quite as hard as he actually did) then the punishment worked. If it's to make third parties feel happier because Vettel 'got his' and was 'put in his place' then I believe that's playing to the crowd and I'm not in favour of that personally.

But, you know what? Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one.