2021 São Paulo Grand Prix - Interlagos, Nov 12-14

[f1jcw]

What do you think of this, could be possible?

https://www.racefans.net/2021/11/15/cou ... ton-clash/

It is possible, but no it won't happen.

[NathanOlder]

Thanks for supporting the point

Also look at Hamilton vs Perez when Perez managed to repass Lewis. Perez was a car length ahead, on the outside, Lewis knew the corner was lost and did the right thing.

Max was in an almost identical position, and Max's actions took 2 cars miles off the track.

[DChemTech]

Thanks for supporting the point

Also look at Hamilton vs Perez when Perez managed to repass Lewis. Perez was a car length ahead, on the outside, Lewis knew the corner was lost and did the right thing.

Max was in an almost identical position, and Max's actions took 2 cars miles off the track.

Again, not putting any of that into question. But it's not the point.

[AeroDynamic]

I’m not sure why you need to tell me this, if it makes you feel better I guess? But it does seem petty to direct this at me because I guess you feel some way about my post. I kinda like Toto, but I don’t care about him, I got no reason to care if others think less of him. F1 is not a personality contest, I’m here to rate drives. Not personalities. If it affects how the sport plays out like it does on the radio to the FIA then I have reason to concern myself with who these people are rather than what they do on track. And I’m not knocking Wheatley, I complimented him; he’s got mad game, way more than Ron has for Mercedes. it’s just revolting to watch. But since you bring up the email thing I feel it’s appropriate to remind you, that was in response to lobbying from another team who didn’t want to allow the stewards to form their own opinion.

I think the right thing to do is let the stewards form an opinion, as it is their boundary and that should be respected, and then react to it after or appeal it if a team feel it should.

I will criticise RB because they have not respected this boundary this season and have in fact been lobbying and gaming the FIA over radio to influence how they should look at the incident or feel about it without affording them their own time and view. They shouldn’t be telling them anything while they’re reviewing technical evidence and video evidence, and going over the rules. Bias opinions from teams abuse the fidelity of the stewards work.

Max and Silverstone is old. Everyone has their own opinion, bringing it up again is a waste of time. I will say that in my view, Lewis would’ve kept his car on the road in Silverstone, and was actually along side almost fully before breaking. I approve of that. I don’t approve of being almost a car length behind before breaking, and out breaking yourself so much that you leave the circuit by more than 4 car widths

I directed it at you because you made the comment. If it were someone else making the comment, I'd be directing it at them. But yes, for someone not claiming to rate personalities, you seem to have quite strong judgements on personalities. But there are other users that made similar, or worse, comments to drivers, stewards, and whatnot - so it's definitely not just (or even predominantly) directed at you personally. It just generally keeps amazing me that there's a sizable group that call out every slight bit of bias in favor of Max, and present themselves as unbiased voices of reason, while they themselves show similar bias in favor of Lewis.

Mercedes is not free of such lobbying. They lobbied regarding wings, they called suspicion on the RB engine when RB was performing well, there are allegations of Mercedes having been a significant factor in pushing for the new pit stop rules, and I do not think the lobbying towards the Steward at Silverstone was 'in response' - they would gave done it regardless.

And yes, Silverstone -the incident, title deciding as it may be- is in the past. That won't change. But I am not bringing up the incident - I am bringing up the response. What I'm saying is that, there are users here that 'assault' Lewis when Lewis's made a mistake, and defend Max when Max's made a mistake. There are equally users that 'assault' Max when Max's made a mistake, and defend Lewis when Lewis's made a mistake - and immediately go into the defense every time Silverstone is named, even when it was not at all about the incident itself...

Instead of making it personal about the individuals, why don’t you just say you disagree and think teams should be lobbying them over the radio to influence their decisions? I don’t care who does it, I just don’t agree with it. This season I haven’t seen Mercedes do what I’m criticising red bull of doing.

Again I think you’re missing the point completely. I’ve criticised personalities based on what they’re doing to affect what happens on the track - FIA making decisions. I never attacked Wheatley personally as an individual, it’s his job at the behest of his team to do what he’s doing. But I don’t agree with it at all. If you like it, good for you.

From your responses, it seems you also disagree and think the FIA should’ve harshly applied that punishment and ended the championship potentially right then and there? Any real F1 fans would’ve been happy for the result of that Brazilian Grand Prix. Who wants this championship decided by something like that?


Apples and oranges - it’s not wrong for teams to query other teams cars behind the scenes, they need to know what they can and can’t do, and how to develop their car to fight the other teams innovations, that’s a rightful boundary, it’s miles away from what we are talking about here, and I think you are reaching now. Lobbying on track incidents is not on. Stewards are there to do the policing and the judging of incidents on track. If every team could influence the stewards, it would never be to get a just outcome, only the one that favours them. That’s why we need independent stewards.


I don’t know any serious grown man that lends that much concern of himself with what these other users on a web forum are saying about each others opinions of drivers moves. Does it matter? Of course these people will pretend to be attorneys for these drivers, some do it so hard they should be getting paid

But anyway. Is what it is.

[Alvareth]

Exciting weekend! What did we learn?
1) Mercedes got caught by 3 hairs
2) Verstappen got caught with touchy fingers
3) Verstappen going over the edge as usual
4) Mercedes reliability and sustainability means burning away engines as fast as possible
And finally,
5) Allways wear your seat belts!

[ringo]

Given that there was no investigation for what was obviously something that should have been.
Should there be a higher level investigation for incompetent or corrupt stewarding?
It sets a bad precedent if Stewards turn a blind eye to infractions during an event. We can see this kind of driving basically ruining the sport if nothing is done.
You can imagine if there was some big bets placed for Max to win with Lewis at the back of the sprint race and the stewarding was rigged to ensure that happens. We never know. So it needs to be looked into.

[carisi2k]

Let them race sounds about right when it comes to Max and Lewis. Considering what those two have been up to this year, that Lewis didn't crash and there was tarmac runoff then no harm no foul. My question to the supposedly corrupt officials is why was Lewis only disqualified from qualifying and not the Q sprint since that is part of qualifying. Lewis should have been starting this race at the back of the grid and not 10th place.

The other thing I have issue with is why the heck didn't red bull take a new PU here as well. It would have given Max plenty of scope to fend off Lewis. They no longer need to worry about Valterri from Max's perspective and so surely giving Max something he will be able to fight with for the rest of the year to win a championship was of a higher prerogative.

[kalinka]

Let them race sounds about right when it comes to Max and Lewis. Considering what those two have been up to this year, that Lewis didn't crash and there was tarmac runoff then no harm no foul. My question to the supposedly corrupt officials is why was Lewis only disqualified from qualifying and not the Q sprint since that is part of qualifying. Lewis should have been starting this race at the back of the grid and not 10th place.

The other thing I have issue with is why the heck didn't red bull take a new PU here as well. It would have given Max plenty of scope to fend off Lewis. They no longer need to worry about Valterri from Max's perspective and so surely giving Max something he will be able to fight with for the rest of the year to win a championship was of a higher prerogative.

Let them race sounds awful when only one of the drivers makes crash-avoiding moves and the other one does nothing. Making the corner at least would be nice.

[Stu]

I’ve just watched the race again and am wondering why they didn’t broadcast Toto losing his --- about how slow the grid formed up for the sprint. They broadcast it in Mexico, but not here. Can’t think why….

[Stu]

Let them race sounds about right when it comes to Max and Lewis. Considering what those two have been up to this year, that Lewis didn't crash and there was tarmac runoff then no harm no foul. My question to the supposedly corrupt officials is why was Lewis only disqualified from qualifying and not the Q sprint since that is part of qualifying. Lewis should have been starting this race at the back of the grid and not 10th place.

The other thing I have issue with is why the heck didn't red bull take a new PU here as well. It would have given Max plenty of scope to fend off Lewis. They no longer need to worry about Valterri from Max's perspective and so surely giving Max something he will be able to fight with for the rest of the year to win a championship was of a higher prerogative.

Let them race sounds awful when only one of the drivers makes crash-avoiding moves and the other one does nothing. Making the corner at least would be nice.

Not really wanting to drag in the racing incident at Silverstone again, but there is only a single difference between that and this lap 49 incident - CONTACT - in both incidents, both protagonists entered the corner too fast, off-line and with the same mentality; at Silverstone neither stayed on the track, the only reason for the penalty in that incident was the contact (causing a collision).

[Starkblood80]

Let them race sounds about right when it comes to Max and Lewis. Considering what those two have been up to this year, that Lewis didn't crash and there was tarmac runoff then no harm no foul. My question to the supposedly corrupt officials is why was Lewis only disqualified from qualifying and not the Q sprint since that is part of qualifying. Lewis should have been starting this race at the back of the grid and not 10th place.

The other thing I have issue with is why the heck didn't red bull take a new PU here as well. It would have given Max plenty of scope to fend off Lewis. They no longer need to worry about Valterri from Max's perspective and so surely giving Max something he will be able to fight with for the rest of the year to win a championship was of a higher prerogative.

Let them race sounds awful when only one of the drivers makes crash-avoiding moves and the other one does nothing. Making the corner at least would be nice.

Not really wanting to drag in the racing incident at Silverstone again, but there is only a single difference between that and this lap 49 incident - CONTACT - in both incidents, both protagonists entered the corner too fast, off-line and with the same mentality; at Silverstone neither stayed on the track, the only reason for the penalty in that incident was the contact (causing a collision).

Hamilton stayed on track at silverstone and has been said before, stewards are not supposed to look at the consequences of an incident, only the intent.

[NathanOlder]

Let them race sounds about right when it comes to Max and Lewis. Considering what those two have been up to this year, that Lewis didn't crash and there was tarmac runoff then no harm no foul. My question to the supposedly corrupt officials is why was Lewis only disqualified from qualifying and not the Q sprint since that is part of qualifying. Lewis should have been starting this race at the back of the grid and not 10th place.

The other thing I have issue with is why the heck didn't red bull take a new PU here as well. It would have given Max plenty of scope to fend off Lewis. They no longer need to worry about Valterri from Max's perspective and so surely giving Max something he will be able to fight with for the rest of the year to win a championship was of a higher prerogative.

Let them race sounds awful when only one of the drivers makes crash-avoiding moves and the other one does nothing. Making the corner at least would be nice.

Not really wanting to drag in the racing incident at Silverstone again, but there is only a single difference between that and this lap 49 incident - CONTACT - in both incidents, both protagonists entered the corner too fast, off-line and with the same mentality; at Silverstone neither stayed on the track, the only reason for the penalty in that incident was the contact (causing a collision).

And the only reason there should have been a penalty this time was, gaining an advantage. The car on the inside was almost a full car length behind going in to the braking zone, he braked later, on a tighter line, missed the apex, missed the track, forced another car off track, and gained the position back that he just lost.

This is almost wide enough that 2 track widths wouldnt have been enough for the dive bomb!!!

[KeiKo403]

When we get a 'No investigation necessary' message, obviously that message is sent from Race Control. However, does anyone know:
1. Is it because Race Control have not deemed it worthy of FIA Stewards investigation
or
2. The FIA stewards have had a preliminary review and deemed the incident not worthy of 'formal' investigation.

In case of option 1, I'm curious to know who and how that decision is made. Did Race Control ever put this incident to the stewards?

[djones]

When we get a 'No investigation necessary' message, obviously that message is sent from Race Control. However, does anyone know:
1. Is it because Race Control have not deemed it worthy of FIA Stewards investigation
or
2. The FIA stewards have had a preliminary review and deemed the incident not worthy of 'formal' investigation.

In case of option 1, I'm curious to know who and how that decision is made. Did Race Control ever put this incident to the stewards?

With Max/Lewis this weekend it was actually number 3.....

Liberty wants to claw back some of their $8bn investment by making 'the show' better for casual viewers.

[KeiKo403]

To answer my own question and for anyone else interested, looks like the stewards did look at the incident, so option 2 of my above post.

47) INCIDENTS DURING THE SPRINT QUALIFYING SESSION OR THE RACE
47.1
The Race Director may report any on-track incident or suspected breach of these Sporting
Regulations or the Code (an “Incident”) to the stewards. After review it shall be at the discretion
of the stewards to decide whether or not to proceed with an investigation.