2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[outer_bongolia]

....

What is true though is that we saw an amazing season, full of emotions, which I'm grateful for, what a ride!

Enough preaching, have a great day lads.

Well said!

Those of us who watch football (soccer) have seen world cups go to the wrong hands due to officiating errors. We breathe in and out and move on.

I have been a Ham fan since he lost the WDC in his first year partially thanks to his within team competition: mighty Alonso. I definitely understand the frustrations.

And looking at Max’s season: The poor guy had terrible luck. In Azerbaijan, Hungary, GB (yup I just called it an unlucky accident that could’ve been avoided)... If he had some luck, this competition might have gone his way earlier.

The race, though. Major officiating blunder. Initially not allowing the cars to unlap themselves and then handpicking those who can do so was, simply put, choosing the winner.

[El Scorchio]

So Red Bull aren't clever enough to work that out, and their pitting was a waste of time?

I'm sorry but that really doesn't make sense IMO. Mercedes had every opportunity to also pit and to expect a restart.

No they didn’t. They’d have lost track position. Pitting would have been insane and as good as giving the title away regardless of whether the race ended under safety car or not.

Honestly not worth explaining this. I understand that we get a flow of trolls passing through that will not understand how the rules and strategies work.
But the regulars around here really should know better. Don't waste your time trying to explain, its clear they don't want to understand. I replied to this user but reading on, I have realised its a waste of time.

Agree. Either a failure to grasp the basics or being deliberately obtuse.

[mzivtins]

It is not gambling when someone causes an act of randomness that very clearly gifts benefit to one driver over another.

How do you explain max having the bonus of the cars removed infront of him whilst leaving them behind him insulating him from a fast Sainz?

How is that a strategy call? This was artificial as the scenario was manufactured by someone in the fia with power.

Calling it strategy is completely incorrect.

If they didn't remove the lapped cars, it would still be a SC finish (just without SC)... nobody seems to understand that.

The only "issue" I have is, why wait that long to remove the lapped cars.

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

[DChemTech]

If they didn't remove the lapped cars, it would still be a SC finish (just without SC)... nobody seems to understand that.

The only "issue" I have is, why wait that long to remove the lapped cars.

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

[Mattyw]

If they didn't remove the lapped cars, it would still be a SC finish (just without SC)... nobody seems to understand that.

The only "issue" I have is, why wait that long to remove the lapped cars.

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

I was just reading about the Sainz point. It just gets worse. Farcical frankly.

[Aesop]

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

I fully agree. Alonso does too.

[mzivtins]

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

Normal procedure would have finished under SC, or at very least given sainz a run for the win.

How can you glance over the glaring issue of sainz and many others races being neutralized whilst only Max's wasn't? That's rigging.

Vettel was also complaining that the cars he could have passed were gifted a lap over him!

Just forget about max and Lewis fir a second and the issue becomes more grave. The sport was rigged by way of stopping all cars racing apart from max.

[Aesop]

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

Normal procedure would have finished under SC, or at very least given sainz a run for the win.

How can you glance over the glaring issue of sainz and many others races being neutralized whilst only Max's wasn't? That's rigging.

Vettel was also complaining that the cars he could have passed were gifted a lap over him!

Just forget about max and Lewis fir a second and the issue becomes more grave. The sport was rigged by way of stopping all cars racing apart from max.

The sport was rigged the moment Masi decided lapped cars weren't allowed to unlap themselves.

[mzivtins]

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

Normal procedure would have finished under SC, or at very least given sainz a run for the win.

How can you glance over the glaring issue of sainz and many others races being neutralized whilst only Max's wasn't? That's rigging.

Vettel was also complaining that the cars he could have passed were gifted a lap over him!

Just forget about max and Lewis fir a second and the issue becomes more grave. The sport was rigged by way of stopping all cars racing apart from max.

The sport was rigged the moment Masi decided lapped cars weren't allowed to unlap themselves.

I think that all cars unlap, or no cars unlap is fine because it's an either or in the rules right?

And could be said that it's just the way the randomness falls.

By not allowing lapped cars past, it means one lap of racing, and a chance fir max to win, allowing them all past means finishing under SC.

Mercedes obv though either of those two scenarios means we stay out and chance it. Red bull say in either scenario, we either had the chance, or we missed out because our pace was lacking today.

What actually happened was an abomination that no one could have planned, massi behaved like he had the hand of God.

[basti313]

If they didn't remove the lapped cars, it would still be a SC finish (just without SC)... nobody seems to understand that.

The only "issue" I have is, why wait that long to remove the lapped cars.

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

This is nonsense.
The track was clear with 3 laps to go. You could see a perfectly clean track when the tractor with the Williams left the track. The track was perfectly clean once the field passed the scene on the second to last SC lap.
The big error was that the director did not allow the unlapping immediately once the tractor left. The back and forward decisions on how to follow the rules or not made it too short.
The unlapping was surprisingly quick...usually it takes longer, so it was a right decision to do it like this as time was too short to do anything else.

The simple error was not to start the unlapping before turn 1.

[ArcticWolfie]

Normal procedure would have finished under SC, or at very least given sainz a run for the win.

How can you glance over the glaring issue of sainz and many others races being neutralized whilst only Max's wasn't? That's rigging.

Vettel was also complaining that the cars he could have passed were gifted a lap over him!

Just forget about max and Lewis fir a second and the issue becomes more grave. The sport was rigged by way of stopping all cars racing apart from max.

The sport was rigged the moment Masi decided lapped cars weren't allowed to unlap themselves.

I think that all cars unlap, or no cars unlap is fine because it's an either or in the rules right?

And could be said that it's just the way the randomness falls.

By not allowing lapped cars past, it means one lap of racing, and a chance fir max to win, allowing them all past means finishing under SC.

Mercedes obv though either of those two scenarios means we stay out and chance it. Red bull say in either scenario, we either had the chance, or we missed out because our pace was lacking today.

What actually happened was an abomination that no one could have planned, massi behaved like he had the hand of God.

The stewards & Masi decided this and they didn't overrule Masi and tbh... Connely would've pulled Verstappen from the podium (again...) if he was against this. Which he didn't.

[siskue2005]

As I mentioned, I agree that the 'solution' that the stewards came up with was highly disputable, and it is fully understandable that there is discussion about that.

But a lot of the commentary seems to suggest that somehow Lewis had the right for those lapped cars to be between him and Max, or that keeping the lapped cars in place would somehow be the regular procedure. It is not. The expected scenario with a restart was that Max would be racing Hamilton directly, with no lapped cars around. And yes, maybe Sainz would be in the mix under normal circumstances, but with nothing to lose I don't expect that would have changed the fact that Max was going to attack Hamilton. So I disagree that this was the stewards giving a bonus to Max. With their initial decision, they were giving a bonus to Lewis, but then they decided to revert that.

Normal procedure would have finished under SC, or at very least given sainz a run for the win.

How can you glance over the glaring issue of sainz and many others races being neutralized whilst only Max's wasn't? That's rigging.

Vettel was also complaining that the cars he could have passed were gifted a lap over him!

Just forget about max and Lewis fir a second and the issue becomes more grave. The sport was rigged by way of stopping all cars racing apart from max.

The sport was rigged the moment Masi decided lapped cars weren't allowed to unlap themselves.

No he absolutely don't have to let them through... the funny part is he didn't want to let them through coz he knows the rule that then he has to wait one more lap to pull the safety car in (hence it would have finished under SC).

So he wanted to have one lap race but if he let go lapped cars then they can't have it. Hence his initial decision to no let them through.

Now he succumbed to pressure by redbull and did both which is against the rules and hence its being called rigged

[El Scorchio]

Fully agree. So far, any SC situation in recent and not-so-recent memory has included the point where lapped cars were allowed to unlap. Deviating from that all of a sudden was the problem. It is true that this eventually resulted in a half-baked weird as hell solution of letting some cars pass, but not others. But the real issue was the first decision, not the second - so it's a bit of a stretch to say that Max got a bonus here. If anything, Max was the one that was about to be harmed by an unprecedented FIA decision, until they suddenly changed their mind. As for MB, based on precedent, they should have expected either an SC finish, or a last-lap sprint without any lapped cars in between.

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

This is nonsense.
The track was clear with 3 laps to go. You could see a perfectly clean track when the tractor with the Williams left the track. The track was perfectly clean once the field passed the scene on the second to last SC lap.
The big error was that the director did not allow the unlapping immediately once the tractor left. The back and forward decisions on how to follow the rules or not made it too short.
The unlapping was surprisingly quick...usually it takes longer, so it was a right decision to do it like this as time was too short to do anything else.

The simple error was not to start the unlapping before turn 1.

Err, no- the unlapping wasn't 'short'. It was never allowed to happen as per the regulations. The race director selectively let certain cars pass while refusing others the same right just in order to get car 33 right behind car 44 and stuff everyone else, including car 55 who should have been allowed to be right behind 33.

[mzivtins]

The sport was rigged the moment Masi decided lapped cars weren't allowed to unlap themselves.

I think that all cars unlap, or no cars unlap is fine because it's an either or in the rules right?

And could be said that it's just the way the randomness falls.

By not allowing lapped cars past, it means one lap of racing, and a chance fir max to win, allowing them all past means finishing under SC.

Mercedes obv though either of those two scenarios means we stay out and chance it. Red bull say in either scenario, we either had the chance, or we missed out because our pace was lacking today.

What actually happened was an abomination that no one could have planned, massi behaved like he had the hand of God.

The stewards & Masi decided this and they didn't overrule Masi and tbh... Connely would've pulled Verstappen from the podium (again...) if he was against this. Which he didn't.

So the majority makes it right? This is american wrestling then

[basti313]

There are three reasons why only those cars were let through

1: It removes the block between ham and max
2: all car would mean finishing under SC, max loses
3: removing all cars and restarting also gives sainz a shot against Max. By leaving the cars there it insulates max from any rear attack.

It was purely a way to neutralize the race if all competitors apart from max. The race and wdc was gifted by a man made decision.

It makes no difference to f1, but at least my close group of friends have integrity and will be boycotting f1 in favor of superior racing and management by SRO.

F1 is the eastenders of motorsport

This is nonsense.
The track was clear with 3 laps to go. You could see a perfectly clean track when the tractor with the Williams left the track. The track was perfectly clean once the field passed the scene on the second to last SC lap.
The big error was that the director did not allow the unlapping immediately once the tractor left. The back and forward decisions on how to follow the rules or not made it too short.
The unlapping was surprisingly quick...usually it takes longer, so it was a right decision to do it like this as time was too short to do anything else.

The simple error was not to start the unlapping before turn 1.

Err, no- the unlapping wasn't 'short'. It was never allowed to happen as per the regulations. The race director selectively let certain cars pass while refusing others the same right just in order to get car 33 right behind car 44 and stuff everyone else, including car 55 who should have been allowed to be right behind 33.

No, there is no rule saying this. The first rule is that the race director has the right to say what is going on, which overrules all others.

I am surprised that Ham fans here now try to use Sainz in their discussion. This is utterly stupid.
He would not have played any role when Ver dive bombed Ham before the long straight. The only thing Sainz could have done is to go to the inside after the long straight and simple overtake Ham. This was a real risk in the scenario as the Ferrari had more top speed and would not have been compromised on the exit due to the dive bomb by Ver.