2024 Chinese GP

[venkyhere]

Btw, has there been a discussion in this race thread about the penalties bonanza from the stewards ?

- Sainz having his T16 incident, stopping on track in the middle of quali, bringing out red flags, recovering and going back home under red flag => Aston martin launch protest, as it breaches the text in rulebook "someone stopped on track during quali, someone drove under red flag"
FIA : dismissing your protest; look at the context, we can't implement text rules without real world context

- LeClerc racing with Sainz in Sprint, makes an ambitious move around the outside, Sainz aggressively pushes out his team mate, due to understeer after late braking and also intentional (as can be seen from onboard)
FIA : just a racing incident, we dont care for context or intention

- Alonso racing with Sainz in Sprint, makes an over ambitious move, ploughs into Sainz due to understeer and late braking
FIA : +10s and 3 points on your licence, context considered, as it was an intentional attempt to push the other guy off the racing line.

- Sargeant on track, is ahead of Hulk out of the pits, by a photofinish margin on the safety car line during SC (him & his team could have well been under the impression that he was indeed ahead, as there is a big speed diff b/w pitlane exit guy and the track guy)
FIA : +10s and 2 points on your licence, we dont care for context.

- Divebombing Magnussen hits Tsunoda, who has already given him enough space, understeered on purpose ? or maybe not
FIA : poor driving standards, +10s only. No licence points penalty

- Ricciardo thinks since Hulk (who was behind him during SC) had nowhere to go and had to go past Ricciardo when he was pole-axed by Stroll, the position can be taken back within the SC, since he recovered from the hit and got going anyway
FIA : Not allowed, as per rulebook. 3 place grid drop (since +10s impossible due to eventual DNF) and 2 points on your licence. We have the rulebook, we dont care about context

- Stroll the daddy's boy entitled moron, isn't paying attention and ruins the race of two cars ahead - Ricciardo and Piastri ; and then goes on to blame "the idiot who brake checked" having no idea despite 10+ yrs of freeloading in F1, that safety car restarts will have sudden braking events for keeping deltas and it's concertina effect behind. This happened not in some straight, but before a hairpin. Totally predictable. But only if you have half a brain.
FIA : +10s and 2 points on your licence, we can't consider the context or 'outcome' of this mistake, the standard penalty applies.

Where is the consistency, there is no connection between the severity of the deed and the penalty handed over.
WHAT A F*****G CLOWN SHOW by the stewards.

[chrisc90]

Not to mention, Ricardo got a 3place drop in the next race (as he retired and couldn’t be added on). Alonso gets the same penalty in the sprint, and also retired, yet his +10s was added to his sprint time rather than transferring over.

[Wouter]

They have been attempting to sign Norris for years..

.
There has never been any evidence of this. Talks don't count either.

Also they had Verstappen and Ricciardo together, right? Promoted Verstappen despite having a team leader of Ricciardo. Only lost Ricciardo because he wanted to leave, and then RB had no options for a while. When they wanted to demote Albon, there were no better options than Perez. At the time many on here thought Perez would humble Max.

.
Ricciardo realised quite early that Max would be made number 1 - according to the RedBull philosophy.. and that's why he left. If the philosophy was equal drivers he would have stayed. So that sorta reinforces my hypothesis.

Everything always proves your hypotheses even when counter evidence is provided. It's almost pointless arguing otherwise, so much so that most here have given up trying to disagree with you

Norris was set to drive for Toro Rosso in 2019 (contract agreed) until a last minute decision. Maybe you just didn't follow closely?

Zak brown:

"We were fully aware that if he wasn't going to drive for us next year, he'd be driving for someone else."

Brown said "it would be Toro Rosso"

Marko:

We had already reached an agreement with Norris for Toro Rosso at the time, until his manager realised that there was an option in the contract with McLaren

McLaren themselves said they rejected the proposal mid 2018 it really happened

Speaking about the Toro Rosso offer, a McLaren spokesman said: "We are not surprised that other teams approach our drivers. They clearly believe they are as talented as we do."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... s/3222068/

Speaking about the Toro Rosso offer, Norris said: "I'm flattered by the stories but I'm focussed on F2 and committed to McLaren

.
It is common knowledge that Marko talked several times during the last years to get Norris on board. Yesterday Lando's dad was almost the entire day with Marko and Horner watching the race and podium ceremony together.
.

Red Bull advisor Helmut Marko expressed interest in Norris' services several times last year.
However, the Briton has a long-term contract at McLaren, so there is little chance of him leaving there.

The Austrian team advisor reveals to Servus TV in China that he now again has even already had a few chats with Norris' family: "He is young and he is definitely always in our focus. His father always jokes that Lando won't be able to take his first Grand Prix victory until Max Verstappen retires. I said to him that Lando should come to us, because then it will definitely be faster!"

.

[dialtone]

Btw, has there been a discussion in this race thread about the penalties bonanza from the stewards ?

- Sainz having his T16 incident, stopping on track in the middle of quali, bringing out red flags, recovering and going back home under red flag => Aston martin launch protest, as it breaches the text in rulebook "someone stopped on track during quali, someone drove under red flag"
FIA : dismissing your protest; look at the context, we can't implement text rules without real world context

Not how it went.

FIA wrote that they asked all team principals plus how the rule was implemented in the past. Nobody complained or wanted to make any change to how the rule has ALWAYS been applied.

Just because AM are basically a lawyer team full of spoiled kids doesn’t entitle them to what they want if they cry hard enough.

One doesn’t even need to go that far back to see an example: Imola 2022, i think Norris has an excursion in quali, red flag, back to the pits and participates to quali.

“Look at the context” is your invention for scenic effect, I don’t even think the word context appears in the document , they go back to quote plenty of examples where this happened in the last years and show how this is consistent.

https://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/ ... dismissed/

The only thing here is that AM are a pathetic organization.

And the Sainz penalty on leclerc… again fia has never penalized team mates even for crashes like alpine in Australia. But now it should penalize Sainz? Again pathetic.

As for the other penalties, maybe drivers should try not to push other cars off track? It’s not the stewards fault if they can’t race cleanly. Dive bomb and push wide is not a valid race move.

[djones]

Norris can be a top driver. However I feel he only really becomes this when he has Hamilton in his mirrors or sights

Similar situation with Alonso when he is around Hamilton.

Alonso for obvious reasons and with Norris it’s harder to work out. If I had to guess he either feels like he has to some how stick up for his mate Max or he adores Max so much he wants to feel like he’s in a battle with Lewis like Max pre recent car rule changes.

[f1isgood]

Norris can be a top driver. However I feel he only really becomes this when he has Hamilton in his mirrors or sights

Similar situation with Alonso when he is around Hamilton.

Alonso for obvious reasons and with Norris it’s harder to work out. If I had to guess he either feels like he has to some how stick up for his mate Max or he adores Max so much he wants to feel like he’s in a battle with Lewis like Max pre recent car rule changes.

I wonder when Norris has actually ever had a car to fight with Max, unlike with Hamilton. The one time he did a couple years ago in Singapore, all I remember was Verstappen trying something and locking up straight. Could just be me, but I don't think it's a Norris worshipping Max issue per say, it is really much more simple -- Norris and Hamilton have had similar cars many times, and actually have something to fight for.

And to the point re Max wanting to fight Lewis: indeed given that Hamilton was getting praised left and right for his domination, while other drivers (well at least Max) were arguably more consistent and delivered better-than-expected results, I would like to think that it is only natural that Max probably felt not-so-appreciated until he got his fight in 2021. Likewise I would expect the current drivers in the paddock to go out there and fight Max in case they think they are better than him and feel under-appreciated -- so far it's been the opposite really - everyone praises Max consistently. Probably because Max does deliver what is expected out of him more often than any other driver on the grid.

[bluechris]

To me, Norris shuts down near Max and i don't get why. Off course max with that rocket ship is faster but it is mainly in free air. Don't let him pass like is Leman's and you are in a lesser category, annoy him.. delay him, try to make him to cook his tires.
Damn i wish some times to have in some cars Alonso or even Magnusen, let's see how you will pass them.

[AR3-GP]

People criticize Norris for this, and then selectively ignore that Hamilton has been waving Verstappen through for the last 2 years.

Why is it okay when Hamilton does it, but not when Norris does it?

[Sieper]

This is basic F1 stuff. You try to finish as high up as you can. Wasting your tires in a fight you are never going to win isn’t going to let you finish higher up.

This very race lando’s engineer was in the live feed telling him Alonso was wasting his tires in a fight with checo and “this is good for us”.

Indeed in Singapore he fended Max off, as it is worthwhile there.

[Sieper]

To me, Norris shuts down near Max and i don't get why. Off course max with that rocket ship is faster but it is mainly in free air. Don't let him pass like is Leman's and you are in a lesser category, annoy him.. delay him, try to make him to cook his tires.
Damn i wish some times to have in some cars Alonso or even Magnusen, let's see how you will pass them.

Alonso did the same in the sprint when Max went to overtake him. Com’on People. Narrative is all these days, I know, but keep it real, this is F1Technical.

[venkyhere]

“Look at the context” is your invention for scenic effect, I don’t even think the word context appears in the document , they go back to quote plenty of examples where this happened in the last years and show how this is consistent.
https://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/ ... dismissed/

The only thing here is that AM are a pathetic organization.

by 'context' I meant the consensus they sought from all teams, about how to approach the interpretation of the rulebook for the quali crash and recovery under red flag by Sainz.

The aim of my post was not to evaluate AM as a team and their ethical/moral/legal loci w.r.t the sport. The aim of my post was to show how FIA stewards are 'selective' when showing practical-real-world-logic when interpreting the black and white printed in a rulebook.

And the Sainz penalty on leclerc… again fia has never penalized team mates even for crashes like alpine in Australia. But now it should penalize Sainz? Again pathetic.

<you seem to be in love with the word "pathetic">

So if a driver makes an action that deserves docking some points on his super-licence, he will escape scot free if that action is against his teammate, but get punished if that action is against a guy from another team. They may have implemented this way 100 times, but it is still wrong.

As for the other penalties, maybe drivers should try not to push other cars off track? It’s not the stewards fault if they can’t race cleanly. Dive bomb and push wide is not a valid race move.

Again, I am not talking about the morality/sporting-conduct etc of the action by the divebomber. I am talking about the treatment of the two examples of the same action, differently, without consistency.
Take the Magnussen incident, why was not docked licence points, but Alonso was ? And why Alonso docked 3 points but Stroll docked only 2 ? Stroll's action deserved 5 penalty points, on scale.

[bluechris]

To me, Norris shuts down near Max and i don't get why. Off course max with that rocket ship is faster but it is mainly in free air. Don't let him pass like is Leman's and you are in a lesser category, annoy him.. delay him, try to make him to cook his tires.
Damn i wish some times to have in some cars Alonso or even Magnusen, let's see how you will pass them.

Alonso did the same in the sprint when Max went to overtake him. Com’on People. Narrative is all these days, I know, but keep it real, this is F1Technical.

I know where i wrote it believe me and i know also that all here love a good fight.
Anyway i understand what you all say but i still don't like what f1 became.

[dialtone]

“Look at the context” is your invention for scenic effect, I don’t even think the word context appears in the document , they go back to quote plenty of examples where this happened in the last years and show how this is consistent.
https://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/ ... dismissed/

The only thing here is that AM are a pathetic organization.

by 'context' I meant the consensus they sought from all teams, about how to approach the interpretation of the rulebook for the quali crash and recovery under red flag by Sainz.

The aim of my post was not to evaluate AM as a team and their ethical/moral/legal loci w.r.t the sport. The aim of my post was to show how FIA stewards are 'selective' when showing practical-real-world-logic when interpreting the black and white printed in a rulebook.

A team protested THEIR interpretation of the rule against a very consistent application of that rule by the stewards for ages. The Stewards even allowed their interpretation to change based on the opinion of team principals.

The funniest part of the document is when Stewards report that even AM had to agree that the interpretation from Stewards made sense.

This has absolutely nothing to do with black and white application, this is a team that thought they could be smart and stewards even gave them an hearing instead of dismissing of frivolous grounds.

And the Sainz penalty on leclerc… again fia has never penalized team mates even for crashes like alpine in Australia. But now it should penalize Sainz? Again pathetic.

<you seem to be in love with the word "pathetic">

So if a driver makes an action that deserves docking some points on his super-licence, he will escape scot free if that action is against his teammate, but get punished if that action is against a guy from another team. They may have implemented this way 100 times, but it is still wrong.

Couldn’t agree with you more, but if you are looking for consistency, which you seem to hint at below, then this is what it looks like.

As for the other penalties, maybe drivers should try not to push other cars off track? It’s not the stewards fault if they can’t race cleanly. Dive bomb and push wide is not a valid race move.

Again, I am not talking about the morality/sporting-conduct etc of the action by the divebomber. I am talking about the treatment of the two examples of the same action, differently, without consistency.
Take the Magnussen incident, why was not docked licence points, but Alonso was ? And why Alonso docked 3 points but Stroll docked only 2 ? Stroll's action deserved 5 penalty points, on scale.

[/quote]

I don’t really consider penalty points to be a real penalty, has anyone been suspended on them? Gasly escaped disqualification a few times after being capped on points and not being docked any on following violations. Most drivers are far from the cap as well. These points are currently teethless.

But sure I agree that the application of those penalties is incosistent but I presume intentionality plays a role. Dive bombing is intentional, being daddy’s child isn’t intentional despite clear incompetence, so smaller violation.

[Dunlay]

To me, Norris shuts down near Max and i don't get why. Off course max with that rocket ship is faster but it is mainly in free air. Don't let him pass like is Leman's and you are in a lesser category, annoy him.. delay him, try to make him to cook his tires.
Damn i wish some times to have in some cars Alonso or even Magnusen, let's see how you will pass them.

Magnussen? The guy leaves his brain in hotel room when he leaves to the track. House keeping has been told not to flush it considering it a human waste. His return was a perfect example of Gunther's amazing brain dead decision making powers for which he was rewarded with firing.

Lando is smart and knows he cannot fight Max who has a rocket ship. Fighting him in vain means destroying his tyres and losing strong finishes. There is always Perez to fight with and score better points and positions. Even Alonso let's others pass him when he knows there is no point fighting. Sensible drivers know when to fight and when not to. Just to please couch potatoes like us, they cannot compromise their race positions.

[TFSA]

<you seem to be in love with the word "pathetic">

So if a driver makes an action that deserves docking some points on his super-licence, he will escape scot free if that action is against his teammate, but get punished if that action is against a guy from another team. They may have implemented this way 100 times, but it is still wrong.

No it's not. If a footballer tackles a teammate by accident*, he won't be punished, while the same tackle would have gotten him punished if he had tackled a player from the opposing team.
At the end of the day, F1 is a Constructors championship first and foremost - meaning it's a team game.

*("accident" being an important distinction here - footballers can still be penalized for taking anger out on their own teammates)

Also, if teammate squables starts getting penalized the same way every other squabble is, then you'll start seeing team more heavily employ team orders and have clearly defined #1 and #2 drivers. They'll simply order their drivers never to fight, because it's too big a risk - you risk getting penalties for nothing. You honestly think that will improve racing?

The current system is not wrong. It's consistent with other sports, and it's certainly the best for the racing and the entertainment value of the sport.