Lando Norris 10second stop/go penalty - Qatar 2024

[fourmula1]

If this is the penalty for everyone moving forward that is ok.

The bigger picture is that this change is MBS trying to assert authority over the drivers. This is all political. He doesn’t like them controlling the narrative.

I don’t have a problem with the penalties themselves other than the inconsistency and that the FIA always manages to kill the races. Fire MBS for sure though. If it gets bad enough money will win and he will be out.

[organic]

Just need full time stewards. This weekend, more than any other individual weekend, shows why..

[AR3-GP]

There is nothing inconsistent about these penalties. Full time steward makes zero difference here.

This penalty has been standard several times in the past
2017: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/kimi- ... 8/4996408/

2021:

[Seanspeed]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

[Paa]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

It seems harsh, because we all know it was just a broken mirror off from the racing line.

However, the point is that at double waved yellows it could have been a car stopped at the track so driver needs to respect the flag regardless. Norris couldn't have known at that time why the flag is waved so ignoring it is serious. (luckily with unserious consequences this tim)

[Seanspeed]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

It seems harsh, because we all know it was just a broken mirror off from the racing line.

However, the point is that at double waved yellows it could have been a car stopped at the track so driver needs to respect the flag regardless. Norris couldn't have known at that time why the flag is waved so ignoring it is serious. (luckily with unserious consequences this tim)

I get it was not some 'light' infraction from a bigger picture perspective, it's just they genuinely gave him the harshest penalty possible short of full on disqualification. Seems there were a couple other alternative solutions that could have gotten the point across and made an example of him.

[AR3-GP]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

It seems harsh, because we all know it was just a broken mirror off from the racing line.

However, the point is that at double waved yellows it could have been a car stopped at the track so driver needs to respect the flag regardless. Norris couldn't have known at that time why the flag is waved so ignoring it is serious. (luckily with unserious consequences this tim)

I get it was not some 'light' infraction from a bigger picture perspective, it's just they genuinely gave him the harshest penalty possible short of full on disqualification. Seems there were a couple other alternative solutions that could have gotten the point across and made an example of him.

Andrea Stella pointed out that it was the minimum penalty possible for this infringement so I dispute your claim that it was the harshest penalty possible.

[Seanspeed]

It seems harsh, because we all know it was just a broken mirror off from the racing line.

However, the point is that at double waved yellows it could have been a car stopped at the track so driver needs to respect the flag regardless. Norris couldn't have known at that time why the flag is waved so ignoring it is serious. (luckily with unserious consequences this tim)

I get it was not some 'light' infraction from a bigger picture perspective, it's just they genuinely gave him the harshest penalty possible short of full on disqualification. Seems there were a couple other alternative solutions that could have gotten the point across and made an example of him.

Andrea Stella pointed out that it was the minimum penalty possible for this infringement so I dispute your claim that it was the harshest penalty possible.

I'm confused. Are you disputing it, or is Andrea Stella? Are you 100% confident he's right about this? Have you confirmed this or is this pure argument from authority? Cuz these guys are not infallible whatsoever.

And I didn't say it was the harsh penalty possible, read more carefully. I'm saying it was literally the harshest penalty that they give out at all short of disqualification. Basically, there is nothing in between this sort of penalty and a DQ penalty.

[PapayaFan481]

Another question, did it need to be double waved yellows, or could it just have been a yellow?

[bananapeel23]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

Imagine it was Norris going full throttle going past Grosjean in Bahrain 2020 or Verstappen in Baku 2021 and it makes more sense. A double-waved yellow is a double-waved yellow whether it's a mirror on the track or a car that has turned into a fireball or a driver walking on the track to kick his rear right tyre.

It was arguably stupid that the yellow was even waved to begin with or that they didn't call out the VSC immediately, but it was a very clear case of not slowing down under double-waved yellows with no mitigating circumstances. A 10 second stop/go for such an infringement is in the books and has been given as recently as 2021.

Also the harshness of a penalty shouldn't be determined by the stag eof the race. Sainz got a 5 second penalty in Australia 2023 which dropped him out of the points despite being like P4 due to the race finishing under SC. A 10 second stop/go shouldn't be downgraded to a lighter penalty just because it is late in the race after the cars have been bunched up by a safety car.

Honestly I think the truly ridiculous penalty was the drivethrough that Hamilton got for speeding in the pitlane. He got no benefit from it and it is almost always a 5 second penalty.

[basti313]

I'm confused. Are you disputing it, or is Andrea Stella? Are you 100% confident he's right about this? Have you confirmed this or is this pure argument from authority? Cuz these guys are not infallible whatsoever.

Are you just here for the fun? Ignoring a half page of posts showing that it is the rule book...is masterclass.

Another question, did it need to be double waved yellows, or could it just have been a yellow?

Stationary element on the track is correct with double yellow. Still very small...well, they took it away early, but giving out double is ok.

All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

No, also not possible. Marshall on the actual track requires as full SC.
They had the option of leaving it there or getting a SC for collecting it.

So we have facts:
- Double yellow ok by stationary element
- Collecting only with SC
- Penalty 10sec stop and go by the rule book

Now my opinion:
I think the penalty is ok as it is simply the rule. It is just nonsense to find an excuse just to give here another penalty than before in multiple examples given. I guess the same people would complain next race again about consistency...
Norris throwing away another race...finally he got the start right, now he kills it with not doing the mandatory lift.
Leaving the mirror where it was was also ok. I mean...there were not many drivers likely to drive over it. Even Perez missed it...
And there was no danger, these are super light parts. It was confirmed, that only the front left tire was damaged, as it had no more rubber on it. Without them running down the Mediums nothing would have happened.

[chrisc90]

I disagree there. It needed moving off the track ASAP.

Mirror or not, only takes someone to fly past it, turbulent air pick it up and hit a driver on the head. Aint nobody wanting to hit anything at 200mph however light it is.

Bottas destroyed it, it was on the racing line for a overtake

[Seanspeed]

Inconsistent or not, I do consider it pretty harsh. And I'm saying that as a Ferrari fan.

I think the bigger inconsistency, as others have pointed out, is any desire to push 'safety' looks foolish in light of leaving the car mirror in the middle of a track for many laps and doing nothing about it, which then ruined the races of a couple drivers and caused a safety car, which bunched up the drivers and led to more incidents leading to another safety car. All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

I feel like a simple drive through would have been sufficient if they wanted something harsh that still gets the point across. But they effectively gave him a 35 second penalty. That's basically just one step away from full on disqualification.

Imagine it was Norris going full throttle going past Grosjean in Bahrain 2020 or Verstappen in Baku 2021 and it makes more sense. A double-waved yellow is a double-waved yellow whether it's a mirror on the track or a car that has turned into a fireball or a driver walking on the track to kick his rear right tyre.

It was arguably stupid that the yellow was even waved to begin with or that they didn't call out the VSC immediately, but it was a very clear case of not slowing down under double-waved yellows with no mitigating circumstances. A 10 second stop/go for such an infringement is in the books and has been given as recently as 2021.

Also the harshness of a penalty shouldn't be determined by the stag eof the race. Sainz got a 5 second penalty in Australia 2023 which dropped him out of the points despite being like P4 due to the race finishing under SC. A 10 second stop/go shouldn't be downgraded to a lighter penalty just because it is late in the race after the cars have been bunched up by a safety car.

Honestly I think the truly ridiculous penalty was the drivethrough that Hamilton got for speeding in the pitlane. He got no benefit from it and it is almost always a 5 second penalty.

I never claimed any issue with it based on the stage of the race. I simply feel an effective 35 second penalty is harsh for this, full stop. I totally get they want to have an effective-enough penalty for this, but this was one of the most severe penalties they could give.

[Seanspeed]

I'm confused. Are you disputing it, or is Andrea Stella? Are you 100% confident he's right about this? Have you confirmed this or is this pure argument from authority? Cuz these guys are not infallible whatsoever.

Are you just here for the fun? Ignoring a half page of posts showing that it is the rule book...is masterclass.

Another question, did it need to be double waved yellows, or could it just have been a yellow?

Stationary element on the track is correct with double yellow. Still very small...well, they took it away early, but giving out double is ok.

All for something a quick VSC could have dealt with(or hell, just somebody finding a ~10 second gap and running out and grabbing it real quick like they used to do entirely safely).

No, also not possible. Marshall on the actual track requires as full SC.
They had the option of leaving it there or getting a SC for collecting it.

So we have facts:
- Double yellow ok by stationary element
- Collecting only with SC
- Penalty 10sec stop and go by the rule book

Now my opinion:
I think the penalty is ok as it is simply the rule. It is just nonsense to find an excuse just to give here another penalty than before in multiple examples given. I guess the same people would complain next race again about consistency...
Norris throwing away another race...finally he got the start right, now he kills it with not doing the mandatory lift.
Leaving the mirror where it was was also ok. I mean...there were not many drivers likely to drive over it. Even Perez missed it...
And there was no danger, these are super light parts. It was confirmed, that only the front left tire was damaged, as it had no more rubber on it. Without them running down the Mediums nothing would have happened.

I haven't seen anybody where in the rules it says it must be a 10 second stop and go(did I miss that?), only that there's a couple incidents where they did give that. But are there examples where a similar infraction was given a lesser penalty? We all know how inconsistent steward punishments often are.

Either way, I would disagree with such a rule anyways and would still consider it harsh.

And claiming there was no danger is clearly ridiculous. Even if worn down tires contributed to the threat, that's still an issue. It absolutely had to be dealt with given it was straight up in the traditional overtaking path(and the only one on the track, at that).

[basti313]

I disagree there. It needed moving off the track ASAP.
...

Bottas destroyed it, it was on the racing line for a overtake

No, it was not really. I just checked the replays. It was roughly as much to the right side as the pit exit line.
Even at the restart of the SC after running over it, as far as I see it the top pack was barely that far to the right at this spot. And they went very far to the right as Verstappen defended the inside.

Would be interesting to hear Bottas, how he made it there...he was not overtaking.