2019 [R09] Austrian Grand Prix, Spielberg, 28-30 June

[TAG]

Hmm, this is where interpretation is playing a role. It is mentioned in a separate paragraph then the one before it, where indeed they are talking about the defending driver. But, it is a separate paragraph. So there is equally a case to be made this counts for both the attacking and the defending driver.

I think it comes down to "deliberately crowding a car beyond the race track". One could argue Verstappen just took a normal line throughout the corner without steering input that would suggest a deliberate act of crowing Leclerc off.

Unlike "the Canada incident" which one member here would love for that race thread to be reopened because he still objects to the decision. In that incident intent had no bearing, whether through intent or not, Vettel crowded Hamilton off track and if Hamilton handn't taken immediate corrective action, it would have ended up in a two car pile up. Hence the 5 second penalty for unsafe re-entry.

Here Both drivers were racing, Leclerc defending too damn hard as he would never have been able to successfully make the turn without going off track. And Verstappen also going into the turn too damn hard, but to his credit he was able to keep it under control and steer the car successfully through the turn. So knife edge type stuff.

Unlike Canada, this situation is all about intent. And all about whether or not the attacking driver was trying to push his competitor off the track or simply racing at the edge. They ruled appropriately IMO.

Unfortunately Ferrari is 0-2 in these situations. The one silver lining is that it was Leclerc instead of Vettel, otherwise it would have been mayhem.

[flexcon]

I like the video!Max has the racing line after the apex.

I’d suggest as was discussed earlier - this corner has two racing lines.

In fact throughout the race you either had a high line or the low line.

This is the crux of the debate. I see something totally different. Leclerc is still entirely next to him. Max is not ahead.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Just_a_fan]

do you see the "." doesn't it mean the end of the thought? English being my 3rd language, I somehow feel that the "However" is pointed about the situation in general including both or more drivers involved, and the whole paragraph doesn't refer to the defender or overtaker either, it has sentences that guide both, so I see nothing more than selective reading from your part applying this rule to absolve Max from any wrong doing

I always thought the "you must always leave space" to come from the time when if you did what Max did here, the other guy would have had 50/50 chance of doing acrobatics with his car in the gravel/barrier, with high chance of not walking away after coming to a stop, now, with all the safe run off areas and other safety improvements, drivers must feel like they drive an armored cars, hence this "unwritten" rule has lost some meaning

I was merely pointing out that the leaving of a car's width is particular to moves occurring on the approach to the corner.

As for me trying to absolve Max of any wrong doing, I've been vocal against him in the past from many of his actions, it's just that in this particular case I don't think he is at fault.

The leaving of space, as defined in the rules, was implemented to stop drivers covering the inside line and then diving across to the outside, racing, line in the braking zone - this was a recipe for some hairy moments. It wasn't brought in in response to episodes such as Sunday's.

[jz11]

Er, which video did you watch? Max keeps right hand lock applied through the whole corner. The lock is unwound a bit as he passes the notional apex, as is normal when taking a corner, but at no point does he "turn in to Leclerc".

There's no need to unwind the lock while side by side though is there. That makes it a deliberate move to push someone off. aka crowd another driver out. He had no oversteer so can't use that excuse, and he clearly had the tyres and car to stay tighter and inside Charles, as demonstrated a lap earlier.

That is what YOU think.
Charles knew he had no chance so he threw the door open and hoped Max made this move so he could moan oh he pushed me off the track. He could just have backed off because he simply lost it. He is a smart defender but his trick didn't work today which is good for the sport.

or Charles wasn't really defending this corner, but setting up the inside line for him for one of the following ones, not expecting to be handled like this?

just imagine Alonso being in that Ferrari, one could argue that he wouldn't defend in such way, but if he did, would all the people who say Max had all right to do so say that then? I bet the smell when that sort of thing would hit the fan would be quite terrible...

edit: I think I've said all I had to say about this, peace, out!

[Just_a_fan]

just imagine Alonso being in that Ferrari, one could argue that he wouldn't defend in such way, but if he did, would all the people who say Max had all right to do so say that then? I bet the smell when that sort of thing would hit the fan would be quite terrible...

I'm a Hamilton fan and if he'd done it to Hamilton, I'd still have said "fair move". As it happens, I think Hamilton (and Alonso, as you mentioned him) would have either a) taken the inside line to prevent the attack on the inside, or b) used the cut back to get back on the inside of Max at the exit - this would then have given them the inside line for the next corner.

[rogazilla]

...
I’d suggest as was discussed earlier - this corner has two racing lines.

In fact throughout the race you either had a high line or the low line.

This is the crux of the debate. I see something totally different. Leclerc is still entirely next to him. Max is not ahead.
...

I totally agree! Thare are 2 lines. my personal take is that if you are on a racing line why would you concede that position? People say Max turned into Lec but watching the video multiple time now, he is on the line and unwind the steering wheel to stay on that line. Hence I don't see this as a dive bomb or crowding Lec out. Lec is on the trajectory of leaving the track and he has to turn in further in order to stay on track and on the racing line. The only thing is Max brake late into the corner but he stayed in control. This is just wheel to wheel racing and fighting for that position. If the track limit is gravel or grass, Lec would have backed out even earlier while he was hitting the curb because he was wider than his high line (compare to the lap prior). His wider high line is also what opened up a bit more room for Max compare to the lap prior. It is just racing for me and I don't have any other input into this matter at this point if people can't see the difference of this pass compares to the dive bomb Max used to do.

[henry]

"More than one change of direction to defend
a position is not permitted.
Any driver moving back towards the racing
line, having earlier defended his position offline, should leave at least one car width
between his own car and the edge of the
track on the approach to the corner.
However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other
drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car
beyond the edge of the track or any other
abnormal change of direction, are strictly
prohibited."

strictly prohibited my a*s!
it's just incredible how many times max broke these rules and got away with.

All of the above applies to the defending driver only. Max did not become the defending driver until he was completely in front of Charles!

If that were the case then in the circumstance that they left the corner side by side with Max a little in front Max could, under the rule being discussed, legitimately edge Charles to the side of the track.

I’m not criticising you, your interpretation is as valid as any. The rules are so shoddily written that they only cover a very limited set of circumstances with any sort of precision. You’d think that after nearly 70 years they’d do better than that.

[sosic2121]

"More than one change of direction to defend
a position is not permitted.
Any driver moving back towards the racing
line, having earlier defended his position offline, should leave at least one car width
between his own car and the edge of the
track on the approach to the corner.
However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other
drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car
beyond the edge of the track or any other
abnormal change of direction, are strictly
prohibited."

strictly prohibited my a*s!
it's just incredible how many times max broke these rules and got away with.

All of the above applies to the defending driver only. Max did not become the defending driver until he was completely in front of Charles!

"However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other
drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car
beyond the edge of the track or any other
abnormal change of direction, are strictly
prohibited."
Is this part about defending driver?

I meant he broke the rules during last couple of years

[dans79]

If that were the case then in the circumstance that they left the corner side by side with Max a little in front Max could, under the rule being discussed, legitimately edge Charles to the side of the track.

If you are the outside you are always going to get pushed off, just by the physics of the issue. If you are on the inside you will have a shallower entry into the turn and thus are going to go wide on exit. This why you see the out side defending drive turn in behind the driver attempting the pass so they can try and get the power down early and re-take the pass.

Lewis and Nico in Bahrain 2014 is the example that jumps to mind first. Each time Lewis gets Nico to take a very tight and compromised entry to turn 1, so that he could then cut inside and get the power down sooner.

I’m not criticising you, your interpretation is as valid as any. The rules are so shoddily written that they only cover a very limited set of circumstances with any sort of precision. You’d think that after nearly 70 years they’d do better than that.

Personally I think the rules are written well enough.

I'm not criticizing you or anyone else here, but I think the modern F1 fan is the problem. The modern fan thinks their should be a specific black and white super dumbded down rule for everything. They think the stewards, the FIA, and everyone else is biased against their driver or team!

[sosic2121]

The one silver lining is that it was Leclerc instead of Vettel, otherwise it would have been mayhem.

vet or lec makes no difference to me. I guess ferrari fans are disgusted with this sport to the point they don't care any more. I don't.

[Just_a_fan]

Lewis and Nico in Bahrain 2014 is the example that jumps to mind first. Each time Lewis gets Nico to take a very tight and compromised entry to turn 1, so that he could then cut inside and get the power down sooner.

Exactly. That's what I was saying a page or two ago - I think Leclerc missed a trick and put himself in the compromised position.

I'm not criticizing you or anyone else here, but I think the modern F1 fan is the problem. The modern fan thinks their should be a specific black and white super dumbded down rule for everything. They think the stewards, the FIA, and everyone else is biased against their driver or team!

Agreed. Fans want the rules to suit them and their driver in each situation, even if the situations mirror each other.

It's time F1 stopped listening to "fans" and "pundits" and just got on with racing. If @johnnyFerrari, @jimmyMercedes or @jimboRedBull don't like it, let them go. They'll go soon enough anyway - they're the social media generation and are only interested in things for five minutes before moving on.

[izzy]

Personally I think the rules are written well enough.

for me the trouble is not all the rules are actually written at all! In this case one is, and one isn't. The rule about not crowding a driver off the track is written, but the rule about being allowed to take the racing line on corner exit, even if there happens to be a car there, isn't.

In 2016 Rosberg got 3 penalties all for the exact same thing: driving straight past the apex not steering and NOT on the racing line and then blocking/punting the other car on the far side. Lewis as you say never gets that penalty, because he apexes.

Max basically did a Rosberg, but not quite as blatantly which is how after 3 hours of stewardly studying he got away with it. Must've been close

[Just_a_fan]

I guess ferrari fans are disgusted with this sport to the point they don't care any more. I don't.

Were you disgusted back then too?

[henry]

If that were the case then in the circumstance that they left the corner side by side with Max a little in front Max could, under the rule being discussed, legitimately edge Charles to the side of the track.

If you are the outside you are always going to get pushed off, just by the physics of the issue. If you are on the inside you will have a shallower entry into the turn and thus are going to go wide on exit. This why you see the out side defending drive turn in behind the driver attempting the pass so they can try and get the power down early and re-take the pass.

Lewis and Nico in Bahrain 2014 is the example that jumps to mind first. Each time Lewis gets Nico to take a very tight and compromised entry to turn 1, so that he could then cut inside and get the power down sooner.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_GWdS5RP0Q

I’m not criticising you, your interpretation is as valid as any. The rules are so shoddily written that they only cover a very limited set of circumstances with any sort of precision. You’d think that after nearly 70 years they’d do better than that.

Personally I think the rules are written well enough.

I'm not criticizing you or anyone else here, but I think the modern F1 fan is the problem. The modern fan thinks their should be a specific black and white super dumbded down rule for everything. They think the stewards, the FIA, and everyone else is biased against their driver or team!

Physics has NOTHING to do with it. It’s a choice of the driver on the inside line where they position their car.

The Hamilton/Rosberg incident was also an example where this interpretation of the rules prevented good racing. Had Hamilton not crowded Rosberg off we would have seen the spectacle of them RACING side by side to the next corner, where Hamilton would also have the inside line, and maybe beyond.

The rules as being interpreted encourage one shot overtakes, dive down the inside pass or crash.

I’m not a modern fan, I started following F1 in the 60s. I don’t care particularly for any team or driver. I’m interested in the technicalities of the sport, and as a piece of technical writing the rules are rubbish. They fail to define many of the terms involved and don’t cover the generality of circumstances involved in racing but instead focus on a few specific instances.

This has left the “rules” to be set by the players. As always the players keep pushing at their rules until there is a sudden decision to rein one in. Weaving on the straights, moving under braking etc.

When I started watching they raced between the kerbs not over and beyond them and in the main they didn’t force opponents over the kerbs and off the track, injury or worse was the consequence. Now the consequences are different and the rules should have been carefully written to encourage racing given the changing circumstances. In my opinion they haven’t been.


Oh and you didn’t answer my specific point about Max pushing Charles off on the straight under the interpretation you offered of a “completed overtake”.

[Jolle]

when you leave two car's spaces to the apex, you can expect to be overtaken. Leclerc did a terrible job at defending.