https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/ ... um=twitterThe FIA has confirmed that Nico Hulkenberg, Carlos Sainz Jr. and Lance Stroll are under investigation for allegedly driving unnecessarily slowly.
https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/ ... um=twitterThe FIA has confirmed that Nico Hulkenberg, Carlos Sainz Jr. and Lance Stroll are under investigation for allegedly driving unnecessarily slowly.
You are arguing intent versus affect.Restomaniac wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 18:20Part 2 is where you seem to misunderstand. They were not blocking they WANTED others to go past. Nobody wanted to be at the front. It’s a key but fundamental difference.
all drivers are allowed to pull to the side and do a test start as long as they don't block the exit of the pits.
In Fp3 they investigated and gave penalties in some minutes, the same in qualifying.
Thats is exactly what happens every time something is written off as a ‘racing incident’ when only 1 car has to retire or is disadvantaged.dans79 wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 19:15You are arguing intent versus affect.Restomaniac wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 18:20Part 2 is where you seem to misunderstand. They were not blocking they WANTED others to go past. Nobody wanted to be at the front. It’s a key but fundamental difference.
The intent of the first 2 to 4 drivers, was to not be the first car in the line. The effect was blocking/preventing the cars further back from being able to make it around the track in an appropriate amount of time.
You get penalized for the effect you don't get off because of your intentions.
But they had room to overtake. The reason they did not qualify was because they chose not to overtake. Not because it was made impossible by those ahead.dans79 wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 19:15Restomaniac wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 18:20Part 2 is where you seem to misunderstand. They were not blocking they WANTED others to go past. Nobody wanted to be at the front. It’s a key but fundamental difference.
You are arguing intent versus affect.
The intent of the first 2 to 4 drivers, was to not be the first car in the line. The effect was blocking/preventing the cars further back from being able to make it around the track in an appropriate amount of time.
You get penalized for the effect you don't get off because of your intentions.
Funny, i dont even recall Vettel going off track in Q2. But i do distinctively remember Albon being off track and being investigated for his Q2 lap, yet even though is time was supposedly deleted, he retained his position in the top 10? Or did he do two laps and a slower lap got deleted?
This wasn't the race, it was qualifying.Restomaniac wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 19:21Thats is exactly what happens every time something is written off as a ‘racing incident’ when only 1 car has to retire or is disadvantaged.dans79 wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 19:15You are arguing intent versus affect.Restomaniac wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 18:20Part 2 is where you seem to misunderstand. They were not blocking they WANTED others to go past. Nobody wanted to be at the front. It’s a key but fundamental difference.
The intent of the first 2 to 4 drivers, was to not be the first car in the line. The effect was blocking/preventing the cars further back from being able to make it around the track in an appropriate amount of time.
You get penalized for the effect you don't get off because of your intentions.