Leclerc's win in Monza signals the arrival of F1 reality TV

[strad]

should never put drivers into the position where they have to choose between the plague and cholera.

Boy... You musta hated Senna, Schumacher and Andretti to name just a few...Oh and Black Jack Brabham.

[turbof1]

Leclerc's move was not even especially dangerous. At the very last race, Perez did a far more dangerous blocking move on Albon: https://youtu.be/CLt1IouHgxg?t=162 ...and received no penalty for it! Where were the outcries to penalise dangerous driving then? :raises eyebrow:

OK I'm going to lay out the rules in detail for you

Let me stop you right there. This isn't necessarily a discussion about what the rules are, and JordanMugen was talking from a historical viewpoint and not a regulatory viewpoint, but how racing should be policed. Often times that's not the same as following the letter of the regulations. As it should be: except if you apply catch-all rules, you cannot cover each situation. And vice versa: not every situation requires intervention through rule book application. It is why Verstappen was ultimately allowed to keep his win in Austria. So let us toss the rulebook aside for a moment and look just at what is sensible.

I would, however, argue Leclerc's move was dangerous because Hamilton got pushed onto the grass/dirt under braking. This happened to him as well at the start of the 2016 Spanish Grand Prix, and there he lost control on the slippery grass which took both him and Rosberg out. It isn't may be dangerous in the sense of being in physical danger, but race-ending dangerous it is.

Is Leclerc, therefore, a dirty driver? One move or one race does not determine that. However, he did acknowledge this is now his way of doing battle. And with the FIA intended on shifting the bar towards harsher blocking and defending, it does suit this more aggressive drive style.

should never put drivers into the position where they have to choose between the plague and cholera.

Boy... You musta hated Senna, Schumacher and Andretti to name just a few...Oh and Black Jack Brabham.

Lol, I don't harbor hate towards anyone! I am a nice guy .

What all those guys did, were epic and legendary moments full of despair and tragedy. But, if they happened again today I'd still apply reason and rationality. And you know, F1 isn't always about reason or rationality. Sometimes these controversial, emotional moments is what makes F1 great.

[izzy]

It's the difference between skilled racing and hamfisted racing-sim racing.

yes exactly, on top of the safety aspect it's not skilful to shove the other car off or watch in the mirrors and block to and fro.

[zeph]

I feel like we're going a little off track here.

Nobody says Leclerc is a dirty racer or that he didn't deserve the victory.

My original point was that we can expect to see more decisions made with the audience in mind. Whether this is good or bad, depends on your POV.

[dans79]

Let me stop you right there. This isn't necessarily a discussion about what the rules are, and JordanMugen was talking from a historical viewpoint and not a regulatory viewpoint, but how racing should be policed. Often times that's not the same as following the letter of the regulations. As it should be: except if you apply catch-all rules, you cannot cover each situation. And vice versa: not every situation requires intervention through rule book application. It is why Verstappen was ultimately allowed to keep his win in Austria. So let us toss the rulebook aside for a moment and look just at what is sensible.

I would, however, argue Leclerc's move was dangerous because Hamilton got pushed onto the grass/dirt under braking. This happened to him as well at the start of the 2016 Spanish Grand Prix, and there he lost control on the slippery grass which took both him and Rosberg out. It isn't may be dangerous in the sense of being in physical danger, but race-ending dangerous it is.

Is Leclerc, therefore, a dirty driver? One move or one race does not determine that. However, he did acknowledge this is now his way of doing battle. And with the FIA intended on shifting the bar towards harsher blocking and defending, it does suit this more aggressive drive style.

Whats dangerous or dirty is always going to come down to ones personal views and or biases, so I doubt any kind of consensus will ever be reached on that.

whats more open for debate in my opinion is how much the fia contradicted themselves. They have clear rules about what is and isn't allowed on the straits. well at least they used to, finding details in the currently sporting regulations is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

[TAG]

should never put drivers into the position where they have to choose between the plague and cholera.

Boy... You musta hated Senna, Schumacher and Andretti to name just a few...Oh and Black Jack Brabham.

Not even close as a comparison. There's been a lot of conversation about what Hamilton said. If you're a driver all you want is consistency, and clarity in the rules. Your comment completely disregards the fact that in that era, when they did hand out a penalty... well Schumacher was disqualified out an entire season for it.

I can think of a few drivers within the last decade that back then would have been banned for a race or three if not kicked out of the sport entirely.

[RZS10]

You mean for ramming another car on purpose out of anger after misjudging a situation?

[strad]

Schumacher was disqualified out an entire season for it.

When Mike squeezed his brother and gave him the choice of the wall or back off not a word let alone a penalty. He specialized in the weave, no penalty.
Won't bother reliving the Japan or Australia fiascos.

[dans79]

I'm just going to leave this here!

[cooken]

You folks are comparing stewarding decisions across eras with different rules in play. Like saying someone shouldn't be punished for texting and driving because some famous person didn't 10 years ago (before the law existed).

Please also stop and think, when did these rules get written, and why.

[wesley123]

Leclerc's moves were on the limit but inside of what is allowed! After Austria Leclerc realized at what point he can defend and race other people...had his defence on Hamilton earned him a penalty, it would have been silly since Verstapen's move in Austria didn't earn Max a penalty!

The incident in Austria is no way comparable to what happened last weekend. Verstappen never pushed Leclerc off the track under braking. However, this is what Leclerc did on Hamilton.

[cooken]

Leclerc's moves were on the limit but inside of what is allowed!

Wrong. They were outside of what is allowed, as clearly stated by FIA (via Masi). They just choose to "punish" with a warning instead of a penalty.

[AMG.Tzan]

Leclerc's moves were on the limit but inside of what is allowed!

Wrong. They were outside of what is allowed, as clearly stated by FIA (via Masi). They just choose to "punish" with a warning instead of a penalty.

The new rule with the black n white flag is the way to go i believe! Giving a penalty to a driver straightaway is not nice if it's not something extreme at least! Just like Vettel in Canada...it was a mistake and of course Vettel would defend his position just like he did!
And again i am a Hamilton fan but these kind of penalties that take away someone's win are just too harsh! Same happened to Lewis at Spa in 2008...it was way too harsh to lose him the win...it almost lost him the championship...Massa got a win from nowhere right there!
Anyway, i have to admit that Leclerc winning in Monza, smashing Vettel inside Ferrari's home, was what i was hoping for!!

[dans79]

The new rule with the black n white flag is the way to go i believe! Giving a penalty to a driver straightaway is not nice if it's not something extreme at least!

Pentalties for braking the rules aren't supposed to be nice, that's kind of the point of the penalty. If a driver doesn't want a penalty, they he shouldn't break the rules.

[wesley123]

The new rule with the black n white flag is the way to go i believe! Giving a penalty to a driver straightaway is not nice if it's not something extreme at least!

I would consider pushing someone off the track in a braking zone they enter at 300+km/h rather extreme that can go very, very wrong.

Just like Vettel in Canada...it was a mistake and of course Vettel would defend his position just like he did!

It's still breaking the rules, and breaking it with intent like you describe should be penalized.

And again i am a Hamilton fan but these kind of penalties that take away someone's win are just too harsh!

1. What does it matter here who you are a fan of? Does your opinion become less valued because you are a Perez fan?

2. The only harsh thing is the inconsistency in which the rules are enforced. And somehow suggesting the rules don't count for the leader of the race makes no sense.

Anyway, i have to admit that Leclerc winning in Monza, smashing Vettel inside Ferrari's home, was what i was hoping for!!

What has that got to do with this?