2021 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix - Imola, Apr 16 - 18

[timorous]

FWIW I think the Leclerc Verstappen thing is a bit of a moot point. I think even if he'd lost a place or two from his little mistake, it's highly likely he'd have got them back without too much trouble and still won the race. Just by a smaller margin than he did.

The problem is in light of the Kimi penalty for not getting back to the correct position prior to SC line 1 he was hit with a post race stop and go for a violation of article 42.6

If Leclerc restarts the race when Max has his moment there is 0 chance Max gets infront of Leclerc prior to SC line 1 and therefor he would also be in violation of the same article and be given the same penalty.

[El Scorchio]

FWIW I think the Leclerc Verstappen thing is a bit of a moot point. I think even if he'd lost a place or two from his little mistake, it's highly likely he'd have got them back without too much trouble and still won the race. Just by a smaller margin than he did.

The problem is in light of the Kimi penalty for not getting back to the correct position prior to SC line 1 he was hit with a post race stop and go for a violation of article 42.6

If Leclerc restarts the race when Max has his moment there is 0 chance Max gets infront of Leclerc prior to SC line 1 and therefor he would also be in violation of the same article and be given the same penalty.

Ah ok. See what you're saying here. TBH it would be ridiculous to penalise either driver for that happening under the circumstances in which it would have occurred but we full know common sense does not always apply, and it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility.

For Raikkonen I'd have assumed the spin and resultant loss of positions would have been penalty enough, (as it would have been for Verstappen had he lost his place) and him getting back in position is quite heavily reliant on other drivers allowing him to do so.

[basti313]

FWIW I think the Leclerc Verstappen thing is a bit of a moot point. I think even if he'd lost a place or two from his little mistake, it's highly likely he'd have got them back without too much trouble and still won the race. Just by a smaller margin than he did.

The problem is in light of the Kimi penalty for not getting back to the correct position prior to SC line 1 he was hit with a post race stop and go for a violation of article 42.6

If Leclerc restarts the race when Max has his moment there is 0 chance Max gets infront of Leclerc prior to SC line 1 and therefor he would also be in violation of the same article and be given the same penalty.

I am not 100% sure about this...the rolling start rule is very short on the safety car regulations. In my point of view they are still valid, otherwise there are too many unclear points. But anyways just thinking about the "if"...if Lec would have floored it at the moment Max was on the grass with the front wheels, which can already be counted as the "If any car slows with an obvious problem." wording in the FIA sporting regulations for the SC, then Lando and all others would have done the same. The additional second with Max on the grass would have ended with many cars, maybe even Lewis going past. Even if everyone of them would be given a penalty, the chance of winning would have been low.

[timorous]

Ah ok. See what you're saying here. TBH it would be ridiculous to penalise either driver for that happening under the circumstances in which it would have occurred but we full know common sense does not always apply, and it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility.

For Raikkonen I'd have assumed the spin and resultant loss of positions would have been penalty enough, (as it would have been for Verstappen had he lost his place) and him getting back in position is quite heavily reliant on other drivers allowing him to do so.

If you read the Kimi decision the stewards seemed to point at the contradictions and they fully understood that it was crap situation but they point out that violations of 42.6 are mandatory penalties so have no choice. From the wording it really reads like they did not want to enforce it but that was not an option.

I expect this will be clarified at some point because this was a near miss but it may happen in the future and clearer guidance is needed.

[F1NAC]

Well what a mess would that be if Leclerc overtook Max and then stop on his gridstop (Because of radio problems he didn't know about rolling start)

[Farsari]

He didn't go for a fast lap.

https://i.imgur.com/b42LdVE.png

Sure looks like it thought. Two attempts. Unless there was traffic, was there traffic?
[/quote]

Just checked it. Max did that first 17.5 before he asked what the fastest lap was. Lewis set the fastest lap right after that. In the lap where Max did his second 17.5 he was asked to take no risks by GP.

[El Scorchio]

Ah ok. See what you're saying here. TBH it would be ridiculous to penalise either driver for that happening under the circumstances in which it would have occurred but we full know common sense does not always apply, and it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility.

For Raikkonen I'd have assumed the spin and resultant loss of positions would have been penalty enough, (as it would have been for Verstappen had he lost his place) and him getting back in position is quite heavily reliant on other drivers allowing him to do so.

If you read the Kimi decision the stewards seemed to point at the contradictions and they fully understood that it was crap situation but they point out that violations of 42.6 are mandatory penalties so have no choice. From the wording it really reads like they did not want to enforce it but that was not an option.

I expect this will be clarified at some point because this was a near miss but it may happen in the future and clearer guidance is needed.

Fair play if they were a bit boxed in and had no choice, but it's quite unpaletable. I wonder if they'll have to add a tweak.

[El Scorchio]

FWIW I think the Leclerc Verstappen thing is a bit of a moot point. I think even if he'd lost a place or two from his little mistake, it's highly likely he'd have got them back without too much trouble and still won the race. Just by a smaller margin than he did.

The problem is in light of the Kimi penalty for not getting back to the correct position prior to SC line 1 he was hit with a post race stop and go for a violation of article 42.6

If Leclerc restarts the race when Max has his moment there is 0 chance Max gets infront of Leclerc prior to SC line 1 and therefor he would also be in violation of the same article and be given the same penalty.

I am not 100% sure about this...the rolling start rule is very short on the safety car regulations. In my point of view they are still valid, otherwise there are too many unclear points. But anyways just thinking about the "if"...if Lec would have floored it at the moment Max was on the grass with the front wheels, which can already be counted as the "If any car slows with an obvious problem." wording in the FIA sporting regulations for the SC, then Lando and all others would have done the same. The additional second with Max on the grass would have ended with many cars, maybe even Lewis going past. Even if everyone of them would be given a penalty, the chance of winning would have been low.

But the cars which went past Kimi were not penalised, were they? (and rightly so) So I shouldn't think any cars theoretically passing Verstappen would/should have been either.

[Phil]

Just checked it. Max did that first 17.5 before he asked what the fastest lap was. Lewis set the fastest lap right after that. In the lap where Max did his second 17.5 he was asked to take no risks by GP.

What exactly did you check it against? The broadcast? Radio messages are usually delayed. It could also be that he tried, then realized he didn't have it and then asked his team what the latest fastest lap time was.

[basti313]

Well what a mess would that be if Leclerc overtook Max and then stop on his gridstop (Because of radio problems he didn't know about rolling start)

He knew. The displays on the side of the track display RS for the rolling start. There is no radio needed to get this info.

[basti313]

The problem is in light of the Kimi penalty for not getting back to the correct position prior to SC line 1 he was hit with a post race stop and go for a violation of article 42.6

If Leclerc restarts the race when Max has his moment there is 0 chance Max gets infront of Leclerc prior to SC line 1 and therefor he would also be in violation of the same article and be given the same penalty.

I am not 100% sure about this...the rolling start rule is very short on the safety car regulations. In my point of view they are still valid, otherwise there are too many unclear points. But anyways just thinking about the "if"...if Lec would have floored it at the moment Max was on the grass with the front wheels, which can already be counted as the "If any car slows with an obvious problem." wording in the FIA sporting regulations for the SC, then Lando and all others would have done the same. The additional second with Max on the grass would have ended with many cars, maybe even Lewis going past. Even if everyone of them would be given a penalty, the chance of winning would have been low.

But the cars which went past Kimi were not penalised, were they? (and rightly so) So I shouldn't think any cars theoretically passing Verstappen would/should have been either.

Kimi was far off. For Ves it was a bit of grey area. So yes...maybe they would not have received a penalty in case the SC rules apply or they may have received 10sec.

[RZS10]

Just checked it. Max did that first 17.5 before he asked what the fastest lap was. Lewis set the fastest lap right after that. In the lap where Max did his second 17.5 he was asked to take no risks by GP.

What exactly did you check it against? The broadcast? Radio messages are usually delayed. It could also be that he tried, then realized he didn't have it and then asked his team what the latest fastest lap time was.

I'd guess F1TV footage?

But there's no arguing that he did not go for it, he absolutely did and asked what the fastest lap was afterwards (weird), or more likely the radio message broadcast was delayed (as Phil pointed out) and he asked before he went for it, then tried again and was told to take no risks.

Perez was pointing in more the right way than the wrong and didn't fully lose control of his car during the early safety car but the stewards did not care that two cars went by when they could have safely slowed to let him back infront.

While Max only had all 4 wheels off track for 0.2s or there abouts it was about 4 seconds from the moment he lost the rear to when he had all 4 wheels back on track and the car fully under control. Considering they were originally doing around 80 KPH into a 100+ KPH corner Charles had plenty of leeway to restart the race at that moment.

That then also adds in an element of if Max sees that what happens? Does his reaction to that actually fully induce a spin which would entirely clear Charles of any potential wrong doing or does he stay calm? So many unknowns in how it could have played out.

Yea but Perez was completely off track for so long (7s) that two cars easily passed him ...so it was a completely different situation?

And since he was penalized for retaking those positions it means that they were in the right, so passing a car that is completely off track is fine, in Max' case the absolutely safe window of opportunity was 0.2s.

If a car spun out completely whilst staying on track it would surely also be fine to overtake.

So the question would be:
- would it have been ok to overtake him during the 2.5s he spent in a drift before he left the track?
- would the entire 4s between him losing control and being back on track with all 4 wheels have been fine?
- or was it only ok to overtake him during the 0.2s he was properly off track?

[Farsari]

Just checked it. Max did that first 17.5 before he asked what the fastest lap was. Lewis set the fastest lap right after that. In the lap where Max did his second 17.5 he was asked to take no risks by GP.

What exactly did you check it against? The broadcast? Radio messages are usually delayed. It could also be that he tried, then realized he didn't have it and then asked his team what the latest fastest lap time was.

I'd guess F1TV footage?

But there's no arguing that he did not go for it, he absolutely did and asked what the fastest lap was afterwards (weird), or more likely the radio message broadcast was delayed (as Phil pointed out) and he asked before he went for it, then tried again and was told to take no risks.

It's from the onboards, so the radio's are realtime. Bit weird indeed that he asked afterwards then. Or he was just testing the performance of the tyres a bit, just in case he would indeed go for a fast lap on the last lap.

[timorous]

Perez was pointing in more the right way than the wrong and didn't fully lose control of his car during the early safety car but the stewards did not care that two cars went by when they could have safely slowed to let him back infront.

While Max only had all 4 wheels off track for 0.2s or there abouts it was about 4 seconds from the moment he lost the rear to when he had all 4 wheels back on track and the car fully under control. Considering they were originally doing around 80 KPH into a 100+ KPH corner Charles had plenty of leeway to restart the race at that moment.

That then also adds in an element of if Max sees that what happens? Does his reaction to that actually fully induce a spin which would entirely clear Charles of any potential wrong doing or does he stay calm? So many unknowns in how it could have played out.

Yea but Perez was completely off track for so long (7s) that two cars easily passed him ...so it was a completely different situation?

And since he was penalized for retaking those positions it means that they were in the right, so passing a car that is completely off track is fine, in Max' case the absolutely safe window of opportunity was 0.2s.

If a car spun out completely whilst staying on track it would surely also be fine to overtake.

So the question would be:
- would it have been ok to overtake him during the 2.5s he spent in a drift before he left the track?
- would the entire 4s between him losing control and being back on track with all 4 wheels have been fine?
- or was it only ok to overtake him during the 0.2s he was properly off track?

Perez was a different situation of course but Gasly floored it to get ahead. He didn't just cruise along at normal speed he went for it and got the position.

I think it would have been fine to overtake him from the moment he lost the rear and was heading off track until the moment he has safely rejoined with all 4 wheels and is under complete control of the car. That means with reaction times and response times taken into account I think had Charles been prepping for a safety car restart he would have started to accelerate while Max is heading off track and he would have been ahead while Max is still saving the slide. I do not see how the stewards can penalise Charles (or any other car that goes past) for going past a car that is in the process of spinning.

[Phil]

It's from the onboards, so the radio's are realtime. Bit weird indeed that he asked afterwards then. Or he was just testing the performance of the tyres a bit, just in case he would indeed go for a fast lap on the last lap.

I get the importance of determining if Max went for a fast lap - it would give us more insight about where the Mercedes is relative to the Redbull and viceversa. My opinion is that the RedBull is probably slightly quicker, but the Mercedes is better on the tires, giving them an edge in the races. If this advantage is substantial enough in all conditions or only when it suits the Mercedes tires and temperature wise is yet to be seen.