2024 Azerbaijan Grand Prix - Baku, Sep 13-15

[Hammerfist]

Sainz had a perfectly clear part of the track in which to work, wasn't clear of the other car at any point to take a line of "superiority " and simply drove into the side of a competitor.

The naive point still stands, each wanted to hold their line with the corners that were coming, Sainz had compromised himself against his teammate CL having to yeald to corner #2 apex, it would have been a fair race to next corner, at which we'd have seen the true outcome of whichever of the two (SP & CS) had gained that advantage. Thats racing, that's what we as spectators want to see.

Anyway, Sainz seems to be negotiating his way down the field and ultimately seeing his career come to nothing significant. Perhaps Williams would be better keeping Colapinto for next year in comparison to this attitude.

What sainz did remind me of something that happens a lot in sim racing. He is trying to follow leclerc to get the slipstream while leclerc is not making it easy by not driving the racing line. Problem is that he is ignoring that checo is halfway alongside him. Checo should have reacted to being squeezed by going left but Sainz cannot just blindly seek the tow from leclerc in that situation. Sainz more at fault but Perez could have avoided it.

[Farnborough]

The key for me was that Sainz had no just cause to change direction and not safe to do so UNTIL he was clear if the other driver.

The piece of track he moved to was clearly occupied, it doesn't matter much to me who was there in reality, Sainz was not clear to go, and so caused an avoidable accident. He was the impetus not Perez.

Sainz made a clear and safe move in getting Perez through 1st corner, thats to be applauded for his quick actions.

I wanted to see both of them (I don't really care who is involved) racing it to the next corner on the track too, with the best one winning. I'm not favouring either driver as personal preference.

We as spectators missed out on a thrilling end to that race. Isn't that what people want to see ? and take time out of their lives to sit and watch.

[dialtone]

Are many of you just ignoring what the stewards wrote in the decision? Because it looks like it.

[emp]

That on McLaren is passive DRS.

And that is how F1 should be. Innovating, exploiting gray areas, technical development.

Mclaren can be applauded for exploiting a grey area in the rules(though of course it's 'cheating' when Ferrari or Red Bull do similar). But the FIA is a joke for continuing to allow it and not even attempting to crack down on it after it was brought to their attention with clear evidence, and doing so almost assuredly because of how 'exciting' it is to have a non-RB/Verstappen championship. People are rightfully annoyed to see this season potentially getting decided by the FIA and not proper, fair competition.

Yes, FIA can be a joke from time to time. But, if you choose to watch F1 because of the fair competition you are in for a surprise. This is the sport where a team was DSQ from the championship because of Spygate. Because they want to win at any cost. This is the sport where we had the most dominant teams in history in the last 10 years, beating records after records. It was fair, right?

People were annoyed and bored because of domination, people are annoyed because they think they know better than FIA, people are annoyed because their driver isn't winning, people are annoyed because they think this is manufactured show, people are annoyed because isn't raining in a race. Should i go on? Or do you see the pattern?

[Farnborough]

Are many of you just ignoring what the stewards wrote in the decision? Because it looks like it.

Yup, because each of us are giving an opinion after more time particularly to consider the behaviour element.

If the stewards look toward and action their own phrase "causing an avoidable collision" then Sainz did this. He had no reason to move to his left at all.

The comments on here even allow this in saying (and many have claimed this) that Perez SHOULD have avoided that collision ! This even acknowledges in acceptance that the collision was being caused by the other driver, Sainz.

Further, the "following my usual line" statement ftom Sainz has no weight to it. He was aware of Perez having just passed him two corner before, knew the proximity of Perez at corner apex being inside of his own car. Then trrid to intimidate the other driver to back out of it prior to the next corner.

He should receive a penalty for his approach.

[codetower]

Sainz was the lead driver, He has the right to choose his driving line. He left enough room for Perez, but Perez didn't want to move over, even though it was Carlos' line.

[dialtone]

Sainz was the lead driver, He has the right to choose his driving line. He left enough room for Perez, but Perez didn't want to move over, even though it was Carlos' line.

Not in f1 apparently, according to people here.

[Farnborough]

Define "lead" in this situation.

It was none of that apex and radius stuff, he wasn't clear on track, on a straight, to be able to "take" his line if that's what's being implied.

We're all mature enough to understand it was a to & fro set of behaviour from the two of them at that point in the race, each wanting the advantage, naturally . Being clear of the other car such as it could not cause a collision is just part of that.

Sainz never achieved authority over track position to enact that move.

Acceptance of Perez being judged to NEED application of avoidance proves just that. Until Sainz had clear status to do that, its a threat of "crash or move" on his part.

Showing the rules that clearly support that positional authority would illuminate this.

[cplchanb]

Who said this season was uncompetitive again?

honestly under conventional wisdom the first 5 races was just that with RB 1-2s every race. However noone expected RB to fall off the cliff this badly all of a sudden. Max hasnt had a podium since his home race and hasnt won since Spain. 2009 all over again.

[selvam_e2002]

reason for red bull dip is newly gone from RB. no one can disagree.

[chrisc90]

reason for red bull dip is newly gone from RB. no one can disagree.

Horner said that there was a change on the floor in 2023 that first caused the problems.

More on that article in the team thread- but that was when Newey was there…

[dialtone]

reason for red bull dip is newly gone from RB. no one can disagree.

Even if you want to believe that, it should be obvious that’s an exaggeration.

[Juzh]

Define "lead" in this situation.

It was none of that apex and radius stuff, he wasn't clear on track, on a straight, to be able to "take" his line if that's what's being implied.

We're all mature enough to understand it was a to & fro set of behaviour from the two of them at that point in the race, each wanting the advantage, naturally . Being clear of the other car such as it could not cause a collision is just part of that.

Sainz never achieved authority over track position to enact that move.

Acceptance of Perez being judged to NEED application of avoidance proves just that. Until Sainz had clear status to do that, its a threat of "crash or move" on his part.

Showing the rules that clearly support that positional authority would illuminate this.

Some good takes

[dialtone]

Define "lead" in this situation.

It was none of that apex and radius stuff, he wasn't clear on track, on a straight, to be able to "take" his line if that's what's being implied.

We're all mature enough to understand it was a to & fro set of behaviour from the two of them at that point in the race, each wanting the advantage, naturally . Being clear of the other car such as it could not cause a collision is just part of that.

Sainz never achieved authority over track position to enact that move.

Acceptance of Perez being judged to NEED application of avoidance proves just that. Until Sainz had clear status to do that, its a threat of "crash or move" on his part.

Showing the rules that clearly support that positional authority would illuminate this.

Some good takes

Nobody would agree with them but RBR fans but sure. Even Jolyon called out that Perez is more at fault and needed to use the track he had because he was behind.

We’re now challenging the concept of being the lead car when Checo was 2 car lengths behind before braking point, the stewards note how the pass on checo was completed and have gone through a corner with checo fully behind. But the pass wasn’t complete.

Haha

[Seanspeed]

It's the car in front who must give room to the chasing car, not the other way around. Sainz did, actually he left way way more than needed.

How many drivers have squeezed another car almost to the wall in an attempt to avoid being passed? Uncountable! But while there's enough room for a car width, it's ok

Sainz left 2-3 car room. Can't grasp how people can criticize a driver who didn't even squeezed the chasing car, when squeezing the chasing car/bike is a standard in any racing motorsport

This isn't complicated. Who was technically ahead is pretty much not relevant in this situation. On a straight, if two cars are side by side, they both need to give each other enough room. Perez had every right to retain his line and keep Sainz on his outside, who absolutely had enough space to keep going straight. But instead, Sainz misjudged things and swerved into Perez. Small margins, but this was Sainz's fault.

And I say that as a Ferrari fan who initially thought it was Perez's fault before seeing Perez's onboard.