^^^
Speaking of moving on, any word on the weather for the race?
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
There have been a number of incidents in 2019 requiring steward intervention, many of which result in a difference of opinion as to whether a penalty was or was not justified. In this article we look at the actual rules and what punitive measures are available to the race director.
Sorry but no that’s not true. Many in this thread have made the point that the teams have been bloody stupid by giving themselves not enough time or leeway.dans79 wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 13:17The discussion has been about who and why people should or shouldn't get penalties, the rules are the only thing that matter in this case.Restomaniac wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 12:46That’s the point you seem to be missing in this if I may be so bold. You seem to be getting hung up on the rules instead of using logic.
Certainly up for discussion about 27.4 (and again, I'm not going to repeat myself on that. I had a very good debate on that with Dans79). Not so much for 151c. 151c is a catch-all rule to cover situations not immediately applicable for other regulations. Essentially 151c is something you could use for situations that have not been considered otherwise in the rulebook.Those two rules were never intended for these kinds of situations
You'll find few people claiming a new general rule has to be made for this specific situation. For instance, you can create well written directives to avoid this specifically for Monza. Now directives can fail, can be even questioned. Vettel being cleared for him going off track or not, was down to an ambiguity in a directive. But, it also shows you can use it if these are well written. There are other solutions as well. You don't necessarily need to change the rule book.
Oh it was funny and also looking though your fingers utterly stupidPhil wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 13:32Those two rules were never intended for these kinds of situations. And no, I don't agree that this should be avoided in the future. It's relevant to, what, 3 races among a total of 21 and you want to turn the rules up-side-down? Good luck with that.
PS: Even if you want to make some minor adjustments, do we really want more regulations in a sport that is already over-regulated and killing it in many areas (like the nitpicking on what is deemed acceptable in defending and overtaking)?
People should simply move on. We got at least one run of Q3 laps from pretty much everyone within the top 10. It is what it is. The funniest thing is, it wasn't even unexpected too. Seeing them all sit inside the garage at the 2:10 marker, I'm surprised they even went out.
What about unpredictability without F1 looking like a mess?Phil wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 13:50The most amusing thing about this whole 35 pages of witch hunting is that for once, we ended up with a less than predictable qualifying result, which in theory should give us a fantastic race hopefully. Yet it seems everyone prefers the predictable and boring qualifying sessions that trigger around 5 to 10 posts max.
So sure, lets come up with more rules and regulations so that we get the usual predictability. Will make the sport surely much better.
If you want to know what is wrong with F1 (a never ending topic it seems now days), these topics highlight it perfectly in a sad way.
Order and chaos are at opposide ends of the spectrum. If you take this away, you end up with order, thus predictabilty where the fastest car finishes at the front.
People werent robbed of anything. They got at least one set of qualifying runs. Even if not, they are not owed anything. If you open this can of worms, you are opening yourself to an endless degree of scenarios where the spectator is owed... an exciting race? More spectacle? Entertainment? At least number of x overtakes? Where does it start and where does it end? This sense of entitlement is beyond comical, not least because as it so happens, we might end up with the better race than if we had a ‘normal qualifying session’.turbof1 wrote:Just don't do something that will rob people who buy tickets of something they expect. And I see you raising your finger, but let me pre-empt that: no, garanty on entertainment is not something in the rules.
I wouldn’t say it was a witch hunt at all. Good debate? certainly.Phil wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 13:50The most amusing thing about this whole 35 pages of witch hunting is that for once, we ended up with a less than predictable qualifying result, which in theory should give us a fantastic race hopefully. Yet it seems everyone prefers the predictable and boring qualifying sessions that trigger around 5 to 10 posts max.
So sure, lets come up with more rules and regulations so that we get the usual predictability. Will make the sport surely much better.
If you want to know what is wrong with F1 (a never ending topic it seems now days), these topics highlight it perfectly in a sad way.
Hmm... least it’s not a full set!