- 6,734
- United States
One can dream...You can hate the little troll but you wouldn't have had any F1 to watch without him...
One can dream...You can hate the little troll but you wouldn't have had any F1 to watch without him...
Once again I fully agree with you. Grounds of safety is a easy line to draw and I think they took the easy option in drawing the line there rather than trying to get consensus from everyone involved on where to draw an arbitrary line. For example an team with less complex systems is not going to agree to a team with more complex systems being allowed to driver coach on those more complex systems.I feel Hamilton,Perez and Nico are examples of situations where teams should help their drivers, what's fun about seeing a driver stuck in a slow mode or not knowing how to nurse a failing gearbox.
Once again I fully agree with you. Grounds of safety is a easy line to draw and I think they took the easy option in drawing the line there rather than trying to get consensus from everyone involved on where to draw an arbitrary line. For example an team with less complex systems is not going to agree to a team with more complex systems being allowed to driver coach on those more complex systems.
Yep now everybody in the field can use their radios again and only get a 10 sec penalty for it so in the end it will be even.Pretty clever from Mercedes though, third place is a lot better than a potential DNF. Just shows how nonsensical this rule is.
So was he supposed to guess which gear should he skip? Or should he just drive normally and hope the gearbox won't fail?
Currently they can be instructed on grounds of car or event safety, which I think we all agree with. However, we were discussing allowing communication that aren't on the grounds of safety. My question is how to get agreement on what is acceptable when safety is not the concern?
One can dream...
I dream of a day when he is no longer involved and somebody that is close to sane can fix this sport.You dream that there was no F1 to watch or do you think that F1 would have continued to exist without Bernie?
I dream of a day when he is no longer involved and somebody that is close to sane can fix this sport.
Indeed. CVC pull Bernie's strings, he is just the puppet and will be replaced by another one when he is gone. FIA will continue to pander to the teams on rules.Er, okay. It still wouldn't exist today without him but maybe F1 history's not your thing. For today's villains you should be looking at CVC and the team bosses.
People complained about driver coaching and the fix may have just created a whole new set of problems. Ask yourself whether you'd rather just put up with instructions that we're not always going to hear anyways or situations like today where we're having to discuss whether a compilation of words were a violation of regulations that are wide open to interpretation.It is a problem to black and white define driver coaching. Most people wanted rid of the "Brake 10m later", "X driver is quicker in T2 taking the wider line" type coaching but how do you blanket ban those whilst also allowing what happened today, it's not as clear cut that telling him not to use a gear is coaching or not.
Logically you could decide with common sense but how do you put it in writing with no legal ambiguity? Not easy. Hence what is unfolding. There are hundreds of possibilities that you would need to cover.
The way I understood it was that it was all fine until Nico asked how could he avoid 7th, and should he just go through it, and the team confirmed he should just go through it. That's the bit they fell foul of.Which is entirely their fault if they don't know where to draw the line, untill you can establish proper rules atleast show some leniency.
The weird thing is they don't mind giving instructions to avoid imminent failure, but isn't avoid 7th just that? If not and the car could have gone to the end without this than Nico was actually at an unnecessary disadvantage.
The way I understood it was that it was all fine until Nico asked how could he avoid 7th, and should he just go through it, and the team confirmed he should just go through it. That's the bit they fell foul of.
What I can't understand is why were they so willing to give Nico information when they had locked lips with Hamilton in Baku when arguably the stakes were much higher (in 1st place and a long way from the end).
I wouldn't be the only one if I say that this race was the worst of the seasonWas the race really that bad that we are talking about the colour of the kerbs?!
So do nico and max have to swap trophies?
Looks like nicos was silver and maxs was a bit bronze.
And I think they state the place finished.
most teams keep the originals as part of the contract
VSC should be used as a stopgap to neutralise the race until such time as the safety car can pick up the leader.With the rain I expected a lot more of a mix up, but that VSC ruined any chance of that.
Could be worse, remember Fisichella receiving the winning trophy for Brazil from Raikkonnen about two weeks after the event?
The way I understood it was that it was all fine until Nico asked how could he avoid 7th, and should he just go through it, and the team confirmed he should just go through it. That's the bit they fell foul of.
No it shouldn't. Safety cars close up the field and rob drivers of any advantage they have earned.VSC should be used as a stopgap to neutralise the race until such time as the safety car can pick up the leader.
Well, the VSC can easily make or break your race at random depending on whether you've pit or not. Ricciardo's race was destroyed by the VSC as he had already pit while his team mate and the Mercs could pit under VSC and lose less time, while Perez made up 7 positions due to pitting under VSC. So I don't see it as a better option than a safety car.No it shouldn't. Safety cars close up the field and rob drivers of any advantage they have earned.