Formula 1 - 2016 Season

[Kaotik]

Again, you fail to grasp the point being made due to your blinkers.

Rosberg, unlike every other incident you are referring to, did not push someone wide at the exit of the corner, he pushed them wide before the apex, before he even turned into the corner. It's the 'oh shit I've broken far too later to make the corner so I'll block you' move. As cjo said, it's only happened twice in recent memory, both by Nico.

Please indicate any other move of this type done by anyone else, or shut up.

It's irrelevant where it happens, the rules don't make a difference on if it's exit, apex, before, after, or even on a bloody straight.

As for the penalty, I feel it was harsh, but his BS on the radio yet again probably sealed his fate.

BS? Verstappen changed lane during braking which forced Nico to change his approach and lane too. What Verstappen did is against the rules, just like what he did in last GP and IIRC few times before too were. Maybe those moves are fine in lower racing classes, but they're not in F1.

 

[cjo]

Being on racing line doesn't give you the right to push someone out, and yes, it's been "million" times, it's been done to Rosberg too, without penalties. And again, you're not allowed to change lines mid-braking like Verstappen did, which forced Nico to change line and his entry, too.

It would be fun to see Hamilton & Verstappen being in similar incidents against each other, how do you punish anyone when both have immunity on penalties and different set of rules compared to rest of the field?

You need to understand that the rules for going in to a corner and leaving a corner are different. They may not be encoded explicitly in the written rules as such, but they are treated, by consensus, differently. What Rosberg did against both Verstappen and Hamilton was to not start turning until after he had passed the apex and almost ran out of track himself. This is not considered to be allowable within F1.

What other drivers do, and what you will see more often, is take the racing line on the exit of the corner as long as the other car isn't more than about 75% alongside. This is after having made some attempt to hit the apex of the corner. Regardless of the exact wording of the rules, this is considered to be within the rules and isn't punished. It basically means that if the attacking driver hasn't completed their attempted pass before the corner finishes, they get the choice of running wide or backing out of it.

You can't argue based on the exact letter of the rules when the rule isn't applied like that. In this case there is a well-known and accepted convention. No matter how much you'd like to think otherwise, your interpretation of the rules in this case is not consistent with how the sport works.

 

[DJ12]

The bs was he said he was on full lock, he was, but after he'd already forced verstappen basically off the track.

But two wrongs don't make a right.

I actually thought verstappen was just talking his line into the corner until he saw Rosberg was there. His reactions suggest he wasn't aware of rosbergs position.

And context is everything, so of course it matters when an incident happens.

 

[Kaotik]

The bs was he said he was on full lock, he was, but after he'd already forced verstappen basically off the track.

But two wrongs don't make a right.

I actually thought verstappen was just talking his line into the corner until he saw Rosberg was there. His reactions suggest he wasn't aware of rosbergs position.

And context is everything, so of course it matters when an incident happens.

Yes, he probably wasn't aware of how close Rosberg actually was, but it was still lane change during braking to defend, which isn't allowed, that's not the line you take to the corner normally (and no, I don't mean the change he did when he realized after the actual change that Rosberg is so close)

Context matters somewhat, but rules are quite clear on the fact that you can't push other driver off the track if he's significantly on your side, and significantly is defined as "at least your rear tire level". That rule has been broken over and over and over again without any punishments. Especially Hamilton has been doing it a lot (though this might be affected by the fact that the drivers near front usually get most screentime, so it might happen even more at back but gone missing due bad directors)

 

[cjo]

Context matters somewhat, but rules are quite clear on the fact that you can't push other driver off the track if he's significantly on your side, and significantly is defined as "at least your rear tire level". That rule has been broken over and over and over again without any punishments. Especially Hamilton has been doing it a lot (though this might be affected by the fact that the drivers near front usually get most screentime, so it might happen even more at back but gone missing due bad directors)

You're *still* not understanding this, despite several people explaining it to you. There is a difference between the exact lettering used to write the rules and what is enforced. The rule isn't being "broken". There is an accepted convention that all of the drivers, stewards and rule-makers subscribe to that it is ok to do what you see just about every driver doing on the exit to a corner, and it's not ok to do what Rosberg did on the entry to the corner. A similar concept in real-world laws is "case law", whereby the people responsible for deciding infringement of the rules (laws) and the appropriate punishment have interpreted the written laws in a specific way. This sets a precedent where the same situation is punished (or not) in the same way in future. Just because one technical violation is punished doesn't mean that a different technical violation is punished, because the circumstances are different.

In this case, it's been decided that, despite whatever the written rules might say, squeezing on the exit of a corner is different to the entry of a corner. What you're doing is equivalent to "I see my neighbour driving down the road at 31mph in a 30mph limit all the time and he's never been punished. I drove down the same road at 50mph and got pulled over! How unfair is that?! It's showing blatant favouritism towards my neighbour! The rules are quite clear on the fact that you can't go over the speed limit!". Despite the fact that the text of the law doesn't allow for exceeding the speed limit at all, there are situations where the technical violation of the wording is ignored by convention.

 

[Kaotik]

You're *still* not understanding this, despite several people explaining it to you. There is a difference between the exact lettering used to write the rules and what is enforced. The rule isn't being "broken". There is an accepted convention that all of the drivers, stewards and rule-makers subscribe to that it is ok to do what you see just about every driver doing on the exit to a corner, and it's not ok to do what Rosberg did on the entry to the corner. A similar concept in real-world laws is "case law", whereby the people responsible for deciding infringement of the rules (laws) and the appropriate punishment have interpreted the written laws in a specific way. This sets a precedent where the same situation is punished (or not) in the same way in future. Just because one technical violation is punished doesn't mean that a different technical violation is punished, because the circumstances are different.

Going on the "watch circumstances", part of Nico's too deep corner was caused by Verstappen himself, he, against the rules, switched lane on braking zone, which in turn forced Nico to change lanes and brake even later. And again, the very same move Nico made has been congratulated in past as brilliant tactic because usually the other driver just slows down even more not to go out of track. Do you now suggest that the penalty for a move should be given or not given based on how the other guy reacts to it? If he chooses to drive out instead of slowing, it's punished, if he chooses to slow down instead of going out, it's not punished?

In this case, it's been decided that, despite whatever the written rules might say, squeezing on the exit of a corner is different to the entry of a corner. What you're doing is equivalent to "I see my neighbour driving down the road at 31mph in a 30mph limit all the time and he's never been punished. I drove down the same road at 50mph and got pulled over! How unfair is that?! It's showing blatant favouritism towards my neighbour! The rules are quite clear on the fact that you can't go over the speed limit!". Despite the fact that the text of the law doesn't allow for exceeding the speed limit at all, there are situations where the technical violation of the wording is ignored by convention.

Depends on country, but if you'd push the numbers to, say, 35mph vs 50mph, at least here the only difference would be how much you're going to get fined for it (there's few mphs (or rather kphs) "safe zone" over the limit, but after that only thing changing based on your speed is how harsh the punishment is)

--

edit: disregarding what I think, big part of F1 world and media seems to agree that the punishment wasn't justified, commenting mainly "even if it was against the rules, it was caused by Verstappens illegal move"

 

[cjo]

Going on the "watch circumstances", part of Nico's too deep corner was caused by Verstappen himself, he, against the rules, switched lane on braking zone, which in turn forced Nico to change lanes and brake even later. And again, the very same move Nico made has been congratulated in past as brilliant tactic because usually the other driver just slows down even more not to go out of track. Do you now suggest that the penalty for a move should be given or not given based on how the other guy reacts to it? If he chooses to drive out instead of slowing, it's punished, if he chooses to slow down instead of going out, it's not punished?

There are a lot of situations where punishment is contingent on how the other driver reacts. If it doesn't result in the other driver leaving the track or getting hit, it's usually not punished. If the move is dangerous, the driver will likely get a warning and then a punishment if they keep doing it. Rosberg wouldn't have been punished for forcing another driver off the track if Verstappen hadn't left the track.

I have never seen Nico (or anyone else) congratulated for that move. Which race was that? Youtube links please.

Twice in the last month, he's run straight until the last moment, gone full steering lock and just about managed to keep himself on the track, while denying his opponent any chance of making the corner at all; Verstappen would have had to be stationary and waited for Rosberg to drive off to have any chance of staying within track limits. I've not seen anyone else try that as a racing tactic.

Depends on country, but if you'd push the numbers to, say, 35mph vs 50mph, at least here the only difference would be how much you're going to get fined for it (there's few mphs (or rather kphs) "safe zone" over the limit, but after that only thing changing based on your speed is how harsh the punishment is)

That's why I chose 31 mph. It's an example where it is against the written version of the law, yet is almost exclusively not punished at all; I was hoping that it would be an example you could relate to where two actions are both in technical violation of a rule, yet one is punished and the other isn't.

 

[Tahir2]

Indeed if Rosberg does the same thing and gets another punishment, after being punished once already, that is his issue. He is a smart guy, he just needs to realise that kind of move is not what fans want to see.
It is also a move the stewards are not tolerating as it leaves no room for the other driver to make a racing manouver, crowds the other car off the track and has been deemed as being far too aggressive.

 

[Tahir2]

30 place grid penalty for Hamilton.. Joined by Alonso and Ericsson I believe.
Red Bull are looking fast in free practise.
Spa here we come...

 

[Kaotik]

That grid penalty system is ridiculous, they should carry over to next race if your place can't be dropped as many places as the penalty requires

 

[DJ12]

Oh I hope they take another engine tomorrow. The outpouring of hate will make emperor palpatine proud.

 

[Lightman]

Oh I hope they take another engine tomorrow. The outpouring of hate will make emperor palpatine proud.

They will

Merc spend 5 tokens for PU upgrades and both Nico and Lewis will race new spec engines this Sunday! Oh, and there might be some rain for the race

 

[Kaotik]

They need to throw that dangerous asshole for a kid out from all FIA series asap

 

[Davros]

who?
Crazy race so far and its only lap 8

 

[Gerry]

They need to throw that dangerous asshole for a kid out from all FIA series asap

I assume you mean Verstappen. Was pretty stupid - he was never going to make that move stick. Raikkonen wasn't exactly helped by Vettel cutting into him as well. Not a lot he could have done to avoid contact with either of them. Shame for him.

Red flag now.

 

[Kaotik]

Yes, I mean Verstappen. It's getting hard to remember a race where he HASN'T used dangerous or at minimum illegal moves against others

 

[Arwin]

If the move was illegal, then I assume he will get a penalty yes?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kaotik]

If the move was illegal, then I assume he will get a penalty yes?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He's the wonderkid, immune to normal rules, kinda like Mercedes

edit:
And there goes Verstappen again, pushing Kimi out of track

edit2: SERIOUSLY GET THAT DANGEROUS ASS OF THE TRACK
At this rate there will be dead bodies on the track before Verstappen gets penalized

 

[Tahir2]

The race couldn't have worked out any better for Mercedes... Last to 3rd, not bad.

 

[Arwin]

And then Kimi did exactly the same thing right after ... The first attempt was risky - of course as the presenter had said, had he pulled it off, then he would have been a hero. But he got punished plenty anyway, as he was out of the race right then and there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk