Formula 1 - 2017 Season

[Deleted member 2197]

Vettel was definitely too aggressive. Is there going to be a ruling from the stewards or is no one at fault?

 

[Kaotik]

Well that was as interesting first lap at Singapore.

Got to say I'd put the blame mostly on Vettel. I don't think cutting that far to the left in the wet was a particularly good idea. Verstappen didn't have anywhere to go really.

I wouldn't - Verstappen had already clinched his front left in front of Kimis right rear before Vettel was anywhere near, it would have ended up in crash even if Vettel left enought room.

Verstappen is like the widow with 10 dead husbands - you might not have proof she killed them, maybe they all just fell down the stairs, but....
Similarily there might not be proof that Verstappen is behind all the crashes in the top spots, but when the same guy is involved in one way or another every damn time it can't be a coincidence anymore.

Most drivers would have lifted that 0.01sec and let Kimi & Vettel go ahead and try to take them with better line in corner

edit:

Vettel was definitely too aggressive. Is there going to be a ruling from the stewards or is no one at fault?

No penalties.

 

[entity279]

But this time they would have crashed anyway - if Vestappen blocked Kimmi or not (it does appear a little that he did, but then to me it also appears he tried to back off as well, in the last moments) . So I consider Vestappens actions irrelevant, there was no way he could have avoided crashing either into Kimmi or into Vettel

 

[DJ12]

Blatantly Vettels fault. He put the squeeze on Verstappen, he may have moved over into Kimi but there was little else he could do.

No surprises Ferrari International Assistance gave no penalties, but I'm sure if they did Ferrari would've made sure it was Kimi taking it anyway.

Have to say though it was hilarious and he's blown his own championship chances by being a dick.

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Vettel was on notice after that last incident with Hamilton ... all he needs is one more and will have to sit out a race. I'm sure he was "sweating bullets".

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

I wouldn't - Verstappen had already clinched his front left in front of Kimis right rear before Vettel was anywhere near, it would have ended up in crash even if Vettel left enought room.

Verstappen is like the widow with 10 dead husbands - you might not have proof she killed them, maybe they all just fell down the stairs, but....
Similarily there might not be proof that Verstappen is behind all the crashes in the top spots, but when the same guy is involved in one way or another every damn time it can't be a coincidence anymore.

Most drivers would have lifted that 0.01sec and let Kimi & Vettel go ahead and try to take them with better line in corner

edit:

No penalties.

So you are the idiot running the Ferrari twitter?

 

[Kaotik]

Except that Verstappen doesn't go straight like your image claims, but instead towards Kimi all the time

www.gifs.com/gif/lOj5A1

 

[DJ12]

I see your clown comments extend beyond your Hamilton hate.

Vettel put the squeeze on. If he didn't the accident doesn't happen. Therefore vettel caused it.

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[Rurouni]

Vettel often do that kind of move at the start. I don't mind if he does that when doing 1 on 1 battle and he leave enough space but I don't like seeing that kind of move at the start since it will not be 1 on 1 at the start. Yes, Ver did move into Kimi, but that because he saw Vettel trying to chop him. Ver probably saw Kimi a bit late. I think Vettel was the driver that could prevent this from happening, thus the one that was responsible the most for this incident. I do think that it was a racing incident unless they start to ban someone from doing that type of move at the start. So no penalty is correct.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Singapore Grand Prix: Has Sebastian Vettel's aggression just cost him the title?

It is easy to say that, especially when you are the only other person who could be blamed for the incident. How should a title contender behave in these scenarios? Can they afford to be more conservative than normal? Or is that a potential risk in itself?

This is an example of the fine margins Formula 1 drivers are dealing with as they battle wheel to wheel at speeds approaching 200mph, and the split-seconds they have to make their decisions.

Those fine margins were clear at the first corner. Lewis Hamilton chose the outside line in his Mercedes and stayed out of trouble, slotting in behind Vettel and soon moving into a lead he was not to surrender, and which gave him a commanding advantage in the championship over Vettel.
...
In the paddock afterwards, opinion was split on who was to blame for the start-line incident. Some felt Vettel had been too aggressive in diving across to the left to defend against Verstappen. Others felt that Verstappen, as the man who had a clear view of both Ferraris, could have decided discretion was the better part of valour and backed out of it.

In the end, the stewards were probably right to take no action over the start-line incident, deciding that "no driver was wholly or predominantly to blame".

Vettel was undoubtedly very aggressive in covering against Verstappen. In normal circumstances, that would have been OK. He would have edged the Red Bull to the pit wall, they would have disputed the first corner and moved on from there.

The problem was that Vettel clearly did not realise team-mate Raikkonen was on Verstappen's inside and moving ahead, having made the best start of all three.
...
Mercedes were struggling, well off the pace of both Ferrari and Red Bull in practice and they arrived at the track on Sunday expecting a day of damage limitation. But then it started to rain.

"When that happened, I was like: 'It's on. I am dead certain we can do a very good job in terms of damage limitation and potentially even win.' I was convinced in my mind I was going to overtake everyone.

Fastest lap followed fastest lap as he pulled away from the Red Bull of Daniel Ricciardo behind him and soon the race was totally under his control.

Why the turnaround? Mercedes said they did not fully understand.

Undoubtedly, part of it was the driver, but there were technical reasons, too. Hamilton was four seconds clear by lap six, but then Ricciardo started to run into gearbox problems that cost him in the region of half a second a lap.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/41301477

 

[Kaotik]

Not my image, but with anyone else than Verstappen involved we would have had the right side of the image

 

[Deleted member 2197]

Image too much doctored .... I

 

[tangey]

I've only seen some basic footage of it but:-
Ver did edge to his left on several occasions, but that was becase he could see vettel coming from his right quite agressively. Kimi at all times had enough room, he wasn't at the time of impact being forced into the barriers. My opinion is that if Kimi had moved left then it may not have resulted in a crash. Of the three, he was the only one who could see what the other 2 were doing.

However it looks like Vettel was trying to force the door closed whilst Ver was still in the doorway.

 

[cjo]

View attachment 2196

Not my image, but with anyone else than Verstappen involved we would have had the right side of the image

Why don't you think Kimi should have backed out? Why don't you think Vettel should have backed out? Any one of the three of them *could* have taken action that would have avoided the incident. As it is, the FIA decided it was just a racing incident. Vettel was the one that moved over most aggressively. I suspect that if Verstappen hadn't moved to the left, Vettel would have collected his front wing as he moved across.

If it were VER or HAM that started that race like Vettel did, with Vettel in Max's position, you'd be screaming that VER or HAM shouldn't have moved so aggressively.

 

[Kaotik]

Why don't you think Kimi should have backed out? Why don't you think Vettel should have backed out? Any one of the three of them *could* have taken action that would have avoided the incident. As it is, the FIA decided it was just a racing incident. Vettel was the one that moved over most aggressively. I suspect that if Verstappen hadn't moved to the left, Vettel would have collected his front wing as he moved across.

Because Kimi and Vettel got ahead of Verstappen?

If it were VER or HAM that started that race like Vettel did, with Vettel in Max's position, you'd be screaming that VER or HAM shouldn't have moved so aggressively.

Every pole sitter does similar move in almost every race, usually they're a bit more ahead, but still Vettel was still ahead and Verstappen had already made sure there will be crash by slotting his front left ahead of Kimi's right rear.

 

[entity279]

Sorry but try as he may, VES could't crash into both the Feraris. Assuming ill intent (which Kaotik does, apparently) VES choose to crash into RAI hence Vettel is at least responsible for squeasing both. Or VES choose to crash into VET, but this would have left RAI room (which we can see on RAI's cam that it didn't happened)

And I think images (potentially) casually insulting some of the posters here have no place here

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Except that Verstappen doesn't go straight like your image claims, but instead towards Kimi all the time

www.gifs.com/gif/lOj5A1

Because vettel is moving over to the left very aggressively.

Ver probably didn't notice Kimi had such a good start until it was too late.

Ver could have gotten out of the throttle. Kimi could have moved over to the side some more, he had plenty of space. He must have seen Ver moving to the side but you don't see him moving over. Or vettel could not have cut across the road like he did as the championship is his to lose as he almost certainly did. Unless Mercedes runs into reliability problems.

The fact that vettel has been very quiet after the race about the whole incident tells you he too thinks he got himself to blame as much as anybody else. He's been vocal enough about other incidents.

 

[Kaotik]

...the very same move every pole sitter does on most of the tracks, move aggressively in front of the guy next to you

edit:
this is apparently frame by frame:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jogyv1hjloz25g5/Sieppaa.PNG?dl=0

Shows how much room there was between Vettel and Verstappen when Verstappen hits Kimi

 

[cjo]

...the very same move every pole sitter does on most of the tracks, move aggressively in front of the guy next to you

edit:
this is apparently frame by frame:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jogyv1hjloz25g5/Sieppaa.PNG?dl=0

Shows how much room there was between Vettel and Verstappen when Verstappen hits Kimi

Whether the pole sitter does it or not is usually depends on how well others started. If the person in 2nd place is significantly alongside them, they don't get to move wherever they like.

In the penultimate frame, there's less than 40cm horizontal distance between Vettel and Verstappen's front wheels, and Vettel was reducing that space rapidly. In the frame before that, Vettel was about 88cm horizontally from Verstappen. Even if you're generous and say that frame-by-frame is at 1fps, it goes from "Plenty of room for all 3 cars" to "There's going to be a collision" in a matter of seconds.

It's great being able to look at photos and analyse angles and spend hours staring at pixels to try and work out who is at fault, but realistically it comes down to this: While travelling at speed, in a matter of seconds, one car moved over quickly, another reacted by moving away from them slightly, and a third car didn't move at all. Three cars were trying to occupy the same bit of racing track at the same time, and that ends up with a collision. Each of them could have done something differently which would have avoided the accident, but none of them did. It was deemed to be a racing incident, with no driver substantially at fault.

 

[IainF]

Whether the pole sitter does it or not is usually depends on how well others started. If the person in 2nd place is significantly alongside them, they don't get to move wherever they like.

In the penultimate frame, there's less than 40cm horizontal distance between Vettel and Verstappen's front wheels, and Vettel was reducing that space rapidly. In the frame before that, Vettel was about 88cm horizontally from Verstappen. Even if you're generous and say that frame-by-frame is at 1fps, it goes from "Plenty of room for all 3 cars" to "There's going to be a collision" in a matter of seconds.

It's great being able to look at photos and analyse angles and spend hours staring at pixels to try and work out who is at fault, but realistically it comes down to this: While travelling at speed, in a matter of seconds, one car moved over quickly, another reacted by moving away from them slightly, and a third car didn't move at all. Three cars were trying to occupy the same bit of racing track at the same time, and that ends up with a collision. Each of them could have done something differently which would have avoided the accident, but none of them did. It was deemed to be a racing incident, with no driver substantially at fault.

This is absolutely correct, it was technically a racing incident on the basis of the rules and therefore no penalty by the FIA can apply to any of the drivers..

BUT..

That is entirely separate to the fact that while not illegal, Vettel's allowed one move to very aggressively block at the start was a really poor choice on a wet track, even if you assume Max Verstappen is going to back off to make room it is entirely possible he could lock up in the slippery conditions and end up going into the back of Vettel anyway. The old adage that you can't win the race on the first corner but you can lose it was never more true...

Basically if Vettel did not move across then *maybe* he gets overtaken around the outside by Kimi, he *probably* still has enough lead to stay ahead of Max but either way crucially he stays ahead of Hamilton and keeps the championship alive. If he is still behind Kimi but ahead of Max into the last 3rd of the race then there is no way that Kimi would not get the team order to let him through and play tail gunner vs Max/Lewis and so maximises the points advantage over Lewis in the championship. Instead Lewis retains the lead even if he has a DNF now and that is not including possible engine/gearbox penalties Ferrari may well in particular be vulnerable to and the remaining races are nothing like as one-sidedly suiting either manufacturer.

Vettel was stupid here regardless of whether the way he drove was considered "at-fault" for the crash.