Grand Prix thread 2017 Azerbaijan Grand Prix Chat and Predictions

And then there was J. Villneuve – who still thinks everyone cares what he says.
Vilololololneuve.

Thanks Big Ern.

 

Who doesn't love a bit of Vilolololneuve input though? It usually makes me wonder if all that hydrogen peroxide melted his brain in the mid 90s.

 

JV biggest cock up leaving Williams for BAR. That basically ended his career.

 

I used to think he was quite funny . Looking back however , he was a vindictive spiteful bastard .

 

Of course it might finally have paid off in 2004, if only he hadn't had his arse handed to him by Jenson the year before.

 

Different times, eh Cosi, no track invasions either, Oh well "progress", for want of a more appropriate word.

 

From the BBC:

"Ferrari driver Sebastian Vettel could face further punishment for his collision with Mercedes' Lewis Hamilton at the Azerbaijan Grand Prix.

Governing body the FIA is to hold a meeting on 3 July to "further examine the causes of the incident to evaluate whether further action is necessary".

The outcome will be made public before the Austrian Grand Prix on 7-9 July."

 

How could it take all those laps to dish out a"punishment", and then 3 more days to finally decide to review it further. While I think Vettel got off lightly, they need to sort out these punishments and hearings. Bonkers!

 

I agree . Decision was made , right or wrong . Move on , this is not good .

We all have degrees in hindsight , maybe Charlie etc have had a right bollocking and are desperate ?

 

This is the supposed justification (sorry, I'm quoting Benson):

"The FIA warned Vettel after an incident in the Mexican Grand Prix last year - when he swore over the radio at race director Charlie Whiting - that he could face a tribunal in the event of any future incident of a similar nature."

"Insiders are suggesting that FIA president Jean Todt is perturbed by Vettel's behaviour. Only he has the power to call a new hearing, as has been done in this case."

 

If that's the case, It might just be an opportunity to dish out a final warning.

 

Vettel was driving dangerously, like I said previously, a DSQ is appropriate.

Hamilton appears to have not transgressed outside the rules, although he knew exactly what he was doing and fully aware of the possible reaction of certain fellow competitors. But Hey Ho it's all in the game, Vettel could have chosen to race instead of proving he's a prick.

 

Ok. Here goes…

• This comment is unlikely to find favour with many but I make no apologies. It is based on irrefutable evidence and not the personalities of those involved.
• Vettel got off too lightly. Big time. As I said before, that was a straight red card (Black Flag) offence.
• Under the circumstances, a further penalty is entirely justified.
• Whilst not wishing to excuse the stewards in any way, they have to tread a very difficult line and are too easily concerned with the political fallout of bigger penalties. Hopefully, this will become a thing of the past though. In general, the fear they have is a direct result of what might be termed 'retribution' from what was previously little short of a dictatorship. I'd like to remind people that he was only given the penalty after it became clear Hamilton would need to pit in order to fix his HANS device. That was an example of what can only be described as cowardice from the stewards, where they realised the consequences of penalising Vettel would be reduced and far less controversial. But as I've said, there are reasons that stewards often feel their hands are tied (as above).
• Therefore, I feel that in this instance a retrospective penalty is entirely justified, just as is the case with serious offences in other sport, despite refereeing decisions at the time where their power – like F1 stewards – does not extend to suspensions and bans. The maximum penalty they can give is a disqualification from the ongoing race: a Black Flag.
• I doubt any further penalty will be imposed.

Rest in peace all those who want it brushed under the carpet. It probably will be.

 

Oh I totally think he got off scot free while still extending his lead. I personally think a black flag wouldn't have been harsh in those circumstances. But to whip out the stop go penalty for fear of him going on and winning the race and having a mess on their hands, then taking 3 days to mull ot over is just nuts. I don't quite understand the difficulty they're having.

 

The "mulling over" began immediately (if Monday morning can be considered 'immediate', and had unofficially began on Sunday evening).

But it is a process which needs to be gone through in the cold light of day and not publicised until a properly thought-through decision is arrived at. Publicising any intent to consider further action can and should be delayed because until the process of "mulling" is concluded, all it does is whip up the potential for accusations of 'knee-jerk' reaction from press and public alike, which can interfere with objectivity – and which may not come to pass in any case because no such decision has been taken beforehand.

Also, if the conclusion is to drop it from further definitive investigation such as a Tribunal, it is far better not to be seen to have raised the question in the first place. Serious decisions must be mulled over. It's part of the reason stewards' powers are restricted – similar to those officiating at a footy match being quite different to its governance.

I can understand the frustration at what appears to be a delay; but in all honesty, I cannot think of a viable and credible alternative.

- - -o0o- - -
Personally, I think the most likely outcome will be a fine and/or grid-drop. Probably 5 places but possibly 10.​

 

I just think it should have been dealt with right there and then. Regardless of what Hamilton may or may not have done, that's about as clear a black flag as you get, but it appears as though they bottled it and are now coming back to clean up.

 

Yes, I think we are agreed about a Black Flag, Bhaji.

–But even if he'd been disqualified during the race, that would not discount being investigated for bringing the sport into disrepute. In my opinion, what he did justifies further investigation regardless of any penalty received. In this sense, I do not think the outcome would have been different: Vettel's actions, regardless of any penalty at the time, warrant further investigation – especially in lieu of past conduct.

Also, it is likely that had he been Black Flagged, any further investigation – which is at least in part due to previous misconduct and the warning he was given at the time of the last would – when considering any further punishment – take into account the penalty received at the time. Thus, had he been Black Flagged, he would probably hold more in mitigation this coming Monday…

 

Oh I'd have fully expected him to get pulled in even with the black flag. What I'm not getting is how they viewed the incident not worthy of a DQ, applied the stop-go, applied points and now looking at it further. Was the original punishmet for the initial contact with the back of Hamilton?

 

Sorry if I've not been clear. It is so easy to be clumsy in the written word – as I hope Smithers accepts for my previous error responding to him in this thread! And it's way past my bed-time.


The stewards deal with events during the race. Tribunals deal with the same events at some future point. Two separate bodies. Post race investigation is independent of any punishment handed out during the race. That's what I was trying to say about further investigation being unrelated to any penalty at the time, although of course, it will be taken into consideration if further punishment is warranted.

The original contact with the rear of Hamilton's car was not punished. Vettel's penalty was entirely for what happened next…

- - -o0o- - -
Blimey. It still doesn't read very well does it?​