The Great Overtaking & Stewarding Debate

[Smithers]

I personally don't think its specific drivers being allowed to push the boundaries, I just think its blatant incompetence on behalf of the rule makers and the stewards that implement them.

Charlie is too busy worrying about drivers running wide in practise (which is irrelevant) than how to run a consistent and fair race.

 

[DHCanary]

I personally don't think its specific drivers being allowed to push the boundaries, I just think its blatant incompetence on behalf of the rule makers and the stewards that implement them.

Charlie is too busy worrying about drivers running wide in practise (which is irrelevant) than how to run a consistent and fair race.

Hanlon's Razor, "Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence", seems rather apt here.

 

[dhel]

To be serious though..I have never seen Hamilton go into any corner like he was driving on an airport runway. Why is Rosberg's "moves" compared with Hamilton's? They are not even close. Chech the onboard when Rosberg starts to turn his steering wheel and it's clear that on both occasions he had no intention to make the corner. Just like the Q3 when he run in the runoff area and killed Lewis' chance for pole. Rosberg made no to make the corner..none whatsoever....so he is known for those clumsy moves..I guess that is why he got the penalty this time. Plus the "lift" by the double yellows.....hmmmmmm.

 

[SgtBhaji]

I personally don't think its specific drivers being allowed to push the boundaries, I just think its blatant incompetence on behalf of the rule makers and the stewards that implement them.

Charlie is too busy worrying about drivers running wide in practise (which is irrelevant) than how to run a consistent and fair race.

I hate over penalizing but I also hate inconsistent penalizing. It seems that penalties are sometimes a reaction to some other incident elsewhere that could have warranted a penalty but didn't receive one, which then brings about the inconsistency.

Somehow there has to be a balance where incidents are penalized equally, but also not to the point where drivers are being punished for attempting to race.

 

[BrightLampShade]

Kick a man when he's down

f1.com/ROS-GER-Video

 

[JonnyBaws]

Look at his steering wheel in that video. Honestly, he doesn't even begin to turn until he reaches the edge of the track. Can people see that this is not remotely the same as what Hamilton does?

Not a fan of either but he did the same in Austria... if I were Rosberg, I wouldn't do that again, he'll only get penalised again, the man does appear to have form at doing such moves...
He did similar moves (maybe not quite as harsh) on Vettel and Kimi at last years Bahrain GP!

 

[Smithers]

Look at his steering wheel in that video. Honestly, he doesn't even begin to turn until he reaches the edge of the track. Can people see that this is not remotely the same as what Hamilton does?

It's exactly the same because the end goal is the same - to block the driver on the outside. Just because one driver goes direct to that point and another driver goes gradually to that point is irrelevant - the intention is the same. The lead car on the inside it entitled to position their car anywhere between the white lines that dictate the race track. That is the fundemental basis of racing.

People are arguing that driver A is culpable because it is a deliberate act, where driver B is not culpable because it doesn't appear to be a deliberate act. The outcome is the same, both drivers gain the same advantage. The point here is not to confuse the situation with driver preference but to logically look at the fact the stewards are inconsistent with their decisions.

You must log in or register to see media

 

[allsaintchris.]

It's exactly the same because the end goal is the same - to block the driver on the outside. Just because one driver goes direct to that point and another driver goes gradually to that point is irrelevant - the intention is the same. The lead car on the inside it entitled to position their car anywhere between the white lines that dictate the race track. That is the fundemental basis of racing.

People are arguing that driver A is culpable because it is a deliberate act, where driver B is not culpable because it doesn't appear to be a deliberate act. The outcome is the same, both drivers gain the same advantage. The point here is not to confuse the situation with driver preference but to logically look at the fact the stewards are inconsistent with their decisions.

You've hit the nail on the head.

Driver 'B' performs the same act of easing the opponent to the outside of the track on the exit of the corner, having taken the apex as close to the normal racing line as they can.

Driver 'A' has made no attempt to make the apex.

There is the fundamental difference. Everyone except Rosberg falls into Driver B scenario. Only Rosberg has driven straight on at the apex to stop the other driver making the corner as well. If the following driver cannot even turn into a corner because the apex has been blocked off, then that is not correct.

 

[Big Ern]

They're not inconsistent at all, Hamilton drives people off the track and they consistently ignore it.

You must log in or register to see images

the red car is Hamilton, trying to take an apex is he? Or is he purposefully and blatantly changing direction mid corner to force someone off the track.

 

[Smithers]

You've hit the nail on the head.

Driver 'B' performs the same act of easing the opponent to the outside of the track on the exit of the corner, having taken the apex as close to the normal racing line as they can.

Driver 'A' has made no attempt to make the apex.

There is the fundamental difference. Everyone except Rosberg falls into Driver B scenario. Only Rosberg has driven straight on at the apex to stop the other driver making the corner as well. If the following driver cannot even turn into a corner because the apex has been blocked off, then that is not correct.

....but there is no rule to say you have to take the apex, it's simply the fastest way around the track. Is it an early Apex or a late Apex? Or If you have made or attempted to make the apex and then collide or run them out if road that's then ok? It's difficult to understand unless people have physically raced. Anyway we are all missing the point, because not one person on here can argue that the rules are applied fairly and consistently and that's what I've been arguing for the last few years. It's irrelevant on who the driver is.

Nico doesn't try and hang round the outside like Verstappen does - Nico was never going to hit Verstappen but Riccardo would of hit Nico if he hadn't of got out of it. Nico losses the lead to a puncture and out of the points, Verstappen gets relegated to 4th and Nico gets a penalty.

You must log in or register to see media

 

[allsaintchris.]

....but there is no rule to say you have to take the apex, it's simply the fastest way around the track.

Which is where the inconsistencies in applying the rules by the stewards come into play. It is not against the rules, but is it a general breach of driving standards, which would result in a penalty?

I will again reiterate (like I do almost every race thread) that I do not agree with the Driver B scenario either. Every driver should afford the other at least one car's width AT ANY POINT on the race circuit, regardless of who was the 'racing line' and how far alongside that driver is.

Indycar issue penalties for a deliberate block, which is what I would consider Driver B to be doing on the exit.


On the Ricciardo video (Rosberg's one), he at least he tried to make the apex, the steering angle shows that.

Rosberg has recently gone in with the wheel pointing straight ahead well past the apex of the corner with no attempt to make the corner as normal.

Rosberg then does a 'Driver B' on the exit to block off Ricciardo and screws that up too!


On Hamilton/Ricciardo, again an attempt is made to take the apex, again steering angle shows a genuine attempt to try and get it into apex.

That is where I see the difference being.

 

[Smithers]

They're not inconsistent at all, Hamilton drives people off the track and they consistently ignore it.

You must log in or register to see images

the red car is Hamilton, trying to take an apex is he? Or is he purposefully and blatantly changing direction mid corner to force someone off the track.

No he's got "subtle" under steer. That means it's ok because he tried

 

[allsaintchris.]

No he's got "subtle" under steer. That means it's ok because he tried

Yeah, that's the point. An attempt was made to take the corner on both the video's you posted. Rosberg has made no attempt to even try in Austria or Germany.

If you're going to so something so blatant, how can you expect to get away with it? At least do it with some cunning and claim it was a mistake!

 

[eddie_squidd]

In the Hamilton manoeuvre the other driver at least has the option to back off and drop in behind. With Rosberg the driver is forced to leave the track or pretty much stop.

 

[Smithers]

Which is where the inconsistencies in applying the rules by the stewards come into play.


On the Ricciardo video (Rosberg's one), he at least he tried to make the apex, the steering angle shows that.

On Hamilton/Ricciardo, again an attempt is made to take the apex, again steering angle shows a genuine attempt to try and get it into apex.

That is where I see the difference being.

I "tried" isn't a absolution of fault is it. It doesn't say in the rules that if a driver "try's" to make an apex it's ok. Tries is also an opinion or perception it's not fact.

The problem here is that Nico should have been excluded if they felt that he intended to hit Lewis. There is no try, you either did or you didn't. It's the rules and the stewards screwing everything up.

 

[Smithers]

In the Hamilton manoeuvre the other driver at least has the option to back off and drop in behind. With Rosberg the driver is forced to leave the track or pretty much stop.

...and stop is an option. We see it all the time when a driver parks it on the apex, that's a racing tactic, perfectly legal. What are your thoughts on the contact and where do you aportion blame?

 

[allsaintchris.]

I "tried" isn't a absolution of fault is it. It doesn't say in the rules that if a driver "try's" to make an apex it's ok. Tries is also an opinion or perception it's not fact.

The problem here is that Nico should have been excluded if they felt that he intended to hit Lewis. There is no try, you either did or you didn't. It's the rules and the stewards screwing everything up.

But there are no rules as you said, so it's all down to stewards interpretation, and then the inconsistencies come in.

What was the position with both Hamilton and Ricciardo's moves from Hungary, were either penalised?

 

[allsaintchris.]

...and stop is an option. We see it all the time when a driver parks it on the apex, that's a racing tactic, perfectly legal. What are your thoughts on the contact and where do you abortion blame?

On Ham/Ric, Hamilton steamed in way too quickly but at least with brakes locked and steering angle on he tried to bring the car down to speed and make the turn. A few years ago penalties were being handed out for that and we were up in arms because it meant drivers would be afraid to make a move if there was going to be contact, whether intended or not.

Back to Rosberg, both of his moves this year look like he calmly sailed past the apex n full control and knowing what he was intending to do.

With the way the Pirellie's are, a driver can't afford a lock up, therefore both Hamilton and Riccardo's Hungary moves are more genuine than anything Rosberg has done this year. They wouldn't deliberately lock up because it would ruin the rest of their race.

 

[Smithers]

But there are no rules as you said, so it's all down to stewards interpretation, and then the inconsistencies come in.

What was the position with both Hamilton and Ricciardo's moves from Hungary, were either penalised?

No neither as far as I can remember. I feel bad posting Lewis's videos because my beef isn't with him and I'm conscious that this debate shouldn't be about individual drivers but about what is and isn't acceptable.

 

[allsaintchris.]

No neither as far as I can remember. I feel bad posting Lewis's videos because my beef isn't with him and I'm conscious that this debate shouldn't be about individual drivers but about what is and isn't acceptable.

It's fair to look at all. I think in Austria I posted a vid of Hamilton at Fuji in 2008 when he straight lined the first corner and forced both Ferrari's off the track to which he got a penalty.

So even over the years, they can't consistently apply a penalty correctly.

At least any penalty now is just 5secs, back then it was a drive through which equated to about 20 secs. Rosberg, despite having been penalised, hasn't lost that many points from either race as a result so has arguably got off lightly.