The 'Can''t be worse than last week' Austrian GP thread.

I think F1 has been here before. Loads of silly penalties got handed out inconsistently, then fans and drivers complained, so they relaxed it and fans and drivers said it was too lenient, now we're back to lots of seemingly inconsistent decisions again.

There must be some middle ground somewhere, but it goes back again to it being too easy to crowd a driver knowing they have tarmac to push on to rather than grass/gravel. Just seems to be a general lack of respect for each other.

 

He’s a **** .

 

As an aside, all 20 drivers finished today

 

Is that a positive or a negative?

As a man I'm a barbaric savage who wants to see the odd crash to punctuate a grand prix. I also want to see retirements, because if there isn't any that means that everyone is just coasting around, and not pushing as hard as they could.

On an unrelated note, my recent letter to the FIA requesting the new regs include chariot scythes and a rear mounted paintball gunner has been completely ignored.

 

Most talented people are. Even the ones who seem nice in public. I bet Federer pisses in the sink at home and refuses to give the bus driver the correct change.

 

This is very true .

Nevertheless , he’s still a ...

 

What a race. I so wanted Charles to get his first win but the longer Max’s charge went on the more he deserved it. On any other day Lando Norris would have smashed driver of the day today with a great performance but he (and Charles) were up against a force of nature today.

PS not sure if Max’s first overtaking attempt on Charles was overtake of the day, it would have been if Charles hadn’t pulled off such a brilliant defence. A terrific finish for a change.

 

That's a nice thought but, sadly, I don't think there is a middle ground. The discussion in this thread has been balanced and respectful, from people much more knowledgable than me. And it shows that we're in different places on an overall spectrum from:

• "rules be damned - all's fair in racing and the stewards should butt out"; to
• "rules are what give us fair racing. If we don't have them, victory goes to the most ruthless, rather than to the best"

(Just to be clear, I'm just presenting two extremes - I don't think anyone here is at either end of the spectrum.)

Personally, I think Max should have been penalised. From the bits that I've seen of the incident, he made no attempt at all to hit the apex. He kept going, turned in far later than he needed to if he was trying to be 'hard but fair', and then opened his steering again just to make absolutely sure (when LeClerc would have already been on the dirty part of the track).
To me, that's a penalty. To others, it's hard racing. It doesn't show that any of us is wrong. It just shows that we sit on different parts of the spectrum. So one person's middle ground will be another person's F1 is broken.

Yep, this is another spectrum, from:

• "tracks are too lenient - they don't punish mistakes enough"; to
• "we can't have tracks that cause drivers to tip-toe around for fear one mistake causing a DNF (or worse)"

Again - there's no right or wrong. Just different people occupying different parts of the spectrum. I tend towards the first argument, but I do understand the second.

Cosi has outlined some of the contributory factors very eloquently (as always). If drivers (and team owners etc) all had the same innate sense of where to draw the line, then we wouldn't need half as many rules.
But we've seen that different drivers occupy different parts of the spectrum (just like the rest of us do). Same goes for team owners/principals. The rules are trying to provide a level playing field. (The technical rules and the racing rules that is - the financial rules are shamelessly doing the opposite.)
Sadly, with the amount of money in the sport, I suspect the technical rules & the racing rules will always be fighting a losing battle, as long as the financial rules are stacked against them.​

 

Rosberg's was definitely more naughty, but it was the same kind of move, push the guy wide off the track so there's no hope of coming back.

It would have been just this season all over if the collision today took both of them out, and a melting Mercedes took the win. At least that didn't happen.

 

An absolutely cracking race! (Definitely the right outcome, in my opinion).
Is it worth putting up an awards thread?

 

Not sure if this was more appropriate for this thread or the spare parts thread, but made me chuckle in any case.

 

there's no inconsistency, if there's any room in the rule to let Hamilton or Verstappen off, the stewards will take it.

 

It'd be nice to finally give a race a good score out of 10.

 

This is a great post. I've watched the incident a heap of times and was very undecided at first. Worth adding that I really like both drivers, no preference between the two really. For me it comes down to the question of; 'if there was a wall there, would we deem that to be a penalty?' With that question in mind I think it probably was deserving of a penalty.

Fully appreciate there is a robust counterargument (there isn't a wall there, and if there was, drivers would approach the corner and overtaking in that corner differently), but the question helps to clarify my thoughts about how broadly fair the move was.

 

Thanks JC. It'll be up in a few minutes.

 

I'll second that, Mr B. Very eloquent yourself - and no need to reference me.
But thanks.

 

yes

 

I've only seen a short clip of the overtake, but it looked like Charlie left the door wide open and the corner belonged to Mad Max. Gutted I missed this one.

 

It was a good race. As for the move, I was in a sports bar and mostly the view in the bar was 'it's a slam dunk penalty'. The stewards taking their time, I thought they were waiting for the fans to leave as their decision would cause a reaction. Quite possible, although F1 fans are not known for reacting in such a way..
It was hard racing and deliberate by Max (the boy). I couldn't check but I suspect 'The boy' made an earlier turn on the previous laps. Did it change the outcome? No, the overtake was going to be achieved, if not there then soon after.

I suspect in interview, LeClerc probably confirmed he was battling a lost cause. I also believe the decision was in part influenced by the negativity that has been circulating about the sport as of late.

Ferrari, 2 races they have been on the wrong end of a stewards decision. This was not a time penalty, might Ferrari appeal? I ask not to question the result but how Ferrari feel their season has gone so far, seriously bad and bad luck too. The team morale, are they strong enough for this to make them stronger, I hope so. Mechanical issues, tyre change issues, steward issues, they need to show they can fight back and deliver, not sure they will before the summer break.

A race enjoyed by the fans and long overdue.