F1 - Liberty Media

[steamship]

Originally Posted by HPsauce

And it's not Liberty Media who did that, but the race stewards, who are probably appointed completely independently of them, maybe by the FIA?

Correct Andrew. I realised that as I reread it today. I was just that annoyed at the time.

It's just with all the madness in F1 where cars supposedly can't "pass" each other if they get too close, or a driver has to start at the back of the field because of the penalty system (Brendan Hartley for example, first race in F1 and he's penalised), or whatever other reasons, and then when we do have some actual excitement like Max's drive, it gets ruined both for the driver and the fans.

I've been a fan of F1 since the mid 70s, and have watched it for the racing, irrespective of who the drivers are. Yeah, I want the Brit drivers to do well, but then I also like to see the underdogs do well. I enjoy watching Max and Daniel because they are entertaining and are prepared to race for real.

[MikkiJayne]

Originally Posted by oldnick

let's face it , just because drivers were allowed some discretion in running wide hence lengthening the track and overtaking nobody doesn't mean that the same discretion should be allowed for a driver who shortened the circuit and overtook another competitor in the process ...what a precident that would be !

Agreed. While I have no liking for Ferrari, that was pretty much the definition of 'gaining an advantage by leaving the track'. He was clearly all four wheels off, so exciting as it was, I can't argue with the decision.

There was an interesting article in a recent Racecar Engineering magazine about Indycar's new spec bodywork. One of their primary design criteria was that the cars must be able to follow each other closely without the leading car's aero messing up the following car. This was shown to lead to much closer racing, and both drivers and spectators approved of the changes. The only downside is that the cars are all the same shape, but how many people could tell F1 cars apart if they were all painted the same colour? The only distinctive one is the Force India!

How you would mandate something like that in F1 I'm not sure, but it would interesting to see.

[HPsauce]

The only thing that wasn't clear to me is whether he was forced off to avoid a collision.
In some recordings I saw he appeared to already be past and still on track (just) then Raikkonen moved in on him and he jinked away over the kerb.

But that would need a "normal" stewards investigation with teams producing evidence etc. and it was all very fast.
The big flaw seems to be that what they did had no input from the teams and no time for consideration and no appeal, unlike most other decisions.

[homer simpson]

Ultimately it's the stewards' fault for not laying down the law over the weekend.

However, even though most drivers did exceed track limits, so did Max in those places, so they all gained or lost.

Max however went off the track and gained an advantage which resulted in a place/podium. Harsh as it sounds and as boring as it sounds to fans who are watching, it's the rules.

[1781cc]

If a driver leaves the track and gains a position they usually have to give the place back within three laps, Verstappen didn't do it and didn't have time to do it, so they enforced the rule post race, which would either be a 5 second penalty (putting him behind KR) or by returning the place (putting him behind KR)

In other instances over the weekend drivers exceeded the track limits but didn't gain a position from it.

Overall I agree that there is inconsistency in the stewarding, but in this instance, I think they were right. Incidentally Mika Salo, Ex-F1 driver head was the chief steward, I'm sure he knows racing.