Vettel loses 3rd in Mexico with 10-second post-race penalty

75

Scratch the result, it now seems that the very thing I said would happen (and I was castigated for my view in the comment section) here, has happened. The new “moving under braking” rule has be retroactively applied to the race results after a team lodged a complaint and the results of a race have been erased.

Sebastian Vettel, who was on the FIA’s S-list for cursing out race director Charlie Whiting over his radio to his team, has lost his 3rd place finish at the Mexican Grand Prix after Red Bull complained that he had moved under braking while defending against Daniel Ricciardo. Never mind that Ricciardo’s teammate had ignored the team’s suggestion to cede the position to Vettel as Max Verstappen shortcut turn 1 and then proceeded to hold Vettel up dropping him into the claws of a hungry, charging Ricciardo.

The FIA said:

“Notwithstanding the F1 Commission directive to “let the drivers race” we note the concern that has been expressed about manoeuvres involving a change of direction under braking as expressed at the drivers briefing at the US Grand Prix and in the race director’s notes from the US Grand Prix and this event,”

“The telemetry and video evidence shows that the driver of car 5 did change direction under braking.

“Article 27.5 and the race director’s notes have essentially three criteria that determine a breach: driving in a manner potentially dangerous, an abnormal change of direction and another driver having to take evasive action.

“The video footage, including the close circuit footage, the broadcast vision, both drivers’ on board cameras plus the telemetry show that there was an abnormal change of direction by car 5 and this was considered to be potentially dangerous in view of the proximity of the wheels of each car.

“The video evidence clearly shows that car 3 had to take evasive action as a result.

“Accordingly as all three criteria have been met, the driver of car 5 is guilty of a breach of article 27.5.”

So therefore we have races changed after the event due to lodged complaints that required review of telemetry to determine if a driver moved, not just obvious visual evidence but a forensic review of Ferrari’s data. This is a slippery slope that f1 has gotten itself in to and one in which I find no comfort in.

I get the safety aspect of it but this is nonsense as the consistency and potential abuse of this rule will continue to get worse. I understand the FIA were upset with Vettel’s comments and foul language but this is an odd situation.

I also understand that Vettel has complained about this very issue with Max Verstappen so moving under braking is something that you would expect him not to do. I also agree with Sky Sports F1’s assessment that he squeezed Ricciardo and that’s just part of racing but now we are going to micromanage every inch of the driving on track. We are going to turn F1 into an engineering series that manages races from back of a garage and not on track.

This is an unfortunate situation for fans who are tired of having race results and podium ceremonies erased hours after a race. As I argued, the consistency will be a source of outrage as long as this rule lives and the abuse and lack of context from the fan’s perspective will make this a very difficult situation.

Hat Tip: AUTOSPORT

75
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
Photo and Image Files
 
 
 
Audio and Video Files
 
 
 
Other File Types
 
 
 
18 Comment threads
57 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
29 Comment authors
Ben HutchingsGaryKGramgeeyorejakobusvdl Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Tickled Pink
Guest
Tickled Pink

In other words, VES thought he was going to the podium, VET actually did, but the man who will get the trophy is RIC. Silly season indeed.

Coji
Guest

How close was VET to VES to warrant any would-be claim that he was attacking or positioning his car to take advantage at corner exit? I’m not sure how many people saw that coming – an argument that moving under braking is more tolerable if it’s attacking, without realizing/caring about the third car in line.

Negative Camber
Guest

I think there is some consideration of this and if I were Ferrari, I think they may make the case that Seb wasn’t sure if Max was running wide to let him by, racing or what. Max was ahead but on his right and Vettel inside with enough room for Dan inside that. Regardless, this rule will be more and more exploited as time goes on. There is a reason it was an un-written rule and rightfully so.

C1
Guest
C1

“There is a reason it was an un-written rule and rightfully so.”

Incidentally, RBR’s drivers are involved with almost every single one of these. Common sense would be to address issue with the smaller sample (2 drivers in particular).

Instead, the bright minds of FIA have decided to open a slippery slope and effectively invite further inconsistency.

I understand that Red Bull has committed a lot of money to the sport but the things are getting ridiculous.

B52RockLobster
Guest
B52RockLobster

You talked about context in not giving HAM a penalty for cutting the corner. Although I disagree with that, you could apply the same logic to VET’s situation. Context: 1) VET would not have fallen so quickly into the clutches of RIC if VES would have ceded the position, or lost the position at the corner he cut (which he would’ve done if he had actually stayed on the track). 2) The way RIC attacked that corner, he would have been in trouble going through that corner even if VET had not moved under braking. I don’t understand why the… Read more »

The Late Idi Amin
Member
The Late Idi Amin

why should you be penalized for going off the track? nobody wants to go rally crossing unless they’ve made a mistake.

B52RockLobster
Guest
B52RockLobster

Because you could gain an advantage by going off track? Look at the distance HAM had on the rest of the field by turn 4 on lap 1. By allowing drivers to take shallow lines into corners but not pay the price for that shallow line by cutting the next corner, you take away a main component of attacking/overtaking. The driver ahead can take the inside/shallow line, the driver behind then tries for the undercut, but will never be successful if the car ahead is allowed to cut the next corner. This is exactly what VES and to a lesser… Read more »

Negative Camber
Guest

He did gap the field but that may have been compounded by the fact that Nico was being mugged by Max and both were slow leaving exit of turn one too.

The Late Idi Amin
Member
The Late Idi Amin

not at all. Hamilton went off because he had made a mistake, not because he was looking for positional advantage with any other driver. Thats why he took all the other corners cleanly. sometimes it happens like that, you might get some distance or you might get beached or run in to a culvert. As long he isn’t doing it deliberately its not a problem.

danutonline
Guest
danutonline

In my view he made the mistake in a fight with Nico – just as Max did with Vetel. The way the stewards picks and chooses what they will investigate is befuddling – but what can I say … the Max rule was put into place only after Lewis had trouble with him.

Negative Camber
Guest

In my mind, Lewis didn’t gain an advantage for going off track because his teammate wasn’t there racing him, he was being mugged by Max in turn one and running off track himself. In the case of Max, he did gain an advantage because if that were gravel, he would not have come out in front of Seb. Also, the stewards should have called for him to cede the position immediately not after the race. His own team knew that was the right thing to do. I love Ricciardo but I think his outspoken criticism of Seb’s move was a… Read more »

B52RockLobster
Guest
B52RockLobster

I’m completely with you on Red Bull pushing this for those reasons, and it being uncharacteristic of RIC to do so. I see what you’re saying about the gap being wider than it should have been due to ROS’s incident with VES. However I still think HAM gained an advantage – he didn’t brake early enough, so to actually stay on the track, he would’ve 1) locked up more, damaging his tires 2) missed the apex of both corners potentially giving up a spot or both 1 & 2. Instead, he cut the next corner and faced neither of those… Read more »

Achim
Guest
Achim

On the VET / RIC situation I agree. Seb defended hard, but both cars could make the corner! Unlike VES defence e. g. in Suzuka against Lewis, where HAM had to take avoiding action in order to prevent a crash and thus could not make the corner. So VES forced him of the track and he should have gotten a penalty for that. I disagree on the Hamilton turn 1 situation. He did gain an advantage, because I failed to loose the position. Would that e. g. have happened in Monza, he could not have rejoined the track so quickly… Read more »

Fred Betros
Guest
Fred Betros

Todd, I disagree. Your argument doesn’t hold water. If that was gravel, Lewis would have lost the lead of the race, wouldn’t he??? He made a misjudgement going into turn one and got it wrong. You could argue that the fact he knew there wasn’t gravel there let him be less cautious but ultimately – he gained an advantage by breaking late, not letting the guys behind him close in and had at least 20 meters on the rest of the field coming out of turn 3. I just don’t get how that is consistent stewardship? At least give HAM… Read more »

Negative Camber
Guest

From what I have read and heard, the telemetry from Lewis showed that he clearly backed off the throttle when he went across the grass. As I said in the race report, it seemed like an advantage because Nico was being mugged by Max who was pushing hard and late-braking into turn 1 (which I would expect to be fair) and therefore, neither of them made any ground on Lewis even though he lifted. That’s how the stewards saw it. Max, they said, didn’t lift and gained a clear advantage and therefore lost the position.

MIE
Editor

If the track limits were as they are in Monaco then the first three on the road wouldn’t have made lap one. Yes they did all gain an advantage by being able to exceed track limits without suffering any time loss. While Hamilton (lap one) and Verstappen (when fighting with Vettel) could have slowed down and driven on the track, Rosberg didn’t really have that as an option as he was assisted off the track.

Zachary Noepe
Guest
Zachary Noepe

The problem is that Lewis made a mistake and ran off the track which would have cost him the lead. By aiming straight across an off track portion (by eliminating a corner) he rejoined in the lead instead of where his mistake should have left him, which was third. That’s the issue and it is an advantage in my opinion, I can’t see how it’s not. If you’re in fifth, it’s easier to see that cutting a corner and ending up in fourth gives you an advantage, in first it’s less obvious, but if your driving had put you in… Read more »

pmr
Guest
pmr

I don’t agre with you there, Hamilton did gain a big advantage. They were all (HAM, ROS and VES) close going into the first corner and he came out half a strait ahead. They were all racing him. That it later was negated by the safety car shouldn’t facor in. Verstappen didn’t gain an advantage, he only stayed ahead. Vettel was on his tail oing into the corner and also comming out of the corner. It’s the same as in Monaco where Hamilton cut the cicane comming out of the tunnel and stayed ahead of Ricciardo, no penalty was given… Read more »

yoshif8tures
Guest
yoshif8tures

Daniel was very diplomatic in his interviews and very cautious. I don’t see him being out of character at all.

Zachary Noepe
Guest
Zachary Noepe

Boy reading all this it’s so complex and there are so many things to feel were done wrong, and then dealt with wrong, and then analyzed wrong. Rather than pick apart all these ideas I’ll just say I’m pretty sure we should shut off the team radios that’s the only one thing I can conclude for certain.

jakobusvdl
Guest
jakobusvdl

100% with you on cutting out broadcasting the team radio chatter. I’ll bet Ferrari and McLaren Honda would be with us too – just STFU Fernando!

Johnpierre Rivera
Guest

Oh Snap this is going to be a good week to be a F1 blogger. I can already here the keyboards going into over drive, Right Todd??? ;-)

D. Ga.
Guest
D. Ga.

After the Mexico race, one must ask why FIA has rules if they do not enforce them and hold all drivers to the same standard. Ham cuts a corner and does not get penalized. Then Max runs into Nico and does not get penalized. This is not the first time that Max has pulled such stunts, if you look at Max’s previous braking moves in SPA and other races. He also did not receive any penalties, yet all the drivers voiced their opinion about the dangerous moves that Max did. Yet they penalized Vet for supposedly being unsafe? Come on… Read more »

MIE
Editor

The sports bulletin on BBC breakfast news only mentioned Hamilton’s win, keeping his championship hopes alive. The bias is painful to watch.

yoshif8tures
Guest
yoshif8tures

For their sakes I hope rosberg wins it, I can’t tolerate their bias any further.

Zachary Noepe
Guest
Zachary Noepe

Hard to know, because then we’ll hear a year of comments about the ‘rightful champion’. Ugh.

TheMan
Guest
TheMan

Something you might want to keep in mind is that most reviews are done in slow motion replay.
This has, virtually, zero relationship to what was happening on the track as far as driver reflexes and the amount of time a driver has to react to a given situation. Of course, common-sense has v little to do with F1 above the team level.

Jos Van de Belt
Guest
Jos Van de Belt

Driver of the day: Max Verstappen (yes, seriously) or Joylon ’69 rounds on mediums’ Palmer.
Donkey of the race: Sebastian Vettel (obvious) and the FIA (obvious)
Pass of the race: Daniël Ricciardo (an arbitrary pass from 5th to 3th)

Zachary Noepe
Guest
Zachary Noepe

Verstappen is so arrogant and distatsteful, and watching him push Vettel back into Ricciardo out of spite because he knew he’d been beaten, it was probably the cheapest and most immature behavior in a race full to bursting of childishness and empty of sportsmanship. I really was quite embarassed for F1 for this entire trashy display, and Verstappen is always at the heart of it isn’t he? “”Ridiculous,” he added. “In lap one, Turn One, the first two go off and if they don’t get a penalty, that’s fine for me. OK, we race. But then why do they penalise… Read more »

yoshif8tures
Guest
yoshif8tures

I expected him to also get at least a reprimand for his remarks regarding Charlie. Such language is unacceptable. It’s not tolerated in football and under mosley he’s likely get a race ban. My opinion of him goes down race by race now. My he suffer a few more years of Ferrari drought as his former team get further championship glory.

Negative Camber
Guest

If you mic’d all football players, you’d hear much worse. If a player confronts a ref and says that, then yes, he will be reprimanded. I find the recent morality of the press an interesting thing given they love it when Kimi curses a blue streak on the radio.

Member
Dr T

It depends on the sport… You say that within earshot of a referee in rugby union and you get to have a rest for 10 minutes…

I don’t think we’ve ever heard that kind of language against a named official broadcast

Member

Watch any NBA basketball game this season. Listen for the audio drop-outs during the broadcast and that’s an example of live censorship in progress. For me, FOM could end all the radio transmissions and I would be fine with that.

The Captain
Guest
The Captain

“I don’t think we’ve ever heard that kind of language against a named official broadcast” So you’re not following the U.S. election right now or the news coverage are you.

Ben Hutchings
Guest
Ben Hutchings

And I don’t if we will ever hear the exact radio messages between FIA and VES, VES crew and VES, FIA and VET crew. VET has become the Kurt Busch of formula 1. He will forever receive biased criticism, warnings, and penalties.

The Captain
Guest
The Captain

Hell if you mic’d me just waking up in the morning and checking my email you’d hear a LOT worse.

The Captain
Guest
The Captain

Admittedly I’ve never understood the way some react to curse words as if they are horrific or taboo. But oh well. If you’ve got a problem with the language blame FOM. They didn’t have to play that clip hell most are offline, someone in the directors seat in the studio decided that was going to make great TV and let it go to air.

Member

All I have to say is NC called it!

Negative Camber
Guest

Thank you. Sometimes I grow weary of being told I’m an idiot for an editorial I write. ;)

GaryK
Guest
GaryK

Don’t get me wrong; I do have some of the Smoking’ Joe love too, but I like the fact that you do not need to balance future access to the people about whom you write. I generally agree with you, and I think you’re on it with this column.

Ben Hutchings
Guest
Ben Hutchings

NC I agree as well. The black hole is opening.
Unfortunately the non-call on VES altered VET’s race pace changing the ultimate perplexion of the race. VET and RIC utilize drs in designated zones further changing outcome. If VES was made to give up position, a proper outcome would have occurred. RIC would have not only had to pass teammate, but also VET.
Cutting a chicane should be a painful reminder with a penalty, it shouldn’t take you out of the race like a concrete wall, otherwise everyone will cut and hope to avoid a penalty opening another blackhole of officiating.

Andreas
Guest
Andreas

My few cents on the incidents: Lap 1, Hamilton: Obviously, it was clear he left the track and gained an advantage. But that advantage was compounded by the Rosberg/Verstappen clash, which made Hamilton’s advantage look bigger than it would have otherwise been. And the appearance of the Safety Car, while unrelated to Hamilton’s grass excursion, did negate any “lasting” advantage he may have gained. Now, while FIA does publish all Stewards’ decisions (even those that end up in “no further action”), there’s no published record of the decision to investigate or not investigate an incident. So we don’t know the… Read more »

GaryK
Guest
GaryK

There are exceptions, but so few that, to me, they prove the rule. I give you Gary’s Maxim:

Whatever happens in turn 1, lap 1 stays in turn 1, lap 1 unless there’s what I think Junior Johnson called “bent metal” (a real, true accident).

No putting’ a fine point on this. C’mon. All y’all know real bent metal from bits flying’. No?

Max Johnson
Guest
Max Johnson

This entire mess reminds me of Schumacher winning in the pitlane at Silverstone 1998. At this point, I think they should just turn F1 races into real time gambling that people can bet on, and have a roulette wheel to determine the penalties.

Member
Dr T

It is always ironical when the person who pushes for the rule or law is the first to fall foul of it. If VET and co hadn’t pushed so hard against VES then we wouldn’t have article 27.5, and the unwritten rule would stand. One can hardly get their knickers in a twist when the law is invoked. I think if you move further across before the time you turn to take the apex then you run the risk of breaking the law. But if you turn for the natural apex then everything is fine (until the person coming up… Read more »

GaryK
Guest
GaryK

I agree with you on the gravel. It seems so obvious. However there is also a MotoGP race there (which probably makes an actual profit) that may have different needs with respect to runoff materials, etc.

johnblair7
Guest
johnblair7

I don’t know what you expect, Lewis is a British driver, our highest scoring F1 driver, (not necessarily our best). I’m 57 and have been watching F1 since the days of Jim Clark. I’d like Lewis to win the title but am sure Nico will. I’ll be happy with that, Nico deserves it and so does Lewis. I think some people forget, or don’t know that Lewis was only picked up and sponsored by McLaren because of his performance in Go karts.

jakobusvdl
Guest
jakobusvdl

Hi John, in my case my irritation comes from a view that the coverage shouldn’t be so parochial. The F1 media are are broadcasting to in international audience, the teams are multinational, as are the sponsors. Why is the drivers nationality considered to be of such importance, especially when in the case of Hamilton it appears he considers himself American?

johnblair7
Guest
johnblair7

I’ve heard some other nations broadcasts on F1 and they are just as biased if not more so than the BBC. In any event I don’t consider the BBC biased really, as mentioned Lewis is British and believe it or not as a lot of British fans, see Silverstone 2016, 2015, 2014 etc. He loves America but so what. His lifestyle is not mine, I’m 57 and was a 20th century 1975-99 British soldier. I don’t hold it against him, unlike many posters on various sites.

jakobusvdl
Guest
jakobusvdl

Cheers John, do you really reckon the Five Live podcasts aren’t biased? I’m looking for coverage of the whole of F1, not a fancast for one driver, which is why F1B is so good.

johnblair7
Guest
johnblair7

Hi Jakob, sorry for the late reply. Luckily I’ve generally always watched F1 on free to air apart from the 2 day passes I got when I bought my Now TV box and the few day passes I got on beer pack promotions. On many occasions the BBC and Sky have seemed anti Lewis. They always discuss the other drivers and frequently give driver of the day etc awards to other drivers. Bear in mind we have had extended periods without any really high performing British drivers. Lewis love him or loathe him is newsworthy. He is a mixed race… Read more »

MIE
Editor

For anyone who is interested, the 1996 Champions of the Future kart series was televised, and the full season was available on CHA. I don’t know if it is available as a DVD, but some of the races are on YouTube. Hamilton’s talent is clear to see in his last season before McLaren sponsorship.

Gram
Guest
Gram

Additionally, McLaren was forced to field Hamilton alongside Alonso. Pretty sure R. Dennis’ plan would have been to get him started at a Junior team but there were no seats available and Hamilton’s stock was already pretty high. So they had to make a choice, put the rookie in or risk losing this massive talent and investment to a rival team. Williams almost scooped him up. He could have easily had a one and done year like S. Perez or K. Magnussen at McLaren. Top teams are not proving grounds for rookies. Lewis delivered in 07. Had it not been… Read more »

johnblair7
Guest
johnblair7

Looking forward to the Podcast :)

Peter Riva
Guest
Peter Riva

Here’s my message for the management of F1, Charlie Whiting and the FIA: I deeply appreciate your assistance in allowing me more time with my family this Fall as I have no longer got any interest in watching this bullshit decision making. Like Chinese Water Torture, you have banned testing, banned a spare car, unified tires, unified design, unified pit stop, unified fuel loads, unified an electric car with a motor, come up with rules that you break during the race (advantage gained which you don’t enforce, causing errors you do enforce, etc.)…. in short, it is no longer F1… Read more »

geeyore
Guest
geeyore

+1, totally.

Gram
Guest
Gram

I feel you’re pain. You’re like a disgruntled Trump supporter. It’s so easy to vent rage at Charlie/FIA/Regulations etc. The only people to be upset at is Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren for under performing. No one else. Everyone develops their cars under the same rule book. You get whine like a fare weather fan or take it on the chin like Negative Camber and hope your team turns it around the next season. If you don’t have the same attitude of dedicated fans like Negative Camber who are down, but willing to fight through the pain…then good riddance.

Peter Riva
Guest
Peter Riva

“.then good riddance.” is not civil and doesn’t belong here. Since you have positioned yourself as the defender of the desk drivers who make all sorts of rules binding and restricting development, flip-flopping on driving rules, you can hardly equate that position with that of NC who, honestly, called all this nonsense in the first place.

Gram
Guest
Gram

I have a zero tolerance approach for people bad mouthing a sport I care about. Especially when they present themselves as long time fans. Again, if you don’t like the product because you’re not winning, good riddance because you never were a true fan. Stop hiding behind rules, regulations, etc. No ones making you watch. The F1 of today will not be the same as 2020. So if you don’t like change, you can continue complaining until the cows come home.

Peter Riva
Guest
Peter Riva

Listen up sonny… your level of intolerance has nothing to do with valid criticism of the people running the sport. You sound like a Trump follower who thinks everything is great because you say so. This is a place for civil discussion and you should not (if you value open and fair discussion) seek to ostracize opinion that doesn’t agree with your idolatry of the sport. it is neither pure now sacrosanct. It is being run by people who are, increasingly, making huge mistakes. There is nothing wrong with F1 as a long-history sport, there is a lot wrong with… Read more »

Gram
Guest
Gram

You got that right. I’m intolerant of people like you. If you had a valid critique, I’d listen to what you have to say. Whining for the sake of venting your frustration is not valid critique. Charlie is not the problem. The cars are not electric, and if you are going to claim yourself to be a fan, at least educate yourself on the cars and the sport. Let me give you an analogy that might help your viewing and enjoyment of F1. Think of the season as a course. The off season is what you do your studying, research… Read more »

Peter Riva
Guest
Peter Riva

For somebody who hides his identity, you certainly do have a knack for offending people. I disagree with your opinion and recognize your ability to not engender a civil discussion. I will not respond to you again.

Gram
Guest
Gram

I see you’re offended by the truth. I’ll continue to follow and comment on F1 and you can go spend quality time with the family since F1 is so terrible. Lets see who holds up their end.

Negative Camber
Guest

I can appreciate your love of F1, I love it too but I also believe there are ways to improve it and things that should not have been decided upon as they are detrimental to the sport either from a competitive standpoint or a sporting regulation point. The Verstappen Rule is one of them. I said this would be used as a tool by teams to push the stewards to review all passes they felt might be suspect. A sort of instant replay referee systems that quite honestly, the FIA are not staffed to handle in a timely manner. I’m… Read more »

Gram
Guest
Gram

Well, lets just say if we were doing a podcast together it would be very interesting and entertaining because we won’t be agreeing on everything. If you visit any F1 comment section online, you would think the fans really don’t like the sport right now. But those same people complaining day in and day out are active every grand prix weekend on almost every single article? Why? How could they be so outraged about just everything about the sport from DRS, tires, engine sound, hybrid technology, rules, Mercedes dominance….and yet watch every grand prix religiously. Answer: they’re not really upset… Read more »

Negative Camber
Guest

Ok, mate, I appreciate your opinions and view, as always, but you are ascribing a lot of things you think I am thinking that quite simply are not true. In this latest comment, you think I don’t like the MV rule because I don’t want Max penalized and that couldn’t be further from the truth. I think Max has made some very aggressive and dodgy moves that should have been penalized or at least the team warned over such driving as they have for many years with the threat of sitting him out a race if he doesn’t stop the… Read more »

Gram
Guest
Gram

Its really hard to have a conversation when that persons stance or position keeps changing. But this is good now we’re talking about a specific subject: Moving under braking, what constitutes moving under braking and whether or not MV and SV should have been punished for their actions. “I think Max has made some very aggressive and dodgy moves that should have been penalized…” You say VES should be penalized, but you take objection to VET being penalized for the exact same offense and want it dismissed as hard racing. That’s a contradiction. VET is guilty of moving under braking,… Read more »

Negative Camber
Guest

We disagree. VET move was not, in my opinion, worthy of a penalty. I understand racing just fine. I also don’t agree that if you change your line to defend a trailing car, that’s penalty worthy in every single situation contextually. Some are, some aren’t. To know the difference is to understand racing.

We aren’t going to agree on this and that’s perfectly fine, mate. Appreciate your POV but I simply disagree with it.

The Captain
Guest
The Captain

To be fair, they haven’t been inconstant YET. This was the first time so lets see what happens next time (don;t get me wrong I think they will screw this up). And I got the same frustrations as everyone else about it happening so long after the race. But here’s the thing, the only person I blame for this is the ‘teenage wonder kid’ Verstappen . As you said somewhere else Todd, this used to be an unwritten rule that drivers just followed and we didn’t have this penalty mess. But Verstappen wouldn’t follow that unwritten rule now would he.… Read more »

jakobusvdl
Guest
jakobusvdl

Well argued Captain.
Even if the other drivers couldn’t apply percussive correction to Max, and he wouldn’t listen to reason, what’s RBR’s role in this? They should have made him pull his head in before it got to needing a FIA ruling. Or shifted him to their Rally cross team where those tactics belong.

Peter Riva
Guest
Peter Riva

Bravo.

Gram
Guest
Gram

Sometimes I wonder if F1 viewers have poor racing IQ. The reaction post Mexican GP has feeling that might be true. I don’t know if you guys just started watching racing but starting grid post qualifying and finishing order after the race are always “provisional.” The official results are always confirmed hours later. All racing series do this because of incidents needing review. Its not uncommon for finishing order to be adjusted post race. Now, for the penalties. I believe whats going in is cognitive dissonance. You guys know exactly why Max and Vettel were penalized but not Rosberg and… Read more »

Ben Hutchings
Guest
Ben Hutchings

But had VES been penalized and not held of VET, we will never know if this incident would have ever occurred. Blowing a chicane near end of race should incur a penalty less but close to hitting a wall. FIA making a non-call is the ultimate problem.

Gram
Guest
Gram

You probably typed this on a phone so its a little difficult to understand what you’re trying to say, but I think understand your point. However, the FIA always gives the drivers/teams a small window to correct mistakes before they themselves take action. VES went off track to prevent what appeared to be a 100% pass by Vettel. Hamilton was not in danger of being passed going into the corner. Also being the smart racer he is, he had the mental capacity to “play” the game. He backed off once he rejoined instead of vanishing into the distance. Another case… Read more »

Ben Hutchings
Guest
Ben Hutchings

Obviously the future of formula one racing will continue to me missed chicanes without penalty before drivers begin flat spotting tires with possible judgement calls following. Change the rule now before judgement begins. Giving up a position instead of hitting a wall or ruining tires will keep the integrity of racing.