The F1 debacle

On point 2. I'm pretty sure you are went regarding the reason. It was nothing to do with the safety car coming in and was simply that it was such a regular thing for cars to move inches in front for a matter of seconds that precedents had been set. I've seen a video from this season where some sad ******* has taken the time to show all the times that cars have done this under the safety car and it's a lot of times. The video is about 4 minutes long.


On the Masi issue I still think he will go or that something big will change in his role. They always seem quite slow to act during close season with changes being announced much closer to the start of the new season than at the end of the end of one so there's still chance yet and hopefully they'll do the right thing

 

I still can’t get my head around the events of that last few laps. Absolutely embarrassing

But F1 robbed the great Ayrton Senna in 1989 let’s not forget. Alain Prost intentionally crashed into him, knowing that was enough to seal the Championship. And even when Senna - with the help of marshalls - got the car moving again, and went on to win that race regardless, the authorities DQ’d him, and banned him for six months.

That disgraceful event culminated in Ayrton exacting the ultimate revenge a year later at the same track, where this time he ploughed straight into Alain at the first corner to secure the title for himself.

It is remembered as one of the key periods in F1 history. And added to the Senna aura I reckon.

This whole scandal surrounding the fix of last year’s WDC has probably - in the long run - done a similar thing for Lewis Hamilton.

I think he’ll race this coming season. I expect he will be even more motivated than before. And one thing to note regards Verstappen - Lewis will have a more brash and brave wingman this time around. I guarantee Russell and Max collide on a number of occasions. That’s assuming Red Bull are even involved in the battle at the front this season - there are plenty of rumours suggesting they’re well behind in the development of their car under the new regs etc.

Only five weeks until testing…

 

He was still a long way back with plenty of time to call him in when the safety car was deployed or at least the VSC. I remember checking and they had a lot of time. The thing is we all know that Masi messed up (putting it nicely) but what if they'd cleared the damaged car one lap quicker? Wouldn't that have meant the safety car would have come in anyway?
If Lewis had pitted then either max would have two and risked the one lap shootout or max would have stayed out and hoped for the safety car staying out like mercedes did. In that respect although it was a completely understandable call by mercedes it was a strategy call. There's also the safety car earlier in the race where they kept him out too. I seem to remember Lewis complaining about that decision. Would those tyres have been enough to keep him in front?

Masi is 100% to blame for all of this but we know that Lewis complains about team decisions a lot so I'm wondering if he feels hard done to by the team not that he should do

 

I think you could be right about red bull. They have to work out the engine on their own too now

 

"......a regular thing for cars to move inches in front for a matter of seconds that precedents had been set "

Nope!! Drivers to do pull as close as possible to level but risk doing what happened to MV and and other drivers HAVE been penalised for it!!

My point was though that it WAS a breach of the rules intentional or otherwise. You argument also confirms my point of rules being inconsistently applied and penalised. It was CLEAR opportunity for the '**** up' by Masi to be negated with (a correctly applied) penalty for MV RBR. The fact that the stewards threw out the appeal incorrectly defining the rule in their decision statement released to the media makes it even worse.

Throughout all of this and various threads, your consistent attempts to justify and defend the FIA and the farcical outcome suggest you either are either anti Hamilton, Pro Verstappen or both. It is not about individuals but about F1. My issues with the overall situation are about the stewardship of the Sport I have followed for best part of 5o years and not about favouring one specific team or drivers. If LH /Mercedes had behaved throughout the season and been handed the WDC the way MV/RBR were I would be saying exactly the same.

 

The decision regarding overtaking was the correct one based on precedents and the regularity with which it happens. I haven't tried to defend the FIA over the ending of the race. In fact in the post you've just quoted you managed to omit the part where I said Masi has to go

 

Agree @Tekkytyke about the Masi repsonse to Toto over the radio was disgusting. Having Having completely ignored the rules to then say "we went motor racing" no surprise Toto was quoted as saying he has no wish to have a conversation with Masi.
Masi must now realise in the cold light of day how badly wrong he got it. He presumably won't resign as he would be leaving himself unemployed. I just don't see how his postion can be tenable other than the FIA not wanting to make their WDC champion seem illegitimate.

 

I don't think Lewis is going to return and I don't blame him to be honest. If he doesn't I have no idea who they would go for either. I would imagine they would probably want someone such as Lando but can't see McLaren allowing him to leave so close to the start.

 

Kimi is done, he can't be arsed with the media commitments.

If I were Toto I would go for Lando or Carlos, latter being out of contract after this season. Ferrari will want to keep him I suspect until Mick Schumacher has more experience.

 

Lando would be a great option. Whilst McClaren have improved massively, he has pretty much 'owned' Daniel' R most of the season and apart from one or two errors (including the wrong tyre choice error costing him a victory (especially as he more or less ignored team dvice to change tyres )) when the rain got heavier he has matured enormously. I don't know if contractually they could get him but two Brits , both young but clearly fast in Mercedes woould be great for UK racing fans albeit a headache for team management if they kept sharing points when Red Bull are clearly setup for MV and a rear gunner second driver. Neither Russell or Norris (or Carlos)would want to play second fiddle. As regards Mick S. He has shown glimpses and is in a truly inferior car but I think the jury is still out as to whether or not he is even half the driver his father was.

 

I am not talking down to you, as you clearly not unintelligent, but do challenge you on your knowledge of F1 tactically and also the rules, which is clearly limited. An example is your post #9 where you made the following statement.

"I wonder whether deep down he feels let down by Mercedes who made the wrong strategy call (only the wrong call because of Masi but still)"

It has been explained more than once by myself and others on this thread and previouly that Mercedes could not have brought him in without losing the race regardless of what Masi did. Furthermore you are still saying previous examples of inconsistencies by the RD and stewards justifies the decision to ovelook MVs rule breaking regarding the momentary overtake. Funny how the stewards disqualified Hamilton for a broken/damaged wing causing the DRS gap to exceed limits by 1 or 2 millimetres even when no advantage was gained. Given the number of times RBR was allowed to enter Parc Ferme to repair their broken wings with Duct tape and no penalty. How at teh start of the season, RBR own wing flexing was deemed illegal but they were still allowed to use it for a number of races before the ban took effect, giving them a clear advantage. Still rules are rules eh!? !!
Add all these inconsistencies together you can understand why most impartial neutrals who have a better understanding of the the subtleties and technicalities of F1 might think the FIA/Liberty wanted someone, anyone to break Mercedes /Hamilton's domination of the last few years. It just happened that RBR with its global reach /Max Verstappen bringing a whole raft of new supporters (Netherlands) fitted the bill perfectly as the best hope of doing so.
In terms of racing vs finishing under the safety car. The eventual last lap was an anticlimax. IF Masi wanted a race, he could have left the unlapped cars where they were. Whilst they would have had to clear out of the way for MV if LH had a few between him and MV and went early, he would have created a few seconds gap which might have been enough to break the tow from MV once he got past (given DRS would not come into play for the remainding laps) and given him a space to stay ahead as he had superior straight line speed (Remember he was only a couple of seconds behind MV at the end. It might have played out differently and MV may have caught and passed him but we wll never know. The actual ending was a foregone conclusion after Masi broke the rules.

I believe, if the leniency shown to RBR and MV this season spills over into next season, we will see even die-hard fans like myself abandoning F1 as it will have become entertainment over Sport. Sport should be competitive and fair play should not be sacrified at the altar of 'entertainment and viewing figures. Currently it is heading down the road of driver alleigance (I won't use the term 'Fanboy' which I hate) but increasingly forums aare clutte4ed with people who have little knowledge or understanding of the sport. A common one is to say armchair fans don't know as much as stewards. Unfortunately based on some of the decisions tghey have made this season I would have to say, the argument that almost anyone could do a better job than the current PM could be applied to race stewarding. Blaming 'lack of clarity' over rules is nonsense. It is the application (or lack of) of the rules that is the issue. We never had this level of controversy when Charlie Whiting was at the helm. Pretty much the same rulebook now as then.

 

The outcome I would like to see is Lewis leave and compete the indicar series like Mansell did. I really enjoyed mansell doing things that astonished the commentators like overtaking on the bend of an oval.

https://www.historicracingnews.com/Article/Nigel-Mansell-Indycar-s-Most-Famous-Rookie/2292

 

Very solid assessment and it's nice to see it getting a bit more coverage.
Saw some clips from Sky's Pundits discussing it over video link and it was rather poor. Waffling on about no conspiracy and I have to say Brundle has been very disappointing. During the race it was clear he knew either the cars couldn't be unlapped or it would finish behind the safety car. Now he almost seems to be trying to excuse it and comments like who could replace Masi aren't helpful or relevant.
If you put aside the noise from the Lewis and Maxs fan clubs most F1 fans are just dismayed that the rules could be so blatantly ignored.

 

Most pundits have agendas and allegiances (e.g. Coulthard was a RBR driver and held (holds) a position of adviser to them so not impartial). Even current and ex team owners make stupid comments - Eddie Jordan being one chief culprits. He makes more than most but it is debatable whether he does it to be controversial or is simply stupid. I can forgive casual viewers for saying Masi got the first corner at Abu Dhabi wrong (i.e.) he should have made LH give back the place, but it was never MVs legitimate place in the first instance having forced LH off track (as he often did to many drivers throughout the season). Note on second photo MV straight front wheels with no attempt to turn left. Eddie Jordan ignored that fact and should know better.


View attachment 15795





The 'still' photo someone posted on here clearly shows MV left LH no space (that in itself is an infraction of the rules incurring a time penalty, so you could argue that YES Masi and stewards , yet again, failed to apply the rules correctly but not for the reasons EJ claims.

As I said before, this 'lack of clarity' is a smokescreen given we never had all the confusion when Charlie Whiting was in charge. Masi and the stewards have been pretty inept this season either through incompetence , or possibly and more sinister 'by design'.

The contempt the FIA and Liberty hold the fans in is further demonstrated by the timetable for the enquiry, leaving the announcement of the decisions regarding changes to the last possible moment before the start of the new season, something that, for a whole number of reasons, is completely unsatisfactory and inexcusable.

 

I still don't understand though how Masi can say Lewis gave the advantage back. I completely understand you (and others) saying max ran Lewis off the road by diving in too late. I get that. But that is t what Masi said. Masi and the stewards said that Hamilton had given the advantage back and I really have not got a clue what they mean. By saying that they appear to be saying that Lewis was in the wrong (again I understand why anyone thinks he wasn't and max was) but if that is what they thought then what the hell do they mean by he gave the advantage back? If they thought max was in the wrong then why would Lewis have to give any advantage back in the first place?

 

Thats how I'd assume it was supposed to be and what their excuse was but surely it wasn't the case in reality. Lewis disappeared halfway down the straight and can't possibly have been that far ahead before or max wouldn't have been able to lunge. The rules really need clarifying in these situations. What exactly is allowed, what isnt and what's the penalty.ctheres way too much interpretation at the moment. I think Masi's decision there was exactly the same reasoning as his decision at the end. He wanted to create a spectacle. That's all well and good but you can't do what you want to create it (aimed at Masi not the racers)