Official 2024 Australian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Poll: Official 2024 Australian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Total Members Polled: 129
Discussion
I'm going to say it again:
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
PhilAsia said:
Damn right!!
"I was half a second behind Fernando on the entry to the corner...., and then suddenly before the apex I was you know, right on his gearbox and um..., lost the car and ran wide..."
Half a second safe distance in stable air is something that Russell was quite capable of. Alonso suddenly slowing where he should have been flat created the situation where Russell his car lost grip. Alonso caused the incident through his actions, as the stewards found. He should have been DQ'd for at least this race if not more.
Agreed.......Alonso has so much form, that he should have been hit really hard.....there is no excuse for what he did. Russell could have been t boned"I was half a second behind Fernando on the entry to the corner...., and then suddenly before the apex I was you know, right on his gearbox and um..., lost the car and ran wide..."
Half a second safe distance in stable air is something that Russell was quite capable of. Alonso suddenly slowing where he should have been flat created the situation where Russell his car lost grip. Alonso caused the incident through his actions, as the stewards found. He should have been DQ'd for at least this race if not more.
PhilAsia said:
Plywood, how far away was Russell when he was following Alonso into that flat out bend? Half a car length? One car length? He was not three seconds behind...maybe half a second.
And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
Don’t take this as antagonistic but have you read the stewards report and do you agree / disagree with what is written there?And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
PlywoodPascal said:
I'm going to say it again:
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
It was a dirty trick by a dirty driver with loads of form.......Russell was helpless and could have been killed.....Alonso for some reason always gets away with it......Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
Bad Bernie said:
PhilAsia said:
Damn right!!
"I was half a second behind Fernando on the entry to the corner...., and then suddenly before the apex I was you know, right on his gearbox and um..., lost the car and ran wide..."
Half a second safe distance in stable air is something that Russell was quite capable of. Alonso suddenly slowing where he should have been flat created the situation where Russell his car lost grip. Alonso caused the incident through his actions, as the stewards found. He should have been DQ'd for at least this race if not more.
Agreed.......Alonso has so much form, that he should have been hit really hard.....there is no excuse for what he did. Russell could have been t boned"I was half a second behind Fernando on the entry to the corner...., and then suddenly before the apex I was you know, right on his gearbox and um..., lost the car and ran wide..."
Half a second safe distance in stable air is something that Russell was quite capable of. Alonso suddenly slowing where he should have been flat created the situation where Russell his car lost grip. Alonso caused the incident through his actions, as the stewards found. He should have been DQ'd for at least this race if not more.
....... https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/13101706/f... "There's a way to drive tactically, and there's a way that that goes slightly beyond what is being judged as fair, and in this instance, it feels like that was the case." KC.NRS said:
And your argument is that drivers can behave very erratically, because it’s up to the other driver to avoid them whatever happens. The problem being it takes time to react. Ironically it would make less overtakes because drivers could only ever go for a super safe overtake as anything slightly risky they know the other driver could jump on the brakes/change direction and take them out.
This is the issue Plywood.PhilAsia said:
Plywood, how far away was Russell when he was following Alonso into that flat out bend? Half a car length? One car length? He was not three seconds behind...maybe half a second.
And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
I have watched the incident several times now and cannot see anything other than PP suggests.And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
George was not close enough to Fred to be taking avoiding action. The explanation given by the commentary team looks correct to me. George was caught out by reduced downforce approaching the corner, due to his being quite close to Fred. Simple error by George in braking too late.
MustangGT said:
PhilAsia said:
Plywood, how far away was Russell when he was following Alonso into that flat out bend? Half a car length? One car length? He was not three seconds behind...maybe half a second.
And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
I have watched the incident several times now and cannot see anything other than PP suggests.And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
George was not close enough to Fred to be taking avoiding action. The explanation given by the commentary team looks correct to me. George was caught out by reduced downforce approaching the corner, due to his being quite close to Fred. Simple error by George in braking too late.
The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
blueg33 said:
MustangGT said:
PhilAsia said:
Plywood, how far away was Russell when he was following Alonso into that flat out bend? Half a car length? One car length? He was not three seconds behind...maybe half a second.
And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
I have watched the incident several times now and cannot see anything other than PP suggests.And that is why I posted, " It is the equivalent of braking at Heathrow for Trafalgar Square"
For emphasis: Imagine travelling at 70mph, closely following a car that has no brake lights on an absolutely clear M4 at Heathrow, when the driver in front suddenly does a one G emergency brake, from 70mph to 20mph, whilst stating that "Trafalgar Square has a 20mph speed limit".
No wonder Russell was caught off guard. And I am not sure I can make the comparison any clearer.
George was not close enough to Fred to be taking avoiding action. The explanation given by the commentary team looks correct to me. George was caught out by reduced downforce approaching the corner, due to his being quite close to Fred. Simple error by George in braking too late.
The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
Daft to defend FA to be honest.
blueg33 said:
The Stewards have way more info available than you do, multiple camera angles, metre by metre records of brake, throttle and steering input,,the ability to overlay this data map after lap. On top of all that, they are experienced experts.
The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
Are the stewards incapable of making a mistake?The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
PlywoodPascal said:
I'm going to say it again:
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it will never make you rightRussell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
LP670 said:
blueg33 said:
The Stewards have way more info available than you do, multiple camera angles, metre by metre records of brake, throttle and steering input,,the ability to overlay this data map after lap. On top of all that, they are experienced experts.
The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
Are the stewards incapable of making a mistake?The people with all of this data and all of the experience found by majority against Alonso.
Yet you think you are right!
I’m impressed with your confidence however misguided!
George was c 0.5 seconds behind Fred. At this distance, George knew that he had sufficient downforce to take the corner. Fred lifted earlier and harder than at any point in the race, meaning that George’s half second gap closed to half a car length and his downforce reduced, leading him to slide off into the wall.
Fred isn’t my favorite driver, but I doubt this is what he intended. He knew George was going to get a run on him after the corner, so lifted to get a better drive out of the corner and possibly to make George lift too.
Daft, but IMHO nowhere near as idiotic as Max’s move on Lewis.
Fred isn’t my favorite driver, but I doubt this is what he intended. He knew George was going to get a run on him after the corner, so lifted to get a better drive out of the corner and possibly to make George lift too.
Daft, but IMHO nowhere near as idiotic as Max’s move on Lewis.
PlywoodPascal said:
I'm going to say it again:
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
So why do you think the stewards disagree so much, Plywood?Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
I doubt any racing driver agrees that "a driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it."
Also, a reminder that Lewis got a penalty at Silverstone '21 for missing an apex by a metre.
PlywoodPascal said:
I'm going to say it again:
Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
Why don't you explain thay to the race Stewards, who completely and demonstrably disagree with you? Russell didn't crash into Alonso
Neither did Russell crash in the course of avoiding hitting Alonso
Russell crashed because he tried to go too fast around a corner.
Therefore Alonso's move of slowing early appears well judged because Russell did not have to take avoiding action.
Therefore there was nothing wrong with it.
the driver can choose where to drive their car, when to slow it, how much to slow it.
LP670 said:
Likes Fast Cars said:
And he got off light, I still say should have been DQ’ed.
He has gotten away with way too much over the years, those posters on here trying to defend the indefensible Alonso need to get their fanboy blinkers off.
He has gotten away with way too much over the years, those posters on here trying to defend the indefensible Alonso need to get their fanboy blinkers off.
Likes Fast Cars said:
Personally, I would love to see Alonso DQed for a season, can’t stand that piece of human trash.
Who's wearing the blinkers again?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff