Official 2024 Australian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

[HardtopManual]

paulguitar said:

carlo996 said:

Nah. It just fits your narrative.

What are you disagreeing with, specifically?

Just ignore, there's no point discussing something with someone who denies basic facts.

[TheDeuce]

Bo_apex said:

540TORQUES said:

Fernando Alonso, Aston Martin Aramco Formula One® Team driver and Double FIA Formula 1 World Champion, said: “Promoting driving standards across motorsport is vitally important. I’ve been in my fair share of on-track battles throughout my 23-years of racing in multiple categories of motorsports. Each battle requires an understanding and respect between fiercely competitive racers. We need consistency in how drivers attack and defend on the race track, as well as how the rules are interpreted during all competitions. I want to promote clean driving for the current racing generation, and the upcoming racers who are learning their craft and wanting to have professional careers in the future. Everyone has a responsibility to enjoy racing but do it fairly. The FIA's new Drivers' Standards Guideline will be crucial.”

The new for 2025 driving standards document from the FIA for all drivers from grassroots up.

https://www.fia.com/news/fia-drivers-committee-del...

Release less than one month old, and you get Alonso doing the oposite of what he wrote.

Edited by 540TORQUES on Wednesday 27th March 08:33

So no more 50g punting at Copse from 2025 ?

Racing incidents and heat of battle misjudgedments can never be prevented. If two drivers are fighting for one bit of tarmac, one has to lose and sometimes dramatically - but in that moment they both know they're fighting.

Pre meditated acts at random times with intent to make another driver panic and react awkwardly can be prevented, and by the drivers unofficial agreement always have been severely frowned upon - often penalised very heavily in lesser series.

I don't blame Alonso for being tempted to pull a stunt in his last lap to prevent being potentially passed. He's a racer, of course it was tempting, once the idea crossed his mind... It's disappointing he went through with it, although I doubt between having the idea and carrying it out, he had any real time to mull over how serious the consequences could be for GR. He probably expected that if he spooked GR at all, GR would just be very out of shape and hence no longer a threat.

[Forester1965]

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

[TheDeuce]

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

Yes quite possibly. I don't believe for a second he would want to harm another driver beyond removing them as a threat.

But whatever he thought and however he justified the decision... He's ultimately at odds with the long standing code of racing conduct and his own prior statement on driving standards.

[Jader1973]

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

[isaldiri]

Jader1973 said:

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

So what's the issue with brake-checking someone too then? the driver behind should be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention right?

[TheDeuce]

Jader1973 said:

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

I think he relied upon them paying attention to spook them!

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car, but it's just not on to seek to disrupt a drivers attention and force them to recalibrate their focus at high speed, at a time when they would never expect it. FA is free to battle anyone anytime, once they've arrived at the battle to be had. Using tactics to spook a driver before they even arrive at the battle is not acceptable.

If I challenged you to a boxing match and then shot you in the eye with an air pistol as you approached the ring... You wouldn't say I was being entirely sporting would you?

[Forester1965]

A venn diagram of those who supported the notion cars should be able to follow more closely through the corners and those who believe Russell should have been able to anticipate Alonso's behaviour with a 0.5 second gap would be an interesting view.

[Bo_apex]

TheDeuce said:

Bo_apex said:

540TORQUES said:

Fernando Alonso, Aston Martin Aramco Formula One® Team driver and Double FIA Formula 1 World Champion, said: “Promoting driving standards across motorsport is vitally important. I’ve been in my fair share of on-track battles throughout my 23-years of racing in multiple categories of motorsports. Each battle requires an understanding and respect between fiercely competitive racers. We need consistency in how drivers attack and defend on the race track, as well as how the rules are interpreted during all competitions. I want to promote clean driving for the current racing generation, and the upcoming racers who are learning their craft and wanting to have professional careers in the future. Everyone has a responsibility to enjoy racing but do it fairly. The FIA's new Drivers' Standards Guideline will be crucial.”

The new for 2025 driving standards document from the FIA for all drivers from grassroots up.

https://www.fia.com/news/fia-drivers-committee-del...

Release less than one month old, and you get Alonso doing the oposite of what he wrote.

Edited by 540TORQUES on Wednesday 27th March 08:33

So no more 50g punting at Copse from 2025 ?

Racing incidents and heat of battle misjudgedments can never be prevented. If two drivers are fighting for one bit of tarmac, one has to lose and sometimes dramatically - but in that moment they both know they're fighting.

Agree they cannot be prevented. But Ham got rattled at the previous corners.

The Copse punt was highly accurate and highly effective. Do you believe it was a mistake ?

[Forester1965]

Bo_apex said:

Agree they cannot be prevented. But Ham got rattled at the previous corners.

The Copse punt was highly accurate and highly effective. Do you believe it was a mistake ?

Yes and no. It looked impulsive and I suspect he wanted to put Verstappen in the position of either back off or we're going to crash. It wasn't the first or last time he tried into that corner, though. If I remember correctly Leclerc was rather more for letting him through.

Hamilton deserved his penalty.

[LP670]

TheDeuce said:

Jader1973 said:

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

I think he relied upon them paying attention to spook them!

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car, but it's just not on to seek to disrupt a drivers attention and force them to recalibrate their focus at high speed, at a time when they would never expect it. FA is free to battle anyone anytime, once they've arrived at the battle to be had. Using tactics to spook a driver before they even arrive at the battle is not acceptable.

If I challenged you to a boxing match and then shot you in the eye with an air pistol as you approached the ring... You wouldn't say I was being entirely sporting would you?

except its nothing like that, it would be more like a jab to the kidneys while locked together and out of sight of the ref.

[simon_harris]

Isn't this a well traversed loop of discussion?

A driver should be able to have a level of expectation of what a driver ahead/behind would normally do, is it reasonable to expect a driver to lift off/brake in the middle of a fast corner where they would never normally lift off/brake? to my mind it is just as egregious as a brake check on the straight, if not worse because it is more likely to result in an off for the following driver.

While i doubt FA's intention was to make GR crash he should have considered this as a possible outcome, if we are going to sanction such driving then we have to allow all sorts of other poor driving in my view

[TheDeuce]

LP670 said:

TheDeuce said:

Jader1973 said:

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

I think he relied upon them paying attention to spook them!

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car, but it's just not on to seek to disrupt a drivers attention and force them to recalibrate their focus at high speed, at a time when they would never expect it. FA is free to battle anyone anytime, once they've arrived at the battle to be had. Using tactics to spook a driver before they even arrive at the battle is not acceptable.

If I challenged you to a boxing match and then shot you in the eye with an air pistol as you approached the ring... You wouldn't say I was being entirely sporting would you?

except its nothing like that, it would be more like a jab to the kidneys while locked together and out of sight of the ref.

Not really - already locked together? They weren't. My analogy was based on scuppering someone ahead of battle commencing.

Analogies eh? Never perfect really

[LP670]

TheDeuce said:

LP670 said:

TheDeuce said:

Jader1973 said:

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

I think he relied upon them paying attention to spook them!

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car, but it's just not on to seek to disrupt a drivers attention and force them to recalibrate their focus at high speed, at a time when they would never expect it. FA is free to battle anyone anytime, once they've arrived at the battle to be had. Using tactics to spook a driver before they even arrive at the battle is not acceptable.

If I challenged you to a boxing match and then shot you in the eye with an air pistol as you approached the ring... You wouldn't say I was being entirely sporting would you?

except its nothing like that, it would be more like a jab to the kidneys while locked together and out of sight of the ref.

Not really - already locked together? They weren't. My analogy was based on scuppering someone ahead of battle commencing.

Analogies eh? Never perfect really

Had they not battled for the previous 50 odd laps then?

[shirt]

TheDeuce said:

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car

Not always. Imola 21, high speed pass gone wrong, blamed the other driver with lots of theatrics to boot.

[TheDeuce]

LP670 said:

TheDeuce said:

LP670 said:

TheDeuce said:

Jader1973 said:

Forester1965 said:

Don't even think Alonso was trying to make Russell panic. Just slow him enough through that corner so he couldn't maintain momentum down the following DRS zone. It was an intelligent idea executed badly.

I suspect he expected the driver behind would be both capable of controlling a car and paying attention.

I think he relied upon them paying attention to spook them!

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car, but it's just not on to seek to disrupt a drivers attention and force them to recalibrate their focus at high speed, at a time when they would never expect it. FA is free to battle anyone anytime, once they've arrived at the battle to be had. Using tactics to spook a driver before they even arrive at the battle is not acceptable.

If I challenged you to a boxing match and then shot you in the eye with an air pistol as you approached the ring... You wouldn't say I was being entirely sporting would you?

except its nothing like that, it would be more like a jab to the kidneys while locked together and out of sight of the ref.

Not really - already locked together? They weren't. My analogy was based on scuppering someone ahead of battle commencing.

Analogies eh? Never perfect really

Had they not battled for the previous 50 odd laps then?

Not in a way that required or justified tactical defensive/offensive positioning - no.

They were competing in the same GP, they had yet to get close enough to battle wheel to wheel. FA opted to introduce danger as a tactic to prevent being challenged that way. If GR was faster and could find a way to pass safely, he should have that opportunity.

[TheDeuce]

shirt said:

TheDeuce said:

Of course GR is capable of controlling a car

Not always. Imola 21, high speed pass gone wrong, blamed the other driver with lots of theatrics to boot.

I once walked into a lamp post - but I maintain that I'm capable of walking without doing so. GR going off on this occasion is not relevant when looking at what FA did was reasonable or responsible. Had GR managed to take avoiding action, slithered off the line and caught the car, it would make no difference in terms of the danger introduced by FA.

[Forester1965]

TheDeuce said:

I once walked into a lamp post - but I maintain that I'm capable of walking without doing so. GR going off on this occasion is not relevant when looking at what FA did was reasonable or responsible. Had GR managed to take avoiding action, slithered off the line and caught the car, it would make no difference in terms of the danger introduced by FA.

That's where the steward's decision gets interesting.

They make a point of saying they took no account of Russell's accident. Which means they judged Alonso's driving in isolation.

From the next race on you're going to have teams poring over real-time telemetry data looking for other drivers driving erratically/slowly, irrespective of involvement with another car.

[Byker28i]

Bo_apex said:

TheDeuce said:

Bo_apex said:

540TORQUES said:

Fernando Alonso, Aston Martin Aramco Formula One® Team driver and Double FIA Formula 1 World Champion, said: “Promoting driving standards across motorsport is vitally important. I’ve been in my fair share of on-track battles throughout my 23-years of racing in multiple categories of motorsports. Each battle requires an understanding and respect between fiercely competitive racers. We need consistency in how drivers attack and defend on the race track, as well as how the rules are interpreted during all competitions. I want to promote clean driving for the current racing generation, and the upcoming racers who are learning their craft and wanting to have professional careers in the future. Everyone has a responsibility to enjoy racing but do it fairly. The FIA's new Drivers' Standards Guideline will be crucial.”

The new for 2025 driving standards document from the FIA for all drivers from grassroots up.

https://www.fia.com/news/fia-drivers-committee-del...

Release less than one month old, and you get Alonso doing the oposite of what he wrote.

Edited by 540TORQUES on Wednesday 27th March 08:33

So no more 50g punting at Copse from 2025 ?

Racing incidents and heat of battle misjudgedments can never be prevented. If two drivers are fighting for one bit of tarmac, one has to lose and sometimes dramatically - but in that moment they both know they're fighting.

Agree they cannot be prevented. But Ham got rattled at the previous corners.

The Copse punt was highly accurate and highly effective. Do you believe it was a mistake ?

The one where onboard footage showed Max turned left into Hamilton trying to squeeze him and misjudged it. Thats old news

[TheDeuce]

Forester1965 said:

TheDeuce said:

I once walked into a lamp post - but I maintain that I'm capable of walking without doing so. GR going off on this occasion is not relevant when looking at what FA did was reasonable or responsible. Had GR managed to take avoiding action, slithered off the line and caught the car, it would make no difference in terms of the danger introduced by FA.

That's where the steward's decision gets interesting.

They make a point of saying they took no account of Russell's accident. Which means they judged Alonso's driving in isolation.

From the next race on you're going to have teams poring over real-time telemetry data looking for other drivers driving erratically/slowly, irrespective of involvement with another car.

I understand your point and I broadly agree - although it was the outcome for GR that put FA's driving under the spotlight - had GR not crashed I'm not convinced a penalty would have come of this, presumably some discussion in the subsequent drivers meeting would have been likely as no driver likes this sort of tactic and tend to have an opinion on it. In my personal view, what AT did is not acceptable in principle, irrespective of the outcome.

I don't expect the sport to start penalising every disappointing example of driver conduct, but this sort of incident does tend to do it's bit to make future examples of similar driving more likely to be looked at.