Official 2022 Monaco Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

[NRS]

cgt2 said:

But the Williams were not racing, they were lapped cars ignoring blue flags.

Albon's justification was bullst too. Sorry but this is plain stupid. He passed 16 blue flags. The wonderful TV director missed it all.

Some could suggest his contractual ties with Red Bull are still a factor...

https://www.racefans.net/2022/05/30/albon-didnt-le...

However, as every armchair pundit knows track position is everything at Monaco. Clearly that memo didn't reach the Ferrari pitwall.

Edited by cgt2 on Tuesday 31st May 22:54

Isn’t it max 3 of them before you get in trouble? The new director seems pretty poor in general, from the stuff so far.

[TypeRTim]

paulguitar said:

DOCG said:

paulguitar said:

The pit lane exit thing is to do with consistency. Everyone needs to know what the rule is and that it will be enforced the same way each time. I don't think the fact that it was Verstappen is much/anything to do with it from what I have read here.

Why do they need to enforce it if there was clearly no advantage to be gained and no safety risk? I think it is better to look at the circumstances of each incident rather than automatically enforcing the rules in a very Germanic fashion with no regard to individual circumstances of each incident.

Interesting question. I think they probably do need to enforce these kinds of things rather rigidly. If they don't, it would lead to no end of arguments about why one case should be different from another.

One thing that springs to my mind is rugby's new laws surrounding high tackles and head to head collisions. A head to head collision is an automatic red card offence, but the referees can look at the incident and decide if there were any mitigating factors (such as a slip from one player, a change of body angle, commitment, intention etc.) to change that from a Red to a yellow (sin bin) or even just a penalty. The main thing being, all the referee comms are open for the TV audiences to hear.

I'm not suggesting F1 and rugby are the same - but in this instance I think there were clear mitigating factors that a.) caused the incident b.) meant that it posed no risk to any competitior and c.) meant they didn't gain any lasting advantage from it. From my watching, they crossed the line due to lack of grip in changeable conditions under power. It was only partially crossed and only briefly.

A very different situation to someone crossing over the end of the pit exit line in the dry at say, Monza, to defend a position going in to T1.

[DanielSan]

NRS said:

Isn’t it max 3 of them before you get in trouble? The new director seems pretty poor in general, from the stuff so far.

The Monaco director is different from other F1 races aren't they? I'm sure the ACM organise the filming etc of the F1 weekend to make sure only certain buildings are filmed ans to make Monaco look better etc.

[anonymous-user]

TypeRTim said:

One thing that springs to my mind is rugby's new laws surrounding high tackles and head to head collisions. A head to head collision is an automatic red card offence, but the referees can look at the incident and decide if there were any mitigating factors (such as a slip from one player, a change of body angle, commitment, intention etc.) to change that from a Red to a yellow (sin bin) or even just a penalty. The main thing being, all the referee comms are open for the TV audiences to hear.

I'm not suggesting F1 and rugby are the same - but in this instance I think there were clear mitigating factors that a.) caused the incident b.) meant that it posed no risk to any competitior and c.) meant they didn't gain any lasting advantage from it. From my watching, they crossed the line due to lack of grip in changeable conditions under power. It was only partially crossed and only briefly.

A very different situation to someone crossing over the end of the pit exit line in the dry at say, Monza, to defend a position going in to T1.

You are responsible for driving the car correctly, the weather is no mitigating factor in breaking rules, if necessary to retain control you slow down.

[Sandpit Steve]

DanielSan said:

The Monaco director is different from other F1 races aren't they? I'm sure the ACM organise the filming etc of the F1 weekend to make sure only certain buildings are filmed ans to make Monaco look better etc.

Yes, the World Feed is an ACM production, uniquely on the calendar. It’s one of Liberty’s many gripes with Monaco, that will no doubt come up in the contract talks in the next few months.

[cgt2]

DanielSan said:

The Monaco director is different from other F1 races aren't they? I'm sure the ACM organise the filming etc of the F1 weekend to make sure only certain buildings are filmed ans to make Monaco look better etc.

There was a lot of selective camera work which missed a ton of action. Monaco has their own sponsorship deal with Tag Heuer as official timekeeper for the GP and Historic. Rolex has the official timekeeper agreement with F1. If you noticed the Tag Heuer branding seemed to be given far more prominence than the Rolex banners which were mainly around the start line.

I'm sure Rolex were not very pleased.

[freedman]

NRS said:

Isn’t it max 3 of them before you get in trouble? The new director seems pretty poor in general, from the stuff so far.

Freitas has been excellent in the WEC, apart from last years finale where his failure to issue the correct punishment handed Ferrari the world championship

In hindsight his failure to apply the correct sanction after that incident seems ideal practice for running F1!

[Jasandjules]

DOCG said:

Jasandjules said:

Are you suggesting that crossing the pit exit line is a trivial thing?

Yes, it had no safety implications whatsoever.

Ok so you are saying the Pit Lane Exit Line should only be enforced in the event it is dangerous to cross it?

[HustleRussell]

I am far from a Red Bull fan but I didn't want to see them penalised for touching the line as they did. Certainly not anything which could impact their finishing position or points score. I believe the smallest in-race penalty available to the stewards is a five second(?) which would be disproportionate to any advantage gained.

I am surprised that the rules are written in such a way that even touching the line is an infringement. I did not know that.

Where is the precedent for a penalty for touching the line? I bet there are loads of cases of drivers touching the pit lane entry or exit line without being penalised. I can't remember the last time this came up. We have had drivers penalised for making a late pit decision and crossing the pit entry line, but I don't recall anybody being investigated of penalised for touching the line.

If the stewards decide that they want to take a zero tolerance approach to that rule then they can use this case as an example and ensure that drivers are forewarned.

[SturdyHSV]

As Ferrari 'do not advertise', I was very surprised when I stumbled across a Youtube channel called 'Ferrari' with Carlos and Charles speaking after the race.



Now I appreciate they've just snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, but my god that is painful viewing. It feels like a video they'd send to their families attached to a ransom demand.

I only endured a couple of videos and scrolled through to see what they had, but even so the whole channel seems comically poorly done, I can only assume the marketing department at Ferrari has the same demographic composition as PH

[glazbagun]

NRS said:

A few years ago….

Grr, should have checked before trusting twitter.

[5s Alive]

glazbagun said:

Grr, should have checked before trusting twitter.

Silver arrow livery gave it away but hadn't heard it before so thanks!

[Byker28i]

HustleRussell said:

Where is the precedent for a penalty for touching the line? I bet there are loads of cases of drivers touching the pit lane entry or exit line without being penalised. I can't remember the last time this came up. We have had drivers penalised for making a late pit decision and crossing the pit entry line, but I don't recall anybody being investigated of penalised for touching the line.

Yuki Tsunoda in Austria last year. Ferrari used this example in their appeal, but because they've rewitten the rule to say cross the line Red Bull argued that Gifted front and rear wheel hadn't all crossed the line, only some of it, which the Stewards accepted.

Gifted took the racing decision to move over and block the track as the Ferrari was coming quicker behind him, but went slightly too early.
It's another example of those little mistakes he makes that add up. Usually its overdriving and losing time, in this case he needed the stewards to not dock him the 5 secs penalty and lose the place.

But the rules been set now with a challenge, that means the drivers have almost an extra 305mm at the front and 405mm at the rear wheel of track to use when exiting the pits. There's often little time between pit exits and the next person coming through. Allowing Gifteds defence of his position has opened this up for others to use and exploit in the future.

Remember the Portugese GP with the tight pit lane exit?

Edited by Byker28i on Wednesday 1st June 14:55

[FNG]

HustleRussell said:

I am far from a Red Bull fan but I didn't want to see them penalised for touching the line as they did. Certainly not anything which could impact their finishing position or points score. I believe the smallest in-race penalty available to the stewards is a five second(?) which would be disproportionate to any advantage gained.

I am surprised that the rules are written in such a way that even touching the line is an infringement. I did not know that.

Where is the precedent for a penalty for touching the line? I bet there are loads of cases of drivers touching the pit lane entry or exit line without being penalised. I can't remember the last time this came up. We have had drivers penalised for making a late pit decision and crossing the pit entry line, but I don't recall anybody being investigated of penalised for touching the line.

If the stewards decide that they want to take a zero tolerance approach to that rule then they can use this case as an example and ensure that drivers are forewarned.

Understand where you're coming from, but if you're allowed to put a bit of your car over the line, why have the line? It now can't prevent the exact circumstance it was put there to eliminate.

The fact that it hasn't been penalised before is moot - the FIA are cracking down on all the rules in the wake of the Masi debacle. In that context, previous precedent doesn't apply.

[tertius]

I do find it odd that “touching the line” is not seen as the point of transgression. It seems the simplest to express, easiest to understand and achieves the objective in all circumstances. Above all it would be consistent.

[Nigel_O]

paulguitar said:

DOCG said:

paulguitar said:

The pit lane exit thing is to do with consistency. Everyone needs to know what the rule is and that it will be enforced the same way each time. I don't think the fact that it was Verstappen is much/anything to do with it from what I have read here.

Why do they need to enforce it if there was clearly no advantage to be gained and no safety risk? I think it is better to look at the circumstances of each incident rather than automatically enforcing the rules in a very Germanic fashion with no regard to individual circumstances of each incident.

Interesting question. I think they probably do need to enforce these kinds of things rather rigidly. If they don't, it would lead to no end of arguments about why one case should be different from another.

If the FIA are now chosing to "interpret" rules differently depending on whether there were any adverse implications, why the hell are they getting uppity about Lewis' nose studs and Seb's undies?

They can't have it both ways. If (as bin Sulayem states) "rules are rules", they need to apply them consistently - this was the cause of much of the angst last year when application of the rules around Max's agressive driving appeared to vary from corner to corner, never mind race to race

[resolve10]

Byker28i said:

Yuki Tsunoda in Austria last year. Ferrari used this example in their appeal, but because they've rewitten the rule to say cross the line Red Bull argued that Gifted front and rear wheel hadn't all crossed the line, only some of it, which the Stewards accepted.

Gifted took the racing decision to move over and block the track as the Ferrari was coming quicker behind him, but went slightly too early.
It's another example of those little mistakes he makes that add up. Usually its overdriving and losing time, in this case he needed the stewards to not dock him the 5 secs penalty and lose the place.

But the rules been set now with a challenge, that means the drivers have almost an extra 305mm at the front and 405mm at the rear wheel of track to use when exiting the pits. There's often little time between pit exits and the next person coming through. Allowing Gifteds defence of his position has opened this up for others to use and exploit in the future.

Remember the Portugese GP with the tight pit lane exit?

Edited by Byker28i on Wednesday 1st June 14:55

Have you actually watched it? He didn't touch the line because he was moving across to cover Sainz, he touched it because he got a snap of power oversteer on cold tyres. Had he not steered into it he'd probably have spun across the track. I accept the point that it's up to each driver to control their car, but I'd rather see discretion used in situations like this.

The rule around contact on Lap 1 is a good example. Stewards will be a bit more lenient regarding contact between cars as it's understandably more difficult to avoid contact with 20 cars jockeying for position than it is later in the race when the field has spread out.

The problem with black and white rules is it sometimes means stupid penalties for very trivial things that have no effect on the race. A good exanple being Hamilton/Mercedes penalty for a .5mm discrepancy in the wing last season (Brazil I think?). I'd have preferred a more sensible approach of 'put the car right before the race' than a grid penalty.

[Zarco]

tertius said:

I do find it odd that “touching the line” is not seen as the point of transgression. It seems the simplest to express, easiest to understand and achieves the objective in all circumstances. Above all it would be consistent.

It always was the case. Not sure why they changed it. Doesn't make it any easier to police, gives the drivers a bit more margin but that's it.

[Sandpit Steve]

resolve10 said:

Have you actually watched it? He didn't touch the line because he was moving across to cover Sainz, he touched it because he got a snap of power oversteer on cold tyres. Had he not steered into it he'd probably have spun across the track. I accept the point that it's up to each driver to control their car, but I'd rather see discretion used in situations like this.

The rule around contact on Lap 1 is a good example. Stewards will be a bit more lenient regarding contact between cars as it's understandably more difficult to avoid contact with 20 cars jockeying for position than it is later in the race when the field has spread out.

The problem with black and white rules is it sometimes means stupid penalties for very trivial things that have no effect on the race. A good exanple being Hamilton/Mercedes penalty for a .5mm discrepancy in the wing last season (Brazil I think?). I'd have preferred a more sensible approach of 'put the car right before the race' than a grid penalty.

Given the choice between spinning out aand taking a 5s penalty for crossing the line, I’m sure he would have taken the penalty every time.

[anonymous-user]

resolve10 said:

Have you actually watched it? He didn't touch the line because he was moving across to cover Sainz, he touched it because he got a snap of power oversteer on cold tyres. Had he not steered into it he'd probably have spun across the track. I accept the point that it's up to each driver to control their car, but I'd rather see discretion used in situations like this.

The rule around contact on Lap 1 is a good example. Stewards will be a bit more lenient regarding contact between cars as it's understandably more difficult to avoid contact with 20 cars jockeying for position than it is later in the race when the field has spread out.

The problem with black and white rules is it sometimes means stupid penalties for very trivial things that have no effect on the race. A good exanple being Hamilton/Mercedes penalty for a .5mm discrepancy in the wing last season (Brazil I think?). I'd have preferred a more sensible approach of 'put the car right before the race' than a grid penalty.

No, it's even more important in poor conditions to keep within the defined limits.

If you drive out of control in a safety zone in particular, you have no excuse because the conditions are worse, you should be more cautious, not less.