Official 2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix Thread **SPOILERS**
Discussion
Muzzer79 said:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
It doesn't matter. It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
You do not overtake behind the safety car. It is a binary rule - was he in front at any time: yes/no. Much the same as, say, a rear wing 0.2mm out on one side (not even across the whole width) on a mercedes. It is outside of the permitted measurements: yes/no? If yes, according to the binary nature of that rule, a penalty applies.
You can't stand by the absolute nature of the rules and then choose to completely ignore them when it is 'only slightly out' as it didn't hurt anyone.
bobski1 said:
jm doc said:
Altrezia said:
jm doc said:
He did what he was specifically asked to do by Red Bull. If he was doing it to ensure it finished under a green flag he wouldn't have needed to be told. And he was actually not doing anything that would allow that until he was told directly to do it by Red Bull. He was not going to allow cars to un-lap if I recall correctly, that message was given out to the cars.
You're correct. He decided that, the message went out saying the lapped cars would *not* be let through, then he changed his mind after(? - who knows the actual timings) red bull asked him to.He was then asked directly to do something completely different and completely at odds with the rules by Jonathan Wheatley and then Christian Horner when they appealed for help over the radio. He changed his decision to follow the rules in order to comply with that request. He was then challenged directly by Mercedes not to do that and to follow the rulebook, when they heard what was happening, but this was rejected out of hand.
There are no if's, but's or maybe's about this, it's all bluster and smokescreens to try and deflect from what actually happened over the radio and what followed those conversations during those few disastrous (for the sport) minutes.
Go listen for yourself
GCH said:
Muzzer79 said:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
It doesn't matter. It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
You do not overtake behind the safety car. It is a binary rule - was he in front at any time: yes/no. Much the same as, say, a rear wing 0.2mm out on one side (not even across the whole width) on a mercedes. It is outside of the permitted measurements: yes/no? If yes, according to the binary nature of that rule, a penalty applies.
You can't stand by the absolute nature of the rules and then choose to completely ignore them when it is 'only slightly out' as it didn't hurt anyone.
Muzzer79 said:
I get all of your points apart from:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
The stuff about Perez
He either broke down or ran out of fuel. The pitlane is closed to stop people changing tyres and going back out. Latifi's incident wasn't in the pitlane and cars weren't going through it as a result of the safety car. It therefore is common sense that Perez should be allowed to enter the pitlane. What else is he supposed to do? Stop the car on track?
As regards to an investigation about him being under-fuelled, this really is reaching......there's no rule that says you must input a prescribed amount of fuel to finish the race, nor is there a rule saying that your fuel-load cannot be optimised to assist your team-mate.
In general; incompetence is far more likely than conspiracy. They wanted a dramatic ending, they got one.
Max broke the rules regarding following the car in front during a safety car, its a slam dunk penalty, always has been.Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
The stuff about Perez
He either broke down or ran out of fuel. The pitlane is closed to stop people changing tyres and going back out. Latifi's incident wasn't in the pitlane and cars weren't going through it as a result of the safety car. It therefore is common sense that Perez should be allowed to enter the pitlane. What else is he supposed to do? Stop the car on track?
As regards to an investigation about him being under-fuelled, this really is reaching......there's no rule that says you must input a prescribed amount of fuel to finish the race, nor is there a rule saying that your fuel-load cannot be optimised to assist your team-mate.
In general; incompetence is far more likely than conspiracy. They wanted a dramatic ending, they got one.
It is against the rules to retire a car in the pits during a safety car period, you are only allowed to enter to change tyres. Stupid rule, but thats the rule and RB broke that.
Muzzer79 said:
I get all of your points apart from:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
Not quite true. When he was buggering about along-side (and 'in front') he was pushing lewis OFF the racing line - or at least preventing lewis taking the ideal line and making him drive on the dirty stuff - not ideal for the race leader. Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
Edited by Altrezia on Tuesday 15th February 17:43
Altrezia said:
Muzzer79 said:
I get all of your points apart from:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
Not quite true. When he was buggering about along-side (and 'in front') he was pushing lewis OFF the racing line - or at least preventing lewis taking the ideal line and making him drive on the dirty stuff - not ideal for the race leader. Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
Edited by Altrezia on Tuesday 15th February 17:43
Roofless Toothless said:
I believe the safety car rules stipulate that the cars follow in line behind the leader. By even being alongside, Max was breaking the rules. Sticking his nose in front even more so.
48.5 No car may be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person at any time whilst the safety car is deployed. This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.48.7 All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car no more than ten car lengths apart. In order to ensure that drivers reduce speed sufficiently, from the time at which all Competitors have been sent the “SAFETY CAR DEPLOYED” message via the official messaging system until the time that each car crosses the first safety car line for the second time, drivers must stay above the minimum time set by the FIA ECU at least once in each marshalling sector and at both the first and second safety car lines (a marshalling sector is defined as the section of track between each of the FIA light panels). The stewards may impose either of the penalties under Article 47.3a), b), c) or d) on any driver who fails to stay above the minimum time as required by the above.
48.8 With the exception of the cases listed under a) to h) below, no driver may overtake another car on the track, including the safety car, until he passes the Line (see Article 5.3) for the first time after the safety car has returned to the pits.
The exceptions are:
a) If a driver is signalled to do so from the safety car.
b) Under Articles 41.1c), 48.12, 51.6 and 51.12 below.
c) When entering the pits a driver may pass another car remaining on the track, including the safety car, after he has reached the first safety car line.
d) When leaving the pits a driver may overtake, or be overtaken by, another car on the track before he reaches the second safety car line.
e) When the safety car is returning to the pits it may be overtaken by cars on the track once it has reached the first safety car line.
f) Whilst in the pit entry, pit lane or pit exit a driver may overtake another car which is also in one of these three areas.
g) Any car stopping in its designated garage area whilst the safety car is using the pit lane (see Article 48.11 below) may be overtaken.
h) If any car slows with an obvious problem.
There doesn't seem to be much in the regs that specifically requires that they stay in line - however, under 48.5 it could be construed as "erratic driving", I suppose, & 48.7 says reduce speed & form up "in line". The overtaking under 48.7 is unequivocal though; however, there doesn't seem to be a definition of what "overtaking" actually is - which is perhaps their get-out-of-jail card...
Altrezia said:
MarkwG said:
The overtaking under 48.7 is unequivocal though; however, there doesn't seem to be a definition of what "overtaking" actually is - which is perhaps their get-out-of-jail card...
If they'd crossed the line as they were at that point in time, who'd have won the race?jsf said:
angrymoby said:
Nova Gyna said:
I see Joe Saward is still refusing to accept that Michael Masi is anything other than a good, honest man who has done no wrong.
For a man (Saward) with such a history in the *sport, it beggars belief that he’s unable/unwilling to call out Masi for any of the contentious decisions made this season.
JS said:
‘ Everyone feels for Lewis and what happened but some of the crusaders who are trying to mount witch-hunts against Masi need to understand – as the FIA Stewards in Abu Dhabi obviously did – that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with what the Race Director did’
Rather than condemning Masi’s actions he seems quite happy to assume all the noise is down to the parochial nature of the English.
How disappointing.
he's always had an MO of backing whats in F1's interest or whoever he considers a 'decent' person, no matter the morals or fairness ...he did the same with backing Kaltenborn when Sauber ran off with Van de Garde's £7m & deliberately blocked him obtaining his super licenceFor a man (Saward) with such a history in the *sport, it beggars belief that he’s unable/unwilling to call out Masi for any of the contentious decisions made this season.
JS said:
‘ Everyone feels for Lewis and what happened but some of the crusaders who are trying to mount witch-hunts against Masi need to understand – as the FIA Stewards in Abu Dhabi obviously did – that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with what the Race Director did’
Rather than condemning Masi’s actions he seems quite happy to assume all the noise is down to the parochial nature of the English.
How disappointing.
He should go home, there's a village somewhere missing an idiot.
Edited by Tommo13 on Tuesday 15th February 21:59
Roofless Toothless said:
I believe the safety car rules stipulate that the cars follow in line behind the leader. By even being alongside, Max was breaking the rules. Sticking his nose in front even more so.
Not sure if it is a written rule but I am thinking it is as least an unwritten rule, as the cars weave all over the place so getting alongside could lead to a crash....PhilAsia said:
GCH said:
Muzzer79 said:
Max 'overtaking' under the safety car
It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
It doesn't matter. It's well documented that all drivers accelerate and brake hard under the safety car. He didn't so much overtake Lewis as have his nose edge past him by about a foot whilst he was accelerating and Lewis was braking. He returned to his position....it was a victimless transgression.
You do not overtake behind the safety car. It is a binary rule - was he in front at any time: yes/no. Much the same as, say, a rear wing 0.2mm out on one side (not even across the whole width) on a mercedes. It is outside of the permitted measurements: yes/no? If yes, according to the binary nature of that rule, a penalty applies.
You can't stand by the absolute nature of the rules and then choose to completely ignore them when it is 'only slightly out' as it didn't hurt anyone.
The rules regarding overtaking under the safety car are there to prevent people racing under the safety car and gaining advantage whilst the race is ‘suspended’
Max’s ‘overtake’ was not gaining an advantage. People are using it as an excuse for a penalty to be applied that corrects the wrongs of the safety car usage itself and as another line in the lists of errors made by race control.
I don’t think that’s necessary. Race control made enough of a monumental cock-up with lapped cars and bringing the safety car in early, we don’t even need to add this too.
Perez’s situation - OK, so let’s assume we decide that was wrong.
Using precedent - Hamilton’s entry to the pits under red light at Monza in 2020 - he gets a 10 second stop/go penalty.
What’s the point in the ‘rule’ being applied? His car isn’t working - he’s retired from the race. He can’t serve the penalty, because he’s already suffered the retirement. It’s moot.
Jasandjules said:
Roofless Toothless said:
I believe the safety car rules stipulate that the cars follow in line behind the leader. By even being alongside, Max was breaking the rules. Sticking his nose in front even more so.
Not sure if it is a written rule but I am thinking it is as least an unwritten rule, as the cars weave all over the place so getting alongside could lead to a crash....I know they weave about, and nobody expects them to proceed like circus elephants holding the tail of the one in front with their trunks, as it were, but to drive alongside like Max did, and even put the nose of the car in front, is certainly not “in line”.
It was an inexplicable decision by the stewards to dismiss the infringement.
I’m the grand scheme of things, sticking his nose in front of Lewis behind the safety car was the least of Max’s infringements last season. Everyone is obsessing over Massi’s poor decision at AD, but in a way that works for the FIA. The whole season was a demonstration of how to get away with dangerous driving and then blame it on someone else by Max. With all the focus on AD, the FIA don’t need to address all the other issues.
Also… Volume 2 here we come!
Also… Volume 2 here we come!
Roofless Toothless said:
Jasandjules said:
Roofless Toothless said:
I believe the safety car rules stipulate that the cars follow in line behind the leader. By even being alongside, Max was breaking the rules. Sticking his nose in front even more so.
Not sure if it is a written rule but I am thinking it is as least an unwritten rule, as the cars weave all over the place so getting alongside could lead to a crash....I know they weave about, and nobody expects them to proceed like circus elephants holding the tail of the one in front with their trunks, as it were, but to drive alongside like Max did, and even put the nose of the car in front, is certainly not “in line”.
It was an inexplicable decision by the stewards to dismiss the infringement.
"In order to avoid the likelihood of accidents before the safety car returns to the pits, from the
point at which the lights on the car are turned out drivers must proceed at a pace which involves
no erratic acceleration or braking nor any other manoeuvre which is likely to endanger other
drivers or impede the restart."
I feel that one could argue that Hamilton was not maintaining a consistent pace prior to the restart - he was speeding up and slowing down, nearly stopping. While that's pretty much accepted - the leader has to keep those behind guessing to avoid being jumped - it would, if you wanted to be funny about it, mean that applying the letter of the law would result in punishing both Max (for nosing ahead) and Lewis (for erratic pacing).
Regarding a red flag restart, and the logical thought :
MarkwG said:
Perhaps, although Verstappen would logically be right up behind on new tyres - so a banzai move would benefit him, rather than Hamilton. That's part of why I lean away from the conspiracy idea, because there was a neater way of arranging that result: the "Masi" way, for want of a better description, seems clumsy, unethical, messy & fraught with too much risk, which is as it turned out.
Did Max have any spare softs left? He started the race on softs (having burned out his mediums in qualifying) so I suspect the set he put on at the end were used? Whereas I imagine Hamilton had a new set. So a standing start would likely have not seen Max get past? Especially as Red Bull weren't making brilliant getaways towards the end of the year. Jasandjules said:
Running Lewis off the road at T4 in Brazil. Brake Testing Lewis in Saudi. Those are just the events in the last 1/4 of the season.....
AS for Masi being "financially" tied to Red Bull, I don't think that is the case at all.
It is that the FIA wanted a different WDC this year. They hobbled Merc with the aero rule changes, allowed Max to get away with a number of dangerous moves, allowed Red Bull to play swaperoo with rear wings between Quali and Race etc because that is best "for the show" - at least in their eyes.
I also recall the race control turning yellow lights off and marshals turning them back on stuff in Qatar. The Brazil DQ (but tape all over wings being fine) together with the "it's one of those" response to the running off the road added to the really cynical part of me that was already suspicious of the long red flag in Hungary (time for Red Bull to fix Max's car? Although Mercedes benefitted in Italy so at the time I decided I was being too conspiracy minded, especially as Max barely made it into tenth anyway). But we seemed to just have a series of decisions all going one way, to the point that when the Saudi brake test happened (which itself was after a bizarre Red Flag period) I gave up watching the live races (I actually turned Saudi off halfway through, couldn't be bothered with it). Rather glad I did as it meant that I didn't waste two hours watching Abu Dhabi - I got to see the abbreviated "highlights". AS for Masi being "financially" tied to Red Bull, I don't think that is the case at all.
It is that the FIA wanted a different WDC this year. They hobbled Merc with the aero rule changes, allowed Max to get away with a number of dangerous moves, allowed Red Bull to play swaperoo with rear wings between Quali and Race etc because that is best "for the show" - at least in their eyes.
I do wonder if this year may be different. The new guy is a racing driver, there is going to be a lot of scrutiny, and possibly a deal has been done to avoid Mercedes and Hamilton bringing a court case and/or walking away.
Sadly none of that will be enough for me to be bothering with the live races this year. I'll see what happens and then decide on 2023. Not investing my time and energy to see another debacle.
(I'm really only posting this as I want to see this thread hit 500!)
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff