Sebastian Vettel
Discussion
REALIST123 said:
jm doc said:
Vettel should have his licence suspended and be made to undertake anger management training. He should not get it back until he can demonstrate that he can control himself. The FIA will leave themselves wide open if they fail to act on such an open and shut case of loss of self control in such a dangerous sport and something serious occurs at a later date.
The fact that he appears to be in complete denial of the event is in my opinion very significant and highlights the seriousness of his problem.
The fact that he appears to be in complete denial of the event is in my opinion very significant and highlights the seriousness of his problem.
'such a dangerous sport'. Really?
Whatever, if the FIA do as you suggest they might as well hand Hamilton the WC now. The season will be over.
And yes, of course motorsport is highly dangerous. There used to be death and serious injury on a regular basis throughout the season amongst drivers, spectators and marshalls. This has been massively reduced by the many safety features at circuits and on cars, and by much stricter rules and regulations, and the proper enforcement of them.
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
And yes, of course motorsport is highly dangerous. There used to be death and serious injury on a regular basis throughout the season amongst drivers, spectators and marshalls. This has been massively reduced by the many safety features at circuits and on cars, and by much stricter rules and regulations, and the proper enforcement of them.
yes, but they were going along at walking speed. There was zero danger. Just a bit of friendly aggro. And yes, of course motorsport is highly dangerous. There used to be death and serious injury on a regular basis throughout the season amongst drivers, spectators and marshalls. This has been massively reduced by the many safety features at circuits and on cars, and by much stricter rules and regulations, and the proper enforcement of them.
/over-reaction/
REALIST123 said:
jm doc said:
Vettel should have his licence suspended and be made to undertake anger management training. He should not get it back until he can demonstrate that he can control himself. The FIA will leave themselves wide open if they fail to act on such an open and shut case of loss of self control in such a dangerous sport and something serious occurs at a later date.
The fact that he appears to be in complete denial of the event is in my opinion very significant and highlights the seriousness of his problem.
The fact that he appears to be in complete denial of the event is in my opinion very significant and highlights the seriousness of his problem.
'such a dangerous sport'. Really?
Whatever, if the FIA do as you suggest they might as well hand Hamilton the WC now. The season will be over.
He knew damn well he crossed the line as soon as he drove into Hamilton the second time - that's why he won't even accept it happened.
He'll get a reprimand.
He may get docked a couple of points (perhaps making the WDC points dead level (that would hurt)).
But nothing will be done to spoil the show in the first season for years with a proper team competition.
ELUSIVEJIM said:
LMAO.Marshall tries to help driver, gets a smack in the chops for his efforts. Imagine if that happened today. Banned, massive compensation. Haha.
brierleys said:
I think you have to look at the incident in the context of his denial.
No, judge it by the facts. Daft aggro. Not the first, not the last. Zero danger.Judging it by reactions, the driver's, or more likely, some partisan fans, makes no sense, since a cracking apology could become a get-out-of-jail-free card or the whole thing could descend into mob rule.
deadslow said:
Zero danger.
I would disagree. There was every chance that in choosing to ram into LH there could have been serious consequences in terms of suspension damage to either car, which could have manifested when the cars were under load at speed (on a street circuit with no run off).hornetrider said:
I would disagree. There was every chance that in choosing to ram into LH there could have been serious consequences in terms of suspension damage to either car, which could have manifested when the cars were under load at speed (on a street circuit with no run off).
yes, but you do rather over-state it, don't you. Nobody got rammed. While I do appreciate that LH's main title adversary is always going to get the Dick Dastardly treatment on here, and it's obvious that SV was wrong to be so aggressive, folks are just looking for more that is actually there, imho.
The Hamilton headrest issue isn't entirely unrelated to the Vettel incident, I mean it's not directly related, but what was irksome at the time was that Hamilton was told that he would be black flagged if he didn't pit immediately for something that may have become a safety issue if the car had gone on to crash. Yet Vettel was not black-flagged despite demonstrating that his state of mind was such that he was not safe to drive.
It was further irksome, especially in light of the later comments, that the timing of Vettel's penalty appeared to suggest that Hamilton having to pit had perhaps helped the Stewards decide whether Vettel should be penalised as the impact on the Championship was removed.
That was compounded by Vettel having a number of laps grace before serving his penalty, which allowed him to get ahead of Hamilton, whereas Hamilton had to come in immediately.
Without intervention, Lewis would have continued to drive with his hand on the headrest on the straights and won the race and argued that the situation was safe. It was certainly more safe than Vettel's conduct.
It was further irksome, especially in light of the later comments, that the timing of Vettel's penalty appeared to suggest that Hamilton having to pit had perhaps helped the Stewards decide whether Vettel should be penalised as the impact on the Championship was removed.
That was compounded by Vettel having a number of laps grace before serving his penalty, which allowed him to get ahead of Hamilton, whereas Hamilton had to come in immediately.
Without intervention, Lewis would have continued to drive with his hand on the headrest on the straights and won the race and argued that the situation was safe. It was certainly more safe than Vettel's conduct.
deadslow said:
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
And yes, of course motorsport is highly dangerous. There used to be death and serious injury on a regular basis throughout the season amongst drivers, spectators and marshalls. This has been massively reduced by the many safety features at circuits and on cars, and by much stricter rules and regulations, and the proper enforcement of them.
yes, but they were going along at walking speed. There was zero danger. Just a bit of friendly aggro. And yes, of course motorsport is highly dangerous. There used to be death and serious injury on a regular basis throughout the season amongst drivers, spectators and marshalls. This has been massively reduced by the many safety features at circuits and on cars, and by much stricter rules and regulations, and the proper enforcement of them.
/over-reaction/
And you still insist that someone shouldn't be punished because it may make it harder for them to win. I can see why you empathise with Vettel, you're both quite delusional
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
In this instance it's not about denying someone the chance of winning. This sport is an entertainment business. If you remove one of the two main protagonists with two-thirds of the season left to run what do you think will happen? Will everyone still tune in to the next twelve races to watch Hamilton cruise to an unchallenged WDC?The 'sport' might want to make an example of Vettel, but the 'business' won't allow it.
thegreenhell said:
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
In this instance it's not about denying someone the chance of winning. This sport is an entertainment business. If you remove one of the two main protagonists with two-thirds of the season left to run what do you think will happen? Will everyone still tune in to the next twelve races to watch Hamilton cruise to an unchallenged WDC?The 'sport' might want to make an example of Vettel, but the 'business' won't allow it.
deadslow said:
No, judge it by the facts. Daft aggro. Not the first, not the last. Zero danger.
Judging it by reactions, the driver's, or more likely, some partisan fans, makes no sense, since a cracking apology could become a get-out-of-jail-free card or the whole thing could descend into mob rule.
Nevermind an apology, he doesn't even appear to acknowledge doing it. Judging it by reactions, the driver's, or more likely, some partisan fans, makes no sense, since a cracking apology could become a get-out-of-jail-free card or the whole thing could descend into mob rule.
jm doc said:
thegreenhell said:
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
In this instance it's not about denying someone the chance of winning. This sport is an entertainment business. If you remove one of the two main protagonists with two-thirds of the season left to run what do you think will happen? Will everyone still tune in to the next twelve races to watch Hamilton cruise to an unchallenged WDC?The 'sport' might want to make an example of Vettel, but the 'business' won't allow it.
thegreenhell said:
jm doc said:
thegreenhell said:
jm doc said:
Really? You think somebody should avoid punishment for a serious infringement of the rules because it might spoil their chance of winning?
In this instance it's not about denying someone the chance of winning. This sport is an entertainment business. If you remove one of the two main protagonists with two-thirds of the season left to run what do you think will happen? Will everyone still tune in to the next twelve races to watch Hamilton cruise to an unchallenged WDC?The 'sport' might want to make an example of Vettel, but the 'business' won't allow it.
Derek Smith said:
I wasn't commenting of SV's abilities in a car. I think we've all seen enough to negate the 'only because he's in the best car' idea.
In RB days I couldn't get myself to like him and I didn't know why. It's not as if I hold his nationality against him. It's not as if I hold his WDCs against him. But in immediately post race interviews he was like glass paper being rubbed inside my ears. Once into Ferrari, a team I don't favour, things changed slowly and I began to take to him. This wasn't against my better judgement; he seemed quite likeable. Even his tirade against Whiting could be put down to racing pressures.
The driving into LH twice isn't what has soured him for me but the post race reaction. My thought on the matter were that the old SV was back and 'get over yourself'. We all make stupid mistakes - I'm something of an aficionado - but you have to move on. Nursing a grudge isn't a sign of maturity.
I agree with you about him as a driver and it is good he's in the Ferrari to challenge the power of Merc and Hamilton, especially now it's a one-man team. Mind you, wouldn't it be so much better with Alonso in his place?
OK, having a likeable personality. Just playing devil's advocate, I know everyone here praises Hamilton for wearing his 'heart on his sleeve'. He seems to mention it a lot too. Why bash another guy for doing the same? Would one rather he said all the right things in public so he measures up to one's moral standards? While being a totally different guy in private? Isn't it nice that he expresses himself however he sees fit in this boring corporate world? Isn't it very rare to find an elite sportsperson with a 'normal' personality?In RB days I couldn't get myself to like him and I didn't know why. It's not as if I hold his nationality against him. It's not as if I hold his WDCs against him. But in immediately post race interviews he was like glass paper being rubbed inside my ears. Once into Ferrari, a team I don't favour, things changed slowly and I began to take to him. This wasn't against my better judgement; he seemed quite likeable. Even his tirade against Whiting could be put down to racing pressures.
The driving into LH twice isn't what has soured him for me but the post race reaction. My thought on the matter were that the old SV was back and 'get over yourself'. We all make stupid mistakes - I'm something of an aficionado - but you have to move on. Nursing a grudge isn't a sign of maturity.
I agree with you about him as a driver and it is good he's in the Ferrari to challenge the power of Merc and Hamilton, especially now it's a one-man team. Mind you, wouldn't it be so much better with Alonso in his place?
As for Alonso vs Hamilton, nah, I don't for one minute believe Fernando would be doing a better job than Seb this year.
Love the psychoanalysis in this thread, btw.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff