Official 2023 Saudi Arabia Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Poll: Official 2023 Saudi Arabia Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Total Members Polled: 168
Discussion
Killer2005 said:
Chamon_Lee said:
I feel bad for lando too - the car is a bit of a turd
Couldn't even get near the Williams even with DRS. Lando is fast but has nowhere to go (into another decent team). That must be tough but then again, he's not the only one.
Otispunkmeyer said:
2nd race in and already at the changing the result after the fact.
Happy Alonso was bumped back to 3rd. But FIA should have their confusions sorted out!
The FIA simply need to employ someone who can draft unambiguous rules and regulations. Every decision now seems to have a loophole to enable an appeal. A simple rule stating that no person, or equipment may approach within, say 0.5m, of a car that is serving a penalty. Why use something as vague as “working” on a car?Happy Alonso was bumped back to 3rd. But FIA should have their confusions sorted out!
Presumably Alpine now need to appeal Ocon’s penalty from Bahrain. Since the Masi catastrophe in Abu Dhabi and the arrival of Ben Sulayem they seem to have gone very rapidly downhill in trying to create unnecessary controversy.
Justice did prevail and I am very happy for both AM and FA. George also gained a few Brownie points for being so magnanimous about it.
rdjohn said:
The FIA simply need to employ someone who can draft unambiguous rules and regulations. Every decision now seems to have a loophole to enable an appeal. A simple rule stating that no person, or equipment may approach within, say 0.5m, of a car that is serving a penalty. Why use something as vague as “working” on a car?
It's always happened. It's very hard to write rules for every single scenario... its events like this that trigger clarifications.vaud said:
rdjohn said:
The FIA simply need to employ someone who can draft unambiguous rules and regulations. Every decision now seems to have a loophole to enable an appeal. A simple rule stating that no person, or equipment may approach within, say 0.5m, of a car that is serving a penalty. Why use something as vague as “working” on a car?
It's always happened. It's very hard to write rules for every single scenario... its events like this that trigger clarifications.Dull race and almost unreadable (but I did ) race thread with the football fan bickering
rdjohn said:
Otispunkmeyer said:
2nd race in and already at the changing the result after the fact.
Happy Alonso was bumped back to 3rd. But FIA should have their confusions sorted out!
The FIA simply need to employ someone who can draft unambiguous rules and regulations. Every decision now seems to have a loophole to enable an appeal. A simple rule stating that no person, or equipment may approach within, say 0.5m, of a car that is serving a penalty. Why use something as vague as “working” on a car?Happy Alonso was bumped back to 3rd. But FIA should have their confusions sorted out!
Presumably Alpine now need to appeal Ocon’s penalty from Bahrain. Since the Masi catastrophe in Abu Dhabi and the arrival of Ben Sulayem they seem to have gone very rapidly downhill in trying to create unnecessary controversy.
Justice did prevail and I am very happy for both AM and FA. George also gained a few Brownie points for being so magnanimous about it.
I've still not seen any reasonable justification from the FIA as to why the change of decision as to whether the penalty was served correctly took so long.
Paranoia and suspicions of gamesmanship, still feels like there was an outside influence involved somewhere ..... the suggestion of the penalty not being served correctly, and delaying for that being raised, feels exactly like the kind of thing that Mercedes and Toto would (legally and appropriately) pull.
rdjohn said:
The FIA simply need to employ someone who can draft unambiguous rules and regulations. Every decision now seems to have a loophole to enable an appeal. A simple rule stating that no person, or equipment may approach within, say 0.5m, of a car that is serving a penalty. Why use something as vague as “working” on a car?
yes its easy they just needed someone to do the simple job of writing clear regulations like yours..by the way, the driver is within 0.5m of the car when he's sat in it, and they're normally a person. Also, the pit gantry for the wheel guns and their air lines, and the stop/go light they use (all equipment) is likely 0.5m of a car in normal pit stops.
edit - I've just thought of a another loophole - you say people or equipment can't approach with 0.5m until the penalty is served. If the people are already standing where they are and the car drives up to within 0.5m of them then that rule isn't broken. the car approaches them.
so simple!
personally I don't think it's vague. I think lifting a car isn't working on it. I think that assembly, or disassembly, or reassembly, or a change of configuration (e.g. wing angle) is working on a car. I think lifting a car is moving a car. The status/state of the car or any of its components is unaffected by being lifted. When it's put back down again if no work has occurred the car will function identically and all of the parts are the same.
Edited by GiantCardboardPlato on Monday 20th March 12:02
Edited by GiantCardboardPlato on Monday 20th March 12:14
rdjohn said:
Presumably Alpine now need to appeal Ocon’s penalty from Bahrain.
They can't, the wing screws were turning 0.5 before the 5 seconds were up. There is no avenue for any argument in that one.Also slightly mind bending to be reminded that Perez just equalled Leclerc's career wins.
GiantCardboardPlato said:
yes its easy they just needed someone to do the simple job of writing clear regulations like yours..
by the way, the driver is within 0.5m of the car when he's sat in it, and they're normally a person. Also, the pit gantry for the wheel guns and their air lines, and the stop/go light they use (all equipment) is likely 0.5m of a car in normal pit stops.
so simple!
personally I don't think it's vague. I think lifting a car isn't working on it. I think that assembly, or disassembly, or reassembly, or a change of configuration (e.g. wing angle) is working on a car. I think lifting a car is moving a car. The status/state of the car or any of its components is unaffected by being lifted. When it's put back down again if no work has occurred the car will function identically and all of the parts are the same.
its saving time on the subsequent stop though, which negates the aim of a penalty. by the way, the driver is within 0.5m of the car when he's sat in it, and they're normally a person. Also, the pit gantry for the wheel guns and their air lines, and the stop/go light they use (all equipment) is likely 0.5m of a car in normal pit stops.
so simple!
personally I don't think it's vague. I think lifting a car isn't working on it. I think that assembly, or disassembly, or reassembly, or a change of configuration (e.g. wing angle) is working on a car. I think lifting a car is moving a car. The status/state of the car or any of its components is unaffected by being lifted. When it's put back down again if no work has occurred the car will function identically and all of the parts are the same.
Edited by GiantCardboardPlato on Monday 20th March 12:02
also work = force x distance so in your example work has most definitely taken place
i just think the FIA need to draw a line in the sand, define rules as they see them then apply them uniformly going forward. any appeal to historical precedents should be ignored.
ChocolateFrog said:
The RBs are so far ahead I'm surprised they burn through so many new sets of tyres in quali. They could literally do the whole thing on one set.
Less than two tenths to Ferrari in Q3 in Saudi Arabia, and less than three tenths to Ferrari in Q3 in Bahrain ........ That's not THAT far ahead at the end of the day, considering what we've been used to during the last decade of Mercedes dominance.Race pace for RBR, with the ability to hold so much in reserve, is truly outstanding though.
SmoothCriminal said:
Oh no, they actually handed him the trophy for a couple of hours. That’s harsh, but also shows how silly things are now. Did George manage to sneak it out, and onto his plane home, before the AM appeal was upheld - or did they take the same charter from Jeddah to Nice?
GiantCardboardPlato said:
yes its easy they just needed someone to do the simple job of writing clear regulations like yours..
by the way, the driver is within 0.5m of the car when he's sat in it, and they're normally a person. Also, the pit gantry for the wheel guns and their air lines, and the stop/go light they use (all equipment) is likely 0.5m of a car in normal pit stops.
edit - I've just thought of a another loophole - you say people or equipment can't approach with 0.5m until the penalty is served. If the people are already standing where they are and the car drives up to within 0.5m of them then that rule isn't broken. the car approaches them.
so simple!
personally I don't think it's vague. I think lifting a car isn't working on it. I think that assembly, or disassembly, or reassembly, or a change of configuration (e.g. wing angle) is working on a car. I think lifting a car is moving a car. The status/state of the car or any of its components is unaffected by being lifted. When it's put back down again if no work has occurred the car will function identically and all of the parts are the same.
The other side of that argument is that pit crew can't work on the car if the car isn't lifted with the jacks, so therefore lifting it must be an integral part of 'working on the car'.by the way, the driver is within 0.5m of the car when he's sat in it, and they're normally a person. Also, the pit gantry for the wheel guns and their air lines, and the stop/go light they use (all equipment) is likely 0.5m of a car in normal pit stops.
edit - I've just thought of a another loophole - you say people or equipment can't approach with 0.5m until the penalty is served. If the people are already standing where they are and the car drives up to within 0.5m of them then that rule isn't broken. the car approaches them.
so simple!
personally I don't think it's vague. I think lifting a car isn't working on it. I think that assembly, or disassembly, or reassembly, or a change of configuration (e.g. wing angle) is working on a car. I think lifting a car is moving a car. The status/state of the car or any of its components is unaffected by being lifted. When it's put back down again if no work has occurred the car will function identically and all of the parts are the same.
I don't know why they don't just have a penalty box outside the FIA garage where they have to wait for 5 seconds before proceeding to their team pit box, just like when they have to go on the weighbridge in qualifying.
thegreenhell said:
I don't know why they don't just have a penalty box outside the FIA garage where they have to wait for 5 seconds before proceeding to their team pit box, just like when they have to go on the weighbridge in qualifying.
This "sin bin" idea would be much simpler and easier to control and police, and if there were a situation where once driver needed to visit the box and it were already occupied ..... tough! Get in the queue.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff