Aston Martin on the front row at the Grand Prix
Discussion
Absolutely
That’s 2 out 2 podium finishes, crikey you would have taken that for the entire season
I know it’s a bit silly but when they keep saying Aston Martin, I get all excited knowing there is one in my garage!
I wonder if McClaren, Ferrari Mercedes owners get the same!!!
Red Bull don’t make cars!
Lol
Kev
That’s 2 out 2 podium finishes, crikey you would have taken that for the entire season
I know it’s a bit silly but when they keep saying Aston Martin, I get all excited knowing there is one in my garage!
I wonder if McClaren, Ferrari Mercedes owners get the same!!!
Red Bull don’t make cars!
Lol
Kev
Coobie said:
P3 for Alonso. Another fantastic result for Aston. Shame Stroll had to retire. Red Bull however seems untouchable.
Pity the team touched the car and invalidated the penalty having been served. Now 4th with George Russel promoted to 3rd. Still a stellar start to the season compared to last year.CSK1 said:
Yes, it’s ridiculous to get double the initial penalty for just touching the car. Fernando didn’t gain any advantage from the technician just touching the car.
Rules are rules, and the same thing happened, and penalty was imposed, on Ocon in the first race 2 weeks ago. If the rules say you can’t touch the car, then you can’t touch the car. You could argue that the tyre contact patch being 150mm outside the starting box also didn’t give Alonso a real advantage, but one issue the teams and fans complained about in previous seasons was inconsistent application of the rules.Agreed but I think the fact the driver has gained an advantage or not should be taken into account when issuing a penalty.
The fact Fernando’s car was slightly positioned to the left of the marks on the grid didn’t provide him an advantage, it’s not like his car had passed the front limit which would have provided an advantage over the pole man.
Same with the technician’s car jack which just touched the car, he didn’t effectively use the jack until after the 5 second penalty time lapsed so again it’s unfair to give the driver a penalty for that.
The fact Fernando’s car was slightly positioned to the left of the marks on the grid didn’t provide him an advantage, it’s not like his car had passed the front limit which would have provided an advantage over the pole man.
Same with the technician’s car jack which just touched the car, he didn’t effectively use the jack until after the 5 second penalty time lapsed so again it’s unfair to give the driver a penalty for that.
Alonso`s P3 reinstated, so no harm done in the end.
Seems video was presented of jacks touching other cars that were serving penalties without them being further penalised, so the "car touching" agreement with the FIA was called into question and now could not now be relied upon, which was reason enough for the reversal. Or something like that.
Seems video was presented of jacks touching other cars that were serving penalties without them being further penalised, so the "car touching" agreement with the FIA was called into question and now could not now be relied upon, which was reason enough for the reversal. Or something like that.
Thats great news , my heart sank for Alonso when they penalized him for such a stupid error. At worst it should have been the original 5 seconds which still would have meant the podium position 3 for him. Even George Russel said Alonso deserved 3rd place which was good sportsmanship IMO.
A great race for Red bull and Verstappen.
A great race for Red bull and Verstappen.
CSK1 said:
Agreed but I think the fact the driver has gained an advantage or not should be taken into account when issuing a penalty.
<snip>
I get your point, but that brings subjectivity back into the judgement. Rules are better if they are black and white - but it sounds like the “jack touch” rule was already grey. Clarification required, methinks.<snip>
CSK1 said:
Agreed but I think the fact the driver has gained an advantage or not should be taken into account when issuing a penalty.
That was my thought too. Note both Red Bulls going off the track when they cut a particular corner completely; how many seconds did that gain them?But then we have the issue...
CSK1 said:
The fact Fernando’s car was slightly positioned to the left of the marks on the grid didn’t provide him an advantage, it’s not like his car had passed the front limit which would have provided an advantage over the pole man.
Same with the technician’s car jack which just touched the car, he didn’t effectively use the jack until after the 5 second penalty time lapsed so again it’s unfair to give the driver a penalty for that.
Agreed on both points, especially the latter. Perhaps when the rule 'Don't touch the car' was written they meant 'Don't start any work on the car'. The problem is when the offence MIGHT have provided an advantage and it's impossible to show either way. And so the stewards revert to :numptytrafficwardenjobsworth: mode which involves no intelligence or judgement, and as a result screams unfair.Same with the technician’s car jack which just touched the car, he didn’t effectively use the jack until after the 5 second penalty time lapsed so again it’s unfair to give the driver a penalty for that.
At least they took so long to work it out that Alonso took the podium
NB Let's not forget that Alonso only started second because Verstappen's car broke down in qualifying and Russell had a penalty, so you can regard it as 'honours even'.
I also note (if I heard the commentator correctly) that the last time Aston Martin qualified on the front row was in 1953. We await the coronation of William V!
Simpo Two said:
... I also note (if I heard the commentator correctly) that the last time Aston Martin qualified on the front row was in 1953. ...
That is rather like TVR unveiling a working car (Goodwood), two years before it was even manufactured (DVLA).
AM were not in F1 in 1953. Perhaps it might have been better if they were, because later on when they did enter F1 (front engine), most of the field had already changed to the mid-engine configuration. I don't know whether they ever qualified on the front row back then. Unlikely.
Much more successful of course with sports car racing, in the 1950s and 60s.
David W. said:
This was helpful. https://youtu.be/zhRdmmJEeeQ
A good summary of some thorough work by someone at AM F1!Jon39 said:
AM were not in F1 in 1953. Perhaps it might have been better if they were, because later on when they did enter F1 (front engine), most of the field had already changed to the mid-engine configuration. I don't know whether they ever qualified on the front row back then. Unlikely.
Much more successful of course with sports car racing, in the 1950s and 60s.
Hmm. Looks like it was 1963, and at Le Mans... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1963_24_Hours_of_Le_...Much more successful of course with sports car racing, in the 1950s and 60s.
I think I worked out that 2023 - 60 = 1953
Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 20th March 18:51
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff