Kristensen to advise F1 race stewards
Discussion
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82354
Lots of experience and no obvious ties to any current F1 teams (racing in DTM for Audi)
There will probably be more for the stewards to do in Melbourne as there are usually a few accidents and yellow flags / safety cars.
Do you think that the likes of Mansell will really want to be a steward?
I can see them wanting to get involved to help the sport, but I think Mansell will be unhappy happy if decisions dont go the way he wants. Plus if they make a bad call it will be embarrassing.
I wonder who else they will choose?
autosport said:
Tom Kristensen, the eight-time Le Mans winner, will perform the drivers' advisory role on the stewards panel at the Australian Grand Prix.
The Dane, who was present at the season opener in Bahrain when the role was performed by Alain Prost, will join the panel of three stewards at Albert Park.
The move to involve drivers this season has come at the request of new FIA president Jean Todt, who wants experienced drivers to help offer insight for stewards who have little or no experience of racing cars.
Damon Hill, Nigel Mansell, Johnny Herbert and Alexander Wurz are other drivers who have been in contact with the FIA about performing the advisory role this season.
Kristensen raced full-time in the DTM between 2004 and 2009, retiring at the end of last season. He will continue in Audi's sportscar line-up this year at Le Mans and selected LMS rounds.
Seems like a good choice.The Dane, who was present at the season opener in Bahrain when the role was performed by Alain Prost, will join the panel of three stewards at Albert Park.
The move to involve drivers this season has come at the request of new FIA president Jean Todt, who wants experienced drivers to help offer insight for stewards who have little or no experience of racing cars.
Damon Hill, Nigel Mansell, Johnny Herbert and Alexander Wurz are other drivers who have been in contact with the FIA about performing the advisory role this season.
Kristensen raced full-time in the DTM between 2004 and 2009, retiring at the end of last season. He will continue in Audi's sportscar line-up this year at Le Mans and selected LMS rounds.
Lots of experience and no obvious ties to any current F1 teams (racing in DTM for Audi)
There will probably be more for the stewards to do in Melbourne as there are usually a few accidents and yellow flags / safety cars.
Do you think that the likes of Mansell will really want to be a steward?
I can see them wanting to get involved to help the sport, but I think Mansell will be unhappy happy if decisions dont go the way he wants. Plus if they make a bad call it will be embarrassing.
I wonder who else they will choose?
Edited by Holst on Thursday 25th March 23:31
Mansell said he would be happy to do it in a BBC interview last race weekend. I agree it would be interesting to see how they react if their advice is not taken. Some incidents from the past could still go either way if ex drivers are judging. The technical ones, not likely. When Ferrari protested that Alonso's dirty air had affected Massa in qualifying, I can't see any driver agreeing with that decision and then the Hamilton chicane cutting incident, although technically correct, I can see the likes of Mansell wanting to let them get on with racing.
Other sports have improved with video evidence and using technology, yet F1 has always got decisions wrong despite having the evidence and technology longer than most sports. To the point of looking extremely Bias let alone embarrassing. Think of Montoya getting the penalty when Schumacher turned into him at Nurburgring 2003 as they both fought for the championship. Or Heidfeld getting punished for cutting the same chicane schumacher had only a few laps previous, the list goes on. F1 still has the potential to be corrupt even with ex world champions in an advisory role. But then with the racing being a lot cleaner in recent years, there's less to go on.
Other sports have improved with video evidence and using technology, yet F1 has always got decisions wrong despite having the evidence and technology longer than most sports. To the point of looking extremely Bias let alone embarrassing. Think of Montoya getting the penalty when Schumacher turned into him at Nurburgring 2003 as they both fought for the championship. Or Heidfeld getting punished for cutting the same chicane schumacher had only a few laps previous, the list goes on. F1 still has the potential to be corrupt even with ex world champions in an advisory role. But then with the racing being a lot cleaner in recent years, there's less to go on.
the hamilton chicane cutting incident was not technically correct because raikonnen got back in front of hamilton (far enough in front to allow hamilton to cross from the left to the right side of the track behind raikonnen) before he re-passed him. The hamilton chicane cutting incident decision was totally retarded.
DangerousMike said:
the hamilton chicane cutting incident was not technically correct because raikonnen got back in front of hamilton (far enough in front to allow hamilton to cross from the left to the right side of the track behind raikonnen) before he re-passed him. The hamilton chicane cutting incident decision was totally retarded.
Hamilton gained the momentum he would not have had if he had taken the corner properly, it really is that simple. And the rule has been changed to make sure this advantage cant be had again. Allowing Kimi past briefly in a straight line and almost immediately back on the power, didnt lose him the same momentum if he'd have taken the corner fully.Edited by oilspill on Friday 26th March 13:13
oilspill said:
DangerousMike said:
the hamilton chicane cutting incident was not technically correct because raikonnen got back in front of hamilton (far enough in front to allow hamilton to cross from the left to the right side of the track behind raikonnen) before he re-passed him. The hamilton chicane cutting incident decision was totally retarded.
Hamilton gained the momentum he would not have had if he had taken the corner properly, it really is that simple. And the rule has been changed to make sure this advantage cant be had again. Allowing Kimi past briefly didnt lose him the same momentum if he'd have taken the corner fully.Edited by DangerousMike on Friday 26th March 13:13
DangerousMike said:
oilspill said:
DangerousMike said:
the hamilton chicane cutting incident was not technically correct because raikonnen got back in front of hamilton (far enough in front to allow hamilton to cross from the left to the right side of the track behind raikonnen) before he re-passed him. The hamilton chicane cutting incident decision was totally retarded.
Hamilton gained the momentum he would not have had if he had taken the corner properly, it really is that simple. And the rule has been changed to make sure this advantage cant be had again. Allowing Kimi past briefly didnt lose him the same momentum if he'd have taken the corner fully.I can see why it looks harsh, and would expect the likes of Mansell not to agree, but then Ferrari were in the habbit of protesting and proving technical foul play and they won, again.
Did anybody see Schumacher going a fastest lap under red flags after Kobayashi crashed?
Was he shown red flags before the pit entrance or only on the straight? The replay didnt show us.
He didnt do anything dangerous as the accident was on the other side of the track but it was mentioned on the replay as something the officials may want to look at.
Was he shown red flags before the pit entrance or only on the straight? The replay didnt show us.
He didnt do anything dangerous as the accident was on the other side of the track but it was mentioned on the replay as something the officials may want to look at.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff