F1 2019
- Thread starter 1%er
- Start date
1%er
Well-Known Member
The Vettel incident
More information has come to light about this incident. The stewards categorised the offence under Article 38.1 of the Sporting Regulations (which basically means the race director reported an on track incident which he believed was a breach of the Sporting Regulations). The breach according to the Stewards reports was this; car 5 left the track, re-joined unsafely and forced another car off the track.
Ferrari have submitted their intention to appeal against the decision to the FIA and now have 96 hours to gather evidence and decide if they wish to pursue the appeal. During the TV coverage the reporters said a number of times that as it was an in-race incident the team could not appeal, this was in fact incorrect. There are two ways in which Ferrari can appeal this "in-race decision by the stewards", the first is covered under Article 15 of the FIA International sporting code and the 2nd is under the FIA Judicial and disciplinary rules Article 9.1.1
It helps to belong to a whatsapp group full of people who know the various FIA rules and codes
More information has come to light about this incident. The stewards categorised the offence under Article 38.1 of the Sporting Regulations (which basically means the race director reported an on track incident which he believed was a breach of the Sporting Regulations). The breach according to the Stewards reports was this; car 5 left the track, re-joined unsafely and forced another car off the track.
Ferrari have submitted their intention to appeal against the decision to the FIA and now have 96 hours to gather evidence and decide if they wish to pursue the appeal. During the TV coverage the reporters said a number of times that as it was an in-race incident the team could not appeal, this was in fact incorrect. There are two ways in which Ferrari can appeal this "in-race decision by the stewards", the first is covered under Article 15 of the FIA International sporting code and the 2nd is under the FIA Judicial and disciplinary rules Article 9.1.1
It helps to belong to a whatsapp group full of people who know the various FIA rules and codes
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
I think the problem is the stewards have to look at and apply the rules as written, and in anyone’s book the way VET came back onto track wasn’t safe, as he crossed the path of Lewis and caused him to take avoiding action. The pertinent point, which I’m not even sure the Stewards are supposed to / allowed to look at ,is whether VET actually had sufficient control to be able to avoid it.
It may be that they based their decision on information that Vettel didn’t brake at all while on the grass or as he rejoined, so as to attempt to avoid crossing onto the racing line. I can well imagine he did what any racing driver would do, which is to preserve his momentum as best he could. Would braking on the grass actually cause him to slow, or would it simply have spun him out?
I can’t remember the last time a stewards decision was overturned on appeal. Most of these appeals seem to get dropped soon after they are lodged. Perhaps the FIA has ways of applying pressure behind the scenes to avoid appeal hearings going against them.
They (the FIA) can’t really win either way in this case, as if their decision is reversed by themselves, or overturned at appeal it will lead to renewed accusations about Ferrari Intl Assistance.
It may be that they based their decision on information that Vettel didn’t brake at all while on the grass or as he rejoined, so as to attempt to avoid crossing onto the racing line. I can well imagine he did what any racing driver would do, which is to preserve his momentum as best he could. Would braking on the grass actually cause him to slow, or would it simply have spun him out?
I can’t remember the last time a stewards decision was overturned on appeal. Most of these appeals seem to get dropped soon after they are lodged. Perhaps the FIA has ways of applying pressure behind the scenes to avoid appeal hearings going against them.
They (the FIA) can’t really win either way in this case, as if their decision is reversed by themselves, or overturned at appeal it will lead to renewed accusations about Ferrari Intl Assistance.
1%er
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you and there are a number of issues here. First it was Vettel who under pressure went off the track, another unforced mistake by him. Then there is the rule, how it was interpreted by the stewards and what penalty was available.
Lets deal with the rule, the rule states in basic terms that any driver returning to the track having left it, must do so in a safe manor and leave a cars width between himself and the edge of the track. Well Vettel didn't re-enter the track in a safe manor (the fact that he had little or no control over his car isn't the point), had Lewis not jumped on the brakes and left the track (in the very small area between the white line defining the track limit and the wall) there would have been an almighty accident, so Lewis was compromised by Vettel re-entering the track unsafely. It was Vettel who made the error in leaving the track.
The smallest penalty available to the stewards having found that Vettel had breached the rule was a 5 second penalty, I don't think there is any doubt that Vettel re-entered the track unsafely (that is clear to see from the footage, he was not in control of his car and in fact said so on the team radio (see full radio below), so he is guilty and the stewards awarded him the smallest penalty available to them.
Now people can argue about the rule but do drivers want other drivers to be able to leave the track and come back on in a way that just cuts them dead?
Here's what was said over the Ferrari radio channel:
Engineer: “We’ve got a five-second time penalty for unsafe re-entry, head down, head down. Hamilton three seconds behind…”
Vettel: “I had nowhere to go. Seriously, I had nowhere to go. I did see him.”
Engineer: “Copy.”
Vettel: “I had to go through the grass, and you come back, he has amazing grip, where the hell am I supposed to go? I have grass on my wheels. It’s his fault if he decides to go that way. If he goes to the inside he’d have gone past me.”
Engineer: “OK, stay focused, copy that, stay focused. Ten laps to go.”
Vettel: “I am focused. But they are stealing the race from us.”
Engineer: “Copy that.”
After the race, there was more exchange over the radio...
Vettel: “You need to be an absolute blind man to think you can go through the grass and then control the car. I was lucky I didn't hit the wall. Where the hell am I supposed to go? This is a wrong world I tell you. This is not fair.”
Team boss Mattia Binotto tried to calm Vettel down but the German was having none of it…
Vettel: “I am not staying calm. This is not fair. It is not fair. I'm angry... and I have the right to be angry. I don't care what people say.”
[I'd post more but don't have the time, maybe I'll revisit it later if there are questions]
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
Thanks 1%er. He’s definitely a driver who generates controversy from time to time! I still believe him catching Lewis’s rear tyre in Mexico 2016 was deliberate. He had every motivation to try and take out Hamilton to keep his feint title hopes alive and could control the car’s trajectory on the throttle, even if there was a twitch of the steering wheel.
But I’m going off track. Despite backing Vettel for WDC this year because I saw value In the odds, I don’t like the guy. I met him once - “encountered him” would be a better term as it’s not as if we were introduced. He seemed reasonably nasty in real life, so the public image is all for show I reckon.
But I’m going off track. Despite backing Vettel for WDC this year because I saw value In the odds, I don’t like the guy. I met him once - “encountered him” would be a better term as it’s not as if we were introduced. He seemed reasonably nasty in real life, so the public image is all for show I reckon.
1%er
Well-Known Member
History repeating itself
Oh how I remember the old days when Ferrari were winning all the championship, Then loads of people and some teams said "they have an unfair advantage, they must be getting help from the FIA". Then along came a young upstart called Red Bull and they started winning everything. What happened then? Loads of people and some teams said "they have an unfair advantage, they must be getting help from the FIA".
Now look whats happening, along comes Mercedes and guess what
Red Bulls Helmut Marko is telling anyone who'll listen that Mercedes are gaining an unfair advantage In an interview Auto Bild Marko reckons the Silver Arrows had an advantage when building their 2019 car and were afforded some early tip-offs. “Let’s put it this way,” Marko told Auto Bild “It’s noticeable that the rule changes and decisions lately have always been good for Mercedes. For example, Pirelli changed the tyres for 2019 so they do not overheat, but last year only Mercedes had a problem with them. Suddenly in 2019 only Mercedes always gets the temperatures in the correct working window. Everyone else not. The concepts of all the cars was for less downforce. Only Mercedes built a car with a lot of downforce and traction, and in hindsight that was exactly the way to get the most from these new tyres. I cannot prove that Mercedes got data earlier than us, but I cannot rule it out. We at Red Bull will look very closely at the future development of Formula 1 and there will also be discussions with Pirelli”.
His job at Red Bull nowadays appears to be propagandist in chief as he sure as hell isn't bringing any new young drivers through Red Bulls academy, which until recently seems to be him main job.
Max Verstappen to Mercedes rumors start again
Having stopped for a few weeks these rumors appear to have started again and guess who is in the mix, yep Helmut Marko,.Marko has again said that Toto and Jos, max's father are in close contact and he also confirmed that Max has a performance clause in his contract. A three-year contract extension that he signed in October of 2017 to continue driving for the Milton Keynes-based team through the 2020 season, that would allow him to leave the team after the 2019 season if they do not produce a car that is capable of winning the championship. Here is what Marko had to say about the matter, “Of course I am worried Verstappen could leave. At the moment there is only one car that is winning and it is Mercedes. We have taken a step backwards even though our performance is better”.
Jos who has apparently recently "liked" a number of social media posts highlighting a possible move for his son and who almost never posts on social media, has stoked the rumors. But Max recently posted this “I am the driver, not my father. I’m enjoying myself but of course we all know that we need to do better. But I believe in the project that we are in with Honda, we’re working hard now to try to step up the performance”.
O what a tangled web we weave....................
Ferrari didn't tell Charles Leclerc about Vettels penalty
Ferrari has admitted to making yet another strategy error in 2019. Already criticised by the Italian press for a range of strategy mistakes this year, boss Mattia Binotto has confirmed that another oversight took place last Sunday in Canada. When Sebastian Vettel was given his now highly controversial five second penalty, Charles Leclerc was not told to back off to protect the team leader’s second place finish. In fact, Leclerc finished just six seconds behind Vettel on the track, a single second away from snatching second place from the furious German. After the race Leclerc said “I did not know what was going on or that Seb had a penalty, I was just attacking in case something happened in front of me. I did my own race”.
Binotto admits that was an oversight “It was an error on our part. We were very busy on the wall and we missed it".
Oh how I remember the old days when Ferrari were winning all the championship, Then loads of people and some teams said "they have an unfair advantage, they must be getting help from the FIA". Then along came a young upstart called Red Bull and they started winning everything. What happened then? Loads of people and some teams said "they have an unfair advantage, they must be getting help from the FIA".
Now look whats happening, along comes Mercedes and guess what
Red Bulls Helmut Marko is telling anyone who'll listen that Mercedes are gaining an unfair advantage In an interview Auto Bild Marko reckons the Silver Arrows had an advantage when building their 2019 car and were afforded some early tip-offs. “Let’s put it this way,” Marko told Auto Bild “It’s noticeable that the rule changes and decisions lately have always been good for Mercedes. For example, Pirelli changed the tyres for 2019 so they do not overheat, but last year only Mercedes had a problem with them. Suddenly in 2019 only Mercedes always gets the temperatures in the correct working window. Everyone else not. The concepts of all the cars was for less downforce. Only Mercedes built a car with a lot of downforce and traction, and in hindsight that was exactly the way to get the most from these new tyres. I cannot prove that Mercedes got data earlier than us, but I cannot rule it out. We at Red Bull will look very closely at the future development of Formula 1 and there will also be discussions with Pirelli”.His job at Red Bull nowadays appears to be propagandist in chief as he sure as hell isn't bringing any new young drivers through Red Bulls academy, which until recently seems to be him main job.
Max Verstappen to Mercedes rumors start again
Having stopped for a few weeks these rumors appear to have started again and guess who is in the mix, yep Helmut Marko,.Marko has again said that Toto and Jos, max's father are in close contact and he also confirmed that Max has a performance clause in his contract. A three-year contract extension that he signed in October of 2017 to continue driving for the Milton Keynes-based team through the 2020 season, that would allow him to leave the team after the 2019 season if they do not produce a car that is capable of winning the championship. Here is what Marko had to say about the matter, “Of course I am worried Verstappen could leave. At the moment there is only one car that is winning and it is Mercedes. We have taken a step backwards even though our performance is better”.
Jos who has apparently recently "liked" a number of social media posts highlighting a possible move for his son and who almost never posts on social media, has stoked the rumors. But Max recently posted this “I am the driver, not my father. I’m enjoying myself but of course we all know that we need to do better. But I believe in the project that we are in with Honda, we’re working hard now to try to step up the performance”.
O what a tangled web we weave....................
Ferrari didn't tell Charles Leclerc about Vettels penalty
Ferrari has admitted to making yet another strategy error in 2019. Already criticised by the Italian press for a range of strategy mistakes this year, boss Mattia Binotto has confirmed that another oversight took place last Sunday in Canada. When Sebastian Vettel was given his now highly controversial five second penalty, Charles Leclerc was not told to back off to protect the team leader’s second place finish. In fact, Leclerc finished just six seconds behind Vettel on the track, a single second away from snatching second place from the furious German. After the race Leclerc said “I did not know what was going on or that Seb had a penalty, I was just attacking in case something happened in front of me. I did my own race”.
Binotto admits that was an oversight “It was an error on our part. We were very busy on the wall and we missed it".
1%er
Well-Known Member
Sorry about the lack of posts but family dog died and I had other priorities
Some interesting news about Spa-Francorchamps
As mentioned above the race at Spa is under threat because of Zandvoort coming back on the calendar. The event at Spa-Francorchamps has enjoyed a significant bounce in attendance since Max Verstappen joined the grid in 2015 with a mass of Dutch and local fans making their way to the Ardennes. However, now organisers at Spa are fearing the new race at Zandvoort could dramatically reduce the crowd size regardless of their respective places on the schedule. Last year, the Belgian GP signed a three-year contract extension to keep F1 at Spa until 2021.
There was a provision included though, which stated that if Holland again hosted a race in that period, Belgium would be able to apply for a reduction in the hosting fee. And now, race promoters are seeking guidance on their next step as they try to evaluate what the impact of Holland's return will be. That next step is crucial because, despite the recent boom, the race itself at Spa is a loss-making event and relies on subsidies from the local government to take place. However, the economic impact of F1 on the local region has meant the Grand Prix profitable to Wallonia.
But if that is no longer the case next year then it will once again raise questions over the future of the Belgian Grand Prix at one of motorsport's most famous venues.
Vettelgate (a nod to Limejuice for the name)
Ferrari had said they were not going to continue with their appeal against the stewards decision in Canada, but news is that may not be the case. it is being reported that Ferrari have triggered a meeting with FIA chiefs as new evidence has come to light which could strip Lewis Hamilton of his Canadian Grand Prix victory. Sebastian Vettel defended his pole position for the duration of the race a fortnight ago but was denied a first win of the season. On lap 48, the German cut the corner at Turn 3 and almost forced Hamilton, who was performing an overtake, into the wall. The stewards then slapped Vettel with a five-second penalty which meant, even though he crossed the chequered flag first, he had to settle for second place, falling a further seven points behind his Mercedes rival in the Drivers' Championship. Ferrari admitted after the race that they were considering appealing the "dangerous driving" decision. But a couple of days later said they would not pursue the appeal.
However, they claim new evidence has apparently come to light which allows for a late appeal through another avenue. Ferrari have refused to detail what new evidence they have found to abstain Vettel for any blame over the incident. “Due to the sensitivity of the matter we are not giving any further details," a statement from the Italian team read. The Canadian Grand Prix was the first time this season Ferrari showed that they have the pace to stop Mercedes dominating all year. Vettel and team-mate Charles Leclerc both secured podium spots in Montreal. Competitors can trigger Article 14, titled Right of Review, if “a significant and relevant new element is discovered which was unavailable to the parties seeking the review at the time”. The rules state stewards “must meet (in person or by other means) on a date agreed among themselves, summoning the party or parties concerned to hear any relevant explanations and to judge in the light of the facts and elements brought before them”.
Hamilton extended his lead to 62 points over Vettel in the standings. In the unlikely event the stewards overturn their decision, the standings could see a 14-point flip in favour of Vettel. That would then increase the pressure as Ferrari continue chasing the deficit.
Edit to add
Ferrari have officially asked for a review it appears and this doesn't come without risk. It will be the same stewards as and when they can reconvene and listen to the relevant arguments and make a judgement based on the facts and elements brought before them. If the stewards do not believe that there is a "new" element involved, they have the right to increase the penalty if they believe the review is a waste of time.
I can't really think of anything Ferrari can bring that will be "new", the stewards will have had all the data from Vettels car plus all the camera angles including in-car footage. My guess is that Ferrari understand that Bottas was so far behind that any extra penalty imposed on them wouldn't really effect much for the team, if they add 5 seconds for wasting their time it would just swap Leclerc and Vettel.
I think the days of Ferrari putting political pressure on the FIA are gone and it would be a disaster for the FIA to play such games nowadays (Bernie is well and truly gone and Liberty Media wouldn't entertain any such shenanigans. I think Ferrari are playing to their fans and the Italian media trying to win sympathy. They should spend this time on their car trying to make it faster.
Some interesting news about Spa-Francorchamps
As mentioned above the race at Spa is under threat because of Zandvoort coming back on the calendar. The event at Spa-Francorchamps has enjoyed a significant bounce in attendance since Max Verstappen joined the grid in 2015 with a mass of Dutch and local fans making their way to the Ardennes. However, now organisers at Spa are fearing the new race at Zandvoort could dramatically reduce the crowd size regardless of their respective places on the schedule. Last year, the Belgian GP signed a three-year contract extension to keep F1 at Spa until 2021.
There was a provision included though, which stated that if Holland again hosted a race in that period, Belgium would be able to apply for a reduction in the hosting fee. And now, race promoters are seeking guidance on their next step as they try to evaluate what the impact of Holland's return will be. That next step is crucial because, despite the recent boom, the race itself at Spa is a loss-making event and relies on subsidies from the local government to take place. However, the economic impact of F1 on the local region has meant the Grand Prix profitable to Wallonia.
But if that is no longer the case next year then it will once again raise questions over the future of the Belgian Grand Prix at one of motorsport's most famous venues.
Vettelgate (a nod to Limejuice for the name)
Ferrari had said they were not going to continue with their appeal against the stewards decision in Canada, but news is that may not be the case. it is being reported that Ferrari have triggered a meeting with FIA chiefs as new evidence has come to light which could strip Lewis Hamilton of his Canadian Grand Prix victory. Sebastian Vettel defended his pole position for the duration of the race a fortnight ago but was denied a first win of the season. On lap 48, the German cut the corner at Turn 3 and almost forced Hamilton, who was performing an overtake, into the wall. The stewards then slapped Vettel with a five-second penalty which meant, even though he crossed the chequered flag first, he had to settle for second place, falling a further seven points behind his Mercedes rival in the Drivers' Championship. Ferrari admitted after the race that they were considering appealing the "dangerous driving" decision. But a couple of days later said they would not pursue the appeal.
However, they claim new evidence has apparently come to light which allows for a late appeal through another avenue. Ferrari have refused to detail what new evidence they have found to abstain Vettel for any blame over the incident. “Due to the sensitivity of the matter we are not giving any further details," a statement from the Italian team read. The Canadian Grand Prix was the first time this season Ferrari showed that they have the pace to stop Mercedes dominating all year. Vettel and team-mate Charles Leclerc both secured podium spots in Montreal. Competitors can trigger Article 14, titled Right of Review, if “a significant and relevant new element is discovered which was unavailable to the parties seeking the review at the time”. The rules state stewards “must meet (in person or by other means) on a date agreed among themselves, summoning the party or parties concerned to hear any relevant explanations and to judge in the light of the facts and elements brought before them”.
Hamilton extended his lead to 62 points over Vettel in the standings. In the unlikely event the stewards overturn their decision, the standings could see a 14-point flip in favour of Vettel. That would then increase the pressure as Ferrari continue chasing the deficit.
Edit to add
Ferrari have officially asked for a review it appears and this doesn't come without risk. It will be the same stewards as and when they can reconvene and listen to the relevant arguments and make a judgement based on the facts and elements brought before them. If the stewards do not believe that there is a "new" element involved, they have the right to increase the penalty if they believe the review is a waste of time.
I can't really think of anything Ferrari can bring that will be "new", the stewards will have had all the data from Vettels car plus all the camera angles including in-car footage. My guess is that Ferrari understand that Bottas was so far behind that any extra penalty imposed on them wouldn't really effect much for the team, if they add 5 seconds for wasting their time it would just swap Leclerc and Vettel.
I think the days of Ferrari putting political pressure on the FIA are gone and it would be a disaster for the FIA to play such games nowadays (Bernie is well and truly gone and Liberty Media wouldn't entertain any such shenanigans. I think Ferrari are playing to their fans and the Italian media trying to win sympathy. They should spend this time on their car trying to make it faster.
Last edited:
1%er
Well-Known Member
Changes at Paul Ricard
The pit lane entrance has been relocated to Turn 14 at Paul Ricard following complaints over safety during last year's French Grand Prix. The entrance had previously been located after the final corner (Turn 15) with a sharp right then left hand turn, which forced the FIA to lower the speed limit to 60km/h, instead of 80km/h. The organisers confirmed earlier this year that the entry would be revised for this year's race, with it now being positioned on the outside of the penultimate corner (Turn 14) with the speed limit line located before the first right-hand turn. The pit exit has also been widened and extended, now exiting further down the start/finish straight. The track has also undergone a partial resurfacing at Turn 1, Turn 3 to 7, Turns 8, 9, 11, 12 and Turn 14 to 15.
Vettelgate
Why did Ferrari announce an appeal against Vettel's penalty only to drop that appeal 4 days later, then decide to go for a "right to review", under a very different area of the sporting regulations? Remember in 2017 there was a big outcry because Ferrari poached Laurent Mekies from the FIA to work for them as their sporting director. Laurent Mekies was the FIA's safety director and also a deputy race director, so has an intricate knowledge of how the governing body’s review process works. Is he about to earn his money I wonder?
Maybe there is what could be a very big change in how the decision is "looked at" under the different rules? I don't know for sure and I am only speculating here. but under the appeals process I believe that the original stewards would reconvene in person or via video link at the earliest opportunity and look again at the incident, but under a right to review, maybe the stewards at this weekends French GP would be tasked to review the incident. I think this could be a way Ferrari have found to remove the original stewards from looking again and hope a fresh set of eyes may come to a different view. I have asked this question on the whatsapp group I'm on and hope someone there will now the answer.
I'm sure that having new people look would help as it is always hard to get people who made a decision to overturn that decision, rather than new people coming to a different decision
The pit lane entrance has been relocated to Turn 14 at Paul Ricard following complaints over safety during last year's French Grand Prix. The entrance had previously been located after the final corner (Turn 15) with a sharp right then left hand turn, which forced the FIA to lower the speed limit to 60km/h, instead of 80km/h. The organisers confirmed earlier this year that the entry would be revised for this year's race, with it now being positioned on the outside of the penultimate corner (Turn 14) with the speed limit line located before the first right-hand turn. The pit exit has also been widened and extended, now exiting further down the start/finish straight. The track has also undergone a partial resurfacing at Turn 1, Turn 3 to 7, Turns 8, 9, 11, 12 and Turn 14 to 15.
Vettelgate
Why did Ferrari announce an appeal against Vettel's penalty only to drop that appeal 4 days later, then decide to go for a "right to review", under a very different area of the sporting regulations? Remember in 2017 there was a big outcry because Ferrari poached Laurent Mekies from the FIA to work for them as their sporting director. Laurent Mekies was the FIA's safety director and also a deputy race director, so has an intricate knowledge of how the governing body’s review process works. Is he about to earn his money I wonder?
Maybe there is what could be a very big change in how the decision is "looked at" under the different rules? I don't know for sure and I am only speculating here. but under the appeals process I believe that the original stewards would reconvene in person or via video link at the earliest opportunity and look again at the incident, but under a right to review, maybe the stewards at this weekends French GP would be tasked to review the incident. I think this could be a way Ferrari have found to remove the original stewards from looking again and hope a fresh set of eyes may come to a different view. I have asked this question on the whatsapp group I'm on and hope someone there will now the answer.
I'm sure that having new people look would help as it is always hard to get people who made a decision to overturn that decision, rather than new people coming to a different decision
1%er
Well-Known Member
It seems the "review" will take place today (Friday afternoon French time), so unless they have the Canadian stewards at the track on a video call, it will be the French stewards who will conduct the review. It is claimed there is unseen footage of the incident, which I find hard to believe (unless it comes from a fan or maybe the people who film the Netflix series Drive to survive). The original stewards would have seen all the FIA/Liberty Media footage, plus all the telemetry, so I'm not sure what they would/could have missed, but Ferrari seem confident the new footage will clear Vettel.
Here is the footage shown so far of the incident
Apparently this is the new footage analyzed by SKy F1's Anthony Davidson and Johnny Herbert. I can't watch this footage as it is blocked here and I can't be arsed to use a proxy server as I'm sure it will be on over the weekend at some point.
I await the results of this "review" with interest
FP1 result for anyone interested
Lewis was fastest with Bottas just 0.069 slower, Charles Leclerc was third for Ferrari, more than three-tenths off Hamilton's pace ahead of Max Verstappen of Red Bull, Sebastian Vettel in the second Ferrari and Pierre Galsy in the second Red Bull. Lando Norris was seventh for McLaren ahead of team-mate Carlos Sainz, followed by Daniel Ricciardo in a Renault powered by a new upgraded engine and Alex Albon of Toro Rosso.
1%er
Well-Known Member
FP2
Bottas fastest followed by Lewis, then came Leclerc and Vettel, Norris was 5th and Verstappen 6th, then came Sainz, Gasly, Raikkonen and Magnussen making the top ten.
The Canadian stewards are at the track and the hearing is over, but still 2 hours after the hearing the FIA still haven't given a ruling, which I think is bad news for Ferrari. I believe that Mercedes also had some input, claiming that after the incident and the penalty Lewis clearly gave up trying to pass Vettel and they believe the stewards should take that into consideration as it also effected the result in their view.
Other news I heard during FP2 was; Lewis left the track and returned unsafely and the stewards will be looking at it after the session, as it wasn't in the race, so if he is found guilty it is likely to be a reprimanded only. There were 50 overtakes here last year with 35 of those using DRS.
The commentators were also saying that they are again re-servicing Silverstone, right now in fact, so the first race weekend it will be raced on will be the British Grand Prix weekend, not sure that is going to make racing better
Bottas fastest followed by Lewis, then came Leclerc and Vettel, Norris was 5th and Verstappen 6th, then came Sainz, Gasly, Raikkonen and Magnussen making the top ten.
The Canadian stewards are at the track and the hearing is over, but still 2 hours after the hearing the FIA still haven't given a ruling, which I think is bad news for Ferrari. I believe that Mercedes also had some input, claiming that after the incident and the penalty Lewis clearly gave up trying to pass Vettel and they believe the stewards should take that into consideration as it also effected the result in their view.
Other news I heard during FP2 was; Lewis left the track and returned unsafely
and the stewards will be looking at it after the session, as it wasn't in the race, so if he is found guilty it is likely to be a reprimanded only. There were 50 overtakes here last year with 35 of those using DRS.The commentators were also saying that they are again re-servicing Silverstone, right now in fact, so the first race weekend it will be raced on will be the British Grand Prix weekend, not sure that is going to make racing better
1%er
Well-Known Member
So there was no "overwhelming new evidence" it seems, the stewards said "there are no significant and relevant new elements which were unavailable to the parties at the time of the competition concerned".
The right decision in my view, it was clear that it was only the actions taken by Lewis that avoided a massive accident.
1%er
Well-Known Member
Good morning all, I think we could have an interesting qualifying today with McLaren up in the mix, we may have a different mid-field after today
Honda play the rules game
Honda have pulled a stroke but it is well with-in the rules. What they have done could play well for them later in the season. Kvyat’s car was fitted with a new Spec 3 Honda engine for this weekend’s French GP, along with a new MGU-K, Energy Store as well as Control Electronics. He also took on a new turbocharger but that part did not come with a penalty as he was still within the permitted allocation for the year.
However, Honda later broke the seal on both the MGU-H and turbocharger. The post FP2 technical report from Formula One Technical Delegate Jo Bauer read: “A seal was found broken on the new introduced turbocharger and new introduced motor generator unit-heat of car number 26, driver Daniil Kvyat”. By breaking the seal Honda put Kyvat onto his fourth MGU-H and turbocharger despite not actually putting in another new part. Honda’s decision will have absolutely no impact on Kvyat’s French GP weekend as the earlier changes meant he was already facing a 40-place grid penalty and a back-of-the-grid start.
Why would they do that, I hear you ask, well under F1 regulations, the first time additional elements beyond the season’s limit are taken, it is a 10-place penalty but after that it is just five. As he will start from the back anyway this weekend he may as well take the extra 10 places and not have that problem later in the season
Honda play the rules game
Honda have pulled a stroke but it is well with-in the rules. What they have done could play well for them later in the season. Kvyat’s car was fitted with a new Spec 3 Honda engine for this weekend’s French GP, along with a new MGU-K, Energy Store as well as Control Electronics. He also took on a new turbocharger but that part did not come with a penalty as he was still within the permitted allocation for the year.
However, Honda later broke the seal on both the MGU-H and turbocharger. The post FP2 technical report from Formula One Technical Delegate Jo Bauer read: “A seal was found broken on the new introduced turbocharger and new introduced motor generator unit-heat of car number 26, driver Daniil Kvyat”. By breaking the seal Honda put Kyvat onto his fourth MGU-H and turbocharger despite not actually putting in another new part. Honda’s decision will have absolutely no impact on Kvyat’s French GP weekend as the earlier changes meant he was already facing a 40-place grid penalty and a back-of-the-grid start.
Why would they do that, I hear you ask, well under F1 regulations, the first time additional elements beyond the season’s limit are taken, it is a 10-place penalty but after that it is just five. As he will start from the back anyway this weekend he may as well take the extra 10 places and not have that problem later in the season
1%er
Well-Known Member
I had a feeling that McLaren would do well today (see post 769 above
)
1%er
Well-Known Member
The Renault board will be asking questions about this qualifying, Red Bull (running a Renault power-unit) beat Renault for years and now McLaren with a Renault power-unit in the back has beaten the manufacture team, I know one qualifying doesn't a season make but I think this is really something to keep an eye on, as if McLaren can do this a few more times I can see changes coming at the top of the Renault F1 team.
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
So good to see McLaren shining once again, and I hope they can build on that and become podium challengers later in the season.
I really don’t know what to make of Vettel this year. Every time I write off his troubles as an aberration he manages to find some other way to underperform the next race. It reminds me of his last season at Red Bull, when it seemed like he just lost his mojo.
I’ll miss the race tomorrow. Something which rarely happens, I think I’ve only missed about five of them in the past 15 years. I do hope I can find someplace to watch it online once I’m home in a week’s time.
I really don’t know what to make of Vettel this year. Every time I write off his troubles as an aberration he manages to find some other way to underperform the next race. It reminds me of his last season at Red Bull, when it seemed like he just lost his mojo.
I’ll miss the race tomorrow. Something which rarely happens, I think I’ve only missed about five of them in the past 15 years. I do hope I can find someplace to watch it online once I’m home in a week’s time.
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
It’s such a long run to the first corner that I think the available engine modes will play a role in a few position swaps. Ferrari are said to have an advantage with starting engine modes, so we will see if LeClerc can pop one up the inside of the first corner. Not sure how McLaren’s Renaults are on this front.
