Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

F1 2021

On a pair of brand new soft boots vs 35 lap worn hard tyres. You can argue the legalities or otherwise until the end of time, but you can't argue it was made into a fair fight that Verstappen somehow pluckily triumphed in.
I believe the best man won. Hoping for more of the same next year.
 
I believe the best man won. Hoping for more of the same next year.
I'm an unashamed Hamilton fan, and I wholeheartedly applaud Verstappen on his title. Hamilton has been pushing hard in an excellent car and when those 2 things come together he wins title after title, so for the season to play out as it has is testament to both Max and Red Bull - there's no doubt there's a hell of a driver in a hell of a car. Bravo.

But, in no way shape or form did the climax of that race demonstrate who the best driver/car combo is. A thrilling season that deserved a fitting finale was manipulated to within an inch of its life. Again, debate the legalities all you like and debate the motives (incompetence or malice?)* but don't try and argue that Max triumphed in a fair fight.

* FWIW the result should without question stand, and Merc shouldn't be pursuing through the courts. The F1 powers that be should currently be in a state of deep self reflection, of their own volition, and they need to ask themselves whether this was a triumph because of ratings and column inches, or a clusterfuck of neutered sporting merit.
 
Zapp Brannigan I agree with this "But, in no way shape or form did the climax of that race demonstrate who the best driver/car combo is. A thrilling season that deserved a fitting finale was manipulated to within an inch of its life. Again, debate the legalities all you like and debate the motives."

I'd have like to have seen a full on proper race to the line. I think Max would not have won, he didn't have the pace, and would have depended on pit stops to keep him challenging. (I think Mercedes didn't call it right.) But that isn't what we got, and, as much as this is a controversial win, it went to Max in the end.
 
15.3 The clerk of the course shall work in permanent consultation with the Race Director. The Race
Director shall have overriding authority in the following matters and the clerk of the course may
give orders in respect of them only with his express agreement:
a) The control of practice, sprint qualifying session and the race, adherence to the timetable
and, if he deems it necessary, the making of any proposal to the stewards to modify the
timetable in accordance with the Code or Sporting Regulations.
b) The stopping of any car in accordance with the Code or Sporting Regulations.
c) The stopping of practice, suspension of a sprint qualifying session or suspension of the
race in accordance with the Sporting Regulations if he deems it unsafe to continue and
ensuring that the correct restart procedure is carried out.
d) The starting procedure.
e) The use of the safety car.
 
Zapp Brannigan I agree with this "But, in no way shape or form did the climax of that race demonstrate who the best driver/car combo is. A thrilling season that deserved a fitting finale was manipulated to within an inch of its life. Again, debate the legalities all you like and debate the motives."

I'd have like to have seen a full on proper race to the line. I think Max would not have won, he didn't have the pace, and would have depended on pit stops to keep him challenging. (I think Mercedes didn't call it right.) But that isn't what we got, and, as much as this is a controversial win, it went to Max in the end.
Uncontroversial would have been to red flag the moment Latifi hit the wall. Standing re-start, every driver with the option to change tyres, a proper level playing field and a few short laps to determine a winner on sporting merit.

Slightly controversial (and definitely anti-climactic) would have been to stick to precedent, allow all lapped cars past, run out of laps and finish behind the safety car.

Even more controversial would have been to ignore precedent and leave lapped cars where they were, have the one lap with Verstappen needing to clear backmarkers before having a solitary chance at passing late in the lap.

The most controversial of all was to fling the rule book out of the window and hand Verstappen a title on a plate. That's what we got.
 
On a pair of brand new soft boots vs 35 lap worn hard tyres. You can argue the legalities or otherwise until the end of time, but you can't argue it was made into a fair fight that Verstappen somehow pluckily triumphed in.
I think the tyres thing is a bit of a minor point, as even when everything goes according to the rules/precedent, random factors like Latifi's accident result in mismatched contests all the time.

Instinctively, it does feel like Masi should have considered the tyre situation, as it was part of the context in which he was deciding to actively impact the course of the race rather than let it play out by the strict rules of the sport. Buuut... I'm honestly not sure if that instinct is misguided or off-base on this occasion.

But it feels like the state of drivers' tyres is a different kind of 'fairness' to the issue of changing the prescribed procedure.
 
Uncontroversial would have been to red flag the moment Latifi hit the wall. Standing re-start, every driver with the option to change tyres, a proper level playing field and a few short laps to determine a winner on sporting merit.
I've seen a number of people suggest a red flag and restart, but Latifi's accident wouldn't normally require that, would it?

So would it be without controversy? Also feels like it requires some pretty composed on-the-fly thinking to consider that solution and make the call, all while both team principles are shouting at you, the world is watching, and laps are forever running out.
 
I've seen a number of people suggest a red flag and restart, but Latifi's accident wouldn't normally require that, would it?

So would it be without controversy? Also feels like it requires some pretty composed on-the-fly thinking to consider that solution and make the call, all while both team principles are shouting at you, the world is watching, and laps are forever running out.
Convention and precedent went out of the window precisely because of the almost unique circumstances. If it was the 2nd race of the season, they would have stuck to "the norm", cars would all unlap themselves and the race would finish behind the safety car.

Everything was fudged because of a desire to see the title decided by racing, not behind a safety car. Correct, Latifi's accident wouldn't normally have merited a red flag, but if convention and precedent mean nothing at that moment then at least it would have been a clear option which didn't inevitably mean the sport's regulators and administrators deciding the result one way or another. It also wouldn't have to be a instant, spur of the moment decision - there were 4 laps behind the safety car, each taking in excess of 2 minutes, that's 8 minutes to assess that there were options better than the absolute shit show they served up.
 
Hopefully one of the benefits to come from all the discussions about what “should have been” will be for the FIA to give the timing system a software update and change the safety car rules to say lapped cars drop to the back of the pack, instead of needing to overtake and pull away.

The lapped cars dropping to the back of the field could be done while the marshalls are still clearing up the track (while the cars are in a different sector), so as soon as the track is clear, the safety car can go in and the race can restart. If this helps save us from those interminable extra laps under safety car, then at least something good comes from the Abu Dhabi Snafu!
 
I heard someone else on the radio before with another conspiracy theory, about Perez retiring when there was nothing wrong with his car - something about they never intended him to finish so didn't put much fuel in and therefore make him a bit quicker? To hold Hamilton up if that was required at some point? If so that's some seriously good planning.
 
Looking again at Checko holding up Hamilton, that has to be the drive of the season. The last lap Max drove brilliantly, but Checko was at least as good. The drive of the day?
 
I heard someone else on the radio before with another conspiracy theory, about Perez retiring when there was nothing wrong with his car - something about they never intended him to finish so didn't put much fuel in and therefore make him a bit quicker? To hold Hamilton up if that was required at some point? If so that's some seriously good planning.
Not very likely as he made it all the way to, what was it, three laps to the end? If they wanted to make him light enough to go significantly faster they would surely leave out ten laps of fuel and take the chance that any help Max needed would be in the first 75% of the race.

Having enough fuel to get 95% of race distance means so little performance gain it’s not worth doing surely, in a race where Red Bull could have won the constructors title if both Mercs dropped out.
 
Not very likely as he made it all the way to, what was it, three laps to the end? If they wanted to make him light enough to go significantly faster they would surely leave out ten laps of fuel and take the chance that any help Max needed would be in the first 75% of the race.

Having enough fuel to get 95% of race distance means so little performance gain it’s not worth doing surely, in a race where Red Bull could have won the constructors title if both Mercs dropped out.

Maybe he slowed down once Hamilton passed him and therefore conserved fuel and got as far as he could before he ran out of gas (ie, 3 laps out rather than 10)? It would have been a masterstroke if true. It did seem odd he was brought in.
 
Maybe he slowed down once Hamilton passed him and therefore conserved fuel and got as far as he could before he ran out of gas (ie, 3 laps out rather than 10)? It would have been a masterstroke if true. It did seem odd he was brought in.
No he didn’t. The lap charts show that after the time loss from his pitstop (directly after letting Verstappen through) Perez kept the same pace as the leading pair for the rest of the race (until he closed up under safety car). The time gap chart has long flat sections, ie. same pace as leader. He was definitely pushing.

Of course they all saved a little fuel under the safety car, but for the reasons I explained before this conspiracy theory that he was deliberately under fuelled makes no sense.
 
I don't really know the sport, but can someone explain to me why two drivers from the same teams are so much quicker than their teammates? Do they just put more effort into their No.1's cars?
 
I don't understand the nuances of some of these, but interesting to hear how all the different drivers and engineers reacted to everything after Latifi's crash. Sainz in particular at the end, really emphasises how ludicrous the "only five between Hamilton and Verstappen can unlap" decision was.

Vettel and Alonso's discussions are interesting too. Those are ones where I don't think I quite follow what they're saying, but the two vets (no third 'cause Kimi was out, of course :( ) do seem to have slightly different reactions to the others.

 
Overall, all this is a big part of the reason I much prefer Motogp. No radio comms, no team orders, no bosses in the ear of officials, no pit stops, etc. Just straightforward balls-out racing, with plenty of overtaking and incident to keep it exciting.
 
Lewis appears to have toned down his dress-sense for his trip to Windsor to get knighted today. Fortunately. 😆


He's an extraordinary sportsman, one of the very greatest the UK has ever produced. And though I'm not a believer myself in these type of honours, it would be churlish to begrudge him having his incredible achievement acknowledged in this way. It obviously means a lot to him.
 
He's an extraordinary sportsman, one of the very greatest the UK has ever produced. And though I'm not a believer myself in these type of honours, it would be churlish to begrudge him having his incredible achievement acknowledged in this way. It obviously means a lot to him.
Amen to that! I’m very happy he’s getting such an enduring award which recognises how special his contribution has been. His honour for “services to the fashion industry“ might be somewhat delayed i guess.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom