- 04 Oct 09, 20:38#160368
Interesting thread, if a somewhat immature title...
The way I see it is that blue flags are / should be somewhat redundant in the modern age of F1. I'm quite certain that they were introduced as there was in the past always an element of 'pay per drive' racers who had money but no talent and hence no matter what type of car they were in would be substantially slower and more of a risk to other drivers than those there on merit (see Jean Denise Delatraz - Adelaide 1994!).
Blue flags were a way to indicate to those rubbish drivers who were in a world of their own, probably trying to find radio 2 rather than checking their mirrors, that the leaders were closing in on them and to be vigilant, careful and let them through rather than wreck their race.
Nowadays those drivers in F1 have been virtually wiped out thankfully. In fact in this particular case with Senna, Hill and Irvine, time has since proved that all were either champions or runner up to the title on one or more occasions. However the point is regardless that Irvine was competing in his maiden F1 race, and Hill still in his first full season of F1 (attempting to qualify an ancient Brabham doesn't count!). Both were still potential hazards at that stage of their careers to a more experienced multiple champion who is approaching to lap them, especially in wet conditions.
I think the point in this particular instance is debatable either way, and any one side stating that theirs is the only valid opinion is just as arrogant as those that they are attempting to slag off. In general however, today I feel blue flags should be done away with in F1 and leaders should use their skill to get past drivers that may be as skilled as themselves but in a slower car, or marginally less skilled in a similar car.
Oh, as a final note, perhaps they could have one exception in getting rid of the blue flag... a special 'Badoer' Flag?
The way I see it is that blue flags are / should be somewhat redundant in the modern age of F1. I'm quite certain that they were introduced as there was in the past always an element of 'pay per drive' racers who had money but no talent and hence no matter what type of car they were in would be substantially slower and more of a risk to other drivers than those there on merit (see Jean Denise Delatraz - Adelaide 1994!).
Blue flags were a way to indicate to those rubbish drivers who were in a world of their own, probably trying to find radio 2 rather than checking their mirrors, that the leaders were closing in on them and to be vigilant, careful and let them through rather than wreck their race.
Nowadays those drivers in F1 have been virtually wiped out thankfully. In fact in this particular case with Senna, Hill and Irvine, time has since proved that all were either champions or runner up to the title on one or more occasions. However the point is regardless that Irvine was competing in his maiden F1 race, and Hill still in his first full season of F1 (attempting to qualify an ancient Brabham doesn't count!). Both were still potential hazards at that stage of their careers to a more experienced multiple champion who is approaching to lap them, especially in wet conditions.
I think the point in this particular instance is debatable either way, and any one side stating that theirs is the only valid opinion is just as arrogant as those that they are attempting to slag off. In general however, today I feel blue flags should be done away with in F1 and leaders should use their skill to get past drivers that may be as skilled as themselves but in a slower car, or marginally less skilled in a similar car.
Oh, as a final note, perhaps they could have one exception in getting rid of the blue flag... a special 'Badoer' Flag?
Favourite racing series: F1, Indycar, NASCAR, GP2, F3, Formula E, Trophee Andros, DTM, WTCC, BTCC, World Endurance... etc. etc.
