FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[acosmichippo]

I'm not sure if this has been discussed yet... I didn't see it in the European GP thread. If i missed it, feel free to move or delete.

Anyway, i was just watching FP2 in iPlayer now, and there's an interesting conversation between the main commentator (sorry, don't know his name) and the Sauber CEO Monisha Kaltenborn around the 0:16:10 mark. It was about how during the drivers' briefings before the season with Charlie Whiting "at the drivers' insistence the stewards were asked to investigate every single incident on the track".

So... maybe we shouldn't be too hard on the stewards? Obviously this doesn't explain inconsistency, but it does explain the larger number of investigations we've seen.

[deMuRe]

Yep, the drivers just want consistency I guess. I'm guessing the stewards would cherry pick which incidents to investigate, based on a number of factors. This could potentially lead to manipulation of the results, if all incidents are investigated doesn't matter who or how big/small, that creates consistency and a level playing field.

It's bad viewing however all they need is a 10 minute feature on each of the networks to educate the public why and everyone will go "Awwwwwe" and love it.

[myownalias]

Compared to previous seasons I believe the stewards have been fairly consistent; the race in Canada was special circumstances; often stewards are more lenient in adverse conditions, had the JB incidents been in the dry; I'd expect a drive-through penalty, same goes for the LH/MW first corner incident. If LH was one of the drivers that wanted every incident investigated; I bet he is ruing that decision; in reality most incidents would have been put down to racing incidents in the past, seems the drivers wanting stricter racing has been the catalyst for all these penalties.

[acosmichippo]

Oh I'm sure it was hardly a consensus.

[myownalias]

Oh I'm sure it was hardly a consensus.

The only drivers that wouldn't agree would be drivers that use dirty tactics to win titles... *cough*Schumacher*cough*

[bud]

Oh I'm sure it was hardly a consensus.

Probably the likes of Trulli, Barrichello, Webber and Alonso aka the whinging brigade were most vocal.

[racechick]

Oh I'm sure it was hardly a consensus.

Probably the likes of Trulli, Barrichello, Webber and Alonso aka the whinging brigade were most vocal.

I cant see Kobi or lewis going for it. Consistency yes. What we have now, no.

[Ri21]

I was thinking after the Canadian GP that this season does seem to have had more drive through penalities etc then most....and i started thinking to myself why has there been sooooo many of them throughout this season...but i guess if most of the drivers wanted strict stewarding then it makes sense why there has been soooo many....sometimes i have agreed and other times i havent....(Mclaren fan here so yeah i of course wouldnt of agreed with a few )

BUT its interesting when you listen to the presenters and you hear how they would view the incidents more often that not they would put it down to just a racing insident....but i guess that how much this year has changed

Anywhoooo looking forward to tomorrows race (even though i wont get to watch it live) bbc3 repeat best be on tomorrow night haha

[vaptin]

Investigation doesn't mean a harsh outcome.

[racechick]

Investigation doesn't mean a harsh outcome.

Tends to.

[vaptin]

Investigation doesn't mean a harsh outcome.

Tends to.

Yeah, but it shouldn't, the investigation part is a red herring which is what the OP said.

This is f1, everything should be looked at in incredible detail, what happens next ought to just be better informed.

I agree though, in the past the stewards looking at something meant that they were already thinking about a penalty, the act of looking indicated suspicion. But if they've been asked to look at every ontrack incident, than that shouldn't matter so much, if the stewards are looking at it or not, its just what they do.

[FRAFPDD]

Investigation doesn't mean a harsh outcome.

Tends to.

Yes to both quotes,

Id much rather they penalised everyone for everything, then some for some things, i hate unfairness its like the one thing i cannot stand.

That said theyve got the first bit sorted, but they seem to think everything worthy of looking into is worthy of a penalty. Id rather they let racing be racing, and when it hits the fan they make the penalty calls. If theres contact and the offending car comes of worse, no penalty is needed, if it comes off better, penalise them suitably.

If theres contact and two cars retire, then look into the incident, and see not whos fault it is, but by how far on the scale was that incident worthy of a penalty.

[racechick]

Fraff I like the bit where you said let them race, this is after all top notch motor racing. And like you, I HATE unfairness..BIG TIME! But investigate everything? then guys will be afraid to race. I dont really know the answer.

[FRAFPDD]

Fraff I like the bit where you said let them race, this is after all top notch motor racing. And like you, I HATE unfairness..BIG TIME! But investigate everything? then guys will be afraid to race. I dont really know the answer.

Theyll become afraid to race if they keep doing what theyve done to Hamilton recently, and just penalise him on every investigation.

They need to investigate everything, if only for the sake of consistency, and penalise what needs penalising.

Some, like Hamilton spinning Webber in Canada is pure interpretation, on one hand its a racing incident, two into one in severe weather.

On the other Hamilton should anticipate the weather and the corner. Penalty, not least in this argument because he came off better then Webber.

[racechick]

Fraff I like the bit where you said let them race, this is after all top notch motor racing. And like you, I HATE unfairness..BIG TIME! But investigate everything? then guys will be afraid to race. I dont really know the answer.

Theyll become afraid to race if they keep doing what theyve done to Hamilton recently, and just penalise him on every investigation.

They need to investigate everything, if only for the sake of consistency, and penalise what needs penalising.

Some, like Hamilton spinning Webber in Canada is pure interpretation, on one hand its a racing incident, two into one in severe weather.

On the other Hamilton should anticipate the weather and the corner. Penalty, not least in this argument because he came off better then Webber.

I think he'd have been penalised for the Webber clash if he hadnt been taken out by Button.
Neither incident should have been investigated. These guys need to guage whether the move is on and the defending guy is not absolved of responsibility. If an outside person is always interfering in these manoevers the guys cannot excercise pure racing judgement. Some guys will always play to the adjudicator, this is not good, its not good racing and it's false. Yes if a guy really steps over the line have a look at it,but some of these inquires are an absolute joke.