FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[andrew]

DRS bashers, I understand your issues. But look what we had in seasons prior... would you rather have a DRS pass, or no pass at all?

I'd rather have real passing. DRS is just another gimmick to paper over the cracks.

[LewEngBridewell]

DRS bashers, I understand your issues. But look what we had in seasons prior... would you rather have a DRS pass, or no pass at all?

I'd rather have real passing. DRS is just another gimmick to paper over the cracks.

So would I andrew, so would I. But at the moment, that isn't possible. I'm happy for DRS to fill in until a real and proper solution is found.

[Matt_1222]

DRS bashers, I understand your issues. But look what we had in seasons prior... would you rather have a DRS pass, or no pass at all?

i'd rather have a good on track battle where someone can fight for their position, just because no pass happened it doesn't mean that it wasn't exciting, because good defensive driving can be exciting too

also they could solve the problem properly by limiting aero.

[LewEngBridewell]

DRS bashers, I understand your issues. But look what we had in seasons prior... would you rather have a DRS pass, or no pass at all?

i'd rather have a good on track battle where someone can fight for their position, just because no pass happened it doesn't mean that it wasn't exciting, because good defensive driving can be exciting too

also they could solve the solution by limiting aero.

The ideal situation would be to have cars that can overtake without the need for gimmicks. I hope we see this soon. But there was nothing more anticlimactic than a car advancing on another car infront, only to be halted when 1 - 1.5 seconds behind.

Don't tell me you found that acceptable / exciting, because there was no end of whinging from all quarters of the F1 fan community.

[andrew]

also they could solve the solution by limiting aero.

You're preaching to the converted there. The problem with this is that F1 has evolved to where it has an over-dependance on aero grip. Moving away from areo grip and back to mechanical grip will probably been seen as a move backwards rather than forwards by the teams so limiting aero will be difficult.

[LewEngBridewell]

The F1 Forum coverage went down, and was never put to rights. Anti-climax there.

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

It looks like mark was supposed to win this gp. and the gearbox stuff was just

I am inclined to agree. It was all a little too convenient.

On lap 14, Vettel, who was leading Webber by ~2.5 seconds, was told there was a problem and he should shortshift second gear.

In the early 20s laps, all the leaders pitted for rubber. Once Vettel and Webber both were rejoined, the gap to Webber was UNCHANGED.

On lap 26, with the gap to Webber still at ~2.5 seconds, it was clear Webber could not catch him, even with a dodgy second gear. Vettel then was advised he had a SERIOUS gearbox problem and must shortshift second AND third gears.

On lap 28, Vettel advised the pit wall he was certain to lose position if he continued to short shift. On lap 30, Webber overtook Vettel.

On lap 34, Webber's gap to Vettel was 2.3 seconds.

1. A victory would not give Vettel any further records. WDC and WCC already were clinched and RBR had not a single farthing to gain by Vettel winning yet another race. The only member of the RBR entourage with anything significant to gain from a victory would have been Webber. Further, the Ferraris are known not to get along with the hard compound tyres, which means they probably could not beat the McLarens, so a win for Webber could improve his result over Alonso in WDC.

2. It is common knowledge Horner has wanted to get Webber a win since Vettel clinched WDC. It also is common knowledge that Webber has been vocal about opposing use of team orders.

3. There is no evidence Vettel experienced any gearbox problem. He certainly never complained of any problem, and clearly believed his car was healthy, else he shouldn't have been distraught over the prospect of yielding position to his teammate. The only evidence there might have been a looming problem was in the telemetry.

4. One dodgy gear wasn't enough to cause Vettel to lose the lead. He had to lose full use of a second gear before Webber was able to overtake him.

5. About lap 50, with two dodgy gears, Vettel set fastest lap. Some gearbox problem, eh wot?

6. There was nothing to lose by letting Vettel race until his gearbox detonated. But if Horner could "manufacture" a reason to give Webber the lead and have Vettel take rear guard between Webber and the pursuing horde, a win for Webber would be better assured and might also advance his final standings in WDC.

There are only two possibilities. Either Vettel managed to nurse a crippled gearbox for 55 laps (with a SERIOUS problem for 50 of them), managing not to lose position to anyone except Webber, even managing to set a fastest lap along the way, or Horner gifted Webber his only victory of the season.

If it have been Button whose gearbox went south, and if Hamilton had managed to catch and overtake Alonso, Webber would have come second in WDC. Red Bull would have won WCC and come 1-2 in WDC.

By the 10th lap, RBR were aware they had enough speed in hand to begin crippling gears in Vettel's car and still not risk any car save his teammate's overtaking him.

Would you have me believe Christian Horner, et Al, were beyond a wee bit of skullduggery if it would have netted them a year of advertising their team's drivers had come first and second in the WDC?

Rubbish.

[andrew]

ooh the conspiracy!

[f1boy]

Agree that was a bit poor by the BBC. The forum went pairshaped and never returned.
Maybe that's the BBC trying to say that F1 will be better on Sky. A sad end to very good full season coverage over the past three years.

[LewEngBridewell]

A sad end to very good full season coverage over the past three years.

What an unglamorous way to bring the curtain down on 2011.

You're correct. The BBC team of Jake Humphrey, Martin Brundle, Eddie Jordan and David Coulthard has been terrific. I know some people here don't like it that much, but I think overall, it's been generally regarded as a huge success...IMO, a golden age in the history of F1 coverage for the UK.

[f1boy]

Agree Lew, the BBC have done a great job since 2009 imo. I'm happy that DC is staying. Don't know about Martin and Eddie though.

Are they signed on to the BBC for 2012??

[LewEngBridewell]

Agree Lew, the BBC have done a great job since 2009 imo. I'm happy that DC is staying. Don't know about Martin and Eddie though.

Are they signed on to the BBC for 2012??

Yeah pleased about DC. I'm not sure about the others. I saw rumours posted on here somewhere that Brundle was going to Sky, while Eddie was undecided. And what about Jake?

[andrew]

A sad end to very good full season coverage over the past three years.

What an unglamorous way to bring the curtain down on 2011.

You're correct. The BBC team of Jake Humphrey, Martin Brundle, Eddie Jordan and David Coulthard has been terrific. I know some people here don't like it that much, but I think overall, it's been generally regarded as a huge success...IMO, a golden age in the history of F1 coverage for the UK.

Well there was the minority "sport" of ping-pong to be shown so under the BBC rules this will get preference over a real sport that draws in huge numbers of viewers.

As for the coverage, I can't agree with your verdict. The BBC coverage has been up to the BBCs usual standard - poor. Watch the MotoGP coverage which is very good (rare for the BBC that). Why can't they do the same for the F1? The MotoGP coverage has the right number of knowledgable and unbiased presenters and has the minimum of waffle, and over analysing of everything in minute detail, very often saying the same thing in 5 different ways (or if you prefer, saying 5000 words when 100 will do). The golden age of F1 coverage on the BBC was back in the days to Murray Walker with Johnothan Palmer in the pits, and that was it. Informative and straight to the point. None of this huge expense of having far too many over-paid pundits. The BBC seems to prefer quantity over quality unfortunately. At least it's better than ITVs coverage but not by much at all.

[LRW]

As for the coverage, I can't agree with your verdict. The BBC coverage has been up to the BBCs usual standard - poor.

wow. you seem to be on your own on this one.

[andrew]

As for the coverage, I can't agree with your verdict. The BBC coverage has been up to the BBCs usual standard - poor.

wow. you seem to be on your own on this one.

Of which I care not a jot. I stand by my comments on the BBC coverage.