FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Bubbie]

Two big differences between Vettel and Button's passes...

1 - Lengthened the track instead of shortened it. We have heard again and again that if they lengthen the track by going out of bounds it is okay, it is only when they shorten it they are penalized.

2 - He was past Button by the time they got to the corner. Button was behind Massa when he made his excursion.

With the rules lawyering that the teams on the pitwall do, we would have heard from Martin Whitmarsh if there was something wrong with the pass.

Vettel was the class of the show this weekend. I am starting to think conspiracy theories as to how he was so much faster, but no words from scrutineering so I guess everything passed. But he was epic this weekend and drove the heck out of that Red Bull. He looked like he was passing an HRT going around JB like that.

[darwin dali]

Two big differences between Vettel and Button's passes...

1 - Lengthened the track instead of shortened it. We have heard again and again that if they lengthen the track by going out of bounds it is okay, it is only when they shorten it they are penalized.

2 - He was past Button by the time they got to the corner. Button was behind Massa when he made his excursion.

With the rules lawyering that the teams on the pitwall do, we would have heard from Martin Whitmarsh if there was something wrong with the pass.

Vettel was the class of the show this weekend. I am starting to think conspiracy theories as to how he was so much faster, but no words from scrutineering so I guess everything passed. But he was epic this weekend and drove the heck out of that Red Bull. He looked like he was passing an HRT going around JB like that.

According to Marko, SV didn't even 'drive the heck out of that Red Bull' - he watched LH and drove accordingly and supposedly there's more where that came from...

[Jensonb]

Two big differences between Vettel and Button's passes...

1 - Lengthened the track instead of shortened it. We have heard again and again that if they lengthen the track by going out of bounds it is okay, it is only when they shorten it they are penalized.

2 - He was past Button by the time they got to the corner. Button was behind Massa when he made his excursion.

With the rules lawyering that the teams on the pitwall do, we would have heard from Martin Whitmarsh if there was something wrong with the pass.

At the risk of repeating myself...

You're not being unreasonable, but there seems to be some confusion about the rule. "Cutting the corner" is not a specific offense in F1 at this time. The offense is "Exceeding the Track Limits". In a race, drivers will be warned via their teams for doing so if it doesn't have a material impact. If, however, they "maintain or gain an advantage" by exceeding the track limits, they can be issued one of the Stewards' standard penalties or asked to yield to the driver they were attacking/defending against.

"Exceeding the track limits" is defined as having all four wheels outside the white (In this case, yellow) lines defining the track edge. Vettel carried so much speed into the Turn, he ran completely wide and all four wheels left the track. That's the exact same offense as Jenson was booked for, just with a different cause. Similarly, Buemi is guilty of almost exactly the same thing exactly where Vettel did it.

The fact is, Vettel's overtake would not have stuck had he braked appropriately to keep his car ontrack. Indeed, had the runoff been grass or gravel or worse, had their been a wall, he'd have lost tonnes of time or been out had he pulled that stunt.

The fact that Vettel went around the outside meant that he had to travel further to get around Button. You cannot compare this too Button, who actually cut the corner.

Also consider that Vettel's racing line is severely compromised at turn 5, and on the lead up to turn 6. He did not gain an advantage.

That's not true at all. That corner is massively quicker if you run wide. But either way it's irrelevant, the pass would not have stuck had he not gone off and thus he maintained an advantage by exceeding the track limits. That is against the rules.

[spankyham]

Can't remember who posted it, but I recall someone saying Ferrari used "dirty tricks" (or words to that effect) by pitting Massa before Jenson gave the position back.

Just can't let a silly statement like that go. To try and blame Ferrari for, what ended out being a poor team call is ridiculous.

For the record, Massa stayed out for over 2 laps after the incident. When McLaren knew Ferrari were going to pit (the tyres came out early in fact) they still had plenty of time to tell Jenson to let Felipe back past before he got to the pit lane entry.

Also, McLaren had the experience of exactly the same thing happening to Ferrari in 2010 at Silverstone in the Alonso/Kubica incident. Exactly the same thing, Ferrari were communicating with the Stewards and waiting for an answer (which never came) and then got penalised.

And for the record, I think all these penalties for going off track are rubbish. If we want to improve overtakes and excitement then who cares about going off track - just make the circuit punish the driver/car. Lots more kitty-litter and well positioned kerbs will do the trick. Then lets get back to this, it will do heaps more for F1 than any amount of gimmicks!
[youtube]kl2tIFxSEGA[/youtube]

[Hammer278]

If Ferrari deliberately called Massa in to try and increase the chances for Jenson to get a drive through, its called 'business'. I'd support McLaren doing the same if they were in Ferraris position. It's called being an 'opportunist', its not legal and its not guaranteeing you a place in Heaven either, just business.

[spankyham]

That's not true at all. That corner is massively quicker if you run wide. But either way it's irrelevant, the pass would not have stuck had he not gone off and thus he maintained an advantage by exceeding the track limits. That is against the rules.

@jensonb is right. Technically Vettel should have been penalised, no amount of justification or going around the outside blah blah or he was already in front blah blah can change the fact that the rule says if you go off track to get or keep an advantage you've broken the rules and should be penalised.

Lets also remember the state of the race at the time Vettel did this. We had a fast Lewis with an undamaged car. Had Vettel got the stop go, Lewis would have been in front after the first round of tyre stops with Jenson between him and Seb. Had Jenson been able to drive for the team, Lewis could well have ended up with a win and a potential McLaren 1-2.

The problem is the incredible inconsistency of the rule implementation:-
You have Alonso v Kubica (Alonso was in front and went around the outside too BTW) - penalised
Button v Massa - penalised
Vettel v Button - not penalised

The problem is the inconsistent interpretation of a rule that sucks. Get rid of the rule, make the track punish drivers/cars for going off and lets get more of the racing in the vid I posted above

[Hammer278]

The easiest way to enhance consistency is to replace the damn tarmac with gravel/grass.

Sometimes its up to intepretation. The stewards have to work together, and politics, error in judgement can always come into play. Why can't we just make it pure racing, if you go wide, your race is severely compromised/game over? This way drivers will respect the track more and they WILL be penalised if they leave the track. Humans don't have to be a factor anymore.

[Jensonb]

That's not true at all. That corner is massively quicker if you run wide. But either way it's irrelevant, the pass would not have stuck had he not gone off and thus he maintained an advantage by exceeding the track limits. That is against the rules.

@jensonb is right. Technically Vettel should have been penalised, no amount of justification or going around the outside blah blah or he was already in front blah blah can change the fact that the rule says if you go off track to get or keep an advantage you've broken the rules and should be penalised.

Lets also remember the state of the race at the time Vettel did this. We had a fast Lewis with an undamaged car. Had Vettel got the stop go, Lewis would have been in front after the first round of tyre stops with Jenson between him and Seb. Had Jenson been able to drive for the team, Lewis could well have ended up with a win and a potential McLaren 1-2.

The problem is the incredible inconsistency of the rule implementation:-
You have Alonso v Kubica (Alonso was in front and went around the outside too BTW) - penalised
Button v Massa - penalised
Vettel v Button - not penalised

The problem is the inconsistent interpretation of a rule that sucks. Get rid of the rule, make the track punish drivers/cars for going off and lets get more of the racing in the vid I posted above

I completely agree. It's the inconsistency that gets me. The FIA are incredibly prone to it these days, and it's becoming a nuisance.

[Peng]

Lets also remember the state of the race at the time Vettel did this. We had a fast Lewis with an undamaged car. Had Vettel got the stop go, Lewis would have been in front after the first round of tyre stops with Jenson between him and Seb. Had Jenson been able to drive for the team, Lewis could well have ended up with a win and a potential McLaren 1-2.

Button was due his drive thru at that point in the race and i think could only pass the finish line 1 more time at the time of that overtake so with Vettel on fresher tyres i doubt he would have come out behind Button even with the penalty, not to mention Button had messed his race up so there really wasn't anyway he was getting a podium :p

Although it would have made the end of the race more fun with Hamilton and Vettel battling for 1st place but again i doubt it would have changed the results with Hamiltons car being broken for a good 50-60% of the race.

[nish2280]

And who knows. Maybe Vettel might have actually listened to the stewards and not argued with them over giving the place back.

Had Jenson been able to drive for the team

- Spanky
Classic.

[racechick]

And who knows. Maybe Vettel might have actually listened to the stewards and not argued with them over giving the place back.

Listened to the stewards???? Do you mean race control? There was nothing to listen to. They didnt reply to McLaren they just gave a penalty. So there was no arguing.

Now if what you mean is -Vettel may have realised his error and given back the place...Oh but hang on..he didnt realise his error and give back the pace

But had he, Lewis would have got out ahead of him at his pit stop.

[Robert12010]

The fact that Vettel went around the outside meant that he had to travel further to get around Button. You cannot compare this too Button, who actually cut the corner.

Also consider that Vettel's racing line is severely compromised at turn 5, and on the lead up to turn 6. He did not gain an advantage.

i think with button's incident, it didnt help that you have a bunch of clowns in Race controls, not getting back to mclaren straight away, but then it was kind of coming what happened, but vettel didnt certainly get away with one there

[Big Azza]

First of all it's good to be back, and it's been a perfect start to the season for me, and a contrast to last year.

Taken from: http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sports/formula-one/red-bull-drivers-sebastian-vettel-and-mark-webber-did-not-have-kers-at-the-australian-grand-prix/story-e6frf3zl-1226029779480

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner has finally admitted what many in Formula One already suspected, Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber did not have the Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) installed at the season-opening Formula One Grand Prix in Australia.

"We will run KERS in Malaysia," he told Britain's Guardian newspaper, "It was a very marginal decision not to run it [in Australia] but, in Malaysia, there is a long run to the first turn and we are keen to get it on the car there."

The comments contradict Horner's earlier comments during the weekend, with the team principal implying a different style of KERS was fitted to the cars.

"All I will tell you is our system is not the same as others', but it's at its most beneficial at the start," Horner told the BBC.

That led to speculation of a 'mini-KERS' type of system which only operated on lap one, and therefore didn't have a heavy recharding system on it.

A lack of KERS is almost certainly what cost Mark Webber second early in the Grand Prix, with Webber unable to complete a pass on Lewis Hamilton into turn one despite a superior start.

Had Webber completed that pass, he'd have all but guaranteed himself a podium finish on Sunday.

The lack of KERS cost Webber again late in the race, when he was unable to pass the KERS-equipped Ferrari of Fernando Alonso despite being on the grippier-soft tyre option.

So - I know you guys have been debating about this.

Does this indicate that not using KERS is an advantage? How powerful could the Red Bull be come Sepang?

[nish2280]

And who knows. Maybe Vettel might have actually listened to the stewards and not argued with them over giving the place back.

Listened to the stewards???? Do you mean race control? There was nothing to listen to. They didnt reply to McLaren they just gave a penalty. So there was no arguing.

Now if what you mean is -Vettel may have realised his error and given back the place...Oh but hang on..he didnt realise his error and give back the pace

But had he, Lewis would have got out ahead of him at his pit stop.

Really? I thought race control contacted Mclaren to say that he needed to give the place back, hence the radio conversation in which button claimed to be ahead before cutting the track.
Either way there it suggests that there was doubt in Mclaren, or at least Button that the move was legal.

On the other hand in Vettel's move no one even lifted a finger.

And they obviously have a better grasp of the rules than we do...

[Jamie]

That's not true at all. That corner is massively quicker if you run wide. But either way it's irrelevant, the pass would not have stuck had he not gone off and thus he maintained an advantage by exceeding the track limits. That is against the rules.

@jensonb is right. Technically Vettel should have been penalised, no amount of justification or going around the outside blah blah or he was already in front blah blah can change the fact that the rule says if you go off track to get or keep an advantage you've broken the rules and should be penalised.

Lets also remember the state of the race at the time Vettel did this. We had a fast Lewis with an undamaged car. Had Vettel got the stop go, Lewis would have been in front after the first round of tyre stops with Jenson between him and Seb. Had Jenson been able to drive for the team, Lewis could well have ended up with a win and a potential McLaren 1-2.

The problem is the incredible inconsistency of the rule implementation:-
You have Alonso v Kubica (Alonso was in front and went around the outside too BTW) - penalised
Button v Massa - penalised
Vettel v Button - not penalised

The problem is the inconsistent interpretation of a rule that sucks. Get rid of the rule, make the track punish drivers/cars for going off and lets get more of the racing in the vid I posted above

I completely agree. It's the inconsistency that gets me. The FIA are incredibly prone to it these days, and it's becoming a nuisance.

I agree with you "two" I think the FIA are not consistant enough, the throw out rules yet they do not follow up on other things. I am a little dissapointed McLaren didn't fight that Vettel should recieev a 20 second stop n' go!