![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
You could just make it so that for that car that has been adjudged as fault, you don't get to repair your car until the race is restarted. Everyone else gets to change tyres or do whatever.
Here is another take. Lets say Lewis does it again or Max does it. Pushes the rival into the gravel. The penalty is your main rival is probably a DNF, thats literally adding 25 or 20 points to your position in the Championship. And you go from being 8 seconds ahead of Bottas or Perez or Norris, to 2 seconds behind in a better car. Thats literally making an incident a very genuine strategy and tool.
that's racing. when both parties don't give an inch someone crashes
https://racer.com/2021/07/19/fia-explains-why-consequence-not-a-part-of-hamilton-penalty/
Batman:
that's racing. when both parties don't give an inch someone crashes
https://racer.com/2021/07/19/fia-explains-why-consequence-not-a-part-of-hamilton-penalty/
I dont see how your post is related to an article that explains the penalty decision.
i copied an article that said both of them are not giving each other any inches but this came out, and that the fia was going to speak to them behind closed doors.
can't find it now
They are both aggressive, but Max gave room, plenty of it.He moved left as he looked in his mirrors seeing Lewis. Max didn't get a penalty, problem solved.
tdgeek:They are both aggressive, but Max gave room, plenty of it.He moved left as he looked in his mirrors seeing Lewis. Max didn't get a penalty, problem solved.
Batman:tdgeek:
They are both aggressive, but Max gave room, plenty of it.He moved left as he looked in his mirrors seeing Lewis. Max didn't get a penalty, problem solved.
I'm not sure how that solves anything. He made a 25 point gain on Max.
Ah, I see now. Cheating works. The penalty is based not on the severity of the crash, its based on the level of infringement which was low. Maybe it needs to include a points penalty, or equalising the points based on putting the other guy out of the points. Maybe if such an incident out Max back 5 places, then Lewis goes back behind him? Thats fair. If he caused a DNF then Lewis gets a DNF? As in put Lewis behind Max in the race.
tdgeek:They are both aggressive, but Max gave room, plenty of it.He moved left as he looked in his mirrors seeing Lewis. Max didn't get a penalty, problem solved.
Bung:tdgeek:
They are both aggressive, but Max gave room, plenty of it.He moved left as he looked in his mirrors seeing Lewis. Max didn't get a penalty, problem solved.
You say plenty of room but from what I've seen Max was closing the door. There wasn't any concession for the fact that another car had run up his inside just before the corner. The twitch on the wheel wasn't moving left. One of the other drivers said that as Max moved over it would have taken air off Lewis's front wing and the understeer was the result. Maybe if Max had left more room and as a result had run wide and Lewis had got past the stewards could have done a version of passing outside track limits and told Lewis to let Max back in front.
Max looked in his mirror, turned left to allow room. There was at least 1.5 car widths for Lewis, that's not even counting the inner apex. Room given, Lewis tried to pass, all fair. He hit Max. Is disturbed air Max's fault? As Martin Brundle says when its raining and cars are spinning off. Its not the rain taking them off they are going too fast. Lewis took a corner when he could not control the car, too fast, simple as that
If Max gave even more room and stayed wide and Lewis passed, its a fair pass, no need to swap positions. No one would have been outside track limits
Bung:
There wasn't any concession for the fact that another car had run up his inside just before the corner.
That's because you can get up the inside of almost anyone if you go in too hot and on a line that won't let two cars go around the corner.
Hamilton had room on his inside to move and didn't.
I find it hard to believe that the British press would ever have given Schumacher this kind of 'benefit of the doubt' about an incident.
GV27:
Bung:
There wasn't any concession for the fact that another car had run up his inside just before the corner.
That's because you can get up the inside of almost anyone if you go in too hot and on a line that won't let two cars go around the corner.
Hamilton had room on his inside to move and didn't.
I find it hard to believe that the British press would ever have given Schumacher this kind of 'benefit of the doubt' about an incident.
We all know how Jensen and Brundle love Lewis. Painful at times. They saw it as Lewis's fault. If thats not a guide, I dunno what is
My concern now is that the penalty is based only on the level of infringement which was low. To me, a 10 second penalty is a motivation to make a small "mistake" that pushed the other guy into a race harming position, such as gravel.
Next race will be interesting. Lewis admitted he's tired of not being aggressive enough and he will go hard now. Hungary isn't a fast track, shortish straights, plenty of turns, Max in behind Lewis could be fun
Yea we're about to see a whole bunch of 'Oh, I didn't see him there, sucks for him I guess!' moments that are now a lock for 10 second penalties.
GV27:
Yea we're about to see a whole bunch of 'Oh, I didn't see him there, sucks for him I guess!' moments that are now a lock for 10 second penalties.
You should have posted this on the Off Topic - Investments thread :-)
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |