Daniel Ricciardo, Renault, Paul Ricard, 2019

Two five-second penalties drop Ricciardo to 11th

2019 French Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Daniel Ricciardo has been relegated to 11th place in the French Grand Prix after being given two five-second time penalties.

The decision promotes Kimi Raikkonen to seventh place ahead of Nico Hulkenberg, Lando Norris, Pierre Gasly and Ricciardo.

The stewards ruled Ricciardo left the track and rejoined it unsafely, forcing Norris off the racing line,

“Ricciardo started to pass Norris on the outside at turn eight. At the exit of the corner he distinctly left the track and the stewards determined that he re-joined at an angle that forced Norris off the track to avoid the collision.

“The stewards accepted Ricciardo’s explanation that when he was re-joining the track, he had slowed considerably, going down extra gears and locking up the front left tyre. He also stated that the rumble strips in the turn made the car more difficult to control. However, the stewards considered that the sequence of events constituted re-joining the track unsafely, and he subsequently took the position from Norris.”

The stewards also ruled that Ricciardo completed a pass on Raikkonen by putting all four wheels off the track.

“Following the incident at turn eight with Norris, Raikkonen managed to pass both Norris and Ricciardo. Ricciardo, who by then had regained control of his car then chased Raikkonen from turn 9 and subsequently passed Raikkonen. Raikkonen defended his position on the straight moving slightly to the right.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“However, Raikkonen never put any part of his car off the track and he did not make any move to the right while any part of Ricciardo’s car was alongside, and did not crowd Ricciardo off the track. To make the pass Ricciardo drove off track and then subsequently completed the pass, gaining a lasting advantage.

“The stewards reviewed the case to see if it was a continuation of the previous incident. However, Ricciardo clearly had regained control of the car following his incident with Norris and the pass off-track was a separate incident.”

The Renault driver said he’d tried to keep his car within the circuit boundaries during his last-lap fight with Norris and Raikkonen.

“I did all I could to stay on the track,” he said. “But with this new surface as well you can see there’s a shiny line which is full of grip, anything off that it’s literally like marbles.”

“I’m glad I tried,” he added. “I have no regrets whatever happens because it’s the last lap, it’s a position and it’s never my style to sit back and be the conservative one in a battle.”

Ricciardo has also been given a total of three penalty points on his licence, taking him up to a total of five.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2019 F1 season

Browse all 2019 F1 season articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

112 comments on “Two five-second penalties drop Ricciardo to 11th”

  1. The five seconds for the pass on Kimi justified, but the first five seconds for (presumably) the off-track excursion when attempting to pass Norris into the chicane, not as much since he didn’t gain anything from that anyway as Norris stayed ahead of him, so didn’t see that coming.

    1. The penalty was for returning to the track at the apex of the right hander, which forced Norris wide and costed him positions to every driver who was following.

      1. Exactly, I bet that Norris would have maintained his position and finished ahead of them all if it wasn’t for Ricciardo

      2. Michael Ward
        24th June 2019, 1:51

        Go back and watch the overhead replay, Ricciardo doesn’t get close to the left side of the track until way after Norris had gone off track, and there was still nearly three car widths on Ricciaro’s left at the time Norris goes off track, claiming that is somehow is forcing someone off track is unsustainable. And there was no advantage gained buy outbraking himself into the corner, Norris was able to get back alongside him and then after the next corner Kimi went past him, that “too-late-braking” moment was self correcting, had Norris not driven off the track he and Kimi would have both got past Ricciardo and he would have fell back a position over all, as it was Kimi got past so Ricciardo stayed in the same position he was in when he started the move.
        Where is the advantage?
        Passing Kimi off the circuit isn’t as easy to defend, and since I’ve called for respecting track limits and defended Max’s penalty from the USGP when he passed Kimi off the track, I won’t defend Ricciardo for that.

        1. It was the trajectory. Norris basically thought he was going to dart into his side! Norris clearly thought an incident was going to happen as he would not voluntarily drive off the track and lose 3 positions! Ricciardo clearly benefited from going off track and then did not come back on in an entirely safe manner. He caused another driver to take avoiding action and lose places. He deserved the penalty.

      3. @casjo @Ipsom @Michael Ward Yes, I figured that out a bit later after having read the Stewards’ decision. I initially didn’t realize it was for how he rejoined the track rather than whether he had gained an advantage as was the case with the latter.

    2. What no tantrum?? Oh yeah he is Aussie!! I don’t even a tantrum in Monaco when they forgot his tyres..some of these Prima Donna’s need to take a leaf from him

  2. 2 5-second penalties… Come on! It would have been better just following Norris home and not trying to overtake!

    1. He could overtake Norris, but he risked it (maybe rightly so) but lost control of the car and joined unsafely and forced norris off which let train of cars to overtake norris! norris didnt make a mistake, he was forced off track due to ric’s dive… what is so different to kimi pass? should he have waited behind? he was clearly faster, why didnt he do it properly? kimi didnt force him off, he just drove at will… this is the kind of reason why these so called “mistakes” are penalized, because there is no end to excuses that ruins one driver’s race no fault of his own, and reward the mistake! both penalties were right and just! norris was dealing with his own issues but he was within the track until ric dived and joined unsafely and forcing norris off which he couldnt recover…. he would have been passed on the straight most likely but that doesnt excuse ric’s error and swipe it under the carpet!

      1. Don’t get me wrong, as a Ric fan I can definitely see he deserved a penalty! He royally screwed Norris over and was off the track with the Kimi one. Its just frustrating that when a driver actually takes a risk they get so heavily penalized for it, no wonder a lot of drivers take no chances and just follow the pack around.

        1. @burden93 A 5-second penalty is not “heavily penalized”.

          1. He got two, and it very much is heavy when you drop 4 places/6 points which is almost 40% of his total score this season.

          2. Hamilton got a 25 second penalty for simply leaving the track in 2008… 10 seconds for 2 incidents is not heavily penalised.

        2. That is why it is called “Taking a risk”. If there was not consequences if you got it wrong then it would not be a risk. He took that risk, got it wrong and was penalised.

    2. I can understand the 5 second penalties, what I can’t understand is the penalty point.

      1. F1oSaurus (@)
        24th June 2019, 18:04

        Those are mandatory

  3. He did two mistakes. Very obvious mistakes. If you are not sure that tou have tha advantage, keep your position. Norris lost two positions and Ricciardo three (he would be 8th).

  4. What’s the point of designing cars and tracks to eliminate overtaking if drivers then actually try and do it? Naughty boy, Danny.

    1. DAllein (@)
      23rd June 2019, 19:04

      He broke rules, overtook drivers by going off the track, and forced Lando pff the track… and got penalized.

      Your dissatisfaction is silly.

  5. “But with this new surface as well you can see there’s a shiny line which is full of grip, anything off that it’s literally like marbles.”

    Working overtime with the excuses, lol.

  6. Get rid of this useless track with those huge run off red blue areas.

    1. Couldn’t agree more. It was quite the contrast watching Road America immediately after—grass and gravel everywhere, and drivers allowed to race. And where there were tarmac runoffs, the kerbing ensured it was indeed for runoff purposes, and not viable for overtaking. It’s not impossible!

  7. And yet he didn’t get one for going all four wheels off the track in the earlier incident with Grosjean. An overtake by means of all four wheels off the track, like with Norris.
    I am not saying this should be a penalty. But F1 being maddeningly inconsistent, never changes.

    1. Nevermind. Forcing Norris to avoid a collision. Moving on.

      1. But you were correct, @hahostolze. Ricciardo overtook Grosjean with all four wheels off the track and should have been forced to either give the position back or cop a 5-second penalty. And he forced Grosjean off track when he rejoined, same as with Norris. But that incident didn’t matter, apparently because “the Haas was in a different race”, at least according to one of the Sky idiots.
        But F1 is maddeningly inconsistent, hope it changes.

  8. Tired of this. We get some hard racing between the best drivers in the world on the LAST LAP of a race, and this is the result? Penalties?

    That was HARD RACING. I follow series all across the pond. That sort of racing in any other place would not only be cherished, but encouraged. We need overtakes that makes us reconsider if these drivers are even human. That’s what hooks us to this. Truly disappointed with F1 since Canada

    1. AMG44 was right two comments above, it’s the track’s fault for offering so much space for – seemingly – valid overtaking opportunities where they aren’t really meant to. And when you’re mentioning Canada, I think it was only logical that the stewards couldn’t decide otherwise. It would be far more controversial if they ruled differently in the light of the Canadian incident.

      1. it’s the track’s fault for offering so much space for – seemingly – valid overtaking opportunities

        Oh come on! The boundaries of the track are clearly marked, the run off areas are painted in bright, virtually neon, colours. The drivers all know that they are not allowed to gain an advantage by going off track. “It’s the track’s fault” doesn’t cut it at all!

        With the Vettel incident, the penalty was harsh. He had little to no control over his car when he came back on track, having just slid across the grass. Both of these are completely different. He was going over an abrasive tarmac runoff when he over cooked the corner and should have had at least some control of how he rejoined.

        The second, however, was deliberately making a pass by going off track and, personally, I would have penalised him more heavily for that. I don’t accept his excuse, he was in full control of his car and chose to go all four wheels off track. I love Danny Ric, but this was just stupid and unnecessary.

        1. Oh come on! The boundaries of the track are clearly marked, the run off areas are painted in bright, virtually neon, colours. The drivers all know that they are not allowed to gain an advantage by going off track.

          Yes, the drivers know that they are not allowed to gain an advantage, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. When it does, the stewards need to get involved. If the track were designed in such a way that they couldn’t gain an advantage (gravel, grass, walls etc) then the incident wouldn’t have occurred and the stewards wouldn’t have needed to get involved.

          I think the penalties were justified, but because they don’t get applied instantly it leads to confusing race results. If RIC had hit a wall or got stuck in a gravel trap he would have lost the positions but nobody would have complained about consistency.

          Rules about “gaining an advantage” and “unsafe manner” will always be open to interpretation and people will argue that a penalty should/should not have been applied. I’d take an automated, zero tolerance approach to track limits in areas with tarmac runoff: if a driver put all 4 wheels off the circuit, this would be detected by a sensor in the car and they would instantly receive a drive through penalty (because it’s the smallest penalty that can be applied within a lap). It’s harsh, but the drivers would drive accordingly and the penalty would be consistent and easy to understand.

          1. I’d take an automated, zero tolerance approach to track limits in areas with tarmac runoff: if a driver put all 4 wheels off the circuit, this would be detected by a sensor in the car and they would instantly receive a drive through penalty

            I agree on this one, although I’d investigate other automatic penalties. Something like a timed power reduction, maybe in the next DRS zone, or similar… I don’t know the best way to approach it, but an automatic penalty for leaving the track would certainly stop them doing it on purpose. They do it all the time on certain tracks, lap after lap. They say “but we don’t get an advantage”, but they’re pro racing drivers, if they weren’t getting some sort of advantage from it they wouldn’t be doing it consistently.

      2. F1oSaurus (@)
        24th June 2019, 18:07

        @pironitheprovocateur -1

        This is utter nonsense. Seriously. You are simply parroting Vettel’s excuse nonsense.

        Try to imagine how this is going to work in practice?

        The only way to do that is by creating a track like Monaco with guard rails just outside the track lines for every race. To even suggest that would be better then simply askjing drivers to adhere to the rules (or be penalized) is beyond ridiculous.

    2. He clearly misjudged overtaking Norris and couldn’t stop the car enough to avoid going off track in order to complete the pass. Penalty absolutely justified I’m afraid.
      Everyone knows you can’t exceed the track limits to overtake another car. That should be obvious.

    3. I think the first penalty is undeserved. I just watched the replay again, and I see him being ahead into the corner, and I also I see enough room there for Norris to not go off track. Yet another overly harsh stewarding for nothing more than a racing incident.

      The overtake on Rai was incorrect tho. Be it Spa, for example, he would have most likely ended in a wall.

      1. @njoydesign
        “I think the first penalty is undeserved. I just watched the replay again, and I see him being ahead into the corner”

        he was only ahead bcoz of the late braking point, which was too late as he couldnt stop the car on time to make the corner appropriately!

        watch them in a fair way!

  9. Panagiotis Papatheodorou (@panagiotism-papatheodorou)
    23rd June 2019, 19:02

    So much about racing.

    1. so much about your salt…

  10. His move on Norris cost the latter 3 places so I understand a penalty for this. It was just poor racing from RIC

    Not a fan of these penalties though

    1. Yet every time max makes casualties, and he’s made dozens unlike RIC, you say the penalty, if there’s handed one, is undeserved, and never mention the places/points his victim lost bc of him.

      1. F1oSaurus (@)
        24th June 2019, 18:19

        FA but then it’s “racing as it’s supposed to be”

  11. I don’t necessarily disagree with the penalties. Those were ham-fisted passes and you could see the penalties coming a mile away…

    What I passionately disagree with is the track. End of.
    Build a track. Let the track punish any off.. no penalties needed. This annoyingly striped car park has nothing to do with a track. If you paint some lines on a slab of tarmac you end up policing those lines. Including stupid debates about penalties awarded or should have been awarded. “Yeah all 4 wheels went over the line, you can see it if we pause this frame right here.. but there was no advantage gained because it was on the outside of the track, no corner was cut … ” Nonsense! Make it grass and gravel and you don’t need the *&^&#@ penalties.

    1. You nailed it, 100% agree.

    2. Absolutely. It’s a test track, not sure why it’s appropriate for a race these days. It was an awful race judging by the highlights.

      1. Being a test track means you can’t have grass or gravel, but surely there’s a temporary way of making the circuit automatically penalise the driver? Maybe temporary tecpro barriers? Or even just polystyrene boards – no physical penalty for hitting them, but it’s a lot more obvious that the driver has made a mistake.

    3. petebaldwin (@)
      23rd June 2019, 23:18

      Yeah there is basically no need for anyone else to comment on this story – you’ve hit the nail squarely on the head.

    4. Damn right. If you’re going to build a track with fake limits, don’t be surprised when people get near them and sometimes exceed them. And perhaps they should learn that races aren’t improved when the results are determined by post-race legal chicanery, rather than actual track chicanery.

    5. I agree with you, but I don’t think it would solve the problem. At Canada we had grass, nevertheless they managed to force a silly penalty. On that matter the problem isn’t the circuit alone. I remember Massa being penalised by cutting the white lines before the pits at Interlagos just by driving the usual racing line everybody always had done. But Hamilton got away with it, even cutting lines, grass and whatnot at Hockenheim. Inconsistency and insensibility. Silly legalism. Interventionism at it’s pure state.

      People worried about the “show”, making of racing merely a whisper.

    6. All I came here to say. Glad others are seeing it this way.

    7. Build a track. Let the track punish any off.. no penalties needed.

      The problem is that tracks cannot survive on just one F1 race per year. They have to be designed with multiple forms of Motorsport in mind.

      Using grass or gravel traps or walls, for instance, would be fine for F1 but completely unacceptable for, say, motorcycle racing.

      Personally, I would be in favour of a technological solution. Something like an automatic 5 second power reduction if you go off… It’d need some work to get it right, but would allow a more natural-seeming penalty while still keeping the safety of tarmac runoffs.

      1. @drmouse
        Though I do agree wit the overall sentiment of your comment, motorcycle racing does have gravel traps.

  12. Neil (@neilosjames)
    23rd June 2019, 19:05

    Was very shoddy driving by Ricciardo, and two very obvious penalties. Went off track, came back on and shoved Norris off, costing him seventh. Then drove fully off the track, without being pushed there, to pass Raikkonen.

    I can see a slight argument for letting him off for the Norris one (‘pro-racing’ point of view, but it’d be entirely inconsistent if he’d received no penalty), but the Raikkonen one was about as obvious a penalty as I’ve seen all year.

    1. I’d argue he passed Raikkonen on the track, didn’t he?

      Oh wait.. I forgot we paint some white lines these days and play it is an actual track…

      (I’m not ranting against you btw)

    2. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      23rd June 2019, 20:35

      I don’t think Ricciardo is at the level he was at when driving for Red Bull. Some rather blank moments resulting in errors or penalties. Australia was a bit unlucky but he still triggered his own retirement. Baku was just incredibly clumsy when he reversed into Kvyat as well as pushing Kvyat off track in the first place. Then these incidents today looked a bit cheeky. I thought that at one point, he had gone well over a full year without penalty points. But I think this is the most collected by any driver at just 1 race in quite some time. Ricciardo looks a lot quicker than Hulkenberg, but overall, I don’t think his season has been much better

      1. Aaditya (@neutronstar)
        24th June 2019, 4:27

        @thegianthogweed Where is the “lot” quicker comment coming from? Consistently quicker in qualifying, sure, but the margins haven’t been disastrous(except Baku, which was clearly an anomaly)…and in race pace, they are clearly very close. Hulkenberg could have had a much better race had he not been stuck behind Raikkonen all race; he was clearly quicker, but just didn’t have the pace to overtake him. He needs to sort out his qualifying, and if he does, I’m sure we will see him and Ricciardo more evenly matched then.

        1. @neutronstar
          Losing for seven qualifications in a row is a disaster. Qualification is key to success in the race not only in Monaco nowadays. Hulkenberg implemented his strategy better than Ricciardo twice (Canada and France), and was able to beat his teammate considering their race pace. But did he?
          Nope. In Canada, Nico’s engineer prohibited him to overtake Ricciardo, and in France, Hulk was never close to overtake anyone.
          Ricciardo does improve, Hulk stagnates.
          As a result, Ricciardo destroys Hulkenberg race after race, and you can’t do anything with that.

      2. F1oSaurus (@)
        24th June 2019, 18:25

        @thegianthogweed Ricciardo focuses on Q3 while Hulkenberg focuses on the race. So far they have netted the exact same amount of points with their approach.

        And then take into account that Hulkenberg was not allowed to overtake Ricciardo in Canada and he had a technical DNF in China. While Ricciardo had 2 clumsy DNF’s which he caused himself.

        So in actual result, Hulkenberg is actually doing a lot better really.

        1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
          24th June 2019, 20:48

          I do think Ricciardo is a lot more capable and is also quicker, but I thought I mentioned that Ricciardo hasn’t looked great overall. I wouldn’t argue if people think Hulkenberg has done as well. But a lot better I think is a bit of a stretch.

  13. F1 is back to being the nanny of motorsport. This is the kind of action it needs, divers shouldn’t be penalised for exciting passing. It seems if the pass doesn’t happen half way down the straight with no jostling for position then it’s a penalty.

    1. Should not be penalised for “racing” outside the track? This is supposed to be a sport, not the car version of wrestling.

      If you want to race, keep the car on the track.

    2. Racing is about overtaking on the track, not off of it. That I called cheating on whatever motorsports you can think off.

  14. I agree with the penalty for forcing Norris off on his return to the track. It was a bit silly and made Norris lose more places. But tbh I’m not a fan of the one for the pass on Raikkonen, as he couldnt really go to the left as Hulkenberg was there. I guess then the argument is ‘lift and stay behind Raikkonen’ but eh.

    1. He had enough room to go left, Hülkenberg was 1 car-length behind when Ricciardo went off track.

      And the argument is don’t go off-track to overtake. As far as I’m aware, F1 stewards have been very consistent with this particular rule.

    2. @hugh11
      I’m usually against penalties for crossing the white lines. However, since it’s not expected for RAI to go outside to block him, the penalty is kinda understandable.
      At any other (normal) track, I’d just carry on.

  15. Riciardo played the team game well though :

    Before his attack:

    McLaren 6-7 = 14 pts
    Renault 8-10 = 5

    Pts difference: 9

    After the attack

    McLaren 6-10 = 9
    Renault 7-9 = 8

    Pts difference: 1

    After the penalties:

    McLaren 6-9 = 10
    Renault 8-11 = 4

    Pts difference: 6

    so ultimately he reduced Renault deficit by 3 points, right ? :)


    this time last year McLaren had exactly the same amount of points: 40
    but Renault had 30 pts more at 62 (2019: 32)

  16. Justice!

  17. Sad… Ric work wasnt nice but was hard racing as much as he can on a painted mall parking, like Caesar’s Palace. If isnt allowed it shouldnt be natural, runoff should mandatory be sand, gravel, grass or limit on tecpro barrier or whatever punishes/slows down those who go out.

  18. This is what you get for opening Pandora’s box instead of letting common sense prevail. Up to last race, no one ever thought of using the words “rejoining the track in an unsafe manner” in a single sentence, much less in the context of wheel to wheel racing.
    Then came that bogus penalty in Canada (whatever happened to asking “Racing incident?” and everyone just nodding and moving on?), and suddenly it turns out that this sort of incident happens all the time, and that there’s just no way to rule them in a way that doesn’t end up looking plain silly without publicly admitting that the Stewards in Canada simply had a brainfade and forgot how to apply the rules so that they make sense, in other words, setting a terrible precedent.
    It was foreseeable.

    1. @nase

      How long have you been watching F1, because penalties for rejoining the track in an unsafe manner have been around for good long while.

      Or is it no one gave a monkeys previously until it happened to Vettel?

    2. Up to last race, no one ever thought of using the words “rejoining the track in an unsafe manner” in a single sentence, much less in the context of wheel to wheel racing.

      There was a clear precedent for Vettel’s penalty, most obviously when Verstappen got a penalty for the exact same thing in Suzuka last year. Which Vettel defended at the time.

      1. I disagree. There were numerous, albeit gradual, differences between these incidents. First and foremost, Verstappen collided with Räikkönen, leaving him no chance to take evasive action. He rejoined the track almost perpendicular to the racing line instead of going broadly in the right direction. He was nowhere near racing speed when he closed the door, using his car like a very slowly moving roadblock instead. Those are aspects that shift the sliding scale towards its ‘penalty’ end. But this rule has a ‘no further action necessary’ area as well, and it’s the Stewards’ job to separate the crystal clear violations (such as Hamilton almost taking out Paul di Resta with a U turn in Hungary years ago) from the ‘a driver rejoins the track while negatively affecting the mood of a driver in his general proximity’ kind of incident. The Canada one was so far down the latter end of the scale that it’s visibly made life hard for the Stewards in France, for the reasons mentioned above.

        1. couldn’t agree more. Well said

        2. @nase +1
          I don’t get why people treat Suzuka as precedent for Montreal so much. Verstappen misjudged the braking point, low speed corner, chose where to rejoin (having wide room off-track), banged wheels with RAI which was alongside already… Nothing to do with VET/HAM aside from misjudging the braking point. Different dynamic and outcome.

    3. Completely agree.

      It’s been pointed out endlessly that the stewards are tasked with applying the rules, no more, no less. But there is such a thing as interpreting laws according to their original intent. And I have always thought that the original intent of the rule against unsafe reentries was to prevent drivers who had spun off from rejoining too hastily in front of oncoming traffic—not to punish track limits violations like we’ve seen the past two GPs. If the stewards aren’t empowered to consider the intent of the regulations, they ought to be.

    4. Ric made a pass by going off the track… twice. What’s the problem here to understand? I simply don’t understand all the fuss.

      1. William Jones
        23rd June 2019, 23:45

        This is people still all cut up about Canada looking for confirmation bias to make them feel better.

    5. The Stewarts in Canada made the right decision, people are just mad because their fun got popped as opposed to what is fair.

      1. I can’t believe people are still banging on about Canada. Maybe Vettel’s penalty for rejoicing the track unsafely wasn’t very fair, or a bit harsh. But if he hadn’t been penalised for that, he’d still have been penalised for leaving the track and gaining an advantage, as Perez was this weekend.

        1. “But if he hadn’t been penalised for that, he’d still have been penalised for leaving the track and gaining an advantage, as Perez was this weekend” – There have been numerous examples in which the leading car leaves the track, but doesn’t get penalised. Like HAM in Monaco’16 vs RIC, and max VS SAI last year, also in Monaco, and also in Baku BTW.
          A penalty in those instances of “leaving (..) and gaining an advantage”, is (almost) exclusively applied if there’s a place gain.

  19. While I can see the problem with RIC’s overtaking on the final lap, this is getting ridiculous.

    The biggest issue is that a lot of tracks are changed in a why that allow you to take some advantage by going a little outside. A proper circuit will have a patch of grass or gravel, thus such maneuvers, if working at all, will be simply brilliant.

    The new updates with ‘safety’ tarmac are a complete disgrace for the sport. It’s counter intuitive and ugly driving on them – the instinct tells you where the grip is, but the book thinks differently. If I fasted forward 20 years ago to now I would never believe that what I have watched today was a F1 race. It would have looked to me as the local driving school.

    1. William Jones
      23rd June 2019, 23:48

      That’s fine, but a proper circuit will go bankrupt as they pay through the nose for the privilege of hosting an F1 race, then no-one comes to track days because it’s a car wrecker, no other series want to race there because it’s dangerous. There’s a really good reason why every F1 venue is going this way, and as ever it’s all about the money.

  20. The ‘pass’ outside track limits against Raikkonen was blatant. Kimi gave him room to rejoin so he wouldn’t hit styrofoam. There’s aggressive racing, but this was ridiculous! You can’t choose to add another lane to the track when you want.

  21. I really don’t get it.. I really don’t get how there are people here , considering unfair driving as hard driving. Should there be a rule for aknowledging that something is fair or not?? The rule is there in order to determine the punishment and in most cases the rule has derived from previous cases of controversial ruling on similar happenings.. If you don’t like drivers being fair to each other and respecting the track limits then you can just watch something else. And not try to suit the sport to your needs. F1 has a long list of rules and that list will likely get longer, not shorter by trying to be as fair as possible. Yes there have been interpretations of the rules each year that are controversial but the goal of the rules is to be fair and prevent accidents from happening. We should not accuse rules in general because there is also the other part of the rules that dictates how F1 cars are made and how racing has shaped up to be because of that (harder overtaking). Do you want to watch overtaking by forcing other cars off the track? Where ” hard racing ” is allowed and where at the last lap you can “nudge ” the car in front so as to force it off the racing line and win the race? And then be able to brag about it as well? Watch Nascar and be a fan of Kyle Busch.. And stop following F1 if you disagree with the rules it has.. Ricciardo did 2 things that are explained in the rule book. Did he come out to say that rules suck and should stop existing ? Do you know better than him? They are there to drive with the rules in hand. Don’t they like them, drive elsewhere.

    1. And I forgot to mention.. 20 years ago people were being killed every other weekend… Do we really want this again??

      1. Bones Gambino
        24th June 2019, 0:38

        20 years ago….1999?
        I don’t think they were….

    2. Agreed. People just like to moan and have the attention span of gnat.

    3. @vaiosp Nobody is saying there shouldn’t be rules and track limits. The question is what they should be.

      In my mind, a perfect example of what they should be is the pass that Rossi pulled on the outside of Colton Herta at turn 1 of Road America. It was a brilliant, bold move, great racing—and he had all four wheels just outside the painted line on the runoff at the edge of the track.

      But there was no penalty because the IndyCar rulebook explicitly states that the white line does not always define the limit of the Racing Surface, and their definition of the Racing Surface at each track they go to consistently includes tarmac runoff (e.g. turn 19 at COTA). Although that may not have worked ideally at COTA, it works well at Road America because the runoff there is designed to be self-punishing—it has mild sausage curbs that limit traction, and it doesn’t extend very far past the corner exit, which forces drivers to tighten their lines and prevents them from exploiting it greatly.

      So this was a rulebook working in concert with well-designed runoff that allows drivers to explore the physical extent of the track without fear of stewarding intervention. The drivers can “race hard” while also being fair and respecting track limits, because the physical nature of the limits demands respect, and because the rulebook gives IndyCar the flexibility to define the Racing Surface at each track as they see fit.

      The approach F1 took at Paul Ricard is also fair and forces drivers to respect track limits—but does so in a way that sucks the excitement out of the endeavour.

      There is no simple fix for F1, because those two elements—the rulebook and the track design—have to go hand in hand. But F1 currently has neither.

  22. Ben (@scuderia29)
    23rd June 2019, 21:56

    The only interesting 10 seconds of the grand prix, penalised and nullified by the stewards.

    This is 2019 F1.

    1. Let me guess @scuderia29…if a Ferrari was overtaken by a car going off the track you’d be fine with it right?

      1. Ben (@scuderia29)
        24th June 2019, 7:38

        @john h. I’d rather see that than watch another inevitable DRS pass on the following lap, it’s amazing how many people jump to the defence of the stewards, it’s these rules and the subsequent enforcement of them that’s making f1 one of the most boring motorsports going

        1. F1oSaurus (@)
          24th June 2019, 18:28

          @scuderia29 So you would say that Verstappen should have been on the podium instead of Raikkonen after the 2017 USA GP?

          1. Absolutely yes, verstappen drove a great race and an overtake in one of the last turns of the last lap is something people (I) want to see, hardly anyone does it, verstappen did, I was outraged by the penalty, he’d have got ahead with or without going slightly beyond track limits.

            I’m not a ferrari fan, but also not red bull, I just like racing, atm I’d like any of them to do well as mercedes is too strong.

    2. Yeah because the driver cheated.

  23. If Ric didn’t loose 4 seconds being lapped by Hamilton the situation might not have had to be so desperate for him to pass. Not sure why he lost so much time there

  24. Ah well done deal now, move on to Austria and a fresh start. But Renault are making progress as is Maclaren, hoping for some really good racing towards the end of the yr as they catch RB.

  25. He had a go and it didn’t pay off. Case closed.

    I thought the first one would definitely be closely looked at and would get penalised, particularly after the Vettel penalty in the last race.

    The second one – weren’t they having a drag race down a straight?

    Maybe they should penalise Kimi and Hulk too for daring to take advantage of the situation that Dan caused. (Joking… really)

    Oh well, new race next week.

  26. F1 needs a new rule:

    5-second penalty for all unsuccessful passes.

    That’ll teach those pesky drivers who keep trying to change their position. Stay put, darn you!

    1. Nah, that would be unfair to the drivers. What we have now is fine. Ric tried to cheat and got punished for it.

  27. If the track extends to the wall and not the white line, Kimi blocks Ric by driving his car to the wall. Kimi followed the rules and stayed to the left of the white line whilst Ric went over the the line to make the illegal pass. In the US the driver in front will usually defend against cheaters by putting 2 wheels over the white line because you can never be sure what the ruling will be.

  28. Ricciardo is looking more stupid longer his Renault stint goes on. Its high time he revaluates his late divebombing attempts.

    1. I don’t think he actually has anything different in his repertoire.

  29. “Following the incident at turn eight with Norris, Raikkonen managed to pass both Norris and Ricciardo.”

    This sounds boring. Good thing the producers switched to Bottas nursing home his Mercedes.

  30. Disappointed to see that Ricciardo has learnt from and then used some bad habits off of Verstappen.

    1. Yeah let’s drag Verstappen in to this.
      tiring man….

      1. No worries mate.More where that came from.

        1. Shame Ric can’t copy Verstappens speed.

    2. Yes, let’s try and drag Verstappen into this. Good move.

  31. The penalties were justified and follow the rules of F1 – open and closed cases. But like many have said the track needs to stop situations like this from happening. Make it so Danny Ric couldn’t go off track to overtake RAI and find the same amount of grip as on track. Make it so if he overshoots the corner and goes off it actually sends him out the race or slows him to a crawl. Both times the situation could have been avoided with it being a proper runoff area. Imagine trying to teach a non-fan why the red zones slow a car down more than blue zones and failing that the barriers six miles away can catch them. If a car goes wide and bins it in the gravel then the blame should be on the driver not the circuit. If a team cannot afford to repair a car from gravel damage then don’t race – simple. It is stuff like this that is turning away long-time fans let alone not recruiting new ones.

    At least these penalties were cut and dry. Remember that Perez got a penalty got going through the penalty zone to stop himself getting a penalty.

  32. It is understandable that people (and of course me) wants to see wheel to wheel racing, touching to each other, pushing each other out of the track, and some hard racing like that. But, let’s accept that F1 is not about that. It’s all about safety, especially since ’94 (Today we have a pipeline over the head of drivers!). It is meaningless to compare with some other motorsports series.
    Specifically talking on Ricciardo’s moves, yes that was fun to watch, and there was not any safety issue i think, but, c’mon when you have whole track available, running out of track? Really? Ricciardo -generally- loves making things agitated especially since last race, and, sorry I’m not taking it.

  33. The first penalty was karma. Riccardo on Saturday was whining about Hamilton’s pass on him in Monaco where Riccardo didn’t lose a place and was provided with a car’s width plus a centimetre or two. He then does the Dan Dare pass on Norris which was never going to work, goes off track, comes back on: either he was out of control or purposefully shoves Norris off track losing him three paces.

    The second penalty was just cheek.

    But the points made about this track being part of the problem are right. If there were natural penalties for going off – bogging down in gravel, sliding and slipping on an expanse of grass, and kerbs between the grass or gravel and the re-entry to the track, Riccardo and Vettel would have suffered natural penalties, Riccardo two places behind Norris, and Vettel behind Hamilton.

    Even on a track like this milksop to French politicians, temporary kerbing is not that difficult to install in key locations.

  34. Has anyone slowed down the onboard replay from Raikkonen’s car, he clearly goes all 4 off the inside of the track as he straightened to avoid/pass Norris and Ricciardo (you have to watch it very carefully though, but he does, right at the apex). I think that should be a penalty as well unless he can argue he was avoiding Ricciardo’s car which was rejoining unsafely.

    1. in this instance the precedent was set last year at Monaco GP by Max Verstappen as to why Kimi wasn’t penalised.

  35. Well, Riciardo explained it best himself.

    In any case this is what happens on a parking lot track.

  36. Both the Norris vs Ricciardo and Vettel vs Hamilton incidents should have been left alone as racing incidents. Ricciardo purposely went off the track to pass Raikonnen and that was a valid penalty. But it was the stupid track design that allowed it.

    I believe, like Jackie Stewart, that the function of stewards is to penalize flagrantly unsafe moves, and not punish minor slip-ups from racing incidents. And these stupid runoffs in these tracks make moves that would be otherwise unsafe and clearly punishable or self-punishing, actually safe moves.

    The current design obsession with these damn runoffs is unbelievable unappealing. Austin, Abu Dhabi, Paul Ricard, Hockenheim (to a certain extent) make these off-track incidents an exercise in tedious bore.

Comments are closed.