@niefer They also need to be paid for, which I think is going to be the biggest sticking point (assuming sufficient notice to allow schedules to be modified, which in this case would likely mean the end of […]
@aapje Ah, so you don’t know what “woke” and “asleep” mean?
@markzastrow My first point is that you’d have to change several definitions to get the effect you want, which will have unanticipated effects on other parts of the regulations (in this case, on VSC/safety car […]
@drmouse No, the reason most broadcasters don’t cover qualifying is because they haven’t paid for Friday coverage. Three sessions always cost more than two. It’s already the case that free-to-air broadcasters […]
@peartree The rules didn’t give the wrong person the penalty, the stewards did. Also, post-race time penalties are a thing, but post-qualifying time penalties haven’t been a thing since 2006 (when it was […]
@peartree You are being dishonest. You should have realised that there is good reason why the rules are not changed the way you want them to be, for I have specified them multiple times. Red flag races back in the […]
(Adding: I believe the objective of the stewards was primarily to head off any future dodgy tactics of this type at the pass, while deliberately not judging/specifying whether this was an example of the genre or not).
3. The allegations were serious, the stewards aren’t officially allowed to admit they read them closely enough to know if there was any merit to them because the new evidence bar (which has to be […]
They used a two-year-old car, which means it’s not part of the cap. Of course, they’re entitled to get the fees off of Mercedes’ (capped) budget if the FIA had found in their favour and ordered Mercedes to pay the […]
@skipgamer He chose the wrong line, exactly like Max did. Lewis can only be said to have done what he did on purpose to the extent that Max could be said to have done so (in my book, neither did so at […]
@undercut677 It’s only a time penalty at worst if neither deliberation nor unusual recklessness can be shown. A pattern would reveal it to the stewards, even if it was different drivers taking up the “trend” each time.
@red-andy WMSC avenue is closed to Red Bull, as this was an in-race penalty. The only available route is the Swiss Court of Arbitration, in which case they can expect a decision in 2025 at the earliest.
@tone What you advocate is penalty by outcome, which the FIA strictly forbids its stewards to do. Hence Red Bull being obliged to go down the deliberation/unusual recklessness route for their appeal. (Also, hence […]
@roadrunner If true, then that casts the stewarding between 2015 and 2018 into question. What is the point of briefing competitors to do something different from what stewards are advised competitors should be doing?
@slotopen In which case, I think they’ve backfired against Lewis (they’ve tipped their hand that Red Bull are less resilient than Mercedes) and will at best have had no effect on the stewards.
Because we were told about it very recently. (My guess is that we were told it recently as it had become thematically relevant – firing someone for racist comments is a demonstrable action when it comes to being anti-racist).
Checking cars out in the garage is one thing. Actually putting equipment to the car and making repairs or adjusting parts is another.
Not in the eyes of the regulations. In its perspective, the […]
@aapje So you oppose “woke” people because some “asleep” people deliberately harm others and opposing them is necessary? Illuminating.
@peartree Races are not re-run on red flags, and for the reasons I specified in my previous post cannot be re-run. These also need to be treated as neutralised.
MotoGP is not run by the FIA, rather by FIM […]
Of course, I think the incident was Sainz’s fault rather than Russell’s, but that’s a whole different argument…
- Load More