TBK-Light.com

Bring back gravel or grass - problem would be solved. No one could then go off track and rejoin like nothings happened. But we have to have so much tarmac run off areas wich invites the driver to overtake and then he gets penalised cuz he overtook!! Stupid stewards. They are re/writing rules for every race...
And who know the outcome if there were grass or gravel. We could have seen a great overtake if..

And for the sake of consistency they should have enforced it with Vettel as above and also Massa at the start for taking Rosberg off. You can't be selective when you enforce it. That is the problem.

For the millionth time, Vettel chose to drive off the track.

This is the problem - the same rule has to be applied to different circumstances.

_________________
Dan Wheldon | 1978 - 2011

A thin layer of gravel just after the curbs will stop that. Can still have their precious tarmac, but with a 2 meter strip of gravel before. Cars can still continue in the race if go beyond the gravel strip, but driving wide will actually penalise the drivers.

And if he hadn't, Jenson would've driven into him. Grosjean also chose to drive off the track, as he'd committed to that line whether Massa ran wide or not. He was going there anyway. Just because Massa ran wider than Jenson did, doesn't make a difference to Grosjeans actions.

If a surface cannot be used for racing (as they suggested at Hockenheim and Hungaroring), then it should not be exclusive to overtaking manoeuvres. If kerbing and run off is not an acceptable place to put your car, then it should also apply to non-passing moves, which history has shown it does not. At India, Vettel had all 4 wheels on the kerb, whilst Lewis had 2 on the kerb and 2 over the kerb, clipping the grass. At Monza it was common for decades to use the run off on the exit of Ascari. And this is only the cars we see - we generally don't get to watch the mid-back field lapping and the lines they take.

Both drivers committed to exiting the white lines, however both were using kerbing and run off which they generally allow for driving on. If it is legal to drive on it, why is it not legal to pass on it?

They may have banged wheels and that would have been it, but he could still have had two wheels on the track. Vettel had the grip to stick the outside while Button was struggling for grip. Vettel chose very early to just take the easy route unlike Grosjean. He just floored it and drove way off track on tarmac that really shouldn't have been there. If he really was worried about Button hitting him then he could have lifted off, slotted in behind and tried again but I suppose Vettel just sucks at overtaking most of the time.

Vettels penalty was deserved, Grosjeans wasn't.

No, I hate this logic because it means even if you're ahead, you should go behind because the car inside doesn't have the grip to hold it with you.

The incidents were identical. Both drivers made conscious decisions to drive over a white line which dictates the edge of the circuit, but which is ignored in 100% of cases until the incident, to make a pass on a car which they feared was not going to give them space. When someone passes on the outside of Ascari, a line which has been accepted for about 40 years, since the chicane was installed, will that suddenly become bad?

The entire discussion is ridiculous because we basically say you can do 1 thing somewhere, but not another thing. At this rate we'll need colour coded tarmac to say what you can drive on and what you can pass on, and what you can't drive on at all.

Grosjean and Massa were inches away from contact. Grosjean's move was judged to perfection. Vettel committed to the run off area well before Button was anywhere near him. He didn't even try to stick near the circuit. It was a corner where traction was important, and at that point on their tyres, it was an advantage for him to take a shallower angle off the corner. Completely different.

Of course, they could just get rid of that incredibly pointless piece of tarmac at Hockenheim. I mean, you're coming off a hairpin at incredibly slow speed. Surely it's not there for safety reasons? Advertising maybe?

The issue I have is the inconsistency.

Grosjean passed Massa and had to take an extra 2 inches or so to make it legal. Yet as has been posted on the previous page, twice Vettel ran off track while he was defending against Grosjean - on both occasions you can argue that the driver has gained an advantage by exceeding track limits yet only one gets the penalty. That to me is what's harsh. And it's becoming more problematic when you have circuits built with white lines rather than any defining features. It encourages sloppy driving - places like Korea, India, Abu Dhabi. There's no penalty for running wide and we've seen incidents because of that.

_________________
Dan Wheldon | 1978 - 2011

If the argument is that traction is important, then using a dirty run off with paint and dust all over it isn't an ideal part of the circuit to even be close to. Vettel committed to the outside that far as Jenson was in his blindspot, and would surely eventually come to the edge of the circuit (which he did). When it was done doesn't matter, as the outcome was identical. No different to Grosjean, who committed to the outside knowing he'd have to use the kerbing. That is not a criticism of Grosjean, as I have already said - that tarmac is used ALL The time, literally all weekend, then suddenly it becomes not ok.

I think the only thing we're going to agree on is once again, tarmac run off ruined the racing. Which is mad because it's the opposite of what's meant to happen.



Arguably it's even worse than that. India especially the drivers were taking grass inside kerbs, being completely off the white line. The drivers are being allowed to be overly aggressive with these run offs, both inside and outside...until it comes to actual racing. So..the tarmac is there to drive on, but NOT to race on? That doesn't make sense.

I agree that Vettel got screwed at Hockenheim last year but the two incidents have barely any similarity. The only link is the tarmac run off. The Vettel incident happened at very low speed and he was behind the car he was trying to overtake before committing to outside the circuit limits. Whereas Grosjean's incident happened at high speed and he was ahead of the other car before going over the curbs. Considering multiple times throughout the GP a car strayed over and beyond the curbs, why has the line been drawn for Grosjean and yet not for all the other people who went outside the track limits in an attempt to lap quickly, stay ahead of following cars, get into the DRS zone / avoid dropping into the DRS zone, etc...?

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

How can the Vettel and Grosjean overtakes even be compared? just look at it.
[youtubeidiot]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILep8RzQjNg[/youtubeidiot]

Vettel chose to go all the way beyond the kerbs even though Button left room. Vettel made the radius of the corner bigger which results in maintaining a higher speed on exit. The penalty was justified here.

Grosjean took the normal line, drivers were going as wide as him all weekend in that corner without penalty.


Grosjean did the overtaking move of the year imo. This penalty was just as ridiculous as Hamilton in Spa 2008.

Next year with the penalty points system, will this mean we get to enjoy this kind of racing without drivetroughs being handed out? Will drivers just get a penalty point after the race? I sure hope so.

Woah woah woah. Lewis penalty after the race was partially because he and McLaren lied to the stewards. They said they lifted to allow Kimi to pass, but when telemetry was produced it showed Lewis never lifted once he was on the throttle. So a questionable action became a certain penalty. It was a big deal because it was the same team and driver who lied to the stewards about the passing under the SC earlier that year.

If Lewis and McLaren had not lied (again) then they may never have been penalised, but the fact they lied to try and justify the action, whilst already being on a short leash, meant they were always going to get fucked

tl;dr - Whitmarsh is a prick.

Quote of the year

Never has a truer word ever been said.

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

Too bad I didn't know this. But one question, how was Kimi able to pass if Lewis didn't lifted? Or did they say Lewis lifted after he let him passed?

ellis - are you sure you're not confusing Spa 2008 with Melbourne 2009. What you write is more reminiscent of what happened in the incident with Trulli. I don't ever recall reading or seeing any details about telemetry showing Hamilton not lifting. I thought that from the onboard you can hear Hamilton feather the throttle momentarily to allow Kimi back past.

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

When interviewed they said that Lewis had given the place back. When asked if he lifted, McLaren replied yes. Once on the throttle, Lewis never lifted it. Kimi just had an advantage out of the corner from the smoother exit and on the power earlier on a clean part of the circuit.

Looking back, like the Australian GP Farce, I think it's safe to assume that Lewis was pressured into the situation by Whitmarsh, who was the man behind the Aussie mess too. I think Lewis would've maybe gotten the Spa win had they just been honest and argued the point fairly.

I'm referring to both. The telemetry at Spa was what got Lewis convicted of that. Melbourne 2009 was just hilarious, because several of us on this very forum identified that McLaren were lying after the TV interviews didn't line up, and then a few days later the FIA got involved. The telemetry might've been presented there too, but they were already screwed just from not having their stories straight in TV interviews.

I think Australia 2009 must sum up 21st century McLaren in one race: be in the shit, recover from it, screw it up, try and cover themselves and end up in a worse place.

_________________
Dan Wheldon | 1978 - 2011