Sebastian Vettel has taken a surprise win at the Hungarian Grand Prix, taking the lead of the race at the start to never give it up. The action happened behind him though, as incidents caused many position changes throughout the race, allowing both Red Bulls to complete the podium.
Phil wrote:I think in this instance, it's a lot more relevant to contemplate who was in which position to avoid a collision. You can't expect to drive on the "racing line" without caring what happens around you, especially not when there's a huge area of empty tarmac to your right and a car that is in your path on the left side of the track...
You are completely right. But does it play a role here? I strongly doubth, that Ros could see Ric from where he came or would have even expected him to be where he was after sliding across him with locked brakes...I would have expected Ric to be in the run out a second behind for the next corner, not next to the car more or less making the corner on the line.
Phil wrote:The fact that Ricciardo was at some point "ahead" (he crossed Rosbergs path, remember?) puts up a dispute to who had which right. If anything, by the point Ricciardo shot ahead of Rosberg, I'd say the corner and track position was at that point owned by no one (if there is such a thing).
I do not think there is something like a right of "track position" in the rules. All the rules state about "track position" is just related to the pure fact if overtaking is allowed or not and to the current standing. So during a fight for a position, it just does not make any sense to talk about "track position" and who owns it...unless the drivers are crossing the checkered flag.
There is the simple rule, that you need to leave space for your opponent as soon as his front wing is alongside. With this rule all other discussions about who is on the line or not are useless.
Ros had to leave space, but he could not expect/maybe see Ric there. For me it is a racing incident, it was judged in the right way.
Regarding that Ros may have not seen Ric - I think that may be one of the reasons why it was deemed a 'racing incident' and no driver was punished. Also because the margins were so fine - e.g. had the collision occurred just a tenth of a second later, there likely would have been no collision at all. In the end, neither driver wanted to collide, Ricciardo was in a spot he couldn't take evading action and Rosberg simply misjudged.
I like to think back to Canada 2012, when Button shunted Hamilton off the track and into the wall. It was wet, visibility was poor - Button made an error at the chicane and had an extremely bad drive out of it and heading into the next righthander where the best line is by moving to the left to take it at the widest radius. He knew Hamilton was right on his tale, he also knew that he compromised the chicane. Yet, the spray and perhaps a little bit of bad judgment meant that he didn't see that Hamilton had a much higher speed he carried through the chicane and was already pulling alongside when Button moved to the left. He then pushed Hamilton off the track who had a DNF. Who was at fault?
On one hand, you can say it was Hamilton, for putting his car in a gap that was closing (or just about to close). Or you could say Button, for not leaving a cars width. It was later deemed a 'racing incident', although I think when a collision occurs between two team-mates, the stewards historically have had a higher tolerance level.
In my view - Button was to blame. When I go to the track, and I compromise a corner, I'm fully aware that I just compromised my position. If a car overtaking me has then already put himself into a gap, I can no longer simply move over and "crowd him beyond the track". That - in my opinion - would constitute a dangerous malicious move where in I put another driver at risk. If he doesn't go for that gap, I'm free to move over and use the entire width of the track, but because only one defensive move is allowed (before a corner), I then can't move over to block again.
In the Canada 2012 example; I think it was most unfortunate. Button didn't want to shunt Hamilton off the track. He's not that kind of driver, so I think his momentary (lack of) awareness and the spray played a role. So a racing incident was overall a good decision.
Back to Hungary; Rosberg misjudged and payed the price. Had he left more space to cover off all eventualities, no collision would have occurred and the momentum he had would have meant he'd had kept his position. He didn't and payed the price, which is why I think the stewards decided not to punish further. Per the rules, there is no such thing as "who has track position" - because it's not a clear definition. Track position is perhaps who is further ahead, but depending on who is on the inside or outside may play a role in determine who is at an advantage at that specific point. Is it relevant? Perhaps not. But the fact remains, two cars were fighting for position (that much was clear to both) and when you are alongside each other, you can't move over and crowd a car off the track. Sometimes it happens anyway, when you've already committed to a corner and a certain speed and turn in (you will naturally drift towards the outside), but as a steward, I'd always factor in what both drivers did to avoid it to judge how punishable either is.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Andres125sx wrote:You must leave a cars width... when the car trying to overtake has earned the position, not when the car is still clearly behind. Earned position is when the front wing of the car trying to overtake reach driver´s cockpit of the other car if my memory serve me
In this case Ricciardo had not earned the position, so he should have released the throttle because his front wing was only side by side with Rosberg´s rear wheel, as the puncture prove.
The problem is that this definition of "earned position" doesn't appear anywhere in the rules.
What does appear in the rules is that a driver is "along side" when his front wing is beside the other car's rear wheel:
For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.
I was sure it was in the rules... did they change it?
Then I correct myself, Rosberg to blame in this case.
In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said that "any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."
To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"
I suspect the written rules are only meant to cover a part of every situation that can happen during a race. For this, they precisely have stewards who find the "right and wrong" in a complex situation that can't be defined by a black and white rule. Effectively, it's the stewards job to decide and "make the rules" (not apply them).
Of course there are other situations, like speeding in the pitlane that is a basic "apply the rule book" kind of decision. But for every complex situation, like collisions during corners - I think it's the stewards job to decide who and what is punishable, not simply to apply predetermined written rules. That's why the stewards are usually ex F1 drivers and not just some office or armchair experts with basic reading and applying rules skills.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Well if you want to stay consistent with overtakes of the past 20 years in Formula 1 then Ricciardo put his front wing in a place that never existed for him.
Rosberg had as much right to take the line here as Hamilton had in SPA 2014. This isn´t GT racing where you must leave a cars width, this is Formula 1 where if you are off by a tiny bit the inside guy can claim the line. (in fact in most cases being the outside guy you almost have to be ahead to claim a double line through the corner)
You either back out or lose a front wing.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"
SectorOne wrote:Well if you want to stay consistent with overtakes of the past 20 years in Formula 1 then Ricciardo put his front wing in a place that never existed for him.
Consistent except for Vettel-Alonso in curva grande...
SectorOne wrote:Moose should have put up the whole quote instead.
In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said that "any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."
To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."
True, but anycase I agree with Phil, it´s up to the stewarts to decide, every situation is different and must be studied independently
SectorOne wrote:Well if you want to stay consistent with overtakes of the past 20 years in Formula 1 then Ricciardo put his front wing in a place that never existed for him.
Consistent except for Vettel-Alonso in curva grande...
Maybe you disagree, but I see both situations very different...
SectorOne wrote:Well if you want to stay consistent with overtakes of the past 20 years in Formula 1 then Ricciardo put his front wing in a place that never existed for him.
Consistent except for Vettel-Alonso in curva grande...
How is that inconsistent? Maybe you can expand the subject a bit.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"
SectorOne wrote:Well if you want to stay consistent with overtakes of the past 20 years in Formula 1 then Ricciardo put his front wing in a place that never existed for him.
Riccardio didnt "put his front wing anywhere" he was under control driving in a straight line heading to the next corner.... Rosberg put his left rear wheel where it didnt belong because he was the driver that slashed across the track to squeeze the red bull when he didnt even need to.Rosbergs move created the contact not Riccardio driving in a straight line.
SectorOne wrote:Again if you want to stay consistent with the last 20-30 uears of F1 overtakes then you are simply wrong.
I expect there are plenty of what would be viewed as classic overtakes that would now be breaking the rules, so I don't think you can look at anything earlier than 2010 for reference, a 5 year period.
SectorOne wrote:Rosberg had as much right to take the line here as Hamilton had in SPA 2014.
Rosberg was never ahead of Hamilton. He was in no position to even attempt a pass. Hamilton couldn't have had eyes there to know what was happening, he also did not compromise his entry.
Ricciardo was actually ahead of Rosberg at some point. Irregardless if that was under control or not, he actually crossed the track in front of Rosberg. Once Rosberg evaded Ricciardo dashing across the track ahead of him, he too compromised his corner and was not on the ideal racing line anymore. How then can Rosberg have right to the racing line again by default? There is no such thing, especially since the position at that point was neutral. If anything, Ricciardo was ahead up to the point Rosberg came past through better momentum and greater speed and crowded him off the track.
giantfan10 is right on the money. Rosberg did the move, not Ricciardo (he was just staying on the left part of the track). To suggest he should have done anything differently is like numerous backmarkers being lapped, sticking to their side of the track only to then have overtakers dash back on to the racing line and make contact (happened just recently with a Manor car btw). It's not right there and it isn't right here.
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II #Team44 supporter
Phil wrote:giantfan10 is right on the money. Rosberg did the move, not Ricciardo (he was just staying on the left part of the track). To suggest he should have done anything differently is like numerous backmarkers being lapped, sticking to their side of the track only to then have overtakers dash back on to the racing line and make contact (happened just recently with a Manor car btw). It's not right there and it isn't right here.
I posted the video of Grosjean doing that to Stevens in Montreal and was told it's not comparable
