2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
maxxer
maxxer
2
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 11:01 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

roon wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:56 am
Just_a_fan wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:02 am
Outcome based penalties could be done:
1. Rejoin requiring evasive action = 5s
2. Rejoin resulting in contact = 10s
3. Rejoin resulting in damage = drive through.
4. Rejoin gaining an advantage = give back advantage. Failure to give back = drive through.

Etc.
Let's be fair:

Rejoin safely at a dangerous part of the track = 2s penalty til track is fixed
Rejoin dangerously but no cameras around = self report via FIA supplied in-cockpit wireless gavel
Failure to give self report = drive a little slower for a bit
Give up position but still angry about it whilst doing so = 5 deep breaths
Failure to give up a position after internet consensus = must meet with stewards in Toto's office
Failure to revere Hamilton = 44s penalty plus awkward handshake
Failure to expect anything from Vettel = demotion or promotion to P2
Failure to pass a Williams = must now drive for Williams
Failure to apoligize to Grosjean = must report income in France
Failure to make Kimi smile = 2w Finnish sensitivity training
Failure to make 107% rule = must commentate race with Brundle
I find that last penalty way too harsh! 🤣🤣🤣

maxxer
maxxer
2
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 11:01 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

dans79 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:04 am
The problem with just adding grass everywhere is that you've now created a safety issue at some tracks in some corners. instead of just going slightly off track, they'll hit the grass, lose control and end up in a barrier.
Yes its the same when there where big gravel traps instead of run off areas , at high speed sections cars would fly off and just bounce over the gravel and still hit the wall full speed because cant brake on gravel.

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
21
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

notsofast wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:26 am
astracrazy wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:44 pm
I feel like the sport needs to look at other sports and rewrite to move forward.
Tennis.

Out is out.
Tennis line is in, same with soccer
Football line is out, same with basketball

F1 all 4 out is out.

It's quite simple actually, but people's bias make things more difficult than it is.

Stay on the track (as defined by the rules), simple as that.

zeph
zeph
67
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:54 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

I haven’t finished watching the race yet, I’m at lap 12 now, but I’m thinking it would be hilarious if McLaren is faster than RBR by the end of the season. For Renault, that is.

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
21
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

Jackles-UK wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:49 am
The cars have a maximum width of approx 2m I believe - how difficult would it be to install a narrow (one car’s width, perhaps?) strip of gravel/grass/bumps 2m beyond the edge of the track at points of corner exit where drivers are currently tempted to run a wide to gain time? Surely this is the easiest and safest answer to that problem as the gigantic tarmac run-off area is still in place beyond that deterrent should a high-speed accident occur. Street tracks already have Armco/Tec-Pro barriers for this effect so I can’t see how a safety issue can arise.

Maybe this way the drivers will stop pushing their luck with track limits and drive within the boundaries of the rules. Run wide and drop a wheel onto that = the car is significantly affected. “Force” a car wide onto that (still some scope for arguments, I know) = a penalty is applied.

Simple.
Why should are car that is forced off the track by another competitor be even more penalized? Why should a car avoiding a spinning or crashed competitor be even more penalized? Why make the track less safe for someone with a mechanical failure?

Paint a white line and penalize drivers who go all four off (unluss forced to do so by a competitor? That is far more simple.

Do you complain when a basketball or football player is penalized for going out of bounds? Do you think they should put gravel or grass around nba courts? Every sport in the world has bounderies, none of them intentionally put dangers around them to penalize the participants. There is absolutely no reason to put these 20 incredible drivers in any further danger than necessary when simple rules pertaining to out of bounds have already been established.

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
21
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

carisi2k wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:13 am
Daniels penalty was silly. He barely left the circuit if at all and never cut the corner. The re enter rule should not have applied in his instance since he did not gain an advantage by cutting the corner.
Barely left the circuit? Is that like barely going out of bounds in basketball? Or barely being pregnant? Either you is or you ain't, and he was CLEARLY all 4 off. Upon rejoining he forced NOR to take evasive action and go off track, thus disadvantaging him. Penalty deserved.

dans79
dans79
251
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:08 am
carisi2k wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:13 am
Daniels penalty was silly. He barely left the circuit if at all and never cut the corner. The re enter rule should not have applied in his instance since he did not gain an advantage by cutting the corner.
Barely left the circuit? Is that like barely going out of bounds in basketball? Or barely being pregnant? Either you is or you ain't, and he was CLEARLY all 4 off. Upon rejoining he forced NOR to take evasive action and go off track, thus disadvantaging him. Penalty deserved.
yeah, both penalties were a slam dunk. If you listen to the interviews prior to him heading to the stewards he pretty much knew what was going to happen.
163 97 94 7

ENGINE TUNER
ENGINE TUNER
21
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

dans79 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:45 am
yeah, both penalties were a slam dunk. If you listen to the interviews prior to him heading to the stewards he pretty much knew what was going to happen.
Slam dunk huh? I see what you did there.... points.

And I agree with you that the more consistent and proper officiating of the sport is probably a consequence of Whiting's passing. And the sport is better off for it. Clean, hard, safe and fair racing should be the goal, and letting these guys get away with anything is not the way to get there.

drunkf1fan
drunkf1fan
50
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 2:34 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:04 am
Jackles-UK wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:49 am
The cars have a maximum width of approx 2m I believe - how difficult would it be to install a narrow (one car’s width, perhaps?) strip of gravel/grass/bumps 2m beyond the edge of the track at points of corner exit where drivers are currently tempted to run a wide to gain time? Surely this is the easiest and safest answer to that problem as the gigantic tarmac run-off area is still in place beyond that deterrent should a high-speed accident occur. Street tracks already have Armco/Tec-Pro barriers for this effect so I can’t see how a safety issue can arise.

Maybe this way the drivers will stop pushing their luck with track limits and drive within the boundaries of the rules. Run wide and drop a wheel onto that = the car is significantly affected. “Force” a car wide onto that (still some scope for arguments, I know) = a penalty is applied.

Simple.
Why should are car that is forced off the track by another competitor be even more penalized? Why should a car avoiding a spinning or crashed competitor be even more penalized? Why make the track less safe for someone with a mechanical failure?

Paint a white line and penalize drivers who go all four off (unluss forced to do so by a competitor? That is far more simple.

Do you complain when a basketball or football player is penalized for going out of bounds? Do you think they should put gravel or grass around nba courts? Every sport in the world has bounderies, none of them intentionally put dangers around them to penalize the participants. There is absolutely no reason to put these 20 incredible drivers in any further danger than necessary when simple rules pertaining to out of bounds have already been established.
See this is what I never get when people talk about how run off should penalise drivers badly.

Sure, if you make a mistake, mess up and go wide gravel punishing them is fine, but seeing a race with 8 guys in the second half of the race isn't great for the fans. But also what if you're driving great and some idiot slams up the inside, hits you, causes you to spin out and instead of spinning out into a nice run off area so you can get back on track, you're stuck in gravel and your race is over?

The idea that only cars who make mistakes end up off track is ridiculous and so obviously wrong.

As you say, we can easily penalise people but somehow people complain about that, but love the idea of gravel/grass run offs that can just as easily ruin a completely innocent driver who is the victim of someone else's bad driving.

Brundle's the same "I want them to be penalised for going off track with gravel/grass".... "omg, how could you penalise a guy who went off track"..... wait, what? An incredible amount of hypocrisy going on recently. There is plenty going wrong with the FIA, the tires are a disaster, the regulation changes aren't great, but turning on everything that works randomly because people just want to hit out at every aspect of F1 is not going to fix anything.

If the rules get broken, and fair driving is no longer a thing then racing won't be any better with the same cars and tires, if they fix the cars and tires, then with the current fair racing rules, we'll have great racing as we've had before. The rules aren't broken, and insisting that fixing them(getting rid of them) will somehow make cars easier to overtake is absurd. Breaking something that works because you think it will fix something that doesn't when it in fact won't have any effect is just people being reactionary and illogical.

The other thing fans need to be better with, also especially pundits who get to shape a lot of fans views, is miscategorising incidents.

you've got brundle, Crofty and even Ricciardo banging on about how Hamilton did the same thing as Vettel in Monaco in 2016... except just because it was a situation he missed a corner and defended doesn't mean the situations are identical. Fundamental difference is Vettel left no room for Hamilton and pushed him off track, Hamilton left ~1.4 cars widths for Ricciardo, allowing Crofty and brundle to refer to it as an example of the same thing being unpunished is terrible for the image of the sport. In effect they are misleading fans and riling up anger when it's plain to see they are completely wrong in comparing the two incidents as the same, when in fact 10 seconds of video from the right angle could actually be used to calm the fan base and explain exactly why what Hamilton did was an example of great fair driving and what Vettel did was over the line and required a penalty.

Just because incidents are similar broadly, fans and especially pundits need to be much better in highlighting the differences. Stewarding decisions have actually been pretty consistent for a long time, it's mostly fans comparing two pretty different incidents as the same thing.

It could help if the FIA clarify how they give penalties though. Take the Vettel vs Bottas and the Kimi vs Ham penalty. These decisions were again consistent, the fans understanding of them wasn't. They were consistent because the stewards have always taken into account what they did and the result. Meaning Vettel got a 5 second penalty because he screwed bottas but also sent himself to the back, which is effectively a partial penalty already so they added 5 seconds to that. For Kimi he hit Hamilton who went to the back as Bottas did, but Kimi effectively got away with it and stayed in the same position so he got a 10 second penalty. People saw this as a worse penalty and being inconsistent and Brundle/Crofty rather than sensibly explain the difference played up the drama which is imo terrible for F1. If they simply say Vettel got less time because he screwed himself while Kimi got a larger time penalty because he was able to carry on with no real loss then the difference is obvious and it's no longer considered another example of inconsistent penalties.

bosyber
bosyber
54
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:41 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

drunkf1fan wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:56 am
ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:04 am
Jackles-UK wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:49 am
The cars have a maximum width of approx 2m I believe - how difficult would it be to install a narrow (one car’s width, perhaps?) strip of gravel/grass/bumps 2m beyond the edge of the track at points of corner exit where drivers are currently tempted to run a wide to gain time? Surely this is the easiest and safest answer to that problem as the gigantic tarmac run-off area is still in place beyond that deterrent should a high-speed accident occur. Street tracks already have Armco/Tec-Pro barriers for this effect so I can’t see how a safety issue can arise.

Maybe this way the drivers will stop pushing their luck with track limits and drive within the boundaries of the rules. Run wide and drop a wheel onto that = the car is significantly affected. “Force” a car wide onto that (still some scope for arguments, I know) = a penalty is applied.

Simple.
Why should are car that is forced off the track by another competitor be even more penalized? Why should a car avoiding a spinning or crashed competitor be even more penalized? Why make the track less safe for someone with a mechanical failure?

Paint a white line and penalize drivers who go all four off (unluss forced to do so by a competitor? That is far more simple.

Do you complain when a basketball or football player is penalized for going out of bounds? Do you think they should put gravel or grass around nba courts? Every sport in the world has bounderies, none of them intentionally put dangers around them to penalize the participants. There is absolutely no reason to put these 20 incredible drivers in any further danger than necessary when simple rules pertaining to out of bounds have already been established.
See this is what I never get when people talk about how run off should penalise drivers badly.

Sure, if you make a mistake, mess up and go wide gravel punishing them is fine, but seeing a race with 8 guys in the second half of the race isn't great for the fans. But also what if you're driving great and some idiot slams up the inside, hits you, causes you to spin out and instead of spinning out into a nice run off area so you can get back on track, you're stuck in gravel and your race is over?

The idea that only cars who make mistakes end up off track is ridiculous and so obviously wrong.

As you say, we can easily penalise people but somehow people complain about that, but love the idea of gravel/grass run offs that can just as easily ruin a completely innocent driver who is the victim of someone else's bad driving.

Brundle's the same "I want them to be penalised for going off track with gravel/grass".... "omg, how could you penalise a guy who went off track"..... wait, what? An incredible amount of hypocrisy going on recently. There is plenty going wrong with the FIA, the tires are a disaster, the regulation changes aren't great, but turning on everything that works randomly because people just want to hit out at every aspect of F1 is not going to fix anything.

If the rules get broken, and fair driving is no longer a thing then racing won't be any better with the same cars and tires, if they fix the cars and tires, then with the current fair racing rules, we'll have great racing as we've had before. The rules aren't broken, and insisting that fixing them(getting rid of them) will somehow make cars easier to overtake is absurd. Breaking something that works because you think it will fix something that doesn't when it in fact won't have any effect is just people being reactionary and illogical.

The other thing fans need to be better with, also especially pundits who get to shape a lot of fans views, is miscategorising incidents.

you've got brundle, Crofty and even Ricciardo banging on about how Hamilton did the same thing as Vettel in Monaco in 2016... except just because it was a situation he missed a corner and defended doesn't mean the situations are identical. Fundamental difference is Vettel left no room for Hamilton and pushed him off track, Hamilton left ~1.4 cars widths for Ricciardo, allowing Crofty and brundle to refer to it as an example of the same thing being unpunished is terrible for the image of the sport. In effect they are misleading fans and riling up anger when it's plain to see they are completely wrong in comparing the two incidents as the same, when in fact 10 seconds of video from the right angle could actually be used to calm the fan base and explain exactly why what Hamilton did was an example of great fair driving and what Vettel did was over the line and required a penalty.

Just because incidents are similar broadly, fans and especially pundits need to be much better in highlighting the differences. Stewarding decisions have actually been pretty consistent for a long time, it's mostly fans comparing two pretty different incidents as the same thing.

It could help if the FIA clarify how they give penalties though. Take the Vettel vs Bottas and the Kimi vs Ham penalty. These decisions were again consistent, the fans understanding of them wasn't. They were consistent because the stewards have always taken into account what they did and the result. Meaning Vettel got a 5 second penalty because he screwed bottas but also sent himself to the back, which is effectively a partial penalty already so they added 5 seconds to that. For Kimi he hit Hamilton who went to the back as Bottas did, but Kimi effectively got away with it and stayed in the same position so he got a 10 second penalty. People saw this as a worse penalty and being inconsistent and Brundle/Crofty rather than sensibly explain the difference played up the drama which is imo terrible for F1. If they simply say Vettel got less time because he screwed himself while Kimi got a larger time penalty because he was able to carry on with no real loss then the difference is obvious and it's no longer considered another example of inconsistent penalties.
Well said, I do think you touch on two things
a) 'quality and attitude of commentary' - which, looking at RTL.DE (who seem to have become more reasonable and impartial in the last few years), and thinking about much of the 2007 Spain/UK difference in view of who is at fault at McLaren - is quite an issue, and asks a lot of journalistic integrity from those commentators. Which, frankly, Sky do not seem to have, but instead a 'emotion, and controversy/excitement' policy; quite an issue now they also are the English F1tv voices (which is why I used the much more measured, and usually quite excellent, though with less people on the ground, bbc 5 live radio from the F1 app)

b) the fundamental problem still is that the cars, aero, tyres, etc. just aren't well suited to fighting on most of these tracks, which means that drivers often have maybe one or two changes, or revert to things like Ricciardo did 'at least I tried', which give us excitement, and also controversy, because he used the part of the track that is meant to make it safe for cars and motogp, so when a competitor pushes you off from between the white lines you don't automatically lose the race/health/life, but that's not quite fair racing; problem is, often it was the only way to get some attempt, so then people are unhappy that every attempt is blocked.

In the end, Hamilton's 'blame the rule makers' (for example) is quite correct: Brawn and co really have to try and make a difference for 2021, whatever the pushback from the teams.

But also, this situation with the cars isn't new at all, though at different times refuelling (ugh, but, it gave some drama, and options), tyre war/different tyres, and less reliability masked it to some extent; oh, and commentary that maybe looked at what interesting things were going on and explaining those, instead of stirring controversy in the hope it engages viewers.

And, in the past, maybe our expectations were different, because there were definitely races in the 1990-2000's when I had a race on, but wasn't watching with three screens trying to follow everything, expecting to hear and see everything, but rather had the images my broadcaster showed, and then a sort of radio commentary of what actually was happening (not shown on the screen) by the guys in the commentary booth.

What also often makes me enjoy races a bit more, is just having the F1tv 'FX' audio track, ie. without commentary, just cars and car radio (well, and live timing, and data track).

Restomaniac
Restomaniac
8
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 12:09 am
Location: Hull

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

drunkf1fan wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:56 am
ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:04 am
Jackles-UK wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:49 am
The cars have a maximum width of approx 2m I believe - how difficult would it be to install a narrow (one car’s width, perhaps?) strip of gravel/grass/bumps 2m beyond the edge of the track at points of corner exit where drivers are currently tempted to run a wide to gain time? Surely this is the easiest and safest answer to that problem as the gigantic tarmac run-off area is still in place beyond that deterrent should a high-speed accident occur. Street tracks already have Armco/Tec-Pro barriers for this effect so I can’t see how a safety issue can arise.

Maybe this way the drivers will stop pushing their luck with track limits and drive within the boundaries of the rules. Run wide and drop a wheel onto that = the car is significantly affected. “Force” a car wide onto that (still some scope for arguments, I know) = a penalty is applied.

Simple.
Why should are car that is forced off the track by another competitor be even more penalized? Why should a car avoiding a spinning or crashed competitor be even more penalized? Why make the track less safe for someone with a mechanical failure?

Paint a white line and penalize drivers who go all four off (unluss forced to do so by a competitor? That is far more simple.

Do you complain when a basketball or football player is penalized for going out of bounds? Do you think they should put gravel or grass around nba courts? Every sport in the world has bounderies, none of them intentionally put dangers around them to penalize the participants. There is absolutely no reason to put these 20 incredible drivers in any further danger than necessary when simple rules pertaining to out of bounds have already been established.
See this is what I never get when people talk about how run off should penalise drivers badly.

Sure, if you make a mistake, mess up and go wide gravel punishing them is fine, but seeing a race with 8 guys in the second half of the race isn't great for the fans. But also what if you're driving great and some idiot slams up the inside, hits you, causes you to spin out and instead of spinning out into a nice run off area so you can get back on track, you're stuck in gravel and your race is over?

The idea that only cars who make mistakes end up off track is ridiculous and so obviously wrong.

As you say, we can easily penalise people but somehow people complain about that, but love the idea of gravel/grass run offs that can just as easily ruin a completely innocent driver who is the victim of someone else's bad driving.

Brundle's the same "I want them to be penalised for going off track with gravel/grass".... "omg, how could you penalise a guy who went off track"..... wait, what? An incredible amount of hypocrisy going on recently. There is plenty going wrong with the FIA, the tires are a disaster, the regulation changes aren't great, but turning on everything that works randomly because people just want to hit out at every aspect of F1 is not going to fix anything.

If the rules get broken, and fair driving is no longer a thing then racing won't be any better with the same cars and tires, if they fix the cars and tires, then with the current fair racing rules, we'll have great racing as we've had before. The rules aren't broken, and insisting that fixing them(getting rid of them) will somehow make cars easier to overtake is absurd. Breaking something that works because you think it will fix something that doesn't when it in fact won't have any effect is just people being reactionary and illogical.

The other thing fans need to be better with, also especially pundits who get to shape a lot of fans views, is miscategorising incidents.

you've got brundle, Crofty and even Ricciardo banging on about how Hamilton did the same thing as Vettel in Monaco in 2016... except just because it was a situation he missed a corner and defended doesn't mean the situations are identical. Fundamental difference is Vettel left no room for Hamilton and pushed him off track, Hamilton left ~1.4 cars widths for Ricciardo, allowing Crofty and brundle to refer to it as an example of the same thing being unpunished is terrible for the image of the sport. In effect they are misleading fans and riling up anger when it's plain to see they are completely wrong in comparing the two incidents as the same, when in fact 10 seconds of video from the right angle could actually be used to calm the fan base and explain exactly why what Hamilton did was an example of great fair driving and what Vettel did was over the line and required a penalty.

Just because incidents are similar broadly, fans and especially pundits need to be much better in highlighting the differences. Stewarding decisions have actually been pretty consistent for a long time, it's mostly fans comparing two pretty different incidents as the same thing.

It could help if the FIA clarify how they give penalties though. Take the Vettel vs Bottas and the Kimi vs Ham penalty. These decisions were again consistent, the fans understanding of them wasn't. They were consistent because the stewards have always taken into account what they did and the result. Meaning Vettel got a 5 second penalty because he screwed bottas but also sent himself to the back, which is effectively a partial penalty already so they added 5 seconds to that. For Kimi he hit Hamilton who went to the back as Bottas did, but Kimi effectively got away with it and stayed in the same position so he got a 10 second penalty. People saw this as a worse penalty and being inconsistent and Brundle/Crofty rather than sensibly explain the difference played up the drama which is imo terrible for F1. If they simply say Vettel got less time because he screwed himself while Kimi got a larger time penalty because he was able to carry on with no real loss then the difference is obvious and it's no longer considered another example of inconsistent penalties.
It happens in plenty of sports.

Look at Football and VAR. After years of wrong decisions from human officials we now have Video reviews, and the outcome?............loads of complaining #-o

Both Rugby codes have video reviews and still fans, players, coaches and commentators find reasons to moan.

User avatar
Juzh
523
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:45 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

maxxer wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:33 am
roon wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:56 am
Just_a_fan wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:02 am
Outcome based penalties could be done:
1. Rejoin requiring evasive action = 5s
2. Rejoin resulting in contact = 10s
3. Rejoin resulting in damage = drive through.
4. Rejoin gaining an advantage = give back advantage. Failure to give back = drive through.

Etc.
Let's be fair:

Rejoin safely at a dangerous part of the track = 2s penalty til track is fixed
Rejoin dangerously but no cameras around = self report via FIA supplied in-cockpit wireless gavel
Failure to give self report = drive a little slower for a bit
Give up position but still angry about it whilst doing so = 5 deep breaths
Failure to give up a position after internet consensus = must meet with stewards in Toto's office
Failure to revere Hamilton = 44s penalty plus awkward handshake
Failure to expect anything from Vettel = demotion or promotion to P2
Failure to pass a Williams = must now drive for Williams
Failure to apoligize to Grosjean = must report income in France
Failure to make Kimi smile = 2w Finnish sensitivity training
Failure to make 107% rule = must commentate race with Brundle
I find that last penalty way too harsh! 🤣🤣🤣
having to report income in france is also too much to stomach :lol:

sosic2121
sosic2121
20
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

dans79 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:04 am
The problem with just adding grass everywhere is that you've now created a safety issue at some tracks in some corners. instead of just going slightly off track, they'll hit the grass, lose control and end up in a barrier.
While you are right, I don't see a problem with that. It's dangerous sport. Hardest part should be finding the limit without going over it.
I also believe 2m grass trap is good solution.

For example, if in Canada there was tarmac, Vettel wouldn't lose his place or advantage. After all, he did make mistake, he should pay some price.

bosyber
bosyber
54
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:41 pm

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

sosic2121 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:28 am
dans79 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:04 am
The problem with just adding grass everywhere is that you've now created a safety issue at some tracks in some corners. instead of just going slightly off track, they'll hit the grass, lose control and end up in a barrier.
While you are right, I don't see a problem with that. It's dangerous sport. Hardest part should be finding the limit without going over it.
I also believe 2m grass trap is good solution.

For example, if in Canada there was tarmac, Vettel wouldn't lose his place or advantage. After all, he did make mistake, he should pay some price.
I don't quite agree - a lot of that asphalt is also for motoGP safety; and in Canada, had there been asphalt and a bollard/boards that give a slow path back to the track, maybe the unsafe situation would have been avoided. I don't want to see that happening, like grass there much more, but, if drivers are going to abuse stuff (Perez 'but I followed the rules, went around the bollard' ... yes, but fast enough to overtake three drivers off track), well, then gravel I suppose? But what about Norris being pushed off by Ricciardo - he'd not have been 10th, then 9th, but 'out of it'. So, it's not that simple as 'just put grass/gravel'.

sosic2121
sosic2121
20
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: 2019 French Grand Prix - Le Castellet, June 21-23

Post

bosyber wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:35 am
sosic2121 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:28 am
dans79 wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:04 am
The problem with just adding grass everywhere is that you've now created a safety issue at some tracks in some corners. instead of just going slightly off track, they'll hit the grass, lose control and end up in a barrier.
While you are right, I don't see a problem with that. It's dangerous sport. Hardest part should be finding the limit without going over it.
I also believe 2m grass trap is good solution.

For example, if in Canada there was tarmac, Vettel wouldn't lose his place or advantage. After all, he did make mistake, he should pay some price.
I don't quite agree - a lot of that asphalt is also for motoGP safety; and in Canada, had there been asphalt and a bollard/boards that give a slow path back to the track, maybe the unsafe situation would have been avoided. I don't want to see that happening, like grass there much more, but, if drivers are going to abuse stuff (Perez 'but I followed the rules, went around the bollard' ... yes, but fast enough to overtake three drivers off track), well, then gravel I suppose? But what about Norris being pushed off by Ricciardo - he'd not have been 10th, then 9th, but 'out of it'. So, it's not that simple as 'just put grass/gravel'.
I understand that grass is a problem for motogp.

I don't want grass all the way to the wall, just 2m, so driver that makes mistake should pay for it.
For example Hamilton made a small mistake yesterday(can't exactly remember and can't find a video), and those mistakes go unpunished on these circuits. If there was a grass trap, maybe he would lose his lead to Bottas that had a flawless race. This is hypothetical comment!

Also, if driver A pushes driver B onto grass on corner exit, imo that should be a penalty.