But this is the sort of stuff I think needs to be avoided.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:02 amOutcome 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.
Leaving the track and gaining an advantage = penalty of ## seconds + the time gained
Leaving the track and rejoining in an unsafe manner = drive through (harsh but a- it needs to be a solid outcome and drivers know if you do it then it this happens b- unsafe is unsafe and does it really need to get to the point where it damages another drivers race before it actually damages your own)
I generally hate all the possible outcomes if a rule is broken. There needs to be different penalties to fit the crime, but not 5-6 possible outcomes. It then comes down to steward bias, interpretation and opens the door for inconsistency.
At the moment stewards are playing the role of jury and judge, when I think they should just be there to play jury. After that the rule book clearly states the penalty.