Nico Rosberg has been hit with a 10-second penalty after the stewards decided in a lengthy meeting that the driver in question received radio messages from his team that were in breach of F1's new regulations that require a driver to drive his car 'alone and unaided'
To J_A_F too...dans79 wrote:If memory serves, that is specifically allowed.
Good point!Just_a_fan wrote:Rosberg's tyres were the same age as they pitted him directly behind Hamilton.
dans79 wrote:Yep, it falls into the same category as notifying the driver, that the car in front has issues.
nevill3 wrote:Yes that is correct, that is why the rules needs clarifying
I'm not arguing if the rules right or wrong, or even daft. The rules are what they are and CH is not at wrong to point that out, especially not if a possible position is to play for. If those instructions hadnt been given, Ves would have been in 2nd.FoxHound wrote:Do you know the resetting instructions Mercedes have for every possibility? If so, please divulge, thank you kindly.Phil wrote:@fox: Is it too much to ask the driver to know that himself?
That is what the rules say. Strategy info is allowed, car driving info isn't. The "avoid 7th gear" might be deemed to be driving info.FoxHound wrote:To J_A_F too...dans79 wrote:If memory serves, that is specifically allowed.
So the implication of a driver that has no issue(Vers), to that who is at the mercy of reliability(Ros), is that you can coach a driver to give him info regarding slowing down and not risking an overtake(aka racing), but you cannot tell a driver how to reset a specific issue that could lead to DNF?
I think you will find, it's about safety. They don't want the car behind getting close and getting a face full of oil, or debris, or rear-ending the car in front.FoxHound wrote:dans79 wrote:Yep, it falls into the same category as notifying the driver, that the car in front has issues.nevill3 wrote:Yes that is correct, that is why the rules needs clarifying
Surely, it should be the other way round to promote racing!
That's a whole different discussion...FoxHound wrote:dans79 wrote:Yep, it falls into the same category as notifying the driver, that the car in front has issues.nevill3 wrote:Yes that is correct, that is why the rules needs clarifying
Surely, it should be the other way round to promote racing!
+1Xwang wrote:According to me there should be no radio system at all in the car.
No audio messages and no telemetry.
The pilot who knows how to manage his car, has an advantage.
The team who creates a easiere to manage car or a more reliable one, ha an advantage.
If the pilot does not know what to do, he pits and then the mechanics connect a cable and see what is wrong.
- "Shame about the boos, though I suppose they were inevitable after Austria" Your logic is broken. How was booing inevitable and what's the connection between Austria and this rubbish behaviour?NathanOlder wrote:I thought Lewis was in a way asking the crowd not to boo, as he knew the mic was going to Nico next.SparkyAMG wrote:Shame about the boos, though I suppose they were inevitable after Austria.
Hamilton looked like a bit of a tool saying there was not much booing immediately before Rosberg was booed heavily for the second time.
Not a terrible race but tyre management was the key here. I don't think Rosberg will be penalised for the messages as it looked pretty critical, but I don't know how it'll be interpreted.
I didn't miss anything, that's the pointIf you stop watching and come back later, I guess you nirmally miss half the things you regularly argue about.
.lol cant do that, all the self serving, backroom deals and money making happens there. Thats all F1 is to FOM, the racing and the whole having to televise thing is the inconvenient cost.jknights wrote: Give us a break, do away with corporate hospitality that pays for a new engine/race.
