Phil wrote: DarkSurferZA wrote: ↑
Sun Jun 09, 2019 9:48 pm
Well, I think there is something wrong with the stewards office when all the commentators unanimously disagree with a decision.
Would it change the incident in any way, if Mercedes had not won the last 6 races and dominated this season this far? If they had been the underdog? In a way it's funny - many hoped (me included) that Vettel and Ferrari would bring the race home today. But nevertheless, it doesn't change the fact that in the end, he made a mistake, completely left the track and rejoined the track (partially out of control) and in doing so, blocking Hamilton at the same time. If there had not been a wall, or the track been wider, Hamilton would have easily passed. He didn't because he avoided a collision. If this had happened at i.e. the hair-pin - same result. There's no way he would have held on to his position.
The stewards job is not to take into account who should have won the race or how many points are at stake. They should judge the incident independently and in complete isolation, which IMO they did.
I feel gutted for Vettel, I really am, but simply because a Ferrari win would have been marvellous for the sport does not change the fact that he did make a mistake under severe pressure and was lucky not to hit a wall or cause a collision with Lewis. Yet he still rejoined in a way that caused the driver he was racing and who forced him into that error in the first place to take avoiding action.
You make a mistake, you pay. Hamilton locked up multiple times at the hair pin and lost time. That's the way it is. I have no doubt, if the gap had been larger and Hamilton had not been on Vettels tail, the incident would have gone unpunished. Yet the error was a direct result of the pressure Hamilton put Vettel under and thus, it wouldn't be fair to let that slide without consequence simply because we all wanted Vettel to win.
We can't simply bend or change the rules because we wanted "a race". Legitimate and authentic racing requires rules and these rules are for the safety and for the fairness of all who participate. I feel most who are slamming the stewards about the rules are doing so from an emotional point of view and not because it was without merit.
I do t think Vettel should escape a penalty because it's good for the sport, or because it's popular. I think the penalty wasn't there for the issuing in the first place. SV had oversteer when he hit the kerb rejoining the circuit.
I think it is unfair to say SV could have avoided the oversteer by staying off the throttle. It's not something they practice, and it's not part of racing (to instinctively let your opponent passed).
We have seen a few decision taken lightly in the spirit of "more racing", but this wasn't a bias, this was the incorrect decision. Even with the frame by frame during the post race activities, not a single commentator or race car driver agreed with the decision. Even Lewis saying he didn't make the decision during the post race interviews after seeing it on screen should be enough to say there is inconsistency in terms of the decision making.
I don't blame any driver, or any team, but it just can't be that even with frame by frame, so many people (with racing experience) disagree with a decision. It just can't be that the decision making is as inconsistent as it is (Max at Monaco, vs Seb at Canada). It's either got to be hard but fair, to the letter of the rule book, or reasonable and with some understanding of the on tract situation.
Sent from my SM-T815 using Tapatalk