Formula 1 2021

[LiberalFox]

I haven't faced watching the live broadcast back but Sky led us to believe they would be starting on the final lap with the lapped cars remaining where they were. That would have actually been an exciting conclusion that could have gone either way. There is no logic to what happened. If lapped cars are a safety issue then the race shouldn't have restarted until all lapped cars had passed the safety car and the race would have ended under the safety car. If lapped cars are considered an interference to cars on the lead lap and you don't have time to clear them then it is better to start with them there than not racing at all. Cars are where they are though because of gaps that were there before the safety car or due to pit stops that were taken. Letting some cars unlap themselves while others cannot totally interferes with the race. It meant 2nd place was shielded from behind. It meant some cars that were lapped but still in points scoring positions effectively had their race ended. 

 

I guess I'll just have to decide whether I want to watch next season. Feel like this season has been overly influenced by what is perceived as "good for the sport". 

[reporterpenguin]

37 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

That is not true though, them not pitting has nothing to do with them following the rules or them being forced not to pit, they didn't pit because of strategy. They were gambling on the race finishing under safety car, the point of contention is that certain cars were able to unlap without doing a full lap behind the safety car. had Masi not allowed them to unlap themselves the last lap would've been under green racing conditions regardless because the incident had been cleared. It's not a requirement for the lapped cars to unlap themselves on a race restart and this would've been the scenario that would've played out and this would've been perfectly legal. Again nothing to do with strategy calls, or the idea that mercedes were forced to take one strategy call because of the rules.

 

Mercedes didn't pit purely on track position and had they pitted Max would've probably stayed out and had a much better opportunity to defend Lewis despite being on the harder tyre but has much less wear. And the scenario at the time could've well been Max on worn tyres but checo on a fresh soft behind Lewis to also prevent him taking the lead and again this is purely a strategy call, nothing to do with the "rules"

 

The point of contention is whether the lapped cars that unlapped themselves was legal, not the fact mercedes didn't pit because "they were following the rules", again it's irrelevant. The race would've finsihed under green flag rules regardless the point of contention is the lapped cars, the strategy is irrelevant.

That’s not the point they’re making though. 
 

They’re saying that Mercedes strategy was influenced by the expectation that the rules would be followed, meaning one of two things could have happened:

 

1) The lapped cars unlap themselves with the safety car coming in the following lap, meaning it would have finished under the after car

 

 2) The lapped cars remain between Hamilton and Verstappen, the safety car comes in, and there is one lap of racing with Verstappen having to get passed the lapped cars

[Stinkenzo]

2 hours ago, AKCJ said:

Are they not doing Drive to Survive for the 2021 season?

They are, and what a scripted ending Latifi helped them to fabricate! 

[The Horse's Mouth]

6 minutes ago, reporterpenguin said:

That’s not the point they’re making though. 
 

They’re saying that Mercedes strategy was influenced by the expectation that the rules would be followed, meaning one of two things could have happened:

 

1) The lapped cars unlap themselves with the safety car coming in the following lap, meaning it would have finished under the after car

 

 2) The lapped cars remain between Hamilton and Verstappen, the safety car comes in, and there is one lap of racing with Verstappen having to get passed the lapped cars

His claim specifically was "Mercedes didn't pit because they followed the rules" which is false and to expand it even further this begun because the not to pit strategy was brought in as a reason that Lewis had been "robbed". I'm not sure if you read my post or not because I literally stated these two scenarios in my response, however the race finishing under SC was the most unlikely option based on the news of all teams agreeing to finish the race under green flag conditions under any means necessary.

[cityfanlee23]

56 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

That is not true though, them not pitting has nothing to do with them following the rules or them being forced not to pit, they didn't pit because of strategy. They were gambling on the race finishing under safety car, the point of contention is that certain cars were able to unlap without doing a full lap behind the safety car. had Masi not allowed them to unlap themselves the last lap would've been under green racing conditions regardless because the incident had been cleared. It's not a requirement for the lapped cars to unlap themselves on a race restart and this would've been the scenario that would've played out and this would've been perfectly legal. Again nothing to do with strategy calls, or the idea that mercedes were forced to take one strategy call because of the rules.

 

Mercedes didn't pit purely on track position and had they pitted Max would've probably stayed out and had a much better opportunity to defend Lewis despite being on the harder tyre but has much less wear. And the scenario at the time could've well been Max on worn tyres but checo on a fresh soft behind Lewis to also prevent him taking the lead and again this is purely a strategy call, nothing to do with the "rules"

 

The point of contention is whether the lapped cars that unlapped themselves was legal, not the fact mercedes didn't pit because "they were following the rules", again it's irrelevant. The race would've finsihed under green flag rules regardless the point of contention is the lapped cars, the strategy is irrelevant.

Good grief. It would take roughly 3 laps to clear the debris, then 1 lap for everyone to unlap themselves, then the safety car is required to do 1 full lap with everyone in the correct position. That's 5 laps. The crash happened with 5 laps left. If Mercedes pitted, Max would have stayed out, thus giving him the championship under a safety car. That is why they could not afford to pit, because they followed the rules, yes, this is strategy, because the rules of this scenario is a massive part of strategy. They followed the rules, those rules got changed. So they are absolutely relevant. We had 1 lap of racing specifically because Masi broke the rules of F1. If he had followed the rules, it would not have been green racing conditions. With respect mate, this info is freely available. 

As i've said, i'm frankly bored/tired of max fans who havent read the rules giving opinions on why Merc did what they did. The rules are clear, Mercedes knew them, so did Ferrari etc. Red Bull took a gamble as they had nothing to lose, their only strategy was to do the opposite of merc. Merc were forced by the rules to stay out because the race SHOULD have ended under SC if the rules were followed. It's not irrelevant, it's the entire conversation in a nutshell. If you still cannot see this, you never will. 

We can agree to disagree on this. Otherwise we will go in circles. 

[cityfanlee23]

9 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

His claim specifically was "Mercedes didn't pit because they followed the rules" which is false and to expand it even further this begun because the not to pit strategy was brought in as a reason that Lewis had been "robbed". I'm not sure if you read my post or not because I literally stated these two scenarios in my response, however the race finishing under SC was the most unlikely option based on the news of all teams agreeing to finish the race under green flag conditions under any means necessary.

They did not agree under "any means necessary" and the race director specifically quoted "highly desirable" There is a huge difference between fundamentally changing the race rules which massively gives one driver a huge advantage and massively negatively affects other drivers and trying to find a solution that keeps the fight fair and balanced. 

[Stinkenzo]

4 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Good grief. It would take roughly 3 laps to clear the debris, then 1 lap for everyone to unlap themselves, then the safety car is required to do 1 full lap with everyone in the correct position. That's 5 laps. The crash happened with 5 laps left. If Mercedes pitted, Max would have stayed out, thus giving him the championship under a safety car. That is why they could not afford to pit, because they followed the rules, yes, this is strategy, because the rules of this scenario is a massive part of strategy. They followed the rules, those rules got changed. So they are absolutely relevant. We had 1 lap of racing specifically because Masi broke the rules of F1. If he had followed the rules, it would not have been green racing conditions. With respect mate, this info is freely available. 

As i've said, i'm frankly bored/tired of max fans who havent read the rules giving opinions on why Merc did what they did. The rules are clear, Mercedes knew them, so did Ferrari etc. Red Bull took a gamble as they had nothing to lose, their only strategy was to do the opposite of merc. Merc were forced by the rules to stay out because the race SHOULD have ended under SC if the rules were followed. It's not irrelevant, it's the entire conversation in a nutshell. If you still cannot see this, you never will. 

We can agree to disagree on this. Otherwise we will go in circles. 

In case you didn't know he is one of a few trolls that regularly post in this thread, however skimming through what you're quoting from him it appears to be the first time ive ever seen him try and debate with somebody without just replying " hahahahahahaha"

[The Horse's Mouth]

5 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

Good grief. It would take roughly 3 laps to clear the debris, then 1 lap for everyone to unlap themselves, then the safety car is required to do 1 full lap with everyone in the correct position. That's 5 laps. The crash happened with 5 laps left. If Mercedes pitted, Max would have stayed out, thus giving him the championship under a safety car. That is why they could not afford to pit, because they followed the rules, yes, this is strategy, because the rules of this scenario is a massive part of strategy. They followed the rules, those rules got changed. So they are absolutely relevant. We had 1 lap of racing specifically because Masi broke the rules of F1. If he had followed the rules, it would not have been green racing conditions. With respect mate, this info is freely available. 

As i've said, i'm frankly bored/tired of max fans who havent read the rules giving opinions on why Merc did what they did. The rules are clear, Mercedes knew them, so did Ferrari etc. Red Bull took a gamble as they had nothing to lose, their only strategy was to do the opposite of merc. Merc were forced by the rules to stay out because the race SHOULD have ended under SC if the rules were followed. It's not irrelevant, it's the entire conversation in a nutshell. If you still cannot see this, you never will. 

We can agree to disagree on this. Otherwise we will go in circles. 

Have you even read my post lol, cars unlapping themselves is not a requirement . With the teams agreement before the race, I imagine Mercedes would've known the most likely scenario was the race resuming with the lapped cars behind Lewis, which would've been perfectly legal. So no, the idea that finishing under the safety car was the only legal way for the race to finish is wrong.And if you want to be technical, Masi didn't break the rules cause he has overriding authority and full control of the safety car procedure (rightly or wrongly, but this is the case, we can debate whether that's too much power and need for more clarity within the rules but that's a completely different argument)

 

The race shouldn't have ended under safety car though, the debris were cleared and the track was in perfect condition to race in. The fair and legal course would've been the the race restart with the lapped cars in the pack, with the agreement within the teams in mind and this would've been a perfectly legal way to restart the race.

[fuchsntf]

23 hours ago, Jimmy said:

if Masi is still there next year I'm genuinely unsure if I'll bother watching, you cannot have someone making rules up on the spot like he did

I wont be watching any F1, if it doesnt Clean up its General F1 off-track immature rumblings.& Soap-opera antics,

you cant tell me it doesn't Effect the Drivers race driving mentality...

[PhillippaT]

On 13/12/2021 at 19:39, Jimmy said:

if Masi is still there next year I'm genuinely unsure if I'll bother watching, you cannot have someone making rules up on the spot like he did

According to the FIA the Race Director can do whatever the hell he wants with the safety car   

[goody2028]

 

 

Remarkable few minutes of radio. How the fvck Bono stays so calm for Lewis I don’t know. Around 0:30 you can tell he just knew what was going to happen. 

[Legend_in_blue]

I had calmed down a little since the weekend's manufactured result but then I clicked on a BBC article this evening quoting that nutter Marko.  Total numpty that guy.

[BlueSi13]

3 hours ago, Walkers said:

In case you didn't know he is one of a few trolls that regularly post in this thread, however skimming through what you're quoting from him it appears to be the first time ive ever seen him try and debate with somebody without just replying " hahahahahahaha"

To be fair to him, he's done an admirable job trying to defend a hopeless position without resorting to the usual social media bullshit like "cRy mOooOoOOore".

 

Anyways do people think Mercedes are going to pull the trigger on the appeal on Thursday?  It's been radio silence from them since they announced their intention to appeal.  No doubt they will have been war gaming since then and most independents have expressed a belief that they have a very very strong case.  

 

However I think the key questions are, what do Mercedes actually want and what would the authorities be able to give if they win?  For example, Mercedes might argue that the safety car laps should be declared null and void, however is that legally possible?  Do they want the race itself declared null and void?  In such case Verstappen stays champion and Mercedes are already confirmed as Constructors champions, why waste millions to essentially end up where you started?  Principle?  To shame the FIA?  If so that damage is already done.  

 

Or would it be better to perhaps keep it behind closed doors, ensure that the laws are tightened for next year so this can never happen again and accept some hush money from the FIA.  Maybe that might be the best solution for all parties.

[Stinkenzo]

I don't think Merc are necessarily trying to take the title off Max, I assume their beef is with Masi (probably stating the obvious there)

 

I don't really buy this stuff about their rep being tarnished at pursuing this, anyone who isnt Dutch and has common sense can understand why Merc feel aggrieved about the whole thing. Whether legally the FIA can wriggle their way out of it is another matter. 

[Legend_in_blue]

It's frustrating that in an effort to appeal the FIA decision making, RB have taken it upon themselves to weigh in on the situation.  There's no need for their involvement.  The written statement from the FIA literally takes RBs interpretation of the rule book and uses it to deliver a final verdict which I still find absolutely stunning but there you go.

 

The FIA are trying to throw it back at the teams but ultimately they, Masi, ****ed it up so an appeal which results in Masi walking would be fine by me.  He threw the race after an unnecessary interjection from Karen, despite what that nutter Marko has to say on the matter.

[Stinkenzo]

Every team should have been asked if they want to weigh in but I bet you they absolutely weren't. Were Ferrari okay that Sainz had back markers between himself and the leaders? Not sure if 4th was directly behind him but if not, the back markers infront of Sainz could easily have cost him his podium finish. I understand Mercedes winning the appeal would have the biggest consequences on Red Bull, but really this should be for all of teams (should they wish to be an "interested party"), or Mercedes only. But only two teams and two drivers existed to Masi/the stewards on Sunday. 

[The Horse's Mouth]

2 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

To be fair to him, he's done an admirable job trying to defend a hopeless position without resorting to the usual social media bullshit like "cRy mOooOoOOore".

 

Anyways do people think Mercedes are going to pull the trigger on the appeal on Thursday?  It's been radio silence from them since they announced their intention to appeal.  No doubt they will have been war gaming since then and most independents have expressed a belief that they have a very very strong case.  

 

However I think the key questions are, what do Mercedes actually want and what would the authorities be able to give if they win?  For example, Mercedes might argue that the safety car laps should be declared null and void, however is that legally possible?  Do they want the race itself declared null and void?  In such case Verstappen stays champion and Mercedes are already confirmed as Constructors champions, why waste millions to essentially end up where you started?  Principle?  To shame the FIA?  If so that damage is already done.  

 

Or would it be better to perhaps keep it behind closed doors, ensure that the laws are tightened for next year so this can never happen again and accept some hush money from the FIA.  Maybe that might be the best solution for all parties.

They won't appeal it because it's a fruitless endeavour, and it's unlikely they would win as the articles stated do confirm that Masi had complete control over the safety car procedure and even if they did win, they're not going to want Lewis' record 8th championship decided in a court room. Also would the legal fees involved be counted towards the budget cap?

 

I think what youve outlined in the last paragraph is the most likely outcome if anything is pushed. If rules can be overridden by other rules it seems like the rulebook needs a complete overhaul possibly leading to the race director having less power, but I'd imagine this measure would have to include all the teams across the paddock.

[Super_horns]

1 hour ago, Walkers said:

Every team should have been asked if they want to weigh in but I bet you they absolutely weren't. Were Ferrari okay that Sainz had back markers between himself and the leaders? Not sure if 4th was directly behind him but if not, the back markers infront of Sainz could easily have cost him his podium finish. I understand Mercedes winning the appeal would have the biggest consequences on Red Bull, but really this should be for all of teams (should they wish to be an "interested party"), or Mercedes only. But only two teams and two drivers existed to Masi/the stewards on Sunday. 

Some radio from the other drivers/teams show the confusion and sudden change of plans made.

 

 

[LiberalFox]

One thing as a Hamilton fan is I think I like this ending more than if he had won an 8th world title the way Verstappen won this one. Imagine if Lewis had been the one brake testing on a straight and repeatedly trying to cause a collision and then won the title from a Williams hitting the wall. It was a good season with the title decided in a terrible way. Legacy wise both drivers come out of it well though. This is probably closest to the Senna vs Schumacher battle that never got to happen. 

[Jimmy]

19 hours ago, PhillippaT said:

According to the FIA the Race Director can do whatever the hell he wants with the safety car   

not when it comes to when it comes in after letting lapped cars go, that is written in the rules

[PhillippaT]

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

not when it comes to when it comes in after letting lapped cars go, that is written in the rules

You understand that I'm (kinda) just repeating what the FIA said, when they say that the section that says the Race Director has full authority over the use of the safety car, it overrides section 48/49?  (Even though we all know it shouldn't, as you say.)

Edited 15 December 2021 by PhillippaT

[Jimmy]

40 minutes ago, PhillippaT said:

You understand that I'm (kinda) just repeating what the FIA said, when they say that the section that says the Race Director has full authority over the use of the safety car, it overrides section 48/49?  (Even though we all know it shouldn't, as you say.)

that wasn't the FIA that was the stewards marking their own homework

[PhillippaT]

4 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

that wasn't the FIA that was the stewards marking their own homework

They wouldn't have said that if they didn't expect the FIA to allow it...

[Super_horns]

FIA admit the incident tarnished the reputation of the sport .

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/andrewbensonf1/status/1471202625764872195?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1471202625764872195|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2Ftwitter.min.html1471202625764872195

[Leicester_Loyal]

28 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

FIA admit the incident tarnished the reputation of the sport .

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/andrewbensonf1/status/1471202625764872195?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1471202625764872195|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs9e.github.io%2Fiframe%2Ftwitter.min.html1471202625764872195

They're moving the goalposts now, basically shifting the narrative from no wrongdoing occurred to this.

 

I suspect a deal is going to be agreed with Mercedes, probably to shift out Masi or something.