2012 Formula 1 SingTel Singapore Grand Prix

webbsy · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 2:31 am

StefMeister wrote:

Not sure I agree with Webber's penalty.

Yes Mark had all 4 wheels beyond the white line, However he only ended up there because Kobayashi didn’t leave him room to remain within the white line.

The rules clarification from a few races ago states that when a driver behind gets his car alongside the one infront while atempting a pass he must me left room, Kobayashi failed to leave him room & this forced Mark to put all 4 wheels over the white line.

Funny I thought the the edge of the kurb constitutes the edge of the track on any given corner, not the white line painted BEFORE the kurb.

osella 1986 · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:54 am

Some glasses designs for Schumi after todays accident.
http://bertholdbouman.wordpress.com/2012/09/23/singapore-gp-give-schumacher-a-pair-of-glasses/

Coldtyre · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:38 am

They should also allow him to use ABS on his car. :lol:

Ospi wrote:

I am really confused as to the justification of these rulings. Monza, Vettel squeezes Alonso who is attempting a pass on the outside off the track, Vettel Penalty. Here Koba queezes Webber who is attempting a pass on the outside off the track, Webber Penalty. So because Webber gained an advantage from being pushed off the track, he gets a penalty? I would have thought letting that one go would have been the better decision since Koba broke a (retarded) rule himself. I dunno, the more they try to clarify and tighten the rules the harder they make it for themselves and consistency then slips it seems.

Exactly. This kind of rules cannot be clarified or generalized because it corresponds to an infinity of situations on the racetrack.

They would be better off (and paradoxically, more consistent) if they left it as vague as possible in the rulebook, and started handing penalties for "unfair advantage" and "dangerous driving" only for the most obvious and dangerous cases that everybody will agree with anyway.

For the small, low-speed, grey-zone shenanigans they should just call it a day and let the drivers stand for themselves.

phil1993 · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:29 am

Shameless plugging time
http://www.f1zone.net/news/the-bulls-ar ... iew/15890/

nightflight · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:46 pm

ellis wrote:

Since the FIA has looked at the telemetry and discovered what we already knew - that Vettel was braking for a corner - does that not put the blame onto Jenson now? Surely the safety car rules are that everybody keeps a steady pace. Although there was not an accident, they were ready to hand out a penalty to Vettel for not holding pace. Now it turns out he did hold pace...which means Jenson didn't. So do the SC rules only apply to leader?

Even though Vettel wasn't penalised, if I were Red Bull I'd be a bit worried about the penalties of recent times. Webbers today was especially harsh.

Blame Jenson!?! Oh dear... for what... :lol:

Not sure, but it seems to be not a good idea to be a RBR driver atm... A number of "interesting" decisions made, incl. the "there-is-a-closing-gap-and-i-go-for-it-BANZAIIII!!" of Alonso against Vettel, and yesterday the dumb penalty for Webber and the hearing of Vettel for nothing.

ellis · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:19 pm

nightflight wrote:

Blame Jenson!?! Oh dear... for what... :lol:

Not sure, but it seems to be not a good idea to be a RBR driver atm... A number of "interesting" decisions made, incl. the "there-is-a-closing-gap-and-i-go-for-it-BANZAIIII!!" of Alonso against Vettel, and yesterday the dumb penalty for Webber and the hearing of Vettel for nothing.

Did you read my post?

They looked into the situation because they thought Vettel slowed too quickly, this not maintaining a sensible speed. After they looked at it they deemed Vettel had not done anything wrong (probably because of the corner they were approaching). So if Vettel hadn't done anything wrong, but the gap had still closed enough for there to almost be an accident, then surely Buttons driving under SC wasn't really appropriate...but we never seen any McLaren representatives get called down to the stewards.

Gap closed. Driver A was thought to be at fault. He was deemed not to be. Surely common sense then says you look at what Driver B was doing. Can't help but feel if it was the other way around, and a Red Bull driver who was second, they'd be looked at. You can maybe claim both of Vettels incidents this year were judgement calls, but Webber was totally screwed in Singapore.

nightflight · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:14 pm

ellis wrote:

nightflight wrote:

Blame Jenson!?! Oh dear... for what... :lol:

Not sure, but it seems to be not a good idea to be a RBR driver atm... A number of "interesting" decisions made, incl. the "there-is-a-closing-gap-and-i-go-for-it-BANZAIIII!!" of Alonso against Vettel, and yesterday the dumb penalty for Webber and the hearing of Vettel for nothing.

Did you read my post?

They looked into the situation because they thought Vettel slowed too quickly, this not maintaining a sensible speed. After they looked at it they deemed Vettel had not done anything wrong (probably because of the corner they were approaching). So if Vettel hadn't done anything wrong, but the gap had still closed enough for there to almost be an accident, then surely Buttons driving under SC wasn't really appropriate...but we never seen any McLaren representatives get called down to the stewards.

Gap closed. Driver A was thought to be at fault. He was deemed not to be. Surely common sense then says you look at what Driver B was doing. Can't help but feel if it was the other way around, and a Red Bull driver who was second, they'd be looked at. You can maybe claim both of Vettels incidents this year were judgement calls, but Webber was totally screwed in Singapore.

You saw the smilie i set? As i wrote already yesterday, Vettel made nothing wrong. But Mr. Button!

Gael · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:14 pm

Can Red Bull appeal Webber's penalty?

ryan86 · PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:15 pm

No.

They could perhaps, if they really wanted to, possibly take it to the Sporting Court of Arbitration I guess, but I think they look more at the procedure than the actual decision and if there was flaws in that.

Philthy82 · PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 4:57 am

And he's losing 1 point from a generally disappointing race, so I doubt he's got much motivation to fight it either.

HURRR

Magnifico · PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:47 pm

ellis wrote:

phil1993 wrote:

Nico Rosberg finished 5th. No-one noticed, no-one cares. It just goes to show my theory about him being good, but such a boring racing driver.

He was beaten by a Force India. I don't really see it as that good.

A Force India that was quicker all weekend.

I don't see Rosberg's drive as anything special, but neither was Paul Di Resta's which seems to have garnered stupid amounts of praise.

The Force India as shown on Saturday was only a little slower than Alonso's Ferrari and comfortably quicker than the Lotuses, Mercedes and Saubers. It was a very competitive car the entire weekend. Given where he started what was any more impressive about Di Resta's drive compared to Rosbergs? They both gained positions thanks to reliability issues for Hamilton and strategic/reliability issues for Maldonado.

Антон · PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:52 pm

kals wrote:

Tata Tea to sponsor? Tata should have used Tetley.

kals · PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:07 pm

I don't get your point?

highgroove · PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:05 pm

Don't think there is one to get? He's just showing a picture of the announced sponsor.

kals · PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:43 pm

highgroove wrote:

Don't think there is one to get?

Then why this...? :tumble:

LuckyStrike FAN · PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 10:26 pm

kals wrote:

highgroove wrote:

Don't think there is one to get?

Then why this...? :tumble:

Maybe he doesn't like the taste of it?

Mika Kimi · PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 11:21 am

That must be it. :lol:

Антон · PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 2:20 pm

kals wrote:

highgroove wrote:

Don't think there is one to get?

Then why this...? :tumble:

Because I was hoping for Tetley or something else.
Tata, Tata Motors, and now, Tata Tea is getting boring.
Nothing personal

highgroove · PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:31 pm

codename_47 · PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 7:48 pm

I've lost a bit of sympathy for Webber and his penalty after looking back on the 2009 race and realised he did the exact same thing again and got penalised for it again, so you have to wonder why he decided to try his luck there again.

Yes, that means he should've turned in on Kobayashi and yes that probably means there would've been an accident, but if you look at the pics Stefmiester posted, Kamui probably would've taken the blame if there was contact.

The FIA might be inconsistent but bizarrely they've been very consistent in regard to that particular bit of track.
(Though as I say, I don't see the need for that kerb to be there, but ho-hum)

TBK-Light.com

2012 Formula 1 SingTel Singapore Grand Prix

Who is online