Formula 1

I can't shake off just how mad about it I am. I've watched every season since 1988. I've seen some shady stuff in that time. Renault getting Piquet to purposely crash in Singapore in 2008, so a safety car would come out, enabling Alonso to win. Schumacher forcing Hill out, to claim the title. Schumacher trying the same thing on Villenueve but failing. The Barrichello/Schumacher team orders days. And of course, Senna/Prost.

But today is not a driver cheating another driver, or a team ordering something dodgy, it's the race director fixing a world title.

Horrific. And sad.

 

77 for me. I’ve never seen anything like it. Not even Balastre would have pulled a trick like that..

 

I don't really care who wins the championship - these days I only check the results and see how the Finns have done (usually not much to cheer about!) - but I actually watched the race a bit today, and to me it seemed like they "only" wanted to make the ending of the race a great spectacle. I understand your frustration though, this was a terrible way to decide the winner. "Fixing the world title" is a bit too much though, I think, considering how Mercedes has had so many decisions going their way over the years.

 

MV didn't win the world title for Red Bull Masi did first the 3 laps behind the safety car "race":then todays absolutely bent race he must be on some contract at Red Bull Masi. I wonder if the FIA will change his job title next season to the real one
Race director in charge of making sure Red Bull win.

 

By completely throwing out the rulebook, there was only ever going to be one winner over that last lap. So I'll stick with it being a fixed title.

 

They're not very good at fixing things then, if they had to rely on Latifi's accident a few laps before the end of the race to make it happen!

 

As I said already, by re-writing the rules on the final lap of the final race of the season, they knew what would occur. You could re-run that final lap a hundred times over, and Verstappen would overtake Hamilton 100 times. Therefore, by ignoring all precedence, by breaking their own rules, they fixed the winner of the race/title.

 

I don't know much about modern F1, but surely 100 times out of 100 is a bit unrealistic? I can see how FIA would like to make the ending as exciting as possible, even if they had to bend the rules a bit (don't they do that all the time, though?) - how much of an anti-climax it would have been if they had just crossed the finish line behind the safety car, especially in a race like this? But did they deliberately try to make Verstappen the champion? Nah, I don't think so. Then again, I suppose anything's possible in the world of F1.

 

I can't help but think if this ends up in any kind of impartial court room the FIA will get torn to pieces over not following the rules. I don't know if that would change the outcome but I really hope they take it as far as possible, for the good F1 it needs to addressed. Not just finding themselves "not guilty"

 

Another poster referred to him as a fraud, I was initially replying to them.

The here we go again comment was purely about you saying I’d put words into your mind which i simply hadn’t. It’s a tactic you’ve used before on this forum multiple times.

The whole thing is a complete shambles. Should Hamilton have won? 100%. Did the race director make a massive error that allowed Verstappen to win? Yes.

I’ve just got total respect for both drivers, they both deserve to be champions but Verstappen got the luck today.

 

It has become obvious listening to the experts, drivers etc on the F1 sky sports broadcast and the subsequent statements from the FIA
that the rules people are claiming are set in stone and were broken were not( in the FIA opinion)
And there are sub rules to those main rules which allow the race director to sway from those rules at his behest

Basically the Race director has the authority to overrule the main rules as he sees fit for the safety of the drivers and all other persons involved , the changing evolving unfolding situation that may be happening in a challenging live race environment so he can get the drivers back racing as soon as he safely can.

i agree with the above poster that they did not want for better word a flat ending to what has been seen by many people as a vintage season.

it has also because this happened in the last laps highlighted some ludicrous rules which many people don't understand and cannot in any circumstances be deemed as fair.

A driver could have outdriven outthought all the other drivers and be 10/ 20 + seconds in front
a safety car is deployed and depending on your track position its a lucky dip if you have passed the pit entrance or not that you can go in and get a free pitstop and fresh tyres and have a huge unfair advantage over other drivers in the race for no reason and to top it all off your sat on the rear bumper of the lead car.

Verstappen went from being a one pound to win one million pounds to a million pounds to win one pound shot without doing anything.
the live in race odds on betfair exchange would certainly be worth checking out and looking back on.

The race communication by the team principals to the race director live in running was also not shown in the best light to say the least
Lets be honest the communication by Christian Horner to the race director under the safety car was a masterstroke.
and yes it shouldn't have been allowed to happen ,unless it was a safety issue the comms should have been muted to him and it should have been someone else taking that call as he was busy !!
The race director was clearly flustered talking to him as he was trying to deal with the unfolding and demanding live race situation.

The race director his principal decision was for no overtaking/unlapping to happen.
After this Horner had asked !! for the cars to be moved out of the way and give us 1 racing lap.

Then the race director after a lap or so announced that those cars unlap themselves
because that actually happened it has been perceived that Horner got his way and he bullied ,intimidated the race director into getting his way and bowed to his wishes.
that may or not have been the case it may have just been the unfolding race situation as it took place live and the comms communication between Horner and the race director didn't change anything that was going to take place anyway.
don't forget we have no idea when the communication between Horner and the race director took place
was it live or recorded and played back by the Sky sports producers for maximum effect.

the problem is it looks such a bad look for F1 in that it looks from the outside that one of the big teams principals has got on the radio to the race director and intimidated/ talked him into changing his mind.
.

 

It was a genuine question Loko - asked of those who appeared to have read them.

 

OK Having slept on it. IMHO...

The only people who do not see the injustice and evidence of a 'fix' for RBR are RBR, Verstappen fans , those who for whatever reason dislike Hamilton, and the FIA ( albeit heavily influenced by Liberty interested in growing viewing figures/revenue by creating a spectacle rather than the sport ) .
All long term F1 fans (more interested in the Sport rather than individual drivers) and who know the rules condemn the obvious manipulation over the season. Yes we all have our favourite drivers but not so blinkered that we cannot see the PoV of the opponents. What we can see are inconsistent arbitrary decisions made by Race control and the stewards to artificially create a 'spectacle' to boost the sports profile in the media.
Briefly looking back there has been much nonsense talked by the 'driver fans' over various incidents (Silverstone is one example where, contrary to MV fans and 'stewards', Hamilton was nowhere near the edge of the wide track, he made the corner and actually braked prior to the corner as he saw MV turn in). He was awarded a 10 second penalty (albeit he still won the race). Subsequent race, MV comes into the corner too hot. so hot he could not make the corner himself and pushes Hamilton completely off the track . Racing incident no penalty.
Then we have MV weaving down the straights, the braking on the straight.
I fail to understand the incident where LH had gained an advantage in the last race. MV came into the corner so hot he could not make the corner leaving the required (in the rules!) space on the ouside and forced LH off the track. The ONLY reason he could claim to have been " in front" was that he was he came in too fast. Therefore, why should LH give up the position. There are countless videos of MV applying the same tactic at hairpins not just against LH but other drivers where he is on the outside on the first part of the chicane but then cuts straight across leaving no room for the driver next to him who then has to leave the track bouncing across the kerbs. He gets away with it nearly every time.
Those claiming LH does the same but more subtly do not understand the rules. He often 'opens the steering' on the second part of the chicane if he is ahead and on the inside at the first part (and under full control but the rules are if you have the inside line and are full ahead you can take the racing line. The difference is MV takes that line when he is still alongside or only partly in front. Going back to Sliverstone, the last 20 m or so before the corner, LH was on the inside and slightly ahead. MV braked late and turned in but was not fully ahead of LH (hence he got tagged with LH front wheel clipping MVs rear). He had plenty of room on the outside (at least 2 car widths) but instead chose to cut in.
In terms of 'team bias' by the FIA, we had teh farce of RBR found to be in breach of rules regarding the 'flexing' rear wing but were allowed to complete 3 more races before the ban was imposed. We then had the farce of RBR being allowed into parc ferme to repair the 'broken wing' with duct tape on more than one race and yet LH was disqualified on the one time their wing sustained damage and failed to comply with the rules. The latter was a legitimate ban but why then, was RBR given such preferential treatment.
Spa was yet another example where they redefined the dictionary definition of a 'race'. That was an absolute farce.
The rule changes before the season started heavily and deliberately penalised two teams Mercedes Aston Martin because the adverse impact on low rake cars which they were and, again, the rule changes were an attempt to level the playing field and end Mercs dominance which Liberty deemed not good for the 'spectacle'.
The simple answer is the result of whole season was (before and during) influence by Liberty and the FIA. If you want spectacle and entertainment then fine, but it was not Sport. I do not blame MV or even CH and RBR. They pushed (and occasionally exceeded ) the limits of what is acceptable but who can blame them if they were allowed to get away with it.

The biggest problem I have is that we now have a team and specifically a World Champion who feel vindicated that his aggressive, and, frankly, dangerous driving style and attitude is acceptable and will continue in that approach next season*. Other drivers have already expressed concerns that they do not know where they stand given the 'shifting sands' of rule interpretation and inconsistent penalties being applied.

* Unless Masi (who has shown that he is a perfect example of the 'Peter Principle') is replaced and the FIA clarify the rules and rigidly apply them (like Charlie Whiting used to ) the confusion will continue. As regards the pundits on SKY and elsewhere. Whilst they may be ex-drivers they still have allegiances to respective teams e.g. Coulthard worked as a consultant for Red Bull so obviously his opinions are swayed by that. Sir Jackie Stewart (who was one of my Grand Prix heroes when I was younger) has become less so as he was blatantly anti-Hamilton. Alonso, who I have warmed to of late and was, and still is, a great driver still resents LH going back to McLaren days and his pro MV stance show that.

I have no doubt MV is a highly talented, incredibly fast driver, but he needs a reality check on his style and coming 2nd could have been just that. Now his ego has been massaged I fear he may only get worse and F1 as a sport will suffer for it.

 

And yet, if Latifi doesn't crash - Lewis wins. If Mercedes react quicker to the safety car - Lewis wins. There aren't many sports where luck doesn't play a part at some point. It's disappointing, but it's what it is.

 

YEs but as I said. Sports have strict rules. These are sometimes bent or ignored but usually by the competitors. In this instance the rules were broken by the very people who should enforce them to the detriment of several competitors It didn't just affect LH but some drivers found themselves stuck behind lapped cars at restart. Since finishing positions have a financial impact on teams (particularly those on a lesser budget) it adversely affected those teams financially as well.

PS But Merc had every right to believe he SC rules would be applied and the race would end on a SC. If tehy had stopped and MV stayed out he would have lost position.

WIth respect, I bow to your knowledge on may topics but as someone who has been an avid followed and fan of motorsport for many years and also a keen SIM racer I genuinely feel (perhaps mistakenly) that I have a fairly in depth understanding of the technical aspects and applied rules of F1. I would state without hesitation that this season's outcome would have been different if Charlie Whiting had still been at the helm instead of Michael Masi who is completely out of his depth.

 

And a misapplication of the rules won us the ODI World Cup two years ago. Things happen?

 

Again with respect, what has that to do with F!? Also does that make this right?

 

It's another sport. And no - of course not!