official F1 World Championship 2012 Thread

[IceBlackIce]

I think its a bit too far...they should be switched places and be done with it...20s its too much for a move that dint put anyone in risk.

[spikey_richie]

The stewards have to be fair IceBlackIce. We all know if it was Lewis who had performed the move Seb did, Lewis would have had a 10 place grid drop for the next race or some ridiculous penalty. Seb could have given the place back to JB and taken him legitimately in the next DRS zone, but he chose to abuse the boundaries of the track. Seb is just p!ssed because Lewis held him up when unlapping himself. If Seb let Lewis past rather than defend, he wouldn't have lost time, would have got in the 1s DRS window AND would have got a nice slip stream up to Alonso.

[what]

I think its a bit too far...they should be switched places and be done with it...20s its too much for a move that dint put anyone in risk.

They have standard punishments for rule infringements that they have to stick to. The 20 seconds is to replicate a drive through penalty which would have been given if it happened earlier in the race.

Just switching the places would be a bad precedent for the future. Drivers would do the same thing knowing that the worst that will happen to them is be put back in the position they would have been in if they hadn't carried out the move. That isn't a punishment at all. Now that drivers are aware of the potential consequences, they will have to think more before they overtake off the race track - it's not just the position they lose, but potentially more and the points that go with it.

[Noir Angel]

They have standard punishments for rule infringements that they have to stick to. The 20 seconds is to replicate a drive through penalty which would have been given if it happened earlier in the race.

Just switching the places would be a bad precedent for the future. Drivers would do the same thing knowing that the worst that will happen to them is be put back in the position they would have been in if they hadn't carried out the move. That isn't a punishment at all. Now that drivers are aware of the potential consequences, they will have to think more before they overtake off the race track - it's not just the position they lose, but potentially more and the points that go with it.

Precisely. He gained an unfair advantage and made no effort to give the place back, the decision was entirely correct.

[IceBlackIce]

Earlier this season, didnt someone took a place and just got told to give it up? I think it was one of the "lesser" teams...Force India and Sauber maybe...Im not talking about Rosberg/Hamilton thingie, but i believe it had happen.

One of the problems for F1 is precisely the lack of standards and the wording of the rules...teams/drivers do whatever they want and some get punishment X and others get punishment Y, or equal situations get different treatment.

[HSoft]

They have standard punishments for rule infringements that they have to stick to. The 20 seconds is to replicate a drive through penalty which would have been given if it happened earlier in the race.

Just switching the places would be a bad precedent for the future. Drivers would do the same thing knowing that the worst that will happen to them is be put back in the position they would have been in if they hadn't carried out the move. That isn't a punishment at all. Now that drivers are aware of the potential consequences, they will have to think more before they overtake off the race track - it's not just the position they lose, but potentially more and the points that go with it.

If you take a place unfairly, whilst off track, the ruling is you have to give it back. This has to happen within x number of laps once the decision has been made (sometimes the drivers know they've done wrong and give it back immediately but not always and therefore goes to the race director for a decision). Since there was only a lap and a half left, I don't think the race controllers had enough time to make the decision. One of the bad things and things I don't like about formula 1 is all these after the race decisions.

I think a 20 second (drive through) penalty was extreme in this case. It would not have cost him 20 seconds to give the spot back. Look at the ruling that was made on Nico Rossberg a few races back when he was forcing people off track and at least one of them overtook him whilst off track (Hamilton I think it was). Nothing happened. The decisions of the stewards need to be consistant and I don't think it was in this case.

[mps69]

Earlier this season, didnt someone took a place and just got told to give it up? I think it was one of the "lesser" teams...Force India and Sauber maybe...Im not talking about Rosberg/Hamilton thingie, but i believe it had happen.

One of the problems for F1 is precisely the lack of standards and the wording of the rules...teams/drivers do whatever they want and some get punishment X and others get punishment Y, or equal situations get different treatment.

Under normal circumstances that is the case and either the team or the race steward will tell the driver to give the place back. If its the stewards it is emailed to the team who then instruct the driver to give the place back.

In this case, IMO, both the driver and the team thought the pass was legitimate, and the stewards didn't have enough time to contact the team as it was so close to the end of the race. Hence why they said they would investigate the incident after the race.

[what]

If you take a place unfairly, whilst off track, the ruling is you have to give it back. This has to happen within x number of laps once the decision has been made (sometimes the drivers know they've done wrong and give it back immediately but not always and therefore goes to the race director for a decision). Since there was only a lap and a half left, I don't think the race controllers had enough time to make the decision. One of the bad things and things I don't like about formula 1 is all these after the race decisions.

I think a 20 second (drive through) penalty was extreme in this case. It would not have cost him 20 seconds to give the spot back. Look at the ruling that was made on Nico Rossberg a few races back when he was forcing people off track and at least one of them overtook him whilst off track (Hamilton I think it was). Nothing happened. The decisions of the stewards need to be consistant and I don't think it was in this case.

The Rosberg incident was different so you can't use it as a comparison.

If a 20 second penalty was "too harsh", what punishment would you have given for Vettel's move instead?

[IceBlackIce]

If in normal circumstances the penalty is to give the place back why is that if the race is over you get 20s?

[what]

If in normal circumstances the penalty is to give the place back why is that if the race is over you get 20s?

Because, for the 100th bloody time this season, it says so in the rules.

As it says in the rules, if a decision is within the final five laps of a race or after the race is over, the punishment is restricted to either a 20 second time penalty to replicate a drive-through, or a 30 second penalty to replicate a stop-go penalty. After that there are options of a grid penalty for the next race, exclusion from the results, or suspension from the next event.

If they chose a grid penalty, Vettel and RBR would have kept the points they won by cheating. Exclusion or suspension would have been a bit extreme. Therefore, if you follow the rules, a 20 second penalty is all they can give.

Of course, if Vettel had just given the place back before the end of the race it could have been avoided. Instead, Vettel, Horner and RBR decided to try and convince everyone it was a legal move, and failed spectacularly.

They deserve the punishment for the lack of sportsmanship above anything else imo.

[Noir Angel]

If you take a place unfairly, whilst off track, the ruling is you have to give it back. This has to happen within x number of laps once the decision has been made (sometimes the drivers know they've done wrong and give it back immediately but not always and therefore goes to the race director for a decision). Since there was only a lap and a half left, I don't think the race controllers had enough time to make the decision. One of the bad things and things I don't like about formula 1 is all these after the race decisions.

I think a 20 second (drive through) penalty was extreme in this case. It would not have cost him 20 seconds to give the spot back. Look at the ruling that was made on Nico Rossberg a few races back when he was forcing people off track and at least one of them overtook him whilst off track (Hamilton I think it was). Nothing happened. The decisions of the stewards need to be consistant and I don't think it was in this case.

He did have the choice to give the place back of his own volition, which drivers are encouraged to do if they make a pass by going off the track.

If in normal circumstances the penalty is to give the place back why is that if the race is over you get 20s?

It's the same in the race, if you don't give the place back in timely enough fashion you will also get a drive through. Giving the place back is in itself not a penalty just a recommendation to prevent a penalty.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

FIA set to force Red Bull to change engine mapping

Red Bull Racing is set to be forced to make changes to the engine mapping of its cars for this weekend's Hungarian Grand Prix, AUTOSPORT has learned, with the FIA poised to issue a clarification in the next 48 hours on the matter.

Following the controversy at Hockenheim on Sunday, when Red Bull Racing was referred to the stewards to explain why its cars were operating with engine maps that had reduced torque in the mid rpm range, motor racing's governing body is now close to acting.

AUTOSPORT understands that the FIA is planning to issue an official clarification on the matter before action gets underway in Budapest on Friday.

This document is almost certain to make it clear that what Red Bull Racing was doing in Germany will no longer be deemed acceptable.

Sources suggest that the FIA will lay down specific limits on the variations of torque that can be used throughout the rev range - with Red Bull Racing believed to have been using much less than the maximum available torque in the middle rev range.

It is understood that the new limit could allow as little tolerance in torque as two per cent, which is believed to be well inside the variation shown on the engine map used by Red Bull Racing at the German GP.

By having a greater variation in its engine mapping, Red Bull Racing was able to both minimise wheelspin and also pump more gases through its engines, therefore helping the aerodynamic benefits that the outfit still gets through the use of exhaust flow at the rear of the car.

Although Formula 1 technical delegate Jo Bauer believed that Red Bull Racing's engine maps were in breach of the regulations in Germany, the race stewards did not agree - even though they also did not accept the team's explanations of what was happening.

Red Bull Racing team principal Christian Horner was keen to play down the matter at Hockenheim, suggesting that he never had any doubt his team was in compliance with the regulations.

"Unfortunately, when you have a quick car, it's inevitable that questions are asked," he said. "F1 is a competitive business.

"The rules are pretty black and white and having looked at the evidence, the data, they [the stewards] were fully satisfied. That's the nature of Formula 1 at the end of the day. Of course, you are always going to get other teams that are going to speculate."

Even if the FIA rule clarification does mean Red Bull Racing has to make changes to its engine maps, it should be a fairly simply matter for the team to revert to settings that it used without problem earlier in the campaign.

Source: Autosport

[i11usive]

Does that mean RB will be penalised for running that engine in Hockenheim?

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

Does that mean RB will be penalised for running that engine in Hockenheim?

No, all they have to do is alter the engine mapping for Budapest to be within the regulations.

[]SK[]

They let it slide then decided it needs to be changed after a race? Someone's up RB's arse.

[i11usive]

SK[' timestamp=1343210607' post='595032195]

They let it slide then decided it needs to be changed after a race? Someone's up RB's arse.

Hear hear!! If the shoe were on McLaren's foot, the FIA would be ALL over it!

[what]

SK[' timestamp=1343210607' post='595032195]

They let it slide then decided it needs to be changed after a race? Someone's up RB's arse.

They can't introduce a clarification and then enforce it retrospectively :rolleyes:

[]SK[]

True. I'll give RB credit though as the one team who push to the boundaries. It's clearly a winning formula as its got them where they are now. Adrian is clearly the best engineer in F1. It's just with the crazy penalties that FIA dream up McLaren seem to come out worse than everyone else.

[Noir Angel]

The main advantage from this wasn't aerodynamic but in that it gave them a rather crude form of traction control, I don't think Newey had a great deal to do with it.

[HSoft]

The Rosberg incident was different so you can't use it as a comparison.

If a 20 second penalty was "too harsh", what punishment would you have given for Vettel's move instead?

The Rossberg incident wasn't that much different. He forced people off the road and at least one of them (Can't remember which one but think it was Hamilton) overtook him whilst off the course.

Even Charlie Whiting, the highest ranking FIA official said that the 20 second penalty was too harsh.

If it was me I'd have swapped back the places, put Vettel 3rd and Button 2nd.

[what]

The Rossberg incident wasn't that much different. He forced people off the road and at least one of them (Can't remember which one but think it was Hamilton) overtook him whilst off the course.

Even Charlie Whiting, the highest ranking FIA official said that the 20 second penalty was too harsh.

If it was me I'd have swapped back the places, put Vettel 3rd and Button 2nd.

The difference was Rosberg forced Hamilton off the road, and the actual manoeuvre was completed after Hamilton had rejoined the track. He hadn't gained any speed advantage from driving in the sand. Vettel, on the other hand, drove off the track under zero pressure from Button (and may or may not have had an advantage driving over the smooth paint surface).

Swapping the places is not in the rules, so you can't do that.

[Noir Angel]

The Rossberg incident wasn't that much different. He forced people off the road and at least one of them (Can't remember which one but think it was Hamilton) overtook him whilst off the course.

Even Charlie Whiting, the highest ranking FIA official said that the 20 second penalty was too harsh.

If it was me I'd have swapped back the places, put Vettel 3rd and Button 2nd.

As far as I am concerned the rule is fair, if you cheat the punishment should be substantially bigger than the gain, if the punishment equals the gain it will just encourage more drivers to do it.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

[MightyJordan]

Shame the practice sessions rarely translate into similar results in the qualifying and race sessions; I'd love to see a McLaren 1-2 again, although with Jenson 1st instead. :p

Just come across this story...

Ferrari do not take up Massa contract option for 2013

Ferrari has allowed a contract option on Felipe Massa?s services for the 2013 season to expire, according to Autosprint magazine.

Amid the Brazilian?s early struggles in 2012, it appeared a certainty that the Italian team was in the market for a new teammate for Fernando Alonso.

But Massa sped up as the F2012 also improved, even though it emerges that in the past days Ferrari let a one-sided contract option ? that would have seen Massa definitely stay next season ? expire.

It means that if the 31-year-old races a Ferrari for an eighth consecutive season in 2013, he will have agreed a brand new contract.

Massa told reporters in Hungary on Thursday that if he cannot stay at Ferrari, he could leave Formula One altogether.

?I want to stay in Formula One, but it has to be in a situation where I am in Formula One to race, not just to participate,? he said.

?If for whatever reason I don?t have the chance to stay in Ferrari, then I will try and find a direction where I can race.

?But, otherwise, small teams? I?m not interested.?

...and here's a funny take on the story: http://www.thef1slate.com/news/120727

I highly recommend that site, BTW; some really funny stuff there.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]