planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:26 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
f1guyus wrote:
My conclusion after watching the race replay? The 22 best racing drivers in the world can’t complete a lap of racing from a standing start.

Did Manor make it to the grid?

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 4:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2236
Hamilton himself said that he was at a major advantage having a new engine and not having to mollycoddle it like the guys at the front. See the BBC website if you want to read what he said. So nothing particularly exciting about him getting up to fourth when you think about it... he was a sole point of interest in a dull race, made duller by the lack of a championship to care about.

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 4:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:54 pm
Posts: 1434
Banana Man wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
Grosjean continues to act like an entitled idiot, always the first to moan about other drivers before sticking it in the wall (or in today's case another car).


To be fair. Today was a racing incident
If you really wanted to be picky. Ocon should be given a grid drop for Abu dahbi. Why was ocon still racing when the safety car message came through on the screen ocon and grosjean were not yet at turn 6 when the display was put out on the tv screen.


I don't think it was a racing incident. Grosjean was left 75% of the track and still lost control of the car and slid into Ocon.


Neither do I. I just can't fathom how any of the expert pundits and commentators think it was anything other than Grosjean's fault. Ocon left him plenty of room and it was hardly a surprise lunge around the outside. Ocon was on the outside and slightly ahead for a good few seconds before they reached that corner, Grosjean had plenty of time to back off if he couldn't control his car.


Well grosjean confirmed to will Buxton that he had a slow puncture from the turn 1,2,3 incident


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Paris
wire2004 wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
Grosjean continues to act like an entitled idiot, always the first to moan about other drivers before sticking it in the wall (or in today's case another car).


To be fair. Today was a racing incident
If you really wanted to be picky. Ocon should be given a grid drop for Abu dahbi. Why was ocon still racing when the safety car message came through on the screen ocon and grosjean were not yet at turn 6 when the display was put out on the tv screen.


I don't think it was a racing incident. Grosjean was left 75% of the track and still lost control of the car and slid into Ocon.


Neither do I. I just can't fathom how any of the expert pundits and commentators think it was anything other than Grosjean's fault. Ocon left him plenty of room and it was hardly a surprise lunge around the outside. Ocon was on the outside and slightly ahead for a good few seconds before they reached that corner, Grosjean had plenty of time to back off if he couldn't control his car.


Well grosjean confirmed to will Buxton that he had a slow puncture from the turn 1,2,3 incident


True. Grosjean was having a slow puncture, which is now confirmed, and the way he lost control clearly shows that.
And, as far as I know, SC was announced before they reached that corner, thus meaning Ocon's move on the outside had to be cancelled.

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 69
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2248
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.


Even if Hamilton was on pole i still reckon it would have been a race to the first corner for the win. The Ferrari has been a good starter.

_________________
Podiums: 1st Spain 2016, 2nd Germany 2016 and 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:59 pm
Posts: 69
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12287
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


It shouldn't be a risky position. The guy on the inside shouldn't crash into the guy on the outside. TBF I hear Grosjean had a puncture. If so he has my sympathy's. If not it's about as stonewall a penalty as I have seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 6814
Location: Belgium
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
f1guyus wrote:
My conclusion after watching the race replay? The 22 best racing drivers in the world can’t complete a lap of racing from a standing start.

who were 2 of the drivers? I know 20 of them :lol:
Bernd Mayländer is one, I forget who drives the medical car. ;)

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2537
Location: UK
Fiki wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
f1guyus wrote:
My conclusion after watching the race replay? The 22 best racing drivers in the world can’t complete a lap of racing from a standing start.

who were 2 of the drivers? I know 20 of them :lol:
Bernd Mayländer is one, I forget who drives the medical car. ;)

Perhaps the 21st and 22nd best are Kvyat and Maldonado?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
mikeyg123 wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


It shouldn't be a risky position. The guy on the inside shouldn't crash into the guy on the outside. TBF I hear Grosjean had a puncture. If so he has my sympathy's. If not it's about as stonewall a penalty as I have seen.

Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:58 am
Posts: 28
Location: Kansas
F1_Ernie wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.


Even if Hamilton was on pole i still reckon it would have been a race to the first corner for the win. The Ferrari has been a good starter.


If Hamilton had been up front and Sebastian had beat him to the first corner, Lewis would have still won the race because he would have made the undercut pitstop work. Valtteri was not quite quick enough to make that strategy come out in his favor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2877
BMWSauber84 wrote:
One conclusion I have drawn is that looking at those speed traps, Torro Rosso-Honda will be battling with Sauber next year.


I am predicting they will be dead last. Sauber will get the updated engine so they will be far better imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am
Posts: 2103
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


You've just immediately answered your own question.

There is more leniency on the first lap because the cars become so bunched together and in trying to avoid one car, a driver could inadvertently take out another. In other situations there is just nowhere to go and blame can't really be apportioned to one particular driver.

_________________
I remember when this website was all fields.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 6814
Location: Belgium
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


It shouldn't be a risky position. The guy on the inside shouldn't crash into the guy on the outside. TBF I hear Grosjean had a puncture. If so he has my sympathy's. If not it's about as stonewall a penalty as I have seen.

Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 953
Banana Man wrote:

You've just immediately answered your own question.



He did :D

That's what's so funny. Lewis lost control of his car during Q1. It's no one else's fault but his. Some times you push too hard and you enjoy the rewards.. if you make a mistake and push too much you can lose grip.. that's it.. the back end goes out. You lose control and take some one else out.

Grosjean lost control and took out another car. Not for the first time and not for the last.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 953
kleefton wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
One conclusion I have drawn is that looking at those speed traps, Torro Rosso-Honda will be battling with Sauber next year.


I am predicting they will be dead last. Sauber will get the updated engine so they will be far better imo.


This is what I predict. Honda won't have access to the same facility or staff that McLaren have. They have also spent recent years making that car around that engine.

Still that engine is better now than it was a while ago...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
ALESI wrote:
Hamilton himself said that he was at a major advantage having a new engine and not having to mollycoddle it like the guys at the front. See the BBC website if you want to read what he said. So nothing particularly exciting about him getting up to fourth when you think about it... he was a sole point of interest in a dull race, made duller by the lack of a championship to care about.

The Massa/Alonso/Perez battle would have been great TV if they actually showed it

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4397
Location: Michigan, USA
mcdo wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Hamilton himself said that he was at a major advantage having a new engine and not having to mollycoddle it like the guys at the front. See the BBC website if you want to read what he said. So nothing particularly exciting about him getting up to fourth when you think about it... he was a sole point of interest in a dull race, made duller by the lack of a championship to care about.

The Massa/Alonso/Perez battle would have been great TV if they actually showed it

I actaully said as much when we briefly saw it on the last lap. I could have done with seeing more of that, less of Hamilton inevitably overtaking this car or that (Max and Kimi being exceptions).

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 5183
Location: Mumbai, India
Exediron wrote:
mcdo wrote:
ALESI wrote:
Hamilton himself said that he was at a major advantage having a new engine and not having to mollycoddle it like the guys at the front. See the BBC website if you want to read what he said. So nothing particularly exciting about him getting up to fourth when you think about it... he was a sole point of interest in a dull race, made duller by the lack of a championship to care about.

The Massa/Alonso/Perez battle would have been great TV if they actually showed it

I actaully said as much when we briefly saw it on the last lap. I could have done with seeing more of that, less of Hamilton inevitably overtaking this car or that (Max and Kimi being exceptions).


Even more surprising that the race director didn't focus on the Massa - Alonso - Perez battle despite it being in Brazil. Usually, a home driver gets loads of coverage during the grand prix weekend.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10734
Teddy007 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
BMWSauber84 wrote:
One conclusion I have drawn is that looking at those speed traps, Torro Rosso-Honda will be battling with Sauber next year.


I am predicting they will be dead last. Sauber will get the updated engine so they will be far better imo.


This is what I predict. Honda won't have access to the same facility or staff that McLaren have. They have also spent recent years making that car around that engine.

Still that engine is better now than it was a while ago...


If Honda is still serious about their F1 effort, and intent on succeeding, then I see absolutely no reason why they would not invest the same kind of time and resources into it and work together closely with STR.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?

He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8862
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?

He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?


It shouldn't be a risky position. The guy on the inside shouldn't crash into the guy on the outside. TBF I hear Grosjean had a puncture. If so he has my sympathy's. If not it's about as stonewall a penalty as I have seen.

Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that gives proof to Grosjean having a puncture?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
$0.02

Penalty for Grosjean was harsh, so once again the majority of the fans and commentators disagree with the stewards. Stewardship needs to be more transparent, as with other sports. The current system is not working very well.

If Hamilton qualified where Bottas was, odds are Hamilton would have won the race. Therefore, it can't all be about the car.

I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?

He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

Is this merely based on the Will Buxton interview that he may have had a puncture because he got hit from behind, Grosjean wouldn't be a driver that needs an excuse?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 7
My take?

The top cars and drivers are so good it doesn't really matter where they qualify, they will beat all but the top 4.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 673
Banana Man wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
wire2004 wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
Grosjean continues to act like an entitled idiot, always the first to moan about other drivers before sticking it in the wall (or in today's case another car).


To be fair. Today was a racing incident
If you really wanted to be picky. Ocon should be given a grid drop for Abu dahbi. Why was ocon still racing when the safety car message came through on the screen ocon and grosjean were not yet at turn 6 when the display was put out on the tv screen.


I don't think it was a racing incident. Grosjean was left 75% of the track and still lost control of the car and slid into Ocon.


Neither do I. I just can't fathom how any of the expert pundits and commentators think it was anything other than Grosjean's fault. Ocon left him plenty of room and it was hardly a surprise lunge around the outside. Ocon was on the outside and slightly ahead for a good few seconds before they reached that corner, Grosjean had plenty of time to back off if he couldn't control his car.


Not dissimilar to Hamilton's qualy mistake really. I'd agree Grosjean's fault.

_________________
Should I grow a beard?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 6814
Location: Belgium
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that gives proof to Grosjean having a puncture?
Did I say proof? In turn I might ask you for proof that he didn't, but braked too late in his accident with Ocon, as you claim. For what it's worth, Martin Brundle in the video speaks of oversteer, not braking late.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8862
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think that when a car gets crashed out of the race then the stewards have to look at culpability, Grosjean lost control of his car and crashed out Ocon, I'm happy with the penalty, KMag might have got penalised for crashing out Vandoorne if he had not retired also?


So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?

He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

Is this merely based on the Will Buxton interview that he may have had a puncture because he got hit from behind, Grosjean wouldn't be a driver that needs an excuse?

No he's also said as much on e.g. Twitter.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 5183
Location: Mumbai, India
I always feared any Force India car being near Grosjean's car, especially during the race starts. This race he finally did hit one. As for his excuse of puncture, it's better than apologizing, isn't it?

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that gives proof to Grosjean having a puncture?
Did I say proof? In turn I might ask you for proof that he didn't, but braked too late in his accident with Ocon, as you claim. For what it's worth, Martin Brundle in the video speaks of oversteer, not braking late.

Oversteer if not caused by braking then too much throttle then.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Paris
UnlikeUday wrote:
I always feared any Force India car being near Grosjean's car, especially during the race starts. This race he finally did hit one. As for his excuse of puncture, it's better than apologizing, isn't it?


I don't get why you would say this. Grosjean has been terribly average this season (Austria excluded), but has not been that dangerous. Vettel, Verstappen, Raikkonen and Bottas have been as much involved in first lap crashes as him.

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Longnose wrote:
So how did Grosjean "cause" the collision, it seemed like he lost control and it was because Ocon was in a risky position on the outside thru the corner that there was a collision?

Race stewards need more transparency because they seem inconsistent. Why for example are the rules different for the first few corners than later in the race?

He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

Is this merely based on the Will Buxton interview that he may have had a puncture because he got hit from behind, Grosjean wouldn't be a driver that needs an excuse?

No he's also said as much on e.g. Twitter.

I have not heard anything of the sort from his team apart from criticising his penalty.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5317
Fantaribo wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
I always feared any Force India car being near Grosjean's car, especially during the race starts. This race he finally did hit one. As for his excuse of puncture, it's better than apologizing, isn't it?


I don't get why you would say this. Grosjean has been terribly average this season (Austria excluded), but has not been that dangerous. Vettel, Verstappen, Raikkonen and Bottas have been as much involved in first lap crashes as him.

And they are not even starting from the mid-field, where the bunching up is more dangerous


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 6814
Location: Belgium
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Grosjean thinks he may have had a puncture because he got hit on his left rear tyre, when does he ever admit to actually making a mistake in the various spins he has, there is always something wrong with his car.
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that gives proof to Grosjean having a puncture?
Did I say proof? In turn I might ask you for proof that he didn't, but braked too late in his accident with Ocon, as you claim. For what it's worth, Martin Brundle in the video speaks of oversteer, not braking late.

Oversteer if not caused by braking then too much throttle then.
So, where do you see proof that Grosjean braked too late? Or proof he did NOT suffer a puncture in the accident?

My reading of your comment is that you were unaware of the incident in turn 1, which made you criticise the driver only. It would be nice if you could give him the benefit of the doubt, now that you know there was indeed the possibility of a puncture.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Well, before wishing Grosjean would admit to making a mistake, you yourself might take a look at the highlights video. https://www.formula1.com/en/video/2017/11/Race_highlights_-_Brazil_2017.html

In fact, I wish I knew whether the stewards saw this, and whether they tried to find out from Haas if they got an indication of reduced tyre pressure. It might not be decisive in itself, but if anything, the stewards might give Grosjean the benefit of the doubt. Cars going three abreast through corners is a bit crowded.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing there that gives proof to Grosjean having a puncture?
Did I say proof? In turn I might ask you for proof that he didn't, but braked too late in his accident with Ocon, as you claim. For what it's worth, Martin Brundle in the video speaks of oversteer, not braking late.

Oversteer if not caused by braking then too much throttle then.
So, where do you see proof that Grosjean braked too late? Or proof he did NOT suffer a puncture in the accident?

My reading of your comment is that you were unaware of the incident in turn 1, which made you criticise the driver only. It would be nice if you could give him the benefit of the doubt, now that you know there was indeed the possibility of a puncture.

I was aware of Grosjean spinning into Ocon and putting him out of the race at the time it actually happened, I'm also aware of Grosjean blaming all and sundry apart from himself when he spins, crashes or whatever, I've not heard of any telemetry being put forward by the team that Grosjean had a puncture before the crash.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12287
Grosjean crashes pretty much every weekend and has an excuse for it every time. How many "benefits of the doubt does he get"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8862
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
He lost control because he braked late into the corner to defend from Ocon who was half a car length in front of him, lack of talent is no excuse.

I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

Is this merely based on the Will Buxton interview that he may have had a puncture because he got hit from behind, Grosjean wouldn't be a driver that needs an excuse?

No he's also said as much on e.g. Twitter.

I have not heard anything of the sort from his team apart from criticising his penalty.

But you have heard it was caused by him running out of talent I presume? If you don't know for a fact there wasn't a puncture you shouldn't be so eager to crucify him.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23695
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
I thought he had a slow puncture? Could well be that with an intact car there wouldn't have been a collision.

Is this merely based on the Will Buxton interview that he may have had a puncture because he got hit from behind, Grosjean wouldn't be a driver that needs an excuse?

No he's also said as much on e.g. Twitter.

I have not heard anything of the sort from his team apart from criticising his penalty.

But you have heard it was caused by him running out of talent I presume? If you don't know for a fact there wasn't a puncture you shouldn't be so eager to crucify him.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 15th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], P-F1 Mod, purchville, Zoue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group