planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 5:32 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

Who was at fault?
Ricciardo mostly/completely at fault 2%  2%  [ 3 ]
Ricciardo at fault, but a racing incident 11%  11%  [ 15 ]
Verstappen mostly/completely at fault 69%  69%  [ 96 ]
Verstappen at fault, but a racing incident 19%  19%  [ 26 ]
Total votes : 140
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14186
Zoue wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
iano wrote:
SpeedTurtle wrote:
Has this comment from Marko been missed (apologies if it's already been discussed)? I haven't seen it quoted anywhere else, but apparently he said:

"For me that is 70 percent the fault of Verstappen,” Marko added.

“He drives there zig-zag, that's completely pointless. He does not learn. "

This was quoted at Express https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... lmut-Marko

If true it shows that the initial public stance by Red Bull may be different behind closed doors and may explain why Ricciardo was willing to take some blame: maybe RB have put the fault on Verstappen in private.

Edit: sorry Geckko65 I see you already posted this




It was not 100% clear to me from the original post that is was also Marko with the '70% Verstappen' comment. It is surprising.... and even worth pointing out a second time


I think we can all agree that behind closed doors they blame Verstappen. That was not the point of what we discussed.

If some viewers still believed that Ver was not at fault, they are delusional.

The problem is different. The RBR management have to turn this around, as they must justify why they signed Ver. He has to deliver, and to deliver he needs time, and Marko and Horner are willing to do that.

They will tell him in private that he is at fault, but not publically.

Ricciardo is not signed yet, so they don't have to give him time or understanding. And they never will.

Sometimes in business, when you make a mistake, it is better to hold on to your mistake for a while and see if you can turn it around. You don't just run to the next thing. See Mclaren and Honda. They held on for a while. Let's see how long Redbull holds on.

I would argue that it's the other way around. Verstappen has already signed, so they don't have to risk upsetting him by telling him how it is. Ricciardo has yet to sign, so there's an argument to say they don't want to upset or antagonise him while that's the case, in order to keep him on side.

It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially


But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5920
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially

But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.

I honestly don't see how anyone can put the majority of blame on anyone but Max. What Ricciardo did was totally normal, perfectly legal, and found in an almost infinite number of safely executed overtakes: he dummied right, then tried to outbrake Max on the left. What Max did was start moving right - you can plainly see that from his onboard, although it's not much - before cutting back across to block Ricciardo. And then, most bizarrely of all, he moves back to the right and blocks any chance of Ricciardo avoiding the collision.

Basically, to say Ricciardo is at fault is to say that any late braking maneuver where you don't leave yourself a margin for error is bad. To say Max is at fault all you need to do is say that blacking is bad, which it plainly is. In IndyCar Max's move would be cut-and-dried illegal, and I think it should be in F1 as well. Blocking - which is making a defensive move after the attacking car has committed - is simply dangerous driving, and Baku is a perfect example of why. If Ricciardo really braked too late, Max should have let him go past and done a switchback; if Ricciardo didn't leave it too late, then he had Max beat.

I get that you feel Max is being unfairly piled on, and sometimes in the past he has been. But his driving was on the border all throughout the Azerbaijan GP, and his block on Ricciardo (after weaving on the straight, mind you) was just plain and simple dangerous driving.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 9:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14186
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially

But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.

I honestly don't see how anyone can put the majority of blame on anyone but Max. What Ricciardo did was totally normal, perfectly legal, and found in an almost infinite number of safely executed overtakes: he dummied right, then tried to outbrake Max on the left. What Max did was start moving right - you can plainly see that from his onboard, although it's not much - before cutting back across to block Ricciardo. And then, most bizarrely of all, he moves back to the right and blocks any chance of Ricciardo avoiding the collision.

Basically, to say Ricciardo is at fault is to say that any late braking maneuver where you don't leave yourself a margin for error is bad. To say Max is at fault all you need to do is say that blacking is bad, which it plainly is. In IndyCar Max's move would be cut-and-dried illegal, and I think it should be in F1 as well. Blocking - which is making a defensive move after the attacking car has committed - is simply dangerous driving, and Baku is a perfect example of why. If Ricciardo really braked too late, Max should have let him go past and done a switchback; if Ricciardo didn't leave it too late, then he had Max beat.

I get that you feel Max is being unfairly piled on, and sometimes in the past he has been. But his driving was on the border all throughout the Azerbaijan GP, and his block on Ricciardo (after weaving on the straight, mind you) was just plain and simple dangerous driving.


I consider Verstappen to be largely to blame in this case. Although as per normal criticism of him goes over the top.

I do take issue with sentences such like - It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. - Which Zoue said because it's clearly untrue. I've seen lots of former drivers and pundits put blame on both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 10:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
iano wrote:
SpeedTurtle wrote:
Has this comment from Marko been missed (apologies if it's already been discussed)? I haven't seen it quoted anywhere else, but apparently he said:

"For me that is 70 percent the fault of Verstappen,” Marko added.

“He drives there zig-zag, that's completely pointless. He does not learn. "

This was quoted at Express https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... lmut-Marko

If true it shows that the initial public stance by Red Bull may be different behind closed doors and may explain why Ricciardo was willing to take some blame: maybe RB have put the fault on Verstappen in private.

Edit: sorry Geckko65 I see you already posted this




It was not 100% clear to me from the original post that is was also Marko with the '70% Verstappen' comment. It is surprising.... and even worth pointing out a second time


I think we can all agree that behind closed doors they blame Verstappen. That was not the point of what we discussed.

If some viewers still believed that Ver was not at fault, they are delusional.

The problem is different. The RBR management have to turn this around, as they must justify why they signed Ver. He has to deliver, and to deliver he needs time, and Marko and Horner are willing to do that.

They will tell him in private that he is at fault, but not publically.

Ricciardo is not signed yet, so they don't have to give him time or understanding. And they never will.

Sometimes in business, when you make a mistake, it is better to hold on to your mistake for a while and see if you can turn it around. You don't just run to the next thing. See Mclaren and Honda. They held on for a while. Let's see how long Redbull holds on.

I would argue that it's the other way around. Verstappen has already signed, so they don't have to risk upsetting him by telling him how it is. Ricciardo has yet to sign, so there's an argument to say they don't want to upset or antagonise him while that's the case, in order to keep him on side.

It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially


But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.

Even those who split blame tend to call out Max's weaving as the cause. The stewards cite "the incident had its origins in the moves," while Lauda stated: “It is 70 per cent Verstappen, and 30 per cent Ricciardo, If you move on him all the time, where can the poor guy go?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 10:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially

But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.

I honestly don't see how anyone can put the majority of blame on anyone but Max. What Ricciardo did was totally normal, perfectly legal, and found in an almost infinite number of safely executed overtakes: he dummied right, then tried to outbrake Max on the left. What Max did was start moving right - you can plainly see that from his onboard, although it's not much - before cutting back across to block Ricciardo. And then, most bizarrely of all, he moves back to the right and blocks any chance of Ricciardo avoiding the collision.

Basically, to say Ricciardo is at fault is to say that any late braking maneuver where you don't leave yourself a margin for error is bad. To say Max is at fault all you need to do is say that blacking is bad, which it plainly is. In IndyCar Max's move would be cut-and-dried illegal, and I think it should be in F1 as well. Blocking - which is making a defensive move after the attacking car has committed - is simply dangerous driving, and Baku is a perfect example of why. If Ricciardo really braked too late, Max should have let him go past and done a switchback; if Ricciardo didn't leave it too late, then he had Max beat.

I get that you feel Max is being unfairly piled on, and sometimes in the past he has been. But his driving was on the border all throughout the Azerbaijan GP, and his block on Ricciardo (after weaving on the straight, mind you) was just plain and simple dangerous driving.


I consider Verstappen to be largely to blame in this case. Although as per normal criticism of him goes over the top.

I do take issue with sentences such like - It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. - Which Zoue said because it's clearly untrue. I've seen lots of former drivers and pundits put blame on both.

Well, clearly you don't think it was the cause so I guess that makes my statement untrue. But I was trying to convey the fact that most interviews cite the weaving as the cause, even if they then do go on to split the blame. Frankly most of the statements are a little bizarre, when you get Brawn saying one second that Ricciardo was a passenger after Max changed his line twice, then going on immediately to say both were equally to blame. They all all seem to contradict themselves


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 12:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 326
Zoue wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
iano wrote:
SpeedTurtle wrote:
Has this comment from Marko been missed (apologies if it's already been discussed)? I haven't seen it quoted anywhere else, but apparently he said:

"For me that is 70 percent the fault of Verstappen,” Marko added.

“He drives there zig-zag, that's completely pointless. He does not learn. "

This was quoted at Express https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... lmut-Marko

If true it shows that the initial public stance by Red Bull may be different behind closed doors and may explain why Ricciardo was willing to take some blame: maybe RB have put the fault on Verstappen in private.

Edit: sorry Geckko65 I see you already posted this




It was not 100% clear to me from the original post that is was also Marko with the '70% Verstappen' comment. It is surprising.... and even worth pointing out a second time


I think we can all agree that behind closed doors they blame Verstappen. That was not the point of what we discussed.

If some viewers still believed that Ver was not at fault, they are delusional.

The problem is different. The RBR management have to turn this around, as they must justify why they signed Ver. He has to deliver, and to deliver he needs time, and Marko and Horner are willing to do that.

They will tell him in private that he is at fault, but not publically.

Ricciardo is not signed yet, so they don't have to give him time or understanding. And they never will.

Sometimes in business, when you make a mistake, it is better to hold on to your mistake for a while and see if you can turn it around. You don't just run to the next thing. See Mclaren and Honda. They held on for a while. Let's see how long Redbull holds on.

I would argue that it's the other way around. Verstappen has already signed, so they don't have to risk upsetting him by telling him how it is. Ricciardo has yet to sign, so there's an argument to say they don't want to upset or antagonise him while that's the case, in order to keep him on side.

It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially


At this point they only care about making Max go well. They can't really go to executives and say they wasted 40 million. Even if Mateschitz is well informed about what is going on, he trusts people to run his business. It doesn't matter what everyone says, he puts more weight on what Marko says.

And this is somewhat normal. He puts his money and trust behind him, on better and worse days.It worked before and it will work again.

Marko and Horner consider at this point that blaming both is more efficient than blaming the part at fault. Simple as that. They also care more about not putting public pressure on Max, than about what Ricciardo feels or thinks.

It is just putting eggs in one basket and going for it.

Every pundit is saying that Max is at fault, without actually saying Max is at fault.

I can't see anyone saying what Ricciardo might have done differently, besides holding position. If someone can clarify this, it would be really useful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
paul_gmb wrote:
At this point they only care about making Max go well. They can't really go to executives and say they wasted 40 million. Even if Mateschitz is well informed about what is going on, he trusts people to run his business. It doesn't matter what everyone says, he puts more weight on what Marko says.

And this is somewhat normal. He puts his money and trust behind him, on better and worse days.It worked before and it will work again.

Marko and Horner consider at this point that blaming both is more efficient than blaming the part at fault. Simple as that. They also care more about not putting public pressure on Max, than about what Ricciardo feels or thinks.
The only positive side I can see from Mateschitz's point of view, is that there is supposedly no such thing as bad publicity. Nobody cares about Hamilton's "win", nearly nobody remembers Bottas continues to suffer bad luck, but everybody is still talking about Red Bull. And only Red Bull.

Not putting public pressure on Max... I think if I were Mateschitz, I would invite Max for dinner, and ask him when he intends to become a F1 driver.

_________________
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: Sun May 06, 2018 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2017 9:39 pm
Posts: 4
I think it's quite obvious that RB's public stance is quite different than it is privately. That's the only way to explain Marko's comment (I'm sure Horner wouldn't have liked it) and Ricciardo's willingness to publicly accept some blame.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 1:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1586
Location: Canada
Ricciardo is in a tough spot. I certainly would not like to be in his shoes trying to decide the next career move. Terrible baloney politics.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 9:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 12:49 am
Posts: 312
jimmyj wrote:
Ricciardo is in a tough spot. I certainly would not like to be in his shoes trying to decide the next career move. Terrible baloney politics.

Does not look like there is a choice open to him....unless choosing between Red Bull and a year off counts as a choice.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 9:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
iano wrote:
jimmyj wrote:
Ricciardo is in a tough spot. I certainly would not like to be in his shoes trying to decide the next career move. Terrible baloney politics.

Does not look like there is a choice open to him....unless choosing between Red Bull and a year off counts as a choice.

I'm also not sure I'd define it as a tough spot. He has a seat in one of the top teams waiting for him. Guaranteed. His decision-making is predicated on whether the grass is greener elsewhere, but it's not like he has his back to the wall. I suspect many drivers would love to be in such a tough spot as him


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1586
Location: Canada
Zoue wrote:
iano wrote:
jimmyj wrote:
Ricciardo is in a tough spot. I certainly would not like to be in his shoes trying to decide the next career move. Terrible baloney politics.

Does not look like there is a choice open to him....unless choosing between Red Bull and a year off counts as a choice.

I'm also not sure I'd define it as a tough spot. He has a seat in one of the top teams waiting for him. Guaranteed. His decision-making is predicated on whether the grass is greener elsewhere, but it's not like he has his back to the wall. I suspect many drivers would love to be in such a tough spot as him

For sure. All is relative.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:33 am
Posts: 2886
Some more opinion, this time John Watson:
http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/636377/Red_Bull_should_demote_Verstappen_to_Toro_Rosso_over_Ricciardo_crash/

And from Mark Hughes:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/red-bull-fallout-baku

Looks like Marko has now changed his stance too, from 50:50, to 70:30, a la Lauda:
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/955101/F1-news-Max-Verstappen-Daniel-Ricciardo-Red-Bull-Helmut-Marko

Edit: I'm not so sure now about the validity of the last quote..

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition:
- 4 victories (Singapore '18, USA '17, USA '16, Mexico '16),
- 6 podiums
- 2013 Rookie of the Year
- 2014 Championship 6th position
- 2016 Championship 9th position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 5:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14186
purchville wrote:
Some more opinion, this time John Watson:
http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/636377/Red_Bull_should_demote_Verstappen_to_Toro_Rosso_over_Ricciardo_crash/

And from Mark Hughes:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/red-bull-fallout-baku

Looks like Marko has now changed his stance too, from 50:50, to 70:30, a la Lauda:
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/955101/F1-news-Max-Verstappen-Daniel-Ricciardo-Red-Bull-Helmut-Marko

Edit: I'm not so sure now about the validity of the last quote..


So John Watson clearly hasn't received the "don't blame Verstappen" memo that some seem to believe must have been circulated to every former driver and any other figure loosely related to the sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 6:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 326
mikeyg123 wrote:
purchville wrote:
Some more opinion, this time John Watson:
http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/636377/Red_Bull_should_demote_Verstappen_to_Toro_Rosso_over_Ricciardo_crash/

And from Mark Hughes:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/red-bull-fallout-baku

Looks like Marko has now changed his stance too, from 50:50, to 70:30, a la Lauda:
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/955101/F1-news-Max-Verstappen-Daniel-Ricciardo-Red-Bull-Helmut-Marko

Edit: I'm not so sure now about the validity of the last quote..


So John Watson clearly hasn't received the "don't blame Verstappen" memo that some seem to believe must have been circulated to every former driver and any other figure loosely related to the sport.


Don't put it quite like that. :)

Besides some pundits, everyone is playing his card in this issue. Merc and Ferrari want a frustrated Ricciardo inside of RBR. If they manage to add to the turmoil inside RBR it's good, if Ricciardo becomes frustrated even better as if they need to sign him, the paycheck will definitely be smaller.

This is how I see, but I may be wrong.

I am not a Verstappen fan, quite the contrary, but I fully understand why RBR are behind him. He is young, and definitely what happened in the first 4 races will not define his career. But if you treat this aspect wrong, it might result in him backing down too much. So they have to calm him down a bit and they think this is the way to do it. Nothing wrong with that from my point of view.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 6:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 12:49 am
Posts: 312
Here is another view, expressed by David Gow in an interview on motorsport.com What is stated is that Verstappen is being given favourable treatment.

While I don't think everyone is favouring Verstappen, I do agree it seems to go beyond the Red Bull team. This suggests it is not just Red Bull who believes that Verstappen with his records of success at a young age is the person to bring fans to F1


Last edited by iano on Tue May 08, 2018 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 6:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14186
iano wrote:
Here is another view, expressed by David Gow in an interview on motorsport.com

While I don't think everyone is favouring Verstappen, I do agree it seems to go beyond the Red Bull team. This suggests it is not just Red Bull who believes that Verstappen with his records of success at a young age is the person to bring fans to F1


Or they're offering up a genuine opinion based on events they saw.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 9:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
paul_gmb wrote:
I am not a Verstappen fan, quite the contrary, but I fully understand why RBR are behind him. He is young, and definitely what happened in the first 4 races will not define his career. But if you treat this aspect wrong, it might result in him backing down too much. So they have to calm him down a bit and they think this is the way to do it. Nothing wrong with that from my point of view.
I really don't understand how you can calm a driver down, by blaming the team-mate for something that was entirely his own fault.

I just re-read what Christian Horner said after Verstappen had lost 3rd place at Austin last year, when he went off-track to overtake Räikkönen.
Horner wrote:
It's wrong. We'll have a look at it, but for me it was fair, hard racing. I think that's a bad judgement by the stewards to have made that call.
I felt at the time that it was dangerous to pander to a far too immature driver that way, and unless the team threw the book at him in private both then and now, it simply cannot be the best way to go about calming him down. The result suggests the team have truly failed in that respect.

But there's a worse danger; less informed fans might just believe the nonsense the team are feeding them - very many Dutch fans already do, though they may be excused somewhat for their "Orange Fever". If on top of team nonsense we get "expert" commentators joining in, sportsmanship is in danger.

Source for the quote:http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/132574

_________________
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 May 08, 2018 11:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 12:49 am
Posts: 312
mikeyg123 wrote:
iano wrote:
Here is another view, expressed by David Gow in an interview on motorsport.com What is stated is that Verstappen is being given favourable treatment.


While I don't think everyone is favouring Verstappen, I do agree it seems to go beyond the Red Bull team. This suggests it is not just Red Bull who believes that Verstappen with his records of success at a young age is the person to bring fans to F1


Or they're offering up a genuine opinion based on events they saw.


Who is offering the genuine opinion? The majority who say Verstappen is at fault, or the small minority who say it is 50/50? Or those who say anyone apportioning any blame to Ricciardo is blatantly favouring Verstappen (as in the link provided).... or perhaps all of them?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1021
Zoue wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
It's a very strange one, tbh. It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. I don't really understand why neither the stewards nor Red Bull management are willing to state that officially

But it's not though is it? Lots of former drivers and pundits put the blame on both.

I honestly don't see how anyone can put the majority of blame on anyone but Max. What Ricciardo did was totally normal, perfectly legal, and found in an almost infinite number of safely executed overtakes: he dummied right, then tried to outbrake Max on the left. What Max did was start moving right - you can plainly see that from his onboard, although it's not much - before cutting back across to block Ricciardo. And then, most bizarrely of all, he moves back to the right and blocks any chance of Ricciardo avoiding the collision.

Basically, to say Ricciardo is at fault is to say that any late braking maneuver where you don't leave yourself a margin for error is bad. To say Max is at fault all you need to do is say that blacking is bad, which it plainly is. In IndyCar Max's move would be cut-and-dried illegal, and I think it should be in F1 as well. Blocking - which is making a defensive move after the attacking car has committed - is simply dangerous driving, and Baku is a perfect example of why. If Ricciardo really braked too late, Max should have let him go past and done a switchback; if Ricciardo didn't leave it too late, then he had Max beat.

I get that you feel Max is being unfairly piled on, and sometimes in the past he has been. But his driving was on the border all throughout the Azerbaijan GP, and his block on Ricciardo (after weaving on the straight, mind you) was just plain and simple dangerous driving.


I consider Verstappen to be largely to blame in this case. Although as per normal criticism of him goes over the top.

I do take issue with sentences such like - It's clear to just about everybody that it was Max weaving that caused the accident. - Which Zoue said because it's clearly untrue. I've seen lots of former drivers and pundits put blame on both.

Well, clearly you don't think it was the cause so I guess that makes my statement untrue. But I was trying to convey the fact that most interviews cite the weaving as the cause, even if they then do go on to split the blame. Frankly most of the statements are a little bizarre, when you get Brawn saying one second that Ricciardo was a passenger after Max changed his line twice, then going on immediately to say both were equally to blame. They all all seem to contradict themselves


Not sure why this argument is still going, but by blaming both drivers doesn't mean 'equal' blame. Both drivers were committed, Ric was attacking and Max defending. Both drivers could have prevented it but Ric was more of a passenger due to the slight second move (plus the sudden gain).

Could also add a bit of blame on to Horner who refused to do a team order. Especially when Max had already caught Ric previously in the same race...

I love both drivers, I want to see racing and things like this will always happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
Teddy007 wrote:
Not sure why this argument is still going, but by blaming both drivers doesn't mean 'equal' blame. Both drivers were committed, Ric was attacking and Max defending. Both drivers could have prevented it but Ric was more of a passenger due to the slight second move (plus the sudden gain).

Could also add a bit of blame on to Horner who refused to do a team order. Especially when Max had already caught Ric previously in the same race...

I love both drivers, I want to see racing and things like this will always happen.
I don't see any reason for a team order by Horner, Marko or Mateschitz. It is fantastic that Red Bull allows their drivers to race. Simply explaining the sporting code to Verstappen would do the trick. If they don't (didn't) then indeed things like this will continue to happen.

Perhaps I need to be clearer; I think the worst Red Bull could have done was to order Verstappen to let Ricciardo past. That would have simply upset everybody, and achieved remarkably little. Especially in Verstappen's mind.

What might have helped Verstappen during the race is a simple reminder that 2 cars were needed to score points. But again, without the blatant favouring of one driver over the other, as we were treated to by Ferrari during their dominance.

_________________
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 May 08, 2018 1:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Fiki wrote:
Teddy007 wrote:
Not sure why this argument is still going, but by blaming both drivers doesn't mean 'equal' blame. Both drivers were committed, Ric was attacking and Max defending. Both drivers could have prevented it but Ric was more of a passenger due to the slight second move (plus the sudden gain).

Could also add a bit of blame on to Horner who refused to do a team order. Especially when Max had already caught Ric previously in the same race...

I love both drivers, I want to see racing and things like this will always happen.
I don't see any reason for a team order by Horner, Marko or Mateschitz. It is fantastic that Red Bull allows their drivers to race. Simply explaining the sporting code to Verstappen would do the trick. If they don't (didn't) then indeed things like this will continue to happen.

Perhaps I need to be clearer; I think the worst Red Bull could have done was to order Verstappen to let Ricciardo past. That would have simply upset everybody, and achieved remarkably little. Especially in Verstappen's mind.

What might have helped Verstappen during the race is a simple reminder that 2 cars were needed to score points. But again, without the blatant favouring of one driver over the other, as we were treated to by Ferrari during their dominance.

Interesting take on this by Mark Hughes:

All of which is to say, Ricciardo’s trademark dive-bomb attack is legitimate. Moving twice in defence and leaving the other guy nowhere to go is not. Up until the point Verstappen did that, this had been a totally clean no-holds-barred dice. Rubbing tyres as they fought out the exit of Turn 1? Fine. The same again up to Turn 2? Just part of the game if you want to take it that far. The accident was almost totally Verstappen’s fault.

He then goes on to say:

Which contradicts the official team position (Horner’s and both drivers’) post-race. But that almost has to be the team’s position if it’s to move forwards, so as not to further antagonise the situation. Of more importance is what the team’s position really was behind closed doors – when Horner, Helmut Marko, the two drivers and the race engineers were locked in the debrief room together after the incident. Because it really needs to have been spelt out to Verstappen that the double defensive move was a foul – whether he accepts that or not, that it would henceforth be considered a foul by the team if used against the other Red Bull. Ricciardo’s public shouldering of some of the blame when in reality there was little or none suggests a maturity and long-game awareness that his younger team-mate perhaps lacks. But it may also be indicative of having been vindicated in the team meeting.

edit: whoops, no accreditation for the quotes!

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/red-bull-fallout-baku


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
To add to Fiki's post above, for me the danger is also that he doesn't seem to think that he has done anything wrong. All the interviews from Verstappen show that he truly believes that he is doing nothing wrong. We have seen it in so many races, he resorts to some sort of aggressive move and destroys his or others races. But he goes on to defend his actions every time, apart from the clash with Vettel. And even then, the first thing he said on the radio was that Vettel turned on him. Last thing I read was when he said he doesn't think that he has to tone it down. Last year (or the year before, can't remember now) he was saying that they are all ganging up on him because he is the new fast guy and the established names are kind of scared of his speed, something along these lines.

To top it off, Horner's protection does not help. Maybe Lauda's suggestion that the drivers should pay for the damages on the cars would be a fitting solution


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 4:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:36 pm
Posts: 15
Just one observation.


With regard to the "Ricciardo left his braking too late". In the context of the accident, that means nothing more than he left his braking later than Max (to definitively say he left his braking too late, you would need to see him miss the corner; which we didn't for obvious reason). Moreover, Ricciardo has zero (to my knowledge) record of out braking himself. We can only give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't actually brake too late, simply later than VER.

So are we really going to argue that drivers shouldn't be trying to out brake as an overtaking tactic, or are we arguing that drivers can be able to cover and brake-check into corners as a defensive tactic?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 12:49 am
Posts: 312
Siao7 wrote:
To add to Fiki's post above, for me the danger is also that he doesn't seem to think that he has done anything wrong. All the interviews from Verstappen show that he truly believes that he is doing nothing wrong. We have seen it in so many races, he resorts to some sort of aggressive move and destroys his or others races. But he goes on to defend his actions every time, apart from the clash with Vettel. And even then, the first thing he said on the radio was that Vettel turned on him. Last thing I read was when he said he doesn't think that he has to tone it down. Last year (or the year before, can't remember now) he was saying that they are all ganging up on him because he is the new fast guy and the established names are kind of scared of his speed, something along these lines.

To top it off, Horner's protection does not help. Maybe Lauda's suggestion that the drivers should pay for the damages on the cars would be a fitting solution


Even if they paid in the ratio 70% to 30% - Ricciardo would be giving back a bigger percentage of what he gets paid


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:36 pm
Posts: 15
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

For the laugh. Maldonado objecting to comparisons with Verstappen.

https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/1350 ... maldonado/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

For the laugh. Maldonado objecting to comparisons with Verstappen.

https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/1350 ... maldonado/

I can't be certain weather users with under 10 posts have an edit button on each of their posts. Then what you could do is remove what you have said and type ''Deleted Post''

About the link, I think what Maldonado says is perfectly reasonable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 326
Fiki wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
I am not a Verstappen fan, quite the contrary, but I fully understand why RBR are behind him. He is young, and definitely what happened in the first 4 races will not define his career. But if you treat this aspect wrong, it might result in him backing down too much. So they have to calm him down a bit and they think this is the way to do it. Nothing wrong with that from my point of view.
I really don't understand how you can calm a driver down, by blaming the team-mate for something that was entirely his own fault.

I just re-read what Christian Horner said after Verstappen had lost 3rd place at Austin last year, when he went off-track to overtake Räikkönen.
Horner wrote:
It's wrong. We'll have a look at it, but for me it was fair, hard racing. I think that's a bad judgement by the stewards to have made that call.
I felt at the time that it was dangerous to pander to a far too immature driver that way, and unless the team threw the book at him in private both then and now, it simply cannot be the best way to go about calming him down. The result suggests the team have truly failed in that respect.

But there's a worse danger; less informed fans might just believe the nonsense the team are feeding them - very many Dutch fans already do, though they may be excused somewhat for their "Orange Fever". If on top of team nonsense we get "expert" commentators joining in, sportsmanship is in danger.


Source for the quote:http://classic.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/132574


I think it depends on the person. For example, if I evaluate suppliers and customers of my companies, there are some customers which I treat more carefully, others not. And some of those that I don't treat more carefully bring in more money.

I do admit that looking from a customer care point of view, yes, this is unfair. I will agree on this. Do I have an explanation? Not a logical one. I am not claiming I have their level of professionalism etc, was just giving this explanation as an example.

So I guess they see and endgame with Max, and consider this route to be the better one.

But they took this route before, with Vettel ( with differences of course ), and had success. Looking back, yes, Mark Webber did not win a WDC. But remember, RBR had to take this decision in 2009, when this kind of decision was harder to take.

I am not saying I agree with them or not, I think this is just how they see things. Only the future will tell.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 8:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
Geckko65 wrote:
Just one observation.


With regard to the "Ricciardo left his braking too late". In the context of the accident, that means nothing more than he left his braking later than Max (to definitively say he left his braking too late, you would need to see him miss the corner; which we didn't for obvious reason). Moreover, Ricciardo has zero (to my knowledge) record of out braking himself. We can only give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't actually brake too late, simply later than VER.

So are we really going to argue that drivers shouldn't be trying to out brake as an overtaking tactic, or are we arguing that drivers can be able to cover and brake-check into corners as a defensive tactic?
Using a stopwatch and checking the on-boards from both drivers, I found that Ricciardo is off the throttle about 1.25seconds before the hit, while Verstappen only leaves the throttle around 0.87seconds before the hit. It would have been interesting to see this in a synchronised shot from both cockpits, which makes me wonder whether the stewards requested this. Seeing Ricciardo trying to make up for Max's clear breach of the rules should absolve him of blame, regardless of what he initially thought, or what the team made him say.

_________________
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 May 08, 2018 9:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5920
Location: Michigan, USA
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

I can't be certain weather users with under 10 posts have an edit button on each of their posts. Then what you could do is remove what you have said and type ''Deleted Post''

About the link, I think what Maldonado says is perfectly reasonable.

You can delete a post right after you post it, can't you?

EDIT: Yes, you can. Next to the red exclamation mark symbol for reporting a post there should be a little 'X' symbol: that lets you completely delete your post. I don't know how long it sticks around, but if you catch a mistake immediately after posting and decide you don't want the post around anymore you can delete it.

You can also edit it to just correct the link, mind you...

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:04 am
Posts: 297
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

For the laugh. Maldonado objecting to comparisons with Verstappen.

https://www.gpfans.com/en/articles/1350 ... maldonado/


already taken care of, but for the future you can delete your own post and you can go back into your post allowing you the ability to edit (correcting any mistakes / revise content)

_________________
- Mod Team


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
Fiki wrote:
I wonder why Ricciardo said he braked too late. He is braking roughly halfway between the first and the second distance board. I believe there are signs for 200, 150, 100 and 50 metres to the corner. That means that Ricciardo was braking around 175, 170m before the corner, and was downshifting.
Max goes well beyond the 150m sign, say he brakes around 125m. That's roughly a 50 m braking distance difference, which presumably should cover the extra speed Ricciardo had from his DRS - and probably even more.

Fiki wrote:
Using a stopwatch and checking the on-boards from both drivers, I found that Ricciardo is off the throttle about 1.25seconds before the hit, while Verstappen only leaves the throttle around 0.87seconds before the hit.

Looking at his successful overtake round the outside, Ricciardo braked around the 125m. (And it's only when looking at this at 1/4 speed, I noticed that Max had locked up behind him.) So, further from my first post above, this means that Ricciardo was braking also 50m earlier for his inside overtake attempt. If that successful outside overtake is representative of the speeds during the inside overtake Max torpedoed, then I would suggest braking 50m earlier should be sufficient to get rid off an extra 27km/h (DRS advantage) and to compensate for being off the racing line. After all, he brakes around 3 tenths earlier than Max. So once again, what did the stewards base their verdict on, assuming they took the time to analyse all the specialist information available to them? Their verdict suggest they didn't. :?

_________________
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: Wed May 09, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27942
Siao7 wrote:
To add to Fiki's post above, for me the danger is also that he doesn't seem to think that he has done anything wrong. All the interviews from Verstappen show that he truly believes that he is doing nothing wrong. We have seen it in so many races, he resorts to some sort of aggressive move and destroys his or others races. But he goes on to defend his actions every time, apart from the clash with Vettel. And even then, the first thing he said on the radio was that Vettel turned on him. Last thing I read was when he said he doesn't think that he has to tone it down. Last year (or the year before, can't remember now) he was saying that they are all ganging up on him because he is the new fast guy and the established names are kind of scared of his speed, something along these lines.

To top it off, Horner's protection does not help. Maybe Lauda's suggestion that the drivers should pay for the damages on the cars would be a fitting solution

Another line from Verstappen seems to be that the other drivers have to respect him on the track because of his aggressive defence but I think that he confuses respect with drivers being wary of him much like they had to be with Maldonado.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
pokerman wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
To add to Fiki's post above, for me the danger is also that he doesn't seem to think that he has done anything wrong. All the interviews from Verstappen show that he truly believes that he is doing nothing wrong. We have seen it in so many races, he resorts to some sort of aggressive move and destroys his or others races. But he goes on to defend his actions every time, apart from the clash with Vettel. And even then, the first thing he said on the radio was that Vettel turned on him. Last thing I read was when he said he doesn't think that he has to tone it down. Last year (or the year before, can't remember now) he was saying that they are all ganging up on him because he is the new fast guy and the established names are kind of scared of his speed, something along these lines.

To top it off, Horner's protection does not help. Maybe Lauda's suggestion that the drivers should pay for the damages on the cars would be a fitting solution

Another line from Verstappen seems to be that the other drivers have to respect him on the track because of his aggressive defence but I think that he confuses respect with drivers being wary of him much like they had to be with Maldonado.

True, though I'll be honest, I don't remember Pastor being so naive (or confused or plain stupid or insert whatever you want here!).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27942
Exediron wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

I can't be certain weather users with under 10 posts have an edit button on each of their posts. Then what you could do is remove what you have said and type ''Deleted Post''

About the link, I think what Maldonado says is perfectly reasonable.

You can delete a post right after you post it, can't you?

EDIT: Yes, you can. Next to the red exclamation mark symbol for reporting a post there should be a little 'X' symbol: that lets you completely delete your post. I don't know how long it sticks around, but if you catch a mistake immediately after posting and decide you don't want the post around anymore you can delete it.

You can also edit it to just correct the link, mind you...

You can only completely delete a post if no one has read it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5920
Location: Michigan, USA
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

I can't be certain weather users with under 10 posts have an edit button on each of their posts. Then what you could do is remove what you have said and type ''Deleted Post''

About the link, I think what Maldonado says is perfectly reasonable.

You can delete a post right after you post it, can't you?

EDIT: Yes, you can. Next to the red exclamation mark symbol for reporting a post there should be a little 'X' symbol: that lets you completely delete your post. I don't know how long it sticks around, but if you catch a mistake immediately after posting and decide you don't want the post around anymore you can delete it.

You can also edit it to just correct the link, mind you...

You can only completely delete a post if no one has read it.

Ah, so that's what it is. All I knew was that the option disappears fairly quickly. :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 5402
I've come a bit late to this and without reading any other posts on the subject because I want to come in with my viewpoint from the off.

I have one question. In what universe can Ricciardo be to blame for any part in the accident, other than one where you're not supposed to try to overtake the car in front.

That's all he was trying to do and it just happened to be his team-mate.

Nothing wrong with Dani's move but how was Verstappen allowed to get away with changing direction twice and not leaving enough room for the guy behind?

My feeling is that when team-mates are involved, the rules somehow change and the stewards don't do their job.

The converse of this is Hamilton rear-ending Rosberg at Barcelona in 2016. Rosberg had completely done what he was allowed to with a slower car than the guy (team-mate again) trying to overtake him and yet the guy behind just loses it on the grass trying to go where there wasn't room and took out the WDC leader from another 100% record for the season. Only got away with it because it was between team-mates.

It makes no sense!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 11:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
flyboy10 wrote:
I've come a bit late to this and without reading any other posts on the subject because I want to come in with my viewpoint from the off.

I have one question. In what universe can Ricciardo be to blame for any part in the accident, other than one where you're not supposed to try to overtake the car in front.

That's all he was trying to do and it just happened to be his team-mate.

Nothing wrong with Dani's move but how was Verstappen allowed to get away with changing direction twice and not leaving enough room for the guy behind?

My feeling is that when team-mates are involved, the rules somehow change and the stewards don't do their job.

The converse of this is Hamilton rear-ending Rosberg at Barcelona in 2016. Rosberg had completely done what he was allowed to with a slower car than the guy (team-mate again) trying to overtake him and yet the guy behind just loses it on the grass trying to go where there wasn't room and took out the WDC leader from another 100% record for the season. Only got away with it because it was between team-mates.

It makes no sense!

hope you're wearing a bullet proof vest for the example you gave...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 92
Zoue wrote:
flyboy10 wrote:
I've come a bit late to this and without reading any other posts on the subject because I want to come in with my viewpoint from the off.

I have one question. In what universe can Ricciardo be to blame for any part in the accident, other than one where you're not supposed to try to overtake the car in front.

That's all he was trying to do and it just happened to be his team-mate.

Nothing wrong with Dani's move but how was Verstappen allowed to get away with changing direction twice and not leaving enough room for the guy behind?

My feeling is that when team-mates are involved, the rules somehow change and the stewards don't do their job.

The converse of this is Hamilton rear-ending Rosberg at Barcelona in 2016. Rosberg had completely done what he was allowed to with a slower car than the guy (team-mate again) trying to overtake him and yet the guy behind just loses it on the grass trying to go where there wasn't room and took out the WDC leader from another 100% record for the season. Only got away with it because it was between team-mates.

It makes no sense!

hope you're wearing a bullet proof vest for the example you gave...


:lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 12:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 27942
Exediron wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Exediron wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Geckko65 wrote:
Ooops. Mod's please delete last post. Wrong link:

I can't be certain weather users with under 10 posts have an edit button on each of their posts. Then what you could do is remove what you have said and type ''Deleted Post''

About the link, I think what Maldonado says is perfectly reasonable.

You can delete a post right after you post it, can't you?

EDIT: Yes, you can. Next to the red exclamation mark symbol for reporting a post there should be a little 'X' symbol: that lets you completely delete your post. I don't know how long it sticks around, but if you catch a mistake immediately after posting and decide you don't want the post around anymore you can delete it.

You can also edit it to just correct the link, mind you...

You can only completely delete a post if no one has read it.

Ah, so that's what it is. All I knew was that the option disappears fairly quickly. :thumbup:

Yeah and on that score it relates to the competition I run and you play in, a competitor made a second entry after or during a practice session, realising his second entry was worse he then tried to delete it. He couldn't delete it completely because it had already been read so he changed it to a spurious post about the practice session, unfortunately for him the person that read it was me. :)

That's got me thinking about a new rule for the competition which will warn competitors about making edited posts after practice has started, it could be a potential cheat so has to be penalised no matter.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Last edited by pokerman on Sat May 12, 2018 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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: Black_Flag_11, lucifers, UnlikeUday 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