Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Formula 1 Thread

1…343344345346347349»

Comments

  • DamoNorthStand
    DamoNorthStand Posts: 12,921
    Kenzo is starting to motor in F4. 


  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 100,470
    Harsh on Hamilton to get a penalty for that contact with Russell on Lap One... Good of George to call it out as well... Ridiculous as Ugochukwu punting out Slater in the F3 yesterday was deemed as a racing incident in the exact same place.
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 100,470
    Leclerc then doesn’t get a penalty despite running Piastri out of room and giving him damage... Hmmm
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 10,237
    This is such a messy race with all the VSCs. 
  • DamoNorthStand
    DamoNorthStand Posts: 12,921
    Lewis shit out of luck in this race 
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 10,237
    Embarrassing how far off the pace the Aston's are. All those billions invested and they're miles off. 

    Be lucky if this B Spec car is infront of a Caddy. 
  • Alwaysneil
    Alwaysneil Posts: 14,595
    Yeah if you are daddy stroll youve fucked up two big decisions, letting your son in a racing car and thinking Adrian Newey can run a team rather than design a car
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 10,237
    Alwaysneil said:
    Yeah if you are daddy stroll youve fucked up two big decisions, letting your son in a racing car and thinking Adrian Newey can run a team rather than design a car
    Whatever is going on with Jonathan Wheatley coming in can't come soon enough. Newey might be the greatest designer of all time but he's never a TP. 
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 10,237

  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 48,360
    edited July 19
    ForeverAddickted said:
    Leclerc then doesn’t get a penalty despite running Piastri out of room and giving him damage... Hmmm
    I think this requires a investigation of the stewards. I can accept Lewis was a 50/50 and Russell said it was a racing incident but Leclerc was a slam dunk penalty. Who were the stewards? Do they have a known anti Hamilton bias?

  • Sponsored links:



  • gringo
    gringo Posts: 1,228
    More like a pro- Hamilton bias on this thread.
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 100,470
    edited July 19
    MarcusH26 said:

    Wait so a Guest of Campos took the wrong headset, so Leon got DSQ
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 10,237
    edited July 19
    ForeverAddickted said:
    MarcusH26 said:

    Wait so a Guest of Campos took the wrong headset, so Leon got DSQ
    Essentially yes , Tsolov safe because it was a guest of Leon
  • DamoNorthStand
    DamoNorthStand Posts: 12,921
    gringo said:
    More like a pro- Hamilton bias on this thread.
    Explain why you think Lewis’ was a penalty and Charles’ wasn’t. Happy to hear your logically thought out reasoning 
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 48,360
    DamoNorthStand said:
    gringo said:
    More like a pro- Hamilton bias on this thread.
    Explain why you think Lewis’ was a penalty and Charles’ wasn’t. Happy to hear your logically thought out reasoning 
    Better still, give us an example where the person who went off doesn't blame the driver deemed at fault. Read what Russell said. I would suggest the bias is from the accuser in this case. But maybe, Gringo could still give an example. I won't hold my breath!
  • sam3110
    sam3110 Posts: 23,867
    I think both were racing incidents tbh
  • Alwaysneil
    Alwaysneil Posts: 14,595
    I was pretty sure Hamilton couldn't do much else and didn't deserve a penalty, as confirmed by Russell. 

    I was also pretty sure that leclerc deliberately squeezed until he had not left the regulation amount of width around the corner and he should have been penalised. 
  • gringo
    gringo Posts: 1,228
    edited July 20
    DamoNorthStand said:
    gringo said:
    More like a pro- Hamilton bias on this thread.
    Explain why you think Lewis’ was a penalty and Charles’ wasn’t. Happy to hear your logically thought out reasoning 
    I thought they both were, but Im not a steward, and (as Brundle pointed out today) don't have the benefit of all the telemetry and camera angles that the stewards have- and neither do you. So at the end of the day it's just our opinions. My view is fairly neutral (in that I don't have a current favourite driver since Senna and Petersen passed, and Jenson retired), yours is probably taken from a more pro-Lewis standpoint.
  • gringo
    gringo Posts: 1,228
    edited July 20

    MuttleyCAFC said:
    DamoNorthStand said:
    gringo said:
    More like a pro- Hamilton bias on this thread.
    Explain why you think Lewis’ was a penalty and Charles’ wasn’t. Happy to hear your logically thought out reasoning 
    Better still, give us an example where the person who went off doesn't blame the driver deemed at fault. Read what Russell said. I would suggest the bias is from the accuser in this case. But maybe, Gringo could still give an example. I won't hold my breath!
    Because its not him who decides, he doesn't have the benefit of telemetry, Lewis is a mate (and ex-team mate) who he admires, and Hamilton has a lot of "support" that Russell doesn't need to piss off (especially when he is under real pressure for his place next year). He also seemed to have an agenda that stressed his major problem being his own cars top speed performance (maybe to explain his deficit relative to Antonelli)- I think they could possibly be valid reasons but I don't really know. However I doubt that in any case you would be prepared to accept any viewpoints that differed to your own.
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 48,360
    edited July 20
    Yes, but a driver who goes off will always blame the driver who gets a penalty. Of course he doesn't decide but who will know better than him? You have just proved you can't accept the most likely viewpoint and you have failed to give an example where a driver who went off has said it wasn't the driver who got a penalty's fault. Come on I'll let you go back decades to find one! 

  • Sponsored links:



  • gringo
    gringo Posts: 1,228
    edited July 20
    MuttleyCAFC said:
    Yes, but a driver who goes off will always blame the driver who gets a penalty. Of course he doesn't decide but who will know better than him? You have just proved you can't accept the most likely viewpoint and you have failed to give an example where a driver who went off has said it wasn't the driver who got a penalty's fault. Come on I'll let you go back decades to find one! 
    Why do you feel the need to so aggressively challenge me to provide a meaningless comparative example?.

    There is a due process in place. An incident is looked at, and if deemed necessary referred to the Stewards to investigate. They make their decision based on the data, cameras etc. Russells viewpoint is interesting (possibly unique) but as I said before other factors could be in play with him.

     I cant think of one example where the opinion and viewpoint of a driver has overridden the process during a race, or where they have taken witness statements from other drivers before making a decision, can you? Come on I'll let you go back decades to find one. Are you saying the Stewards have just got a big box of punishments they have just put aside for Hamilton, and him alone, and are just waiting to clobber him with them?
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 48,360
    edited July 20
    You accused me of bias when you could have just disagreed and I asked you to back up what you said and you can't. It is pretty major that the driver who went off said it was a racing incident, you accused him of trying to suck up to Hamilton fans. Sadly it is a one way street with people like you. It was also the first lap where there is more leeway as tyres haven't fully warmed up. My view is they realised they had gone over the top when they didn't punish Hamilton for the pitstop issue. That is usually a slam dunk punishment even though it isn't the driver's fault.

    I wasn't asking for the opinion of a driver to overide the officials. I was asking for an example of when a driver doesn't blame the other driver. Like Piastri did with Leclerc for instance.
  • gringo
    gringo Posts: 1,228
    edited July 20
    MuttleyCAFC said:
    You accused me of bias when you could have just disagreed and I asked you to back up what you said and you can't. It is pretty major that the driver who went off said it was a racing incident, you accused him of trying to suck up to Hamilton fans. Sadly it is a one way street with people like you.Sadly. It was also the first lap where there is more leeway as tyres haven't fully warmed up. My view is they realised they had gone over the top when they didn't punish Hamilton for the pitstop issue. That is usually a slam dunk punishment even though it isn't the driver's fault.

    I wasn't asking for the opinion of a driver to overide the officials. I was asking for an example of when a driver doesn't blame the other driver. Like Piastri did with Leclerc for instance.
    Bit of an assumption as you have no idea what I think- that is Sad!
    Tata.
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 48,360
    Why did you accuse me of being biased then? I called it as I saw it. And I think I am in the majority on that one including those that don't support Hamilton. You can't have your cake and eat it and start something then get annoyed when people give some back. 

Categories