Home	Forum	Formula One General chat Formula One races 2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9 - Page 67
Hamilton wins Canadian GP thanks to Vettel penalty Sun Jun 09, 2019
Formula One has seen yet another controversial result of a Grand Prix as Lewis Hamiton inherited the Canadian GP race win after a controversial 5s penalty for leader Sebastian Vettel. An infuriated Vettel was classified second, ahead of Leclerc in third.
Vettel grabs first pole position of 2019 at Canada,
FP3: Vettel leads Ferrari charge ahead of qualifying,
FP2: Leclerc fastest as Hamilton hits wall,
FP1: Mercedes set early pace at Canada
2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9
For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
dans79
Re: 2019 Canadian Grand Prix, Montreal June 7-9
Post Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:20 pm
Manoah2u wrote: ↑
But by actually penalizing Vettel 1 thing has been proven: they are most definately not in favour of Ferrari this year,
NOR are they artificially keeping the championship alive like has been mentioned in regards to the Vettel-Hamilton incident in baku 2 years ago.
On the other hand, there's now wide open for speculation that FIA is favouring and helping Mercedes.
Especially since there's already so much talk about how the tire changes have helped Mercedes quite a lot and other teams on the back foot.
What I think they've shown more than anything else this season, is that the new regime is going to be much more by the books when it comes to the regulations.
Edax
zibby43 wrote: ↑
Sorry if this was already posted, but here are '16 World Champion Nico Rosberg's thoughts (and indirectly, Keke's) on the matter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gykAh22nbM
For a bit of balance, this is Rosberg's idea of rejoining safely
DiogoBrand
Shrieker
NathanOlder wrote: ↑
Here is the first example I have found, quick search...
A car taking to the grass at turn 3/4. Ricciardo in the Toro Rosso. He jumped across the grass at the last second to avoid a crash, so he didnt plan on going across the grass until the last second (Like Vettel) He then rejoined the track, had no one closing in on him yet still didnt need to use all the track, in a car with far less grip than the current cars. So I cant understand why ex-drivers say Seb had no choice when he clearly did.
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=286 ... 26c27d0274
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=c38 ... ba17bd7430
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=142 ... b0a634c8a9
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=948 ... 749e079d40
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=f8f ... c46893b5f5
The car we are onboard with (Kimi) clearly hits the throttle harder and gets more oversteer and drifts wider showing that if you control the throttle better you can easlily control the trajectory of your car. If you listen to the ex-drivers who say Seb had no choice, it sounds like they are saying, if you go across the grass there, you can only avoid a crash by using the full width of the track! but its clear from a 10min search online that those drivers are talking BS.
What a great find.
I've heard all sorts of nonsense on the internet how Vettel needed to give gas on grass to stabilize the car, how he couldn't have gone further to the left, how he was a passanger bla bla. For me those shots should settle any ounce of doubt whether Vettel could've done better or not. Quite obviously he went as far right as possible when rejoining to retain the lead.
Education is that which allows a nation free, independent, reputable life, and function as a high society; or it condemns it to captivity and poverty.
-Atatürk
LM10 wrote: ↑
He corrected the part at 3:48 where he's telling that it's irrelevant if out of control or not. In the comments he wrote:
Actually this part is incorrect. Sorry. If out of control all the time whilst squeezing Lewis then no penalty. As you don't get penalty for making a mistake going off and sliding back onto the track even if you end up hitting someone.
Vettel obviously was out of control and constantly trying to get the car under control again. What now?
You didn't include his full comment, which concludes:
"Crucially, Vettel was definitely totally in control of his car in the latter part of squeezing Lewis where if Lewis would not have backed out there would have been a collision = unsafe rejoining = penalty."
You're true, I missed that. Vettel was in control of his car in the latter part, I agree. However, Hamilton already needed to brake when Vettel still was in the process of getting the car under full control. As soon as this was the case, there was no 1 car width between track limitation and the Ferrari.
What Vettel should have done different is that he should have gone to the left as soon as he was in control again. But like I said, this would have not changed the need of Hamilton to brake because in my opinion at that point he has already been pushed out of track when Vettel was still gaining control.
Last edited by LM10 on Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DiogoBrand wrote: ↑
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9shj1rtGjg
Two different kinds of being in control of the cars. Anyway, Vettel even tells that he's not a fan of such penalties. And it was his team mate being pushed off.
sosic2121
Post Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:13 am
Wynters wrote: ↑
sosic2121 wrote: ↑
and Mexico, while he gained lasting advantage by avoiding T1(if let's say Schumacher did that, lots of people would say he did it on porpoise), they are mostly irrelevant.
On what basis do you claim he gained a 'lasting advantage' when all available evidence shows he did not?
To quote Charlie:- "You can see that Lewis makes a small mistake at the beginning, cuts across, gains significant track advantage but then sets about giving that back immediately."
"And you can see on the straight between turns three and four He backs off to 80% throttle to give that advantage back because obviously he'd got a significant advantage there
"And then about a minute later the Safety Car deployed and that advantage gone completely. So the stewards felt no lasting advantage."
He avoided possibly the most difficult T1 of entire season. He gave back time advantage that he gained, but in my opinion he gained much more.
Anyway, that's not really comparable with last event, so in that sense, it was wrong from me to bring it back.
Location: in a good place
Autosport has a write up with a few very important details about why they came to the decision they came to.
It was a unanimous decision by the stewards to penalize Vettel.
They looked at Hamilton's telemetry, not just the video review to see how hard he had to brake to avoid hitting Vettel.
They used CCTV video from cameras at the circuit to confirm Vettel checked his mirrors to see exactly where Hamilton was.
The stewards all agreed that Vettel had regained control of the car then checked to see where Hamilton was, then used a second steering imput to block Hamilton from overtaking.
Vettel "I didn't know Hamilton was there"
माकडाच्या हाती कोलीत
GrizzleBoy
At this point Seb regains full control. And that's being generous as I feel it was earlier than this.
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=1b4 ... ae1cca86c0
Yet he still ends up out this wide
http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=948 ... 24d85b7c60
That's definitely being generous.
Seb felt in control enough immediately after rejoining the track that he stamped on the throttle and spun up his rears while trying to defend.
Which put him almost parked facing across the track in front of oncoming traffic.
The point here, is that Seb blocking the road was not just an act of god he had no control over. It was the result of choices Seb consciously made.
SEB made the mistake and put himself on the grass.
SEB stamped on the accelerator to get back to defending as quickly as possible, at a time where he apparently was a passenger and was "lucky" not to hit the wall.
Spinning his rears and rotating his car till it was facing the wall, across the path of incoming cars.
SEB decided after going off track, coming back on and making a second "mistake" that had him facing the wall, to then crowd an incoming car off the defined boundaries of the race track.
The definition of unsafe re entry onto the race track.
Go off.
Come back on and make another mistake spinning up your wheels that has you facing the wrong way on track.
Impede another cars progress in an acceleration zone by both crowding them off the track and forcing them to brake to avoid contact with your car that you're still not done swinging all over the place.
Multiple rule violations, sloppy driving and to be quite frank, bullshit excuses, plus stewards with actual telemetry data and every camera angle available = penalty.
Seb ruined his own chances, nobody else.
Not a single other person is to blame but Sebastian Vettel.
drunkf1fan
Post Tue Jun 11, 2019 1:09 am
TAG wrote: ↑
Yeah, this peeves me off even more, he's cheated, he's actively tried to put a competitor into the wall, he's then played victim and is trying to play off how the sport isn't the one he fell in love with because the stewards gave an exceptionally lenient penalty to someone who tried to put their competitor into the wall. Something any driver throughout F1 history would be penalised for and for which it's usually deemed despicable driving. Somehow his reaction and fanboyism turned him into a victim when he just did the most Schumacher style cheating he's done in his career......
So far from the FIA ruining the sport or hurting it, Vettel implying the FIA /stewards are at fault and ruining his favourite sport is actually a direct attack on the sport itself. Vettel is causing people to say they are fed up with F1, because he's lying and manipulating the outcome.
he also managed to get away without many complaining that he's saying he was on the radio, driving one handed, knew the grass would cause him a loss of grip... but it's not his fault he couldn't regain control. Also he didn't see Hamilton, because the guy who was <1 second back for 10 laps was obviously not going to be right on him at that point anyway.
I know Vettel is trying to move away from being deemed making another mistake but he's taken his actions to a compete other level.
It's also turned into a Liverpool defending Suarez for racist comments on a pitch type situation. Ferrari are pretending they won with flags on show at home base.... because their guy fairly got a win taken away and imo unfairly got 2nd place.
In general intentionally shoving someone towards a wall should be a LOT more than a 5 second penalty, probably a drive through at least.
It's just a shame the stewards stated it was for unsafe entry, because it wasn't, if they'd stated the penalty was for attempting to push another driver into a wall it would have been more black and white and clear what they did it for and far less excuse worthy.
And to add to the above, drivers who have just gone off the track cannot claim that they have a right to the racing line on corner exit, because they were not on it.
Drivers are generally allowed to squeeze on corner exit because they are allowed to use the excuse that they are just following the natural racing line.
There isn't a single way anyone can argue that was the case on Sunday.
If anything, Sebs trajectory was pointing him in a much better position to have good.momentum to keep pushing on after he got back on track.
But the reality is that after he got back on track, he made throttle and steering inputs that took him on a shorter and unnatural course back to the racing line (spinning rears and turning his wheel right on the exit of a left turn).
As a car returning to track, he was not squeezing an incoming car as part of a drivers defense to an overtaking attempt, he was squeezing someone who actually DID have the right to take the corner on the natural racing line and both blocking them and forcing them off track.
You can squeeze if you are the lead car ON THE TRACK and are taking the line for that corner.
You cannot squeeze if you are the car returning from an off and in the process of blocking the road to prevent another car from accelerating in an acceleration zone.
You have the right to the racing line if you are the lead car ON THE TRACK and are taking the normal line for that corner.
You do not have the right to the racing line if you are the car returning to the track after an off and are in the process of blocking the road to prevent another car from accelerating in an acceleration zone.
Going off the track and as the stewards saw in the telemetry intentionally parking in front of incoming cars to halt their progress after you're enter the track is not an acceptable method of defending a place or trying to regain a place you effectively lost due to a mistake that was all your own fault in the first place.
I don't think anyone would really argue against that in 99% of other circumstances where the drivers or teams or formulas were different.
Last edited by GrizzleBoy on Tue Jun 11, 2019 1:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
While that's pretty damning, if that was their decision making process then he didn't violate the rule they say he did.
He should have gotten a penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage, as that basically sounds like the conclusion they game came to.
dans79 wrote: ↑
I'd say that making a second "mistake" immediately after the first one ended by spinning up your rears as soon as you rejoin, turning your wheel hard right on the exit of a medium speed left hander, causing you to block the path of incoming traffic that you no longer had the right to impede, qualifies quite clearly as unsafe reentry onto the track.
bill shoe
So did Vettel simply ruin the post-race ceremonies for everyone by having the mother of all temper-tantrums?
The FIA racing penalties are quite mild. It seems if you get judged to have done something wrong then you get a very small penalty that puts you back to where you began but nothing more, so really just a correction rather than a penalty. This incentivizes drivers to always go for the bump, block, shortcut, etc. and see what happens. If the decision goes against you then you're no worse off than when you started, plus you can whinge up and down to the international TV audience.
This culture of micro-penalties for race-changing behavior may actually make F1 driving worse. NASCAR has a famously laissez-faire culture for driving standards, where anything (including simple retaliation) is fair game as long as it's on the track and under green. It's never perfectly equitable, but you largely get punched to the extent that you punch. I can think of one or two current F1 drivers that would quickly get their asses handed to them if they tried to race NASCAR in the same lawyered-up way they race F1.
Return to "Formula One races"