Renault suspended from European GP
Posted by mika19b
The Lopper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rather amusingly, i spotted a B194 in the
> Autosport mag classifieds a year or so ago, with
> traction control listed amongst the spec
>
> Teh awesome!
GPG Nostalgia
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rather amusingly, i spotted a B194 in the
> Autosport mag classifieds a year or so ago, with
> traction control listed amongst the spec
>
> Teh awesome!
GPG Nostalgia
it is what it is
16.2 a) It shall be at the discretion of the stewards to decide, upon a report or a request by the race director, if a driver or drivers involved in an incident shall be penalised.
16.2 a) It shall be at the discretion of the stewards to decide, upon a report or a request by the race director, if a driver or drivers involved in an incident shall be penalised.
tripleM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it is what it is
>
> 16.2 a) It shall be at the discretion of the
> stewards to decide, upon a report or a request by
> the race director, if a driver or drivers involved
> in an incident shall be penalised.
I think that's half the problem - leaving it up to the stewards. They should have a set system of standard penalties for things like this, ratified by people with common sense.
-------------------------------------------------------
> it is what it is
>
> 16.2 a) It shall be at the discretion of the
> stewards to decide, upon a report or a request by
> the race director, if a driver or drivers involved
> in an incident shall be penalised.
I think that's half the problem - leaving it up to the stewards. They should have a set system of standard penalties for things like this, ratified by people with common sense.
DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Webbers situation was far more dangerous
how could a pitlane crash be more dangerous than a wheel bouncing around the track?
X (@ed24f1)
-------------------------------------------------------
> Webbers situation was far more dangerous
how could a pitlane crash be more dangerous than a wheel bouncing around the track?
X (@ed24f1)
DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Important point from Brundle:
>
> There is an automatic wheel retaining device
> fitted to all F1 wheel spindles which clearly also
> failed in this case and which would normally have
> prevented the wheel parting company fully.
>
> As far as Renault was concerned, the wheel should
> not have come off. The car failed which allowed it
> to come off. If we are penalising car failures,
> then where is Brawns for having put a driver in a
> coma?
Whilst not wanting to sound like i'm trying to justify the penalty, the FIA's statement said:
[...]
"[Renault] knowingly released car no. 7 from the pitstop position without one of the retaining devices for the wheel-nuts being securely in position, this being an indication that the wheel itself may not have been properly secured."
[...]
I'm reading that as it wasn't actually on the wheel when he was released.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Important point from Brundle:
>
> There is an automatic wheel retaining device
> fitted to all F1 wheel spindles which clearly also
> failed in this case and which would normally have
> prevented the wheel parting company fully.
>
> As far as Renault was concerned, the wheel should
> not have come off. The car failed which allowed it
> to come off. If we are penalising car failures,
> then where is Brawns for having put a driver in a
> coma?
Whilst not wanting to sound like i'm trying to justify the penalty, the FIA's statement said:
[...]
"[Renault] knowingly released car no. 7 from the pitstop position without one of the retaining devices for the wheel-nuts being securely in position, this being an indication that the wheel itself may not have been properly secured."
[...]
I'm reading that as it wasn't actually on the wheel when he was released.
I reckon they need to implement a more consistent rules and punishment system from now on - something like this would be a good start :
Its a failing of the Renault team for letting Alonso out of the pits in the first place. The wheel cover didn't lock in place like it should, and it is unsafe to release a car when the team can clearly see the tyre isn't safely secured.
The penalty is harsh and will be overturned, but i think Renault will still get a serious penalty, and should (as i think Vettel should have earlier in the season). This is a TEAM failing and not the driver so Alonso shouldnt be punished so harshly. But Renault failed in keeping their driver, other drivers, and fans safe by letting Alonso leave the pitlane with the problem. Simple as that!
The penalty is harsh and will be overturned, but i think Renault will still get a serious penalty, and should (as i think Vettel should have earlier in the season). This is a TEAM failing and not the driver so Alonso shouldnt be punished so harshly. But Renault failed in keeping their driver, other drivers, and fans safe by letting Alonso leave the pitlane with the problem. Simple as that!
DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SchueyFan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > DaveEllis Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Webbers situation was far more dangerous
> >
> > how could a pitlane crash be more dangerous than
> a
> > wheel bouncing around the track?
>
> I can't believe you just asked that.
I am definitely not saying that pitlane crashes are not potentially very dangerous. Maybe I am over-reacting to recent events, but in my opinion the danger of the wheel bouncing around the track is at least much more comparable to a pitlane crash than you are implying. Maybe that is not the case in Alonso's case in particular, now that I watch it again, but in general, I think the potential danger of each event is much less different than you were implying.
X (@ed24f1)
-------------------------------------------------------
> SchueyFan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > DaveEllis Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Webbers situation was far more dangerous
> >
> > how could a pitlane crash be more dangerous than
> a
> > wheel bouncing around the track?
>
> I can't believe you just asked that.
I am definitely not saying that pitlane crashes are not potentially very dangerous. Maybe I am over-reacting to recent events, but in my opinion the danger of the wheel bouncing around the track is at least much more comparable to a pitlane crash than you are implying. Maybe that is not the case in Alonso's case in particular, now that I watch it again, but in general, I think the potential danger of each event is much less different than you were implying.
X (@ed24f1)
This is a difficult one.
A very dangerous situation, however may be a harsh penalty. Penalty was no doubt needed but this maybe a little harsh.
The tyre/wheel was not attatched properly and the team knew but released the car. As Brundle said there is a device to prevent the released of the wheel in such situations. HOWEVER is that not the device in which the stupid wheel covers attatch (and that was lose)??? Also given that the wheel had not gone on it was no inconcievable to think that the spindle had failed also.
Another thing, as for previous mentioned incidents, ie Kimi. In hindsight he shoulld have been blacked flag and dq'd but he wasnt. At the time many thought he should have, this imo just goes to show the FIA's and the stewards total lack of competance.
The FIA have issued harsh penalys in the past. BAR's springs to mind, apparenlty (not proven) running underweight in races. The device in question was a fuel system shared by many of the teams.
As far as Renault was concerned, the wheel should not have come off. The car failed which allowed it to come off. If we are penalising car failures, then where is Brawns for having put a driver in a coma?
Brawn did not know or have any belief of the spring failing. Renault knew the wheel locking system was not done properly and so you have to assume the worst in such a case and not allow the car on track. Two compleley different situations. Its like saying a team should get a penalty for having an engine failure, dropping oil on track, a driver losing all grip and driving into the barriers and breaking a leg or two. I know the point you are trying to make but Renault are not being peanilized for a failure. They are being peanilized for causing a possible dangerous situation. When the wheel does not go on properly there is every chance it could be a mechanical problem or the tyre man didnt fasten it properly. In any case they should have assumed that there was a possibility for the wheel to come lose imo. Granted it was no dangerous than Kimi's incident and thats what I find wrong, the FIA's lack of consistancy.
Still a harsh penalty, a little too harsh but a penaulty should have been applied. A race ban is not helping anybody! If Alonso's not racing what are the stands going to be like??? tbh I cant imagine the ban holding through and imo Renault will be at Valencia 100%. Imagine the outcry of fans if not!
"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL
A very dangerous situation, however may be a harsh penalty. Penalty was no doubt needed but this maybe a little harsh.
The tyre/wheel was not attatched properly and the team knew but released the car. As Brundle said there is a device to prevent the released of the wheel in such situations. HOWEVER is that not the device in which the stupid wheel covers attatch (and that was lose)??? Also given that the wheel had not gone on it was no inconcievable to think that the spindle had failed also.
Another thing, as for previous mentioned incidents, ie Kimi. In hindsight he shoulld have been blacked flag and dq'd but he wasnt. At the time many thought he should have, this imo just goes to show the FIA's and the stewards total lack of competance.
The FIA have issued harsh penalys in the past. BAR's springs to mind, apparenlty (not proven) running underweight in races. The device in question was a fuel system shared by many of the teams.
As far as Renault was concerned, the wheel should not have come off. The car failed which allowed it to come off. If we are penalising car failures, then where is Brawns for having put a driver in a coma?
Brawn did not know or have any belief of the spring failing. Renault knew the wheel locking system was not done properly and so you have to assume the worst in such a case and not allow the car on track. Two compleley different situations. Its like saying a team should get a penalty for having an engine failure, dropping oil on track, a driver losing all grip and driving into the barriers and breaking a leg or two. I know the point you are trying to make but Renault are not being peanilized for a failure. They are being peanilized for causing a possible dangerous situation. When the wheel does not go on properly there is every chance it could be a mechanical problem or the tyre man didnt fasten it properly. In any case they should have assumed that there was a possibility for the wheel to come lose imo. Granted it was no dangerous than Kimi's incident and thats what I find wrong, the FIA's lack of consistancy.
Still a harsh penalty, a little too harsh but a penaulty should have been applied. A race ban is not helping anybody! If Alonso's not racing what are the stands going to be like??? tbh I cant imagine the ban holding through and imo Renault will be at Valencia 100%. Imagine the outcry of fans if not!
"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.