davewantsmoore

Members
  • Content count

    13,205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

About davewantsmoore

  • Rank
    Log! It's big, it's heavy, it's wood.
  • Birthday October 16

Uncategorized

  • Location
    Hobart
  • Country
    Yes
  • First Name
    Dave
  1. F1 2017

    You really seem to be mixing up the roles of the stewards and the FIA judiciary. Vettel action (steering in to another car, when there was no corner or other reason) was very dangerous. The stewards made the correct call IMHO. Whether he meant to do it, or not .... was not considered as a factor, as it could not be under the rules of F1. It's very simple.
  2. F1 2017

    Those types of incidents are typically 'racing incidents' as nobody could realistically see them coming, or have enough time to do anything to avoid, etc. Eg. two cars ending up trying to share the same piece of track, due to decision made by both drivers. Seb OTOH, steered into someone dangerously. He should have known it was dangerous, and he shouldn't have DONE it. See here how whether he actually MEANT to steer in, isn't a factor in anything. He doesn't get to claim "oh it was an accident" as a defence.... and others don't get to claim "he did it on purpose" as strengthening the penalty. That's how the rules of the sport work. Yes, the difference between dangerous and deliberate could be seen as semantic, or pedantic ..... but, that's how rules work. If you're making the claim that the stewards used some other rule book to adjudicate this incident ..... then you've got a long hill to climb. If you're just trying to push the point that you think that Seb did it on purpose ..... then sure. I reckon there's a real majority of people out there who would agree with that on some level. OTOH, a FIA tribuneral (if convened, which they've chosen not to) .... would be allowed to take all sorts of things into account. They could look at the telemetry and say "we think you did this on purpose" ..... and they could use what he said after the race regarding the incident, as a factor, etc. etc.
  3. F1 2017

    Oh, I see. It's pretty hard to be conclusive about that, of course .... but the steering in looked to be a deliberate action. Was making contact deliberate? Who knows? It would be surprising to me either way .... if contact was a mistake (a mistake of this nature is surprising to me), or if deliberate (he shouldn't be this silly). Anyways.... my only point was that talk of stewards and deliberate in same sentence is nonsense - becuase it makes no difference. Any claim otherwise is to claim stewards did no adjudicate within the rules.... which is a super bold claim. Are you making that claim? I would have like to see the FIA refer it to the judges for a hearing later on (even if the judges rule he doesn't need a sanction) .... to simply let it go looks bad IMO.
  4. F1 2017

    No it isn't. Just repeating it and repeating it doesn't make it so. The RULES don't work like that. So if it was like you say, then they all should be sacked..... It was judged on how dangerous it was, becuase that is what the rules say. Yes, poorish choice of wording on my part.... the FIA looked at it (as they do everything), and decided that no further action was required. No further action being charges, and trial with FIA judges, etc. (ie. a big arsed investigation into vettels 'behaviour').
  5. F1 2017

    Relevant for what ?! The race stewards? No. (If you think it is, then you are a moron) .... it being deliberate, is actually one of the things which isn't relevant. Someone's intention just doesn't come into it. A potential FIA investigation. Sure. FIA chose not to investigate this. Most people seem to think they should have (and I agree).
  6. F1 2017

    Which is what by the way? You keep talking about "deliberate". Yes, Seb deliberately hit Lewis.... or almost certainly it was deliberate (we can't see inside his mind). ... but what's your point about that? The stewards can not, did not, and will not take "deliberate" into account. It could have been even more deliberate than it was (or seemed to be), and it would not (could not) be a factor in the stewards decision. .... investigation by the FIA (which they have declined to undertake in this incident) is another matter. Deliberate can be considered then. Yes, it probably does. So what?
  7. F1 2017

    Yep... most of the time, it probably would be. There isn't a rule for that though .... so the relevance is?!?!?!?!?!
  8. F1 2017

    ... hey, let's live dangerously. I've not seen it directly quoted yet. Makes sense to me. You steer into someone. That is dangerous. You get penalised.
  9. F1 2017

    You seem to be inferring that I agree with the stewards. I'm just telling you what THEY ruled. I can quote them for you if you'd like, however you've instructed me not to do that. So bye.
  10. F1 2017

    >_< No. They penalised his actions for being dangerous. There is no such rule for 'deliberate'.
  11. F1 2017

    Sure, they probably would have liked to do that.... but they can't.
  12. F1 2017

    It's been done to death, yeah? Ric has laid it out for you real simple like. The stewards pinged him for the rule he broke .... the rules do not consider whether his actions were deliberate, only the outcome of his action.... and they handed him the second to harshest penalty possible. The FIA has the power to more broadly investigate his 'deliberate' 'behaviour' .... they have declined to do that .... but instead have noted that "Scuderia Ferrari is aligned with the values and objectives of the FIA".
  13. F1 2017

    You can't be serious. Of course it was.
  14. F1 2017

    You are incorrect. It's pretty simple.
  15. Paper machè horns.

    Delicious