[Rumours] Groundhog Day’s Hamilton vs Masi - P45s at the ready?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The fact is there has been a lot of criticism from many quarters, not just Merc, about what happened at the last round.

I haven't heard any complaints from Honda Racing or Red Bull Racing as I recall - they seem rather pleased even!



It would have been dreadful if Verstappen had been unable to execute Red Bull Racing's tyre strategy due to backmarkers being in the way. As Masi said it was a motor race and he did what was necessary to facility "going motor racing". It's a shame that Sainz was disadvantaged by still having lap traffic, but oh well.

Originally Posted by S griffin

I can’t see anything Merc has said that has been worse than what other people unhappy with Masi’s decision have

Having made the decision to not change tyres, it is strange for Mercedes to "blame" Masi instead of their own pit wall! The stewards decided on the day that Masi was within his discretion due to the conflicting nature of the various sporting regulation clauses, and Mercedes accepted this decision by foregoing an (unsporting) appeal.

15.3 ... The Race Director shall have overriding authority in the following matters and the clerk of the course may give orders in respect of them only with his express agreement: ... d) The starting procedure. e) The use of the safety car.

39.12 ... "LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE"

39.13 ... "SAFETY CAR IN THIS LAP"
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...20-05-27_0.pdf

The stewards noted the regulations do not set out whether or not 39.13 overrides 39.12 and they take the position that 39.13 does override 39.12, notwithstanding that the Race Director used the message "LAPPED CARS 4 (NORRIS) – 14 – 31 – 16 – 5 TO OVERTAKE SAFETY CAR" and not the message "LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE" that would engage 39.12.

Note also that Mercedes protested Verstappen edging ahead by 10cm for about 0.1s as "overtaking under the safety car", which was rightly dismissed by the the stewards, demonstrating the frivolous and unsporting nature of Mercedes' intentions to protest.

As a very good F1 sporting director who does well at managing complex issues like track repairs, it would be silly for Masi to be replaced.

[crmalcolm]

Probably a more balanced consideration of Wolff's comments about Masi (because they are the actual quotes):

'Asked if naming a new Race Director could be a solution for F1, and restore his own trust in the FIA's decisions, Wolff called for improvements across the board, following a series of other controversies earlier in the campaign.

"I'm afraid it's not only a decision to change the Race Director – the whole system of decision-making needs to be improved," Wolff told media. "I think that the Race Director is certainly under big pressure and some of that is due to our own faults. I would have wished [for] more consistent decision-making that could have avoided many of the controversies throughout the year. The last one [in Abu Dhabi] was just a decision that had the biggest impact. From a sporting perspective, [it had] a catastrophic impact, because it decided the World Championship. But now you can say all season [it] went back and forth. We were on the receiving end sometimes, and sometimes we were more lucky."'

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

I haven't heard any complaints from Honda Racing or Red Bull Racing as I recall - they seem rather pleased even!



It would have been dreadful if Verstappen had been unable to execute Red Bull Racing's tyre strategy due to backmarkers being in the way. As Masi said it was a motor race and he did what was necessary to facility "going motor racing". It's a shame that Sainz was disadvantaged by still having lap traffic, but oh well.

Having made the decision to not change tyres, it is strange for Mercedes to "blame" Masi instead of their own pit wall! The stewards decided on the day that Masi was within his discretion due to the conflicting nature of the various sporting regulation clauses, and Mercedes accepted this decision by foregoing an (unsporting) appeal.

Note also that Mercedes protested Verstappen edging ahead by 10cm for about 0.1s as "overtaking under the safety car", which was rightly dismissed by the the stewards, demonstrating the frivolous and unsporting nature of Mercedes' intentions to protest.

But 'oh well'....

....i suspect you wouldnt be using those words if Max had been disadvantaged the same as Carlos.....

as noted multiple times, mercedes couldnt have pitted, they would have handed the lead to Max, they also expected the race would end under safety car, knowing the procedure that has been used previously, one which was ripped up in this race.

unsporting and frivolous protest?.....ahhh you mean like Red Bull at Silverstone who protested by inventing evidence by getting Albon to lap silverstone for a day.....

Masi doing well at dealing with complex situations...lol thats why theres all this fuss then,...because hes so good at his job. Red Bull seemed perfectly happy with his performance after Silverstone and Saudi...

I can see youre just trolling now and trying to stoke the flames, so best for me to bow out rather than give you the satisfaction.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

mercedes couldnt have pitted, ... they also expected the race would end under safety car

Mercedes own radio transcript suggests otherwise, on Lap 55:

Hamilton: What's the situation?
Bono: Verstappen has fresh softs, he had a free stop, we would have lost track position.
Bono: Four laps remaining, it may not restart
Hamilton: (bleep), is he (Verstappen) right behind me?
Bono: He will be once they have sorted out all the order.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

unsporting and frivolous protest?.....ahhh you mean like Red Bull at Silverstone who protested by inventing evidence by getting Albon to lap silverstone for a day.....

In that case Hamilton was penalised for the incident. Red Bull Racing were a bit cross about the engine (and chassis?) being written off through a not-at-fault incident I guess!

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

Mercedes own radio transcript suggests otherwise, on Lap 55:

Hamilton: What's the situation?
Bono: Verstappen has fresh softs, he had a free stop, we would have lost track position.
Bono: Four laps remaining, it may not restart
Hamilton: (bleep), is he (Verstappen) right behind me?
Bono: He will be once they have sorted out all the order.



In that case Hamilton was penalised for the incident. Red Bull Racing were a bit cross about the engine (and chassis?) being written off through a not-at-fault incident I guess!

So you agree, Hamilton would have lost track position, he would have come out behind Max.....

With 4 laps to go it wouldnt have restarted had safety car rules been followed

A bit cross...thats an understatment...and Saudi...i see you convenniently didnt reply to that part.

anyway as i said im out. zero point in contunually going around in circles.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

and Saudi...i see you convenniently didnt reply to that part.

I don't recall Red Bull Racing being cross with Masi at the Saudi Arabian GP, what are you referring to?

Saudi Arabia did however show that Masi has a tendency to forget about competitors other than #44 and #33, as he forgot #31 Ocon would be restarting from pole when negotiating a restart grip drop for #33, which perhaps goes some way to explain his decisions at the Abu Dhabi GP. I.e., he prioritised getting the lapped cars out of the way between #44 and #33,and forgot about the lapped cars that may impede #55 Sainz. Regardless, Ferrari did not protest this so they clearly weren't that bothered by that minor procedural anomaly.

At most Masi is a bit forgetful or a bit incompetent, the idea that Masi is malicious against Mercedes GP is dubious in the extreme IMO. Masi simply wanted to create a green flag finish without lapped cars between the leaders. What's wrong with that, that's what everyone wants to see isn't it?

[It's possible or likely that Masi didn't even realise the leaders had differing tyre strategies, as he would have been busy with recovering Latifi's car during the final round of pitstops.]

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

I don't recall Red Bull Racing being cross with Masi at the Saudi Arabian GP, what are you referring to?

Saudi Arabia did however show that Masi has a tendency to forget about competitors other than #44 and #33, as he forgot #31 Ocon would be restarting from pole when negotiating a restart grip drop for #33, which perhaps goes some way to explain his decisions at the Abu Dhabi GP. I.e., he prioritised getting the lapped cars out of the way between #44 and #33,and forgot about the lapped cars that may impede #55 Sainz. Regardless, Ferrari did not protest this so they clearly weren't that bothered by that minor procedural anomaly.

At most Masi is a bit forgetful or a bit incompetent, the idea that Masi is malicious against Mercedes GP is dubious in the extreme IMO. Masi simply wanted to create a green flag finish without lapped cars between the leaders. What's wrong with that, that's what everyone wants to see isn't it?

[It's possible or likely that Masi didn't even realise the leaders had differing tyre strategies, as he would have been busy with recovering Latifi's car during the final round of pitstops.]

Marko, Horner, Max all slammed Masi for inconsistant decisions, stating that they treat Hamilton and Max differently after Max was penalised in saudi....plenty of actual quotes from those involved out there to search.

Noone has stated that he is malicious against Mercedes.

Whats wrong with Masis decision in the last race? he didnt follow the pre set procedures that have been used multiple times over the previous years. The FIAs job isnt to produce an exciting finish, its to uphold the rules.

Reverse the situation, if Max was leading and lost the championship, the fallout would be the same, if not worse in the other direction.

Thats what makes this situation so bad, it ended an amazing championship between 2 brilliant drivers and teams in an utterly distastful way, which neither team or sets of fans would have enjoyed if they were on the bad end of it.

Anyway, i really am out this time, have far more important things to do than debate a well worn path...

[chillibowl]

in an attempt to ensure that every talking head still has something controversial to bang on about, the FIA have decided to release their Abu Dhabi findings 2 days before the start of the new season!

https://www.espn.com/f1/story/_/id/3...dings-march-18

i would say you cant make this stuff up but they really do seem to be giving it a good go!

[Adam43]

Sweet mother of all that is Motorsport. So we have ridiculousness of all the articles linked above and the pure fantasy of what is read into it in those reports and the above until right up to the first race.

Then we have the first weekend where a major topic will be this and not the actual sport, whatever that is now.

This is everything I despise about the sport.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Sweet mother of all that is Motorsport. So we have ridiculousness of all the articles linked above and the pure fantasy of what is read into it in those reports and the above until right up to the first race.

Then we have the first weekend where a major topic will be this and not the actual sport, whatever that is now.

This is everything I despise about the sport.

seconded!

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

seconded!

Yes, same here. Seems they can’t get this controversy sorted sooner for whatever reason, meaning we have to wait to hear it all. If they got it sorted sooner, it meant we could enjoy look forward to the new season more. Instead we have this lingering in the air just before the racing starts.

And if they decide to change the rules, it will be last minute. Not convenient at all

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Yes, same here. Seems they can’t get this controversy sorted sooner for whatever reason, meaning we have to wait to hear it all. If they got it sorted sooner, it meant we could enjoy look forward to the new season more. Instead we have this lingering in the air just before the racing starts.

And if they decide to change the rules, it will be last minute. Not convenient at all

Indeed.

And I suspect the FIA could have started and concluded this investigation earlier, which basically means they or Formula 1 didn’t want it to for what ever reason.

As above I was really hoping this would be sorted sooner so we can enjoy the new cars and go into the season with a clean sheet.

Think I may just miss the first race and miss all the BS and talk over it, for my own sanity.

On the bright side, IMSA this weekend which is a good way to cleanse the soul

[Beau2]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

So again, i ask how this is bringing the sport into disrepute, its no worse than comments or actions from Horner and Max in silverstone or Saudi, especially Saudi where they questioned Masi

I dont remember you claiming that they brought the sport into disrepute

Many people on this forum and the FIA themselves suggested that Horner's 'rogue marshall' comment at Qatar brought the sport into disrepute. There really isn't much difference between those comments and some of those made by Hamilton/Toto post Abu Dhabi. Of course we could just dismiss Horner's comments as being made in the heat of the moment..

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Beau2

Many people on this forum and the FIA themselves suggested that Horner's 'rogue marshall' comment at Qatar brought the sport into disrepute. There really isn't much difference between those comments and some of those made by Hamilton/Toto post Abu Dhabi. Of course we could just dismiss Horner's comments as being made in the heat of the moment..

There’s a large difference. Horner actually made the accusation, went on live TV fully criticising the marshals themselves.

Toto has chosen his very few words carefully…..

…if you can’t see the difference there is no point in discussing this further

[Beau2]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

…if you can’t see the difference there is no point in discussing this further

There is no difference.

"No Michael No - This is so not right"

"Michael you should reinstate the lap before"

"Michael - what was that?"

But you are right, I won't bother conversing with someone else that aims to shut down every opinion that differs from their own at any opportunity.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Sweet mother of all that is Motorsport. So we have ridiculousness of all the articles linked above and the pure fantasy of what is read into it in those reports and the above until right up to the first race.

Then we have the first weekend where a major topic will be this and not the actual sport, whatever that is now.

This is everything I despise about the sport.

You've nailed it there Adam - the constant carry on is beyond pathetic.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

seconded!

Yeah, count another second here, plus a vote in support.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Indeed.

And I suspect the FIA could have started and concluded this investigation earlier, which basically means they or Formula 1 didn’t want it to for what ever reason.

Not convinced about that - FIA had change of Pres, new Pres needs to get himself in the role, get things rolling amongst all the end of year hoopla - I THINK that the new term for Pres didn't actually start till January1& the outgoing Pres, essentially in caretaker mode wouldn't want to hold the investigation as it really is more appropriate for the new Pres. Then it is of course Xmas time and the main players would have likely headed off home - so around now would genuinely be about the earliest anyone could expect the review to start.

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

…if you can’t see the difference there is no point in discussing this further

I think that we reached the "no point" finish line weeks ago (although it feels like months).

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Beau2

Many people on this forum and the FIA themselves suggested that Horner's 'rogue marshall' comment at Qatar brought the sport into disrepute.

Good point. That was a very poor comment and out of line and Horner was fined accordingly.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Beau2

There is no difference.

"No Michael No - This is so not right"

"Michael you should reinstate the lap before"

"Michael - what was that?"

But you are right, I won't bother conversing with someone else that aims to shut down every opinion that differs from their own at any opportunity.

Errrr there’s a massive difference between saying ‘this is not right’ correct by the way, as per rules it wasn’t right, and Horner slamming volunteer marshals live on air, and being reprimanded for it.

I don’t put down every opinion, I just ask for proof, evidence and common sense.

Clearly if you can’t see the difference between the 2 incidents you don’t have anything from a, b or c

Goodnight

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Errrr there’s a massive difference between saying ‘this is not right’ correct by the way, as per rules it wasn’t right, and Horner slamming volunteer marshals live on air, and being reprimanded for it.

I don’t put down every opinion, I just ask for proof, evidence and common sense.

Clearly if you can’t see the difference between the 2 incidents you don’t have anything from a, b or c

Goodnight

Putting the "but but but RB did this this and this" aside, you have to agree that Toto badgering Masi to not do a full SC when Giovinazzi DNFed was also out of line.

The best summary on the teams and their principals can be: 'they are all as bad as each other'

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Skam85

Putting the "but but but RB did this this and this" aside, you have to agree that Toto badgering Masi to not do a full SC when Giovinazzi DNFed was also out of line.

The best summary on the teams and their principals can be: 'they are all as bad as each other'

This I agree with.

They ARE as bad as each other. Which is the point I’ve been trying to make….(maybe badly)

Tbh I think the whole Badgering of race control is distasteful at best and should be banned. Tbh I think Smedly should stop relaying most messages but hey ho.

The only difference i see is the way in which they do it (or the degrees in which they are bad)

Horner, Red bull, Marko, max air their views publically and bluntly

Mercedes, Toto are slightly more diplomatic…

…compare Silverstone/ Saudi with the last race…one was disgraceful, one was more diplomatic, one was for a race win, the other for the championship.

…not sure anyone can disagree with that

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

mercedes couldnt have pitted, they would have handed the lead to Max, they also expected the race would end under safety car, knowing the procedure that has been used previously, one which was ripped up in this race.

And this is where a key factor of this race is so often overlooked.

Mercedes assumed that the race would end under the safety car and didn't pit Hamilton.

This despite:
- This happening just nine times in the history of F1

- Further to the above, only once in history has a race finished under SC when an incident has happened five or more laps from the end (Lap 70/78, 2010 Monaco where clearing cars takes a lot longer). All other SC-ending incidents were four laps from the end or closer.

- All teams agreeing the RD will avoid a SC finish at almost all costs

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

This I agree with.

They ARE as bad as each other. Which is the point I’ve been trying to make….(maybe badly)

Tbh I think the whole Badgering of race control is distasteful at best and should be banned. Tbh I think Smedly should stop relaying most messages but hey ho.

The only difference i see is the way in which they do it (or the degrees in which they are bad)

Horner, Red bull, Marko, max air their views publically and bluntly

Mercedes, Toto are slightly more diplomatic…

…compare Silverstone/ Saudi with the last race…one was disgraceful, one was more diplomatic, one was for a race win, the other for the championship.

…not sure anyone can disagree with that

I definitely agree that the teams should not be allowed to contact race control during the race.

Having said all that I do like that people in F1 wear their hearts on their sleeves, better than personality-less robots. But there is a line.

I think I should change my Ten-Tenths profile photo until this blows over - I'm in a RB shirt but in reality I own about 7 different team gear

[Bump Pass]

Originally Posted by Beau2

There is no difference.

"No Michael No - This is so not right"

"Michael you should reinstate the lap before"

"Michael - what was that?"

But you are right, I won't bother conversing with someone else that aims to shut down every opinion that differs from their own at any opportunity.

I agree.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Skam85

And this is where a key factor of this race is so often overlooked.

Mercedes assumed that the race would end under the safety car and didn't pit Hamilton.

This despite:
- This happening just nine times in the history of F1

- Further to the above, only once in history has a race finished under SC when an incident has happened five or more laps from the end (Lap 70/78, 2010 Monaco where clearing cars takes a lot longer). All other SC-ending incidents were four laps from the end or closer.

- All teams agreeing the RD will avoid a SC finish at almost all costs

You say assumed, but in Masis own words from previous occasions….including Germany, he went against his own interpretation of the rules so from Mercedes point of view, it was safe to assume that it would be the same case…

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Skam85

Mercedes assumed that the race would end under the safety car and didn't pit Hamilton.

This despite:
- This happening just nine times in the history of F1

- Further to the above, only once in history has a race finished under SC when an incident has happened five or more laps from the end (Lap 70/78, 2010 Monaco where clearing cars takes a lot longer). All other SC-ending incidents were four laps from the end or closer.

- All teams agreeing the RD will avoid a SC finish at almost all costs

Just for context on this, noting that when there has appeared to be a lengthy SC period, the race is regularly Red-flagged:

- Safety Cars have only been an official part of F1 since 1993.

- In the same period five races were ended under Red Flag, after the SC was called more than 5 laps before the scheduled distance.

- In the same period five races were resumed after a Red Flag, following a late SC deployment.

So in actuality, we should be saying that - since 1993, roughly 20 races have seen late Safety Cars called where they were then either concluded under the Safety Car or were Red Flagged. Of these 30 races, on only one occasion has the Race Director deviated from the prescribed use of the Safety Car as outlined in the Regulations.

Therefore, Mercedes were on the wrong end of what is in hindsight a 1/20 gamble, betting against a situation that had occurred 0/19 times previously.