EPTJOLYON PALMER’S ANALYSIS: Did Alonso cause Russell’s crash in Melbourne – and was his penalty fair?
Formula 1 Discussion - Page 165
| Forum Index > Sports |
Join the TLnet's F1 Fantasy before the season begins!  https://fantasy.formula1.com/ Code: ce956688bf Thank you KobraKay for making the league. :D | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
JOLYON PALMER’S ANALYSIS: Did Alonso cause Russell’s crash in Melbourne – and was his penalty fair? | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
On March 28 2024 06:11 Penev wrote: Jolyon Palmer doesn't agree with the penalty: JOLYON PALMER’S ANALYSIS: Did Alonso cause Russell’s crash in Melbourne – and was his penalty fair? Youtube link. He agrees with the fact that it was erratic driving, but not with the penalty. Russell definitely didn't react as well as he could've to that type of driving. I think penalty was deserved to discourage the games. Alonso's definitely done it before - someone on Reddit with a longer memory than me found this, same behaviour, similar result, no penalty. https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1bnm9i9/fernando_alonso_brake_checks_david_coulthard/ I'm on the deserved penalty train, although that's definitely outcome biased. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On March 28 2024 06:05 Aristodemus wrote: Brake testing is incredibly dangerous hence why he got the penalty and why Aston didn't dispute it. Alonso has previous for it, on coulthard if I remember correctly and a 20sec penalty isn't harsh at all imo. He's a great driver over the years you have seen his true colours, this is just another example. Just to shoot in, Aston didn't dispute not because they agreed with it, but because they couldn't. You can only dispute a decision if there is new evidence, not because you disagree with it | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On March 28 2024 06:11 Penev wrote: Jolyon Palmer doesn't agree with the penalty: JOLYON PALMER’S ANALYSIS: Did Alonso cause Russell’s crash in Melbourne – and was his penalty fair? From what I'm gathering, most people who actually knows about racing disagrees with the penalty, or at least the severity of it. It definitively isn't as black and white as "hurp derp brake check!" as some disingenuous people might be clamouring on about. In no other racing serious would Fernando be found at fault. However, F1 isn't just any racing series. It's downforce dependant, and fast enough to be dangerous even with all the modern safety developments. It's clear FIA here has taken a stance putting safety above racing. On one side you can applaud them for that mindset, but on the other I'm not thoroughly enjoying the idea of punishing racing aspects because the guy behind didn't pay attention. | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
Safety is important but was this really unsafe enough to warrant that high a penalty or did the crash just make it look too unsafe? As was mentioned before: The reason this was penalized was because it resulted in a heavy crash. | ||
|
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
| ||
|
Mikau313
Netherlands230 Posts
| ||
|
LennX
4570 Posts
Danny Ric clipped Albon and we have a red flag =/ Halo saved Albon from a head injury imo | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
In front everything back to normal. | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On April 07 2024 16:07 Penev wrote: Also gratz to Yuki, he delivered. Kudos to Stroll for qualifying like absolute garbage. I don't think Stroll could've passed Yuki on track without a big tire advantage though, Stroll was just keeping up on the straights even with DRS. Just had way too much wing, could pass where nobody else really could through the first sector when he had the tire advantage and the extra downforce, but just was nowhere once it came to straight line speed. Fair play to Yuki though, absolutely maximized what he was given. A point when none of the top 5 teams have issues is pretty amazing. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
Gz to Sainz for picking the correct strategy tho, and to Yuki for absolutely maximizing any possible result he could have hoped for in that shitbox of a car | ||
|
pebble444
Italy2503 Posts
On April 07 2024 17:53 Amui wrote: A point when none of the top 5 teams have issues is pretty amazing. Pretty sure stroll is an actual issue for Aston Martin to begin with, but then again he is the son of the team owner, so yeah, baby wants seat, baby gets seat | ||
|
Branch.AUT
Austria853 Posts
On April 08 2024 01:28 pebble444 wrote: Pretty sure stroll is an actual issue for Aston Martin to begin with, but then again he is the son of the team owner, so yeah, baby wants seat, baby gets seat We wouldn't have any of the "who gets the tenth points" excitiment, if aston had an even remotely competent second driver. Im honestly glad that lance has a seat for once. | ||
|
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
| ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
| ||
|
mderg
Germany1740 Posts
| ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On April 20 2024 22:57 mderg wrote: I kind of want to say he deserved it for making a dumb move like that but 3 penalty points is definitely a bit harsh Not going to pretend it was the greatest move in the world, and more of a dumb decision made in the heat of the moment. But I feel like if they're going to dish out punishments as harsh as this for every little bit of mild contact, all you're doing is actively discourage wheel to wheel fighting. That's pretty much the exact opposite of what we want from F1 right now | ||
|
pebble444
Italy2503 Posts
Yes it is totally his fault but this makes it look like you should not try to defend your position more than blocking the inside or outside line. It was super fun to watch, most interesting part of the race, and Isn t it borederline what racing is all about? Drivers fighting for position? Also how come did they put Alonso and send him out again? With so few laps to go I refuse to think they needed other data, as most team where aiming at with this sprint; Does this have to do with doing over 90% of the race because aston kinda knew he was going to get a penalty? And how would a 10 second penalty apply to a driver that retires the car under 90% of race completed then? As usual the FIA play more by their own rule book, even though the rule list is longer than Alonso’s career heh | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On April 21 2024 00:50 pebble444 wrote: Also how come did they put Alonso and send him out again? With so few laps to go I refuse to think they needed other data, as most team where aiming at with this sprint; Does this have to do with doing over 90% of the race because aston kinda knew he was going to get a penalty? And how would a 10 second penalty apply to a driver that retires the car under 90% of race completed then? As usual the FIA play more by their own rule book, even though the rule list is longer than Alonso’s career heh The default position for all teams is to try to send the driver back out, even if they're last. You don't generally retire the car just because you're not doing well. Presumably they sent him out, found something else wrong with the car, and then decided to pit. I don't think avoiding future penalty was in the forefront of their minds, tho I'm not a mindreader so I can't guarantee it. That said, if they had retired the car the first time around, they wouldn't have been designated as having finished the race (exactly because of the 90% rule, yes), and the penalty would have become a grid drop for the feature. So they got fairly lucky with that bit at least. | ||
| ||
