|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
16 Oct 2010, 20:03 (Ref:2775870) | #26 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,306
|
|||
|
16 Oct 2010, 20:54 (Ref:2775888) | #27 | ||||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,592
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
16 Oct 2010, 21:37 (Ref:2775904) | #28 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,228
|
Quote:
As to the incident's in F1 not being inconsistent, I think quite a few are consistent, it's the penalties that aren't and that's what people are objecting to. |
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
16 Oct 2010, 21:58 (Ref:2775916) | #29 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,592
|
I get that. I just don't think that further explanation will help. Other than to supply more words for people to get giddy about.
As in rugby many people find the rules are inconsistent depending on who is playing. Or just their view on the rule rather than the application of it. Also you have to accept that, as with many things, it just isn't possible to always be consistent. Unless two things happen at the same time in exactly the same manner then they are different. F1 isn't a board game. Rules, in both sport, also develop and may be applied differently from one incident to another. Especially if in the mean time we've had some public outrage! |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
16 Oct 2010, 22:23 (Ref:2775925) | #30 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,228
|
I think in Rugby Union many people find the rules are inconsistent, depending on the referee; take the France v England game in the 6 Nations, Jonathan Kaplan's dedicicions (the South African ref) were very questionable.
Yes there is the human equation when it comes to giving penalties in sport but when you get situations, as in Hockenheim this year and the resulting decicision, is it any wonder people despair? |
||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
16 Oct 2010, 23:00 (Ref:2775938) | #31 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 42,592
|
Hockenhiem probably demonstrates my point.No matter what extra information (the FIA did give a full understanding of the situation) was given some people would not have liked the situation. It would also have been very difficult to be consistent with everything that had gone before.
If there had been true consistency then the rule would never have been introduced in the first place. As for Kaplan, I consistently groan whenever I see he is about to referee a match I am about to watch. |
||
__________________
Seriously not taking motorsport too seriously. |
16 Oct 2010, 23:34 (Ref:2775945) | #32 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,228
|
Quote:
I know what you are saying and like with Wnut's argument about transparency I'm arguing the same point as you but from a diffrerent perspective. As for Kaplan, I don't really get it. |
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
16 Oct 2010, 23:39 (Ref:2775947) | #33 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
I think that any sport should strive to have the rules fairly and impartially applied. Why would you not want the stewards' decisions subject to scrutiny and the reasons published so a system of precedence is created instead of a random lottery? All the driver rep on the stewards' committee ensures is a different bias at every race. On a side note, I must admit it doesn't worry me much when Reugby Refs screw up their decisions. |
||
|
16 Oct 2010, 23:48 (Ref:2775950) | #34 | ||
Ten-Tenths Hall of Fame
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,408
|
Ruegby as whole has me confused.
|
||
|
17 Oct 2010, 00:00 (Ref:2775951) | #35 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,228
|
Quote:
With F1 there are certain rules as well but they seem to deal with how many engines and gearboxes you are allowed to use rather than rules that deal with the racing itself; hence the inconsistency in the Japanese GP. |
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
18 Oct 2010, 09:43 (Ref:2776551) | #36 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 978
|
Sadly it'll never happen, you have more chance of seeing goal mouth and video reply technolagy introduced for referee's in top flight football.
|
||
|
19 Oct 2010, 11:53 (Ref:2777078) | #37 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,676
|
I don't really understand the comparison with Rugby because the referee must make a decision there and then (with a limited video review facility at time).
In F1 the stewards have all the time in the world to come up with a good decision. Like the original poster I don't understand how Petrov got a penalty and Massa didn't. Massa chose to drive on the grass rather than slow down and as a result of his decision he could have wiped out half the field. The fact he didn't was pure luck. If you collide because of a misjudgement (Petrov) then I can live with a penalty but I can live without. If you make a bad decision to leave the track and collide as a result that should be a penalty in my humble opinion. |
||
__________________
"If we are all god's children, what's so special about Jesus?" - Jimmy Carr |
19 Oct 2010, 21:58 (Ref:2777253) | #38 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
Quote:
They need a better system than ad hoc random penalties driven by unclear motives! |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Official] Rate the Japanese GP | Bononi | Formula One | 37 | 8 Oct 2009 14:22 |
2007 Japanese GP. | Knowlesy | Formula One | 579 | 4 Oct 2007 15:06 |
Japanese GP predictions | Gerard | Formula One | 36 | 10 Oct 2000 06:06 |
Japanese GP: most likely to... | slicktoast | Formula One | 2 | 5 Oct 2000 01:37 |