[Race] Australian Grand Prix 2023: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 3 of 23

[Kingair]

Could understand, a red flag incident in the first few laps would see the cars start from there original grid positions. However even with a red flag mid race, just go with an indian file start behind the pace car. Working on the car under a red flag in pit lane is a bit of a dodgy call.

Hopefully Melbourne will see the FIA review the start procedures for the remaining 2023 season.

[Greem]

Speaking from personal experience, the FIA really do not want marshals beyond the barrier/wall/fence unless they have been given clearance.

Under practically any other conditions, we make the decision locally and report that. But the FIA race director for F1 exerts total control and simply will not allow people trackside unless they say so. This is why the "unsure or unprepared" comment from Teretonga is simultaneously correct (unsure) and hugely wrong (unprepared).

All I'm going to add is that this approach means some very senior marshals have left the sport completely, which is bad for the sport as a whole.

[S griffin]

That I understand. But it still seemed over the top the red flags. The FIA overreacted. Time for a rethink here

[billy bleach]

Red Flags classic F1 overcomplecation why not do the following

Red flag - cars into pit Road entry stop prior to first Garage - no work except cooling fans ( and maybe tyre heaters) - 15 min countdown to restart - no work except normal start procedure - any car requiring work to peel off to their Garage for repairs as field leaves for restart behind safety car - rolling restart. This off course only applies if as proposed next year tyre heaters are banned. However even this year it must be possible to keep the tyres hot in Parcferme

[BTCC frog]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I agree with most all of the comments here. But I have to wonder if there had not been the last red flag and it resulted in some overtakes and fantastic racing if everyone would still be complaining (I do think the first red flag is questionable)

Richard

Some people might disagree with me here but I believe that Max Verstappen had sown up the race victory by that point, and it seemed unfair to have a red flag that suddenly put Lewis Hamilton right alongside him for a start when Verstappen had so comfortably beaten him today. I would not have been happy with the result if Hamilton had beaten Verstappen into turn one and then held him off for one lap and taken victory, even though that would have been very exciting, because it just doesn't seem fair that 55 laps of racing can be considered worth nothing more than setting the grid for a 2 lap race which decides the actual result. For the same reason, I don't think putting a red flag at the end of Abu Dhabi 2021 would have been a good solution either, albeit it would have been better than what actually happened.

I think if there is a red flag before the first sector split on lap one, then the race should be restarted with a standing restart. If it happens after that point then it should be restarted with a rolling start because at least that makes it easier for all the drivers to hold their positions. And if it happens after enough of the race has been completed to award full points, then the race should just be called there. And under no circumstances should drivers be allowed to change tyres during a red flag (or they can make the decision to do so if they have a puncture, for example, but they have to drop to the back of the pack or something). I think this would make it more fair because at the moment, red flags to spice up the show are adding too great an element of luck into Formula 1 and I don't think that is right. George Russell was absolutely robbed of the lead through no fault of his own in that first, totally unnecessary red flag, in my opinion, and it simply didn't need to be that way.

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by Greem

Speaking from personal experience, the FIA really do not want marshals beyond the barrier/wall/fence unless they have been given clearance.

Under practically any other conditions, we make the decision locally and report that. But the FIA race director for F1 exerts total control and simply will not allow people trackside unless they say so. This is why the "unsure or unprepared" comment from Teretonga is simultaneously correct (unsure) and hugely wrong (unprepared).

All I'm going to add is that this approach means some very senior marshals have left the sport completely, which is bad for the sport as a whole.

So sad to read that Marshals are walking due to ineptitude and politics from the organisers

[Woolley]

F1 insist on going to places where there is no marshalling and so micro manage everything in a totally risk averse manner.

This in turn undermines the marshalling at places where there are excellent marshals who could do a really good job if F1 would let them.

This marshalling defaults to the lowest possible standards.

Aussie marshals are more than capable of clearing gravel and a bit of wheel which is 4 feet from the gap in the wall without red flags. F1 is either unaware of this or wilfully ignores it, mainly because they know nothing about marshalling.

All of which turned the race into a complete shambles.

[Akrapovic]

I think we (on this forum) have a disconnect from regular fans. At work this morning the F1 fans were discussing it, and I was the only person who thought the red flags were nonsense. Everyone else (some pre-Netflix, some post-Netflix) thought it made it more exciting, and that's what counts.

I don't think we're representative of the general F1 viewing.

[Greem]

I think the word "enthusiasts" better describes most of us here.

For better or worse this is my 41st year watching F1.

Maybe "obsessives" would be more accurate

[bjohnsonsmith]

The simple solution would be for all restarts to be rolling starts, behind the SC. If the race is red flagged, then parc fermé rules are applied.

[chillibowl]

Definitely we are not representative of the average fan, but my buddies who I have talked to (both pre and post Netflix in fan status) all really hated the delay given that all felt the race was largely settled by that point and it was already so late at night for us…finished around 3am or something over here.

And for both new and old fans, I would like to think that no one enjoys seeing a sporting event end in confusion.

[S griffin]

The race was fine before the second red flag. They wasted too much time with the delay. The race was pretty much over before then. Putting out the red flag when there was only a few laps left and then deciding to restart with a two lap sprint was completely the wrong decision, it made a mockery of the whole race prior to that

Really we need to go back to sensible decision making. What happened at the end was unforgivable and really could and should have been avoided.

[Jimmy Magnusson]

I think they handled it about as well as they could have. It's obvious that they prefer having the race finish under green (and not repeat Monza from last year) but do not want to bend rules to achieve it a la Abu Dhabi. I think that's a pretty sensible approach to both spectacle and sport.

TBH I think the main issue is the standing start after a red. It sacrifices too much of the advantage gained in the previous part of the race. Replace it with a rolling start as with a regular SC and it would be less of an issue. But I would remind that this isn't a new phenomenom - we did mid-race reds and standing restarts in the 80's but with an aggregate time, which was an even worse experience.

[Lancsbreaker]

Agree with many of the points made above - principally the excess use of red flags, and the ludicrous situation of, after all the unnecessary carnage they had caused, finally ending the race with effectively a parade lap........


My immediate reaction when watching was that a Red Flag when only a few laps remaining meant "Race Over" - it has in every race series I've competed in.


The comments in today's Times that it appears to be being engineered for Netflix had a certain resonance.....

[ChrisA]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The race was fine before the second red flag. They wasted too much time with the delay. The race was pretty much over before then. Putting out the red flag when there was only a few laps left and then deciding to restart with a two lap sprint was completely the wrong decision, it made a mockery of the whole race prior to that

Really we need to go back to sensible decision making. What happened at the end was unforgivable and really could and should have been avoided.

Totally agree

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by S griffin

The race was fine before the second red flag. They wasted too much time with the delay. The race was pretty much over before then. Putting out the red flag when there was only a few laps left and then deciding to restart with a two lap sprint was completely the wrong decision, it made a mockery of the whole race prior to that

Really we need to go back to sensible decision making. What happened at the end was unforgivable and really could and should have been avoided.

So...you would allow F1 cars with "balloon tyres" to keep circulating through the maze of razor sharp carbon fibre debris?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

So...you would allow F1 cars with "balloon tyres" to keep circulating through the maze of razor sharp carbon fibre debris?

So…you would allow the killing of elephants for the ivory?

I don’t think S griffin suggested what you say. Saying you don’t like the red flag and two lap race is not the same as saying you want them to race over the debris.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Greem

Speaking from personal experience, the FIA really do not want marshals beyond the barrier/wall/fence unless they have been given clearance.

Under practically any other conditions, we make the decision locally and report that. But the FIA race director for F1 exerts total control and simply will not allow people trackside unless they say so. This is why the "unsure or unprepared" comment from Teretonga is simultaneously correct (unsure) and hugely wrong (unprepared).

All I'm going to add is that this approach means some very senior marshals have left the sport completely, which is bad for the sport as a whole.

My comment about unsure and unprepared, was not a reference to the marshals themselves being unprepared but the systems in place not being properly thought through.

This leaves marshals unsure of what to do in particular situations and to look as though they don't know what to do when they are in fact waiting on a call from race control.

For the most part, when marshals, experienced and on the scene of the incident, are left to make their decisions they are ususally very competent and efficient.
But systems that take away that decision making process and substitute processes, often through centralized control, are bulky and inefficient, often focused on concerns that are not central to the people involved in the incident.
Historically there have been numerous situations contrary to showing ability to handle situations themselves but most of those were over twenty or thirty years ago.
My comment was not to infer that marshals themselves were unprepared but that the situations of communication from race control sometimes create that that impression, and in my opinion, that happened in Melbourne.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Alan52

I was there and they should have ended the race after the Magnusson incident under SC,VSC or at 56 laps.The concept of a 1 lap F1 GP is a farce.I said to the person I was sitting with that there will be probably 4 wrecked cars and a million dollars worth of damage in that 1 racing lap.Close.
After the 1 lap Grand Prix red flag I left because they had done 58 laps in a 58 lap race.Regardless of where the cars were when the red flag was thrown the cars had to complete that lap.The 59th lap should never have happened.I have a lot of sympathy for Haas.
Why don’t they just put the Drive To Survive director in charge of race control?
By the time they set off on that final pointless lap I had got a tram back to the city,collected my luggage and was on a bus to the airport.

Should have ended the race....... which is contrary to the rules.

Do we prefer the Masi "make it up as you go" or the current "follow the rules as they are written"?

I am not sure there is a clear cut answer to that.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I think we (on this forum) have a disconnect from regular fans. At work this morning the F1 fans were discussing it, and I was the only person who thought the red flags were nonsense. Everyone else (some pre-Netflix, some post-Netflix) thought it made it more exciting, and that's what counts.

I don't think we're representative of the general F1 viewing.

There certainly is a general tone on this forum that the only path to F1 fandom was by a Northamptonshire country lane with a Union Jack with Nigel's face draped across your back.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

So...you would allow F1 cars with "balloon tyres" to keep circulating through the maze of razor sharp carbon fibre debris?

That is not what he is saying. There were only two scheduled laps to go.
If we assume that the carbon shards covered the entire width of the track at that point, (they didn't) then that would be irresponsible at racing speed.
But they had already passed over the debris once by the time they came back around again and a FCY or virtual safety car wouldn't have had them at racing speed anyway.
You could argue that you wanted them to have a green flag finish but that policy is what created the demise of Alpine and the Sainz demotion, by putting everyone at risk (cold tires, not new ones) and ending with a safety car led lap anyway. Then we had the reset of the final result which was a nonsense.

You couldn't reinstate the Alpines so they lost out and Sainz got penalized with a 5 second penalty for an incident that Alonso never actually paid any penalty for because you went back to the lap before the incident to get the finishing order, but still saw fit to penalize Sainz.

As someone who has been involved in race control and stewarding that is completely unjust.
If you are going back to the previous order for your result and reinstate Alonso in his position then you put Sainz in his position too, as though the incident never happened.
You can't penalize Sainz, dock him 5 seconds on track for a safety car managed, non-racing lap behind a safety car that takes ignores any of the time that existed on track at the time of the lap you went back to, then reinstate Alonso as though the incident never happened.
If you are going back to the last lap of established racing before the second red flag then it is the grid order.

If it is the order at the time of the second red flag then that order is established and Sainz penalized at that point or the point they passed the end of the sector which should be on timing.

Then penalize Sainz 5 seconds from that position. But to go back prior to that start, thereby reinstating Alonso as though the incident never happened but still penalizing Sainz is a nonsense.

[Alan52]

Originally Posted by chavez

Should have ended the race....... which is contrary to the rules.

Do we prefer the Masi "make it up as you go" or the current "follow the rules as they are written"?

I am not sure there is a clear cut answer to that.

The 1 lap Grand Prix shows the rule is stupid.I don’t advocate making it up on the run but a scenario like Sunday should not be possible.

[steve_r]

I simply don't get this relatively new obsession with a grand prix having to run to exactly 100% of the planned laps. Throw a red and declare the result if you have gone beyond a certain proportion of laps or if a certain time has elapsed - it happens in lots of other forms of motorsport. A 1 lap Grand Prix is utterly ridiculous.

And running a single lap behind the safety car for the sake of crossing the line and taking the chequered flag is absolutely pointless, so why bother?

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Alan52

The 1 lap Grand Prix shows the rule is stupid.I don’t advocate making it up on the run but a scenario like Sunday should not be possible.

The one lap IMHO is not the issue.

It is the rules that allow a race to come to a finish, yet not allowing the competitors to improve their position.

Are they any other sports that actively prevent the competitors from improving their position while the clock (or in this case) the lap counter continues to click over?

Many sports either stop play for safety or injury reasons (and freeze the timer) or if the clock does continue to click, add the time on at the end.

A fair competition would allow for safety car laps not to be counted or at the very least ensure the competitors can actually compete at the conclusion of the race.

And if one lap sprints aren't acceptable, as appears to be the popular opinion here, what about two, three or what about five or is it seven?

Where is that sweet spot?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chavez

Are they any other sports that actively prevent the competitors from improving their position while the clock (or in this case) the lap counter continues to click over?

The only similar(ish) example I can think of is American Football. In certain circumstances, a team in possession of the ball can run down the clock without their opponent being able to improve their position.

Possibly you could also consider Cricket. For example - a team batting last needing more than 6 runs a ball can only hold on for a draw.