[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[ASCII Man]

Whatever happened to the 3 lap rule to serve a penalty? It's just not right for a driver to be allowed to choose when to serve his penalty.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It's the first FCY as it looks like Sainz and Stroll came together and Vettel has got the lead, as Mercedes pit and Hamilton has a rather long pit stop.

Oops, should have been the race thread.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

Whatever happened to the 3 lap rule to serve a penalty? It's just not right for a driver to be allowed to choose when to serve his penalty.

Because it now can be served with a pitstop, it's because drive thrus could destroy your race for minor infractions

[ASCII Man]

It was anything but a minor infraction, but uugh... fine.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

Whatever happened to the 3 lap rule to serve a penalty? It's just not right for a driver to be allowed to choose when to serve his penalty.

I agree.

It is not like Riccciardo chose when he should be impeded!

[Adam43]

The way the rule is applied is much better now. It is more consistent in that it doesn't depend on the vagracies of the circuit which mean drive throughs or stop gos result in different time penalties. It also allows shorter pentalties to be given.

Of course you may think that 5s wasn't enough, but the method of applying it is better than the old way.

[ASCII Man]

I disagree, you do the crime, you do the time, but not on your own terms. It's like a criminal being allowed to choose if he wants to serve his sentence in a minimal security prison instead of a maximum security prison. Completely bonkers, to use a silly word.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

I disagree, you do the crime, you do the time, but not on your own terms. It's like a criminal being allowed to choose if he wants to serve his sentence in a minimal security prison instead of a maximum security prison. Completely bonkers, to use a silly word.

No, that is definitely NOT an apt comparison at all. The penalty is a 5 sec hold after a STOP, it is not a 5 second stop and hold which is a VERY different penalty. You can complain about the 5 second hold not being enough, which is fair and probably accurate, but the rule was rewritten to free the stewards to be able to apply a penalty of varying amounts of time for different offences. Otherwise a 2,3,5, etc sec hold are basically the same penalty if they have to make an additional stop. Stewards had said in the past they were hesitant to make smaller penalties as the drive-through is a huge penalty and they wanted something smaller. Plus they can debate and consider this longer, and importantly after pitstops, or final lap infringements, this time can be added to the time at the line making all penalties a little more equal in application.


That particular offence and any other safety on pitlane violations should be a stop and hold penalty not a hold penalty. But that is not what most are arguing, at least learn the base of the rule before you whine about incorrect application. The rule was applied correctly under that regulation as it is currently written.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

I disagree, you do the crime, you do the time, but not on your own terms. It's like a criminal being allowed to choose if he wants to serve his sentence in a minimal security prison instead of a maximum security prison. Completely bonkers, to use a silly word.

The consequence of what you are saying is that the severity of the penalty (or the maximum or minimum security in your example) would be dependent on the track it occurred at. Postcode lottery the tabloid screams! At Silverstone it would be low as it is quicker to go through the entry to the pits rather than take Club.

So isn't your argument more that 5s was inappropriate (minimum security) rather than how it was given? He didn't get to chose the senate version, but it wasn't enough for you?

[ASCII Man]

I had no idea about these hold penalties even existing, but yes, simply holding him for 5s was not nearly enough of a punishment for what he did.

[F1Guy]

Is this what the 2027 F1 car will look like?



Article HERE.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Is this what the 2027 F1 car will look like?



Article HERE.

There's always the Red Bull X2010.

[old man]

News that name and number display is to be enforced is not a new rule, just one that has been ignored. I for one welcome this and especially the use of the number on the helmet. This should, IMO be visible from the roll bar camera

[S griffin]

I am glad too they are trying to make numbers more visible, but I'd like to see them on the rear wing endplates like the old days

Also am glad to see they are scrapping the shark fins and t-wings which, let's face it should never have been allowed back

[karting]

I like the Shark Fins
I dislike the T Wings

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by karting

I like the Shark Fins
I dislike the T Wings

Bring back the F-Duct and the Double diffuser...

[karting]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Bring back the F-Duct and the Double diffuser...

Sure, I have no problems with innovation. It works and it makes it go better.

So what about looks? Everyone the world over seems to be stuck on how things look and can't embrace change. Yes I know I contradicted myself with that about the T wing, but I can embrace it and I don't moan about it.

Oh.... it dosnt look like a F1 car from 30 years ago. I must cry about it on a public forum. It dosnt sound like a F1 car from 30 years ago, I must go cry about it on a public forum. Everyone gets too butt hurt about every thing nowadays and is a massive pussy about minor things. Wings, spoilers, feminism, vegans, noise, tyres, race tracks, halos brexit, safety car etc etc. Does my swede in. Move with the times people, everyone complains about how Bernie was stuck in the past and then when things change, people cry about it

Disclaimer: That post wasn't aimed at you bjohnson, I added your quote to reply to it in the first part of my post

[ASCII Man]

Look, I love a good moan every now and then, but just because something changes, doesn't automatically mean that it needs to be embraced. Like, there's these things that are called bad changes, the kind barely anyone likes, right? Why should they embrace those?

Because a loud minority likes it? Of course not, because pandering to a loud minority is what gave us these shitty engines and regulations in the first place.

[S griffin]

I love it when people say they are either enjoying the good racing or the sport of the best drivers in the world and the sport is a bit more boring than the recent ones with the increase in the downforce of the sport

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

Doing 2/3 of a race on a second softest compound is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I can agree that doesn't seem right at all.

I know Soschi has fine grain tarmac, but seeing Hulkenberg perhaps even being able to complete the race on the softest compound...

Again I say, they need to add a softer compound and then rename them all so the new compound becomes the new ultra soft.

[S griffin]

This is the problem when you have spec racing, why put a product on the edge, if you have no competition?

[chillibowl]

the durability of the the tires was very surprising.

this might compound the problem, but if teams were allowed to make more set up changes the morning of, would they have avoided their cooling issues/allowed for better pace and reliability?

additionally, if there is aero/following issues, then does letting teams make more adjustments after they know their quali position help alleviate these issue?

[Mike Harte]

It appears that there is no pleasing some people.

For the last few years, people have been moaning about the poor durability of the Pirelli tyres (made so by instructions from the FIA and/or FOM), yet here we are into just the 4th race of the new tyre compounds (changed because of all the moaning) and now people are moaning that the new tyres are too durable!

I cannot believe that the "overheating" problem only reared it's ugly head during the race. Hamilton was off the pace throughout the meeting, and the "overheating" issue was a nice smoke-cloud for Mercedes and him to hide behind.

Hopefully Brawn, who is more than aware of the overtaking problems in F1, will come up with some decent proposals in the near future. We already know that he wants rid of DRS, and hopefully his brain is fertile enough to come up with some solutions pretty smartly.

[chillibowl]

i dont think anyone is moaning about them, just commenting really.

imo, that the 2017 ultras basically lasted longer then the 2016 super softs at this track is a fair talking point.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I cannot believe that the "overheating" problem only reared it's ugly head during the race. Hamilton was off the pace throughout the meeting, and the "overheating" issue was a nice smoke-cloud for Mercedes and him to hide behind.

The "overheating" problem was engine related. Not tyre related.

Any excuse to have a go at Hamilton right?