[Official] 2014 Formula 1 PETRONAS Malaysia Grand Prix

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I think in this instance the team, rather than the driver should be held responsible. I don't see why Ricciardo should be punished twice, it's overkill.

I believe that an incorrectly attached wheel attracts an automatic punishment of a ten place grid penalty - someone with access to the rulebook will be able to confirm that - and it is was mandated by the FIA to stop the teams from releasing cars in an unsafe condition.

We keep being told that this is a team sport, so you can view this as being Ricciardo taking the punishment on behalf of the team, he is after all a member of it. This hurts the team as well as the driver, but a fine of a few thousand, even a few hundred thousand, dollars means absolutely nothing to the team.

Having just looked at Autosport, Horner admitted that it is in the rules that it is an automatic drive-through plus the 10 place grid penalty. He says it is harsh, but those are the rules. And as I say, they were put in place to stop the teams releasing cars with the wheels inproperly attached.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I believe that an incorrectly attached wheel attracts an automatic punishment of a ten place grid penalty - someone with access to the rulebook will be able to confirm that - and it is was mandated by the FIA to stop the teams from releasing cars in an unsafe condition.

We keep being told that this is a team sport, so you can view this as being Ricciardo taking the punishment on behalf of the team, he is after all a member of it. This hurts the team as well as the driver, but a fine of a few thousand, even a few hundred thousand, dollars means absolutely nothing to the team.

Having just looked at Autosport, Horner admitted that it is in the rules that it is an automatic drive-through plus the 10 place grid penalty. He says it is harsh, but those are the rules. And as I say, they were put in place to stop the teams releasing cars with the wheels inproperly attached.

If you want to hit the team, deduct Constructor's points. Ricciardo had no way of knowing the wheel had not been put on properly untill after he had been released, as we all saw.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I believe that an incorrectly attached wheel attracts an automatic punishment of a ten place grid penalty - someone with access to the rulebook will be able to confirm that - and it is was mandated by the FIA to stop the teams from releasing cars in an unsafe condition.

We keep being told that this is a team sport, so you can view this as being Ricciardo taking the punishment on behalf of the team, he is after all a member of it. This hurts the team as well as the driver, but a fine of a few thousand, even a few hundred thousand, dollars means absolutely nothing to the team.

Having just looked at Autosport, Horner admitted that it is in the rules that it is an automatic drive-through plus the 10 place grid penalty. He says it is harsh, but those are the rules. And as I say, they were put in place to stop the teams releasing cars with the wheels inproperly attached.

That's right Mike. That is what the rules say and that is the problem with 'automatic' penalties. If there is discretion people are afraid that will be favouritism or partiality in that the rules are not being consistently applied, but when there is no discretion then it can be quite unjust and this is just such an example.

Where the penalty is automatic for the offence they have no choice but the discretion here comes from the fact that the stewards can make a judgement about whether or not the car was released unsafely and letting it go like that was the offence.

Any discipline or penalty is there to change peoples behaviour, and punitive measures are only really necessary when people blatantly ignore or deliberately violate a desirable outcome. (In this case a rule)

Where it creates an unfairness (and to me this is unfair in a sporting sense) the rules become a mockery and it damages F1 more than it helps correct behaviour nor does it ensure a fair sporting outcome.
So the penalty fails to properly fulfil any real objective in a competitive sporting sense or in a safety sense. And that just angers people, because it is a misapplication or power and authority.

People hate that and it reflects badly on the sport and its administration

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

That's right Mike. That is what the rules say and that is the problem with 'automatic' penalties. If there is discretion people are afraid that will be favouritism or partiality in that the rules are not being consistently applied, but when there is no discretion then it can be quite unjust and this is just such an example.

Where the penalty is automatic for the offence they have no choice but the discretion here comes from the fact that the stewards can make a judgement about whether or not the car was released unsafely and letting it go like that was the offence.

Any discipline or penalty is there to change peoples behaviour, and punitive measures are only really necessary when people blatantly ignore or deliberately violate a desirable outcome. (In this case a rule)

Where it creates an unfairness (and to me this is unfair in a sporting sense) the rules become a mockery and it damages F1 more than it helps correct behaviour nor does it ensure a fair sporting outcome.
So the penalty fails to properly fulfil any real objective in a competitive sporting sense or in a safety sense. And that just angers people, because it is a misapplication or power and authority.

People hate that and it reflects badly on the sport and its administration

How can it be unfair if it is applied to all teams? What would be unfair is if you allowed stewards discretion, because that is always open to interpretation.

I believe that this penalty was included after the tradegy in Australia, when a marshall was killed by an errant wheel that hadn't been correctly attached. Why not ask his family if they think that this penalty is too harsh when compared to the loss of a life.

It is applied solely for safety reasons, and if you read Horner's comments, you will understand that the wheel-man knew that the wheel wasn't attached properly but was powerless to stop the car being released. That, in itself, is worthy of the punishment, and this punishment is probably the only "wake-up" call that the team as a whole will take any notice of.

[Adam43]

It is a harsh penalty, it harsh it applies to Danni Ric. That is the point. It is meant to penalise so the team don't take undue risks for 0.1s in the pit lane.
When introduced the general consensus was that it was a good idea.
In addition they all went for it.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

How can it be unfair if it is applied to all teams? What would be unfair is if you allowed stewards discretion, because that is always open to interpretation.

I believe that this penalty was included after the tradegy in Australia, when a marshall was killed by an errant wheel that hadn't been correctly attached. Why not ask his family if they think that this penalty is too harsh when compared to the loss of a life.

It is applied solely for safety reasons, and if you read Horner's comments, you will understand that the wheel-man knew that the wheel wasn't attached properly but was powerless to stop the car being released. That, in itself, is worthy of the punishment, and this punishment is probably the only "wake-up" call that the team as a whole will take any notice of.

Adam makes the point above, it is harsh.
If you had a car released into the path of another car in pit lane that caused a collision and someone got injured the rule number and automatic penalty would be the same for that offense. They may get an additional penalty but the penalty Ricciardo gets for a much lesser offence is the same. That is why automatic penalties applied without discretion end up being unnecessarily harsh or fail to divide rightly between the offence and the punishment or outcome.
Its not a matter of rules but of fairness of justice in the judicial process. Everyone who operates in a judicial role in sport faces it in some matter. Some do it well. Some don't.

[Tucky]

My point is that RB should rightly be penalised, but their penalty should be a stop and go or a grid drop, not both.

One issue (unsafe release) = one penalty IMO. Imagine what would happen if the FIA said an unsafe release was penalised by a grid penalty in the next two races, everyone including all the teams would be up in arms saying you can't penalise someone like that, but it's similar to what just happened.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Adam makes the point above, it is harsh.
If you had a car released into the path of another car in pit lane that caused a collision and someone got injured the rule number and automatic penalty would be the same for that offense. They may get an additional penalty but the penalty Ricciardo gets for a much lesser offence is the same. That is why automatic penalties applied without discretion end up being unnecessarily harsh or fail to divide rightly between the offence and the punishment or outcome.
Its not a matter of rules but of fairness of justice in the judicial process. Everyone who operates in a judicial role in sport faces it in some matter. Some do it well. Some don't.

Nobody disagrees that the penalty is harsh, but the rules dictate that that is so.

You seem to be overlooking the fact, as acknowledged by Horner earlier today, that he was party to the introduction of this penalty and agreed to it's implimentation. He can't now, on behalf of his team, say that it shouldn't be applied to Ricciardo, because that would give any other team the reasoning why they shouldn't be punished.

I don't believe that anyone is picking on Ricciardo; I sincerely hope that the same would have been applied to anyone else along the pit-lane.

[aki13]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Do people want to see penalties? I certainly don't, not for the sake of it anyway. If there has been an infraction of the rules, it should be in proportion to the whatever the offence is.

I agree with you to a point. Although I do think F1 has become overloaded with penalties.

Any contact appears to be a penalty and I am sure many will think that's right, but personally I think motorsport can have a little bit of contact.

I mean if someone drives dangerously or punts someone off, then fair enough, but racing incidents for me should be left as what they are. Unfortunate touchs and accidents. Back to 2000s levels.

[Adam43]

But people can't cope with the subjective aspect of penalties. Far better to just dish them out automatically then it isn't 'unfair'.

[TrapezeArtist]

I commented elsewhere that I thought the penalties on Riciardo were harsh, but having read this thread I understand the reason. Those are the penalties prescribed in the regulations. If any team wants to avoid the harsh penalty for an unsafe release, the solution is simple: don't commit an unsafe release. Perhaps even take a couple of extra tenths of a second on the pitstop to be sure.

As for the question of penalising the "driver" when the "team" is at fault, they are both part of the team. "Win together, lose together". The wonky wire that caused Hamilton's retirement in Australia was "the team's fault". It wasn't "the driver's fault". But the team and the driver suffered the penalty of retirement. When a driver gets over-excitable and crashes, it's "the driver's fault". It's not "the team's fault". But the team and the driver suffer the penalty of retirement. If drivers and teams can't cope with that, they're in the wrong sport.

[CTD]

I think this is an interesting debate, and forgive me for not having read the entire thread. But the incident between Magnussen and Raikkonen, was an incident which shouldn't have released a penalty, even though it was "only" 5 sec and 2 points off his super license.
Both Raikkonen and Magnussen surrefered of it, and even if the overtaking maneuver was a bit bold, there should be room for these.
The Incident can be reviewed here

[Adam43]

I agree, I wouldn't have penalised that. However there are often (unfair) cries of inconsistency with any contact penalties. This is a solution to that.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I agree, I wouldn't have penalised that. However there are often (unfair) cries of inconsistency with any contact penalties. This is a solution to that.

It is. But the price of taking a competitor out of competition is too high.
The super license penalty should be enough to keep a driver from repeating bold moves.
The same system should/could be implemented on the teams for mistakes, like the Riccardo pit error.
If a team makes too many mistakes, like an unsafe release, It would result in a reduction in Team WC points or a team exclusion from 1 race.
Then it's the threat that keeps teams from doing wrong, hopefully eliminating them from making the mistakes in the first place.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by CTD

It is. But the price of taking a competitor out of competition is too high.
The super license penalty should be enough to keep a driver from repeating bold moves.
The same system should/could be implemented on the teams for mistakes, like the Riccardo pit error.
If a team makes too many mistakes, like an unsafe release, It would result in a reduction in Team WC points or a team exclusion from 1 race.
Then it's the threat that keeps teams from doing wrong, hopefully eliminating them from making the mistakes in the first place.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that there is already the threat of a draconian penalty, and yet they still make them. I seem to recall that there have been at least 3 or 4 occasions in the last couple of seasons when teams have released cars with wheels that were not properly secured.

This discussion is about Ricciardo, and Horner has confirmed that the wheel-man knew at the time that the wheel wasn't secured, but that the car was still released.

You must look at what the possible consequences could have ben if Ricciardo hadn't stopped, but had accelerated out of the pits, and at some point, the wheel had become detatched and bounced over the catch fencing before injuring, maiming or even killing one or more spectators.

It is for this potential scenario that the penalty was introduced with the unanimous agreement of the F1 working group, which included Chritian Horner. As he said earlier today, this penalty is harsh but I agreed to it, so I can't now object to it.

Maybe this will be a salutory lesson to all the team managers, that attempting to shave 10ths of a second off pit-box times might not be worth it. It is just s*d's law that the team that got caught out happened to be Red Bull, and even more so that it was Ricciardo not Vettel.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by CTD

I think this is an interesting debate, and forgive me for not having read the entire thread. But the incident between Magnussen and Raikkonen, was an incident which shouldn't have released a penalty, even though it was "only" 5 sec and 2 points off his super license.
Both Raikkonen and Magnussen surrefered of it, and even if the overtaking maneuver was a bit bold, there should be room for these.
The Incident can be reviewed here

Based on that clip, there is no way I would have penalised Magnussen for that. To me it was as clear a case of a "racing incident" as any I have seen. I was really surprised at the way KM was beating himself up over it. However, the stewards have more camera angles and some telemetry at their disposal in order to arrive at a fair decision (hopefully).

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

You seem to be overlooking the fact that there is already the threat of a draconian penalty, and yet they still make them. I seem to recall that there have been at least 3 or 4 occasions in the last couple of seasons when teams have released cars with wheels that were not properly secured.

This discussion is about Ricciardo, and Horner has confirmed that the wheel-man knew at the time that the wheel wasn't secured, but that the car was still released.

You must look at what the possible consequences could have ben if Ricciardo hadn't stopped, but had accelerated out of the pits, and at some point, the wheel had become detatched and bounced over the catch fencing before injuring, maiming or even killing one or more spectators.

It is for this potential scenario that the penalty was introduced with the unanimous agreement of the F1 working group, which included Chritian Horner. As he said earlier today, this penalty is harsh but I agreed to it, so I can't now object to it.

Maybe this will be a salutory lesson to all the team managers, that attempting to shave 10ths of a second off pit-box times might not be worth it. It is just s*d's law that the team that got caught out happened to be Red Bull, and even more so that it was Ricciardo not Vettel.

The issue with the current penalty is that its forgotten immediately after its been taken. A point system with the risk of exclusion from a future race, is a penalty no team will take ligthly!

[NinnyMan]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I believe that this penalty was included after the tradegy in Australia,
when a marshall was killed by an errant wheel that hadn't been correctly attached.

That was a collision between 2 cars that saw the wheel come off and sadly killed the marshall.
Had nothing to do with a wheel not put on correctly. This rule was brought in after Webber's
wheel came off and went bouncing down pit lane and collected a tv guy.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Based on that clip, there is no way I would have penalised Magnussen for that. To me it was as clear a case of a "racing incident" as any I have seen. I was really surprised at the way KM was beating himself up over it. However, the stewards have more camera angles and some telemetry at their disposal in order to arrive at a fair decision (hopefully).

I would not have penalised him for it.
There was no deliberate intention to interfere with the other driver at all but we have a 'blame and punish' culture emerging that is doing nothing to foster wheel to wheel competition and is in fact discouraging it by penalising the most innocent racing incidents.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by aki13

I agree with you to a point. Although I do think F1 has become overloaded with penalties.

Any contact appears to be a penalty and I am sure many will think that's right, but personally I think motorsport can have a little bit of contact.

I mean if someone drives dangerously or punts someone off, then fair enough, but racing incidents for me should be left as what they are. Unfortunate touchs and accidents. Back to 2000s levels.

As penalties goes these days, it does seem like the outcome of any touch becomes one. It makes you wonder how Arnoux and Villeneuve at Dijon would have been interpreted these days, but isn't that what motorsport is about, going wheel to wheel? Not that this was contact between two cars.

[stripedcat]

Did anyone find the choice of Benedict Cumberbatch for the post race interviews, strange?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by stripedcat

Did anyone find the choice of Benedict Cumberbatch for the post race interviews, strange?

Idupiatably Watson, idupiatably.

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Nobody disagrees that the penalty is harsh, but the rules dictate that that is so.

You seem to be overlooking the fact, as acknowledged by Horner earlier today, that he was party to the introduction of this penalty and agreed to it's implimentation. He can't now, on behalf of his team, say that it shouldn't be applied to Ricciardo, because that would give any other team the reasoning why they shouldn't be punished.

I don't believe that anyone is picking on Ricciardo; I sincerely hope that the same would have been applied to anyone else along the pit-lane.

The point is that the penalty is out of proportion to the offense. No one is saying no discipline at all although the delay in being pushed back and the wheel properly fastened is a racing punishment enough for the team and the driver.
The fact that the penalty is the same for minor and for serious offences is one of the problems with automatic penalties is my point because for one offence it is appropriate and for another it is to harsh or too soft. That is my point.

I have never suggested Ricciardo was being picked on regarding this incident

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

The point is that the penalty is out of proportion to the offense. No one is saying no discipline at all although the delay in being pushed back and the wheel properly fastened is a racing punishment enough for the team and the driver.
The fact that the penalty is the same for minor and for serious offences is one of the problems with automatic penalties is my point because for one offence it is appropriate and for another it is to harsh or too soft. That is my point.

I have never suggested Ricciardo was being picked on regarding this incident

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

I would not have penalised him for it.
There was no deliberate intention to interfere with the other driver at all but we have a 'blame and punish' culture emerging that is doing nothing to foster wheel to wheel competition and is in fact discouraging it by penalising the most innocent racing incidents.

I agree with this. What I see in the KM/KR incident is a driver putting pressure on the guy in front, who faulters under that pressure (looks like the Ferrari got a bit squirmy under acceleration, which we know KR is struggling with). Why should Kevin be penalised for this? If he barrelled into the back of him fair enough, but poking your nose up into the gap is acceptable.