Daniel Ricciardo: “You don’t want F1 rules to become so tight that we’re afraid to do anything”
Innovation
Posted By: Editor   |  10 Nov 2016   |  5:09 pm GMT  |  122 comments

Daniel Ricciardo reckons Formula 1’s overtaking rules should not be restricted any further to ensure that drivers engaging in’hard racing’ – and being seen to race hard by the fans – remains a central part of the sport.

F1’s overtaking rules have come under close scrutiny in 2016 and the FIA issued a clarification ahead of the US Grand Prix to clamp down on drivers making aggressive defensive moves under braking.

The issue was further amplified after the Mexican Grand Prix when Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel was penalised for a collision with Ricciardo towards the end of the event at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez.

Sebastian Vettel

Ricciardo was speaking at the pre-event press conference for the Brazilian Grand Prix, which, in an unusual but welcome move by the FIA, featured the race director Charlie Whiting explaining why certain penalties had been handed out to some drivers in Mexico and not others.

When respect to the Vettel and Ricciardo incident, Whiting stated that the German driver’s defensive move had fulfilled the “three fundamental points” that the stewards look for when assessing a contentious incident.

He further clarified that those measures were: “if the other driver has to take evasive action, if a driver makes an abnormal change of direction in the braking zone, and if it could be deemed to be potentially dangerous to another driver”.

Charlie Whiting

When asked where the racers felt the line on hard racing was under the current rules, Ricciardo explained that he wants F1’s overtaking regulations to continue to allow drivers to make hard, on the edge moves as he believes they make the sport more exciting for fans.

He said: “I was in a position last weekend where I was protesting a move, but on the flip side of that I think that was a specific move under braking. I think they’ve eased the rules in the last couple of years so we did make a conscious effort to give us a bit more freedom to race and I think it’s been more fun and better since then.

“So there’s always going to be incidents where you’ll feel this or that but I definitely feel that we should be allowed to still put it all on the line. I think that makes the sport exciting, it lets out emotions – as we’ve heard – and it gives us our own personality as well, and fans can be attracted to a driver on the way he races or the way he responds.

Daniel Ricciardo Sebastian Vettel

“All of us love racing. You come here to win but if you can’t win you don’t want to drive around on a Sunday afternoon by yourself. You want to have a fight and have a battle. We can always make improvements here or there but you don’t want the rules to become that tight that we’re afraid to do anything. But I think we’re ok where we are.”

Lewis Hamilton, who was appearing alongside Ricciardo, hailed Whiting’s role in implementing the rules during F1 races.

He said: “We’re here to race hard, but of course we all have different opinions about different rules that are set and how we go about them.

Lewis Hamilton

“You’ve got two different opinions for every scenario and that’s why we need people like Charlie in the middle who really helps – with no bias – [and] makes sure that the right decision is made. I think ultimately they’d allow us to race, but of course we can’t be led to go down the wrong path or the incorrect way.”

Max Verstappen, a driver who has been the subject of much discussion for his defensive driving in 2016, stated that firm moves should be allowed if they did not cause a crash or severely affected another driver

He said: “As long as you don’t crash or make the other driver lose a lot of positions, I think you can race pretty hard.”

Title fight won’t stop bold moves against Mercedes drivers

Hamilton and his Mercedes teammate Nico Rosberg are locked in a battle for the 2016 drivers’ world championship heading into the final two rounds of the season. If the German driver wins the race at Interlagos he will take the title with one event in Abu Dhabi to spare.

Lewis Hamilton

When asked if that situation would lead to other drivers not attacking the Mercedes racers with the same intensity for fear of interfering with the title fight, Ricciardo, Verstappen and Williams’ Felipe Massa insisted that that would not be the case.

“If I can be fighting with them then I think they need to be careful with me because I will try everything I can,” joked Massa, who is making his final F1 appearance at his home race before he retires from the championship at the end of the season.

But Vettel, who was involved in a close title fight with Fernando Alonso at the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix when he drove for Red Bull, explained that other drivers not in the championship battle should always “respect” the situation.

Brazilian Grand Prix 2012

He said: “It’s clear that you race to see the chequered flag so you never try to do something that doesn’t allow you to see [the] chequered flag. Equally, it applies when racing against people that are racing for the championship.

“It’s something that you have to have in mind – credit it to them, they did the best job over the course of the season for whatever reason to put them in that position – and I think for the others [they should] respect that fact.”

What do you make of F1’s current approach to overtaking? Leave your thoughts in the comment section below or head over to the JAonF1 Facebook page for more discussion.

Featured Innovation
INNOVATION BRIEFING
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.

122 comments

by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest
1

If all the drivers had Danny's skill and imagination, you wouldn't need many rules at all. Seb had to do something pretty illegal to stop him last race. He's the best overtaker out there.

2

His overtaking is sometimes desperate. His move on Vettel was rubbish. Where was he even headed? Divebomb through the grass?

3

jd
It is a bit perplexing the monstrous over-selling of Ricciardo.
I mean, clearly he has a legitimate place on the F1 grid - no doubt there, but he is definbitely NOT in the top tier, and probably mid-pack in tier two (with his team mate on a non-cheating day).

Totally agree with jd, NickH, Rupert, and TG.

4

Totally agree. Ricciardo doesn't have much skill. He's got speed. But he never impresses me with great overtakes or defending. As a matter of fact, when did he last overtake someone within the top 3 teams? Or when did he last defend his position against Hamilton or Rosberg, like Verstappen did multiple times this season?

5

Yeah have to agree, Dan was already locked up and on the dirty inside line. Would he have made the corner? Not so sure.

6

Jd
Totally agree with you.
Not a fan of Ricciardo hyperactive over zealous and desperate at times fish tailing. As stated before he is all Aces with Alonso. The reality is with other drivers he has a tendency to hyper extend or lunge. Sometimes it pays off but that's because the other driver realises their car may end up off track or bits being trimmed off.
I'm glad Lewis shut the door on him at Monaco. Fight fire with fire.
Vettel was left in the clutches of Ricciardo willfully by Max (which is fair enough , but Max should have been given a bigger penalty than 5 poxy seconds).
Vettel deserved to be on the podium and the delayed penalty sacked for Ferrari and Vettel. As for Ricciardo the grinning cookie monster he again gets a easy walk through to the podium.
He said he deserved being on the podium at Malaysia because of Monaco. He didn't deserve jack after his sullen 'terrible twos' reaction. Mark Webber has a better way of handling loss. "Mark A bit more Man than Dan'. That's a free diss rap Dan."

7

If you haven't (and everyone else), check out the Brasil press conference. Dan, Vettel, Verstappen, Lewis, and even Charlie all there. The body language in that room was fascinating to watch. Answers all very PC, with each sticking to their guns, but the resentment was palpable.

8

Totally agree, best presser of the year.

Was positively jovial at the beginning with the subject of Massa's last home race.

The best stuff started when Charlie began his long winded explanations regarding the stewarding, which got even better when Vettel and Max instantly disagreed with his analysis! 😂

9

In the short term -
Max is catching up fast.

10

Best over taker my foot he does last minute lunges without regard about hitting the other driver. What Vettel did was fair last race as Max was backing him into Ricardo.

11

Agree with you TG
Don't believe the Hype !
The old Kubica had more talent than Dan in terms of over taking.
It's a pity he got hurt in rallying. The Holy Trinity is still
Hamilton Vettel and Alonso the top dogs in F1.
Ricciardo unfortunately is Scrappy Doo from Scrooby Doo. The add on that was shelved after two seasons.

12

TG,
You would have seen the tyre data from Mex by now and know that there was a massive tyre offset between Ves and Vet, and then another one between Vet and Ric. Ves hasn't been around long, but from what i've seen, i doubt that he would do anything to favour his team mates race. It's just not in his DNA!
Can you reel me off a list of drivers that Ric has hit with his crazy last minute lunges? Can you reel me off a list of better overtakers?
Leave out the ones that pass mid-straight using extra horsepower and DRS....

13

LKFE, Verstappen is definitely a better overtaker to begin with. For every overtake Ricciardo has made, Verstappen has made 3. Always without locking up and often in corners where people didn't expect an overtake

14

I don't know about that, they are both very strong in that area. Max doesn't always pull the move off remember, Daniel generally does, but Max tries things Danile might not.

Let's hope next year they are making those moves for wins on a regular basis and making a fight of the championship

15

I think now we know, James 😉 It's funny to read these comments after what we have just witnessed. My favourite part was when Daniel was coached to drive the same lines as Max. But in your defense, Daniel did pull off a few overtakes on Ocon and Wehrlein amongst others

16

James, the only 2 occasions that I remember when Verstappen didnt make the move stick is on Rosberg in Mexico and Ricciardo in Malaysia. Rosberg was in a superior car (I haven't seen Ricciardo even make an attempt to pass a Merc this season, only let them pass by) and he would have easily overtaken Ricciardo at a next attempt if the virtual safety car would not have come into play. I'm pretty sure that's a better record than any of the other top 3 team drivers, as they often didn't get past Verstappen. But maybe you can give me your complete statistics that support your argument?

17

Nonsense....that is unless you have any speed/time traces to support your theory.

18

I tried to post some links to websites that support my argument here. But apparently it is denied. Last year Verstappen has made the most overtakes and I wouldn't be surprised if this year would be the same. He is also voted as best overtaker. This year he has also passed many drivers in spectacular style, applauded by many ex-drivers. And as opposed to Verstappen, on average Ricciardo lost 1.1 position per race in 2015. So no, he doesn't overtake much and if he does it's never in impressing style. Always a big lunge from far back, often locking up, fish tailing, nothing very clever or subtle about it. Ricciardo is definitely not in the top 5 best overtakers on the grid.

19

Who's the best driver at overtaking?
1 Verstappen
7 Ricciardo

http://www.gp-hub.com/stats/who-is-the-best-f1-driver-at-overtaking/

20

@ Chris...GP HUB ? some two bit amateur site carrying out an in depth survey? Let me just say this to you, When other drivers say that that they think ricciardo is one of the best, if not the best, then i will listen to them. When Toto Wolff says that ricciardo is on on a par with hamilton and rosberg i will listen to him. When JA voices an opinion i will listen to him. All these people are professional F1 participants who not only know the drivers personally but also professionally and i will listen to them and take heed of what they say. Now when you can offer up something other than questionable data and personal opinions i will listen. Until then, .

21

Haha Kenneth, Kenneth, Kenneth. You're joking, right? I like your sense of selective perception. Is that all you have to say for yourself? I give you 4 different sources that show Verstappen overtakes more often and in more impressive style and all you say is you don't like one of them and don't want to speak about the other 3, among which the official Formula 1 site and BBC? Are they amateur sites as well?

Ok then you tell me which famous ex F1 drivers have praised Ricciardo's overtaking so much? Nobody. Because everybody can see for themselves what it looks like when Ricciardo divebombs another rival, if he even gets himself into that position. If you want to convince me show me a couple of examples where Ricciardo overtook HAM, ROS, VET, RAI or VES in impressive style this season. Show me he has made the most overtakes. I'm afraid you'll have to dig deep to find some examples because there aren't many. Look, if you want to think Ricciardo is the best driver out there, the best overtaker, a future world champion, go ahead. It's a free world. Just don't think you're right. You don't have the data to support it. Ask any ex driver that achieved something in F1 who impresses them the most on the current grid. Who is the next driver to build a legacy in F1. I think you already know the answer.

PS Are you still sure Ricciardo is a better qualifier than Verstappen? I mean I dont want to break the news to you but Max has beaten Daniel 4 out of the last 5 qualification sessions... Considering that Max needed a while to get used to a new car before the summer break I wouldn't be too cocky about it...

22

Great admiration for Max, but if you want a driver's opinion - like you asked for - here is Alonso's on Ricciardo: “On the track you cannot see any mistakes when you are together with him (meaning: Ricciardo). In the overtaking manoeuvres probably he is the best out there. When he commits to one movement, 99 per cent [of the time] he will achieve the result that he wanted.”

23

I have said what i think and and i stand by my comments. You may care to disagree and that's fine, that's your prerogative. I suggest you take up your argument with the people who i have nominated in my post.

24

Kenneth? Are you still there?

25

If you dont have the data to support your argument, your argument is weak. And you know it. No problem. There's more kids that discuss that way

26

Formula 1: Max Verstappen tops 2015 overtakes list

http://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/35104656

F1 2015 season in numbers:

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/features/2015/12/f1-2015-season-in-numbers.html

Overtaking analysis: Ricciardo lost 1.1 position on average (including 2 DNF's) while Verstappen won 0.2 positions on average (including 5 DNF's)
https://thejudge13.com/2015/12/13/f1-forensics-2015-season-overtaking-analysis/

27

And what exactly was Vettel doing that was illegal ? Every defensive move is potentially illegal under the new ambivalent rule, which leaves too much open for manipulation of race results in the future. It should also be clear if a rule has been broken or not within a reasonable time frime, not after 2 hours watching telemetry diagraphs and questioning drivers after what has been a perfectly normal failed overtake by Ricciardo on Vettel, no more no less. As for the often made argument that Ricciardos tyres were flatspotted, well didnt he cause that himself by braking so late, this certainly isnt Vettels fault.

Anyway i like this penalty to be enforced on all drivers in Brazil who move under breaking while beeing overtaken or on no one. "Potentially dangerous" is one criteria, what a joke. Is this F1 still and who decides when a defensive move while still giving the other driver room is dangerous and when not ? FIA should have penalized Verstappen in Belgium for actually blocking Raikkonen and then we could have moved on without this clarification nonsense which actually goes against racing spirit. Seemed to have worked fine for 100 years but in these strange times everything that works has be changed for sake of complicating it more and more and eventually killing it.

28

This is actually pretty simple, Charlie looked at the data log (GPS trajectory trace ) from both cars and it was easy to determine that Vettel did not take his normal line (that he had taken on previous laps). He deliberately (reference to the steering angle data) placed his car such that it collided with Ricciardo's car (as confirmed by the g force sensors). In comparison Ricciardo's data (GPS trajectory trace, g force data, steering angle etc) supported his view that without deliberate action by Vettel he would have been able to negotiate the corner.

So despite claims to the contrary, made by people with no access to the data, it was a legitimate overtaking move blocked by an illegal (and dangerous) manoeuvre. Hence warranted a penalty.

29

When drivers do to Vettel what Vettel does to them, there is a never-ending diatribe on Ferrari's radio channel: moaning, swearing, name-calling, the whole hog - and a bit like a child going bananas: "Seriously people, what are we doing here, racing . . . ?" But when he does likewise . . . well, he's Vettel, you know. A four times world champion. But he still can't handle first corner traffic. And he still can't overtake. And he still can't defend cleanly. Time then, to count the cost. How many first corner incidents have this guy been involved in, just this year alone, and just with his own team mate (think China and Spa, just to begin with). Thx Gary. Good explanation there of it worked in Mexico.

30

That is my interpretation as well gary.

31

Rubbish, you dont have to taje the same line when your defending and he left Ricciardo all the room he needed on the apex- it could be something else they have but its very hard understand esoecially given Dan locked up before Seb turned in

32

Gary, I think it will be found that the spirit of what you are saying is false.
Certainly Vettel DIDN'T take his normal line, he was defending!
Like many people who have commented on the Vettel incident, his movement was marginal (compared to the infamous Max swerve at Spa), and he left enough room for Ricciardo to get around the corner, and Ricciardo had made the 'lunge' into the dirty part of the track, it was a very, very optimistic move.
Drivers are supposed to be allowed to defend, this is what the one driver said about making too many rules.
But the on the other hand, if every driver does as Max in Spa, there will simply be no more passing!
I totally agree with NickH.
So you have an under enforcement with Max in Spa and the several more that have followed since, then you have Vettel over enforced for a move that was not as bad as any of the half-dozen done by the RB drivers (yeah, Ricciardo is not a bad passer, but he's made some moves counting on the other car to yield and/or bouncing off of them around the corner),
It's this systemic selective under-enforcement which has created this ridiculous situation.

33

"This is actually pretty simple, Charlie looked at the data log (GPS trajectory trace ) from both cars and it was easy to determine that Vettel did not take his normal line (that he had taken on previous laps)."

Maybe you don't understand racing as if previous laps he was under attack.
Reasoning like this is why we have regulations made up in F1, it's beyond ridiculous.

Steering trace should be same everylap like this is scaletrix

34

'FIA should have penalized Verstappen in Belgium for actually blocking Raikkonen and then we could have moved on without this clarification nonsense which actually goes against racing spirit. Seemed to have worked fine for 100 years'

Nail on the head.

35

Again, the kimi action on spa has no bearing on the verstappen rule!
Kimi on Hongary does.
How ever dangerous it was, the move VES made was very legal and noone before did it. But you are allowed to move once and it was way before the braking point. Just accepting drs overtaking without a possible defense is ridiculous.
Kimi had time to brake, so all was well.

36

Hmmm. Seb moved in the braking zone. That's not the same as moving before it. You're allowed one definitive move before the braking zone, none within in. What is so hard to understand about that ?

And as for Ritchie's comment, how often does Danny hit people ? Never. He makes them as offer they can't refuse. Obviously they feel a bit silly afterwards, but he doesn't take them out or push them off the track or force them into the wall. Unlike many others out there. He's just better at it.

37

Never? Do you even watch the races?

38

He did same in Catalunya but then Vettel let him overshoot the corner and cut back after.

39

& Kimi at monaco 15 exactly same way - locked up and went into him "not very nice"..😒

40

Vettel [Mod]. What a hypocrite. He says "people should stay out of the tittle fight". Yet wasn't Vettel one of the main reasons Hamilton nearly lost the championship back in 2008, when Vettel past him on that crazy end to the Brazilian GP.
I suppose Vettle means drivers should stay out of the title fight if it's affecting himself from winning the championship. Its because of Petrov getting involved that Vettel won the 2010 championship.

41

He didnt say one shouldnt race. But one should race respectfully. [Mod] Max and Ricciardo can be quite aggressive into the first corner damaging the prospects of championship contenders.

Vettel in 2008 didnt pull any risky maneuver against Hamilton in Brazil. That overtaking move was pretty straight forward.

42

A couple of thoughts on this: one is that Vettel had plenty of people helping him in his title fights, whether they were from Toro Rosso (some of whom left the circuit to let him past) or fellow countrymen (like Schumacher, who essentially waved him through).

The other is that he could also be referring to Bruno Senna, who I felt was in control of his car in 2012 when Vettel swept across from the outside on the racing line with little regard for surrounding traffic...

43

That is harsh. He is asking for respect, i.e. no crazy lunges because championship contenders need to finish. Overtaking or fair racing is not an issue.

44

There was also Rosberg as a further cushion in Abu Dhabi 2010 had Alonso passed Petrov in order to get the points he needed for a WDC.

45

What Vettel did wasn't in anyway damaging to Hamilton's ability to see the chequered flag.

He is probably referring to his teammate who did his best to screw over Vettel at Brazil '12.

46

What's more, he almost managed it. A shame he failed, but there it is.

47

A shame he failed, how exactly? or a interesting that even with a team mate that tried to ruin it.
One of the best title win I have seen in years, you need to go re-watch that race.

48

Why is Danny laughing?

49

Because that's his natural look when he is making a serious point.

50

Because there is a 'y' in the day?

51

Another mystery solved 🙂

52

Relax rules regarding overtaking, tighten rules regarding track limits. Done.

53

Twitch, I'd like your take on Hulkenburg's cutting of turn 5 after his spin while dicing with Kimi around turn 4 in Mexico.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cUTYc0dEDQ

He's spun around, and is stationary. He gets going into the runoff on the outside of the turn 4 exit, but then instead of rejoining to take turn 5 properly, he deliberately cuts through the grass to join midway between turns 5 & 6.

Hulk's cutting of turn 5 was a deliberate choice, there was no lockup of glazed brake to blame.

If anyone else wants to comment, I'd welcome it. It was an episode that received no attention, and I don't believe it was even investigated.

54

plus enforce them consistently

55

Yes of course! One would think that would be a given...but then again, this is F1 we're talking about 😂

56

I think clarification is still needed. In the Seb-DRic incident, when it starts, there's a decent amount of space between their two lines. As DRic throws it in, he's also moving to the right, and likely under braking for a good chunk of it. Vettel moves left under braking, into space that was there before DRic moved right.

Before Vettel brakes, must his line be parallel with the track lines, or can he aim for the corner apex?

After taking a line and braking, when is Seb allowed to turn to actually make the corner?

How much movement is acceptable? No one can drive a perfectly straight line.

What constitutes "taking evasive action"? If you go into a corner with way too much speed, lock up, and flat spot your tires, is that just your stupidity, or is that on the defensive driver?

Many answers needed to those questions.

57

KRB, I agree with you.
Again it looks like there is a pattern to enforcement of the rules, which has penalized Vettel, in this case, and seems to favour RB, above all others.
If you were in a real business, and responsibel for setting up the controls to manage the business, and you did an equivalent job as Whiting has done, you'd likely be fired (unless the boss told you to do it like that, and yes, there is plenty of that).

58

KRB, all of your points are valid- pre-US GP, but the "two move" understanding and the clarification effectively nullifies any of those variables in terms of car placement. Seb covered the outside, then saw Ric go inside and so moved a second time, and under braking. Ric had to shed more speed that he would have normally because Vet was pinching him into a tighter line, and he locked up. My interpretation of the new rule was to prevent defensive drivers from doing that, but I think JAF1 will need to increase his thread length, because going forward it's going to be a free-for-all on this site after ever race!!

59

Sorry, but it doesn’t nullify any of my variables. Seb eventually HAS to turn the wheel to make the corner. He would do this while still on the brakes. So I want to know when he's allowed to turn left ... does he need to be at a certain speed, or a certain distance to the corner?

Vettel moved over, but it wasn't the steep angle jinks that are the extremely dangerous moves this rule was meant to target.

I think DRic was going to lock up no matter what. Just as Max went flying through there trying to pass Rosberg, there was little grip in that section (added to the generally decreased grip from the altitude in Mexico City).

Ferrari have now appealed the decision, so I hope we get better clarification.

60

The Vet/Ric incident was a terrible example from Charlie. That was just normal racing.

61

I tend to agree. I'm no fan of Vet but I thought he was hard done by in Mexico. Ric's move was fairly optimistic IMO and Vet didn't appear to do anything unusual in defending. Ferrari have launched an appeal - it will be interesting to see how they get on.

62

You say Ferrari appeal, I say Ferrari veto 🙂

63

Daniel Ricciardo 1 month ago: "something has to be done about moving under braking, there need to be more rules, otherwise everyone will be afraid to make a move!"

Daniel Ricciardo today: "we cant have too many rules, then everyone will be afraid to make a move"

So, which one is it Daniel?

64

Whatever suits him best, is the answer. He's just as much a hypocrite as the other drivers that wanted the rule to stop Verstappen from overtaking/defending them. Do you think they were really concerned about their safety? No, it's all about their ego and trying to keep Verstappen from challenging for the title next year

65

Both, they are not mutually exclusive. One rule "no moving under braking", no other rules needed, so simple.

66

...sometines he likes to take the flip-side?

67

Well, if someone is going to do a last second change of trajectory when you're on the anchors and committed, there is a chance you'll end up in the grandstand - so this was probably the "afraid" he was talking about in situation one. For a while there has been a gentleman's agreement about moving in the braking zone, which some have tried to exploit to their advantage.

In situation two, it's being able to race fairly without having to be penalised for some minor slight, so that would be being "afraid" of being sanctioned for having a go. I can appreciate this, as there seems to be many calling out for penalties / receiving penalties that I would have responded to by requesting the ingestion of some cement pills.

68

It's always funny how BigHaydo and Kenneth defend everything Ricciardo does or says. All the experienced drivers wanted the rule (among whom Ricciardo) but apparently thought the Verstappen rule could only be applied to Verstappen. Mark my words: all the aforementioned drivers will use this rule when they cant pass someone saying it's dangerous and cry when the rule is applied against them saying they should be allowed to race

69

@ Chris...obviously you have an axe to grind. Read james' comments then think it through. As for your observation that DR thought that 'moving in the braking area' could only be applied to verstappen is quite silly.

70

No Kenneth. It's not personal for me. Every time I counter your arguments and support my argument with independent sources, you don't go into these supporting statistics and rather refer to other opinions similar to your own. That's weak. That's the only thing I hold against you. I'm totally fine with Ricciardo being your favorite driver, just support your argument with statistics. Especially when you start saying crazy things like Ricciardo is such an amazing overtaker.

71

My recall is sketchy....please remind when i have used those words and said "ricciardo is such an amazing overtaker'. I believe that he is as good, if not better than some but but that's where it starts and finishes. As i have said before alonso knows a thing or two and his opinion is far more valid than any armchair recumbent.

72

Think it through carefully...there's no ambiguity there at all.

73

good catch.
I always like the hypocrits outed.

74

The overtaking situation in F1 is much improved thanks to the tyre choice now available but the DRS system should go.
As to the rules of engagement on overtakes.......it's slightly ironic that Danny Ric should bring this up,could it be that he has since watched the last race and thinks vettel was harshly dealt with? I had that one down as a racing incident. A late lunge and Seb did leave enough space for him.

75

That may have some validity but whiting showed the move, under braking, which left no room for doubt.

76

Amazing how vociferous he was after the race, Vettel this, Vettel that...

77

As a RIC fan I was pretty disappointed with those comments.
(but since Multi-21, Aussies don't think much of Vettel)

78

I am a Ricci fan too, not to say about AUS I wish I could visit one day, and I have high expectations from him. And hate when I see bad mouthing between him and Vettel, usually coming from Daniel. That is my main issue turning 100% toward Ricciardo. But boy, I really like his racing skills, especially now when he is fighting with [Mod] Max.

79

What is it all about? Surely in this sanitised PC world that we exist in drivers should be free to express opinions, rightly or wrongly. Yes, there needs to be certain levels of acceptance realtive to crudity but that is where it should stop. IMO.

80

No DRS means no overtaking at all, especially with the new aero rules. Dan now realizes that you can't turn into a corner anymore without releasing the brake pedal first!

81

Rubbish, look up "trail braking".

82

I was of course being facetious Gary.

83

Whiting in todays press conference:
"There are three fundamental points there in the rules. First, if a driver has to take evasive action. Second, if a driver makes an abnormal change of direction in the braking zone and third, if it could be deemed to be potentially dangerous to another driver. If those three conditions are satisfied then the stewards felt that was a dangerous manoeuvre and should be penalised. So that is how the stewards looked at it and they felt Sebastian had moved under-braking and that was very clear from the data and also pretty clear from the video.

It was potentially dangerous and it was an abnormal change of direction that could have led to an accident.
It is close and I think that is what the stewards looked at and as I say, those three conditions were satisfied as far as the stewards were concerned and that was what they felt they should act on.” End of quote

This leaves the possibility of completely ambivalent interpretation of the rules and i say NOT ONE of the 3 criteria that Whiting mentions necessary for a penalty were met by Vettels defense. It was not an abnormal change of direction by Vettel, Vettel left room for Ricciardo and no evasive action was taken by Ricciardo (he braked late and locked up thats all) and it was no more or less dangerous than any other overtaking manouvre in F1. Live race comentators around the world incl Brundle have also seen this as a hard but rule conform racing so why was there an investigation in the first place ??? There was nothing to investigate unless racing is now considered illegal in F1 !
In todays press conference Vettel has disagreed with Whiting that the penalty was just and Ferrari have formally asked for clarification of the penalty. Good.

84

Yeah I wasn't so impressed with Charlie's explanations. Didn't clear anything up IMO.

85

Charlie should enjoy the next two races as they'll be his last on his expensive sponsored worldwide junket Bernie has paid for the last two decades.

86

I don't see Vettel's opinion in this article, he pretty clear said to cry baby DR:
"I think I moved over once to defend my position, after that yeah, I think I gave Daniel enough room on the inside; I kept the car straight for more than the majority of the braking, so I think the reason why, from my point of view, why Daniel locked up so bad is because there was no grip on the inside and it’s something that… yeah… I think we all knew. There were people locking up on other corners when they were offline, so I think it actually looks a bit worse than it was. I don’t think it was actually dangerous for Daniel at that point but OK, I have to deal with the decision."

87

good point; thank you for calling it out.
it is difficult to overlook a pattern to the inconsistencies in the enforcement of the rules, RB are always on top.
Again, it makes the enire sport look fixed, and is probably the real reason fans are dropping off in droves.

88

"RB are always on top." ahh. bad bad boys. Not fair.. the Poor ferrari team again punished by unfair rules.
Did you ever followed Formula 1?

89

Yeah, I agree, this sport is rigged, that is my feeling sometime. Never trusted those former drivers in steward positions with their interests, making 'independent' judgement. They should look for better judges.

90

Ferrari have asked for a review into the Ricciardo/Vettel incident . My view is that Todt should intervene and the FIA should try and do everything possible to overturn their own stewards decision and reinstate Vettel to a podium . Ricciardo is acting smug and I don't like that. Charlie Whiting must be fired at the end of the season and a new race director who has a greater clarity of thought should be brought in.

91

yep, time for Bernie, Charlie and Herbie to go fishing.

92

Then how will Lewis be allowed to cut corners if his buddy is no longer there?

93

A fortnight after the race!

94

According to Hemingway, there are only three sports: Mountain climbing, bullfighting, and motor racing. The rest are merely games.

The problem with f1 is that is has become too much of a game lately. It is as now almost as contrived as football, or basketball. And the more contrived something is, the more in need of artificial rules it is to keep it fair.

Back in the 50s or 60s, even 70s and 80s, there were hardly any issues with regard to overtaking because the consequences of a manoeuvre gone awry was serious injury, or death. Now there are no consequences. This needs to change. At the very least a driver going off the track should suffer a detached wheel.

95

Man, Hemingway was quite wrong, follow Vendeeglobe race currently in progress, I cannot imagine a more man race than that, around the globe in a skipper for 3 months fighting with ocean, elements, nada sleep, nada normal meal, working around the clock 24/7 with nature and yourself.

I strongly suggest to all of you passionate about F1 to feel your time for the next months with this race http://www.vendeeglobe.org/en/

96

Can't say Hamilton's platitudes towards Charlie elevates his esteem IMO. (cheesy)
This entire issue was non-existant before this season, but became one when drivers raised on video game racing, and lacking maturity and respect came in, and gamed the system to advantage.
To be fair, Max wasn't the only one, but by being the most successful, it is he who came into the spot light for making the dangerous moves under braking, and the entire issue has been rolling along like a soap opera, since.
The real issue is non-functioning and inconsistent (neither valid, nor reliable) rules enforcement.
And since Charlie is the boss of the rules (and we must assume, enforcement of the rules) going to my first line, I find Lewis' platitude very irritating, since it is false, and he knows it!
As for Max, for I know I have been critical, in his defense, why wouldn;t he use it, if, having used it, and getting away with it, why wouldn't he continue to use it?
Well.... he did continue to use it; and others continued (Sainz, etc.) , and others started (Vettel, etc.), and eventually, everybody will use it, and most passing will be eliminated from F1!
Wouldn't that be great?

The root of this latest controversy is (yet again) the random rules enforcement.
This can't be fixed with 'a nice little chat', or some bandaid solutions; the entire approach needs to be reworked, to include quality control, service level agreements of adjudication (i.e. for each class/type of rule, what is the stipulated turn around time for a ruling, i.e. the Verstappen breach causing the Vettel breach in the Mexico GP, had a ruling come right away (within a minute; was there a good reason for it to take any longer?! - no), then Vettel most likely would not have been in a situation to break the rules the way he did.
But they could introduce the categorizations and turn around times in time for this weekend's Brazilian GP with little work, and then not worry about any ambiguity assoicated with other teams interfering with the MMC (Mercedes Managed Championship), because I think most of us would prefer to see some other team(s) driver(s) having an influance on the championship, non?

97

dean. An interesting viewpoint, I agree with a lot of what you have written, the rule on moving under braking needed firming up, and this has been done. It is the drivers job to push the rules, but as you say there would be no racing if this situation had been allowed to continue.
Turnaround times are perhaps less easy to shorten as they may appear. Situations have to be looked at in detail to ensure those decisions are correct, I am not aware of why the Verstappen Vettel incident wasn't resolved quicker, but there seems to be some differences of opinion in whether or not the stewards told Red Bull to relinquish the place or not. I would say the three lap rule needs looking at, I can't see a good reason for that to be left on the book, why not make it one lap?
The parts of your comment that I don't agree with are the "random rules enforcement" and the inevitable digs at Lewis and Mercedes.
The former point I feel is unfair as we sitting at home simply do not have the information available to us to make informed decisions on who should or shouldn't get a penalty, our decisions are inevitably clouded by who is involved, and we have nothing like the data available that the stewards do. No sporting officials get it right 100% of the time, and no decision is universally accepted as being correct. Overall I do believe that Charlie and the stewards do a good job, not perfect, but this isn't possible.
And now the second point of contention, why shouldn't Lewis say nice things about Charlie? Lewis haas clearly known the guy a long time and perhaps has a more thorough understanding of how difficult his job is then we do. For you to say that "I find Lewis' platitude very irritating, since it is false, and he knows it!" requires a level of knowledge that you can't possibly posses. The references to the Mercedes managed championship as you call it, don't really add anything to the point you are trying to make, and don't really make sense either.

98

Completely agree, I just found out that is Charlie the one who authorizes if an incident goes under investigation, if he doesn't authorize it, the race marshalls can't do anything.

99

Hmm, I believe they can initiate stuff themselves. Charlie can refer things for investigation, and they will be investigated. But the race stewards can start investigations themselves, if they think it's warranted, w/o it having been referred to them by the Race Director.

Not 100% on that, but fairly certain.

100

If this comment was at the top of this thread it would have a hundred recs.
Pity it will be lost down here!
Well said Dean..

101

Sarsippious, thank you so much for the recognition.
... there could be a reason why I don't get to head the threat (more than once to a comparatively low controversy post), beyond the fact that I'm less and less on top of it (being well into the unfortunately competition-eliminating MMC).
It's still likely that some of the usual suspects will lay a word here or there.

Always welcoming goodfaith rejoinders,
deancassady

102

It seems to me, Vettel should have been given a pass on Max after their incident. It slowed Vettel up a bit, putting him under pressure from DR. If he would have gotten a pass, DR would have been putting pressure on MV and not even gotten close to SV. MV error was so obvious, for the stewards to wait till after the race to take action is absurd. What are they afraid of?

103

So Verstappen says “As long as you don’t crash or make the other driver lose a lot of positions, I think you can race pretty hard.”

1) By this rationale, the Vettel / Ricciardo incident was hard racing and fair...and the kind of thing you'd like to see more often.
2) Verstappen has broken his own rules (diving up the inside line and contributing, if not causing entirely Vettel to retire) and breaking at least two of the three points when forcing Kimi to take evasive action at high speed, which had a much higher potential for injury than the Vettel/Ricciardo incident....but Max has never been punished for it.
3) If you don't crash isn't an excuse, when you've forced another driver to take evasive action. If they value their position more than you do, they'll try not to crash, unlike you Max "I'm never wrong" Verstappen.

Also, Max was calling the Ferrari drivers some rather unsavoury names a few races back but I don't recall him issuing any apologies. Yeah, his hard racing is good to watch but if he always points the finger at other people and never wants to take responsibility, then he's just being an arrogant little brat. Just once he could say "yeah I need to have a look at how I'm driving and re-assess if that's the done thing around here"....not holding my breath.

104

1: agreed, good racing can be hard racing. Driving to the edge is sometimes over the edge. A choice.
2:Evasive action in the way of "have to brake off" your passing move: Okay. That's driving.
3:Max never crashed someone. So this argument is rubbish.

Did you have seen any excuse from VET tot VES? His Mexican language was more then enough reason to do so!

105

1) Agreed if rules apply the same to everybody
2) Where was that? Spa? When Vettel squeezed both Kimi and Max. This has been discussed thoroughly before. And all ex drivers agree: this was mostly Sebastian's own fault
3) If nobody crashes, nobody loses a position and everything is within the rules: what's the problem?

106

Seriously Daniel needs to watch some races. I like him as a person but his great overtakes are just dumb dives into the side of a driver and he has to hope they don't close the door. If that's skill then bring Kobayashi back cos he had that in spades.

107

For once I agree with you - hes gone into the side of a number drivers sidepods over the last few seasons. Seems their are some with the FIA.

How many other drivers have done this and been penalised!- not RBR !

108

And just how do people overtake? These guys are very, very good and don't leave very much if anything at all available to be outbraked - they are proper F1 drivers who brake as late as possible on the normal racing line. Outbraking them requires a "lunge" and a compromise of the entry line, and the overtaker then has to squeeze the other driver out on the corner exit to stop them getting the naturally better corner exit speed. I'm pretty sure anyone who has not tried racing in relatively even cars realises just how difficult outbraking anyone good actually is.

109

Daniel needs to watch some races

I think you should take the time to do so yourself and realise comparing what Dan does to that of Kobayashi is only making yourself look foolish and uneducated.

110

Clearly I referred to diving down the inside.. something kamui did often. If you can't grasp the concept of referencing then I'm not sure which one of us should feel uneducated.

111

Cheesy poof
Don't worry about the little dig regarding your educational status.
It's an Aussie feeling the pain of not understanding that the majority do not have a liking for Ricciardo and his overtaking abilities and attitude in general. That smarts for some Aussie fans. So they prefer to go on the defensive by taking cheap shots.
But it is great to see them flapping on dry ground out of the comfort zone.

112

If you leave the door ajar and another is good enough to fill the space, then it is too late to close the door.

113

It was good to have Charlie at the drivers press conference & in itself shows that the FIA are at least trying to be inclusive. On the flip side it doesnt really seem that most of the drivers were satisfied with the explanation even if the overall reasons were outlined. Im very disappointed that the question was not put to Charlie:-

"Given that Max was found to have gained an advantage, was that considered in the Vettel /Ricciardo incident , because had Max allowed Seb through -he would not be in the position he was with Dan ?"

I've long been disappointed in the stewards just "letting slide" pun intended-drivers actually not having control when they make a move. In fact several times over the last few years Daniel Ricciardo has hinted then erred away from saying "... a driver does not have or lets say.. on the edge Of having control of the car.."--That right there is an admission of guilt masked in a symapthy call.

Ive definitely been against Seb on a number of occasions this year but there also needs to be much more consideration for the fact that Seb at some point had to turn in to the corner, secondly he did in fact leave a cars width at the apex where Ricciardo could have turned in had he had Control of his car!.& Finally as Seb said - Off the braking line Dan locked a brake on the dusty/less grip and had less control which made it look worse than it actually was-this happened well before Seb turned.

Im very much against the Mad Max manoeuvres of "Wobble block", " React switch" and just driving guys off the track leaving absolutely Zero space- These are NOT racing moves!!. IMO Max's moves at Spa were 10times more dangerous and were totally 1 sided! Effectively brake testing Raikkknen at 320kph on a straight- these would have been catastrophic in anyone else hands - I gurantee you!.(think Melb)

In Mexico Dan contributed because he took a lunge on the dirty side locked a brake and slid towards Seb --the more I look at this more its a racing incident.. Think monaco 15..with Dan /Kimi. These Red Bull guys because they are the darlings of F1 at the moment are getting away with blue murder.

Dear Charlie Whiting, for me Racing in F1 is a top flight racer having control of his car at all times. Where he makes a manoeuvre at the limit - he Must have control of the car -if he doesnt. Thats the first fault right there!- If the driver in front doesnt leave a cars width or changes direction thats the 2nd fault and therefore it becomes a racing incident if the 2 are put together. In Mexico Vettel turned into the corner but still left a cars width... So who collided into whom- the question still remains..& why was it not considered with the Verstappen move where all 3 cars where intentionally sandwhiched??.

In the meantime we have Max & Dan laughing away in the press conference when in fact they are more guilty of dangerous/negligent driving then all the other 20drivers combined.

Very disappointing stewards need to look at incidents in sequence and how they impact on each other not just snapnshots in each corner/moment.

114

@ elie...In a nutshell, i think that you are projecting there with regards to DR's passing maneouvres. Consider this, as this is how i interpret what DR has said. When he sees an opportunity he either goes for it or he backs out, a nano second decision. If he goes for it he 'assumes' ,rightly or wrongly, that the other car/driver will not turn in on him or squeeze him within dangerous margins as per the accepted rules of engagement. There is no guarantee that they will not have some wheel to wheel contact, that's racing. He is right though when he says that once the decision is made he is committed, he is on the edge of control keeping in mind at all times that he expects the other driver is going to defend robustly but fairly. The same cannot be said for all drivers though and sometimes they are caught up and pay the penalty. I think james nailed it most fairly with his comments earlier. Racing will never be black and white in all matters. Yes, ricciardo has made some opportunistic moves but that is racing as well as there may well be times when DR is in the wrong and if so he will pay the penalty but to suggest that he gets away with it because RB are the darlings? well i really expected more from you than a comment like that. I will still place my belief in what the other drivers have to say about DR than any one here on this site, excluding james.

115

Kenneth - I dont blame any racer for "having a go" quite the opposite. What I have a problem with is - what price do they pay for failing & causing an accident ok- if it works-the other driver leaves the requisite room (as required under the rules) and an overtake happens without damage. But just like going off track, cutting a corner and gaining an advantage-you have to give it back or pay a price. What I fear is that this "moving in the braking zone" is being used as an excuse to ignore other valid rules and rights of engagement in the braking zone & the corner..Like I said I'le commend anyone that gets it right and pulls it off clean but I think the guy that fails when left room by the guy in front deserves a penalty & whilst I respect some peoples opinions here sometimes- I have absolutely no fear of telling it exactly like it is to anyone here or elsewhere. I know why its not been penalised atm- because unfortunately the predictable & often boring racing is turning people away-- but that does not mean you ignore the rules because certain drivers have big following-- Or RBR fields 2 teams .Its happening more with Max on a big scale but Dan gets away with it too because "hes pleasant"..It should never personal it should always be sporting.. but what happened Mexico was not Sporting and even the explanation was very obscure to say the least. It was very clear on the differentiation to the Lewis incident but that was all..

116

exactly right!
well put (again).
It's hard to ignor that there is a pattern to the inconsistency of the enforcement of the rules.

117

Hi James
Off topic but after Mexico you said (in a reply to a comment) that there was an article coming on unsporting behavior with relation to Max - firstly not giving the place to Seb and then backing him into Riciardo.
Is that still going to happen?

118

Events rather overtook it, but I'm still working on something which will wrap that up, yes

119

well if this is the short version "unsporting behavior with relation to Max"" it looks very biased before it's written.

120

They're all very biased against Max, Eric. I'd like to hear from them how exciting this season was if Max wouldn't have been there. I guess he must be a threat to their favourite drivers. I watched some documentaries on Senna, Schumacher and Hamilton recently. The things they pulled off... and then talking about Verstappen like he is a mad man and not worthy of racing in F1. Hypocrisy is a common good nowadays

121

Im very much looking forward to it!

122

I do not entirely agree with Charlie's reasoning behind issuing a penalty for one and not the other as every incident will no doubt be different, different time of day, different part of track, a few k's faster or slower so nothing is ever going to the same but any car going off track regardless of who that driver is should be penalised but first corner incidents/overtakes off track are all okay. Consistency which has been missing in issuing penalties. V8 Supercars has one main steward at every race so that should be applied in F1.

As for RIC's overtaking they are not desperate just committed, there is a difference.

Top Tags
SEARCH Innovation
JA ON F1 In association with...
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer

Sign up to receive the latest F1 News & Updates direct to your inbox

You have Successfully Subscribed!