F1 2021 Season

Infordin said:
Wishful thinking, you live in a bubble.

Use the chrome extension which allows you to see dislikes on YouTube. The Abu Dhabi race received an overwhelmingly positive review.

The vast majority of F1 fans loved the season finale.
Click to expand...
Oh wow. This is classic evidence. Youtube likes = case closed. :lol:

Maybe instead of juries, courts of law could ask YouTube comments section to rule in cases? :lol:
 
Buster15 said:
It is reasonable to wonder what would have happened were the result reversed and Max/RB had been screwed on the last lap.
Would Max have shown anything like the same sportsmanship as did Lewis.
And would Horner and Marko not have protested about the total injustice?
Pretty sure we all know the answer to that...
Click to expand...
Red Bull have also become a stain on the sport.

Really sad when you consider the honourable origins and respect between f1 drivers and teams in the 50s 60s etc.
 
Piratesoup said:
For what it's worth: None of my friends are super into F1. Some watch the races, but that's it. This was the first time in years most of us watched and we actually talked about it afterwards. Even at work it was a topic. Everybody absolutely loved it, even though most favor Mercedes over Red Bull I can't speak for die hard F1 fans at all, but casuals and neutrals were universally thrilled from what I can tell.
It even rekindled some interest in the sport for me.
Click to expand...

It's a funny thing, I've been quite an avid follower since the days of James Hunt's triumph in 1976, but I feel that this season finale is the straw that has finally broken the Camel's back for me.
Out with the old, and in with the new, that's evolution I suppose....;)
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
-Giving half points for a farce at Spa (advantage Max)

-Allowing Max to drive Lewis off the track in Brazil (advantage Max)

-Not penalising Max with grid penalty or points deduction for brake checking (advantage Max)

-The icing on the cake, handing the championship and final race to Max despite him being 11 second behind.

These are all decisions and rulings NOT racing incidents. If you can't see that then you may be in denial.
Click to expand...

Man, stop this gross injustice mode especially if you are painting other posters as verstappen fans.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Oh wow. This is classic evidence. Youtube likes = case closed. :lol:

Maybe instead of juries, courts of law could ask YouTube comments section to rule in cases? :lol:
Click to expand...

“the fact this case has even reached cas is a farce. i put it to you, your honour, that pm_me-ur_fat_tits is perfectly happy with the outcome of the race. he instructs “salty hamilton ***** to sit on his fat one. max is da best. no collusion.” whom are we to interfere with the outcome of the race in the face of such overwhelming public support?”
 
adexkola said:
Lewis doesn't need to do anything but lock himself up in a dark room for 7 days with "The Last Dance" on repeat, and take the resulting determination into training and the next season
Click to expand...
I'd love if Mercedes & Hamilton are to become ice cold next year with a "feck the FIA" vibe. :D
 
VorZakone said:
I'd love if Mercedes & Hamilton are to become ice cold next year with a "feck the FIA" vibe. :D
Click to expand...

I'd love it too. Sunglasses on all year round, "feck the FIA" t-shirt on, no interviews, just looking to drive Max off the track every opportunity.

I would defo tune in to watch that :lol:
 
This thread reminds me of twitter.
Ask for an explanation an get accused of being a "so and so" fanboy as well as a history of whataboutism.
 
rimaldo said:
“the fact this case has even reached cas is a farce. i put it to you, your honour, that pm_me-ur_fat_tits is perfectly happy with the outcome of the race. he instructs “salty hamilton ***** to sit on his fat one. max is da best. no collusion.” whom are we to interfere with the outcome of the race in the face of such overwhelming public support?”
Click to expand...
:lol:

YouTube has spoken.
 
macheda14 said:
Stewards are on the track at lap 56 at turn 14, it would have taken until lap 57 for every car to unlap themselves as there are only two corners left. The safety car is supposed to come in the following lap (58) after the last car has unlapped itself.
Click to expand...

But if the overtaking starts on Lap 56, even if it is towards the end of the lap, even though all lapped cars haven't overtaken cars on the lead lap, wouldn't the safety car still be pitting the following lap if it ended on Lap 57? That part I'm unclear about. In any case, I think the race director can be say the 'safety car is ending this lap' at any point, which is I think what the stewards argued (14.13). I just think it'd be less controversial if they'd unlap them all even if they couldn't join back up with the field.

rpitroda said:
Apologies my mistake re: timing of the truck.

Still, they could not let them around on lap 56. If you look in the 55 picture there is still loads of stuff on the road that needed sweeping. They did this on lap 56. So, you can’t wave them through until they’ve crossed that point on 56 as if they did it earlier the marshals wouldn’t have had time to sweep up on lap 56. So the only time on lap 56 to give the order is literally during those last 2 turns.

Given what we now know, this is overall a rather odd line of debate. Clearly the race director wanted to start the race as soon as possible. If it was safely possible to do it the laps before, don’t you think he would have?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess you're right. He did seem quite keen getting the safety car in, and said later it was based on the agreement between teams about wanting to end races in the 'green' conditions. Still think they could've unlapped cars a bit earlier, which would make it less controversial (possibly). Problem would be whether all of them would get far enough in front for it not to matter.
 
Also, looks like Lewis got knighted today.





So I think that's four F1 knights?

Sir Jack Brabham
Sir Stirling Moss
Sir Jackie Stewart

Am I missing anyone?
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Oh wow. This is classic evidence. Youtube likes = case closed. :lol:

Maybe instead of juries, courts of law could ask YouTube comments section to rule in cases? :lol:
Click to expand...
That’s not the argument that was being presented, it’s amazing how many people on here can’t even read.

The argument was whether the decision was popular with the fans, not if it was “just”.
 
Ikon said:
It's a funny thing, I've been quite an avid follower since the days of James Hunt's triumph in 1976, but I feel that this season finale is the straw that has finally broken the Camel's back for me.
Out with the old, and in with the new, that's evolution I suppose....;)
Click to expand...

Not so.
Evolution happens naturally.
What happened last Sunday was a very long way from natural.
It was organised and manipulated to suit an agenda.
That was not evolution. It was a stitch up.
 
Uniquim said:
But if the overtaking starts on Lap 56, even if it is towards the end of the lap, even though all lapped cars haven't overtaken cars on the lead lap, wouldn't the safety car still be pitting the following lap if it ended on Lap 57? That part I'm unclear about. In any case, I think the race director can be say the 'safety car is ending this lap' at any point, which is I think what the stewards argued (14.13). I just think it'd be less controversial if they'd unlap them all even if they couldn't join back up with the field.



Yeah, I guess you're right. He did seem quite keen getting the safety car in, and said later it was based on the agreement between teams about wanting to end races in the 'green' conditions. Still think they could've unlapped cars a bit earlier, which would make it less controversial (possibly). Problem would be whether all of them would get far enough in front for it not to matter.
Click to expand...
No the rules are that once the final car has unlapped itself the safety car comes in the following lap. The stewards know fully well that’s just a regulation written in to document the procedures. Not an overriding rule.

Again he couldn’t have told the cars to unlap themselves earlier as shown bythe pictures you produced. What he could have done within the regulations is pulled the safety car in with no one unlapping themselves and had Max have to get past those 5 back markers (which yes they would have been blue flagged, it still would have taken him a good few seconds.) but again this would have had to happen at the end of lap 57. As by the end of lap 56 stewards were still on the track. You can only call it in once the track is clear.
 
Buster15 said:
Not so.
Evolution happens naturally.
What happened last Sunday was a very long way from natural.
It was organised and manipulated to suit an agenda.
That was not evolution. It was a stitch up.
Click to expand...

I mean for my personal interests lasting in F1 any longer.
My interest in F1 after that debacle has probably now gone, but a younger TV generation probably loved the staged drama, and that's what I mean about the "sport" evolving onto appeal to that kind of TV audience going forward. Oldies such as myself, that are calling fraud, aren't as important as boosting the TV numbers.
You get me?
 
rpitroda said:
I’m quite confident change will happen. Not the result and perhaps not in the public eye. But I think there is a good chance things change.

We’ve seen a lot of Masi bashing in this thread and rightly so. But I did read a few pieces which made me wonder a bit. Apparently Masi doesn’t have a team of people with him, and whilst obviously more analytics and information than all of us watching, he has nothing like the data and team that the actual racing teams do. He is obviously responsible for the call and in all circumstances he should have got it right, but I do think they could implement real changes there. Simple things like:

- More people, who might be responsible for communications with teams so they get them out of Masi’s ear.
- More people to support on analytics and data to have minds working through real time information.
- An assistant race director, or perhaps even turning the role into a 3-person team to get more balance in decision making.
- A clearer understanding of race director and steward interaction.

I think (and hope) Masi is removed. But unless the next person is a superstar like Charlie, without change we might still get weird decisions like this.
Click to expand...

I really like these suggestions. After all, he's 1 guy and if he made a mistake, then that's completely understandable, especially under the circumstances and associated stress of that high pressure situation where a quick decision was being demanded.
So let's lot allow that to happen again, let's put in measures to mitigate the risk of a single person making a mistake (or even perceived to have made a mistake) under the full glare of teams and fans alike.

It would be a far more reasonable outcome than courts deciding champions, or Red Bull taking their ball home in a strop!

But yeah, he has to go. He can't be seen to be associated with the "fix".
 
ForlansHair said:
My point was about the additional lap rather than allowing cars to unlap and that quote doesn't say anything about that.

I think it's entirely plausible Masi either just forgot (as alluded to by other posters he was under intense pressure with multiple things going on), or he thought that bit of the rule wasn't relevant. If however you believe he knows all the rules like the back of his hand, he could argue that, according to 15.3 he has complete control over the safety car (one of the arguments the Stewards used) and he believed the additional lap wasn't necessary (I assume it is there so the now unlapped cars get a fair amount ahead and don't need to be lapped again within a couple of laps (?) which on the last lap of the race isn't needed for obvious reasons).

My personal belief is he doesn't know every single line of the sporting regulations and just forgot, and he would follow 48.12 in full if he had his time again. I don't believe he himself believed he was invalidating procedures

EDIT: Posted before I meant to. I meant to finish off by saying that I believe he realised that what he did was incorrect after the event (but not during), but after the race he has found a way to wriggle out of it by referring to 15.3 and 48.13.
Click to expand...
Untrue. There is literally a radio message from Masi where he states both of these aspects of the rule from 2020.
 
spiriticon said:
Click to expand...


don’t blame them. it’s exactly like when keith, the school bully, who did the “stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself” thing with your own fists then wants you to put in a good word with your sister.
 
F1 obviously needs Mercedes more than they need F1. How many teams would be left without Mercedes engines? And it’s nice advertising of course and they do make money through sponsorship and what not but at the same time there is growing focus on the fact that it’s not environmentally friendly, and no doubt as a stand alone business line is loss making. The engineering and research can be done anyway, so not a factor. Also, how many people genuinely buy a car brand because they see it on a motor sport? And at this point what proportion of people have not heard of Mercedes who would be in a position to consider buying one?

If Mercedes don’t take it to CAS, then the only reason for that is because they have the FIA and Liberty by the scrote and have managed to get something pretty substantial be it financial or otherwise.

I know the team isn’t owned outright but Mercedes but still.
 
rpitroda said:
F1 obviously needs Mercedes more than they need F1. How many teams would be left without Mercedes engines? And it’s nice advertising of course and they do make money through sponsorship and what not but at the same time there is growing focus on the fact that it’s not environmentally friendly, and no doubt as a stand alone business line is loss making. The engineering and research can be done anyway, so not a factor. Also, how many people genuinely buy a car brand because they see it on a motor sport? And at this point what proportion of people have not heard of Mercedes who would be in a position to consider buying one?

If Mercedes don’t take it to CAS, then the only reason for that is because they have the FIA and Liberty by the scrote and have managed to get something pretty substantial be it financial or otherwise.

I know the team isn’t owned outright but Mercedes but still.
Click to expand...
They wont just stop supplying engines, they have contracts to abide to. Even if they leave f1 which wont happen.
 
The Firestarter said:
Because it makes zero sense brand wise.
Click to expand...
Elaborate. Other than the groups AMG line, which would in my opinion happily continue to succeed without being in F1, I don’t agree it makes commercial sense. They’ve been in it sufficiently long to benefit from brand exposure. And advertising and sponsorship pales to insignificance vs the costs of being in F1. Not to mention other non financial considerations.
 
rpitroda said:
Elaborate. Other than the groups AMG line, which would in my opinion happily continue to succeed without being in F1, I don’t agree it makes commercial sense. They’ve been in it sufficiently long to benefit from brand exposure. And advertising and sponsorship pales to insignificance vs the costs of being in F1. Not to mention other non financial considerations.
Click to expand...
Cost for participation is negligible for such a corporation. They get the coolness factor, especially with the likes of Russel now on board, just like it was initially with Lewis. Prestige is extremely important for luxury car maker . Also, something that I place big value on is R&D work and developments orignally inspired by the fierce sports competition that eventually reach the "ordinary" cars.
 
rpitroda said:
Elaborate. Other than the groups AMG line, which would in my opinion happily continue to succeed without being in F1, I don’t agree it makes commercial sense. They’ve been in it sufficiently long to benefit from brand exposure. And advertising and sponsorship pales to insignificance vs the costs of being in F1. Not to mention other non financial considerations.
Click to expand...

They've won 15 out of the last 16 championships. How bad would their reputation sink if they ran away and reneged on contracts because of a first defeat in 16 championships? And why would they run away from a sport that they completely dominate in and basically make the rules for?

Brand wise it'd be suicidal but the cost of compensation to the teams they supply would be enormous as well.
 
hobbers said:
They've won 15 out of the last 16 championships. How bad would their reputation sink if they ran away and reneged on contracts because of a first defeat in 16 championships? And why would they run away from a sport that they completely dominate in and basically make the rules for?

Brand wise it'd be suicidal but the cost of compensation to the teams they supply would be enormous as well.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t suggesting the breach contracts. Simply commit to leaving the sport like Honda did. Number of titles won means nothing at all in my books. If anything it shows they can and have dominated and have nothing left to prove and nothing left to gain from the optics.
 
The Firestarter said:
Cost for participation is negligible for such a corporation. They get the coolness factor, especially with the likes of Russel now on board, just like it was initially with Lewis. Prestige is extremely important for luxury car maker . Also, something that I place big value on is R&D work and developments orignally inspired by the fierce sports competition that eventually reach the "ordinary" cars.
Click to expand...

I get the logic regarding R&D, but do we really think that technology in Mercedes cars is significantly better than that of other electric / non electric cars? I don’t think so. So I think that point doesn’t stack up in reality.

And I understand the prestige point. I definitely agree that’s important for luxury car brands. But that alone to make it impossible for them to leave? I just don’t see it. If it was that important I think other luxury engine brands would be clamouring to get in.
 
rpitroda said:
I get the logic regarding R&D, but do we really think that technology in Mercedes cars is significantly better than that of other electric / non electric cars? I don’t think so. So I think that point doesn’t stack up in reality.

And I understand the prestige point. I definitely agree that’s important for luxury car brands. But that alone to make it impossible for them to leave? I just don’t see it. If it was that important I think other luxury engine brands would be clamouring to get in.
Click to expand...
It's not easy to get in, you need to either buy an existing team, or create all the research from scratch which even for top car makers won't be that easy to achieve in a short amount of time. IIRC you need to show to FIA that your car would be adequate and not some traffic cone for the other cars. Also, even if they get in, most teams won't be winning initially and bring seen as constant losers wouldn't not be that good for their brands either.
 
rpitroda said:
I wasn’t suggesting the breach contracts. Simply commit to leaving the sport like Honda did.
Click to expand...

They could do that but it would mean honouring their engine contracts, not sure how long their longest contract is there, and for PR reasons probably honouring their drivers contracts. Hamilton has 2 more years and Russell is on a long term deal.

And they'd have to wrap up their young driver program as well, that would take years to do without bad PR.
 
The Firestarter said:
It's not easy to get in, you need to either buy an existing team, or create all the research from scratch which even for top car makers won't be that easy to achieve in a short amount of time. IIRC you need to show to FIA that your car would be adequate and not some traffic cone for the other cars. Also, even if they get in, most teams won't be winning initially and bring seen as constant losers wouldn't not be that good for their brands either.
Click to expand...
Perhaps that’s true but the point stands - if it really did have such a significant effect on brand performance and prestige, why wouldn’t they go through all of that pain to get there?
 
hobbers said:
They could do that but it would mean honouring their engine contracts, not sure how long their longest contract is there, and for PR reasons probably honouring their drivers contracts. Hamilton has 2 more years and Russell is on a long term deal.

And they'd have to wrap up their young driver program as well, that would take years to do without bad PR.
Click to expand...
Which is a fair argument I think. I’m not saying there are no negatives to withdrawing from F1, but there are increasing reasons to do so, I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.