[asr245]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Racing line -> Inside line -> Racing line is not technically moving once!

Let me correct/rephrase myself. He made one blocking move at the end of the straight - which is legal. Before that, MS was a long way back and he took a more defensive line. Still one blocking move. He did nothing wrong. Over & out.

[good.car-ma]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Racing line -> Inside line -> Racing line is not technically moving once!

Drivers can make 2 moves. One off the racing line to defend and the second back on the racing line. The second move comes with the condition that there should be a car's width between them and side of track.

First Bruno clearly has adhered to these. Second, as someone mentioned, he does it so early that the incident could have and should have been anticipated and avoided.

See the space on the left side, even if Bruno is much much slower, there is enough and more space to jink left and stay on track. Why would you try to go all the way back across a car thats rapidly decelerating in front of you??

Clear to everyone except MS whose fault it is. Thats why there is so much attention for it

[anachronix]

Let me remind you...

FIA Article 20.3 reads: "More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted.

I have already said it was MS's fault trying to go back to the inside line and crashing into the rear of an early braking Bruno. Dont know if I have agree anything else boys

Originally Posted by asr245

Let me correct/rephrase myself. He made one blocking move at the end of the straight - which is legal. Before that, MS was a long way back and he took a more defensive line. Still one blocking move. He did nothing wrong. Over & out.

Originally Posted by good.car-ma

Drivers can make 2 moves. One off the racing line to defend and the second back on the racing line. The second move comes with the condition that there should be a car's width between them and side of track.

First Bruno clearly has adhered to these. Second, as someone mentioned, he does it so early that the incident could have and should have been anticipated and avoided.

See the space on the left side, even if Bruno is much much slower, there is enough and more space to jink left and stay on track. Why would you try to go all the way back across a car thats rapidly decelerating in front of you??

Clear to everyone except MS whose fault it is. Thats why there is so much attention for it

[PAVAN KADAM]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Let me remind you...

FIA Article 20.3 reads: "More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted.

I have already said it was MS's fault trying to go back to the inside line and crashing into the rear of an early braking Bruno. Dont know if I have agree anything else boys

Correctly said

When Kobayashi made a move on Nico, It was Nico who tried defending his position in two corners, but as his car was not quick enough, he let Kobayashi pass. BUT In case of Brun v/s Michael , Bruno was all over the place, he could hardly defend his positiont, I blame it on Bruno for spoiling Michael's race.

[deetjohn]

I am not getting into the Senna Michael clash.

But have a different point to make. I think Lotus is screwing up race after race. They have a very good car for Sunday, but can't come up with a good strategy to match up to E20' potential.

By the time they get things under control, it already the last lap. And they will just go home with the fastest lap in the bag. Don't they know there are no points for it?

[asr245]

I couldn't understand why they weren't pitting Kimi. Kimi & Alonso made the 2nd stop together but Kimi stayed out 2-3 laps more. It's not as if he was posting competitive times.

[good.car-ma]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Let me remind you...

FIA Article 20.3 reads: "More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted.

Please quote the complete text of Article 20.3

"More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off�]line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner."

This clearly tells us that a move back onto the racing line is permitted. By more than one move they intend to cut out Lewis-like weaving.

[anachronix]

Clarification of that rule by Charlie Whiting

Q: The ‘one-move’ rule on defending a position has been reinstated. Has there been a problem with dangerous blocking in the last few seasons?
CW: This isn’t really a new overtaking rule, rather we’ve put into the regulations what was an unwritten rule. A driver can make one move only to defend a position - but when that driver then moves back onto the racing line to take a corner it can be construed as a second move, which is not allowed. It’s a matter of deciding to what degree resuming the original line is acceptable. We don’t want to get into silly arguments about centimetres so we’ve decided the defending driver must leave at least one car width on the racing line otherwise he will be judged to have made a second move and penalised accordingly. We need to have drivers giving each other space on the track - otherwise we risk dangerous collisions.

Formula 1

Bruno was moving right in the middle of the track, he gave very little movements that could make it tricky for the following driver and it did!

Originally Posted by good.car-ma

Please quote the complete text of Article 20.3

"More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off�]line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner."

This clearly tells us that a move back onto the racing line is permitted. By more than one move they intend to cut out Lewis-like weaving.

[jalsa777]

Originally Posted by PAVAN KADAM

When Kobayashi made a move on Nico, It was Nico who tried defending his position in two corners, but as his car was not quick enough, he let Kobayashi pass.

I don't think Rosberg let his by just because his car was slow.
Kobayashi made such a daring dive and scared the day lights out of Rosberg and thus Rosberg just moved away assuming that Kobayashi would go wide and collect him if he stayed by his side.

It was a good move by Kobayashi, he made it stick and good job by Rosberg to keep out lest Kobayashi would slide out wide.

[good.car-ma]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Clarification of that rule by Charlie Whiting

Q: The ‘one-move’ rule on defending a position has been reinstated. Has there been a problem with dangerous blocking in the last few seasons?
CW: This isn’t really a new overtaking rule, rather we’ve put into the regulations what was an unwritten rule. A driver can make one move only to defend a position - but when that driver then moves back onto the racing line to take a corner it can be construed as a second move, which is not allowed. It’s a matter of deciding to what degree resuming the original line is acceptable. We don’t want to get into silly arguments about centimetres so we’ve decided the defending driver must leave at least one car width on the racing line otherwise he will be judged to have made a second move and penalised accordingly. We need to have drivers giving each other space on the track - otherwise we risk dangerous collisions.

Formula 1

Bruno was moving right in the middle of the track, he gave very little movements that could make it tricky for the following driver and it did!

HAHAHA Looks like Charlie doesn't understand the rule either. If moving back is construed as a second move, why say that they should leave a gap at all! Penalise them for breaking the one-move rule. Agree? Such ambiguity!! Excellent then and in the words of Alonso, lets have some fun!

[asr245]

Thought I will post it here as it's a thought after Spanish GP. Blog by BBC's Andrew Benson.

BBC - Andrew Benson: Fresh questions over struggling Schumacher


An interesting point put up in comments for the above blog - 5 place penalty to cause an accident but back of the grid (LH) for a technical infringement? Does that mean if someone is low on fuel in qualifying, he can get involved in an "innocent" accident?

[anachronix]

Andrew Benson is quite famous for writing utter crap and this article is nothing different!

This article on F1 times makes much more sensible than sensational!

Why post-Spain criticism of Schumacher is wrong*

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by asr245

An interesting point put up in comments for the above blog - 5 place penalty to cause an accident but back of the grid (LH) for a technical infringement? Does that mean if someone is low on fuel in qualifying, he can get involved in an "innocent" accident?

Originally Posted by anachronix

Andrew Benson is quite famous for writing utter crap and this article is nothing different!

Irrespective of what Andrew Benson has written, the comment above indeed has some food for thought. It probably would have been a different story for Lewis if the penalty was less harsh.

[anachronix]

There are lot of 'What if' in F1 where things could have ended rather nice.

But Lewis was handed a penalty for being under fueled and doing it the 2nd time after a warning at Canada 2010. Dont want to comment if the penalty is harsh or not, but he deserved a penalty.

Originally Posted by vb-san

Irrespective of what Andrew Benson has written, the comment above indeed has some food for thought. It probably would have been a different story for Lewis if the penalty was less harsh.

[SchumiFan]

I read that piece of crap posted in BBC. If the same yard stick is used for Button, then he must have been performing even badly than Schumacher.

The car wasn't suited/balanced for his driving and he was there for the taking. Hamilton did a better job than the supposedly smooth driver.

The thing is Schumi was utterly dominant and won a lot of enemies (success breeds envy) in his days with Ferrari. So when he is down now, people are taking pot shots at him. And the British are famous for doing that since he single handedly denied Macca/Hill any sort of success in his days with Ferrari.
Qualifying is a session and Lewis was DSQ'ed from it because of a technical infringement. So he drops to the last place.
Where as Schumi was involved in a racing incident and hence the penalty. Surprised that Webber didn't get one for his high flying stunt after crashing against Kovi in Valencia?

Plus he's German (if I am allowed to say thatNo offence).


P.S. I am warming up to Hamilton now since this season he seems a lot different and calm. Wouldn't mind him at Ferrari.