Your Reject of the Race - Russia

[Londoner]

1. Virtual Safety Car. Gifted the race to Mercedes and Hamilton. Pitting under VSC is such an utterly broken system which needs sorting before 2020.

2. Ferrari. Spent most of the race eagerly trying to gift-wrap it for Hamilton.

What a shite day.

[Meatwad]

I think this one should go to Ferrari. Besides the whole mess with team orders, Vettel's car breaking down and the resulting virtual safety car completely ruined their race. They went from a 1-2 to being 29 points more behind Mercedes.

Dishonorable mention to Alfa Romeo.

[IceG]

Ferrari - started first and third with the demonstrably fastest car and tyres, and two highly motivated drivers on peak form. Instead of just racing, they tried to be clever with the strategy and threw it all away.

The VSC rules - is this how they are meant to work? Why don't we just stop the race and throw a dice to decide where everyone restarts?

[Fetzie]

Ferrari turned up as favourites after last week, qualified strongly, started the race strongly and then proceeded to throw it all away. By trying to be clever they turned what looked like a safe haul of 43 team points into 15.

[mario]

I expect that there will be many complaining about the VSC and Ferrari, so I'm going to go in a different direction and nominate Alfa Romeo. Raikkonen threw away his chances by jumping the start, whilst Giovinazzi got himself tangled up in another incident and ended up wasting his chances too - the collapsing front jack in the pit lane summed up how their race was going this weekend.

[rachel1990]

1- Ferrari- daft team orders that didn't make any sense at all. And then backed down and then tried doing the swap in the pitlane which might have worked however then Vettel's car failed which then cost them the win with Leclerc car as well.

2- Alfa Romeo- No Pace- Kimi jumped the start then Giovinazzi was in the middle of a 3 man crash (Okay not his fault) and then he finished last and if Gasly hadn't gone off they would have been both Alfa's at the back. A weekend to forget!

[Ataxia]

1. Virtual Safety Car. Gifted the race to Mercedes and Hamilton. Pitting under VSC is such an utterly broken system which needs sorting before 2020.

2. Ferrari. Spent most of the race eagerly trying to gift-wrap it for Hamilton.

What a shite day.

If the boot was on the other foot and Leclerc had benefitted from the VSC, I'd bet the house that you'd not have nominated this.

The team orders, in reality, affected nothing.

Let's go for The Bollard System At Turn 2. Every year it's a joke, and continues to be in 2019. There's a good opportunity to shove gravel in the middle - not directly in the firing line of the straight, but halfway across the run-off to stop people taking liberties.

[Samster]

Ferrari Back to them handing wins on a plate to Mercedes again.

VSC Pitstops I've been bitching about this one for a while now. And yes it is natural to been even more against it when it favours the team that already win too much. But it needs a rule change as they are race breaking as they are. The only obvious solution to me is to flat out ban pitstops during VSCs.

[Wallio]

Since the Ferrari Pitwall has this locked up (and deservedly so) I'll nominate someone who keeps getting a pass:

Danny Ric - Has been flat out terrible all year ruined not one, not two, but three drivers races in one (stupid) move, and there's scurrilous rumors that one of the reasons Macca is leaving Renault is they can't afford to develop the engine AND pay Danny his $30 million salary!

[Enforcer]

Since the obvious options are covered, I'm going to nominate Williams for retiring Kubica's car to conserve parts as they weren't competing for points.

You haven't competed for points all season and won't in the remaining races. And even if you somehow do threaten the top 10 again between now and the end of the season, you're not going to rack up 27 points to overhaul Haas.
So you retired a healthy car to save money, basically.

[CaptainGetz12]

1) The Race After the 2nd Safety Car. Became a boring Mercedes 1-2 in the latter half. It makes me hope Russia will switch to a different venue, as this track hasn't produced quality racing since it came on the calendar.

2) Kimi Raikkonen. Pretty lethargic after his false start landed him a penalty.

(Dis)hounurable Mentions:
Daniel Ricciardo (I'm going with Wallio, he just seems to be phoning it in now)
Ferrari Politics (Rather cliche at this point, but this one cost them a potential win)
Virtual Safety Car Rules (This race shows that letting drivers pit under VSC is an unfair advantage to the cars that can stay out)

[RAK]

Sochi itself. It continues to be a dismal venue which has never dished up what I would consider to be a good race. Putin has a lot to answer for his insistence to hold the Grand Prix at Russia's equivalent of Benidorm.

[Spectoremg]

1. Did Vettel stopping in an unsafe place screw Leclerc's race?
2. Ben Edwards referring to Carlos (Sainz) as Fernando. Priceless.

[dj_vicious]

1. Ferrari Strategy This one is too easy I'm afraid. Coming off a 3-win high, Ferrari looked set for another 1-2 today. Everything fell apart by the time the first SC ended when Ferrari Desperately tried to get a much faster Vettel to swap places with Leclerc, ultimately taking advantage of a pit stop to get Leclerc back out in the lead. I don't understand why sabotaging your own race is considered a good idea. It all came to nothing when reliability ended Vettel's race. I'm quietly wondering if Seb parked is car the way he did to purposely bring out the VSC (S/C would have been just as effective) to hand Mercedes the free pits stop. Disclaimer: I'm not a crazy conspiracy theorist, but it is our duty on the Rejects forum to point out any potential rejectful behavior.
I think it's time for Seb to start handing out some resumes, because Ferrari gave him a very cold shoulder today.

2. Pit stop rules under VSC and S/C: What the bathplug is this? Three times now, Australia 2018, Britain 2019, Russia 2019, the race win has been decided by a loophole in the VSC rules., we've all complained, but nothing gets done. Is there an easy fix? Yes: Start up a VSC and everyone engages the pit limiter within a set time window. No more chasing the delta, no more pit loophole.
There's another option, and a more sensible one in my armchair-expert opinion: Safety cars and VSCs alike exist to slow the field and enable a dangerous situation to be cleared, not to maximize one's race strategy. When either are called, the pits are closed if the driver isn't already in the pit lane. You pit when racing is resumed. If the car has damage and needs to pit for emergency reasons, fine, but you are held until the field goes by.

[mario]

2. Pit stop rules under VSC and S/C: What the bathplug is this? Three times now, Australia 2018, Britain 2019, Russia 2019, the race win has been decided by a loophole in the VSC rules., we've all complained, but nothing gets done.

Actually, since you brought that point up, I went back to look at what had been said in some of those races to see whether there really was that much outrage.

Going back to the 2018 Australian Grand Prix thread, and the associated ROTR thread, there wasn't a single complaint in either of those threads about the fact that the use of the VSC in that race decided the winner in that case - in fact, most posters didn't even seem to think it was worth mentioning at all.

As for the case of the 2019 British GP, there were a few minor grumbles about Hamilton winning, but the general attitude seemed to be "well, it probably didn't really matter - Bottas was going to lose on strategy anyway" and it didn't really generate that many complaints either.

It also should be pointed out that, before he went off the track, Leclerc did of course benefit from the use of the VSC during the German GP this year to make a cheap pit stop - now, the fact that he ended up retiring due to an error probably meant that it was overlooked, but he himself has benefited from pitting under a virtual safety car in the past.

If the boot was on the other foot and Leclerc had benefitted from the VSC, I'd bet the house that you'd not have nominated this.

I have to say that, judging by the fact that there were no complaints, or even the slightest mention, of the influence of the virtual safety car on the 2018 Australian GP result, whilst the 2019 British GP only elicited a few minor grumbles, you do indeed seem to have a point that it feels like it's more about the fact that Leclerc lost out in this case.

[dj_vicious]

2. Pit stop rules under VSC and S/C: What the bathplug is this? Three times now, Australia 2018, Britain 2019, Russia 2019, the race win has been decided by a loophole in the VSC rules., we've all complained, but nothing gets done.

Actually, since you brought that point up, I went back to look at what had been said in some of those races to see whether there really was that much outrage.

Going back to the 2018 Australian Grand Prix thread, and the associated ROTR thread, there wasn't a single complaint in either of those threads about the fact that the use of the VSC in that race decided the winner in that case - in fact, most posters didn't even seem to think it was worth mentioning at all.

As for the case of the 2019 British GP, there were a few minor grumbles about Hamilton winning, but the general attitude seemed to be "well, it probably didn't really matter - Bottas was going to lose on strategy anyway" and it didn't really generate that many complaints either.

It also should be pointed out that, before he went off the track, Leclerc did of course benefit from the use of the VSC during the German GP this year to make a cheap pit stop - now, the fact that he ended up retiring due to an error probably meant that it was overlooked, but he himself has benefited from pitting under a virtual safety car in the past.

If the boot was on the other foot and Leclerc had benefitted from the VSC, I'd bet the house that you'd not have nominated this.

I have to say that, judging by the fact that there were no complaints, or even the slightest mention, of the influence of the virtual safety car on the 2018 Australian GP result, whilst the 2019 British GP only elicited a few minor grumbles, you do indeed seem to have a point that it feels like it's more about the fact that Leclerc lost out in this case.

Fair points all around. I had the same opinion about Australia 2018 and Silverstone this year, and I'm of the strong opinion that the strategy of 'waiting for a safety car to pit' should be eradicated. The latter stirs a lot of lot of disagreement and I respect the difference of opinion.

[Alextrax52]

1. Virtual Safety Car. Gifted the race to Mercedes and Hamilton. Pitting under VSC is such an utterly broken system which needs sorting before 2020.

2. Ferrari. Spent most of the race eagerly trying to gift-wrap it for Hamilton.

What a shite day.

If the boot was on the other foot and Leclerc had benefitted from the VSC, I'd bet the house that you'd not have nominated this.

The team orders, in reality, affected nothing.

Let's go for The Bollard System At Turn 2. Every year it's a joke, and continues to be in 2019. There's a good opportunity to shove gravel in the middle - not directly in the firing line of the straight, but halfway across the run-off to stop people taking liberties.

To be fair I was amused when Vettel beat Hamilton that way in Australia last year so yeah driver preference does play a part.

That said all bias aside the VSC rule seriously needs fixing. It’s not just the top teams that can get shafted by it. Imagine if your Racing Point or Alfa Romeo and you lose a double top 6 in that manner? Bring back the rule of the pitlane being closed during SC’s and VSC’s. It was only unpopular in 2007-8 because we had the risk of cars dropping out over refuelling stops because they’d run out of fuel. We don’t have that now.

It’s pretty clear either the VSC rule or Ferrari are going to win this one so for something less obvious how about Daniel Ricciardo whose incident rate seems to tripled of late or Kimi Raikkonen who suffered a Q1 elimination and jumped the start.

Actually just thinking about it how about Mr Charles Leclerc? You can moan about team orders all you want but it wasn’t like Australia and China where you were monstering Seb. You were closer to Lewis behind you. Plus you couldn’t even pass Bottas to give Lewis a challenge late on.

[Pacific Edge]

1st. Ferrari: Even when they were 1-2 they were looking incohesive and confused, and that's BEFORE things went really downhill. This race was theirs to lose, and they did just that, turned a 1-2 into a Merc 1-2. Bravo.

2nd: Magnussen: Drove the wheels off the car, and for once had Steiner in a GOOD mood, gets passed by one or two cars, then totally loses it and throws away all the points he did so well to try get.

3rd: Alfa Romeo: Without Williams in the race, at one point Alfa were the last 2 cars on the road, they were just nowhere.

Hon. Mention: Front jack shenanigans: That Alfa one in particular could have been much worse, but it still looked like it was going to hurt. Hulkenburg lost valuable track position after their incident.

[You-Gee-Eee-Day]

Spinastian Vettel for all the reasons above.

[Pacific Edge]

Spinastian Vettel for all the reasons above.

I'd say your signature sums up Ferrari's race perfectly.

[Wallio]

I have to say, I don't understand the hatred of the VSC rules (especially when many of you were clamoring for it in Singapore). Pit strategy is a viable tactic. Since everyone seems so deadset on refueling never coming back, SCs and especially VSCs are really the only time one pitwall can out think another one. I enjoy the VSC chaos personally, even if it lead to another LOLHAMMYWINSLOL.

[IceG]

I have to say, I don't understand the hatred of the VSC rules.
VSCs are really the only time one pitwall can out think another one.

Because this is a racing formula designed to test the fastest drivers in the fastest cars against each other. It is not a game of chess with random kicking over of the board. Strategy is nice but it should not be a factor capable of overriding the core performance competencies*, nor of replacing over-taking on the track.

* Tyre management is a core competency IMHO, however that is a digression for another thread

[Wallio]

I have to say, I don't understand the hatred of the VSC rules.
VSCs are really the only time one pitwall can out think another one.

Because this is a racing formula designed to test the fastest drivers in the fastest cars against each other.

F1 is not sprint racing. (Now we can argue or whether or not it SHOULD BE, but that's another matter) as long as pit stops exist, as long as its a team sport, F1 will always be about strategy. "4d Chess" has been a part of the game since the 1950s and Fangio only taking half fuel at the Nurburgring. We can't ban bits and pieces of the game we don't like.

[mario]

I have to say, I don't understand the hatred of the VSC rules.
VSCs are really the only time one pitwall can out think another one.

Because this is a racing formula designed to test the fastest drivers in the fastest cars against each other.

F1 is not sprint racing. (Now we can argue or whether or not it SHOULD BE, but that's another matter) as long as pit stops exist, as long as its a team sport, F1 will always be about strategy. "4d Chess" has been a part of the game since the 1950s and Fangio only taking half fuel at the Nurburgring. We can't ban bits and pieces of the game we don't like.

You could go back even further to 1951 and Ferrari relying on fuel strategy to win their first ever race against the Alfa Romeo team - I agree with you that strategy and, indeed, random chance are often inseparable from the sport.

[dr-baker]

It is not a game of chess with random kicking over of the board. Strategy is nice

But a game of chess is exactly how Max Mosley described F1 in the 1990s, and strategy will always be an intrinsic part of the sport, hence debates around team orders.

[Rob Dylan]

I've had various conversations over the years about the VSC and pit stops, and I'll put in the same comment I always make. They used to close the pits when safety cars came out. It used to be a thing. However, they stopped it around 2008/9 because cars would be running out of fuel, would be forced to stop, and would take a harsh penalty for something they couldn't avoid. And so, the pit-lane has been open since 2009.

Oh yeah, refuelling stopped almost ten years ago. Why can't we close the pit-lane during safety cars again?


Anyway, ROTR:
- Daniel Ricciardo: Wallio's right. Although I wouldn't say he's been terrible this year, I feel like he's had an incident or a retirement for countless races now. Absolutely should be in the running finally.
- Ferrari: good job.
- Lady Luck: Hamilton has a habit of being gifted wins, but with Bahrain, Silverstone, and NOW Russia, this is just getting ludicrous.
- Formula 1.5: yeah yeah I know yadayadayada, but Albon had braking issues and started from the bloody pit-lane, and STILL finished 5th.

[Fetzie]

If we close the pit lane during a SC, wouldn't you then be able to argue that benefits drivers that had already pitted at that point as the field is bunched up and you would lose a massive amount of track positions when pitting after a SC?

[Rob Dylan]

Poll is up! You have 48 hours


But to continue the discussion, it is a decent point as to whether it is more "fair" to punish drivers before or after a VSC period. I don't know, I guess there's a feeling that there's the same chance for everybody, that nobody can predict the VSC before it happens. However, if certain drivers have the chance to benefit from things that happen as a result of after it happens, to me that seems unfair. But I agree banning pitting would be an imperfect solution. The VSC will cause problems for some drivers, that is an eternal truth. But I'd rather it had as little impact on the race result, or more importantly race strategy, as possible.

[sswishbone]

For the VSC.... why not just make it when called everyone hits the pit lane speed limiter? Same speed, no one loses out. Job done.

[Rob Dylan]

They went into Sunday with a 1-3 position on the grid. Both cars were on the clean side, and as the commentators pointed out, perhaps the number 3 had an even bigger advantage than the pole sitter, what with the huge front straight and the slipstream. So when their cars were 1-2, what did our winners Ferrari do? They hung out their dirty laundry in public from around lap 2, with some botched strategy about switching drivers in specific situations and whatnot. Neither driver was happy for their own reasons, and all it did was allow the Mercedes to gain the upper hand, when really the red cars were the ones who should have been dominating.

After the whole kerfuffle (scientific term), it all ended with an awkward switching, then Vettel's car failing regardless, which paved the way for an easy Mercedes victory under the championship leader. They turned an easy 43/44 points into... 15. Which given the circumstances is laugh-out-loud embarrassing. Cut and dry, Reject of the Race in Russia.