2010 Monaco Grand Prix Discussion

[eagleash]

Correct me if im wrong but isnt schumacher still under a suspended 2 race ban threat for this season following his 2006 qualifying incident?

He's had the equivalent of a whole season (albeit with a 3 year gap) of racing since then - it's surely expired. Besides, I think they have to be 'similar offences'.

Yep ...agree with that

[WeirdKerr]

Correct me if im wrong but isnt schumacher still under a suspended 2 race ban threat for this season following his 2006 qualifying incident?

He's had the equivalent of a whole season (albeit with a 3 year gap) of racing since then - it's surely expired. Besides, I think they have to be 'similar offences'.

Yep ...agree with that

I was sure i read that the time the Fia stated it would carry the suspended part of the ban over if he came back as it was suspend ban for 2 seasons not 2 years?

[Klon]

Should've used my defense, that would've worked, but no...

[shinji]

Jake Humphrey was reading off an iPad on the BBC coverage - [theatricality]Welcome to the World of Tomorrow![/theatricality]

On the Schumi thing, it's not like there's any precedent that could be referred to as the rule is only new this year, so it's a tad unfair to throw on the 20 seconds. What makes it worse is that unlike in most races where 20 seconds back from 6th would still be points, he goes away with nothing, just for using a bit of cunning. I hope they get something out of the appeal.

Overall, it was a good race, more attrition than usual, Chandhok was very lucky in particular with that Wurz/Coulthard throwback. Webber was the deserving winner, and suddenly he's become a really top-level driver after 9 years of OK-ness.

[eagleash]

He's had the equivalent of a whole season (albeit with a 3 year gap) of racing since then - it's surely expired. Besides, I think they have to be 'similar offences'.

Yep ...agree with that

I was sure i read that the time the Fia stated it would carry the suspended part of the ban over if he came back as it was suspend ban for 2 seasons not 2 years?

They'd never get away with that & I'm sure their lawyers would have pointed out to them, 2 seasons have passed & whether Michael drove those seasons or not is not relevant.
Same applies if a footballer is suspended for one game, but would not have played anyway due to injury.

[muttley]

Agreed, he probably didn't even know that rule existed. The commentators certainly didn't, and the move clearly wasn't dangerous (like say, Vettel vs Hamilton or Alonso vs Massa in the pitline in the Chinese GP).

Well, the german commentators did, so what?

[thehemogoblin]

Never have I seen such a boring four-safety-car race.

Also, Steve Matchett recited that rule immediately, so it's not as if nobody knew it existed.

[eytl]

As a lawyer, I have to say that if rule 40.13 is being invoked, it is ridiculously poorly drafted. From what has happened with Schumacher, it is clear that the intention is that if the safety car is out on the last lap of the race, the race will be deemed to finish under safety car conditions, however the safety car will nevertheless enter the pits at the end of the lap. This is something that has no commonsense about it; on the contrary, commonsense says that whe the safety car pulls in, racing begins at the safety car control line; if the race is to finish under safety car conditions, what's wrong with having the safety car lead the field across the line? As rule 40.13 goes against commonsense, it needed to be made explicit that on the last lap, even if the safety car pulls in, the race is deemed to still be under safety car conditions.

The failure of the rules to state this means that there is an inherent ambiguity every time the safety car is out on the last lap. Is the race finishing under safety car conditions or not? Could there be times when the safety car pulls in and in fact the stewards, ignorant of the intent of the rules, are expecting a few-hundred metre dash to the finish and will allow moves like the one Schumacher pulled?

The more I look at the way the rule is drafted, the more ambiguity I see. Will elaborate more in the written review.

[Phoenix]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

[RejectSteve]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

Photo opportunities? Lame excuse.

[Phoenix]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

Photo opportunities? Lame excuse.

Photo opportunities? I don't really know if you were thinking about what I'm thinking you thought, but my thought was the cars to cross the line in formation. No controversial moves, then.

[CarlosFerreira]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

"Bernd Maylander wins the 2010 Monaco Grand Prix! A superb showing on only the 6th outing for the new-to-2010 Mercedes-Benz SLS, with the German driver managing to hold the F1 prototypes behind him. In a race riddled with incidents, thrills and spills, the veteran German driver (who always looks like he is driving home from a party while having a violent argument with his passenger) didn't lead the most laps, but led the one that mattered!"

[RAK]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

"Bernd Maylander wins the 2010 Monaco Grand Prix! A superb showing on only the 6th outing for the new-to-2010 Mercedes-Benz SLS, with the German driver managing to hold the F1 prototypes behind him. In a race riddled with incidents, thrills and spills, the veteran German driver (who always looks like he is driving home from a party while having a violent argument with his passenger) didn't lead the most laps, but led the one that mattered!"

The feel-good story of the year?

[Dom]

As a lawyer, I have to say that if rule 40.13 is being invoked, it is ridiculously poorly drafted. From what has happened with Schumacher, it is clear that the intention is that if the safety car is out on the last lap of the race, the race will be deemed to finish under safety car conditions, however the safety car will nevertheless enter the pits at the end of the lap. This is something that has no commonsense about it; on the contrary, commonsense says that whe the safety car pulls in, racing begins at the safety car control line; if the race is to finish under safety car conditions, what's wrong with having the safety car lead the field across the line? As rule 40.13 goes against commonsense, it needed to be made explicit that on the last lap, even if the safety car pulls in, the race is deemed to still be under safety car conditions.

The failure of the rules to state this means that there is an inherent ambiguity every time the safety car is out on the last lap. Is the race finishing under safety car conditions or not? Could there be times when the safety car pulls in and in fact the stewards, ignorant of the intent of the rules, are expecting a few-hundred metre dash to the finish and will allow moves like the one Schumacher pulled?

The more I look at the way the rule is drafted, the more ambiguity I see. Will elaborate more in the written review.

Indeed. Also, if they don't want people to overtake, why were they waving green flags? Green flags clearly mean that it's racing conditions and overtaking is allowed. If they had to pull the safety car in but didn't want any overtaking shouldn't they have finished the lap under waved yellows?

[Jordan192]

What's needed is a clear separation of terminology between "The Safety Car" and "Full Course Yellow Flags" (or somesuch). Using the words "Safety Car" to describe both the nullified state of the race, and the physical object policing it is just asking for trouble.

[Porrima]

There's an easy solution: why didn't just let the safety car cross the line before the rest of the field? That way we wouldn't see such an ambiguous situation.

Photo opportunities? Lame excuse.

The reason the safety car "can't" lead the drivers to the finish is precisely the photo opportunities, or more precisely, someone feels it's totally uncool and "detrimental to thee image of the sport" or some other such things that a winner doesn't cross the finish line first or that there's a procession finish.

Rule of cool and imagery and such.


This only slightly related, but as a finnish person I do watch cross-country skiing somewhat. In my youth, there were timed starts only. Skiers left in 30 second intervals. Then they, eventually, reached the checkpoints, and their times would be marked on the table. We saw them appear at a certain time, saw the time of the leader, and the seconds ticking off, the places they were compared to change lower and lower as they fell behind the leader. I always found it fascinating. People would have to ski hard since they didn't know how fast those behind them would come, like those who hadn't even started yet. I found the speculations of how fast this or that person would be at that checkpoint when he reached there fascinating.

Now, we almost completely have mass starts, all start at the same time, the first one arriving naturally wins. I do not watch those competitions. They are boring as all bathimplements. Imagine watching people ski in line for 2 hours for a 50 kilometers race, nothing happens at all - it's then decided few minutes before the end, based on who is the fastest to sprint to the line.
The change to mass starts was intensified before 2002 Salt Lake City winter olympics. The precise reason given?

"American TV audience can't understand that a competitor not arriving first to the goal is not necessarily the winner."

OY tempora.

The situation here is very different, but the basic reasoning of the ruling is in my opinion the same.

[mario]

As a lawyer, I have to say that if rule 40.13 is being invoked, it is ridiculously poorly drafted. From what has happened with Schumacher, it is clear that the intention is that if the safety car is out on the last lap of the race, the race will be deemed to finish under safety car conditions, however the safety car will nevertheless enter the pits at the end of the lap. This is something that has no commonsense about it; on the contrary, commonsense says that whe the safety car pulls in, racing begins at the safety car control line; if the race is to finish under safety car conditions, what's wrong with having the safety car lead the field across the line? As rule 40.13 goes against commonsense, it needed to be made explicit that on the last lap, even if the safety car pulls in, the race is deemed to still be under safety car conditions.

The failure of the rules to state this means that there is an inherent ambiguity every time the safety car is out on the last lap. Is the race finishing under safety car conditions or not? Could there be times when the safety car pulls in and in fact the stewards, ignorant of the intent of the rules, are expecting a few-hundred metre dash to the finish and will allow moves like the one Schumacher pulled?

The more I look at the way the rule is drafted, the more ambiguity I see. Will elaborate more in the written review.

Indeed. Also, if they don't want people to overtake, why were they waving green flags? Green flags clearly mean that it's racing conditions and overtaking is allowed. If they had to pull the safety car in but didn't want any overtaking shouldn't they have finished the lap under waved yellows?

What you're suggesting is very similar to what happened last year in Australia - there, the marshalls were still waving yellow flags as the drivers went through the last corner. Here, they decided to waive green flags, and this is what seems to have confused the matter. Technically, the green flag means that the track is clear (note that the green flag is waived to Whiting at the start of the race, from the back of the grid, to indicate that all the cars are in their positions, and that there are no obstructions, stalled cars or debris on the track), although normally, when it is used after a safety car, it is taken as meaning the race is going ahead as normal.
Now, we know that Mercedes is appealing the stewards decision (they can't appeal against the penalty - it is similar to what happened with Hamilton at Spa in 2008, where Mclaren couldn't appeal against the penalty). Perhaps they might be able to persuade the WMSC that the marshalls, or the clerk of the course, acted wrongly and mislead the team. However, I get the feeling that Mercedes will probably be unsuccessful in their appeal (although they might as well try). Hopefully, though, it'll force the FIA to rewrite the rules so this sort of thing can't happen again.

On another note, Williams have confirmed what caused the accidents of Nico and Rubens - in the case of Nico, the front wing uprights failed after he made contact with one of the HRT's, whilst Rubens was the victim of a rear suspension failure (they haven't confirmed exactly what broke, although they are focussing on a specific - but unmentioned - part). http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83706
Also, on a side note, there has been a slight sting in the tail for Mark this weekend - he has been fined €2,200, because he was caught doing 70.9kph in the pit lane as he left the pits to go to the grid. http://www.f1technical.net/news/14838

[RejectSteve]

This only slightly related, but as a finnish person I do watch cross-country skiing somewhat. In my youth, there were timed starts only. Skiers left in 30 second intervals. Then they, eventually, reached the checkpoints, and their times would be marked on the table. We saw them appear at a certain time, saw the time of the leader, and the seconds ticking off, the places they were compared to change lower and lower as they fell behind the leader. I always found it fascinating. People would have to ski hard since they didn't know how fast those behind them would come, like those who hadn't even started yet. I found the speculations of how fast this or that person would be at that checkpoint when he reached there fascinating.

Now, we almost completely have mass starts, all start at the same time, the first one arriving naturally wins. I do not watch those competitions. They are boring as all bathimplements. Imagine watching people ski in line for 2 hours for a 50 kilometers race, nothing happens at all - it's then decided few minutes before the end, based on who is the fastest to sprint to the line.

You could always switch over to biathlon. The sprint and individual are still timed starts.

[CarlosFerreira]

On another note, Williams have confirmed what caused the accidents of Nico and Rubens - in the case of Nico, the front wing uprights failed after he made contact with one of the HRT's,

Scary stuff me, who started watching F1 in the early 90's and just cannot, under any circumstance, get over the Ratzenberger crash. Feared for Felipe last week as well - Barcelona's turn 3 is a 250-plus km/h affair. What if his wing had failed, after contact with - again... - the HRT?

I know it's probably unfair and chance has a lot to do with it, but those HRTs have really been involved in quite an amount of incidents.

[mario]

On another note, Williams have confirmed what caused the accidents of Nico and Rubens - in the case of Nico, the front wing uprights failed after he made contact with one of the HRT's,

Scary stuff me, who started watching F1 in the early 90's and just cannot, under any circumstance, get over the Ratzenberger crash. Feared for Felipe last week as well - Barcelona's turn 3 is a 250-plus km/h affair. What if his wing had failed, after contact with - again... - the HRT?

I know it's probably unfair and chance has a lot to do with it, but those HRTs have really been involved in quite an amount of incidents.

They have unfortunately been in the wrong place at the wrong time on a few occasions, and being the slowest car, the speed differential between them and everybody else it at it's greatest - thankfully, though, whilst there have been a few accidents, nobody has been harmed (although we can't take that for granted).
On another note, it appears that Hill is calling for a reassessment of the role of the guest driver as part of the stewarding panel. It seems that Hill wasn't entirely happy, since he was being asked to take a more active role in interpreting the regulations then he was comfortable with. As a result, he is suggesting that the driver should take a reduced role instead. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83714

[DonTirri]

This only slightly related, but as a finnish person I do watch cross-country skiing somewhat. In my youth, there were timed starts only. Skiers left in 30 second intervals. Then they, eventually, reached the checkpoints, and their times would be marked on the table. We saw them appear at a certain time, saw the time of the leader, and the seconds ticking off, the places they were compared to change lower and lower as they fell behind the leader. I always found it fascinating. People would have to ski hard since they didn't know how fast those behind them would come, like those who hadn't even started yet. I found the speculations of how fast this or that person would be at that checkpoint when he reached there fascinating.

Now, we almost completely have mass starts, all start at the same time, the first one arriving naturally wins. I do not watch those competitions. They are boring as all bathimplements. Imagine watching people ski in line for 2 hours for a 50 kilometers race, nothing happens at all - it's then decided few minutes before the end, based on who is the fastest to sprint to the line.

You could always switch over to biathlon. The sprint and individual are still timed starts.

Or Rallying. Isn't that basically what they do there?

[mario]

Quick update - Mercedes have announced that they will not go ahead with their appeal against the stewards decision in Monaco. In return, the FIA has agreed to look at the now notorious rule 40.13, with the intention of changing the wording so this sort of incident will not happen again. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83721
Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

[CarlosFerreira]

Quick update - Mercedes have announced that they will not go ahead with their appeal against the stewards decision in Monaco. In return, the FIA has agreed to look at the now notorious rule 40.13, with the intention of changing the wording so this sort of incident will not happen again. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83721
Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

Oh my, they're all making sense! The F1 world is coming to an end!

[coops]

Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

Well, lets hope so! The last thing we want is F1 drivers driving fast when they see a green flag!!

[dr-baker]

Quick update - Mercedes have announced that they will not go ahead with their appeal against the stewards decision in Monaco. In return, the FIA has agreed to look at the now notorious rule 40.13, with the intention of changing the wording so this sort of incident will not happen again. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83721
Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

Oh my, they're all making sense! The F1 world is coming to an end!

No it's just that they realised that rule 40.13 received ROTR and so decided to do something about it so it can't happen again!

[mario]

Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

Well, lets hope so! The last thing we want is F1 drivers driving fast when they see a green flag!!

From a discussion that I saw elsewhere, it is worth pointing out that the green flag does not in itself mean that the race has restarted. Taking a look in Appendix H (where the FIA sets out the flag rules), the green flag actually has a different meaning. If a yellow flag has been shown somewhere on the track, the green flag is used to signal that the track is clear from that point onwards. There is also another important caveat; overtaking is not allowed between the yellow flag and the point where the green flag is being shown.

Appendix H
2.4.5.1 b)
Yellow flags should normally be shown only at the marshal post immediately preceding the hazard. In some cases, however, the Clerk of the Course may order them to be shown at more than one marshal post preceding an incident. Overtaking is not permitted between the first yellow flag and the green flag displayed after the incident.

Either way, though, hopefully we can draw a line under this, and look forwards to Turkey instead (and, of course, the return of a certain song for the podcast for the Turkish edition...).

[shinji]

Either way, though, hopefully we can draw a line under this, and look forwards to Turkey instead (and, of course, the return of a certain song for the podcast for the Turkish edition...).

Speaking of which...

Was this used before? If not, it needs to be.

[muttley]

Speaking of which...

Was this used before? If not, it needs to be.

great choice, shinji!
I prefer They Might Be Giants' version though

[coops]

Interestingly, La Gazzetta dello Sport hasnt updated its Motorsport webpage since its Spanish GP write-up. I wonder if our Italian F1 journos are that upset about the perceived poor performance of the home team that they've given up writing about them?

[muttley]

Interestingly, La Gazzetta dello Sport hasnt updated its Motorsport webpage since its Spanish GP write-up. I wonder if our Italian F1 journos are that upset about the perceived poor performance of the home team that they've given up writing about them?

No, they were probably too busy celebrating Inter winning the football championship and collecting the rants of Spinmeister Mourinho

[Debaser]

Speaking of which...

Was this used before? If not, it needs to be.

great choice, shinji!
I prefer They Might Be Giants' version though

Its damn hard to listen to Istanbul Not Constantinople without toe tapping or giggling throughout, its annoyingly catchy and cheesy.

[Myrvold]

From a discussion that I saw elsewhere, it is worth pointing out that the green flag does not in itself mean that the race has restarted. Taking a look in Appendix H (where the FIA sets out the flag rules), the green flag actually has a different meaning. If a yellow flag has been shown somewhere on the track, the green flag is used to signal that the track is clear from that point onwards. There is also another important caveat; overtaking is not allowed between the yellow flag and the point where the green flag is being shown.

Appendix H
2.4.5.1 b)
Yellow flags should normally be shown only at the marshal post immediately preceding the hazard. In some cases, however, the Clerk of the Course may order them to be shown at more than one marshal post preceding an incident. Overtaking is not permitted between the first yellow flag and the green flag displayed after the incident.

Either way, though, hopefully we can draw a line under this, and look forwards to Turkey instead (and, of course, the return of a certain song for the podcast for the Turkish edition...).

A green flag should not be shown under a SC what so ever, a SC is a full course yellow. If the safety car is coming in, and there is green flag, there are no way for the guys on track to know wheter they should be racing or not, if not, green flag means that you are permitted to race. A green flag cannot mean two things in a same situation. As a driver, you have to trust what you see, and to make it simple, and safe, flags means one thing each.

The line about no overtaking before you pass the green flag, does not count in this situation, because the whole course was green flagged

[LionZoo]

Although this entire affair has left a somewhat unpleasant after taste, at least this should prevent this sort of incident happening again.

Well, lets hope so! The last thing we want is F1 drivers driving fast when they see a green flag!!

From a discussion that I saw elsewhere, it is worth pointing out that the green flag does not in itself mean that the race has restarted. Taking a look in Appendix H (where the FIA sets out the flag rules), the green flag actually has a different meaning. If a yellow flag has been shown somewhere on the track, the green flag is used to signal that the track is clear from that point onwards. There is also another important caveat; overtaking is not allowed between the yellow flag and the point where the green flag is being shown.

Appendix H
2.4.5.1 b)
Yellow flags should normally be shown only at the marshal post immediately preceding the hazard. In some cases, however, the Clerk of the Course may order them to be shown at more than one marshal post preceding an incident. Overtaking is not permitted between the first yellow flag and the green flag displayed after the incident.

Either way, though, hopefully we can draw a line under this, and look forwards to Turkey instead (and, of course, the return of a certain song for the podcast for the Turkish edition...).

What is implicit is that once the green flag is out, passing is allowed again. Appendix H is for a local yellow situation and the green is used to signal when racing can start again.

[LionZoo]

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport ... 17788.html

Is this the year of the damaged chassis?

Edit: It's in the Turkish thread. However it is relevant to Monaco as well!

[Phoenix]

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport/story/17788.html

Is this the year of the damaged chassis?

Edit: It's in the Turkish thread. However it is relevant to Monaco as well!

Then, if he raced in both Spain and Monaco with a defective chassis, he would obviously have had a disadvantage. Christian Horner talks about form, but it seems to me more the effects of the chassis. And, the next question is, what about Webber in Turkey now that Vettel will have a new chassis?

[dr-baker]

Apparently, it looks like that there may well have been a loose drain cover after all, and it may have been the contributing factor towards Barrichello's retirement.

Autosport article: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83774

Blog with photos: http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/05/17/did- ... llo-crash/

[CarlosFerreira]

Apparently, it looks like that there may well have been a loose drain cover after all, and it may have been the contributing factor towards Barrichello's retirement.

Autosport article: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83774

Blog with photos: http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/05/17/did- ... llo-crash/

Whoa, this is really important! I am on the process of writing up the review of Williams' fortunes in the last 2 races, which me and Wizzie want to rady for the podcast, as this casts an entirely different light on the matter.

[mario]

http://en.espnf1.com/redbull/motorsport/story/17788.html

Is this the year of the damaged chassis?

Edit: It's in the Turkish thread. However it is relevant to Monaco as well!

Then, if he raced in both Spain and Monaco with a defective chassis, he would obviously have had a disadvantage. Christian Horner talks about form, but it seems to me more the effects of the chassis. And, the next question is, what about Webber in Turkey now that Vettel will have a new chassis?

Judging by the fact that Vettel says that he only experienced the problems in Monaco, I guess that it might go some way to explaining why he was off the pace there (although he was also complaining of problems with tyre graining, particularly on the super soft tyres, which has to be taken into account as well).
As for Turkey, I think that it'll be tight between the two drivers - Mark will be full of confidence, and he will be champing at the bit to make it three in a row, but Vettel has shown good form here in the past, and I guess that he will be looking forwards to the new chassis.

And I was going to post a link to the Autosport article about Rubens's crash being caused by that manhole cover, although dr-baker has beaten me to it - never mind. It is worrying, though, that there was more than one drain cover which was loose - thank goodness that the other one was off the racing line.

[dr-baker]

And I was going to post a link to the Autosport article about Rubens's crash being caused by that manhole cover, although dr-baker has beaten me to it - never mind. It is worrying, though, that there was more than one drain cover which was loose - thank goodness that the other one was off the racing line.

It was less than 10 minutes - close but no cigar!

But thank goodness it didn't do any other damage - how soon was the "drain-cover" safety car period after Rubens' crash?

[RejectSteve]

And I was going to post a link to the Autosport article about Rubens's crash being caused by that manhole cover, although dr-baker has beaten me to it - never mind. It is worrying, though, that there was more than one drain cover which was loose - thank goodness that the other one was off the racing line.

It was less than 10 minutes - close but no cigar!

But thank goodness it didn't do any other damage - how soon was the "drain-cover" safety car period after Rubens' crash?

I was under the impression that due to the downforce levels of the cars, the ACM welded drain covers and manholes in place.