Comments on: Luca di Montezemolo is right: F1’s safety car rules are humiliating for the sport

By: bernification

bernification — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 00:21:09 +0000

This rule was introduced because of drivers failing to drive safely- the FIA are just responding to the drivers behaviour.

I remember Alonsos crash very well and thought at the time that it was a very irresponsible way to drive- had there been any marshalls on circuit he would have totalled them.
So really, it’s a responce to the drivers behaviour, and in this win at all cost mentality any time someone can take an advantage out of a situation, they will.

The FIA are just trying to maintain the safety of there marshalls.

By: Pingguest

Pingguest — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 07:49:17 +0000

We don’t need the Safety Car in my opinion. Just introduce a full-course yellow on the first lap after an accident and then a maximum speed for the following laps.

By: Steve K

Steve K — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:23:20 +0000

In the IRL you can pit when pit lane is closed only to get fuel if you are otherwise going to run out–just a splash. You cannot get new tires and you cannot make changes to the car. Such a rule would have certainly have helped Rosberg and Kubica.

By: Chaz

Chaz — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:54:11 +0000

The pit lane closure rule under the safety car is completely ridiculous. We are led to believe these are all professional teams and there are a whole host of pit lane rules, so surely the drivers and teams should just be allowed to get on with racing and not be penalized for their car running out of fuel at the wrong time.

mmmmm incidentally and I wonder what Ferrari sales are like in that part of the world…

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:53:37 +0000

Closing the pitlane is nothing to do with protecting the safety car. It’s all about stopping drivers from racing back to the pits through yellow flag zones, when there may be debris or marshalls on the track.

Did this happen before the current rules came in? Yes, at the 2003 Brazilian GP Fernando Alonso was doing exactly this and crashed heavily on the debris from Mark Webber’s Jaguar, which had gone off in a big way just before the pits.

If the pitlane is closed as soon as the safety car has gone out, there’s no incentive to get back to the pits ASAP. But the pits aren’t physically closed, so cars can still come into refuel albeit with a ten second stop go penalty. It’s this rule that ruins races, not the safety car generally.

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:57:12 +0000

most all sports have bad rules. they are the one’s spicing up the game.

That’s a nugget of pure truth right there!

By: CD

CD — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:49:02 +0000

oh sorry about that Keith, i thought were talking about the safety car rules as a whole. In this case, affected parties may appeal. but don’t expect FIA will consider it. most all sports have bad rules. they are the one’s spicing up the game.

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:41:40 +0000

CD – What I’m talking about here is the ‘pit lane closure’ rule, which didn’t affect Ferrari at all. It only affects a tiny number of drivers per season but it usually destroys their races when it does.

By: CD

CD — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:38:59 +0000

Keith

But that’s also the point: “it’s randomly happening.” so i think it was fair enough. it’s part of racing. I am a ferrari fan, in this case i must say that it didn’t go well for ferrari due to the safety car issues, but i didn’t mind. It’s part of the game, sometimes the ball goes your way, sometimes not. It’s random anyway.

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:23:59 +0000

Cd –

Since everybody were affected by the bad rule, I guess there should be an acceptance from all teams.

But that’s the point: not everybody has been affected by the rules. They only affect occasional drivers entirely at random.

Some people would argue “it doesn’t matter because it the long run each driver and team will be affected”, but it doesn’t work that way because safety car periods don’t happen often enough in F1 (unlike, say, NASCAR or Indy Car).

By: CD

CD — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:22:34 +0000

Keith,

maybe he is… indirectly.

sorry for the of topic again.

By: CD

CD — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:20:55 +0000

Here’s my take

Since everybody were affected by the bad rule, I guess there should be an acceptance from all teams. Rules are still rules, everybody should obey them even if they are bad rules. If you can’t obey/accept them… get lost! Look for other races not governed by FIA. FIA made the rules, if you hate FIA then you hate the rules (maybe not all of them).

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:20:20 +0000

CD – True, but he was hardly “bashing Ferrari” was he? Let’s keep the discussion to the point – which is the safety car rules – and not squabbling about which teams people like.

By: CD

CD — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:05:19 +0000

Keith, i think you missed this

Post #49 Eddie Irvine 1 October 2008 at 6:33 pm

“Sorry for being out of the subject but in many situations(festivals, open concerts…etc) the organaizers manage to keep the rain out of the show by many ways .One I am familiar with is bombarding the clouds with helicopters.I suppose that F1 organaizers have this power to do this. So it is very likely singapore organaizers to did this in order to avoid a terrible accident in this dangerous race or somehow to help ferrari….”

By: the limit

the limit — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:50:25 +0000

The rules concerning pitstops made under safety car conditions are bad, and deserve changing, but I find Di Montezemolo’s comments hard to take. After the highly charged and controversial race at Spa, he openly claimed that ‘justice’ had been served, and the ‘correct’ decision had been made. Correct for Ferrari maybe, but correct for Formula One?
I can just imagine his poison being vented if it had been Raikkonen or Massa demoted from the top step, after one of the best races in years. I can remember that he also had little to say after the debacle of Austria 2002, inwhich his team insisted that Rubens Barrichello surrender his lead in favour of Schumacher.
And of course, last year’s spy scandal, inwhich he took every opportunity available to him to pour petrol on the flames.
At the end of the day, Raikkonen crashed out and Massa had his pitstop screwed up, end of story. The pitstop at Singapore affected everybody’s race, including Lewis Hamilton, who also lost track position badly through pitting.
It is quite distastefull to have Ferrari lecturing us on the morals of Formula One, and what is good for the sport. What is truly good for the sport, and the mark of ‘true’ champions, is to take defeat on the chin and win the next three grands prixs. Then I will respect Ferrari and Di Montezemolo’s opinion all the more.
As for the rules, it is absolutely disgusting what happened to Kubica and Rosberg, and has nothing to do with safety. If you can remember three years ago, teams were not even allowed to change tyres, a factor that played a big part in that seasons championship, and contributed massively to Kimi Raikkonen’s crash at the Nurburgring.
Formula One has only a twenty car field spread, unlike NASCAR with around forty cars involved. In almost every instance, in NASCAR, the pitstops are made under safety car conditions to avoid losing out track position. Granted, each car has its own pit stall, unlike F1, but in the most part the pitcrews involved are rarely in any real danger.
The problem with the FIA, is that they change the rules too much, and in the main, it has a negative affect on the racing. One thing is for certain, as Keith pointed out, that if these rules are not changed, we will see a driver lose a championship due to them, and not due to an on track error. And when that happens, it will make Spa 2008 look like very small
potatoes indeed!

By: Rooster

Rooster — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:42:44 +0000

So let’s get re-fueling banned. Can we also get the required prime/option tire switch tossed out as well? I’m a bit of an F1 newbie, but what’s the purpose of that requirement anyway?

Seems like this would solve numerous problems, so therefore it can’t possibly happen!

By: ceedas

ceedas — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:42:49 +0000

Nothing is going to change this year, and the solution for next year is already in place (pit lane open, but a speed limit is imposed in the section of the track where any accident has occurred), it just needs to be tested until everyone’s happy with it. This way, you don’t get drivers ploughing flat-out into debris of another accident, and the marshals are a bit safer too.

As I understand it currently, any speeding in that section (within the usual tolerance) would result in a drive-through or similar.

By: beneboy

beneboy — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:23:43 +0000

Jess, an individual pit (maybe even an individual crew too) would allow drivers to pit more safely without getting held up by their team mate.

Would allow them to pit at the same time in normal conditions too.

I don’t think there’s enough space at most tracks though and it would cost a lot to redevelop them.

I started watching NASCAR occasionally a few years ago and I was surprised at how big their pit lanes are and bet F1 teams wish they had that much space most races.

An oval is much easier to watch than a circuit so the F1 stewards are using TV film to judge most penalties.

So no hate mail yet, I agree but don’t think it’s possible :~)

By: Jess

Jess — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:12:50 +0000

F1 needs to take a page from NASCAR (I can see this getting me hate mail). F1 I have noticed takes its sweet time figureing things out. Penalties take 2 to 3 laps to decided or at the end of a race. NASCAR gives the penalty right then right now. I thought it was a good race but I frist started seeing racing in NASCAR so seeing a safty car decide some races is not new to me. I think part of the problem is the one pit for two cars. If they had a crew for two cars hey there would be no problem. Just my 2cents.

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:07:06 +0000

aa – Eddie didn’t say anything about Ferrari. There’s no need to make this personal.