Comments on: Renault Valencia ban lifted by FIA

By: Don Wilson

Don Wilson — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:28:20 +0000

Commonsense prevails,
Something that has always incensed me, but no one has ever mentioned, is why the FIA impose penalties at one Grand Prix that interferes, in advance, with the next race. Each country that puts on a Grand Prix has the sovereign right to have the best GP possible with all the drivers & cars competing.not only for the fans, local, & worldwide, to see the best possible action, but for the circuit owners to recuperate the vast amount they pay Bernie to put on the race.
Just one example,{There are many.} When Hamilton ran into the back of Raikonen because of the fault of the official who switched on the green light to allow pit stops, but left the exit red, DOH !! it was not Raikonen or Hamilton’s fault. In American racing, they switch both lights to green when the pits open, back to the point, not only did both drivers end there race there & then, because of this stupid error, but Hamilton gets a grid penalty for the next race, the French GP, so this penalty interferes in advance with the spectacle of Raikonen & Hamilton battling it out at the front.The race was a procession. So the FIA were interfering in advance with allowing the French to put on the best possible race.as well as interfering with the race results & the world champonship in advance, That’s it I have had my say.

By: Martin

Martin — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:00:54 +0000

obviously it does and has for a long time now.

By: Maksutov

Maksutov — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:22:08 +0000

I believe inconsistent punishments act as a better deterrent than consistent ones.

O.o!

At every juncture, they will ask themselves if a track position is worth so many $$$ – sometimes the answer may be yes, and other times no.

Are you now talking gibberish, little maybe?

What is appropriate to say now is:
How can the person making this comment possibly know this? haha..

eat bit of your own soup?.. hehe

anyway im not gonna be an #$% like you were, i think your comments albeit are driven by fuzzy feelings, they are indeed interesting

By: Maksutov

Maksutov — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:52:42 +0000

I believe inconsistent punishments act as a better deterrent than consistent ones.

aha!!! you believe do you!!?? LOL om%g..

By: Maksutov

Maksutov — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:50:55 +0000

& she also asks me whether these are real cars or just photographs of toys.

lol

By: Maksutov

Maksutov — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:49:25 +0000

in my opinion the fine shouldn’t have even been a financial one, nor one that relates to them being banned for the race.

The fine could have been related to the constructors points in some way. For example, the initial fine could have been that Renault will have part of its constructors points removed for the next race. Renault made a penalty when they allowed Alonso to keep driving the car around the track on 3 wheels. I think something relating to the removal or restriction of points for the next race could have been implemented.

By: patrickl

patrickl — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:35:45 +0000

The full verdict is out.

Renault admits their pit stop procedure is unsafe. Their procedure doesn’t allow for problems fitting the wheel nut retaining device. The gun man lifts his hand when he’s done fitting the wheel nut while another mechanic then still needs to finish securing the wheel nut retainer.

How can you say that with such a procedure you do not KNOWINGLY accept the fact that you take this risk?

By: spanky the wonder monkey

spanky the wonder monkey — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:28:13 +0000

prev poll i voted that a race ban was too harsh. this poll i voted too soft. a 50k fine is small change and serves no purpose. the logical decision would’ve been to apply a grid penalty of say 10 places.
what this does highlight is that there is no consistency between infringement and penalty and that is something that F1 / FIA should seriously look into.

the mechanic f’d up in saying he’d finished when he hadn’t. the suggestion that FA should’ve stopped when he realised something was wrong will go against every instinct a racing driver has. generally you’ll do whatever you can to nurse the car back to the pits / service to continue the fight. how many people have had miss-fires in their own cars and continued, either hoping it’ll clear or with a thought of “it’s not that far to xyz”? likewise brake fade / broken clutch cable / leaking cooling system etc.

By: Achilles

Achilles — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 05:27:03 +0000

I would argue that the Stewards decisions, and the FIA courts have shown nothing but inconsistency, this decision, while good for the Valencia box office, emphasizes more than ever the need for a permanent team of Stewards to be present at all GP’s, then needless appeals/courts could be avoided.

By: matt

matt — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:17:34 +0000

Although they shouldn’t have had a raceban, they should have had a more serious punishment than this.