Sidepodcast // All for F1 and F1 for all

Next race: Chinese Grand Prix, Shanghai

Malaysia 2013 - Rate the race // Rate the tense and unpredictable race at Sepang

Published by Christine Blachford

It was a race weekend we thought would be dominated by rain, but in fact, the action was overshadowed by all the drama within teams. Team orders, now legal, have caused friction on many an occasion, but behind all that, there was some great racing to behold - overtaking moves aplenty, changes of leader, and several incidents throughout.

Rate the Malaysian GP

Rate the Malaysian GP

139 votes

It was a race of thirds, really, with the first section intriguing for its retirements and squabbles for early position. The middle third quietened down, although there were still pit stop problems aplenty, and a few more retirements on top. The final third was where it all kicked off, team radio from frustrated drivers and placating race engineers, cars side by side for corner after corner. In summary, a frenetic race, but how does it rate amongst your favourites?

As mentioned above, the team orders situation became apparent at not one, but two teams this weekend. Mercedes and Red Bull both had to fight their drivers over the radio, to very different conclusions.

Rate Vettel's actions on Sunday

162 votes

Sebastian Vettel wasn't a popular figure on the podium, with teammate Mark Webber visibly distressed at the actions that had unfolded towards the end of the Malaysian Grand Prix. An apparent agreement between them was ignored, so that Webber lost the lead to his teammate, and the tension remained palpable throughout the post-race coverage. He has since apologised, but is that enough from the German triple champion?

Rate Mercedes' use of team orders

149 votes

Team orders overshadowed much of the racing at Sepang, with Nico Rosberg the unfortunate recipient of some bad news over the team radio. He was forced to hold station behind Lewis Hamilton, despite the latter having to drive slower and slower due to a worrying fuel situation. Rosberg dutifully complied, but were Mercedes being a bit too over-cautious?

As well as the relationship drama, there were also a lot of good drives throughout the field. Where would you place your driver of the day vote, those who managed their tyres well, those who fought for position on track, or someone else?

Who was your driver of the day in Malaysia?

  • Mark Webber

    66%
  • Lewis Hamilton

    4%
  • Nico Rosberg

    14%
  • Jean-Éric Vergne

    0%
  • Other

    16%

154 votes

Finally, a couple of items on the management of the weekend - from the FIA's insistence of including double DRS wherever possible, to the apparent lack of interest from stewards. They'll claim they have more information than we do, but I certainly saw a few things that could have done with investigating!

Were stewards vigilant enough with penalties?

105 votes

We saw quite a few seemingly unsafe releases in the pitlane, but only one of those was flagged up for investigation, and that was to be decided after the race. Were the stewards too busy looking in the other direction, or were the pit lane releases not as bad as they looked on TV? We haven't had much steward interference in the past two races, but should there have been more?

How did double DRS work out in Malaysia?

111 votes

The FIA are trying to bring at least two DRS zones to each circuit that they can, and Sepang was the latest to feature double DRS. Here we had two distinct zones, one immediately after the other. On occasion, we saw a driver take a position only to have it snatched right back in the following zone. Was double DRS in the right place in Malaysia, and was it the correct choice for this circuit?

You're welcome to vote anonymously, but on the flip side, feel free to share your choices and thoughts in the comments, as we analyse what was an intense weekend in Malaysia.

All content in the series Malaysia 2013




  • I have noticed over time some of these votes can be mis-interpreted. I think it would help make things clearer if each one had a note saying 1 means x and 5 means y

  • I have noticed over time some of these votes can be mis-interpreted. I think it would help make things clearer if each one had a note saying 1 means x and 5 means y

    For example?

  • For example?

    Eg Seb's behaviour, was he a 1-star person, or a 5-star idiot... (although people seem to have judged that one ok)

  • Man of the race has to be Jules Bianchi, only lapped once, miles (literally) ahead of his team mate and utterly wasted in the Marussia.

  • Man of the race has to be Jules Bianchi, only lapped once, miles (literally) ahead of his team mate and utterly wasted in the Marussia.

    He's certainly made a very good start to the year. I expect many paddock peeps are taking notice.

  • I'd give hats off to Hulkenberg too. It was his first full race of the season starting with less than ideal racing conditions, he was able to push and keep pace with the Lotus and a little with Massa for sections of the race despite all the while fighting the degradation of his tires which he commented on out loud during the race. I thought he did pretty good in coming up in 8th. Had a good scuttle with Kimi too who so far this season has proven to be racing very well.

  • For example?

    Take the Merc vote

    The headline says rate their use of team orders. 5 would mean we approve but 1 would mean we did not. The last line of the paragraph asks if they were over-cautious so 5 would mean they should not have used team orders where one would mean the opposite. So the vote could be interpreted either way and people could be voting either way

  • Okay, that's just bad writing then. 1 should always be bad and 5 good.

  • if you discount the almighty kerfuffle for positions 1-4. it wasn't a very exciting race was it?

    reckon it's a 3.

  • if you discount the almighty kerfuffle for positions 1-4. it wasn't a very exciting race was it?

    Yes it was. The whole swapping of places between Raikkonen, Massa and Hulkenberg. The pit stops of the Force India's. The unsafe release of Vergne into Pic. The dreadful incident of Alonso! The fact that Maldonado hasn't finished a race yet. The hilarity of Hamilton going into the Mclaren pit box!

    There was so much!!!

  • Yes it was. The whole swapping of places between Raikkonen, Massa and Hulkenberg. The pit stops of the Force India's. The unsafe release of Vergne into Pic. The dreadful incident of Alonso! The fact that Maldonado hasn't finished a race yet. The hilarity of Hamilton going into the Mclaren pit box!

    you sell it well. a four then.

    #wonover

  • you sell it well. a four then.

    #wonover

    I pride myself on my persuasion powers! :D

  • Webber had a decent start, for once.

    Alonso and his wing and the pits....what the heck happened there?

    Pit lane action was very exciting, some of the racing at the beginning and end was exciting.

    RBR drama made my blood boil, but it's more of the same Red BS from them. Diva Vettel rules that roost. The frustration & exasperation on Mark's face in the ready room at the end just made me so upset.

    I give it a 5 for emotion, but an overall 3 for the racing.

  • The frustration & exasperation on Mark's face in the ready room at the end just made me so upset.

    Yes, I agree. The race left a bitter taste. It wasn't a very satisfying end to what otherwise would have been an ok/good race.

  • The after-effects of team-orders:

    Hamilton: Felt sad :o(

    Rosberg: Felt sad :o(

    Webber: Felt angry & sad :o(

    Vettel: ?

  • It would have been a banner day for Team Orders if Massa and the two Lotus held the podium..... In another words, two major car crashes by team mates not obeying orders to hold station....

  • In the team orders front, I guess it is really easy to be humble after the fact when you are leading the point battle in your team......

    Looking at you, Hamilton and Vettel......

  • Webber knows what he's signed up for, though, and he is not as good as Vettel. I hope it doesn't get worse than this for his season....and that when he chooses to be done with F1 (or is pushed out) and goes to another race series he will be #1 there. It's a simple fan's wish.

  • I don't want to be blind to the facts on RBR, but it's painful and maddening to watch.

  • Webber knows what he's signed up for, though, and he is not as good as Vettel.

    The Schumacher legacy continues.

    One multiple-world champion german retires and another comes along who is also very quick but also has a 'win at all costs' attitude.

  • I have this vague memory of a team called Red Bull from around 2005-2009, they were a midfield team but a very happy team known for their celebratory spirit. Must have run out of money or something.

  • Webber knows what he's signed up for,

    Yes Mark knows, a team happy to have the drivers race. That's what they want. Thats the Red Bull image. But at the last pitstop the leading driver has the race, all other things being equal. Mark has followed those instructions before and would have expected SV to do the same. You know, sportsmanship!

  • Why no mention of what Ferrari and Alonso did? In light of the Vettel controversy, Ferrari's highly dangerous decision to leave Alonso out has been overlooked.

    (I appreciate there is a question about the stewards, but I feel it's not specific enough)

    Clearly Ferrari were hoping to delay the pitstop until it was time to change to slicks, but that front wing was dangerous, as we all saw.

    And with 20 cars behind him that could have been damaged by flying debris or an out of control car when the wing inevitably detached, why was the appropriate black/orange warning flag not shown?

    With no steering and reduced braking - because his front wheels were lifted off the ground - Alonso was a passenger with no control.

    In every aspect - aside from the final outcome - this was an exact copy of the incident that killed Roland Ratzenberger at Imola in 1994 (the day before Ayrton):

    Extract from Wikipedia :

    “He went off-track on the previous lap, damaging his front wing, but rather than come into the pits he continued since he was competing for the final grid spot. The high speed on the back straight, and therefore high downforce, finally broke the wing off, sending it under the car. His car failed to turn into the Villeneuve Corner”

    en.m.wikipedia.or…nberger#section_6

    Ferrari were foolish and/or negligent to leave Alonso out when everyone could tell exactly what was going to happen. They were lucky that they got away with it, but they should be ashamed of themselves, and the sport should take action to never let this happen again.

  • nicos drive was abit overrated, hamilton beat him hands down, nico was only there at the end when the team were asking lewis to slow down and save fuel. although given it was only for third they should have let nico through to see if he could hunt down the red bulls.

    seb was a different matter, that was for the win and given they told them both to slow down and save the engine and preserve the car he should have stayed behind mark. had it been a proper fight going at it 100% then it would have been fine to fight for the lead but given the current f1 climate and the need to save the car instead of pushing it to its limits then seb should have just played his part for the team.

    blame the rules for this current situation, this whole preserving the car, saving the tyres, saving for fuel, saving the engines and not pushing it to its limits really takes away from the racing abit.

  • And with 20 cars behind him that could have been damaged by flying debris or an out of control car when the wing inevitably detached, why was the appropriate black/orange warning flag not shown?

    Competely agree. Alonso and Ferrari were stupid and dangerous! Alonso was very close to Webber down the start/finish straight. I am surprised a team like Ferrari and a driver like Alonso would act in this way!

  • yep, stupid by ferrari, not only was it dangerous but stupid in terms of the race stratergy, it was always going to end in tears once he stayed out, better off bringing him in and seeing what he could do, these days its lot easier for the gun drivers to come through the field and still get good points for the championship. they might regret this at the end of the year.

  • nicos drive was abit overrated, hamilton beat him hands down, nico was only there at the end when the team were asking lewis to slow down and save fuel.

    but hamilton's car was lighter, as it started with less fuel. once fuel levels were equalised (near the end) the cars were back together.

  • I have this vague memory of a team called Red Bull from around 2005-2009, they were a midfield team but a very happy team known for their celebratory spirit. Must have run out of money or something.

    :)

  • Ferrari were foolish and/or negligent to leave Alonso out when everyone could tell exactly what was going to happen. They were lucky that they got away with it, but they should be ashamed of themselves, and the sport should take action to never let this happen again.

    that seems a bit over the top.

    there are two identical straights that make up the sepang circuit and alonso had already navigated one of those at full racing speed without incident. if the wing was going to break logic would suggest it would do so along the first straight and its collapse would have sent him into the pitlane (the decision to pit being made for him).

    as it was, the wing almost made it the entire way down the second straight too.

    yeah it was a gamble, but consider that alonso drove 95% of a that lap with a crocked front wing and didn't lose a single place. yep he lost ground to vettel, but only webber go close enough to pass on lap 2. that is bloody incredible driving and alone makes it worth the gamble in my eyes.

  • Incredible driving, no doubt. To stay in position with reduced downforce is no mean feat, albeit at lower speeds on a wet track.

    But I stand by my comments about it being dangerous and reckless, and the marshals should have shown the black/orange flag and forced Alonso to pit.

    That the wing was going to fail at some point was obvious to everyone, it was just a matter of time (maybe the aero loads on the first straight made the wing weaker, the second straight finishing the job?). But the ultimate consequence of the wing failure was a total gamble that should not have occurred.

    Had somebody suffered injury we would all rightfully be pointing the finger of blame for something that could have been avoided by pitying for repair - but blame should still be applied even though they they were lucky and got away with it

  • But I stand by my comments about it being dangerous and reckless, and the marshals should have shown the black/orange flag and forced Alonso to pit.

    the stewards were as useless as a chocloate teapot this weekend. no question, they may as well have not shown up on sunday.

    That the wing was going to fail at some point was obvious to everyone, it was just a matter of time

    agreed. but if it had lasted one more lap, or maybe two, that could've been enough to switch to dry tyres.

    Had somebody suffered injury we would all rightfully be pointing the finger of blame for something that could have been avoided by pitying for repair

    i'd argue that circuit safety did it's job yesterday. the graveltrap did what it was designed to do.

    ferrari weren't 'negligent' because no-one flagged the car. they didn't ignore any safety advice they just went racing.

  • i'd argue that circuit safety did it's job yesterday. the graveltrap did what it was designed to do.

    And for that we should be thankful. But when the wing broke - something that could have been prevented if they'd pitted - we had no idea what the outcome would be.

    ferrari weren't 'negligent' because no-one flagged the car. they didn't ignore any safety advice they just went racing.

    Would that argument hold for a car that was on fire?

    Does it take a Marshall to show a flag before you take matters into your own hands?

    They could see with their own eyes that the wing was damaged, and work out for themselves that it would break - just like you and I could.

    But nobody could tell in advance what the consequences would be, and it could have been very serious even with the massive improvements in circuit and car safety since Ratzenberger died

    Safety is everyone's responsibility, and no team or driver should need to wait for a flag when something is totally obvious like that.

    To knowingly continue with a dangerous and disintegrating car is negligent and there is no excuse.

  • Would that argument hold for a car that was on fire?

    depends. kimi once trundled down the pitlane, caught fire and then carried on happily. not really sure what a fire has to do with anything though.

    They could see with their own eyes that the wing was damaged, and work out for themselves that it would break - just like you and I could.

    but you didn't know when it would break. if ever. you know now, obviously.

    To knowingly continue with a dangerous and disintegrating car is negligent and there is no excuse.

    was it dangerous, was it disintegrating?

    the front wing upright had become partially detached from it's nose mounting, additionally the lowered end plate had brushed on the asphalt.

  • Fire is relevant because its a dangerous thing that we can all see with our own eyes, and work out with a high degree of accuracy what will happen next - without needing to wait for a Marshall to wave a flag before we take it into our own hands to do something about it.

    So it's just like Alonso's broken wing in that we could all see with our own eyes - on the balance of probability, and with a high degree of accuracy - that it was going to break, even if there was no flag.

    And if we could see that, Ferrari could see it too - without waiting for a flag.

    I accept that we didn't know when it would break, if ever. But the flip side is that we didn't know that it would hold together, or for how long.

    We know now that it would/did break but is that hindsight, or was it foresight because it was the most likely (and correct) outcome.

    Is it worth the gamble? What if you lost that gamble, and the worst consequences occurred?

    Maybe I'm erring on the side of caution, but the opposite of caution is recklessness, and indeed possibly negligence should the worst happen.

    Was it dangerous? Yes it was, but they got away with it this time. Next time though?

    Was it disintegrating? At the end if the straight, yes it was.

    Consider that we now have rules about stopping when a wheel isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed (a Marshall in Australia) and could do so again. Well teams should also have a responsibility to stop (or pit) if a front wing isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed and could do so again.

    But it shouldn't need to wait for a new regulation, or a flag.

    Ferrari could have acted, and they should have acted. But they made a conscious decision not to act.

    I wonder what Mr & Mrs Ratzenberger would think...

  • Consider that we now have rules about stopping when a wheel isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed (a Marshall in Australia) and could do so again. Well teams should also have a responsibility to stop (or pit) if a front wing isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed and could do so again.

    the difference is, there is a rule for the former and not for the latter (probably with good reason). if you feel that strongly maybe you should petition the fia?

  • In every aspect - aside from the final outcome - this was an exact copy of the incident that killed Roland Ratzenberger at Imola in 1994 (the day before Ayrton):

    Very good point about how potentially dangerous it was. You have to wonder why he wasn't black flagged. Ferrari were standing in the pit with a front wing so they may have called in Alonso and he decided to stay out.

    Unfortunately this kind of accident is always likely as long as carbon wings are allowed.

  • i'd argue that circuit safety did it's job yesterday. the graveltrap did what it was designed to do.

    Circuit safety should be a last resort like crash helmets. Circuit safety only worked because he went off himself on a clear bit of track. If the wing had let go in a braking zone with cars in front of them he could have been launched over them.

    I think it was a stupid decision by the team/driver not to pit immediately.

  • Ferrari were standing in the pit with a front wing so they may have called in Alonso and he decided to stay out.

    noooope.

    "At that time, we felt the front wing could hold out and on a track that was progressively drying out, we risked leaving him out. With hindsight, it did not work out." - Domenicali

    formula1.ferrari.…enicali-turn-page

    "We knew the front wing was damaged but the car still seemed to be competitive and we decided to run the risk of staying out. We definitely could have played safe and called him in, but that way we would have ended up behind everyone on rain tyres and would have lost even more ground with the next stop to fit dry tyres" - Fry

    formula1.ferrari.…ry-with-hindsight

  • Consider that we now have rules about stopping when a wheel isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed (a Marshall in Australia) and could do so again. Well teams should also have a responsibility to stop (or pit) if a front wing isn't attached properly, because in the past it has killed and could do so again.

    but you didn't know when it would break. if ever. you know now, obviously.

    I think it was quite clear that it was not going to last long with one side dragging on the ground and twisting the one support it was hanging from. Those posts are designed to be strong only in an up and down direction ie in tension or compression. It has minimal strength when twisted and will break quickly.

    "At that time, we felt the front wing could hold out and on a track that was progressively drying out, we risked leaving him out. With hindsight, it did not work out." - Domenicali

    I hadn't seen that. Stupid decision by Ferrari and not just in hindsight

  • I think it was quite clear that it was not going to last long with one side dragging on the ground and twisting the one support it was hanging from. Those posts are designed to be strong only in an up and down direction ie in tension or compression. It has minimal strength when twisted and will break quickly.

    conversely what a hero he/they would have looked if it had lasted another lap and he could have made slicks work. the win was still on.

  • conversely what a hero he/they would have looked if it had lasted another lap and he could have made slicks work. the win was still on.

    A hero he may have been, but only until another team tries to do the same and fails. If Alonso's accident had happened elsewhere, it could have had worse implications.

  • But I stand by my comments about it being dangerous and reckless, and the marshals should have shown the black/orange flag and forced Alonso to pit

    Not really time - they were probably taken by surprise as we were.

    there are two identical straights that make up the sepang circuit and alonso had already navigated one of those at full racing speed without incident. if the wing was going to break logic would suggest it would do so along the first straight and its collapse would have sent him into the pitlane (the decision to pit being made for him).

    The wing failed as soon as Webber pulled in front of Alonso (disturbed the airflow), plus the wing had been dragged along the ground for an extra 200m.

    Maybe Ferrari had tested the scenario, and thought it was OK, but I doubt it. Back in the early 80s, continuing with damaged cars was questionable - less so in the 21st Century.

  • Sorry if this has been mentioned before or elsewhere - but Webbers final stop seemed to come very suddenly - did he jump in the pits a lap early to avoid being jumped by Vettel?

    Was the order 'turn the engines down' or 'not to fight'? because there is a difference, and was this given because they feared Webber would fight to hard to defend (having effectively disobeyed a pit call) rather a wish to simply bring the cars home?

  • Maybe Ferrari had tested the scenario, and thought it was OK, but I doubt it. Back in the early 80s, continuing with damaged cars was questionable - less so in the 21st Century.

    It was a different matter with aluminium wings. I know I have said before Gilles could drive anything but here is another example.

    www.youtube.com/w…tch?v=9SmrV-FFC1w

  • Was the order 'turn the engines down' or 'not to fight'? because there is a difference.../blockquote>My understanding of multi-21 is that it tells the drivers to finish in the order #2car then #1car... ie Webber to lead them home.

  • Commenting fail.

    Was the order 'turn the engines down' or 'not to fight'? because there is a difference...

    My understanding of multi-21 is that it tells the drivers to finish in the order #2car then #1car... ie Webber to lead them home.

  • My understanding of multi-21 is that it tells the drivers to finish in the order #2car then #1car... ie Webber to lead them home.

    huh. genius.

  • But the 'multi' part suggests there are options...

  • But the 'multi' part suggests there are options...

    sounds like it means there are two cars still running?

  • I would also add, that Vettel probably has not heard 'multi-21' before. must have confused the poor chap.

  • sounds like it means there are two cars still running?

    I assumed it meant turn the multi-position switch to 21 which would be a lean fuel mixture or similar

  • sounds like it means there are two cars still running?

    I would also add, that Vettel probably has not heard 'multi-21' before. must have confused the poor chap.

    I'm guessing that Mark has heard multi-12 soo many times before that he's lost count.

  • With regards the possibility of black and orange flags, they tend to be shown at the start line only. By which time it was too late for Alonso anyway.

  • With regards the possibility of black and orange flags, they tend to be shown at the start line only. By which time it was too late for Alonso anyway.

    digiflags can display black/orange electronic flags all the way around the track.

    www.digiflag.it/i…/en/digiflag.html

    not sure if that's the same system f1 uses, but there's no reason any other system couldn't do the same.

  • digiflags can display black/orange electronic flags all the way around the track.

    actually, scrub that. it's only installed on the start/finish straight.

    "The Black Flag Panel panel will be installed on the start/finishing line bridge thanks to special steel supports."

  • And with 20 cars behind him that could have been damaged by flying debris or an out of control car when the wing inevitably detached, why was the appropriate black/orange warning flag not shown?

    Competely agree. Alonso and Ferrari were stupid and dangerous! Alonso was very close to Webber down the start/finish straight. I am surprised a team like Ferrari and a driver like Alonso would act in this way!

    Bah! Maybe in any other F1 car. But it is not dangerous in a Ferrari. For it to be maybe considered to be dangerous in a Ferrari, the nose has to be in a worse shape than broken completely off the mountings, hanging on by threads, obsuring the driver's vision, on a soaking wet track under race conditions in a rainy day and the driver must do at least three complete laps in that state.

    I have proof: www.youtube.com/w…tch?v=9SmrV-FFC1w

    Oh yes, the driver uder these paratmeters came in third place, without the nose of his car, let alone the wings....

  • I have proof: www.youtube.com/w…tch?v=9SmrV-FFC1w

    Points for me

    sidepodcast.com/p…e#comment-3122970

  • The only way you could have make the idea to pit in to fix the nose instead of going around again for the track to dry was to put Alonso on Hard Slicks at the time the nose gets changed.. Like that was going to work.

    Not putting on tires at all would have cost Ferrari around 23 seconds, our the entire length of the field, and in all likelyhold, last place when everyone came out on their first run dry tires too.

    Ferrari would have better off, - every other part of the car wise, just to park it in the garage.

    Now, if the wing holds until the planned pit window. Everything is possible.

  • Hmmm, well, if any of you wondered what it would be like to drive on a F1 circuit on a proper winter's day....

    Here's Circuit Gilles Villeneuve on a typical February day

    www.youtube.com/w…amp;v=gZcX5H8aaeU

    Gotta be Jackie approved... :P

  • Ferrari would have better off, - every other part of the car wise, just to park it in the garage.

    Now, if the wing holds until the planned pit window. Everything is possible.

    agreed. it was worth the gamble.

  • I can't add any more insight to some excellent opinions here. Needless to say I'm annoyed at the following things:

    - Vettel for his spoilt petulance (the Smiley Schumi)

    - Webber for not having enough 'Aussie Grit' to fight back

    - Fans of both sides (not here) using selective arguments and insults to back their man

    - Horner for having no ***** to order Vettel to follow team orders

    - The soap opera aspect of all of this, perpetrated by the cameras in the green room before the podium

    - Both Red Bull and Mercedes for turning the top 4 into a procession.

    - The fact that even after all these artificial interventions for the sake of the show, things have gone so far that way that we have drivers too afraid to push for the sake of hurting the car.

    Honestly, I really don't understand what I am watching anymore. Yes, cars can overtake (but there's little skill in it and after two years, they still don't know how to set it right) and we have a much better product than we did in 2010, but at the same time, there's little strategy and we can never tell who is fastest. I am not even sure what I am seeing could even be called Formula 1, to be honest...

  • Oh, and if you haven't read Joe Saward's and Will Buxton's articles on these, you really should:

    joesaward.wordpre…from-shakespeare/

    willthef1journo.w…smiling-assassin/

  • willthef1journo.w…smiling-assassin/

    "When it became obvious his demand had fallen on deaf ears, did he transmit the severity of his feelings and that his orders were to be followed? No. He weakly asked his driver to stop being silly. He treated him like a naughty child."

    love that. the biggest casualty from sunday's events was horner. he lost all authority in space of 5 laps then sent newey into the lions den while he watched from a safe distance.

    pathetic really.

  • - The fact that even after all these artificial interventions for the sake of the show, things have gone so far that way that we have drivers too afraid to push for the sake of hurting the car.

    that's not true. the problem is red bull tear up their tyres and mercedes aren't going to get many opportunities to back a 3-4 result.

    if fernando had made it past lap one, or button past his fluffed pit stop, or if kimi hadn't made a daft mistake in qualifying, none of the top four cars would've been allowed to rest like they were. what are the chances of that happening at another race this year?

  • love that. the biggest casualty from sunday's events was horner. he lost all authority in space of 5 laps then sent newey into the lions den while he watched from a safe distance.

    Joe called him a Muppet in his comments. I also love the fact that

    " One team boss I spoke to after the race said that if Vettel had been his driver, he would have called him into the pits just to make the point that it is the team, rather than the driver, who calls the shots. The other thing I heard was that Red Bull’s F1 consultant Dr Helmut Marko was very unhappy about what happened, perhaps because he realises that the team’s credibility (and his own) is being undermined."

    I do hope this is the catalyst for the breaking up of Red Bull, Vettel and whoever else, as I really dislike the way they all operate. If it wasn't for Newey, they'd be nowhere.

  • I do hope this is the catalyst for the breaking up of Red Bull, Vettel and whoever else, as I really dislike the way they all operate. If it wasn't for Newey, they'd be nowhere.

    interesting comparison is that horner and brawn both gave the same orders, but horner was ignored. if i were in charge of red bull i'd be thinking about brawn to replace horner before the end of the season.

  • if fernando had made it past lap one, or button past his fluffed pit stop, or if kimi hadn't made a daft mistake in qualifying, none of the top four cars would've been allowed to rest like they were. what are the chances of that happening at another race this year?

    Over 17 races? I'm dreading a few already. Some tracks could be really dull if we are not careful.

    interesting comparison is that horner and brawn both gave the same orders, but horner was ignored. if i were in charge of red bull i'd be thinking about brawn to replace horner before the end of the season.

    Judging by the fact that niki lauda was seen to be very annoyed at brawn for what happened, I can see that switch. Horner lost all credibility for me last Sunday.

  • Over 17 races? I'm dreading a few already. Some tracks could be really dull if we are not careful.

    simple answer, check the rating on sidepodcast then decide if it's worth watching (or watch the highlights) :)

    19 races is a year is too many for any average fan to watch anyhow. embrace your PVR.

  • - The soap opera aspect of all of this, perpetrated by the cameras in the green room before the podium

    You see, I absolutely loved that bit. The raw emotion, face to face, out in the open. Webber aghast, Vettel confused, Newey awkwardly in the middle. Difficult to watch, and upsetting for Webber fans no doubt, but absolutely fascinating.

    So many of the brief rivalries we have are played out as a war of words. Someone says something in the heat of the moment, the other person is interviewed and says something else, an apology plays out behind closed doors and everyone is happy again. Here, we are at least getting to see something, embrace the confrontation, evaluate it with our own eyes. More than anything, it's a much-needed sign that the drivers care more about their sport than we usually get to see with their corporate drone PR fronts.

    It's going to be a long time before F1 can be accused of showing too much of the human side.

  • - The fact that even after all these artificial interventions for the sake of the show, things have gone so far that way that we have drivers too afraid to push for the sake of hurting the car.

    For most of the history of F1 drivers have not been able to push for the whole race. The difference now is that we all have timing screens and access to team radio.

    love that. the biggest casualty from sunday's events was horner. he lost all authority in space of 5 laps then sent newey into the lions den while he watched from a safe distance.

    Can you imagine if that had been Ron Dennis on the radio? I just can't imagine Ron saying "Sebastian, that is silly" He would have been telling him to give back the position immediately.

    The current batch of team principals simply don't have the authority of their predecessors. Whitmarsh, Stefanano, Eric Pineapple just don't have the authority of Ron, Todt or Flavio. Jaguar was such a mess that no-one really had any authority there so the last person to run that team as an independent was Jackie Stewart. Horner vs JYS - not much of a contest.

    interesting comparison is that horner and brawn both gave the same orders, but horner was ignored. if i were in charge of red bull i'd be thinking about brawn to replace horner before the end of the season.

    I think the different outcome has as much to do with who the drivers are as to who the team principals are. The other aspect is that Vettel has always operated over Horner's head to Marko or Mateschitz so Horner's position has been compromised from the outset.

    You see, I absolutely loved that bit. The raw emotion, face to face, out in the open. Webber aghast, Vettel confused, Newey awkwardly in the middle. Difficult to watch, and upsetting for Webber fans no doubt, but absolutely fascinating.

    I couldn't wait for them to get in that room to see what would happen. It used to be that something like that would happen then the drivers would dissapear for 5 minutes before they appeared on the podium. I love that the teams can no longer get in and sort their drivers out before they appear in public.

  • "...He treated him like a naughty child."

    Busted. He's been carrying on all this time trying to manage as everyone's friend, rather than doing a proper job. It seems he's been playing at being team principle and when the proverbial hit the fan he wasn't up to the task. Somebody book a managerial training course in the name of one C. Horner.

  • It's going to be a long time before F1 can be accused of showing too much of the human side.

    I am all for more of the human side, especially the honest side of the drivers (as it seems a few of them have built a likeable character in order to apologise for ruthlessness on track), but the way that green room was set up felt a bit tacky to me - like they were hoping for a scuffle for the ratings or something. They seem to have this in NASCAR at the moment and its a bit too much for me.

    I couldn't wait for them to get in that room to see what would happen. It used to be that something like that would happen then the drivers would dissapear for 5 minutes before they appeared on the podium. I love that the teams can no longer get in and sort their drivers out before they appear in public.

    What did you honestly expect to see though? They know they are on camera so they would think very carefully before they spoke. It's all very orchestrated, even if it feels raw...

    19 races is a year is too many for any average fan to watch anyhow. embrace your PVR.

    Maybe the reason i am so annoyed is that I have so little free time with my job, my 7 month o,d and the fact we are moving house next week that I want to spend it the best way possible. Therefore I can't afford to see things I don't enjoy.

  • What did you honestly expect to see though? They know they are on camera so they would think very carefully before they spoke. It's all very orchestrated, even if it feels raw...

    I just wanted to see how the drivers would behave and how they would deal with each other. I was expecting Horner to be in there trying to sort things out without anything being broadcast

  • I just wanted to see how the drivers would behave and how they would deal with each other. I was expecting Horner to be in there trying to sort things out without anything being broadcast

    Horner should have been there. He's lost the plot. Meanwhile brawn asserts his authority and rosberg thanks him for the privilege!

  • Therefore I can't afford to see things I don't enjoy.

    who can?

  • Horner should have been there. He's lost the plot. Meanwhile brawn asserts his authority and rosberg thanks him for the privilege!

    heh. true story.

  • Horner should have been there. He's lost the plot. Meanwhile brawn asserts his authority and rosberg thanks him for the privilege!

    Not sure I'd call Rosberg's reaction "thanks"...

  • For most of the history of F1 drivers have not been able to push for the whole race. The difference now is that we all have timing screens and access to team radio.

    I agree. But would you not also agree the rules we have now were designed to stop no-overtaking processions? Because it seems like if we get a situation like Sunday, they fail a bit...

  • Therefore I can't afford to see things I don't enjoy.

    who can?

    Exactly. I'm not suggesting anyone can though. I just get a sense with 19 races from March to November that the product has got a little bit too diluted?

  • Exactly. I'm not suggesting anyone can though. I just get a sense with 19 races from March to November that the product has got a little bit too diluted?

    depends how entertaining the races are. i enjoyed the first two rounds, but if vettel hadn't made the final third interesting last sunday my opinion might be different.

    for me, drs + pirelli's are making races this season worth waking up for, but that doesn't mean it'll appeal to everyone. i was hovering around a 3 out of 5 for malaysia, but went with a 4. if it was a one or two and that happened several events in a row, then it'd be time to switch back to highlights :)

  • I agree. But would you not also agree the rules we have now were designed to stop no-overtaking processions? Because it seems like if we get a situation like Sunday, they fail a bit...

    Since the late 70s/early80s they have been trying to write rules that stop processions but as long as downforce is involved they will always happen at times. When you have two cars following each other and the second car loses performance through corners because of the affect on its front wing of the dirty air from the car in front you get far too much difficulty in overtaking.

    The real problem on Sunday was that potentially competitive cars dropped out leaving 2 Red Bulls then a gap to two Mercs. In that situation teams will always call of the fight and bank the points.

  • for me, drs + pirelli's are making races this season worth waking up for, but that doesn't mean it'll appeal to everyone.

    It's not that it doesn't appeal - I applied the measures they are taking. I just think they have gone too far in some races.

    The real problem on Sunday was that potentially competitive cars dropped out leaving 2 Red Bulls then a gap to two Mercs. In that situation teams will always call of the fight and bank the points.

    I agree. Didn't make for good viewing though.

  • I agree. Didn't make for good viewing though.

    i enjoyed it... in an "i can't believe this is happening" kind of way.

    where were you the day that vettel showed his true colours. i was right here :)

Comments closed to new entries.