2022 - McLaren Formula 1 Team

[diffuser]

On another note, What's the difference between what happened between Russel and Sainz in COTA and Ricciardo and K-Mag in Brazil? Why such a difference in penailties? Why does Ricciardo get a 3 place grid penalty when he "technically" retired himself from the race. While Russel, who also took out the car he hit, just gets a 5 second stop and go penality and is allowed to finish 5th? Did the Stewards not watch the COTA race? This kind of shiit drives me crazy.


I think McLaren should challenge.

Ric retired so he could not be punished in this race (by 5-10s penalty), therefore he gets 3 grid drop next GP. Standard stuff.

Think that's silly. Once you've determined that the driver wasn't driving recklessly, just confirm his guilt. Says something like "he would have gotten a whatever penalty had he stayed in the race but since he's out, we'll leave it as that". Otherwise, the next incident like Russel and Sainz happens, just retire Russel and give him a 3 place grid drop for the next race.

[SmallSoldier]

On another note, What's the difference between what happened between Russel and Sainz in COTA and Ricciardo and K-Mag in Brazil? Why such a difference in penailties? Why does Ricciardo get a 3 place grid penalty when he "technically" retired himself from the race. While Russel, who also took out the car he hit, just gets a 5 second stop and go penality and is allowed to finish 5th? Did the Stewards not watch the COTA race? This kind of shiit drives me crazy.


I think McLaren should challenge.

Ric retired so he could not be punished in this race (by 5-10s penalty), therefore he gets 3 grid drop next GP. Standard stuff.

Think that's silly. Once you've determined that the driver wasn't driving recklessly, just confirm his guilt. Says something like "he would have gotten a whatever penalty had he stayed in the race but since he's out, we'll leave it as that". Otherwise, the next incident like Russel and Sainz happens, just retire Russel and give him a 3 place grid drop for the next race.

On the contrary… It might be one of the best punishments in F1… You take a driver out (regardless of intention), you ruin their race and there should be a punishment for it… Whether you finished the race or not, it doesn’t matter… There has to be a punishment.

If the same action makes you DNF, then punishment should be applied at the next possible opportunity and that means a grid penalty… One of the few fair things in F1 in reality.

[diffuser]

Ric retired so he could not be punished in this race (by 5-10s penalty), therefore he gets 3 grid drop next GP. Standard stuff.

Think that's silly. Once you've determined that the driver wasn't driving recklessly, just confirm his guilt. Says something like "he would have gotten a whatever penalty had he stayed in the race but since he's out, we'll leave it as that". Otherwise, the next incident like Russel and Sainz happens, just retire Russel and give him a 3 place grid drop for the next race.

On the contrary… It might be one of the best punishments in F1… You take a driver out (regardless of intention), you ruin their race and there should be a punishment for it… Whether you finished the race or not, it doesn’t matter… There has to be a punishment.

If the same action makes you DNF, then punishment should be applied at the next possible opportunity and that means a grid penalty… One of the few fair things in F1 in reality.

His DNF wasn't enough? The penalty is to make him think twice next time. The DNF delivers that message.The stewards did say he wasn't reckless. If had been reckless, I think then a xtra penalty was warranted. I also find that a 5 or 10 second penalty too lenient for an error that causes the other car to retire. Think Hamilton at 2021 Silverstone should have gotten more. I mean, I didn't think he was even guilty but the stewards did. if they think he's "At Fault", what message does that deliver if you still allow him to win the race? At this point Ricciardo is getting the same penalty that Max got for 2021 Monza and only 2 places less than the disaster Bottas created at Hungry.

[SmallSoldier]

Think that's silly. Once you've determined that the driver wasn't driving recklessly, just confirm his guilt. Says something like "he would have gotten a whatever penalty had he stayed in the race but since he's out, we'll leave it as that". Otherwise, the next incident like Russel and Sainz happens, just retire Russel and give him a 3 place grid drop for the next race.

On the contrary… It might be one of the best punishments in F1… You take a driver out (regardless of intention), you ruin their race and there should be a punishment for it… Whether you finished the race or not, it doesn’t matter… There has to be a punishment.

If the same action makes you DNF, then punishment should be applied at the next possible opportunity and that means a grid penalty… One of the few fair things in F1 in reality.

His DNF wasn't enough? The penalty is to make him think twice next time. The DNF delivers that message.The stewards did say he wasn't reckless. If had been reckless, I think then a xtra penalty was warranted. I also find that a 5 or 10 second penalty too lenient for an error that causes the other car to retire. Think Hamilton at 2021 Silverstone should have gotten more. I mean, I didn't think he was even guilty but the stewards did. if they think he's "At Fault", what message does that deliver if you still allow him to win the race? At this point Ricciardo is getting the same penalty that Max got for 2021 Monza and only 2 places less than the disaster Bottas created at Hungry.

The punishment should be applied regardless of the Outcome, not based on it… It doesn’t matter what the outcome of the action is, the penalties should be applied whether you continue and win or not.

2 separate issues… We can argue about how much the penalty should be, 5 seconds, 10 seconds, stop and go… But, whether you finish the race or not should have nothing to do with the penalty itself.

Yes, he got the same penalty as Max got for Monza… In both situations, they took a rival out of the race, in both situations they didn’t finish the race, in both situations they got a 3 place penalty for the following race… Didn’t Stroll receive a 3 place penalty for the incident with Alonso at Austin? He also DNF’ed while ALO continue.

Norris was given a 5 second penalty for contact with Leclerc (which seems more borderline for me, but think that it was ok since he did understeered towards Charles and therefore predominantly at fault), but he DNF’ed before the end of the race… Should he get a 5 second positive handicap in AD? (Just joking).

Ultimately, whether a driver DNF’s or not… Or if he gets his Front Wing damaged and has to stop to replace it… Has nothing to do with any penalties that should be applied for on track behavior or situations.

[diffuser]

On the contrary… It might be one of the best punishments in F1… You take a driver out (regardless of intention), you ruin their race and there should be a punishment for it… Whether you finished the race or not, it doesn’t matter… There has to be a punishment.

If the same action makes you DNF, then punishment should be applied at the next possible opportunity and that means a grid penalty… One of the few fair things in F1 in reality.

His DNF wasn't enough? The penalty is to make him think twice next time. The DNF delivers that message.The stewards did say he wasn't reckless. If had been reckless, I think then a xtra penalty was warranted. I also find that a 5 or 10 second penalty too lenient for an error that causes the other car to retire. Think Hamilton at 2021 Silverstone should have gotten more. I mean, I didn't think he was even guilty but the stewards did. if they think he's "At Fault", what message does that deliver if you still allow him to win the race? At this point Ricciardo is getting the same penalty that Max got for 2021 Monza and only 2 places less than the disaster Bottas created at Hungry.

The punishment should be applied regardless of the Outcome, not based on it… It doesn’t matter what the outcome of the action is, the penalties should be applied whether you continue and win or not.

2 separate issues… We can argue about how much the penalty should be, 5 seconds, 10 seconds, stop and go… But, whether you finish the race or not should have nothing to do with the penalty itself.

Yes, he got the same penalty as Max got for Monza… In both situations, they took a rival out of the race, in both situations they didn’t finish the race, in both situations they got a 3 place penalty for the following race… Didn’t Stroll receive a 3 place penalty for the incident with Alonso at Austin? He also DNF’ed while ALO continue.

Norris was given a 5 second penalty for contact with Leclerc (which seems more borderline for me, but think that it was ok since he did understeered towards Charles and therefore predominantly at fault), but he DNF’ed before the end of the race… Should he get a 5 second positive handicap in AD? (Just joking).

Ultimately, whether a driver DNF’s or not… Or if he gets his Front Wing damaged and has to stop to replace it… Has nothing to do with any penalties that should be applied for on track behavior or situations.

I get what you're saying and I'll give you that " a penality is a penalty". I just don't think the rules are very fair to the victim when the victim is DNF'd and the villian is convicted as "at fault" but is allowed to drive on and win the race or finish very high. I preffer an eye for an eye.You should not be celibrated for being "at fault". Let's face it, the DNF in a race is the equivalent to Murder. You're not coming back till the next life/race ....

[SmallSoldier]

His DNF wasn't enough? The penalty is to make him think twice next time. The DNF delivers that message.The stewards did say he wasn't reckless. If had been reckless, I think then a xtra penalty was warranted. I also find that a 5 or 10 second penalty too lenient for an error that causes the other car to retire. Think Hamilton at 2021 Silverstone should have gotten more. I mean, I didn't think he was even guilty but the stewards did. if they think he's "At Fault", what message does that deliver if you still allow him to win the race? At this point Ricciardo is getting the same penalty that Max got for 2021 Monza and only 2 places less than the disaster Bottas created at Hungry.

The punishment should be applied regardless of the Outcome, not based on it… It doesn’t matter what the outcome of the action is, the penalties should be applied whether you continue and win or not.

2 separate issues… We can argue about how much the penalty should be, 5 seconds, 10 seconds, stop and go… But, whether you finish the race or not should have nothing to do with the penalty itself.

Yes, he got the same penalty as Max got for Monza… In both situations, they took a rival out of the race, in both situations they didn’t finish the race, in both situations they got a 3 place penalty for the following race… Didn’t Stroll receive a 3 place penalty for the incident with Alonso at Austin? He also DNF’ed while ALO continue.

Norris was given a 5 second penalty for contact with Leclerc (which seems more borderline for me, but think that it was ok since he did understeered towards Charles and therefore predominantly at fault), but he DNF’ed before the end of the race… Should he get a 5 second positive handicap in AD? (Just joking).

Ultimately, whether a driver DNF’s or not… Or if he gets his Front Wing damaged and has to stop to replace it… Has nothing to do with any penalties that should be applied for on track behavior or situations.

I get what you're saying and I'll give you that " a penality is a penalty". I just don't think the rules are very fair to the victim when the victim is DNF'd and the villian is convicted as "at fault" but is allowed to drive on and win the race or finish very high. I preffer an eye for an eye.You should not be celibrated for being "at fault". Let's face it, the DNF in a race is the equivalent to Murder. You're not coming back till the next life/race ....

I agree that penalties should be revised in general… Been said that, we need to also understand that the penalties are thought in a way that they apply to the whole field and should be the same regardless if you drive a top car or a backmarker… What I mean by this is that if for example Albon and Max perform the same infraction, the penalty should be the same, the difference is that if one applies a 5 second penalty to Albon you are probably destroying his race and any chance of been in the points, while if you apply the same penalty to Max, he most probably be back in the Top 5 at least (if he is not outright winning the race regardless).

In the same token, the actions should also carry the same penalty regardless of the outcome to even the victim… Causing a collision should carry “X” penalty, regardless if the other car simply spun out, if it was able to continue or not racing or if it needed to pit for tires due to a flat spot or a new front wing or similar… Yesterday’s situation with Lando and Daniel are a good example of this, both caused a collision, both should have had the same penalty (5 Second Penalty) regardless of the fact that Lando continued in the race and Daniel didn’t or that Leclerc was able to continue racing and eventually finishing P4 while Magnussen DNF’ed in the first lap… The action is what matters… So both Lando and Daniel received a 5 second penalty, since Daniel wasn’t able to serve his during the race, he gets a 3 place grid penalty for the following race.

Before F1 focuses on changing penalties to better match the crime, I wish that we would at least have consistency… That’s a way bigger issue since we’ve seeing several times that the same criteria isn’t applied consistently and that’s a bigger issue in my opinion.

[AR3-GP]

The punishment should be applied regardless of the Outcome, not based on it… It doesn’t matter what the outcome of the action is, the penalties should be applied whether you continue and win or not.

2 separate issues… We can argue about how much the penalty should be, 5 seconds, 10 seconds, stop and go… But, whether you finish the race or not should have nothing to do with the penalty itself.

Yes, he got the same penalty as Max got for Monza… In both situations, they took a rival out of the race, in both situations they didn’t finish the race, in both situations they got a 3 place penalty for the following race… Didn’t Stroll receive a 3 place penalty for the incident with Alonso at Austin? He also DNF’ed while ALO continue.

Norris was given a 5 second penalty for contact with Leclerc (which seems more borderline for me, but think that it was ok since he did understeered towards Charles and therefore predominantly at fault), but he DNF’ed before the end of the race… Should he get a 5 second positive handicap in AD? (Just joking).

Ultimately, whether a driver DNF’s or not… Or if he gets his Front Wing damaged and has to stop to replace it… Has nothing to do with any penalties that should be applied for on track behavior or situations.

I get what you're saying and I'll give you that " a penality is a penalty". I just don't think the rules are very fair to the victim when the victim is DNF'd and the villian is convicted as "at fault" but is allowed to drive on and win the race or finish very high. I preffer an eye for an eye.You should not be celibrated for being "at fault". Let's face it, the DNF in a race is the equivalent to Murder. You're not coming back till the next life/race ....

I agree that penalties should be revised in general… Been said that, we need to also understand that the penalties are thought in a way that they apply to the whole field and should be the same regardless if you drive a top car or a backmarker… What I mean by this is that if for example Albon and Max perform the same infraction, the penalty should be the same, the difference is that if one applies a 5 second penalty to Albon you are probably destroying his race and any chance of been in the points, while if you apply the same penalty to Max, he most probably be back in the Top 5 at least (if he is not outright winning the race regardless).

I don't see the problem. Even if Max takes a 5 sec penalty in a faster car, he still loses out relative to his nearest rivals (the Mercs).

What other option is there really? Point penalty would make a bottom midfield scorer suffer more than someone who amasses 400 points in a season. Grid drop doesn't really impact a Latifi who would start from the back anyway.

[diffuser]

I get what you're saying and I'll give you that " a penality is a penalty". I just don't think the rules are very fair to the victim when the victim is DNF'd and the villian is convicted as "at fault" but is allowed to drive on and win the race or finish very high. I preffer an eye for an eye.You should not be celibrated for being "at fault". Let's face it, the DNF in a race is the equivalent to Murder. You're not coming back till the next life/race ....

I agree that penalties should be revised in general… Been said that, we need to also understand that the penalties are thought in a way that they apply to the whole field and should be the same regardless if you drive a top car or a backmarker… What I mean by this is that if for example Albon and Max perform the same infraction, the penalty should be the same, the difference is that if one applies a 5 second penalty to Albon you are probably destroying his race and any chance of been in the points, while if you apply the same penalty to Max, he most probably be back in the Top 5 at least (if he is not outright winning the race regardless).

I don't see the problem. Even if Max takes a 5 sec penalty in a faster car, he still loses out relative to his nearest rivals (the Mercs).

What other option is there really? Point penalty would make a bottom midfield scorer suffer more than someone who amasses 400 points in a season. Grid drop doesn't really impact a Latifi who would start from the back anyway.

I presume the grid will tighten up with time in the CAP era. so that should take care of itself. We haven't had a quali in the dry in while to see what the gap is between the top and the midfield. I presume it is still greater than 1 sec. I still think 5 or 10 seconds when you've DNF's the other guy is way to weak. Should be 5 -10 seconds for the penalty, + 60 seconds if you DNF the other car. Bonus penalty for being "at fault" and DNFing the other car.

[Emag]

The only thing that eeks me is that McLaren was unable to develop this car past their high points early on in the season.

Excluding Bahrain which was an outlier, they have remained in the same relative level of performance throughout the season.

A team like Mercedes on the other hand, went from scrapping on the midfield early on, to being the clear quickest in Brazil.

You can't help but notice that quality of in-season development. And it does make me somewhat sceptical for the future.

[mwillems]

The only thing that eeks me is that McLaren was unable to develop this car past their high points early on in the season.

Of course, excluding Bahrain which was an outlier, they have remained in the same relative level of performance throughout the season.

A team like Mercedes on the other hand, went from scrapping on the midfield early on, to being tbe clear quickest in Brazil.

You can't help but notice that quality of in-season development. And it does make me somewhat sceptical for the future.

I suppose that depends on where they are putting their resource, into this years car or more into next years, and I wouldn't want to assume that everything developed for next years car will be on this years.

Obviously with the budget cap, perhaps the team felt that they could put up a good fight for 4th still and splash the cash more on design than production, so as to get the team in a competitive place next year.

OR.... you are right and we should all be concerned!

[Seerix]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... rung-2023/
Is this another delay to mid 2023? I can't remember when the windtunnel was supposed to be completed anymore.

[PhillipM]

April/May time, so same timescale as before.

[diffuser]

The only thing that eeks me is that McLaren was unable to develop this car past their high points early on in the season.

Of course, excluding Bahrain which was an outlier, they have remained in the same relative level of performance throughout the season.

A team like Mercedes on the other hand, went from scrapping on the midfield early on, to being tbe clear quickest in Brazil.

You can't help but notice that quality of in-season development. And it does make me somewhat sceptical for the future.

I suppose that depends on where they are putting their resource, into this years car or more into next years, and I wouldn't want to assume that everything developed for next years car will be on this years.

Obviously with the budget cap, perhaps the team felt that they could put up a good fight for 4th still and splash the cash more on design than production, so as to get the team in a competitive place next year.

OR.... you are right and we should all be concerned!

Think we'll know as it plays out. The good news for McLaren is that Gasley is an unknown at Alpine and they lost their fastest driver. The bad news is, Piastri is an unknown quantity. AMR will be stronger next year with their new engineers having spent a whole year there and Alonso's addition. How that all plays out in laptime and points is anybodies guess.

[the EDGE]

The only thing that eeks me is that McLaren was unable to develop this car past their high points early on in the season.

Of course, excluding Bahrain which was an outlier, they have remained in the same relative level of performance throughout the season.

A team like Mercedes on the other hand, went from scrapping on the midfield early on, to being tbe clear quickest in Brazil.

You can't help but notice that quality of in-season development. And it does make me somewhat sceptical for the future.

I suppose that depends on where they are putting their resource, into this years car or more into next years, and I wouldn't want to assume that everything developed for next years car will be on this years.

Obviously with the budget cap, perhaps the team felt that they could put up a good fight for 4th still and splash the cash more on design than production, so as to get the team in a competitive place next year.

OR.... you are right and we should all be concerned!

Think we'll know as it plays out. The good news for McLaren is that Gasley is an unknown at Alpine and they lost their fastest driver. The bad news is, Piastri is an unknown quantity. AMR will be stronger next year with their new engineers having spent a whole year there and Alonso's addition. How that all plays out in laptime and points is anybodies guess.

Team dynamics will no doubt play its part next year,

In Alpine, we have 2 drivers who are both going to want to prove their no 1, and 2 drivers who aren’t going to give each other space

In AM we have a top notch driver who is well known for falling-out with his team, up against the bosses son. Probably not a case of if, but how long, before the off track antics start

I’m pretty sure next year, Piastri will want to work closely with Lando, not against him

[Ben1980]

I know we want to compare Mclaren to the best teams. But it's still silly to compare to Mercedes. We are still way behind the big 3. And will take a while to cone back at them, unless they slip up.

But, after the start Mclaren had the season hasn't been that bad.