2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[Dr. Acula]

It seems to me that we can judge this incident on two criteria. We expect drivers too win either because they are faster or because they use superior race craft in defending or overtaking.

In this incident Vettel wasn’t faster through the corner, he was slow enough that Hamilton would have passed him if there was room. In his words he wasn’t in full control when he rejoined the track, so he wasn’t demonstrating skilful race craft. So in my opinion he deserved to lose the place.

Yep it's as simple as that for me.

If we are really wanting to go all in on the morality of this situation then ask yourself this question.

Who deserved the win more?

The guy who showed excellent pace all race and applied pressure to force his rival into an error and create an overtaking opportunity?

Or the guy who did well to stay ahead under pressure, but buckled in the end, made a mistake and rightfully should have lost his place but only retained it by controversially putting his car sideways in front of incoming traffic and forcing another car to have to stamp on the brakes in an Acceleration zone to avoid an incident?


If any one of us are honest with ourselves here, the person who actually deserved this win is not the guy who made a mistake and blocked a competitor from taking a place they should have gained due to that mistake.

If we're honest the person and team who did more to win this race was not Ferrari or Vettel.

Whether Seb deserved a penalty is one thing, but did he do all he or ferrari do all they needed to do to win this race on pure merit?

Absolutely not.

He cracked, lost his place and only regained it by clumsily and dangerously being almost sideways in front of incoming traffic.

Did he do what he needed to do to win?

No.

That's why he didn't win, and that's why he didn't automatically deserve to win.

So basically then, should we announce the driver who wins the "driver of the day" award as the driver who wins the race? Because he's the driver who would deserve the win the most in the eyes of the viewers and that's what you propose, or isn't it?
The winning driver is not necesseraly always the best driver or the one who made the least amount of mistakes but the one who simply crosses the finish line first, it's as simple as that.
Also, would Vettel have made the same mistake if he would have sat in Merc? Maybe, maybe not. You know, the car can make a huge difference when it comes to making mistakes.

The question is not, who deserved to win. It is if Vettel deserved the penalty for the mistake he made.

[Wynters]

Strategy calls:-
16 lap opening stint was excellent by Hulk.
Why didn't Hamilton or Leclerc try the undercut? If it was a good idea, why didn't Hamilton do it. If it was a bad idea, why didn't Leclerc undercut to force Hamilton to do it?

[izzy]

so they don't think Lewis should have had to brake. There's a whole thing about rejoining the track, that makes it different from if they hadn't left the track

Rejoining the track is in my opinion a conscious decision, so if it was a decision to take a risk the penalty would be fair. Now there wasn't much to decide for Vettel was there, and making a racing mistake by missing an corner is not really illegal, the so called rejoining was just an outcome of that mistake which he wasn't able to correct to a much safer state than this.

well yes it's true he had to rejoin the track, but did he need to go right across to the wall? when I re-watch it i don't think so. Karun was going on about his oversteer but the car wasn't pointing away from the wall in oversteer, it was pointing along the track quite straight, then Seb steered it right, making it point towards the wall

it was instinct obviously and you can understand it, but he had the option imo

[Jolle]

@TAG and Grizzle

Yes because the one who deserves most always needs to win

I think it is quite a 'coloured' post, and I wonder which alternative is suggested for Vettel to have done in that situation? Park his car in the grass, put on his blinker and rejoin when there is a 10 second gap?

Anyway, I was amazed again by the pitstops. I would have expected Hamilton to try an undercut, which he didn't. Letting Vettel pit first was a class decision by Ferrari. But than they messed up I think.
At some point I think Leclerc could have pitted and possibly get in front of Hamilton, but they kept him out and he lost way too much time. I think their reason was they hoped for a safety car which didn't come.

just after regaining control of his car, not pushing his opponent in the wall.... it's racing 101, just like listening to your team boss, not crashing into your teammate or you know, the safety car thing.

[zibby43]

here's a simple question:
After making a mistake on his own, did Sebastian Vettel gain an advantage by not leaving his opponent anywhere to go when he was certainly going to lose the position?
If the answer is yes, you can't criticize the penalty. If the answer is no, you're probably from another planet.

"But Hamilton is always favoured by the FIA".
Sebastian was capable of intentionally hitting another driver's car under a safety car and didn't get a black flag for that, to me that's as favoured as a driver can be.

One of the best arguments I've seen today. Well said.

[NathanOlder]

If it was a bad idea, why didn't Leclerc undercut to force Hamilton to do it?

If it was a bad idea, it wouldn't have forced Hamilton to pit. As everyone would have known it was a bad idea

[dans79]

The question is not, who deserved to win. It is if Vettel deserved the penalty for the mistake he made.

in my opinion he did, it's no different than the one that Max got in Japan for pushing Kimi off track!

[Jolle]

If it was a bad idea, why didn't Leclerc undercut to force Hamilton to do it?

If it was a bad idea, it wouldn't have forced Hamilton to pit. As everyone would have known it was a bad idea

Ferrari's actions towards Leclerc almost look like they want to give him track time but, with pitstop timing, getting him out of the way of Vettel as soon as possible. Like self inflicting sabotage.

[ringo]

so they don't think Lewis should have had to brake. There's a whole thing about rejoining the track, that makes it different from if they hadn't left the track

Rejoining the track is in my opinion a conscious decision, so if it was a decision to take a risk the penalty would be fair. Now there wasn't much to decide for Vettel was there, and making a racing mistake by missing an corner is not really illegal, the so called rejoining was just an outcome of that mistake which he wasn't able to correct to a much safer state than this.

well yes it's true he had to rejoin the track, but did he need to go right across to the wall? when I re-watch it i don't think so. Karun was going on about his oversteer but the car wasn't pointing away from the wall in oversteer, it was pointing along the track quite straight, then Seb steered it right, making it point towards the wall

it was instinct obviously and you can understand it, but he had the option imo

I don't think Karun realized at the time, that the oversteer was caused by Vettel pinning the throttle pedal to get back onto the track. Which by itself proves that Vettel was in no danger of hitting the wall on the right. Vettel pretty much was in full control until the self induced oversteer moment. Vettel was more mindful of keeping P1 than hitting the wall.
Anyhow i can't understand why Gasly is behind Verstappen in the standings.
They need to give Kyvatt that seat.

[Jolle]

Rejoining the track is in my opinion a conscious decision, so if it was a decision to take a risk the penalty would be fair. Now there wasn't much to decide for Vettel was there, and making a racing mistake by missing an corner is not really illegal, the so called rejoining was just an outcome of that mistake which he wasn't able to correct to a much safer state than this.

well yes it's true he had to rejoin the track, but did he need to go right across to the wall? when I re-watch it i don't think so. Karun was going on about his oversteer but the car wasn't pointing away from the wall in oversteer, it was pointing along the track quite straight, then Seb steered it right, making it point towards the wall

it was instinct obviously and you can understand it, but he had the option imo

I don't think Karun realized at the time, that the oversteer was caused by Vettel pinning the throttle pedal to get back onto the track. Which by itself proves that Vettel was in no danger of hitting the wall on the right. Vettel pretty much was in full control until the self induced oversteer moment. Vettel was more mindful of keeping P1 than hitting the wall.
Anyhow i can't understand why Gasly is behind Verstappen in the standings.
They need to give Kyvatt that seat.

The onboard confirms that he puts his foot down and then steers towards the wall. nasty move and, with that in mind, a very very nasty reaction.

But reflection on his own actions never been Vettel's strong point.

[Stevudza11]

Well, if he didn't made a move to the right with opening the throttle, he could have spun easily... Just bare instinct imho

[vogonvader]

It seems to me that we can judge this incident on two criteria. We expect drivers too win either because they are faster or because they use superior race craft in defending or overtaking.

In this incident Vettel wasn’t faster through the corner, he was slow enough that Hamilton would have passed him if there was room. In his words he wasn’t in full control when he rejoined the track, so he wasn’t demonstrating skilful race craft. So in my opinion he deserved to lose the place.

Yep it's as simple as that for me.

If we are really wanting to go all in on the morality of this situation then ask yourself this question.

Who deserved the win more?

The guy who showed excellent pace all race and applied pressure to force his rival into an error and create an overtaking opportunity?

Or the guy who did well to stay ahead under pressure, but buckled in the end, made a mistake and rightfully should have lost his place but only retained it by controversially putting his car sideways in front of incoming traffic and forcing another car to have to stamp on the brakes in an Acceleration zone to avoid an incident?


If any one of us are honest with ourselves here, the person who actually deserved this win is not the guy who made a mistake and blocked a competitor from taking a place they should have gained due to that mistake.

If we're honest the person and team who did more to win this race was not Ferrari or Vettel.

Whether Seb deserved a penalty is one thing, but did he do all he or ferrari do all they needed to do to win this race on pure merit?

Absolutely not.

He cracked, lost his place and only regained it by clumsily and dangerously being almost sideways in front of incoming traffic.

Did he do what he needed to do to win?

No.

That's why he didn't win, and that's why he didn't automatically deserve to win.

Well if it's really honesty and morality of who deserves the win that you're after you have no way of deciding who deserved something more and give merit to a guy you support.

With your logic we can say that we should understand who gave their most to win the race. And with that in mind we can say Ferrari and Vettel gave their everything to win this race on pure merit because we all know Mercedes car was by far the fastest car on race pace today and Vettel still managed to stay ahead of it. If you wanna give credit where it's due you might as well point out that Mercedes was gifted this 2019 tyres with Pirelli doing that intentionally or not, it just benefited them and Vettel stayed ahead of that car. If Hamilton gets a credit for being fast with the fastest car on track, Vettel gets a credit for racing that mercedes with an inferior car.

And if it's about the mistakes made in the closing moments of this race and with your logic if mistakes affect if you deserve to win or not Hamilton locked up his tyres countless times at the hairpin and lock ups are driver errors as well so what does that take us to? Hamilton didn't do everything he could to win so he didn't win on pure merit?

That's just a ridiculously flawed biased logic going on there with you.

[Unc1eM0nty]

Anyway, I was amazed again by the pitstops. I would have expected Hamilton to try an undercut, which he didn't. Letting Vettel pit first was a class decision by Ferrari. But than they messed up I think.
At some point I think Leclerc could have pitted and possibly get in front of Hamilton, but they kept him out and he lost way too much time. I think their reason was they hoped for a safety car which didn't come.

Hamilton didn't have the window, Vettel 2 seconds ahead only just got out ahead of the midfield battle.

Lewis needed another two laps to build a safe gap, Leclerc a further two seconds back needed even more laps, then they had nothing to loose so left him out longer hoping for a safety car

[izzy]

well yes it's true he had to rejoin the track, but did he need to go right across to the wall? when I re-watch it i don't think so. Karun was going on about his oversteer but the car wasn't pointing away from the wall in oversteer, it was pointing along the track quite straight, then Seb steered it right, making it point towards the wall

it was instinct obviously and you can understand it, but he had the option imo

I don't think Karun realized at the time, that the oversteer was caused by Vettel pinning the throttle pedal to get back onto the track. Which by itself proves that Vettel was in no danger of hitting the wall on the right. Vettel pretty much was in full control until the self induced oversteer moment. Vettel was more mindful of keeping P1 than hitting the wall.
Anyhow i can't understand why Gasly is behind Verstappen in the standings.
They need to give Kyvatt that seat.

i don't think there even was any oversteer really, and yes he was defending wasn't he. i mean if you stop this at the last frame of Lewis' onboard at 2s, Seb is steering left, not right
[https://twitter.com/i/status/1137828967237468161

[wickedz50]

Is this penalty appealable? looks like Ferrari and many other teams have appealed such cases but FAILED!