To give them their dues, it is a hard job adjudicating every single incident or contact that happens during races as it’s very rare that many incidents are identical. But it’s incredibly maddening when the rules seem to be applied differently for no apparent reason. They also act too much on the result of an incident rather then necessarily the incident itself.nzjrs wrote: ↑21 Jul 2020, 17:25As your previous posts, and you in this post indeed highlighted, contradictions are common so the arguments about precedent are not as strong as they could be.El Scorchio wrote: ↑21 Jul 2020, 17:05
Extraordinary, really! So presumably every wet race now the mechanics from every team could just ‘accidentally’ leave a bunch of blowers on the track around the front of the car which just happen to be on. That’s what I’d do, and just claim it was an accident and they’d HAVE to accept that now they set a precedent.
And now it’s ok to run another car off the road, until it happens next race and all of a sudden it isn’t.
They must be able to see how silly they make themselves look with some of these decisions. It’s comparable in its insanity only to VAR in football as the reviewing system that still manages to get so much wrong or to be wildly inconsistent with applying or not applying the rules.
Personally I think people make too much of a big deal of things. They ask for common sense and then complain about inconsistency, they ask for zero-tolerance and then complain about idiocy. Its a hard job.
No defence whatsoever though for allowing the RBR team to obviously dry the track or not penalising obvious jump starts- all this sensor rubbish notwithstanding. Same with track limits. These are fairly clean cut things that need to be done consistently.