Kevin Magnussen made a idiot of a system affected by controversy and inconsistency
New controversy within the F1 because of sanctions – or lack thereof -. Little did he just like the five-second penalty on Carlos Sainz because of a maneuver in opposition to Oscar Piastri. A call that, along with being controversial, got here three hours after the competitors ended.
And why is it controversial? Because of the inconsistency of the judgment. Sure, it’s difficult by two conditions: first as a result of not all of the judges who choose the maneuvers repeat race by race; two, as a result of since they’re selections primarily based on a judgment, it’s understood that not everybody will choose the identical, that’s, there are not any goal selections however quite subjective ones.
On this installment we’ll consider two instances, each from Miami and which confirmed the everlasting disaster wherein the F1 on the subject of releasing penalties, however we can even assessment the protocols and the way they may change.
Inconsistencies
Let’s first describe the scenes:
Lap 34. Carlos Sainz tries it outdoors flip 11. Oscar Piastri extends his braking and covers all the curve, forcing Sainz to go off the road to keep away from hitting the McLaren. “He took me out,” the Spaniard accused on the radio.
In lane 36, Sainz considers: “… ask him to offer me the place after which he won’t be penalized.”
McLaren argued that, as Piastri was forward on the time of reaching the apex, they need to not quit the place, since it’s his.
Lap 39. Sainz tries it at flip 17, however this time he manages to realize the within of it and go Piastri, however not earlier than Oscar hit the Ferrari’s proper rear tire and broken the McLaren’s entrance wing. Within the replay on board the Ferrari, a countersteer by Sainz is seen. This can be because of an oversteer correction; nevertheless it is also a tactic, the identical one which Piastri would have used laps earlier than: prolong the automobile as a lot as potential to forestall the rival from turning behind and attempt to overtake within the subsequent nook when leaving with higher traction (see Hamilton’s maneuver with he takes her on board, over Tsunoda in flip 11-12, on lap 36).
The controversial choice: FIA introduced that it might examine the maneuver, a couple of minutes after it. However the verdict didn’t come within the race and the drivers have been nonetheless summoned to the FIA workplace to clarify their actions. And the sanction in opposition to Sainz would arrive hours later. 5 seconds of penalty and the lack of a place within the race and simply barely, since he was 3.2 seconds forward of Checo and appeared to have the tempo to get the mandatory distance and never quit that place. If the penalty had been given in the identical race, Carlos would have tried to go for these 5 seconds, however he did not even have that chance.
The inconsistency: “I do not take into consideration nationalities, solely about consistency and inconsistency,” mentioned Sainz on the finish of the competitors in Miami, with out realizing that he could be sanctioned.
The person from Madrid was referring to the truth that the FIA should be firmer with its standards. {That a} comparable maneuver be judged the identical. He mentioned this as a result of he thinks that Piastri’s defensive maneuver was the identical one which Kevin Magnussen used in opposition to Hamilton a day earlier than, within the Dash. “… Piastri has performed one thing just like what Magnussen did to me on Saturday, the place they imposed I do not know what number of penalties, and he hasn’t obtained any, nor has he returned my place.” The irony is that he was the one who was sanctioned, for a maneuver just like that of Magnussen and Piastri – one sanctioned (Magnussen’s) and the opposite not.
Is Sainz proper within the comparability? Let’s assessment Kevin’s case.
LAP 35 / 57
Sainz is on the radio demanding Piastri give again P4 after this second 👀#F1 #MiamiGP pic.twitter.com/Ov7aHdEcDG
— Components 1 (@F1) Could 5, 2024
Excessive defensive techniques
Spherical 14. Hamilton tries it at flip 11, the identical one Sainz tried at. On the skin and he was clearly already forward of Magnussen when it was time to brake (so Haas could not declare that Kevin had the apex). What did the Dane do? He merely continued straight till he took out Hamilton and prevented him from turning forward of him and even on par. A easy and soiled maneuver.
That is what Sainz compares and though it’s comparable, clearly Oscar Piastri was not so shameless. Nonetheless, he did go away Carlos with out area, simply as Kevin left Lewis with out area. That is true.
And additionally it is true that Magnussen obtained a sanction for this. One among 10 seconds, so there could be two inconsistencies right here:
-
As a result of an similar maneuver was judged otherwise, in response to Sainz.
-
As a result of Sainz’s maneuver, which the FIA did choose as punishable, solely price him 5 seconds and Kevin 10. Why wasn’t it 10?
LAP 15 / 19
Magnussen goes off, delaying Hamilton and Tsunoda pounces to take what is going to ultimately turn out to be P8! 😱#F1Sprint #MiamiGP pic.twitter.com/n3FX3Z5iEe
— Components 1 (@F1) Could 4, 2024
In 19 Dash laps, Magnussen took three 30-second penalties. Not solely was Hamilton unable to go him, however he ended up handed by Tsunoda after Kevin’s final scandalous maneuver. The state of affairs turned ridiculous and a couple of within the paddock seen it.
“We’ve got a case of intentionality,” accused Andras Stella, McLaren director of the Magnussen case. “How can sanctions be accrued? They need to be exponential. It should not be 5, plus 5, plus 5… possibly it’s essential spend a weekend at residence with your loved ones, mirror on their spirit of competitors and are available again,” Stella emphasised about harsh sanctions.
Magnussen first missed the chicane on lap 8; Then, in lap 11, when Hamilton already had the go, Kevin went over him in flip 12 and held the place – he actually hit Hamilton’s automobile to regain the place.
Is Kevin Magnussen a disloyal driver? No. Or quite, I feel not, he merely is aware of the foundations, and he stretches them. Play with him. His statements are clear on the matter. So trustworthy that they may properly be interpreted as cynicism.
“All of the penalties have been deserved, there isn’t any doubt about that,” accepted the Dane from Haas. And why did he do it? To assist his teammate, Nico Hulkenberg, rating the final level. At Haas they knew that, if Magussen was handed , the following could be ‘Hulk’ and so they may very well be left with out factors, in an F1 mid-pack that’s claustrophobically compact.
“I began utilizing these silly techniques that I do not like, however on the finish of the day I did my job as a crew participant and Nico scored as a result of I received him that hole so Lewis and Tsunoda could not catch him.” I insist, you may’t say that Kevin do not be trustworthy.
Stella says that Magnussen ought to go residence and take into consideration this. He’s 5 factors away from doing so, however this is able to not clear up the issue, as a result of the rules would nonetheless be there, simply the identical, for the pilots to use and perform these excessive techniques. To do?
These previous occasions…
Perhaps it is time to return to the previous and efficient drive via or cease and go. Really sturdy sanctions, within the race, that actually struck down the punished.
Think about the next state of affairs: For some motive Verstappen is second and quicker than the primary, however not sufficient to overhaul him. Max decides to go to the restrict of what’s sanctionable and executes a ‘soiled’ maneuver. He’s penalized with 10 seconds. Since it’s Verstappen and he has one of the best weapon and, in our hypothetical state of affairs he has sufficient laps, he will get the ten seconds and takes first place. Truthful or not? Beneath the present guidelines it’s, however would not the spirit of the rule, of the sportsmanship that Stella says, be damaged?
Beneath the identical state of affairs, if as a substitute of 10 seconds Verstappen will get a go and continues (drive via), he must undergo pit highway. He would lose greater than 10 seconds and maybe a couple of place. When you needed to cease and go it might be worse, since you would need to go to the pits, wait 10 seconds, with out them with the ability to do something to the automobile (these days they will change tires or the entrance wing after 10 seconds), after which go away. This was F1 within the nineties and initially of the century.
It modified as a result of these harsh sanctions threatened the present. The viewer’s favourite driver barely obtained a sanction, and he was tempted to vary the channel. That is why he switched to the system of seconds over race time. This fashion the present was not punished.
Alright. It’s nearly not possible to return to this punitive system. However what if a pilot solely had one probability to make a mistake. As Stella says, you must scale the punishment exponentially, not accumulate them.
Lets say with the Magnussen case. He already made a mistake in lane 11 by lacking the chicane. He will not be penalized for that, let’s simply say he already spent his probability for an error in opposition to Hamilton (on this case). The following mistake won’t be paid for in seconds, will probably be paid for in place. Sainz gave us the answer: “…ask him to offer me the place and that method he’s not penalized.”
Overlook seconds in race time. Giving up the disputed place that can not be defended by ‘authorized’ means must be the sanction. Thus, within the Hamilton case, Lewis would have gone for Hulkenberg and the competitors’s present wouldn’t be broken, quite the opposite, it might improve. And Magnussen must defend himself in opposition to Tsunoda and beneath our hypothetical sanctions system, Kevin would have a chance to make a mistake now in opposition to Yuki, and with the second mistake, one other place to surrender… and so forth. The present isn’t ‘punished’ and the repeat offender pilot is punished extra harshly.
It’s not a straightforward problem to resolve. Controversies will proceed as a result of judgments can’t be goal since those that choose achieve this from subjectivity. To be very clear with the thought: you see a film and your judgment about the identical film will likely be totally different from that of one other individual. Little or loads, however totally different.
So, so long as a gaggle of individuals must agree to guage a maneuver, there will likely be controversy. It’s a reality.
Nonetheless, this subjectivity may be restricted if the system adjustments by way of procedures. This can be a proposal, however there will likely be extra and individuals who can attain the ears of the crew leaders, the FIA and Liberty Media, who’re the actors who should agree.
The nice factor, what I’ve all the time applauded in regards to the FIA and F1, is that there’s a willingness to vary and enhance.
“Sooner or later, stewards might want to think about whether or not, in applicable conditions, particularly within the case of repeated infringements, the penalties to be utilized for every infringement must be elevated to discourage situations reminiscent of these we encounter at the moment,” the FIA mentioned within the Magnussen case. .
“That is one thing we’ll explicitly increase with the FIA and the judging crew.”
As they resolve this matter, we’re left with Sainz’s clear phrases: “…ask him to offer me the place…”. As simple as that.
