- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
Arguably the toughest race on the calendar, a number of cars met the wall/barriers in practice
2019 F1 Championship Round 15 - Singapore Grand Prix
- Thread starter drd23
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Arguably the toughest race on the calendar, a number of cars met the wall/barriers in practice
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
- Thread starter
- #2
YippeeYiYeo
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jun 21, 2015
- 9,087
- 14,295
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Banned
- #3
Vettels reign as teh #1 Ferrari driver is officially over.
Rug= Pulled out
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
- Thread starter
- #5
Very surprised Ferrari are as competitive as they are
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
Danny Ric disqualified because his Renault team made his MGUK produce more power.
Just when you think they've got it together they go and do that.
Just when you think they've got it together they go and do that.
TheMase
Brownlow Medallist
It was on his slower Q1 lap too, so not like he gained an advantage. Disappointing.
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,226
- 24,749
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Race is 1 hour earlier than usual tonight (10PM EST, 8PM WST)
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,226
- 24,749
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
- Thread starter
- #10
What's ridiculous?
They failed to stay within the technical regulations and the rules are clear on the punishment no matter how small the breech or how advantageous (or not) it was
They failed to stay within the technical regulations and the rules are clear on the punishment no matter how small the breech or how advantageous (or not) it was
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,226
- 24,749
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Not saying the decision was wrong. The rules are clearly written
But you don't see any element of a driver going from P8 to P20 based on a 1 microsecond time gain on the slowest lap of qualifying to be ridiculous ?
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
- Thread starter
- #12
Less ridiculous than the ruling that lead to Vettel having his victory stripped in Canada
- Jun 15, 2005
- 69,233
- 60,483
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- AUFC, Everton, Sturt
More or less the same I'd have thought, it's almost as unbelievable as last night's non reviewed Collingwood goal.
- Mar 20, 2007
- 28,226
- 24,749
- AFL Club
- West Coast
On a similar level. Both technically correct decisions under the rules but certainly highlight the stubbornness of FIA regulations to take the broader context into account.
Goal was reviewed.
UPDATE: AFL admits score review blunder over Thomas goal
A last-quarter goal to Collingwood's Josh Thomas sparked debate but it ultimately had no impact on the result
www.afl.com.au
The microsecond advantage though......
- Feb 28, 2009
- 37,102
- 34,269
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
- Thread starter
- #16
FOM streaming stuff on YT. Driver Parade on right now in some cool vintage/classic cars
Holy moly it's Rusty!
And plenty of Rust!
Is that Howie over the PA as well?
NSWCROW
Make me an Admin!
THRUSTA !!!
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
The Vettel decision is more contentious than this one. Sporting regulations have room for debate. Technical regulations do not.
If you want to push the MGU-K to the limits, don't complain when a minor incident causes it to breach the rules.
Broken
Brownlow Medallist
Such a great location, visually.
