
happy_eagle
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 20, 2007
- 26,343
- 21,897
- AFL Club
- West Coast
At Mercedes, absolutely no way.Question: If Hamilton retires, could Piastri slot straight in?
At Alpine if Alonso/Ocon go to Mercedes, would probably be the case.
At Mercedes, absolutely no way.Question: If Hamilton retires, could Piastri slot straight in?
Increasing talk of Hamilton weighing up his options, this won't help lure him back to F1.
I do wonder what Mercedes will do if Hamilton walks. I think they would have to go after an experienced driver to support George for a couple of seasons.
Vettel and Alonso would be the obvious choices. Ricciardo and dare I say Bottas (would be weird) would be outside choices.
Was impressed with Hamilton post race but the whole Mercedes team sooking it up since then, is not a good look.
Yawn, these type of posts are getting boring. It wasn't manipulated, it wasn't contrived. This is no Nelson Piquet Jr incident.There was a whole lot that was "not a good look" last Sunday.
The sport lost a lot of credibility.
The brand of F1 was tarnished.
When the outcome of a marathon is manipulated and contrived, so that a grand finale sprint is put in place, to ensure a TV viewing drama at the expense of principals and ethics of the sport.
Then you know that something is inherently amiss within the sporting organisations governance.
Regardless of who won, the way that they went about deciding who the winner was, the result was undeniably manufactured for TV.
Hardly a fitting end to what had been a wonderfully competitive season.
I wish I could see the alternate reality where Hamilton wins the race the way Max did, and then see your comments.Yawn, these type of posts are getting boring. It wasn't manipulated, it wasn't contrived. This is no Nelson Piquet Jr incident.
Would have said the same thing but good job assuming like usual. Ace.I wish I could see the alternate reality where Hamilton wins the race the way Max did, and then see your comments.
There's no doubt in my mind you'd be crying foul.
DoubtfulWould have said the same thing but good job assuming like usual. Ace.
Cool story. Right up there with the bible and jack and jill as fairy tales.Doubtful
Saw this on Reddit
Hard to distinguish this from the real thing
(hint: its the F1 video game with a graphics mod applied)
Yawn, these type of posts are getting boring. It wasn't manipulated, it wasn't contrived. This is no Nelson Piquet Jr incident.
Singapore 2008, Alonso had pitted and Nelson Piquet Jr deliberately crashed causing a safety car. I believe at the time they had Champ Car style rules where Pit lane was auto closed on a safety car.For us newbies - what is this?
If over the last 10 years a safety car rarely (and I mean very rarely) was out for more than 4 laps, then the bigger gamble is to assume that it will be out for more than 4 laps. There was nothing particularly difficult about clearing Latifi's car. It's not like it was a major accident, the car was almost completely intact, had only lost a wing.Mean doesn't mean exactly 4 laps. It takes as long as it takes to make the track safe. It's still a huge gamble in such an important race.
I don't have a problem with cars being allowed to pass the safety car, until the race leader is immediately behind the SC. By definition, these cars are not regaining a lap - they may be regaining 99.9% of a lap, but they are still remaining on the same lap that they were on (relative to the race leader).
What I have a problem with is allowing lapped cars behind the leader to overtake both the leader and the SC, in order to regain the lap they have lost. These cars regain a full lap, which is just plain unfair on the cars/drivers which weren't lapped prior to the SC intervention.
Yes - that's the difference between being lapped, and not being lapped.You're splitting hairs here. So you're happy with someone regaining 99.9% of a lap, but you're not ok with someone regaining 100.1% of a lap? It doesn't make any difference to the leaders of the race, it's only important to those in the positions of "just been" or "about to be" lapped.
The lapped cars have only been lapped by the leaders, they haven't been lapped by the cars immediately in front of them. Your approach effectively grants their immediate rivals a lap over them. How is that fair?
I wish I could see the alternate reality where Hamilton wins the race the way Max did, and then see your comments.
There's no doubt in my mind you'd be crying foul.
You can also add Drive To Survive which is growing interest in F1.
Based on what? I've been following the sport for about 25 years and while this year was interesting, I don't think the sport itself is at its peak.The F1 brand has never been stronger. And comments to the contrary are just Hamilton fans.
Yes - that's the difference between being lapped, and not being lapped.
Nope, I understand. I just don't care. Nobody should be allowed to regain a lap once they've been lapped, unless they are able to overtake the lead car on merit.Are you deliberately ignoring the fact that the lower placed unlapped cars have NOT lapped their immediate rivals, and so gain an unfair advantage, effectively being given a free lap over them?
Or are you just failing to understand the concept?