Crash.Net User: Livemusik

Comments rating: 162
Position in rating: 591

Show Comments on:

Livemusik

June 07, 2013 10:09 PM

F1 » Perez: I did nothing stupid


@Richard But Raikkonen is moving left before Checo has any part of his car alongside. Search A2jba0cEqco on youtube. It's a Perez on board. The left wheel of the lotus is aligned with the white line in the middle of the road at the start of 16 seconds. At 16.5 seconds, th line is now with the center of the lotus' rear wing, and Perez is still not yet alongside, indicating the Lotus is already moving left before Perez is alongside. By the letter of the law, Raikkonen is in the right. I think Perez wasn't penalised because he only had tenths of a second to determine if Raikkonen was turning in. Also search dtBTZt8gyes for a slow mo. At 0 seconds, the white line is nearly aligned with the Lotus left wheel. At the very start of 1 second in, the white line is aligned with the centre of the lotus front wing and Perez is not yet alongside. Okay, I should probably go get some sunlight now...

Livemusik

June 07, 2013 9:42 PM

F1 » Perez: I did nothing stupid


@107SS2009 Reg 20.5 The 'deliberate crowding' and 'abnormal move' issue. Please note the 'deliberate' part. This implies 'crowding' i.e. closing a gap is fine. Well Kimi makes no change of direction so he's not guilty of an 'abnormal' move. Kimi was moving to the left BEFORE Checo was alongside. It was not deliberate because he did not wait till Checo was alongside to then turn in. He was ALREADY moving left. Raikkonen is not guilty of either Reg 20.3 or 20.4 so you're trying to get blame him with Reg 20.5's 'deliberate crowding' rule.

Livemusik

June 07, 2013 8:29 PM

F1 » Perez: I did nothing stupid


Reg 20.5 No 'one car width' condition here. This refers to 'deliberate crowding' and abnormal changes of direction. I think Kimi is in the clear here, as the line he is going to take is clear from the start, and the move not 'deliberate'. It was Perez who made the choice to go for the closing gap. There is no abnormal change of direction by Kimi, as only one move was made. If you watch the Webber Vergne crash in China, Verge is not obliged to give Webber the corner just because a part is alongside. Vergne does not give Webber a cars width, and Webber hits him. Webber was penalised for causing a collision. Thats why i think Perez was lucky to escape a penalty. Sorry for the essay.

Livemusik

June 07, 2013 8:24 PM

F1 » Perez: I did nothing stupid


@rob01 Not true. There are only 2 regulations where you must leave a space when defending. I argued above how Raikkonen is compliant with 20.4, which applies to the defending driver. Reg 20.3 Yes you do have to leave a width but only when returning to the racing line after a defensive move, so if the offensive car is on the racing line, you can't just shove them off. But Raikkonen is not returning to the racing line, he is continuing his defensive line which is allowed. In fact, neither are anywhere near the racing line. The racing line is on the outside of both of them. If Perez was attacking on Kimi's right (the racing line) and had his wing alongside Kimi after Kimi's move left, and Raikkonen moved right to return to the race line hitting Perez, Kimi would've been at fault. However as I said before, Kimi is not returning to the racing line, therefore this rule doesn't apply. Reg 20.5 No 'one car width' condition here. This refers to 'deliberate crowding' and abnormal changes of d

Livemusik

June 07, 2013 7:44 PM

F1 » Perez: I did nothing stupid


Reg 20.4 (giving a cars width) only applies to a defending driver on a straight. Perez has no part of his car alongside Kimi's while they are both going straight, only when Raikkonen starts moving left does Perez have any part of his car next to Kimi (watched the replay a million times, yes I am sad). Ergo, Perez' fault and lucky to receive no penalty.


Page 2 of 6
« 1 2 3 4 5 6  »

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.