Have F1 penalties gone too far?

[Paul Jeffrey]

The Austrian Grand Prix bore witness once again to a clash between Mercedes AMG Petronas team mates Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton, costing the former two penalty points on his licence and a further 10 seconds added to his race time at the end of the Grand Prix.

As Rosberg somehow managed to snatch a defeat from the jaws of victory at the weekend, our RaceDepartment poll showed an overwhelming 76.2% of voters (282 votes) judged the German driver to be at fault for the incident. The race day stewards seemed to agree with that judgement after awarding Rosberg a 10 second post-race time penalty and 2 penalty points to be added to his racing licence. However opinion seems to be divided amongst the fans and media as the if Rosberg, despite being perceived to be at fault, deserved the sanctions handed out to him for the incident. This brings us to a much larger question that needs to be asked if Formula One is going to continue as the pinnacle of driving excellence it has long been associated with, ever since the first Grand Prix was held on a windy day on a former World War 2 airfield at Silverstone in 1950.

Does the recent steward decisions handed out to Rosberg post-race help maintain a quality driving standard, or does the ever present threat of driver sanctions suffocate todays stars and reduce the likelihood of drivers being willing to go wheel to wheel on track?

Formula One has been subject to much scrutiny in reason years for seemingly inconsistent steward decisions during key race flash points, and has worked hard to bring a more unified approach to how decisions are made following on track collisions between rival cars. The introduction of a permanent steward panel and inclusion of guest ‘expert’ former drivers have gone a long way in recent times to reduce the number of inconsistent and often bizarre rulings during events, however in a world ever more safety conscious coupled with a growing blame mentality for incidents many would consider par for the course just a few short years ago, has the allocation of mid race penalties gone too far?

Although very clearly blame can be placed at Rosberg’s door for Sunday’s accident, many consider the loss of points and a potential victory were punishment enough for the Mercedes #6, not least of which is the fact the collision was with another driver from the same team!

Do you think the FIA are too harsh with penalties in recent years? Do you think on track action could be improved if drivers feel less likely to receive a reprimand when things go wrong?

Discuss….

 

[Christian Moreau]

After thinking about it for a bit, it really sucks the race had to end like that, and Rosberg could've handled that situation a little better, but he lost the GP and didn't even get a podium spot.

That's plenty enough punishment to me. 10 second penalty? Whatever. But I don't think he was deserving of those 2 license points.

 

[Martin Maaskant]

Sometimes a driver get two times a penalty. Like the situation with Rosberg, IMO Rosberg was at fault but he got punished enough to end up in fourth place. No need to punish him again. We, as fans, want track action. Sometimes that results in drivers hitting each other. If a driver gains an advantage by hitting or crashing into someone then you must penalize (like the first WC of Schumacher).

 

[Milos]

If Hami would also get punished for similar actions, F1 would be a better place

 

[Tim Ling]

I dunno how I feel. While it does seem a bit harsh, at the same time Rosberg should have know the he would be passed by Lewis and been a bit more careful with his braking, especially if there was a problem with his braking system. You also have to consider the fact that he continued driving with a very unsafe car. That could have caused Nico to have another accident or caused problems for another driver hitting any debris that was dropped.
After typing that, I guess I do feel it was fair after all, as Nico was stupid twice. Mercedes deserve part of the blame for not telling him to stop with a destroyed front wing trapped under his car.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

i also wondered why that hugely unsafe car was not taken off the track at once by either the team or the stewards. that said, if a driver loses a podium spot, this is punishment enough, so the 10secs on top were probably right following the rules, but at times life writes its own rules and one could have dropped the 10secs. For me, the incident spoiled one of the best three final laps in a long time, so spoiling the viewer's fun was another sort of punishment, i guess.

 

[Milos]

I dunno how I feel. While it does seem a bit harsh, at the same time Rosberg should have know the he would be passed by Lewis and been a bit more careful with his braking, especially if there was a problem with his braking system. You also have to consider the fact that he continued driving with a very unsafe car. That could have caused Nico to have another accident or caused problems for another driver hitting any debris that was dropped.
After typing that, I guess I do feel it was fair after all, as Nico was stupid twice. Mercedes deserve part of the blame for not telling him to stop with a destroyed front wing trapped under his car.

Mercedes were not allowed to tell Nico about the brake issue, according to Toto, hence why he made the turn 1 error in the first place. And, honestly, what was he supposed to do, stop the car with 5 corners to go?! Even if it was not the final lap, if he had no other damage, he'd have just come into the pits to change the nose cone.
Also, to share a similar example here, Hamilton was not told off for driving a slow, even more severly damaged car in Belgium 2014.

 

[Tim.E]

All Nico's fault.

Nuff said...

 

[Milos]

All Nico's fault.

Nuff said...

We know, generic Lewis fanboy #420

but in all seriousness, you should've bothered to at least try to read the opening post. Or at least the title.

As Rosberg somehow managed to snatch a defeat from the jaws of victory at the weekend, our RaceDepartment poll showed an overwhelming 76.2% of voters (282 votes) judged the German driver to be at fault for the incident. The race day stewards seemed to agree with that judgement after awarding Rosberg a 10 second post-race time penalty and 2 penalty points to be added to his racing licence. However opinion seems to be divided amongst the fans and media as the if Rosberg, despite being perceived to be at fault, deserved the sanctions handed out to him for the incident.

 

[Tim.E]

We know, generic Lewis fanboy #420

but in all seriousness, you should've bothered to at least try to read the opening post. Or at least the title.

Just expressing my opinion, okay.

 

[Milos]

Just expressing my opinion, okay.

Sure, but you're a Hamilton fan, you can't have an opinion

Jokes aside though, you can vote in the poll here: http://www.racedepartment.com/threa...o-blame-in-austria.123547/page-4#post-2268224

 

[Tim Ling]

@Milos no argument mate. But you'd think Nico would have realised his brakes were iffy, in fact didn't he say they were under control? The whole move just seemed reminiscent of Senna/Prost to me.
As for the broken front wing, I don't think it's safe for anyone to drive round like that.

 

[Milos]

As for the broken front wing, I don't think it's safe for anyone to drive round like that.

(skip to end)

 

[PsyaNyde]

If Hami would also get punished for similar actions, F1 would be a better place

Yaar, boo, hiss!!

 

[stbreaker]

Hamilton haters seem to selectively forget that he gets his fair share of punishments - some deserved and some not.

Anyway, it's not the penalties for racing incidents so much as the mechanical penalties that bother me. The racing incident penalties don't seem inherently wrong, but they are too inconsistent in their enforcement and severity. While I agree that losing places is punishment enough in some cases, it's too hard to define what "enough" actually means. So in that spirit, I don't have a problem with Rosberg getting a further penalty for "causing a collision" on top of whatever loss of position happened. That being said, his penalty is for "driving an unsafe car" or something else really nebulous... (oh FIA)

The penalties that are more out of control to me are the grid penalties. I'm not sure that component failures should be a grid penalty rather than a fine, but maybe that would just kill teams struggling financially - so I don't agree, but I understand. But c'mon now, Didn't McLaren have like a "100+ grid spot penalty" last season? If you somehow break your gearbox during Friday practice, that shouldn't be a grid spot penalty; If you're starting from pit lane, you don't need a grid penalty; etc. That gets compounded later when you run out of said failed component and get another penalty to use extras later. I'm sure Hamilton haters will rejoice, but it will be a real shame if we don't get to see a championship fight because Lewis has penalties every few races for an MGU-K replacement

 

[Kakusso]

Racing incidents happen and always will happen, but unclean racing, has to be punished.
Situations where a driver crosses the line of race etiquette have to be punished, non gentleman behavior cannot have positive reward.

 

[Dan ONeill]

Racing incidents happen and always will happen, but unclean racing, has to be punished.
Situations where a driver crosses the line of race etiquette have to be punished, non gentleman behavior cannot have positive reward.

I agree with this, gentlemanly behaviour is what we all think a race driver should exhibit in terms of how they race. Unfortunately though the real behaviour of a race driver is "just enough of an a***hole to get away with it".
Some blatantly exceed the ratio of a***hole to gentleman, this is the true human competitive nature shining through. My 2p worth anyway....

 

[kona076]

Anything that inhibits drivers and their ability to race is bad, whether it's team orders or harsh penalties. Sometimes these things are necessary but they should always be a last resort.

Rosberg was at fault, but he was doing what a racing driver is supposed to do. Ask any Senna fan.

 

[Peter Klawitter]

F1 has become so boring, no racing, really about who has most $$$$ and largest budget...boring first 6-8 cars, no position changes like in the good old days, every couple of laps or battling it out for laps and laps...and huge ego's in F1 now, also whoever brings along most $$$ to enter a cockpit and bring investors...IMO absolutely boring! i wish RBR boss would have started his own Formula series, because that would have killed the current F1 series for sure. sad part is, becoming more and more boring, from year to year. inconsistent penalties already going on for some years now, IMO nonsensical penalties anyways since there is no balance in them. and worst of all those grid penalties and time penalties...in a field of let's just say 20-22 cars there are regulations in the books, where you add it all together for parts changed out, you would be at the end of the grid, but yet they add time or more stuff to it, just plain stupid. they need to make F1 competitive again between most of the teams, so people can enjoy F1 again and watch it with excitement and enjoy the battles for positions!
in short, now is all about who has biggest budget $$$$ to push out best tech, that's bottom line, IMO Pascal Wehrlein or Palmer could sit in the Mercedes vehicles and win races instead of Hamilton and Rosberg, since I think they would all be in the same boat more or less with the Mercedes cars. of course one driver has more talent than others, but not to this extend, right now it is the cars dominating and controlling the F1 action, not the drivers.

 

[aphidgod]

Honestly the only reason to watch F1 now is the morbid hope that the two Mercs will crash each other out of the race and something different than every other race for the last 3 years will therefore occur. (Because if they don't, they go 1-2, again, which is less exciting than watching dirt turn brown at this point.)

It's been a great season so far. (TWICE!! Not even in my wildest dreams...)