Leclerc: "Magnussen is and always will be stupid"

[Tberg]

I don't get why some people are defending Mag because he moved once and not twice. The problem isn't the number of moves made, but the timing. The rules states that you cannot move after the car behind has made the move. Leclerc clearly moves to the right and almost a second laster Mag tries to defend. Even if he moves 5ms (again, we talk about more than half a second in this case) after Leclerc has made his, he is still at fault, cause Mag wanted to wait until the end to defend and that's a risk he was willing to run. That's a clear penalty, easy.
And again to those saying the stewards are right: we've seen multiple times that the stewards in F1 are not reliable, with penalties that differs based on the driver committing the infraction. So whatever is the decision chosen by the stewards, it's not necessarily the correct one.

While I won't put a disagree on your post just to flame, your claim of rules is interesting: point to where in recent published F1 sporting regulations, where it says that 'you cannot move after the car behind has made the move', and let me know when and where you found it.

Rights to rights, I agree that stewards are not always right, f.i. I think it was odd to hand Alonso a penalty after recognizing Strolls fault in forcing him off.

Yeah, that would be called blocking and it's not allowed.

Again, during what times is moving in front of another car called blocking and when is it defending?

 

[BhZ]

There's probably none of us that would have been able to react or avoid that accident any better.

If you are talking about Leclerc attempting to avoid it, yes, it close to impossible. If we are talking about Magnussen late move, then i don't agree. Those guys react in way less than 2 tenths of a second, it was rather easy to avoid.

 

[BhZ]

I won't put a disagree on your post just to flame

What?

point to where in recent published F1 sporting regulations, where it says that 'you cannot move after the car behind has made the move', and let me know when and where you found it.

Ofc it's not written like that, but late moves have always been punished in the past (again, depending on who does it).

 

[Tberg]

Yeah, that would be called blocking and it's not allowed.

Again, during what times is moving in front of another car blocking

If you are talking about Leclerc attempting to avoid it, yes, it close to impossible. If we are talking about Magnussen late move, then i don't agree. Those guys react in way less than 2 tenths of a second, it was rather easy to avoid.

Kimi did quite fine:

Anyway, I think it was an unwise move by Mag, it cost him a DNF and a shitstorm. Was it his fault and repsonsibility entirely? No. Does the rules say you can move once on a straight to defend, before a breaking zone? Yes, it does in the 2017 regulations, it has now been removed, solely being refered to as 'the code' in 2018 regulations.

 

[Tberg]

What?

Ofc it's not written like that, but late moves have always been punished in the past (again, depending on who does it).

So "The rules states that you cannot move after the car behind has made the move." was just an expression?
FIA has argued back and forth about this type of incident, the Kimi vs. Max was about the most recent "dangerous" one. Even Alonso approved Max's defence back then, refering to what the "rules" actually states in regulations at the time.

 

[BhZ]

Again, during what times is moving in front of another car blocking

Doing it after the car behind has made his move is blocking. Your video about ver vs kimi just reminds once again how stewards don't apply the same rule the same way every time. Kimi didn't crash on verstappen cause the speed difference was less and the move was much less sudden. Kimi and Ver almost moved at the same time.

 

[Turk]

If you are talking about Leclerc attempting to avoid it, yes, it close to impossible. If we are talking about Magnussen late move, then i don't agree. Those guys react in way less than 2 tenths of a second, it was rather easy to avoid.

I don't think you can be certain that F1 drivers reaction times will always be less than 200ms, the average for a human (under laboratory conditions) is 215ms +, and while quicker is possible you do start to hit the technical limitations of the nervous system after that. I'm not sure that having reaction times well below 200ms is possible. Now, under the right conditions when someone is expecting a cue to react, they may be able to pull off superhuman reaction times, but that's down to the brain predicting events rather than reacting.

But that's just a reaction time and doesn't take into account all the other processing that the driver has to do at the same time.

The bottom line is it's very, very easy to make the wrong move and have it look intentional from the outside.

 

[BhZ]

I'm not sure that having reaction times well below 200ms is possible. Now, under the right conditions when someone is expecting a cue to react, they may be able to pull off superhuman reaction times, but that's down to the brain predicting events rather than reacting.

Look it up, a man under 30 should go below 200 "easily". A reaction of half a second or more is usually a reaction of a 70 years old. F1 drivers are full of adrenaline, especially when making an overtake.

 

[Tberg]

Doing it after the car behind has made his move is blocking.

I'm posting the 2017 F1 article again:

27.7 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track
without justifiable reason.
For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is
alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.

There's zero articles in the 2017 or 2018 regulations mentioning something contradicting this.

Yes, I know the term 'blocking' and when it applies. I've had this discussion many times in leagues, both as driver and steward (yeah, sorry for bringing that card to the table).
That said, thank you for taking the discussion serious and bringing arguements to the table.

 

[v8william]

Charles is a good clean overtaker and Kevin has history of fighting too aggressive and needs to dial it down for when it matters. So i side with Charles

Charles will be thinking "can't wait till i get my Ferrari "

Yeah, that is pretty true, but do you really want conservative drivers that dont do anything agressive at all? I might be Danish, but setting that aside i still think Magnussen makes the sport more fun to watch. I hate the boring Vettel takes Hamilton (and opposite). The only reason they are interresting is because of the drivers. So many love them.

But i think it is pretty impresive that Magnussen (the slow and "unnoticed" driver) makes it just as fun to watch without so many people rooting for him!

 

[Enagee]

@v8william my message says Kmag needs to dial it down for when it matters, his stats show being aggressive all the time does not work. We see this type of driving online.

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

The rule says:
27.7 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track
without justifiable reason.
For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is
alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’

I'm baffled that he uses frames as arguements, completely ignoring rules of racing, or 'code' as refered to in F1 sporting regulations. His comment is completely irrelevant to what actually happened, I highly doubt that he is speaking the stewards word here. Now I really want a steward to come forward and say what they based their decision on

Does the rules say you can move once on a straight to defend, before a breaking zone? Yes, it does in the 2017 regulations, it has now been removed, solely being refered to as 'the code' in 2018 regulations.

I'm posting the 2017 F1 article again:

27.7 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full
width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting
to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track
without justifiable reason.
For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is
alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.

There's zero articles in the 2017 or 2018 regulations mentioning something contradicting this.

Yes, I know the term 'blocking' and when it applies. I've had this discussion many times in leagues, both as driver and steward (yeah, sorry for bringing that card to the table).
That said, thank you for taking the discussion serious and bringing arguements to the table.

First of all, sorry for quoting 4 posts from you, but they all go around the same point.
You are focusing solely on single rule-paragraphs, and as Magnussen didn't breach 27.7 in the F1 Sporting Regulations, you view it as being perfectly fine, and you refer to "the code" without looking it up.

Let's do a deep dive in to the different rules and regulations. As you correctly point out, there is no 27.7 in the 2018 F1 Sporting Regulations, which means pointing to that is a bit irrelevant.
However, the 27.4 in the Sporting Regulations do state "At no time may a car be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person." This is exactly what Magnussen was reprimanded for in Spain, when he did the exact same thing to Leclerc during FP1. He got his official reprimand because his move was potentially dangerous. I honestly think the one in Japan looks worse.
To recap. The upper one was reprimanded, bottom was not.

The "code" you refer to, which all drivers holding an FIA license, that attend any FIA-races needs to follow is the International Sporting Code, the ISC is huge. However, it is chapter IV in Appendix L that is the part that covers driving conduct on circuits. Article 2 of Chapter IV mentions the same regarding potentially dangerous. It also mentions the whole "one move" and the previous 27.7 in the F1 Sporting Regulations.
Regardless, the whole issue here is the potentially dangerous situation, which he was reprimanded for earlier this year, haven't learned from, and does the same thing again.
I'm also sure that the majority know that this kind of contact, the chance to be launched over the rear of another car is one of the most dangerous things that can happen, just ask Mark Webber, Marco Campos, Jeff Krosnoff, Takashi Yokoyama or Hitoshi Ogawa. Except, for the fact that only Webber survived an incident where they connected with the rear of the car ahead, Ogawas incident was at the end of the s/f straight at Suzuka as well.

I cannot see how a late, reactive defensive move, one that's so abrupt as this one as well, isn't dangerous. The fact that Leclerc in the end hit Magnussen dead on, is probably the thing that kept the car from getting some air under it.

The easy way would be to employ the IndyCar rule. One defensive move is allowed, however, any defensive moves must be pre-emptive. Any defensive move in reaction to, is not allowed. That way you remove this danger. They have learned from the dangers. F1 hasn't.

 

[BhZ]

i still think Magnussen makes the sport more fun to watch.

A driver can be fun to watch without being dangerous. F2 is fun and drivers are generally clean. Having a dirty driving style is unsportsmanlike and dangerous for other drivers. You confuse the "boring factor" thinking it's driver's fault for being too clean, when it's the current regulations that don't allow too many battles on track.

 

[Tberg]

First of all, sorry for quoting 4 posts from you, but they all go around the same point.
You are focusing solely on single rule-paragraphs, and as Magnussen didn't breach 27.7 in the F1 Sporting Regulations, you view it as being perfectly fine, and you refer to "the code" without looking it up.

Let's do a deep dive in to the different rules and regulations. As you correctly point out, there is no 27.7 in the 2018 F1 Sporting Regulations, which means pointing to that is a bit irrelevant.
However, the 27.4 in the Sporting Regulations do state "At no time may a car be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person." This is exactly what Magnussen was reprimanded for in Spain, when he did the exact same thing to Leclerc during FP1. He got his official reprimand because his move was potentially dangerous. I honestly think the one in Japan looks worse.
To recap. The upper one was reprimanded, bottom was not.

The "code" you refer to, which all drivers holding an FIA license, that attend any FIA-races needs to follow is the International Sporting Code, the ISC is huge. However, it is chapter IV in Appendix L that is the part that covers driving conduct on circuits. Article 2 of Chapter IV mentions the same regarding potentially dangerous. It also mentions the whole "one move" and the previous 27.7 in the F1 Sporting Regulations.
Regardless, the whole issue here is the potentially dangerous situation, which he was reprimanded for earlier this year, haven't learned from, and does the same thing again.
I'm also sure that the majority know that this kind of contact, the chance to be launched over the rear of another car is one of the most dangerous things that can happen, just ask Mark Webber, Marco Campos, Jeff Krosnoff, Takashi Yokoyama or Hitoshi Ogawa. Except, for the fact that only Webber survived an incident where they connected with the rear of the car ahead, Ogawas incident was at the end of the s/f straight at Suzuka as well.

I cannot see how a late, reactive defensive move, one that's so abrupt as this one as well, isn't dangerous. The fact that Leclerc in the end hit Magnussen dead on, is probably the thing that kept the car from getting some air under it.

The easy way would be to employ the IndyCar rule. One defensive move is allowed, however, any defensive moves must be pre-emptive. Any defensive move in reaction to, is not allowed. That way you remove this danger. They have learned from the dangers. F1 hasn't.

Thanks Ole, for a sound reply, appreciated. I'm aware of the ISC and that Indycar has a defensive rule, I remember a video from safeisfast we used to refer to couple of years ago. The thing that bugged me the most here was the invented fanatasy facts without documentation or arguements to back it.

 

[BrunoBæ]

What a load of crap. Yes I'm dane and I root for Mag, but I don't defend his mistakes. Mag moved once and is allowed to, Leclerc was sleeping. Yes, in hinsight Mag could have been patient and it was a late call, but he did not change line twice and they were not in the brakingzone. If the judges would have come to the conclusion that Mag was infact at fault, they'd penalize him even though he had to retire. Obviously they classified it as a racing incident.
Second,'all drivers'? Join the choir that Alonso started. Magnussen has taking his penalties heads up most of the time, unlike others (if they even get it, being a F1 star).
Third, you actually believe stewards use only the broadcasted TV when investigating? Sigh..

Which brings thought, that so many vote for Mag at fault, without commenting on why. It seems a very emotional voting upon the popularity Leclerc has gained, which is totally deserved.

100% agree.
The stewards checked the timespan between Magnussens move and Leclerces attack - and concluded that because it was actually at the same time (= less than 10ms) it was not a reaction but a legal defensive move.
The stewards also concluded that Magnussen did only move 1 time(one) - and not like Verstappen has done several times zigzagging 2-3 times - as a reactive defensive move..
So much for the clever boys who repeat Alonzos BS that ALL F1 drivers hate Magnussen because he is sooo unsportsman like.
And CatsAreTheWorstDogs check Magnussens individual rating if you think he should have no place in modern F1.
You dont earn this rating if your only skill is to make your car "too" wide.
Or to tell other drivers to "suck your balls"

 

[Nestoche]

Anyone forget the Russian GP? I didn't see anything different than Vettel's one block move to Hamilton in Russia. The difference is that Hamilton's quick reflects reaction saved him from crashing into Vettel where Leclerc was a little too slow in his reaction time to avoid Mag IMO.

Looking forward to seeing the hyped Leclerc in the Ferrari next year....

 

[paracletus]

An unfortunate incident, nothing more or less.
He just started the move, and then finished it.
Magnussen and Growjean have both done very well this year, and deserved the 2019 contract.

 

[BrunoBæ]

F1 race director Charlie Whiting said: "If you analyse very, very carefully, what you see is two cars coming down, with Kevin not moving and then Charles catches, catches, catches.

"He [Charles] decides to go to the right and, at exactly the same time, or on the video it was one frame, one frame's distance, then Kevin moves.

"I think it is impossible to say Kevin blocked him. It was just that he had made the decision, he was going to go right, fractionally after Charles had.

"You have to look at it quite a few times and analyse it in a little detail to see that. But I think it was just unfortunate. And I think that is what the stewards felt."

So much for all the clever boys making this poll pointing at Magnussen.
Their judgement based on their little telly will allways be more objective than a certain Whitings.

 

[RasmusP]

So much for all the clever boys making this poll pointing at Magnussen.
Their judgement based on their little telly will allways be more objective than a certain Whitings.

I won't put all the blame on mag but I still think that his decision "he made at the same time leclerc did his decision", is still risky and on the edge to unsportsmanlike.
It's totally normal vor the overtaking car to wait for the last inch before moving out of the slipstream but to do such a last second defending move is always risky.

I'd still go with racing incident but just because something is fine with the rules, it doesn't mean that you can't be an arse overall.

And I think that is what's happening with Mag. He still got pretty much a white vest. But he's also making enemies where he can.

 

[BrunoBæ]

@RasmusP
You are ofcourse allowed to have this oppinion.
But compare Vettels behaviour in this video (from Russias race) and try to make a mental experiment if this had been Magnussen instead of Vettel.
Im sure most people would have said that this idiot Magnussen should be excluded from several races because he intentionally try to crash other drivers.
Actually I personally think this Vettel move is much harder to defend than Magnussens vs Leclerc.