So I was having a think about some of the responses to the safety car poll and it got me thinking about the fairness of the outcome when a safety car is introduced into a live event.
Now I know that the commonly dragged out expression when this subject is brought up is 'thems the breaks deal with them' and I fully appreciate that all teams say that they know what they are in for, but consider the following:
How it effects the points over the space of a season is what really matters to all involved, so there clearly arent enough SC incidents to make the argument that it (points wise) evens itself out over an acceptable period of time.
And secondly, an atypical scenario is that driver X loses points, or even loses the Win of a race because driver Y put his car into a wall, conversely other drivers have gained points without any justification - Now we can say thems the breaks, but its one hell of a cop out.
So after the long winded introduction, i'll get to my point. The SC isn't the real cop out, I personally believe the process of pitting for 'the other' tyre is (the first thing everyone does the minute the SC is deployed). In my mind it is in no way different to the pitting for fuel, it's a mechanism for introducing randomness into the results to give the illusion of competition.
I really don't get excited when I hear tyre manufacturers rubbing their hands together with glee at the thought of bringing silly tyre combinations to events to 'make things more exciting' (aka having an impact on the result wildly beyond their remit).
I'm a true believer in the idea that once we remove false mechanisms of implying competition exists, only then would the FIA be forced to take a real sober look at what needs to be changed - so my starter for 10, get rid of pit stops all together!
Thoughts, mumblings and spare straight jackets welcome as usual
Now I know that the commonly dragged out expression when this subject is brought up is 'thems the breaks deal with them' and I fully appreciate that all teams say that they know what they are in for, but consider the following:
How it effects the points over the space of a season is what really matters to all involved, so there clearly arent enough SC incidents to make the argument that it (points wise) evens itself out over an acceptable period of time.
And secondly, an atypical scenario is that driver X loses points, or even loses the Win of a race because driver Y put his car into a wall, conversely other drivers have gained points without any justification - Now we can say thems the breaks, but its one hell of a cop out.
So after the long winded introduction, i'll get to my point. The SC isn't the real cop out, I personally believe the process of pitting for 'the other' tyre is (the first thing everyone does the minute the SC is deployed). In my mind it is in no way different to the pitting for fuel, it's a mechanism for introducing randomness into the results to give the illusion of competition.
I really don't get excited when I hear tyre manufacturers rubbing their hands together with glee at the thought of bringing silly tyre combinations to events to 'make things more exciting' (aka having an impact on the result wildly beyond their remit).
I'm a true believer in the idea that once we remove false mechanisms of implying competition exists, only then would the FIA be forced to take a real sober look at what needs to be changed - so my starter for 10, get rid of pit stops all together!
Thoughts, mumblings and spare straight jackets welcome as usual