Grand Prix 2019 Canadian Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

Back in 1991 Nigel Mansell had been persuaded not retire after his time at Ferrari and re-joined Williams. What took him back to Williams was the first Adrian Newey design Williams F1 car, the FW14. The 1991 car did not have the infamous active suspension of the FW14B but it was still a very advanced racing car.

The car proved fast but unreliable in the early races. Patrese took a second place in Brazil and Mansell the same in Monaco, in the other races the Williams failed to finish.

Then came Canada.

Patrese put his car on Pole, 0.4 seconds quicker than Mansell. At the start of the race Mansell took the lead and there he stayed for 68 laps. Meanwhile Patrese was having trouble with his gearbox and was passed by Nelson Piquet in the Benetton and Stefano Modeno in the Tyrrell.

Mansell was cruising at the front. On lap 65 he set the fastest lap and was stroking the car home. On the final lap he was over a minute ahead of Piquet and looked set to take his first victory on his return to Williams. As he approached the hairpin for the final time the car slowed, it rounded the hairpin and as Nigel attempted to accelerate down the straight towards the chicane the car simply wouldn't go. The Englishman vented his frustration and beat the steering wheel as the machine dribbled to a halt in front of one of the main grandstands. He got out and left the car where it was.

How could Mansell lose the race so close to the finish? When the car got back to the pits the engine started, the gearbox worked fine and it probably could have done another race. Unfortunately Nigel had let the revs drop too low as he approached the hairpin which lost electrical and hydraulic power causing the gearbox barrel to get stuck.

Meanwhile his nemesis, Nelson Piquet, over half a lap behind, kept it all together and cruised past to take what would be his last victory in F1 in his last season in the sport.

What of 2019? Expect a Mercedes front row with Hamilton on pole. Lewis will take a lights to flag victory and, I suspect, a Grand Chelem. Enjoy.

 

[F1Brits_90]

 

[Johnny Carwash]

We can get on with our lives now.

 

[Grizzly]

Ahh' crap does this mean this thread has run its course? I keep dipping in every time I feel a little too calm with how things are going on any particular day and need winding up.

 

[Ruslan]

This thread will never end. Every time a driver sits on a line, or re-enters the track ahead of anyone, or doesn't leave enough space....someone is going to say, it is like Vettel at Barcelona, he should be penalized.

I gather we have defaulted to the stricter interpretation of the racing rules, which I gather is:

1. If you exit the track while ahead of a pursuing car, you must give up the position.
2. When you re-enter the track, you must say off the line.
3. You must always leave a car width of space for a car running next to you.

We shall see how this is interpreted in future races.

 

[Hamberg]

I want consistency in season not across seasons. Rules and interpretations three years later are going to be different.

 

[Izumi]

This thread will never end. Every time a driver sits on a line, or re-enters the track ahead of anyone, or doesn't leave enough space....someone is going to say, it is like Vettel at Barcelona, he should be penalized.

I gather we have defaulted to the stricter interpretation of the racing rules, which I gather is:

1. If you exit the track while ahead of a pursuing car, you must give up the position.
2. When you re-enter the track, you must say off the line.
3. You must always leave a car width of space for a car running next to you.

We shall see how this is interpreted in future races.

Ruslan, this is turning into revolving door argument. Our mutual friend Publius eloquently explained that under certain conditions a driver returning onto track has very little, if any control over his car. How then you can demand where he should go? (Your No. 2.)
My wish regarding FiA - stay out of it, please. Last thing what we need is domineering, arrogant, consistently inconsistent
knowing all group of people managing races. I do not find it particularly appealing.

 

[F1Brits_90]

1. If you exit the track while ahead of a pursuing car, you must give up the position.
2. When you re-enter the track, you must say off the line.
3. You must always leave a car width of space for a car running next to you.

what if like vettel them 3 werent physically possible. I still believe that like handball rule in football. it should only be deliberate like Schumacher v Hill & Villeneuve that needs a penalty. the rule needs changing

I found it ironic that this morning, on the Verstappen incident, Lewis Hamilton was interviewed by F1 inhouse team. he said sometimes these things happen it wasn't deliberate or anyone fault. just is what it is its funny how he takes that view now & not 2 weeks ago

I will try make this the last point & personally put this to bed

 

[Ruslan]

I will try make this the last point & personally put this to bed

Well, it is not going to go to bed, because every other race there will be a similar incident, and the argument over the rules (or their current interpretation) and what happens on track will be re-visited. It appears that F1 (or FIA) has a set of rules that are stricter than what a lot of people would want.

 

[Ruslan]

Our mutual friend Publius eloquently explained that under certain conditions a driver returning onto track has very little, if any control over his car.

Well, the stewards ruled that he had control.

 

[Izumi]

Well, the stewards ruled that he had control.

Unfortunately that is true, however it doesn't follow, they proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had control. In fact, they didn't have to prove anything beyond expressing their opinion and without being accountable to anyone for the decision rendered.

 

[Ruslan]

Unfortunately that is true, however it doesn't follow, they proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had control. In fact, they didn't have to prove anything beyond expressing their opinion and without being accountable to anyone for the decision rendered.

The standard "beyond reasonable doubt" applies to criminal cases in the U.S. (but not civil cases). I do not think it applies to adjudicating a sporting series.

And.....they are held accountable. The decision can be appealed and overturned, although I note that Ferrari did not (were afraid to) appeal the decision. Furthermore, stewards have been fined in the past (Jacky Ickx was for a weather call he made at Monaco), and of course, they can not be chosen for any further stewarding duties if they are not happy with their work. So...it does appear that they are held to some level of accountability.

 

[Izumi]

I think Canadian race saga is over. To add insult to the injury, Ferrari and Vettel became subject of internet ridicule, yet I think this event will remain etched in memory of many for some time as a small example what's wrong with F1 today. Playing accuser, judge and jury as it happened in this case is definitely not something that should be pumping up my blood pressure. Issues with stewards is an ongoing problem for many years, however this latest one ends here today for me.