Di Resta blames Heidfeld for incident


Leave me alone I'm on Smoko
Got this from the BBC but not sure how accurate it is. Paul Di Resta is quoted as saying

"I'd had a chance of passing Heidfeld the lap before the incident but thought I'd bide my time. I got another run on him, got alongside him, but where he was trying to brake and what he was trying to do, he was never going to make the chicane and he took my front wing off"

Now I've only seen the incident a couple of times but it didn't look that way to me. To me it look like Di Resta had a half hearted look up Nick's inside and had his nose taken off. I certainly don't remember Di Resta being alongside him! the move might of worked in DTM though!

He's also quoted as saying

"So I had to stop for a wing change and I got a drive-through penalty, which again I thought was harsh"

Now this I agree with - it wasn't a dangerous move, just clumsy, and Heidfeld escaped without damage whilst Di Resta already had his punishment in the form of a wing change.

Whats everyone elses view on all this?
Brundle said it was half-hearted and clumsy, so I assume many people will take this view (not you specifically Ras).

I find it absurd that any driver would have been given a drive-through for that incident. There was no need to penalize a move that only hampered the driver who attempted it? Heidfeld carried on with no problem, and in fact probably gained a second or two by getting nudged across the run-off area.

di Resta has a right to feel aggrieved, and it's penalties like this that allow for the "Closing of Doors" to occur. If the leading driver knows he can slam the door shut without any fear whatsoever of being penalized, the racing will suffer immensely.

Blame should not be apportioned to the trailing driver EVERY TIME, in EVERY SITUATION, which is basically how the FIA operates these days.
Blame should not be apportioned to the trailing driver EVERY TIME, in EVERY SITUATION, which is basically how the FIA operates these days.

couldn't agree with you more on that one Keke, I thought the penalty was ridiculous too so not suprised to see Di Resta saying so - bit suprised he says it was Heidfeld's fault though. Will go back and look at it again but I'm not sure what else Nick could have done - he has to try and make the chicane.
It is a tendancy to blame other for ones problems these days, silly attempt to make when it is really a non-passing zone(theoretically) passing in a chicane is something someone stuck on stupid will attempt.

Di Resta has been pretty good to watch bar the mental errors in the last two races, I would love to see him at Mercedes Petronas sooner rather than later.
Well I do agree with him on the fact that Heidfeld wasn't going to make that corner as he normally would. I am not blaming Heidfeld, but he would have ended up either in the wall or cutting the chicane either way.

As for Di Resta, clumsy move, but the penalty he got was a farce, but then again his team-mate got a penalty in the same race for a similar reason.
Like i said in the other thread, Di Resta's penality was an absoulte joke. He'd been punished enough since his wing came off why punish him again on top of that?

But i don't like the way he's blamed Heidfeld for this as the move was clumsy at best.
Haven't you heard? You're not allowed to accidently collide with other drivers anymore. They were more investigations in that race than I've had hot dinners. Absolute load of nonsense. Together with the 2-hour long stoppage and the numerous deployments of the safety car by that hyperchondriac Charlie Whiting, I'm afraid I can't agree with certain sites and papers that called it "a classic".
I'm not sure I agree that if a driver is punished by his own bits falling off that he shouldn't face further punishment. I think the only time a driver should face a penalty (whether they've damaged their own car or not) is if they've caused the collision and the other driver (who was minding his own business) suffers race altering damage, even if it's a tenth a lap.

I don't think Heidfeld suffered from the Di Resta incident. I think Hamilton suffered slightly after the Alonso one (probably not enough to warrant a penalty). Rosberg, Massa, Alguersuari are all drivers who weren't penalised this year with the latter actually causing significant damage to another driver but not facing penalty because he'd ended his own race.
There are too many "if's" and "buts", if experts and former drivers can't interpret what should be punishable and what shouldn't, leads to the current status quo, that some drivers are getting the brunt more than others.
OK! Ok forget for a second that Nick Heidfeld is a divine and perfect being unlike you or I. Definitely unlike Di Resta. Now I like Di Resta and I think the stewarding is ridiculous. There is no way he deserved a penalty for something that didn't do anything to Heidfeld's race and harmed his own hugely, but there is no way a man such as Nick Heidfeld should be considered at fault in this situation. I feel this needless onslought on one of the most competant, well mannered gents in Forumla One. I would feel bad, except I know Di Resta will lose sleep over his comments.
Form is temporary. Class is permanent.

I would call this the proverbial shoveling of dirt into ones own grave, it is bad enough being called to the stewards office, but if you are going to have social network or media jibes it will never land you good repore by the powers to be.
Top Bottom