Sebastian Vettel

Lots of threads have alluded to having a discussion about the current world champion so lets get it all off our collective chests (oooeer!)

Lots has been has been written about this young man from his testing debut with BMW Sauber in 2006 aged just 19 - he then progressed to the the toro rosso team for his first full race season in 2008 - the memorable race being his drive in the wet at Fuji where he managed to rear end his future team mate Mark Webber who said ""It's kids isn't it... kids with not enough experience – they do a good job and then they fuck it all up." - Little was Mark to know he would be paired with the "Kid" just 2 years later.

His maiden win came at the 2008 Italian GP where he qualified up from, the race started under the safety car in the rain and the young German led from start to finish in the Toro Rosso - becoming the youngest winner of a grand prix ever.

Then we enter the era of the Red Bull. In 2009 he joined the Red Bull team, which got off to a torrid start as he managed to crash into Kubika in Australia, a feat he would go on to repeat during the 09 season.

Last year needs no mention........

So to the crux of the matter. Is Sebastian Vettel?

the real deal, the baby schumi, the new pretender - a genuine racer? - aka Wunderkind

or

A very quick driver, who lucked into a very fast car and can bang it on pole and lead from lights to flag and be the quickest pilot of a car, yet can't overtake for toffee? aka WunOrAother

 

[RasputinLives]

I think he's too angry to realise what's going on until the bump.

 

[Il_leone]

Like I said I am surprised Seb did not say his hand slipped off the wheel or blamed it on an oil patch

I have to say Hamilton did well to stay calm at that moment I think the other way round Vettel would have lost it . Had it been Verstappen or Webber (ooops that has already happened) they would have used some colourful language to bring Seb to tears

 

[Bushi]

I think he's too angry to realise what's going on until the bump.

Yep, I also think it's like that.

He's so mad that he doesn't think straight and the primitive side of his brain takes over and he only realises whats he's done when the anger has sank away.

 

[sobriety]

Is that really any better? In which case surely saying 'yeah, I did it, heat of moment, lost me rag, really sorry, won't do it again, no real harm done' would've been the best approach.

 

[RasputinLives]

Now that I agree with sobriety - and someone should have been brave enough to tell him to get his shit together when he didn't.

Coming forward and owning up seems very far away from F1 culture right now. So much team cloak, daggers and PR crap.

 

[vintly]

I wouldn't be surprised if Vettel does just that - says that he lost his rag and over-reacted. I also wouldn't be surprised if he has a little dig at Hamilton for slowing suddenly mid-corner, after perhaps appearing to start his getaway. Not that it would reduce blame on Vettel's part, I just think he might not be able to help saying it. We'll see.

 

[siffert_fan]

Yes, Hamilton NEVER escapes penalties he should have gotten (see Monaco and Germany last year just for starters)

 

[Rutherford]

I wouldn't be surprised if Vettel does just that - says that he lost his rag and over-reacted. I also wouldn't be surprised if he has a little dig at Hamilton for slowing suddenly mid-corner, after perhaps appearing to start his getaway. Not that it would reduce blame on Vettel's part, I just think he might not be able to help saying it. We'll see.

According to an analysis of Hamiltons telemetry data, Hamiltons speed was 'more or less' constant which means that Vettel must have acclerated into Hamiltons rear.

The bump as such was harmless, they were driving ca. 45 km/h according to some papers, yet it was comletely out of order and wrong, as he violated the sporting conduct.
Some people who are calling for a disqualification and / or ban are overreacting. Maldonado received a grid penalty of 3 positions in Spa 2012 for a similar incident with Hamilton.

 

[vintly]

Do you have a link to this telemetry data analysis Rutherford?

 

[Rutherford]

Do you have a link to this telemetry data analysis Rutherford?

FIA analysis showed Hamilton did not brake-test Vettel

FIA data shows Hamilton didn't brake-test Vettel in Baku clash

 

[Bill Boddy]

It would be interesting to see what Vettel's telemetry data shows.

When the telemetry data shows that a car has not slowed it does not mean that the car's progress along the circuit has not slowed; if it were weaving whilst the one behind continued at the same speed in a straight line eventually there would be a collision. This probably did not occur in this case but Vettel must have had some reason for thinking that Hamilton had slowed otherwise he would not have pulled out and drawn levelish with him.

 

[vintly]

Thanks for the link Rutherford.

Lesson for Seb - the driver in front of you is not predictable nor conforms to old norms.
Lesson for Hamilton - this chap's easier to wind up than I thought.

 

[Rutherford]

It would be interesting to see what Vettel's telemetry data shows.

When the telemetry data shows that a car has not slowed it does not mean that the car's progress along the circuit has not slowed; if it were weaving whilst the one behind continued at the same speed in a straight line eventually there would be a collision. This probably did not occur in this case but Vettel must have had some reason for thinking that Hamilton had slowed otherwise he would not have pulled out and drawn levelish with him.

I assume that Vettel was thinking ahead, as most drivers do, and was expecting Hamilton to acclerate out of the corner. But as the examination of Hamiltons data showed his speed was 'more or less' constant.

 

[teabagyokel]

Some people who are calling for a disqualification and / or ban are overreacting. Maldonado received a grid penalty of 3 positions in Spa 2012 for a similar incident with Hamilton.

F1 drivers should never, ever, ever, ever be allowed to use their cars as weapons. In other words, the lack of a disqualification was wrong then, is wrong now and will be wrong whenever it happens again.

 

[Il_leone]

If you are trying to compare Maldonado and Hamilton in 2012 to last Sunday the difference was they were at it after qualifying was finished whilst Vettel could have taken out Hamilton and caused another a dangerous situation for all the cars behind

The fact he could not contain himself and decided to give Hamilton a tap..harmless or not that is considered illegal aggressive driving

 

[RasputinLives]

Il_leone yes but on the other hand Maldonado's was down at higher speed and more likely to kill the driver he was aiming at.

Swings and roundabouts.

 

[The Pits]

F1 drivers should never, ever, ever, ever be allowed to use their cars as weapons. In other words, the lack of a disqualification was wrong then, is wrong now and will be wrong whenever it happens again.

That there is a statement of conviction that i can respect.

 

[Rutherford]

F1 drivers should never, ever, ever, ever be allowed to use their cars as weapons. In other words, the lack of a disqualification was wrong then, is wrong now and will be wrong whenever it happens again.

Did the stewards disqualify Senna when he took out Prost in Suzuka 1991?, he had previously announced that he would commit to taking both out, if Prost would try to overtake around the outside.

I can't think of a driver who has been disqualified for bumping into another one on purpose. Schumacher was even handed the WDC in 1994 after ruining Hills race.

 

[vintly]

F1 drivers should never, ever, ever, ever be allowed to use their cars as weapons. In other words, the lack of a disqualification was wrong then, is wrong now and will be wrong whenever it happens again.

Totally disagree. I'm generally a fan of sweeping statements that are true, but in the case of F1 safety you have to be case sensitive. And cars aren't weapons, they're just inherently dangerous.

Vettel's loss of control that led to the wheel-barge was not actually dangerous. Yes he purposely banged wheels with another car, but the fact remains that at the speed they were going, and due to their not being any bodywork damage, the act was not dangerous enough for a ban. There was negligible effect on the victim, and that is a large part of the consideration.

Like a thief who steals £5 - it's different to stealing £500. Although the act is deplorable and should be punished, the effect on the victim is relevant to the amount stolen, so the punishment has to take that into account. If Vettel had damaged bodywork, or caused a spin, that would have been completely different. Hence you can't have a one-size-fits-all disqualification rule.

 

[cider_and_toast]

I disagree with that. For me it comes down to intent not outcome. Vettel intended to hit Hamilton with his car. Just because nothing severe happened doesn't excuse the intent of the action. The thief who stole the £5 note would have stolen the £500 had it been there. A thief is a thief.

He deliberately used (Vettel) his car to hit another competitor. The intent was to show anger, aggression and was in response to an incident that was not caused by Hamilton. It is unacceptable, potentially unsafe and does not reflect well on the driver or his team. (Though as I have said, I still find it funny).

A one race ban is fully commensurate with the gravity of the incident.