2024 Formula 1 Canadian GP Review - Ferrari Flounder
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2024
- In this weeks Back of the Grid Formula 1 Podcast, Another mixed weather classic from the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve this weekend saw two identically timed pole laps, mixed weather racing, safety cars and battles up and down the pack. Join us as we discuss the good and the bad of the weekend.
Join our Patreon for exclusive content and access to the Discord
/ backofthegrid
Enter the BOTG prediction league on our site;
backofthegrid....
Join our fantasy league on Grid Rival today!
gridrival.com/
Back of the Grid F1 Fantasy League -
fantasy.formul...
Back of the Grid is a Formula 1 podcast hosted by 3 passionate F1 fans. Tom, Chris & Stu discuss the weekly goings on in the word of Formula 1, review and preview races and offer up thoughts on all the F1 talking points. New episodes every Tuesday during the season!
F1 | Formula 1 | F12023 | 2023 | Mercedes | Lewis Hamilton | Valtteri Bottas | McLaren | Sebastian Vettel | Charles Leclerc | Ferrari | Alfa Romeo | Red Bull | Max Verstappen | Honda | Renault | Daniel Ricciardo | Motorsport | Alexander Albon | Carlos Sainz | Lando Norris | Williams | George Russell | Alpha Tauri | Pierre Gasly | Yuki Tsunoda | Sergio Perez | Aston Martin | Alpine | Fernando Alonso | Haas | Kevin Magnussen | Nico Hulkenberg | Oscar Piastri | Daniel Ricciardo | Logan Sargeant | Canada |
I'm sure you'll have better guest options, but if you don't, I've run a podcast and interview series for a small competitive gaming community for several years. I'm a 'newer' American fan, watching for 3+sh years, and following this podcast weekly for 2+. So I could be the token new US fan, have a little different perspective. My schedule is pretty flexible too.
Thank you guys !
Your analysis of the Perez situation needs more intelligence applied; the action is different from the famous crash gate (i.e crashing vs driving a dangerous car back to the pits). Once you separate the actions you realize both are premeditated. The decision to drive Perez' car back to the pits is premeditated not to crash the car. In law, there is a discussion about how to determine premeditation. What you were thinking is preplanning. Premeditated is about intent preceding the action but not about the length of time. If you have the internet and act on it in two seconds or plan your action for a year both are equally premeditated but not equally preplanned.
Are we boycotting LeMans this year or somwthing? 1:01:03
We were all away over the weekend so didn't get a chance to watch any of it live sadly
I agree that Perez’s car was dangerous, i do find the commentary hypercritical. People have very short memories on stuff like this. It’s not a first time, most teams would want to avoid a SC in that situation where possible e.g. Silverstone 2020 (first race) Lewis drove the last lap with a deflated tyre to win even though tyres were delaminating all over the place and his was still on the rim. I don’t recall any talk of it being dangerous, only praise for Lewis. There will be other examples too (non LH related ones) that is just the obvious one that comes to mind where I was watching and thinking ‘why isn’t he being told to stop’.
Yeah, I think the key difference with the Hamilton example you give being that Hamilton was never stationary at any point. I think if you’re in the wall with bits hanging off and you’re obviously going to have to retire, then clearly the sensible protocol is to have the car taken off track by officials, not driven around with large parts hanging off it.
No one can compare a deflated tyre to a destroyed rear end with the wing hanging down and debris falling while claiming to be reasonable or to have common sense. Formula 1 cars are intentionally designed to make it to the pits on three wheels because punctures are common. You probably heard "I have a puncture hundreds of times" followed by coming to the pits to change tyres from every driver over the years if you watch the races rather than Drive to Survive. The most recent example is Lance Stroll in Monaco when he hit the wall (as a Lance Stroll does) and came with not just a puncture but potential damage to the suspension. His tyre came off as he crossed the pit entrance. Lance fitted new tyres and finished the race and no one ever said he should stop on the track. The logic is that it's not good for safety or racing to stop a car anywhere on the track that can safely make it to the pits when the part that can fall off has already fallen off. You just increase the risk for everyone and sacrifice the driver's race for no benefit. Another example is the front wing.
Any penalty RB get is light, slap on the ?wrist and creating a dangerous precedent, according to your "unbiased" opinion. When was the last time a team got a pen for a damaged car returning to the pits when we have seen cars with more damage return to the pits? Didn't we see Albon drive around with a loose wheel just last race without any pen? Didn't we see Hamilton win a race driving on 3 wheels?
And I know its too much to ask but engage your 2 brain cells for a bit and ask yourself what kind of conspiracies you would be making if that exact incident had happened in the 1st stint when Max was chasing Lando and Perez had parked an obviously drive able car to the side causing an SC? You would be calling for RB to be banned from the sport.
No need for the offensive comments friend.
😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢😢
Chill out xyfufxtxxyf3690
Maybe you should rub your two brain cells together and realize the difference is intent which can be letigated and proven with evidence. If you "knowingly" do something that causes the death of someone is still different from "intentionally" killing them according to the law. You can prove Red Bull's intention easily because they admitted to it before the action in question was taken and afterwards when investigated. Red Bull used dangerous and unsportsmanlike action by one driver to benefit the other driver on the team intentionally and with premeditation. This is what these guys got wrong because premeditation does not require preplanning. The crash was an accident but the driving of a dangerous car was done knowingly and intentionally.
Furthermore, defense with "whataboutism" is pitfall because you must be aware of the distinction to avoid comparing apples to oranges.
No one can compare a deflated tyre to a destroyed rear end with the wing hanging down and debris falling while claiming to be reasonable or to have common sense. Formula 1 cars are intentionally designed to make it to the pits on three wheels because punctures are common. You probably heard "I have a puncture hundreds of times" followed by coming to the pits to change tyres from every driver over the years if you watch the races rather than Drive to Survive. The most recent example is Lance Stroll in Monaco when he hit the wall (as a Lance Stroll does) and came with not just a puncture but potential damage to the suspension. His tyre came off as he crossed the pit entrance. Lance fitted new tyres and finished the race and no one ever said he should stop on the track. The logic is that it's not good for safety or racing to stop a car anywhere on the track that can safely make it to the pits when the part that can fall off has already fallen off. You just increase the risk for everyone and sacrifice the driver's race for no benefit. Another example is the front wing.