2017 race 8 Azerbaijan comments thread

I didn't hear it,  however after not being an Alonso fan in the past,  I'm really warming to his recent (last year or 2), more laid back, chilled and humorous attitude.

I would have had the VSC for two reasons. Firstly due to the location of the debris, between turns 2 and 3. It wasn’t scattered around the track in various turns. Being such a long lap, the Safety Car would have been justified if it was scattered everywhere. And the long lap was ideal for the VSC. As an example, the second SC period was called for the debris from the Force India clash between turns 2 and 3. Perhaps Race Control could see the marshals needed more time compared to more traditional motorsport countries who have more experienced volunteers, but that should have been possible under the VSC.

Secondly, deployment of the Safety Car should have been avoided where possible to avoid restarts. Restarts just don’t work at Baku; the leader can’t reasonably see the Safety Car or accurately when it will enter the pits, the length of the pit straight means that the cars will always arrive in turn 1 scattered everywhere. It doesn’t help that turn 2 and 3 are equally as inviting. It really was like a race in America, where you simply get continual Safety Car periods because of contact on restarts.

I’m not sure why the Safety Car line was introduced back in 2010. It appears to answer a question that nobody asked. Unless I’ve missed something, what was wrong with the start/finish line being the point where overtaking was permitted? We now see drivers trying to overtake before the final turn on most circuits, which seems unnecessarily dangerous – especially on cold tyres and brakes.

The Safety Car carries a lot of equipment that wouldn’t fit in something like a GT3 racing car, plus the infotainment screen which beams back to Race Control. Race cars also hate being idle, which a racing Safety Car would have to be in the pits – or generally going at low speeds. I’ve been to a few races now where the FCY has been used (it's like the VSC), and hearing GT3 cars trundling along at 70 mph sounds pretty awful.

Like Eddie, I’m surprised why the GT-R isn’t being used for 2017. They upgraded the Safety Car to a GT-C, which will be faster compared to the GT-S, but considering the extra downforce, power etc of the GT-R, its absence is puzzling.

However, part of the problem is that Maylander wasn’t going particularly fast. It was evident even on the pit straight he wasn’t going faster enough. Oddly he was pushing hard under braking, with the way that the nose dived down, and the rear ever so-slightly squirmed about. Now and then you’ll even see Maylander get lairy on corner exit. But that isn’t great for the F1 cars; they need the Safety Car to go fast on the straights so they can build more temperature. That is all one can hope for in a road car performing the Safety Car duties.

I was at the Blancpain Sprint race at Brands Hatch last month, and the Audi R8 Safety Car driver got a big slide coming into Paddock Hill bend. It’s always interesting what the TV doesn’t show you.

I see Jenson, Ross Brawn and Toto Terminator have all had a say about the incident. Interesting that those that have been at the sharp end are less vehement about the sanctions that should be imposed on Seb, citing the heat of competition (JB); the kind of rivalry F1 needs (RB) and that Seb and Da Ham can't be friends (TW). I hope le petit Frenchman remembers his days in Maranello fondly when he holds his Courts Martial for Seb.

I think there's a danger of F1 being mistaken for a sport here. At scrutineering the man at the front of the team crew is the lawyer, pointing out where the car is actually legal as opposed to what the scrutiniser thinks - no lawyers are present to defend the inspection of the players studs in ball sports. If Senna got away with forcing Prost off the road and was rewarded with a world title then those lawyers would have wasted no time in pointing out that (and other precedents) to the stewards before they took any drastic action. Sure they will allow the issue to be argued afterwards (again between lawyers) but not for a summary court to make such a huge decision unopposed - Schumacher only lost all his points in '97 AFTER a decision decided well after the season was over.

The point is: whoever wins the title it shouldn't be tainted with "I would have won it if I hadn't lost those points to a ban" or "I would have won it if he'd been banned and lost points", especially in the first year into a new commercial jurisdiction.