F1 2024

[HappytalkAgain]

Fair enough, but I still can't tell if Piastri chose to stay out or was compelled to to permit Norris his stop. Which, kinda dictates whether giving him the win was valid or not.

As far as I’m aware it was the team that made the call but surely agreed on by Oscar’s side of the garage as they’d have had first dibs.

 

[GeeJayW]

Fair enough, but I still can't tell if Piastri chose to stay out or was compelled to to permit Norris his stop. Which, kinda dictates whether giving him the win was valid or not.

I think Lando’s first stop was a bit early and both as mentioned, in response to Lewis. There was some radio chat and the team told Piastri that they would essentially look after him, which is what happened. Can’t imagine many racing drivers giving up a nailed on win to keep a team mate (fellow competitor) on side, but it seems Lando’s team-player qualities came through for Piastri.

 

[Bellow]

As far as I’m aware it was the team that made the call but surely agreed on by Oscar’s side of the garage as they’d have had first dibs.

It is just so opaque. But if Piastri agreed knowing he could be disadvantaged then that's where (IMO) he lost the race.

I think Lando’s first stop was a bit early and both as mentioned, in response to Lewis. There was some radio chat and the team told Piastri that they would essentially look after him, which is what happened.

But, if he knew he was at a disadvantage to Norris and was promised the lead back then a different complexion. Which then begs the question as to why Norris ran away with a catch-me-if-you-can attitude. As if Piastri had to earn what was promised.
Was that the day we realised how effective Zak Brown is - by his absence?

 

[ChrisPDuck]

MV saying over the radio to his team "OK, so you can just drive people off the track then?" made me laugh out loud.

Me too! Such a lack of self-awareness.

The rest of that exchange showed a comic use of the future tense
"OK, so you can just run people off the track then? You can tell the FIA that’s how we’re going to race from now onwards... just driving people off the road".

 

[HappytalkAgain]

I think Lando’s first stop was a bit early and both as mentioned, in response to Lewis. There was some radio chat and the team told Piastri that they would essentially look after him, which is what happened. Can’t imagine many racing drivers giving up a nailed on win to keep a team mate (fellow competitor) on side, but it seems Lando’s team-player qualities came through for Piastri.

Can you imagine the conversation afterwards between best buddies Lando & Max? I can just hear Max’s opinion on the matter.

 

[GeeJayW]

It is just so opaque. But if Piastri agreed knowing he could be disadvantaged then that's where (IMO) he lost the race.


But, if he knew he was at a disadvantage to Norris and was promised the lead back then a different complexion. Which then begs the question as to why Norris ran away with a catch-me-if-you-can attitude. As if Piastri had to earn what was promised.
Was that the day we realised how effective Zak Brown is - by his absence?

I think Lando was a bit miffed at a) being squeezed in the first corner and b) being told to swap with Piastri. So he was demonstrating just who the quicker race driver actually is. His plan (from what I’ve read today) was to let Oscar through on the last corner of the last lap, but was reminded by his team that would not be allowed under a safety car. So he backed off and let him past earlier.

 

[GeeJayW]

Can you imagine the conversation afterwards between best buddies Lando & Max? I can just hear Max’s opinion on the matter.

Well Max showed in Brazil ‘22 what he thinks about team orders to let his team mate through… “don’t ask me about this again! Are we clear!?”

 

[Bellow]

Can’t imagine many racing drivers giving up a nailed on win to keep a team mate (fellow competitor) on side, but it seems Lando’s team-player qualities came through for Piastri.

To be fair, it was only when threatened with lack of support from Piastri and the team over the remainder of the season that he showed compliance.
To my mind, unless Piastri's race was compromised (ie, denied a requested stop) and then failed to catch Norris only because he'd been promised the place, then the win should have been to Norris. Nothing against Piastri - the reverse - I rate him highly. And would have preferred to see him take his first F1 win with no doubts whatsoever.

 

[Bellow]

I think Lando was a bit miffed at a) being squeezed in the first corner

That's racing folks!

and b) being told to swap with Piastri. So he was demonstrating just who the quicker race driver actually is. His plan (from what I’ve read today) was to let Oscar through on the last corner of the last lap, but was reminded by his team that would not be allowed under a safety car. So he backed off and let him past earlier.

It's messy. I guess it comes down to exactly what was said to Piastri at the time of that pit stop. And the only justification for any promise was if he was definitely compromised by Norris's early stop. And I'm not seeing the evidence of that - other than 'lead car' protocols regarding prioritisation of pit stops. Maybe McLaren need to practice double stacking.

 

[GeeJayW]

To be fair, it was only when threatened with lack of support from Piastri and the team over the remainder of the season that he showed compliance.
To my mind, unless Piastri's race was compromised (ie, denied a requested stop) and then failed to catch Norris only because he'd been promised the place, then the win should have been to Norris. Nothing against Piastri - the reverse - I rate him highly. And would have preferred to see him take his first F1 win with no doubts whatsoever.

Me too. As mentioned above, in my view the team should be managing Piastri (the junior driver) and giving full backing to Norris given he is second in the championship. But, it’s their call…

 

[ChrisPDuck]

MV: "Shouldn’t you leave a car’s width?"

Looks like about twice that to me. He has no shame - he'll say anything he can think of to justify his actions, regardless of how ridiculous it looks.

 

[GeeJayW]

That's racing folks!

It's messy. I guess it comes down to exactly what was said to Piastri at the time of that pit stop. And the only justification for any promise was if he was definitely compromised by Norris's early stop. And I'm not seeing the evidence of that - other than 'lead car' protocols regarding prioritisation of pit stops. Maybe McLaren need to practice double stacking.

It was racing, but that doesn’t mean Norris shouldn’t be a bit miffed about it.

As for double stacking, there wasn’t an opportunity for that as far as I can see.

 

[HappytalkAgain]

In hindsight it would have been exciting to see Lando give the place back instantly then both fight for the win

 

[grober]

Zak was in the US at the IndyCar race, I think…

Arrow McLaren IndyCar: Speed & Strategy on the American Circuit

Join Arrow McLaren in the NTT INDYCAR SERIES for high-speed races and strategic mastery. Witness our pursuit of glory on America's iconic tracks.

www.mclaren.com

seems a pity he missed out on the first McLAREN F1 podium 1/2 for years

 

[Bellow]

It was racing, but that doesn’t mean Norris shouldn’t be a bit miffed about it.

Norris appears to be in a one man struggle with execution. He knows what he wants, is capable of achieving it - but is hampered by how he executes.

As for double stacking, there wasn’t an opportunity for that as far as I can see.

If, Piastri had call on being first to pit (due to race position) he could have pitted on the same lap as Norris, double stacked, to preserve the protocol and track position. Unnecessarily clumsy, but....

 

[HappytalkAgain]

If, Piastri had call on being first to pit (due to race position) he could have pitted on the same lap as Norris, double stacked, to preserve the protocol and track position. Unnecessarily clumsy, but....

Good point. IIRC Oscar was around 4.2 seconds ahead when Lando pitted so plenty of time.

 

[Dryce]

If, Piastri had call on being first to pit (due to race position) he could have pitted on the same lap as Norris, double stacked, to preserve the protocol and track position. Unnecessarily clumsy, but....

I don't think you double stack in these circumstances. Too risky against the benefit.

 

[Bellow]

I don't think you double stack in these circumstances. Too risky against the benefit.

When the lead driver has to be begged to comply, threatened with consequences if he doesn't, there's new risk to be considered. Team harmony is a benefit worth preserving - or so it transpired.
As I said double stacking would have been clumsy but so was what prevailed.

 

[GeeJayW]

When the lead driver has to be begged to comply, threatened with consequences if he doesn't, there's new risk to be considered. Team harmony is a benefit worth preserving - or so it transpired.
As I said double stacking would have been clumsy but so was what prevailed.

The ‘begging’ on the radio can only be described as pathetic. Issue a clear and concise team order and that’s it. The ‘comply or else’ narrative is a given or should be.

However as before, I think McLaren need to get off the fence. Piastri taking points off Norris is silly.

 

[Bellow]

The ‘begging’ on the radio can only be described as pathetic. Issue a clear and concise team order and that’s it. The ‘comply or else’ narrative is a given or should be.

However as before, I think McLaren need to get off the fence. Piastri taking points off Norris is silly.

I can't help but think Zak Brown's absence contributed to what was a somewhat shambolic affair.