In the round-up: AlphaTauri team principal Franz Tost heaped fresh praise on driver Pierre Gasly, who was second-fastest in both free practice sessions at Losail International Circuit yesterday.
Become a RaceFans Supporter and go ad-free
RaceFans operates thanks in part to the support of its readers. In order to help fund the development and growth of the site please consider becoming a RaceFans Supporter.
For just £1 per month/£12 per year you will also be upgraded to an ad-free account. Sign up and find out more below:
In brief
Gasly now has “very high level of knowledge” of all car aspects
Following his return to AlphaTauri (formerly Toro Rosso) in mid-2020, Gasly has made significant gains, said Tost.“He has continuously improved his performance year by year,” he explained. “You can hear it in the debriefs when he is talking about the car, about the technical side.
“He has, now, the experience. It’s important for the driver to understand, especially nowadays with these complicated cars and with the power unit, to get everything optimised. He has now reached a very high level of knowledge regarding the aerodynamic side, the mechanical side, but also from the power unit side.
“He does many changes in the cockpit from his side to optimise the performance. For me, Pierre is belonging to the best drivers in Formula 1 currently.”
Ricciardo power unit failure due to cracked pipe
Daniel Ricciardo’s retirement from the Sao Paulo Grand Prix was caused by a cracked pipe within the chassis part of his McLaren’s power unit housing, not by a crack in the chassis itself, said Andreas Seidl.
“We found a cracked pipe on the chassis side of the power unit installation, so we didn’t find a crack on the monocoque,” Seidl explained.
He said McLaren had “corrected” the problem and Ricciardo’s power unit had not been damaged.
McLaren addressing kerb damage problem overnight
Lando Norris suffered damage to his car over the exit kerb of turn 14 in both first and second practice, which McLaren’s racing director, Andrea Stella, said the team was addressing overnight.
“Losail provides some challenges from a car set-up point of view,” acknowledged Stella, “and because some of the kerbs are very aggressive. Some teams have experienced problems with those, us included, and we’ll try to address that overnight.”
Mazepin says he hadn’t gone off when car took damage
Nikita Mazepin was unable to participate in second practice as Haas were forced to change the chassis on his car following damage taken to his initial one during first practice.
Mazepin, who is one of two drivers with prior experience of the Losail track, said “I felt something come very close on the bottom of my car. It’s frustrating because I actually didn’t leave the the circuit and I was inside the track limits at the moment that this happened.
“So I think these kerbs just not very nice to all the cars, but it’s actually hit my car at the wrong angle and it makes it for a very careful race and any sessions from now.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Social media
Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner wasn't just taking swipes at Mercedes' Toto Wolff in the @FIA press conference. #F1 #QatarGP pic.twitter.com/UQ8WvBQoMg
— RaceFans (@racefansdotnet) November 19, 2021
I guess you're all good to reduce your turn in angle and drive someone off the circuit in #f1 then. If they hadn't screwed all the runoffs this would be a non-issue. Both cars would be out or at least facing the wrong way in a cloud of dust. Sportsmanship and respect be damned.
— Chris Beatty – www.chrisbeatty.design (@ChrisDuffBeatty) November 19, 2021
Wow, the FIA just doubling down on the bad call. I just remember them handing out 5s penalties like candy in Austria, all were much more innocent incidents. The controversy is only just beginning, the line on what is and isn’t a penalty is completely blurred now. #Formula1 #F1
— Stefan Wilson (@stef_wilson) November 19, 2021
- Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
Links
Motor racing links of interest:
Charles Leong takes pole in qualifying for the Macau Grand Prix (Formula Scout)
"Charles Leong earned Macau Grand Prix pole position for the second year in a row as he resurrected his rivalry with Andy Chang in qualifying. The two Macanese drivers are the favourites to win their home grand prix this year, with Leong having won the opening four races of the Chinese Formula 4 season but not being eligible to score points."
Mistakes and mechanical issues cost ART Grand Prix a title bid says Team Principal Phillipe (F3)
"In terms of those who finished below Hauger, it was more down to some mechanical issues that we had, and some mistakes that we made, but in terms of performance, we were able to challenge everyone other than Hauger."
We always endeavour to credit original sources. If you have a tip for a link relating to single-seater motorsport to feature in the next RaceFans round-up please send it in via the contact form.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Comment of the day
After stewards denied Mercedes’ request to seek right to review over Verstappen and Hamilton’s Sao Paulo incident, Hotbottoms points out this puts into question the decision making process used not for outcomes but for whether incidents are worth investigating at all.
The stewards’ decision (or non-decision) in Brazil was indeed horrible. I absolutely think that Max should’ve received a penalty for that move, but I can also understand the argument that it wasn’t worth of a penalty. But I can’t understand how stewards can watch that incident and decide that it isn’t even worth investigating. Totally inexplicable.
I think it will be very hard for the stewards to recover from this at least during this season. After this, every time someone gets a penalty it will be compared to the fact that Verstappen wasn’t even investigated.
@hotbottoms
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Mark Young and Drew!
On this day in motorsport
- On this day in 1981 Riccardo Patrese signed to partner world champions Nelson Piquet at Brabham, in his first of two stints for the team
Newsletter
Get the best of our motorsport coverage after every F1 race in your inbox – sign up for the free RaceFans email Newsletter:
Aussie Rod (@aussierod)
20th November 2021, 1:37
The stewarding has gone too heavy with penalties this year. There have been far too many 5 sec penalties handed out for incidents where the stewards should simply ‘let them race’. Austria comes to mind immediately as does a few lap 1 incidents. This puts them in an untenable position when they decide to apply any amount of discretion.
I also think the FIA need to admit that the consequences of an action / incident SHOULD and DO matter when handing out penalties.
I deal with risk quite a bit at work and to determine risk you have to compare both the likelihood AND severity of a particular scenario. Racing should be the same, comparing the severity of the breach of rules with the severity of the consequences.
I actually think this is what the stewards already do (and why they didn’t investigate in Brazil) but they don’t admit it.
Consequences do matter. If you disagree consider Gasly and Bottas in Hungary. They both made almost identical mistakes at the start of the race into T1 however Bottas on the inside wiped out multiple cars whilst Gasly on the outside didn’t. One was quite rightly worthy of a penalty and one quite rightly was not. The only significant difference between the two was the consequence of their mistakes.
I’ve been a supporter of Masi, he’s been thrown into a tough, thankless job. And we shouldn’t forget Whiting was not without plenty of criticism when he was in charge. But the stewarding of racing incidents needs a re-think and a reset.
jff
20th November 2021, 8:10
I’m starting to change my mind and agree with this.
The problem (especially for fans) will be that the stewards already struggle to be consistent (in our eyes) when solely reviewing an action.
This will be much worse, and will break many comments record here, when the consequences of an action is included.
RandomMallard (@)
20th November 2021, 8:24
@aussierod I think your point about Gasly vs Bottas isn’t the best example tbh. Like, please don’t take this as a personal attack or anything, but I think it’s a better example of only taking into account the consequences to the point it affects the offence. Gasly outbraked himself and went off, but by hitting someone, Bottas opened the door to an investigation for causing a collision. To put it in a similar light after this Brazil (where Max should definitely have been penalised imo), by running him off, he should have been given 5 seconds imo, but had they collided (technically a consequence of his over opportunistic dive), he would/should have been penalised for causing a collision. That’s as far as they should go in terms of consequences for me. Like, if a driver makes a tiny mistake, a small lock up or something, that starts a huge pile up that, in an absolute worst case scenario, leads to death or serious injury, should the first driver be punished for a small lock up or that much, much larger consequences of that?
RandomMallard (@)
20th November 2021, 8:25
Ahhh I opened italics, but when I went to close them after offence, I must have hit bold instead. Sorry for the bad formatting.
Davethechicken
20th November 2021, 8:40
If we think back to Msc and Hill at Australia or Senna Prost 1990, both were deliberate collisions directly affecting the WDC. Deliberate collisions or those judged likely to have been should have a severe sanction, like exclusion from the WDC. IMHO both Senna and MSC should not have been crowned champions those years and this has set the tone for the future generations where dirty driving is somehow acceptable to many especially newer fans.
Aussie Rod (@aussierod)
20th November 2021, 10:03
@randommallard Yes that’s a good point about very small errors having very serious or significant consequences. At some point there has to be a line to cross (or a rule to break) and small mistakes that don’t cross that line shouldn’t be penalised no matter the consequence. But I agree there’ll always be grey area and room for debate !
The Bottas example is one of a relatively minor, or at least very easy, mistake being heavily penalised due to the outcome (multiple cars out of the race). In my view a clear example of the consequence affecting the penalty (and rightly so).
S
20th November 2021, 10:29
@aussierod In the Bottas/Hungary case, I don’t think it was the consequence so much as the circumstance that lead to the penalty.
In other words, it wasn’t so much about the collisions/damages but more about the fact that it was the first corner with the field bunched and he was on the inside. That circumstance carries a higher risk, and therefore, a greater responsibility to get it right.
Gasly, on the other hand, was on the outside and affected nobody.
There usually needs to be an incident to investigate… There was for Bottas, but not for Gasly.
ruliemaulana (@ruliemaulana)
20th November 2021, 4:34
Re COTD: Just made the rule and follow it strictly. Decision making that rely on circumstances would never fair. If they consistent, there will be no controversial penalty because it’s the rule.
But then again, maybe all those ruling drama was artificially crafted.
nandy
20th November 2021, 7:30
Gasly has been driver of the season up to this point. Supreme talent.
jff
20th November 2021, 8:12
Too 4, I’d say.
(Not necessarily 4th though).
jff
20th November 2021, 8:13
*Top
ian dearing
20th November 2021, 9:21
At the moment I see him has Hams successor at Mercedes. Unless he is still tied to one of RBs restrictive contracts when Ham leaves.
Jere (@jerejj)
20th November 2021, 10:06
@ian dearing His (general) RB contract runs until 2023 (Marko’s words) as does Hamilton’s upcoming two-year deal.
ian dearing
20th November 2021, 12:08
Cheers for that.
RandomMallard (@)
20th November 2021, 8:31
I disagree with this. Yesterday, they made no ruling on the incident in Brazil. They only made a ruling that the new video was not substantial enough evidence for a review (which has a very high standard of evidence to attain); it got no further than that. I still feel it’s probably the wrong call. On one hand, if that evidence isn’t substantial I don’t know what is, although on the other it may simply just confirm the telemetry they may or may not (I’m not sure how far it got) have got on Sunday. And it’s still the wrong call over the incident, but that call was made on Sunday not today.
anon
20th November 2021, 8:42
@randommallard Masi has confirmed the telemetry data was excluded by the stewards because they chose not to investigate the incident – it seems that was also treated as not being substantial enough information to justify a review either.
hahostolze (@hahostolze)
20th November 2021, 8:52
@keithcollantine @hazelsouthwell totally irresponsible to include those tweets, which are completely incorrect. That’s how coal gets heaped onto the fire.
jff
20th November 2021, 9:40
It keeps the clicks coming, which websites need.
You just fell for it :P
Jere (@jerejj)
20th November 2021, 10:07
A savage response by Horner.
COTD is spot-on.
Jockey Ewing
20th November 2021, 12:46
Binotto and Ricciardo, good one :D