Nissany given grid penalty for “unsafe” move which caused shocking Hauger crash

Formula 2

Posted on

| Written by

Roy Nissany was judged to be wholly to blame for the shocking crash between him and Dennis Hauger at the start of yesterday’s Formula 2 feature race.

DAMS driver Nissany forced Hauger off the track between Stowe and Vale. This sent Hauger, out of control, over the sausage kerb at the apex of Vale, which launched his car through the air into Nissany’s.

Hauger’s car struck Nissany’s around the cockpit area, the DAMS car’s halo taking the brunt of the impact which lifted both cars from the ground. The pair were able to exit their cars unaided but were clearly shaken.

The stewards ruled Nissany was responsible for the collision and said the driver did not dispute their decision.

“Instead of merging into traffic in a safe manner, the stewards determined that [Nissany] made an unpredictable and unsafe move to defend his position that initiated the contact with Hauger,” the stewards said in a statement. “Additionally, Nissany fully accepted blame for the incident.”

Nissany will receive a five-place grid penalty for the first race in Austria and three points were added to his license, putting him halfway to a race ban on six points total this year.

In the same race the ART team avoided collecting penalties for both its drivers after almost falling foul of pit lane safety rules again.

Frederik Vesti and Théo Pourchaire were given suspended five-place grid drops at the Spanish round after the team’s mechanics failed to place tyres flat on their sides during pit stops. This is required by the rules to prevent tyres rolling away during pit stops.

ART representatives were summoned to the stewards after the Silverstone feature race as the stewards considered whether the front-left wheels of Vesti and Pourchaire’s cars were not laid flat during their pit stops.

To ART’s relief, the stewards opted to take no action, ruling the team had taken sufficient safety precautions. “Having considered the matter extensively, the stewards determined that the actions of the pit stop personnel acted in a manner that prevented an unsafe incident,” they noted. “The stewards, therefore, take no further action.”

Formula 2

Browse all Formula 2 articles

Author information

Hazel Southwell
Hazel is a motorsport and automotive journalist with a particular interest in hybrid systems, electrification, batteries and new fuel technologies....

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories Formula 2Tags , , , , , , ,

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 21 comments on “Nissany given grid penalty for “unsafe” move which caused shocking Hauger crash”

    1. As mentioned in the round-up, I also judged he was ‘wholly to blame’.

    2. Nissany has certainly been involved in an uncanny amount of incidents over the last three F2 seasons.

    3. Great, now Mr Nissany has even more targets ahead of him to collide with.

    4. Those sausage kerbs need removed, especially a corner like that where you’re guaranteed to launch the car into others.

      1. @davidhunter13 Only an isolated case, so people shouldn’t overreact.
        Sausage curbs aren’t unsafe literally everywhere, especially on & around slow-speed corners & Vale is among these corner types.
        Vale’s inside curbing has had the sausage piece for quite a while without anything happening, so a single incident isn’t really a strong reason for removal.

        1. This is hardly the first time sausage curbs have been an issue. There’s been cars completely destroyed on those curbs, for instance, which is a problem in and of itself. But mostly what they’ve done is create situations where cars were completely uncontrollable for the driver because they were airborn, or broke a suspension, or got their rear wing stuck under their wheels. It’s entirely too much of a risk to take for an artificial solution.

          Someone would have died yesterday if not for having the halo there, if that’s not enough reason to reevaluate the use of such curbs, I wouldn’t know what would be.

          1. @sjaakfoo
            I see your point, but I recall one similar incident from the 2014 Belgian GP GP3 practice: https://youtu.be/AFe6nVKYGsc but otherwise, nothing directly sausage curb-involving.
            Abbie Eaton’s case at COTA last year only featured three small speed bumps, different from sausage curbs, so I discount that. Nevertheless, overreaction in that instance too.
            T1 is a slow-speed corner & had featured those bumps for some time before without anything going wrong + several COTA corner exits & also some Paul Ricard ones (T2, 5, & last corner) have such bumps without any issues.

            Back to sausage curbs, i.e., the long tall-ish ones, Red Bull Ring’s T1 or Niki Lauda curve, among others, similarly has one & nothing has ever gone wrong.
            Sausage curbs have mainly got placed only on slow-speed corner exits & apexes, where the risk is considerably lower than on high-speed stuff, so a non-issue in the big picture.

            1. We have seen quite a few cars flying from the kerbs. That was a scary one. As said they work on slow speeds but if a car goes too fast it could end up in a serious accident.
              Kerbs missions are to prevent shorcutting but there are downsides. Gravel does the same thing but in modern times if someone would cut a corner and there would be gravel on track it would be a red flag (at least in FP). You cannot build walls around Monza (see Saudi) so it will be a never ending story unless drivers stop cutting corners or someone will make a bulletproof invention.

        2. I like linguica, actually …

      2. Whilst the sausage kerb did launch Haugers car, I feel if it hadn’t been launched, there would have been a very similar accident to that of Anthoine Hubert, with Hauger’s car T-boning the side of Nissany. At least with Haugers car being airborne, there was the ability for the car to be deflected with minimal resistance.

        I do t like sausage kerbs and feel that they are dangerous in many ways, from sending cars airborne in erratic was to being the cause of drivers to face broken backs (as with Abbie Eaton).

    5. TBH, I’m surprised he still competes in F2 despite being unable to reach F1 anyway.
      I made the following point earlier this year, but he should move to another series, be that FE, WEC, IndyCar, SF, or even DTM, whatever, but essentially a pro series where long-term career continuation is possible, unlike in a junior formula series a la F2. Nothing to gain for him by continuing in F2 forever as a mere grid-filler.

      1. I doubt that would change much for these kinds of drivers. In F3 and F2, drivers pay for their seats throughout the field. Someone like Nissany, who is rich enough to pay for their own seat but not talented enough to be interesting for any “pro” series, would still just pay for a drive in F2 until no teams were left interested, just like they do now.

        1. @sjaakfoo Good point.

      2. Nissany has improved a lot over the last 10 years, and he can continue enjoying racing for a long time, but probably it will be Blancpain GT or some other GT racing series next.

        He is quite old at 27 compared to the rest of the field, and yet some significantly younger racers show more race-craft.

        F2 is the highest you can get with big pockets without showing 200% motivation and brilliant drives. I just don’t think that required level of motivation exists within Nissany. I find the F2 grid to be quite poor beyond the top 8-10 racers, with the rest being more or less pure pay-drivers, and generally there is much more talent in F3.

        Nissany also has strong links to Israel which could turn into a PR headache for a team and in regards to other sponsors.

        1. Jockey Ewing
          4th July 2022, 14:02

          Yes, sadly and apparently the manager-like people managed to make a business out of the feeder series like F2 or F3. (I mean when it comes to landing drives to pay-driver-like people instead of more talented ones.)

          I agree that a pro series from Jere’s list would be nicer career-wise than F2.

          And I agree with you, that because those pro series are imo offering a harder challenge than F2 (because some people managed to make a business out of the road-to-F1), realistically it will be something like the Blancpain GT level for Nissany in the long run. By now maybe he could win the F3 European Championship as a Prema driver (or other top team), supported by a more-talented-than-him second driver being sacrificed.

          I think the superlicense system is not as bad as many are considering. Maybe occasionally it can become a road block for a real talent, but at least, more or less F1 is free from real pay drivers. (I can’t consider a talented driver with big sponsors a pay driver. Good drivers are followed by sponsors, as we see there are even many people who can round up money for much less promising prospects as well.)

          Maybe the superlicense system should be more honest, less discriminative for the series likes of Indy, and some not-so-much-FIA-backed ones, out of some people’s business interests. And then it could be introduced as a barrier for lower tiers as well. Maybe it should be more head heavy to act as a road block fot those who only can grind up in the stepping up by achieving mediocre results for many seasons as a well funded driver. That should be the real goal. A sport is either good or has a sporting and spectating value by itself or after a while it looses its popularity.
          Imo there is much more problem with the mean people around, than with the cost cap or superlicense points. For example, being cost capped is not beating the purpose of an engineering challenge, or sustainibility, while the superlicense points are not blocking real talents indefinitely.

          1. Jockey Ewing
            4th July 2022, 17:18

            When I wrote “more or less F1 is free from real pay drivers”, mainly I meant, that at least, thanks to
            – the relatively more races in the feeder series than before,
            – the superlicense system
            – the more and more advanced simulators
            the rookies are coming to F1 quite prepared, more prepared than decades before, and at least the least serious attempts are excluded by the superlicense system.

            For me the very-young Alonso, or the young Perez were never pay drivers, just because they had huge sponsors. They had more skill than many as well.
            Imo there was nothing wrong about investing into Mick Schumacher by the German companies. There are many of those companies, and many of those can afford investing into some business-wise promising idea. The new cars are maybe not for him, but that is just only hindsight. In the end, somehow, some people should be tried out in F1 from the feeder series.

            There are some upsides of making a business out of basically everything around this sport as well, at least the rookies grow in a more professional environment than before. But the downsides are there as well. And due to these I consider F2 less competitive than the aforementioned pro series, like Formula E, WEC, IndyCar, Super Formula, DTM, and maybe some more, like the best small touring car championships. I mean many of the better than average entrants of these series most likely would be capable to do well at F2 or F3. This is why I consider the current feeder system of F1 not more than a feeder system. Although due to the not so big, and not so clean air dependent cars, these feeder series thankfully provide enjoyable, nice to watch racing. I would just still vote for a more honest superlicense system for the lower tiers as well.

            1. Complete lies about Perez who is 100% a pay driver . The ONLY reason he is in F1 is because of carlos slim the richest man in mexico who is a close friend of the family and funded all of his motorsport seats and ultimately a drive in F1. This is why his Japanese team mate Kamui who matched him performance wise at Sauber was kicked out the team because he did not have the pay driver funding perez brought.

              much like untalented Nissany, Maldanardo and Zhou the main reason Sergio gets massive funding because he is a flag carrier for a nation under represented in motorsports and also acts as soft power nation branding on a global scale.

              nissany at 27 and multiple seasons has no place in F2 but due to his massive funding he can be a nuisance on the grid and it wouldn’t be a shock if he does end up in F1 considering zhou was in a similar situation spending 3 seasons in F3 and another 3 in F2 winning no titles and was able to game the super licence system and buy an F1 seat..

    6. Fihar (@halcyondigest)
      4th July 2022, 10:31

      I might be wrong, but I think I heard one of the guys in the cooldown room (I think it was Pouchaire?) saying how it’s always the same guy involved in these kinds of incidents. And they’re not wrong.

      This is far from the first time Nissany’s dangerous driving has been under the spotlight. F2 needs to get their act straight.

      1. Nissany is another Alessio Deledda, “rich daddy” pay driver wasting a race seat in a good team because he is totally inept and talentless with no place in F2.
        Blame the FIA and corrupt F2 organisers who make massive profits from teams due to their control and monopoly on engines, ecus and Dallara chassis allowing anyone to race with deep enough pockets..

    7. So George is going to get a grid penaulty for the same fault (causing the huge crash) i wonder. Or are there different set of rules?

    8. Shouldn’t Nissany be banned from motor racing anyway because his country has invaded and is occupying another?

    Comments are closed.