Um akshually

For once they get something right

@realduckofdeath.bsky.social
Would ya look at that

True.. philosophical question: would I have to think while working tho?

I think someone called me a bot today.
I wish I was a bot and didn't have to go to work tomorrow

* for extra context nobody but you brought up radios

My dearest friend Hans, if you scroll up directly from this reply you will see that nowhere within the thread I replied to the word radio was used.
But more than that could you please for once reply how much slower Lawson was meant to be and what else he was meant to do in your opinion?

clearly not a significant reduction in speed as I have been told

1st, pls tell me where I used the word radio.
2nd, did Lawson not follow the flags? if 65kph isn't slowing down significantly then please do enlighten me what is.
3rd, do you not think situations where marshals run on track directly in front of a car should be avoided in the first place?

I am not refusing to listen as such I am trying to understand why you keep saying that the root cause of the situation is somehow irrelevant to the situation. do you not think it shouldn't have happened at all bc that is what the og point you are arguing against was.

he was going 65kph how much slower should he have been in your opinion? I've been on a few pavements were cars were driving past me at that speed have you not?
the way you talk about it is as if he was doing 200kph or even 100kph which he wasn't it was 65.

How is it irrelevant to the incident if it's the reason it happened in the first place?
Also Lawson slowed down significantly, he didn't steer towards the marshals who were moving away from the direction he was driving to, and had he not slowed enough he would've gotten a penalty don't you agree?

Just to make sure I understand you assign absolutely no blame to race control who considering it was lap 1 could've waited to make sure all cars had passed before telling the Marshals to go on track right?
They have zero blame and it's all just the drivers which is why there were no penalties right?

Why are you so focused on Liam?
Why are you assigning more blame to him than the people that created the situation in the first place? Should the situation not have not happened at all in the first place? There were many many things that failed before it comes to Liam why are you ignoring those?

Can you explain to me why it's irrelevant that someone failed their job of making sure the procedures happen in a safe manner and TOLD the marshals that it's safe to go on track?
Nobody is blaming the marshals themselves, you do know that right?

Accurate representation of the data the F1 teams have about their cars and the publicly available telemetry data.
You can still tell it's a horse but you can't truly know any details

I get that anything with Lewis gets engagement but if you're doing any analysis at least finish thinking your thought before you go and feed into some insane bullshit.

I can't believe that the whole of F1 is losing their heads over a team internal T1 "incident" that literally ended with another driver between them.

If I have to see one more analysis about how it's a slam dunk penalty that doesn't acknowledge the existence of Verstappen in the middle I'll lose it

You do know that there is a second turn after this right?

Are you really that pissed off that he chose to avoid contact with his teammate? Bc he had the inside line for the next corner and then what? And considering he had the inside for the next corner he only really gained on NOR and he gave that back.

So he should've conceded a position to George then?
He "got away with it" bc he gave the advantage back to NOR and there was no way of also letting HAM past bc VER was ahead of HAM. He gave the advantage back.
And Ferrari were never going to make them swap while in a DRS train in L1

You are totally right it's a turn 1.5 incident which totally changes everything bc it's not like what's happening is part of the aftermath of being like 4 cars wide into turn 1 or like Leclerc had a snap of oversteer.

Serious question would you rather he'd have driven into LH?

+ they were leading a DRS train for a good while in the beginning that's also not a good time to swap cars.

And since LEC did give up his advantage on NOR the stewards were never going to get involved with a team thing and why would the team sabotage themselves in lap 1?

Serious Q to everyone who says LEC should've given the position back to HAM: when?
Bc when he gave the position back to NOR, VER was ahead of HAM.
So are we talking like a lap later which would've been unusual since he already gave up most of his advantage. or was he supposed to let VER past too?

You are kinda forgetting the tyre age which is what I was originally referring too. In the first stint the tyres were the same age and the car much heavier = more deg esp. on the S.
The second stint LECs Ms were 10 laps older.
That + the fact that the McLaren is good with tyres makes a difference

Reducing the fact that NOR couldn't overtake LEC exclusively down to the tyres and the cars is a take and a half. So in your opinion LECs defensive driving and positioning of his car and therefore skill had nothing to do with keeping NOR behind?
Is that really your take?

LEC definitely did hold up NOR and I don't think anybody is arguing against that. But considering the VSC was in lap 6-7 and the "DRS train" ended with the VSC and didn't start up again where instead the gaps between HAM and PIA kept increasing saying LEC held the whole pack up is wrong. That's it

bc I am bored another viz this time with VER as the reference that shows the same

he needed a tyre advantage to do it in the end which he wouldn't have had with VER either.
Idk what would've happened but imo the race probably would've been more boring

the other thing is if Leclerc in that Ferrari was able to hold him up that well then imo there isn't that much to suggest that a fight between NOR and VER would've been that likely to happen and be any more interesting than the one we got.
at least there was good on track action that wasn't contact