Floyd on F1
RUSSIAN GP: APART FROM MIDFIELD BATTLES, IT WAS A DISAPPOINTING RACE
Kvyat wanted to impress on home soil, but will have to limit aggressive moves.
If it had not been for a few good mid ield battles, the Russian Grand Prix would have been disappointing to say the very least. Another perfect drive for the Mercedes of Nico Rosberg who led from lights to flag and was never challenged, with team-mate Hamilton second and Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen on the final podium step. So what went wrong? During qualifying it looked as though we were in for a good race. Then, in Q3 it all went pear shaped for Hamilton, who suffered a mechanical failure resulting in him having to start from tenth on the grid. Vettel chased hard and put his Ferrari in second spot alongside Rosberg, but a gearbox change meant he had a five position penalty and would start seventh. So with two world champions down in the pack and sure to be fighting for the front, we had all the ingredients for a great race.
Being on home territory, I assume that Russian Daniil Kvyat wanted to impress the crowd and duplicate his brave Chinese race first corner overtaking move. Well, you saw the rest. The collision with the rear of Vettel’s car pushed the German into the second Red Bull of Daniel Ricciardo, damaging Kvat’s teammate’s car.
Then it was round two when the young Russian hit the German once again. This time Vettel was spun into the wall and out of the race.
The amount of overdub bleeping that the programme directors brought in may have masked the words, but certainly not the sentiment of Vettel’s frustration.
With rumours that Max Verstappen could be moving up from Torro Rosso to Red Bull next year, Kvyat can ill afford such an incident again,
Helmut Marko doesn’t need an excuse for his decisions.
I have to agree with many friends and colleagues that I am a purist in as far as racing and rallying are concerned.
Current rules and regulations and so called imposed budget cuts are having little effect other than completely sterilizing the sport of motor racing.
We are faced with the prospect of halos, windscreens or even fully enclosed cockpits on the grounds of safety in F1. I really struggle to understand why.
No one, apart from a few rather strange individuals who still hold on to those video copies of early crash and burn racing incidents, wants to witness a death or serious injury.
Improvements such as safety cells work extremely well and I am totally in favour of such systems.
If it ensures that designers no longer place a driver into a maze of thin tubing covered in glass fibre and surrounded by large capacity fuel tanks I’m all for it.
But this move towards total safety is a misnomer,
In motorsport, total safety just cannot exist, as nothing is certain and the fates play a role. I wager that very few people who embarked on a space mission believed it was totally safe.
The same could be said of mountain climbing, particularly free climbing, or for that matter any other of the extreme activities that a section of mankind regularly participate in.
So why do people do these things if they are not safe?
Usually because it is a challenge, because they want to prove to themselves that they can do it and of course it is an unbelievable adrenaline rush.
But one thing must be considered. All those involved in these dangerous activities share a very important and significant common factor. They chose to do it.
No one forced them into risking life and limb – it was a decision that they made for their own personal reasons.
For those on a space mission it could have been the addition of national pride, but it was not an order, it was a choice. But with all the so called quality checks that were carried out, faults occurred and those aboard lost their lives, so how certain is safety?
Those climbing mountains do not have to wear an approved safety system before the ascent, particularly the free climbers, where a pair of shorts and climbing boots appears to be the norm.
Those that climb into an F1 car know that the sport is dangerous, and there is always the risk of death or serious injury. But these people chose to do it – no one forced them.
Many spent their life savings trying to reach Formula One.
For years they raced in the myriad open wheel series around the world and every time they drove they took that same risk.
On many occasions the venues for these races did not offer the same medical facilities and helicopter ambulances as F1.
Many of the deaths we have seen in recent years – fortunately few in number – have been as the result of freak accidents.
Things such as a loose wheel, which should never happen, and ancillary vehicles on the circuit, which also should never occur, are surely proof of this.
So far the drivers have not been ecstatic regarding the limited trials of the halo and the windscreen systems and one must ask – are these devices foolproof?
The FIA and Co seem to believe so, but does it guarantee a driver’s safety in every accident?
That, sadly, only another freak accident will reveal.