Hungarian GP release

auto98uk · 02-08-2010, 09:44

So, when renault released kubica early, how come no-one noticed the reason he released him early was because the lollipop man was watching the tyre bounce over everyones heads, then reacted without checkin g the pit lane once the engneers stopped - surely that should be extenuating circumstances?

unuspromulti · 02-08-2010, 10:49

It's the lollipop man's responsibility to release the car safely, if he was looking elsewhere he simply shouldnt have released the car as he would not have known it was safe. Above all, that is his role.

Personally I think that he probably saw/heard the car behind him although because of the distractions he didnt twig it was a Force India pulling into the next garage.

auto98uk · 02-08-2010, 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by unuspromulti

It's the lollipop man's responsibility to release the car safely, if he was looking elsewhere he simply shouldnt have released the car as he would not have known it was safe. Above all, that is his role.

Personally I think that he probably saw/heard the car behind him although because of the distractions he didnt twig it was a Force India pulling into the next garage.

Then the question would be - if the tyre was heading at his head, and he moved the lollipop to avoid himself being hit, should there be a punishment for the driver?

truman · 02-08-2010, 12:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by auto98uk

Then the question would be - if the tyre was heading at his head, and he moved the lollipop to avoid himself being hit, should there be a punishment for the driver?

Didn't realise it had bounced,I thought it "just" rolled..

HeadingNorth · 02-08-2010, 12:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by truman

Didn't realise it had bounced,I thought it "just" rolled..

It rolled for some distance and then started bouncing into the air. I don't know whereabouts it passed the Renault pit and what it was doing at the time.

I also don't know if Renault have claimed "moving the lollipop to avoid getting hit by an oncoming wheel" as extenuating circumstances. It looked to me like a perfectly normal "go" signal, but I wasn't watching particularly closely.

HotPhil · 02-08-2010, 12:35

The clips are on the BBC website. I didn't see that the lollipop man moved to avoid the tyre (which then went on to bounce more than a storey high!!) but more that he probably didnt twig that the approaching car was Sutil and he was heading for his box.

unuspromulti · 02-08-2010, 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by auto98uk

Then the question would be - if the tyre was heading at his head, and he moved the lollipop to avoid himself being hit, should there be a punishment for the driver?

I'd then ask if a wheel was bouncing over your car and at your lollipop man would you set off in the Renault??

The point is though that when it comes to safety there are never extenuating circumstances. It'd never be ok to release a car into the path of another regardless of what's going on in the lollipop man's view. It was a one off and thankfully nobody was hurt in the Sutil/Kubica incident although could you imagine if Kubica had gone a bit earlier/later and Sutil's car went over the top or span into the mechanics?!?

HeadingNorth · 02-08-2010, 16:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by unuspromulti

I'd then ask if a wheel was bouncing over your car and at your lollipop man would you set off in the Renault?

The driver is not, and should not be, looking at anything else except the lollipop.

So far as the safety argument goes, it should be fairly easy to distinguish between the lollipop man lifting the lollipop to give a "go" signal, or diving to one side in fear of a stray wheel flying out of nowhere. In the latter case, the driver should not move.