2021 Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya

JPSLotus said:

Exactly why those administering the sport are supposed to be the adults in the room since the riders are always going to make decisions based on what lets them be out there regardless of whatever injuries they have suffered, or push the limits of whatever is in the rulebook or out right break the limits. They'll all disregard better judgment in order to get on a bike.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Jackie Stewart pioneered F1 safety in the early 70's. At the time, at least one driver, spectator, marshall or team member was losing his life each year in F1, and yet, there were many opposing his push for better safety, including many of his fellow drivers.

The only way he had credibility with his appeal actually leading to change was because of his success in the sport and his actually taking risks as well out there on track, race weekend after weekend, losing colleagues and friends, one after the other. The drivers of today have a lot to thank him for, in that he had the balls to stand up for what clearly needed to change.

This FQ leathers debate seems trivial in comparison, but so do we develop in some ways and devolve in others.

JPSLotus said:

Stoner said he should have been black-flagged. I quoted his tweet a couple of pages back.

How do you feel about that?

Click to expand...

Agree with misfit, Stoner is very consistent in this area and was scrupulous about not putting others at risk after his accident as a rookie in 2006 which injured other riders, although he did have that one scratchy race the race after he crashed on the second last corner in light rain chasing Dani Pedrosa. He was proved right unfortunately about the speed differential thing he prosecuted so vigorously.

I am actually not a big FQ fan and am still to be convinced he isn’t a tad flaky, and would far prefer that Jack Miller wins the title which FQ being penalised helps, but have my suspicions as does another recent poster that condensing the points standings might have had something to do with the penalty being handed out by RD post race. Perhaps I misunderstood Warthog but what I thought I was agreeing with was not liking to watch Zippergate while the race was live, considering it dangerous and not to be repeated, and with it being fairly clear that any repeat will prompt a black flag in future. Sure he could have been black flagged, and I am not giving RD any credit for not doing so.

Given nothing did happen and that he gained no advantage I am not unhappy he don’t lose more points, and cynical about the motives of those among his rivals who called for penalties post race.

Keshav said:

Having read his bio twice, it’s pretty clear that joie de vivre is not really in his wheelhouse.

Click to expand...

Yes, he's quite a sober personality. I found it odd that he would be like that and compete at the highest level in motorcycle racing. He's one of my favourites for it. Honest and principled to the end. Definitely not a crowd pleaser to feel good. So I value his opinion since he will not give it to please the crowd. If the crowd is happy, it's pure coincidence. OTOH, very different with Jorge.

michaelm said:

Perhaps I misunderstood Warthog but what I thought I was agreeing with was not liking to watch Zippergate while the race was live, considering it dangerous and not to be repeated, and with it being fairly clear that any repeat will prompt a black flag in future. Sure he could have been black flagged, and I am not giving RD any credit for not doing so.



Given nothing did happen and that he gained no advantage I am not unhappy he don’t lose more points, and cynical about the motives of those among his rivals who called for penalties post race.

Click to expand...

I am happy he was not black flagged as I prefer the championship to be decided on the track.
I haven't seen the like before and I don't expect to see it again. I also expect he has been told to stop should it happen again.
It was resolved.
The later penalty was unnecessary and a response to complaints imo. That was pretty ordinary.

With respect to the championship I don't see Fabio as being as strong mentally as others but he is fast. We will see how he goes in the remainder of the season and how he deals with the pressure.

misfit said:

Yes, he's quite a sober personality. I found it odd that he would be like that and compete at the highest level in motorcycle racing. He's one of my favourites for it. Honest and principled to the end. Definitely not a crowd pleaser to feel good. [emoji14] So I value his opinion since he will not give it to please the crowd. If the crowd is happy, ,it's pure coincidence. OTOH, very different with Jorge.

Click to expand...

I don't see Jorge as particularly playing to the crowd.
He took on the most popular rider with the motoGP fanbase during his time at Yamaha and was pretty resilient at resisting mind games and pressure.
He made himself pretty unpopular with a large section of the crowd in the process.

What he has said over this incident hardly seems to be playing to popular opinion.

I see 2 primary points to zippergate.

1. Rules and Application Thereof

Ambiguousness of punishment for not being properly equipped fostered debate (correctly) about race direction, and how, where, why, when, and to whom punishments are applied.

A simple writing of simple punishment into the rules eliminates the above issue.

Adding "Any violation of the above will result in immediate black flag of the rider unless they pull into the pits to rectify the problem", to the existing rule would make things black and white. ALL riding gear included.

2. Philosophical Question of Risk in MGP

Motogp vs IOM TT...;
Can riders assess risk?;
If not, who assess risk?;
How much risk IS acceptable?;
How is abdication of risk policed?;

These are WAY tougher questions worthy of healthy debate and, by nature, without black and white answers.

warthog1 said:

He threw it off the line and it expect it was retrieved by marshalls.

Click to expand...

Would not have been retrieved during the race itself as no marshall would or should enter a live track (the protector was on the track) without relevant flags to cover the issue.

That said, if the debris flag (otherwise called the oil flag) was shown, then riders should have been aware of something on track

JPSLotus said:

Stoner said he should have been black-flagged. I quoted his tweet a couple of pages back.

How do you feel about that?

Click to expand...

Totally IMO but a black flag to correct the leathers should have been displayed (a meatball style of flag - not a DQ).

Sure this would have had the effect of knocking him out of the points but it is either safety or open slather

JPSLotus said:

I find Casey remarkably consistent in his beliefs on proper rider behavior.

He was the one who said Rossi should have been black-flagged in 2015 without question for what he did then.

For me the whole point of black-flagging FQ was because he obviously was not going to come in to fix or attempt to fix his leathers. The decision should have been made by Race Direction because FQ was incapable of making a decision about his own safety. Michael says he doesn't want the championship decided by such an incident, but what is the big deal if it was? FQ was in blatant breach of the rules, if that caused the championship to be decided, who's fault is that? FQ's entirely. Championships have been decided because of rules breaches across multiple race series in the past. It isn't fun when that happens, but if you don't want it to occur, then you have to adhere to what the rulebook says. If you don't follow any rules, why have them since they become nothing more than suggested, but not required guidelines for on-track conduct...or even technical regulations. Yamaha should have been kicked out of the championship last year for the valve issue, instead they got a slap on the wrist.

Click to expand...

While I suspect that RD were looking at the position of the race (a few laps to go), the rider and their championship position and any combinations, I totally agree that FQ should have been black flagged to return to the pits and correct this leathers.

If RD feel that it was acceptable to leave him on track, what will they do if a helmet comes undone, a visor starts to fall off or any other combinations(and many of these have occurred).

RD were weak.

JPSLotus said:

Thing is, people saying FQ shouldn't have been penalized seem to be drawing this conclusion based on the hindsight of nothing happening. If something had occurred where FQ had gone down, I'm pretty sure no one here would be saying he shouldn't have been penalized, they would instead be saying, "Why wasn't he black-flagged?"

Click to expand...

Just to add here, but people saying he should not have been penalised because the likelihood of sliding on his chest is rare (the body will usually roll or if sliding, it will be on their back) overlook that we have seen many riders who are unconcious slide on their front.

Moreso for me anyway, as everyone talks sliding, what fo a piercing injury from a footpeg in a fall or even perhaps some grave or debris that may cause significant injury to a now unprotected chest.

Yes this is a 'what if' scenario but RD have now established a precedent

warthog1 said:

And Jorge said he was right to continue and shouldn't have been sanctioned in any way for the suit.

Click to expand...

Correct me, but both are use Alpinestars leathers don't they?

If so, that could well explain why Jorge says what he does.

Mick D said:

I see 2 primary points to zippergate.

1. Rules and Application Thereof

Ambiguousness of punishment for not being properly equipped fostered debate (correctly) about race direction, and how, where, why, when, and to whom punishments are applied.

A simple writing of simple punishment into the rules eliminates the above issue.

Adding "Any violation of the above will result in immediate black flag of the rider unless they pull into the pits to rectify the problem", to the existing rule would make things black and white. ALL riding gear included.

Click to expand...

Depending on the true outcome of any checks on what caused the zipper to open, particularly as it was subsequently re-zipped after the event I suspect that we may see Alpinestars and others to have a small piece of velcro or similar across the top of the zip next similar to Dainese leathers to assist in fastening or retaining a closed zip.

ApriliaRS250 said:

Black flag for everything pisses me of, same with safety car coming out for every little reason. Kills all the Action and (amongst too little overtaking) made me stop watching F1 entirely.

A race has something wild and pure to it, if stuff like that happens, so be it. It's those crazy circumstances that brings the spice. I remember one in Moto3 in Assen having a highside in the last lap last corner chicane but safed it, hanging next to his bike going through the finish line. Perhaps it says somewhere in the bloody rulebook that you need to sit on your bike and have Full control over it and that guy should have been Black flagged too. Black flag my ...

The only good Thing about the penalty was Making the championship closer and more exciting

Click to expand...

There is a rule that the rider and bike must cross the line together and that is what occurred at Assen plus, at the end of the race if the rider is one of the top 4 or a random, minimum weight rules also apply.

There is a big difference however between a wild and willing race and safety issues as a riders unnecessary injury can result in liabilities (financial and mental) that can significantly impact on a sport as well as those involved.

warthog1 said:

I am happy he was not black flagged as I prefer the championship to be decided on the track.
I haven't seen the like before and I don't expect to see it again. I also expect he has been told to stop should it happen again.
It was resolved.
The later penalty was unnecessary and a response to complaints imo. That was pretty ordinary.

With respect to the championship I don't see Fabio as being as strong mentally as others but he is fast. We will see how he goes in the remainder of the season and how he deals with the pressure.

Click to expand...

The later penalty was a knee jerk top a realisation of a total stuff up and does not actually reflect the penalty that could/should have been applied which in theory, to fix FQ either had to stop offline on track or visit the pits, both of which would have lost more than 3 seconds.

The penalty was to be SEEN to be doing something

Gaz said:

Correct me, but both are use Alpinestars leathers don't they?

If so, that could well explain why Jorge says what he does

Click to expand...

You think that a more valid proposition than Jorge giving his honest opinion during his review of the event?
We disagree.

Gaz said:

The later penalty was a knee jerk top a realisation of a total stuff up and does not actually reflect the penalty that could/should have been applied which in theory, to fix FQ either had to stop offline on track or visit the pits, both of which would have lost more than 3 seconds.

The penalty was to be SEEN to be doing something

Click to expand...

I see it as a pandering to the righteous indignation caused by him riding with the zipper not fastened.
Some penalty was given to quell the consternation.
We disagree there too.

Meh. I am sure zippergate will roll on until at least the next event. Probably longer.

warthog1 said:

You think that a more valid proposition than Jorge giving his honest opinion during his review of the event?
We disagree.

Click to expand...

In short, yes I do suspect it to have played a part in what Jorge has said as money talks and Alpinestars would still be a personal and possibly lucrative sponsor of Jorge (much as Nolan etc still are for Stoner who long left the sport)

All good to disagree btw.

warthog1 said:

I see it as a pandering to the righteous indignation caused by him riding with the zipper not fastened.
Some penalty was given to quell the consternation.
We disagree there too.

Meh. I am sure zippergate will roll on until at least the next event. Probably longer.

Click to expand...

I actually don't think we disagree on this - I think we agree but just see a slightly different trigger point for it.

The penalty is due to the righteous indignation as you call it, while I see it as a reaction and a subsequent need to be seen to do some action.

As for rolling on, it will do just that plus it is in many ways more newsworthy than a lot of other things doing the roundas

Gaz said:

In short, yes I do suspect it to have played a part in what Jorge has said as money talks and Alpinestars would still be a personal and possibly lucrative sponsor of Jorge (much as Nolan etc still are for Stoner who long left the sport)

All good to disagree btw.








I actually don't think we disagree on this - I think we agree but just see a slightly different trigger point for it.

The penalty is due to the righteous indignation as you call it, while I see it as a reaction and a subsequent need to be seen to do some action.

As for rolling on, it will do just that plus it is in many ways more newsworthy than a lot of other things doing the roundas

Click to expand...

I think pretty much everyone agrees that riding with unsecured leathers +/- no chest shield, particularly riding at the limit in a close podium battle in a premier class motogp race, is not a good idea in general, nor a good look, and most would agree there should be no repetition with it being made clear to the riders as has likely happened that stopping to secure the leathers or being black flagged are the alternatives should there be any recurrence of the circumstance.

The objections with which I somewhat agree seem to be to FQ, having continued to ride without mishap with RD not exercising the option obviously available to them to black flag him during the race, being penalised post race due to complaints from other riders or teams when he gained no advantage other than being allowed to continue to race. On the other hand if he really should have been black flagged and anyone who repeats his conduct will be black flagged in future perhaps he should count his blessings for getting to retain as many points as he did in the circumstance.

The other thing is the inconsistency and perhaps sometimes outright favouritism displayed by RD, it would appear depending on the identity of the rider concerned, including in regard to rider safety such as this incident and Valentino being allowed to ride in the rain with the defective light as has been mentioned. I can understand FQ thinking that if it wasn’t clear to RD that he should have been penalised during the race then why was it different post-race ?. I often disagree with David Emmett, but one thing he said about Sepang 2015, to which I would add myself whether or not MM did anything wrong in that race, is that both VR and MM had been conditioned by RD to believe rules which applied to other riders didn’t apply to them.

michaelm said:

I think pretty much everyone agrees that riding with unsecured leathers +/- no chest shield, particularly riding at the limit in a close podium battle in a premier class motogp race, is not a good idea in general, nor a good look, and most would agree there should be no repetition with it being made clear to the riders as has likely happened that stopping to secure the leathers or being black flagged are the alternatives should there be any recurrence of the circumstance.

Click to expand...

As far as I am aware, it's a breach of safety regulations and protocol. Sanctions or pulling the rider out of the race to fix the breach before continuing applies whether or not something happens. Safety regulations are there to prevent injury. They wouldn't be there unless there was ample evidence that they do help in the prevention of injury/death.

This is very different to careless or irresponsible riding where a sanction is possible only if there has been an incident to investigate.

So an appeal for clemency or leaving things as is when a safety regulation has been breached, or to allow the breach to continue during a race because nothing has happened or it seems to be OK, or something is unlikely to happen makes little sense.

michaelm said:

The objections with which I somewhat agree seem to be to FQ, having continued to ride without mishap with RD not exercising the option obviously available to them to black flag him during the race, being penalised post race due to complaints from other riders or teams when he gained no advantage other than being allowed to continue to race. On the other hand if he really should have been black flagged and anyone who repeats his conduct will be black flagged in future perhaps he should count his blessings for getting to retain as many points as he did in the circumstance.

Click to expand...

Yes. I think it would be unfair to treat future instances of what happened during this racing season, differently, especially if it will affect the points score. Although he gained no advantage, he was allowed to continue riding with an ongoing safety issue.

At RD are consistent. They are happy to enforce safety regulations before race start or if all riders will be equally affected as with decisions to red flag etc. However, when it's a single rider, and worse, the championship could be decided by enforcement of safety, they will allow the problem if it is 'relatively' minor, and doesn't seem to be creating an obvious problem on-track giving all the impression that something is going to happen if the rider isn't stopped.

michaelm said:

The other thing is the inconsistency and perhaps sometimes outright favouritism displayed by RD, it would appear depending on the identity of the rider concerned, including in regard to rider safety such as this incident and Valentino being allowed to ride in the rain with the defective light as has been mentioned. I can understand FQ thinking that if it wasn’t clear to RD that he should have been penalised during the race then why was it different post-race ?. I often disagree with David Emmett, but one thing he said about Sepang 2015, to which I would add myself whether or not MM did anything wrong in that race, is that both VR and MM had been conditioned by RD to believe rules which applied to other riders didn’t apply to them.

Click to expand...

I don't know if it's favouritism rather than a reluctance to interfere with the race of a rider vying for the race win and moreso, the championship. The potential for criticism is a LOT higher and they give the rider the benefit of the doubt. Since VR and MM are frequently vying for both race wins and championships, the instances of RD ruling in their favour or overlooking incidents, will ramp up.

misfit said:

I don't know if it's favouritism rather than a reluctance to interfere with the race of a rider vying for the race win and moreso, the championship. The potential for criticism is a LOT higher and they give the rider the benefit of the doubt. Since VR and MM are frequently vying for both race wins and championships, the instances of RD ruling in their favour or overlooking incidents, will ramp up.

Click to expand...

Both positions gained by the 2005 Rossi pass on Gibernau, and the similar (perhaps an intentional direct copy) MM pass on Lorenzo should not have been retained imo, and were let go despite being early in the seasons concerned. I don’t know what the regulations were in 2008 but Rossi both maintained his position by leaving the track and re-entered the track unsafely in my view (he would have torpedoed Stoner on the track on the racing line if Stoner hadn’t been all three of sufficiently aware, good enough to avoid a collision, and inclined to do so); when MM repeated the move on VR, again quite likely in direct emulation of the 2008 Laguna Seca corkscrew thing, RD ruled both weren’t allowed to retain or gain position by leaving the track but both doing so, MM being pretty much forced off the track by VR, cancelled out. Your point probably does apply to both corkscrew incidents.

misfit said:

The potential for criticism is a LOT higher and they give the rider the benefit of the doubt.

Click to expand...

If you are in a position of authority and are in any way basing your judgements on "the potential for criticism" you are doing it wrong...

This controversy continues precisely because RD has a solid reputation for wishwashery.

FQ is becoming stronger mentally and will work through this.

Dorna is ridiculously incompetent in developing and applying rules. This should of course change but I am at a loss as to how to correct it. Seems that one individual deciding will not get buy in of all parties. Perhaps a 6 person board with, for example, 2 riders, two marshals and 2 Dorna mucky mucks to debate and decide on a set of rules and application of penalties?

Bern1 said:

This controversy continues precisely because RD has a solid reputation for wishwashery.

FQ is becoming stronger mentally and will work through this.

Dorna is ridiculously incompetent in developing and applying rules. This should of course change but I am at a loss as to how to correct it. Seems that one individual deciding will not get buy in of all parties. Perhaps a 6 person board with, for example, 2 riders, two marshals and 2 Dorna mucky mucks to debate and decide on a set of rules and application of penalties?

Click to expand...

Political pressure or having to deal with opposing interests is a lot easier for those not under the firing line as it were. We, the fans, in our warm armchairs wonder why the decisions are so difficult.

MotoGP's and F1's RDs are are poles apart. In F1, the fans and teams complain that too many penalties are being applied for what should be seen as race incidents and that the drivers should be allowed to race. The same applies for other sporting rules and regulations, thought to be way too invasive and disruptive. RD for F1 is now in the process of finding a compromise. MotoGP's RD seems to be at the opposite end of the spectrum and they too will need to find a compromise.

The debate is very healthy for the sport and for change.