Thing is, when you analyse a racing incident there isn't a crystal-clear, "either contact is allowed or contact is not allowed" kind of ideal while going into it. Sure, you can say that racing is a non-contact sport and while that is true, you cannot go into a race and expect it to be fully contact-free, as others have stated; we aren't gaming AIs programmed to drive on racing lines (and even then, AIs can crash).
When a racing incident does happen, it's up to the stewards in the real racing world to determine the course of action, but they have three main things to follow:
*The
letter of the law,
*The
spirit of the law,
*The
spirit of competition.
Basically, while you have to respect the law and it's main intent; that being the mantra that racing is a non-contact sport, you have to take that letter and with it, and your own view of the law (the spirit of the law), call the situation appropiately, while keeping in mind the spirit of competition.
Let's say two Gr.3 cars have been in a battle around the Nürburgring GP, and it's been a great race for a ton of laps; spectators on their feet, commentators on TV super excited and shouting at every move the drivers give, and then contact happens. The car behind gave up and divebombed the leading car into turn 1, and ran away with the leadership for the race.
Letter of the law: Racing is a non-contact sport: contact happened. •
Spirit of the law: The view that most people would have is that a bit of contact is okay as long as it doesn't influence the race result, but must be avoided if possible. •
Spirit of competition: Car number 2 gained an unfair advantage over car number 1 by divebombing, barging through, and ruining the show that was making the spectators all fired up. •
In this case, almost everyone would issue a penalty to car number 2, probably a harsh one at that like a stop-and-go or a 10-second penalty. Thing is, not every incident is crystal clear in the real world and neither are they on GT Sport and by extent, all other racing simulators.
In those instances where contact happens or something funky happens (like Vettel going off track in the 2019 Canadian GP), more time is required for the stewards to come to a consensus. In the example I put, a great race was being given between Vettel and Hamilton, before Vettel went off track and had to cut the corner and rejoined pretty unsafely due to the lack of grip, causing Hamilton to have to back off, and both cars continuing in the same positions.
Did Vettel gain an unfair advantage there? Yes, in my opinion at least, because of the layout and nature of the corner; Vettel was able to cover his mistake by blocking Hamilton (not on purpose though), and it was unfortunate that the race had to be killed with the 5 second penalty that was issued to Vettel. Harsh, but I can get behind it.
You might be wondering "well why is this relevant"? Because we're talking penalty system as well as contact. GT Sport has an algorithm that can't really get much better, as it's an automated system with boxes to tick to give a penalty instead of a system run by humans who can guide themselves by the three bullet points I've established. And we all know that the penalty system is crap and undecipherable at times; largely penalizing small contact that has no effect on the race or is unfair to one of the drivers (like bump drafting now being penalized for instance, or how contact through a corner is penalized inconsistently throughout sessions), or how it's easily gamed (for example, the popular "tap the car in front and drive off track to give them a penalty because I can't be arsed to overtake on track"). And it's pretty much unfixable since day 1, because the nature, it'z roots of how it operates, are plainly and simply broken and are inapplicable to actual racing situations in a consistent manner.
Now you're probably expecting me to say my opinion on how to fix or implement another system that can work like the current penalty system; automated. And I'm going to say "that is a purely mad idea". You can't make a system that operates like the one we have, with the inconsistent penalties being dished out, but you also cannot have a system that only operates with the letter of the law. You need all three of them to make a system work.
And that can only be done by a human. Not a machine, sadly, at least not in these days.
My two cents. Hopefully a civilized conversation can happen as we all see the common problem of the penalty system. Cheers
.
