Flatcapdriver

That's not what the FIA are saying. See above. Hamilton wasn't ahead of Raikkonen coming into the corner unless you completely ignore the racing line which was clearly occupied by Raikonnen, but what the FIA are trying to insinuate is that Hamilton left the track but he didn't really have much option other than to collide with Raikonnnen.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

And who put his car in that position, the FIA?

Flatcapdriver

And who put Raikkonen's car off the track later that lap? The FIA?

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

But did he gain a clear advantage and have to give it back?

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

LOL at this thread. At least you are all talking about F1 again I guess.

Dave Bullock

Having watched said incident at normal speed / slow mo etc I believe that Hamilton could have backed off a tiny bit and dropped in behind KR halfway through the bus stop chicane but he had precious little room and it would have been bl@@dy close. In the heat of the moment I think that Hamilton did the safe and correct thing in using the run off area.

I don't believe that he gained an advantage from cutting accross the run off area and then letting KR re-take the place.

I'm not going to get into the whole Ferrari FIA argument I just like to see good racing and whilst I would Like to see LH win the championship I would prefer just to see good racing which is what we got in the final couple of laps.

To see the rule book overturn this for a very questionable infringement is pathetic and I would have said the same if it had been the other way around.

I am surprised that no-one has mentioned the straight after eu-rouge on the lap after the incedent with KR behind Hamilton did 4 movements along the one straight! Is that allowed?

Dave.

Odds on

Yes, he drives a Ferrari.

Hamilton avoided a collision and as such gained a position. He then gave that position back on the straight as the rules require. The penalty has been applied unfairly IMO.

The Chief

F1 : Niki Lauda slams Hamilton penalty - FIA - F1-Live.com

Niki Lauda has described it as the worse descision in F1!!!!

Dream Weaver

I suppose it's no co-incedence that the next GP is in Italy and Ferrari scumbags have been awarded the GP win

Maybe chavvy Ecclestone is worried about ticket sales in Italy?

About time all these old boys were struck off from the FIA and Bernie the chav was told to stick his F1 up his ****.

The Chief

I have a sneaky feeling this may be overturned with the likes of Niki Lauda airing his views.

Flatcapdriver

No he didn't. But that's irrelevant because that's not what the FIA are saying. Their point is simply that Hamilton left the track as per the regulation I posted earlier so on that basis, there has to be consistency in how those regulations are applied, therefore if Hamilton is penalised due to his trangression then Raikkonen (and all the other drivers who left the track) have to be equally treated.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

No the FIA are not saying that. The stewards ruled that Hamilton had cut the final chicane and gained an advantage, a breach of Article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and Appendix L chapter 4 Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code.

scooby L

Hell will freeze over 1st....

Drive through penalties cannot be appealed... so win win for the FIA, actions with no consequence... I bet they're laughing their Ferrari socks off...

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

[QUOTE=The Chief;8118028]I have a sneaky feeling this may be overturned with the likes of Niki Lauda airing his views.[/QUOTE

Hmm, he didn't manage to stop Mclaren from being thrown out of last years championship. :thumb

The Chief

We'll see

scooby L

Sorry...Senna/Mclaren fan.....

Jay m A

iTrader: (2)

Here they are going into the chicane



Pretty level I'd say with Kimi having the inside line. Which means because Kimi isn't ahead he can't claim the next apex. Since he did go for the apex it left Lewis with no choice other to take avoiding action.

This all assumed Lewis could make the 2nd apex and wasn't going in so fast that he had no choice but to use the escape. This is the only way the stewards have a claim - as in there was no way that Lewis could have made the turn.

But of course this is all a moot point since Lewis gave back any advantage he had before the finish line.

He was level going into the corner, he was behind crossing the line.

No advantage gained, no rule broken.

This is a sad day for F1 if this decision stands.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

But the move would never have worked out as you have to be atleast half a car length along side if you taking the inside line to be deemed to have the corner. Lewis was level and on the outside. So the only way it would have worked is if Kimi had let him through, or Lewis cut the chicane. One was legal, the other wasn't. So using the above as a case for the penality to be scapped won't hold up.

Turbo2

That ruling makes absolute sense if the penalty is actually applied during the course of the race: in those cases we could not have a situation where the penalized driver is subsequently reinstated on appeal, because no one knows what the actual outcome of the race would have been if he hadn't done a Drive Through or Stop and Go. Therefore the FIA stewards have to be 1000% certain that they make the correct decision. If there's any doubt (I guess like Massa's "dangerous" pit-stop the other day), they cannot call it. Had this happened during the first half of the race, do you think anything would have happened? I think not. There's no reason to believe that Ferrari would have complained then either. I doubt the stewards would have given it a second thought since it was not immediately clear-cut that Hamilton had broken the rules, so they would not have issued the penalty.

However, this situation is different: the "offence" was too late to be implemented as a Drive Through penalty, but what's odd is that no-one called the "offence" during the race: we didn't even get a "Car 22 under investigation" message during the closing few minutes. Ferrari did not complain to the FIA about the manoeuvre during or after the race, until they were "invited" to comment by the stewards, at which point I guess they thought that all their Christmases had come at once!

Unlike an implemented Drive-Through or Stop and Go penalty, everyone knows 100% for sure what the affect of repealing the 25 second punishment will be; i.e. a Hamilton victory.

So on this occasion, the FIA should let McLaren appeal the decision and take a closer look at whap happened. Oh, and quickly!!!

Markus

As said by others, the time penalty was given due to the remaining number of laps, as otherwise a drive through would have been issued, and you cannot appeal against a drive through and thus cannot appeal against this

It is good to see Niki Lauda speaking up about this, I'm sure we will hear similar comments from other ex F1 drivers (ex drivers simply as current drivers, unless they support the decision, will no doubt wish to avoid incurring the wrath of the FIA) and ex team managers.

However, I seriously doubt there will be any reversal of this, due to the rules.
The cynic in me also wonders what will happen at Monza, will there be some "incident" for McLaren, be it at a driver or team level that will result in a loss of points/monies, as yet another stab at them.

For what it's worth, I would like to see either Massa or Hamilton win the championship this year. Massa as he has been outperforming his team mate, Kimi who has had a shocking year, then again, Alonso hasn't been doing well either and he's a prior double world champion, anyway, I digress. If Kimi were to seriously pull his socks up then perhaps he deserves the double, but he shouldn't win purely because another team's drivers are being punished to allow Ferrari to claim the title.

I want Hamilton to win as he does deserve it, and he should really have won last year, but there were a few mistakes and of course the whole stepneygate debacle (cynic mode tells me that after that came about and McLaren was stripped of their points that a decision was made, either by themselves, or forced upon them by Ferra... sorry, the FIA to not let Lewis win the championship, the idea being that you cannot have a championship winner whose team has been disqualified). He is still in only his second year and yes he has made mistakes, some of them foolish, but how many rookies don't make mistakes, hell, even the experienced drivers **** up now and then.

Alas we are mere spectators (no pun intended) when it comes to F1 and have no say in this type of thing, so all we can do is voice our displeasure and hope that it does not fall on deaf ears and that future situations like this will be handled more appropriately.

I will not be boycotting the rest of the season as it will not change anything, and I am curious to see what happens next.

scooby L

The fact of this matter is why di the FIA feel they had to hand out a penalty on this occation?

The only person effected by the overtaking attempt was Kimi... who later (all on his own) stuffed it in the wall.

The incident didn't damage either of the cars involved

Kimi still led the cars after the incident (shortlived yes but he was in front)

So the only person that would gain from a penalty being issued is Massa, who was so far back you needed a calendar to time him, and had no involvement what-so-ever with winning this GP.

In Spain, a team makes a mistake, neither of the cars are damaged, but it's still deamed a dangerous action by Ferrari. The only person who would gain from Massa being penalised was Lewis.. but they get a slap on the wrist fine of £5 (might as well have been)

So like for like... McLaren should have only been facing a fine similar to Ferrari's...Yes?

NO...because F1 is corrupt.. to the core

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

You sound very bitter my friend.

A pitlane infringment is very different to gaining an on-track advantage by cutting the chicane. They don't throw driver's out of a grandprix for speeding in the pitlane do they? I agree that this is a very unpopular decision and wish we could just have one season not spoiled by politics. Last year was Mclarens own doing and they were lucky not to have been thrown out of this years world championship.
Lewis is a great driver, a true natural talent. But, he needs to start using his head abit more rather than his raw speed. He knew he was quicker than kimi at that point and that that move was his first attempt for the lead. Why didn't he just wait? Did he really expect Kimi to yield?

scooby L

Bitter's not the word I'd use..

A pitlane infringment is just as serious, imagine the injury's involved if 2 F1 cars collide with so many pit crews/camera crews/fuel hoses/brolly dolly's around...
Pitlane speeding=stop go penalty, dangerous manover in the pitlane = penalty of some kind surely?!!
What I want to see is some kind of constant in Penalty enforcement... not 3 bods in a room to think up a suitable fine (if your Ferrari) or result breaking penalty if you're not.

I found this: The list of Penalty's handed since 1998

I thought we could collectively edit this and provide links to videos, so we get some kind of semi-impartial record of the FIAs impartiality (or lack of). Please add incidents and videos/web links as necessary.

• 1998 McLaren's illegal brakes banned, results gained while using them allowed to stand - which brakes had already been approved by the scrutineers and were therefore legal until FIA "clarification"

• 1999 Ferrari Barge Boards

Interestingly the FIA sporting regulations state:
Article 58. Acquaintance with and submission to the regulations
Every person, or group of persons, organising a competition or taking part therein :
2) Shall undertake to submit themselves without reserve to the above and to the decisions of the sporting authority and to the consequences resulting therefrom.
In case of non-compliance with these provisions, any person or group which organises a competition or takes part therein, will have the licence which has been issued to them withdrawn, and any manufacturer shall be excluded from the FIA Championships on a temporary or permanent basis. The FIA will state reasons for its decisions. If a car is found not comply with the technical regulations, it shall be no defence to claim that no performance advantage was obtained. which was what Ferrari used as their defence (this rule may of course been updated since then)

• 2005 Montreal (Montoya DQ for passing red light in pit lane)

• 2005 BAR 2 race ban and points removed - no advantage gain from a secondary fuel tank

• USA 2005 (tyre controversy)

• Hungary 2006 http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-5UnPeyzcHM

• 2006 Renault Mass Damper

• 2006 Alonso 'blocking' Massa (YouTube - Alonso penalized for blocking Massa in Monza, 2006)

• Australia 2007 (illegal movable floor on ferraris)

• Hungary 2007 (qualifying spat and loss of constructors point) (YouTube - Alonso V Hamilton ( Hungary '07 )) Penalties applied directly by FIA, overruling race stewards who saw no case for McLaren to answer.

• Hungary 2007 McLaren win race with un-approved gearbox, fine imposed. Same gearbox then approved by FIA with no issues.

• Spy Scandal 2007 - Ferrari competition (McLaren) Punished, Ferrari non-competition (Toyota) let off. Renault also let off, but for a completely different offence. ..an offence against McLaren.

• Japan 2007 (no penalty to Ferrari despite their having started race on prohibited tyres)

• Japan 2007 (no penalty for Massa for 'Hamiltoning' some of the corners) http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5WsM8MRvHk

• Brazil 2007 (FIA fail to enforce their own rules on fuel temp, enabling Raikkonen to win WDC by 1 point)

• Malaysia 2008 (Hamilton's and Kovalainen's qualifying penalties)

• Monaco 2008 (Kimi's crash with Sutil)

• France 08 (Kovi's qualifying penalty)

• France 08 (Hamilton cuts chicane)

• France 08 (Kimi loose exhaust, no black flag)

• European GP 2008 (Massa penalty, Kimi pitstop incident)

• Spa 2008 (Hamilton penalty) http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TzKMyFCaZy0

Ferrari Penalties:

• Canada 1998 (Schumacher runs Frentzen off the road)

• Monaco 2006 (Schumacher blocks track)

• 1997 Schumi loses 2nd place in the Championship after trying to put JV off the track. Whoopi doo.

• Montreal 2007 (Massa DQ for jumping red light)

• Monaco 2008 ( Räikkönen given a drive-through penalty, given because his car was not fitted with tyres until after 3 minutes before the parade lap)

dazdavies

iTrader: (22)

Chris please stop your attention seeking trolling rhetoric.

That's all it is, your moment in the limelight.

Some of the "facts" you're coming out with are complete and utter drivel. For intance "the telemtry doesn't show Lewis lifting off it just shows he was slower". Of course it bloody will. If you're the oracle of F1 you claim to be you'll know for a fact that Mclaren will be able to tell the FIA the exact percentage he lifted off by for how many seconds or 100's thereof and by how much the car slowed down by over what distance.

Now please stop winding people up just for the sake of being the centre of attention there's a good boy

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Hamilton backed off enough. He was 6kph slower over the line!

Hopefully the appeal will sort it.

scooby L

I think some of you "Ferrari loving FIA are not bias" peeps should watch this in pertucular

No one was penalised for this...



YouTube - Fuji 2007 Massa vs Kubica


It's called RACING

Let the drivers do their job (and what they're paid millions to do)

dazdavies

iTrader: (22)

That says it all doesn't it, boot on the other foot and no action taken.

Now Chris lets hear your BS defence to that!!!!!!!!


If I was Mclaren I'd be sending that very clip to the FIA

Dream Weaver

Have The Stewards Made An Error Of Fact? - Planet-F1 News - from planet-f1.com

Article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 Formula One Sporting Regulations' makes no mention of whether an advantage had been gained and instead states that 'During practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe the provisions of the Code relating to driving behaviour on circuits'. The near-identical Appendix L chapter 4 Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code adds that 'The racetrack alone shall be used by drivers during the race'.

Complete bollocks up I would say

P1Fanatic

x 2