EddScott

No matter what happens, short of someting nasty happening to him or he sticks two fingers up at the lot of them and goes to IRL, he will be F1 champion on more than one occasions.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

This site gets worse everyday.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

I hope so too. Would be nice to have an English champ again.

FlightMan

Still waiting.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

Yes, he does. But what does that prove?

The video was posted on here to show that Lewis lifted and gave the place back to Kimi. It actually shows Lewis accelerating hard (maybe not 100%, I know - but it was wet) as soon as he is back on the track. Kimi was out accelerating Lewis as they crossed the line. At no point does it show Lewis backing off once he is on track again. Please show me where you think it does.

Because he did not take the corner properly, he had clearly gained an advantage as he re-joined, yes? How can you say that he gave back, the same amount of ground that he gained? How many times through the race was somebody over-taken into the first corner? It doesn't matter that Lewis was faster in the wet, he still gained more ground by cutting the chicane than if he would have taken the corner properly. This put him in the position to make another move on kimi.

It took him the entire length of the back straight to catch Kimi before the bus stop. Are you saying that if Lewis had followed Kimi through the bus stop, that he would have passed him into turn one? How do you know that? Kimi had more than enough grunt to make Lewis go defensive at the end of the next straight.

In the early stages of the race when Lewis was around 1 second behind Kimi, how come he wasn't able to over-take him into the first corner?

Leslie

Did it not occur to you that the McLaren was handling better than the Ferrari in the wet and that Hamilton was demonstrating his outstanding skill in the wet anyway?

Les

RA Dunk

off course hes going to back it when he is the one thats going to gain the advantage in the championships points side of things

so i guess Lauda, Jackie stewart, Eddie Irvine and the rest of them who have backed Hamilton all got it wrong then and there all ex F1 drivers

scooby L

I still say that McLaren did everything required of them to abide by the rules... the FIA chose to undermine Charlie Whiting (1st time ever) and this "give the position back gentleman's agreement" in the drivers briefing needs to be put down in writing, so further "miss-interpretations" cannot happen.

Sad day for F1 whatever your views in this matter are.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

He is fantastic in the wet, I am not disputing that. But the issue isn't about his talent! Why make the move at a corner where he was likely to fail? Why not wait until the next corner where there is a lot of room on the exit. As you said, he was was way faster and the bus stop was his first attempt for the lead.

FlightMan

You're showing your complete lack of understanding of F1.

Point 1. LH doesnt have to back off. He has to let KR past. He did. End of.

Point 2. In the early stages, you'll find it wasn't raining. Brundle said during commentary;
" The McLaren is in the dirty air behind the Ferrari and we know it doesn't work well there. Lewis will struggle to close the gap "


He managed to overtake him into the first corner when he did for 2 reasons.

1. It was raining.
2. The Ferrari was handling like a shopping trolley.
3. KR hit the brakes roughly where dear old Mrs Edwards from number 74 would have done in her 1978 crossply tyred Metro.

magepaster

iTrader: (2)

Because it's a bloody race!
He pissed all over KR under braking going into the chicane and was rewarded with KR turning into him at the apex.LH had no choice other than to take the run off. Everything that followed was a result of KR driving dirty.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

FFS it's called racing. Sorry, but calling KR's driving dirty is just ridiculous.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

We will never agree. I feel you can label it as 'a racing incident' in the grand scheme of things But, just because Lewis was faster in those conditions, it doesn't mean that 'he' decides on how much distance or 'advantage' to give back that he himself, had gained by an 'illegal' move. Racing is not about cutting corners. And why shouldn't have Kimi taken the apexi at the bus-stop?

As you say, it was a race!

swampster

iTrader: (1)

Agreed entirely, and the whole incident should have been left at that.. a RACING incident..

Kimi is perfectly entitled to defend his line, and as such Lewis had to avoid a collision, but he's still perfectly entitled to make a move.. they both battled as best they could in poor conditions providing a spectacle not often seen in F1 these days, and the imposition of rules like this without common sense will mean that we'll see even less and then races become even more procession like!

BTW... Over 40,000 have signed the petition

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

Would that be a pre-production prototype Metro?
I thought they were introduced in 1980

magepaster

iTrader: (2)

Yes it was dirty. If KR had turned in on LH while LH was trying to pass, fine. But KR turned into LH when he was half a cars length ahead and clearly visible to KR.

EddScott

Working on giving back what was given. Before he left the track LH was along side KR. I believe he went off track to avoid an accident as staying on that line would mean wheels over wheels - as shown by the onboard footage.

As they pass the line the effectively swap swides with KR in front then swap back with LH in front.

By that way of thinking LH gave KR more than he gained (a full car length) before leaving the track.

Its a shame because LH totally monstered him coming up to that chicane. The gap was shortened to such an extent over such a short space of time that in the dry only a broken motor car would have lost that much ground so quickly.

LH clearly obeyed the rules. He have the advantage back. His problem and the "hook" that is being pinned on him is that he did not give back an equal amount of the "advantage". The crux of the matter is how do you judge the "advantage".

Rubbish. They were racing.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Tosh frankly, it was racing and just as Hamilton shouldn't have been penalised neither should KR. They did nothing wrong, just got on with racing and nit picking like this is exactly what the stewards have done here. Maybe you should apply.

MooseRacer

Complete rubbish. Neither Kimi nor Lewis raced dirty. It was a great spectacle that most likely should have been left at that. The appeal (if it's ever heard) may provide some more information.

Those on here that are questioning Kimi's lack of skill in the wet clearly don't appreciate the difference in handling between the Ferrari and Mclaren on dry tyres on a wetting track. Kimi is good in the wet, Lewis would appear to be truly fantastic - albeit possibly flattered by the car.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and maybe Lewis would do it differently next time but the guy is a racer and did what he knows best.

It "seems" that Lewis did a Schumi and exploited the rules as they stand and I would expect some rule clarification at the very least to come out of this.

Leslie

He had taken the opportunity as he is entitled to do when he had the chance to outbrake Raikkonen into the bus stop. He was leading Raikkonen into the corner.

Raikkonen held his line thus forcing Hamilton onto the rumble strip. If you have ever driven a racing car in the wet and are forced to straddle the rumble strip, you would realise that you would be in imminent danger of a spin due to the effects of that strip. Hamilton was forced to drive over the strip completely to the inside for that reason. Having regained the track after the bend he then allowed Raikkonen to pass him. What more do you expect him to do as well as follow the rules precisely as he in fact did?

Les

bugeyeandy

Still haven't found anywhere in the rules that it states you must give back and advantage you gain by cutting a corner. The rules just say you will be penalised for leaving the track by one of three things - Drive through penalty, stop go penalty or in the last 5 laps of the race a penalty of 25 secs deducting from race distance time.

I still think the stewards shouldn't have interfered, it was clearly a genuine overtaking attempt that didn't come off nothing more, nothing less.

dpb

Id petition the Hamiltons

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

1) Hamilton was not leading at the bus-stop, he was along side.
2) When Lewis re-joined the track, please identify the moment where he 'gave' the position back. All you can see on the video is Kimi out accelerating Lewis. There wasn't a break in acceleration from Lewis's car.
3) I have raced in the wet (only karting, obviously not F1 but then neither have you. ) So when he crossed the chicane, are you saying that Lewis slowed down to avoid spinning, or to let Kimi by. You can't have both.

Everyone is saying that it was clear cut move. If that was the case, why did Mclaren ask Charlie Whiting, 'Was that ok?' They obviously knew it was a 'grey' area.

urban

iTrader: (1)

See my previous post - there are no rules as such, however it seems a gentlemans agreement during the drivers briefing sorts it out.

Iain Young

But how could he have had more momentum when Kimi was overtaking him, (at that point, Kimi must have more momentum as he came from behind and retook the place). You can't break the rule of physics...

Besides, you can't impose a penalty based upon a gentlemans agreement. You should only be able to impose a penalty based upon the rules book, and Hamilton didn't break any.

PeteBrant

I've tried to point this out several times but it seems some people have been taking stupid pills and taken leave of common sense when it comes to this issue.

They also conveniently ignore the fact that Raikonnen had bugger all grip going down the pit straight and is car was wobbling about all over the place as he fought for traction.

At the end of the day, Hamilton was penalised for having a car that behaved better in wet conditions with a dry setup. End of.

Iain Young

Yep, and penalised using non-existent rules to back it up

urban

iTrader: (1)

Yes yes.
I understand this for the umteenth time.
But he still gained an advantage by cutting in the first place and did not fully give back the place/advantages gained in the process.

He could easily have backed off and made the corner - afterall he tried a stupid move in the first place which was never going to work.

Then we wouldn't be have this correspondence in the first place.

Anyway - long might the wrath on the Hamilton's continue.
After all neither Father or Son can drive anyway

Iain Young

The rules only state that you have to give the place back. He did, and at that point Kimi was going faster than him. No rules were broken. They don't mention anything about handing back advantages, and Kimi was obviously having so much trouble keeping the thing in a straight line that Hamilton could easily catch him again before the next bend. In dry conditions it would have been a different story.

Note that Hamilton had to try the move when he did whilst he still had the advantage. The Mclaren keeps the tyres warmer for longer than the Ferrari in those conditions, but once they were cold, the advantage wouldn't have been anywhere near a great (if there at all). He simply had to make the move before his tyres cooled down too much.

There were plenty of other similar (and worse) things happening around the rest of the track in those final laps, and nobody else got penalised. I wonder why.....

Dream Weaver

Indeed, it really is unbelievable that people like purvis and urban can keep banging on about momentum, even though telemetry has shown that Kimi was 6kmh quicker over the s/f line.

Could these people please explain how LH could have had extra momentum even though he was going slower?

This is reminding me of that Corsa bloke that laid his rear seats flat to get a better centre of gravity and "lower" weight

Lewis made Kimi look like an absolute amateur that last 3 laps, regardless of whether people want to blame KR's "bad tools"!!