cavallino

Kimi At Monaco Vs Lewis At Canada

101 posts in this topic

So Kimi takes someone out and gets no penalty, Hamilton takes someone out and he gets a penalty. Nice to be reminded who still lines the FIA's pockets. Perhaps a pay back for Monty-the-mellow's support for Mosley?

Ok, let's actually try to have a discussion, trolling gets boring pretty fast :P Here's a post of mine from anotehr thread.

Funny how people can not differentiate between hitting a stationary car that has stopped on a red light and hitting a car when yours is out of control at a very high speed. If you have a driver's lisence you'll know that the penalities are different even on the road anywhere around the world. Try hitting a car stopped on a red light in front of you.

That's not the point and bringing up ridiculous ridiculous analogies doesn't help your argument. Penalties have been handed out in the past for incidents similar to Kimi'

s at Monaco, usually to lower grid drivers. Losing control of your car is never an excuse, or there will be nothing to prevent drivers from going banzai, especially drivers with little to lose, and when they screw up, they can claim that they just lost control. Imagine this - towards the end of the race, a driver in P9 tries a crazy manoeuvre to overtake the driver in P8. Going by your argument, if he loses control of of his car, by your logic, all he gets is a DNF, and if he's a top driver, P9 isn't worth anything anyway. Drivers have to be responsible for where their cars go at all times in the race, 'losing control' can never be an acceptable excuse.

Edited by cavallino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Kimi takes someone out and gets no penalty, Hamilton takes someone out and he gets a penalty. Nice to be reminded who still lines the FIA's pockets. Perhaps a pay back for Monty-the-mellow's support for Mosley?

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As cav is apparently a Ferrari fan, I do not see any point to this thread apart from flamebait :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So Kimi takes someone out and gets no penalty, Hamilton takes someone out and he gets a penalty. Nice to be reminded who still lines the FIA's pockets. Perhaps a pay back for Monty-the-mellow's support for Mosley?

Totally different circumstances. But nice try...... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lewis and Sutil are friends. It was pre-arranged that should Lewis find himself behind Kimi that he would put one up Kimi's backside and see how he liked it :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol:

I guess it's true then, what goes around comes around.

:lol:

and if Sutil crashes into Hamilton next GP the circle will be closed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and if Sutil crashes into Hamilton next GP the circle will be closed

True

:lol:

Kimi's comments:

"There's not much I can say,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey I just read on some spanish news site that Kimi had spiked Lewis's pre-race drink and that Alonso spun on his own oil that sprayed onto the track after being told to "transfer oil" by his pit crew a few laps earlier. SHOCKING!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey I just read on some spanish news site that Kimi had spiked Lewis's pre-race drink and that Alonso spun on his own oil that sprayed onto the track after being told to "transfer oil" by his pit crew a few laps earlier. SHOCKING!!

I'm dissapointed. Where is Cav's customary: "Boring race. Nobody wanted to drive. WHY am even watching this?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So Kimi takes someone out and gets no penalty, Hamilton takes someone out and he gets a penalty.

erm...

red light?

Edited by adamstrags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while i think hamilton should get the penalty i dont think it was entirely his fault. if u look at what happens, raikkonen should not be next to kubica when waiting for the light. u're supposed to line up behind the person not next to him. it's not raikkonens fault tho since they were both trying to exit when the light came on, but i think anyone would make that same mistake considering u see two cars racing out of the pits so u're trying to follow them out and then they suddenly stop. its hard for a driver to concentrate on trying to avoid the two cars in front of him who are trying to race out of the pits and still see a small red light 200 metres out in front. at the very least rosberg did the same thing so it just goes to show how dangerous putting the red light on can be. i understand that the pace car needs to clear the pit lane but it might actually be safer to let ppl blend back into the line instead of making them fully stop at the exit.

also, hamilton and rosberg were penalized for causing an avoidable accident. thats what i have a problem with, last year at barcelona, massa was half a car length behind alonso going into the first turn and forced alonso to run on to the grass. alonso turned into the corner first so he had the right of way but he ended up losing places and massa got no penalty. then massa destroys DC in the first race of this season (an accident which even schumacher said was massa's fault) and he gets no penalty. then in monaco alonso plows into heidfeld when there was no hope of passing and escapes without penalty. how can u penalize hamilton and rosberg for "causing and avoidable accident" when so many other avoidable accidents went on unpunished. even raikkonen caused an avoidable accident in monaco. he may have lost control but that was clearly his fault and he ruined someones race because of it but went unpunished as well. regardless of sutil's penalty, it's still better for the force india to finish 9th or 10th rather than dropping out after getting their car destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
while i think hamilton should get the penalty i dont think it was entirely his fault. if u look at what happens, raikkonen should not be next to kubica when waiting for the light. u're supposed to line up behind the person not next to him. it's not raikkonens fault tho since they were both trying to exit when the light came on, but i think anyone would make that same mistake considering u see two cars racing out of the pits so u're trying to follow them out and then they suddenly stop. its hard for a driver to concentrate on trying to avoid the two cars in front of him who are trying to race out of the pits and still see a small red light 200 metres out in front. at the very least rosberg did the same thing so it just goes to show how dangerous putting the red light on can be. i understand that the pace car needs to clear the pit lane but it might actually be safer to let ppl blend back into the line instead of making them fully stop at the exit.

An explanation of what happened is not the same as an excuse for what happened. Yes, there can be a thousand reasons about why Hammy did what he did. But he still crashed a car stopped at the red light. Kimi and Kubi did the right thing. Hammy didn't. An accident in the pitlane is rather serious. He got what he deserved. Nothing more, nothing less.

also, hamilton and rosberg were penalized for causing an avoidable accident. thats what i have a problem with, last year at barcelona, massa was half a car length behind alonso going into the first turn and forced alonso to run on to the grass. alonso turned into the corner first so he had the right of way but he ended up losing places and massa got no penalty. then massa destroys DC in the first race of this season (an accident which even schumacher said was massa's fault) and he gets no penalty. then in monaco alonso plows into heidfeld when there was no hope of passing and escapes without penalty. how can u penalize hamilton and rosberg for "causing and avoidable accident" when so many other avoidable accidents went on unpunished. even raikkonen caused an avoidable accident in monaco. he may have lost control but that was clearly his fault and he ruined someones race because of it but went unpunished as well. regardless of sutil's penalty, it's still better for the force india to finish 9th or 10th rather than dropping out after getting their car destroyed.

All those cases were either: bad decisions from the stewards or less blatant accidents. None of them in any case would excuse Hammy. We can't excuse whatever happens in any race because of Senna Prost incidents, right? If there were bad decisions in the past, I can't see why making bad decisions in this race would benefit the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WEll, after a careful review, here is what I saw: Kubica was out of the pit first. Raikkonen did not want to let him go, so his started passing Kubica in the pit lane (if you watch carefully, you can see Raikkonen actually accelerating and getting even with Kubica WHILE IN THE PITLANE. The reason this didn't work was the dreaded red light. Kimi parked actually where the runoff area was to avoid exactly this type of accident. Hamilton was caught by surprise (for whatever reason) and tried to do the right thing - i.e. avoid Kubica and stop in the empty area. Except that Kimi was there. Rosberg Likely expected Hanilton to stop next to Kubica, except that he stoped way before that, so Rosberg run out of space.

My conclusion - If Raikkonen wasn't trying to emulate Kubic-Alonso scene from 2006 Monza, the accident would not have happened. Therefore, in my opinion, Raikkkonen is as guilty as Hamilton or Rosberg. I really believe that Ice Man's ice is melting this year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cavallino let me explain...

You're right when you say that we can't excuse all accidents as racing incidents and not have any penalties incured.

By the same token we can't dish out equal penalties for all accidents either.

What you fail to understand is that all accidents are different.

now stay with me here...

i) sometimes a driver can't do anything to avoid a crash -

wheels blow, oil gets left by drivers ahead of them, transmissions fail.

ii) sometimes a driver has very little oportunity to avoid a collision -

drivers ahead brake suddenly, other drivers cut accross their line, drivers ahead crash causing pile ups at the first corner etc etc.

iii) sometimes a driver has every oportunity to avoid a collision -

there's a red light and two parked cars ahead of them in the pit lane.

there are plenty of other gradations but these 3 serve to make my point - you can generally order accidents on a scale of avoidability, which essentially corrolates to driver neglect.

what stewards should do is assess a proportional punishment depending on where on that scale an incident sits.

often they get it wrong, but that doesn't mean they should cease trying to get it right.

now taking the two examples in hand...

I would say that Kimi's crash into Sutil fits roughly into category (ii). Once he hit the wet stuff, he had very little oportunity to avoid crashing. He tried. He showed amazing car control in doing so. He failed. He took out Sutil in trying to stay on track, but not being able to brake. Very sad, but there you have it.

I would say that Hamilton's pit lane fiasco fits firmly into category (iii). The lights were on. The team had warned him that the lights could be on. The cars in front were breaking and then stationary before he hit Kimi. I think he did well in trying to pull to the left, and that Kimi's car shouldn't have been there, but behind Kubi's instead, but even then Hamilton would have over shot his spot which would have been due to his neglecting to look at the red light or the other cars in front of him.

Now assuming that you understand 1) all accidents are different and 2) Hamilton's accident demonstrated more driver neglect on his part than Kimi's did, you should understand that the penalties will differ.

I personally think that Hamilton could have had 5 places taken off rather than 10, but for the most part, in both instances, the stewards got the calls right.

I will reiterate...

Stewards do make mistakes. Some decisions are incorrect. But since we're talking about these two instances, other (previously incorrect) decisions have no bearing on this conversation. Equally, incorrect decisions shouldn't alter the scale on which incidents are measured. If we let anomolies cloud the scale of accountability then we have no scale of accountability at all. In which case we should roll a dice and hand out penalty grid places for every collision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blah, blah, <all of the postings above>, blah.

Kubi deserved the win, Massa looked racey, Hami/Nico made a c#ck-up, they got rightly penalised. Let's move on....

Can't believe the amount of micro-analysing that takes place here of every driver error... get a life :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LH at fault I guess, but how could KR overtake another car in the pit lane?

On another point it was anounced by the commentators that IF we had a breakaway formula, it would not work if FIARRAI were not part of it ?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My conclusion - If Raikkonen wasn't trying to emulate Kubic-Alonso scene from 2006 Monza, the accident would not have happened. Therefore, in my opinion, Raikkkonen is as guilty as Hamilton or Rosberg. I really believe that Ice Man's ice is melting this year...

Of course if Kimi was not racing... Hamilton would have been WDC.

You can blame Bridgestone wiith same type of argument!

Let's assume that Kimi was behind Kubica and that there was empty space to the left of Kubica. Hamilton's show would put him parralel to the Kubica thus gaining unfair advantage over Kimi. So, please stop trying to defend something that is undefendable. He screwed up and got fair penalty for that.

But it is so typical of Lewis and his fans that someone else has to be blamed for his mistakes. There are always good excuses for the golden boy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WEll, after a careful review, here is what I saw: Kubica was out of the pit first. Raikkonen did not want to let him go, so his started passing Kubica in the pit lane (if you watch carefully, you can see Raikkonen actually accelerating and getting even with Kubica WHILE IN THE PITLANE. The reason this didn't work was the dreaded red light. Kimi parked actually where the runoff area was to avoid exactly this type of accident. Hamilton was caught by surprise (for whatever reason) and tried to do the right thing - i.e. avoid Kubica and stop in the empty area. Except that Kimi was there. Rosberg Likely expected Hanilton to stop next to Kubica, except that he stoped way before that, so Rosberg run out of space.

My conclusion - If Raikkonen wasn't trying to emulate Kubic-Alonso scene from 2006 Monza, the accident would not have happened. Therefore, in my opinion, Raikkkonen is as guilty as Hamilton or Rosberg. I really believe that Ice Man's ice is melting this year...

It is perfectly legal to try and gain position IN THE PITLANE. It is also perfectly legal to line up like Kimi and Kubica did side by side... so if all they did was legal and Mclaren failed to remind Lewis of the red light and therefore their man crashed, they should be punished...totally ignorant....and get over yourself....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now