maure

Belgium Gp - Spa-francorchamps

514 posts in this topic

I agree here with Brad, and look towards the decision from the appeal. IF the championship comes down to this race, then it's a bit hollow should Massa win. But that's racing. And Kimi's not entirely out of it yet either. I don't care what that Domenchilli fulla says - Massa can still F it up for himself, on his own, and without the team helping him! :P

well, this is just sad.....

"There may, however, be little recourse for McLaren, despite the British team's notification of its intention to appeal the decision in the International Court of Appeal.

Hamilton's 25-second adjunct was technically a drive-through penalty, which could not be served because the incident occurred so close to the end of the race.

Drive-throughs cannot be appealed."

source:

www.F1way.com

http://www.f1way.com/news/2008/september/8...amilton-penalty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well ignoring all the fanboy arguments - I have some questions:

What was Lewis supposed to have done to "undo" the advantage that he gained? OK, so he dropped back, but at what point does his self-imposed penalty become acceptable? e.g. how far did Lewis have to drop back for a penalty to be avoided?

These are important points as this could/will affect every driver in a similar situation.

Unfortunately another subjective judgment made by FIA - would be better if they could be clearer and more consistent with the rules and their interpretation.

Look, everyone knows you're supposed to stop, run down to the local Golden Arches, order a Big Mac, then run back to the car, and resume your pursuit. Heck JPM did that BEFORE the race :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well ignoring all the fanboy arguments - I have some questions:

What was Lewis supposed to have done to "undo" the advantage that he gained? OK, so he dropped back, but at what point does his self-imposed penalty become acceptable? e.g. how far did Lewis have to drop back for a penalty to be avoided?

These are important points as this could/will affect every driver in a similar situation.

Unfortunately another subjective judgment made by FIA - would be better if they could be clearer and more consistent with the rules and their interpretation.

Piotr is correct, it is a judgement call. They thought that Hamilton could have not passed Kimi at the end of the straight if he had not cut the chicane. Perhaps this is so. I don't care. I disagree with the decision too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was pushed out by Kimi as he was already ahead of him, watch the video. Yes you are right about slipstream, but didn't he back off for a full car length? First of all I don't even think (my opinion) he should have given back his place to Kimi. Well, its over, I would like to see how Mclaren respond to Ferrari on track. Rest is all crap. Wouldn't waste my time discusing this again.

If he hadn't give back his place to Kimi the penalty wouldn't be arguable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well ignoring all the fanboy arguments - I have some questions:

What was Lewis supposed to have done to "undo" the advantage that he gained? OK, so he dropped back, but at what point does his self-imposed penalty become acceptable? e.g. how far did Lewis have to drop back for a penalty to be avoided?

These are important points as this could/will affect every driver in a similar situation.

Unfortunately another subjective judgment made by FIA - would be better if they could be clearer and more consistent with the rules and their interpretation.

Well, that is the question isn't it? I have been trying to find the rule, but I've been too tired to look properly. Where is Kay when you need her, she's normally pretty good at finding specific rules! :lol:

The other observation I have, is that in the corner prior to Lewis & Kimi meeting Rosberg coming back on track, can't remember the name of the corner, you see Kimi running right around the outside of the run off area and come back on track with a fair amount of speed and is then able to overtake Lewis when Lewis avoids Rosberg. In theory, did Kimi not gain as much of an advantage here as Lewis did in the bus stop chicane, because without using that run off area, he surely wouldn't have been as close to Lewis? Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look, everyone knows you're supposed to stop, run down to the local Golden Arches, order a Big Mac, then run back to the car, and resume your pursuit. Heck JPM did that BEFORE the race :P

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other observation I have, is that in the corner prior to Lewis & Kimi meeting Rosberg coming back on track, can't remember the name of the corner, you see Kimi running right around the outside of the run off area and come back on track with a fair amount of speed and is then able to overtake Lewis when Lewis avoids Rosberg. In theory, did Kimi not gain as much of an advantage here as Lewis did in the bus stop chicane, because without using that run off area, he surely wouldn't have been as close to Lewis? Just a thought.

true, I do think Kimi got an advantage there......why can't they just let people race......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What was Lewis supposed to have done to "undo" the advantage that he gained? OK, so he dropped back, but at what point does his self-imposed penalty become acceptable? e.g. how far did Lewis have to drop back for a penalty to be avoided?

At that moment I thought he had to complete next sector behind Kimi, I thought it was written somewhere in the rules but now I'm not too sure. Does anybody know what the rules say about those situations?

Unfortunately another subjective judgment made by FIA - would be better if they could be clearer and more consistent with the rules and their interpretation.

I agree.

Edited by AleHop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that is the question isn't it? I have been trying to find the rule, but I've been too tired to look properly. Where is Kay when you need her, she's normally pretty

Yeah. And I'd like to see the rule too. Doesn't anyone who cuts a chicane gain an advantage anyway, eg the advantage of not spinning? So every time Kimi went off the track to avoid spinning should be penalised too? And didn't Vettel cut the chicane repeatedly in Canada for example, when otherwise he'd have spun and lost a place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
true, I do think Kimi got an advantage there......why can't they just let people race......

because this is not gp2, a1gp, irl, nascar, v8-supercars, le-mans, or anything else called motorsport. this is F1, and the F doesn't stand for formula.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lewis only let Kimi three quarters by. He didn't come 'OFF' the throttle, he modulated it. He then got a tow. He wouldn't have got that tow unless he had been so close. He wouldn't have been so close unless he was uncharacteristically alongside Kimi coming out of Bus Stop. He was along side Kimi coming out of Bus Stop because he CUT THE CHICANE.

Tell that to your friend Fizz Ixx.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaeA-njNLf0

You are either blind or lying. it is impossible to swap sides on Kimi as Lewis plainly did without being in front, behind or by going through. Since we can plainly see in the link you posted that Lewis was not in front you must thtink he went through. Please share your wonderful new "Fizz" theories with the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
true, I do think Kimi got an advantage there......why can't they just let people race......

Precisely. I am of the opinion that a driver doesn't take to the run off area unless he has to, especially in condtions like yesterday's race, because it's a bit of a lottery. If they find some grip out there, great, let them race.

At that moment I thought he had to complete next sector behind Kimi, I thought it was written somewhere in the rules but now I'm not too sure. Does anybody know what the rules say about those situations?

I haven't heard that one before, I must admit, Aley. Are we talking about sectors as in the 3 timing sectors they use?

Yeah. And I'd like to see the rule too. Doesn't anyone who cuts a chicane gain an advantage anyway, eg the advantage of not spinning? So every time Kimi went off the track to avoid spinning should be penalised too? And didn't Vettel cut the chicane repeatedly in Canada for example, when otherwise he'd have spun and lost a place?

That's a good point, I suppose they do in that sense. Mind you I suppose it would have to be offset against the chances of damaging your car :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading that one of the stewards who took the crazy decision recently criticized Seb Loeb the stunning WRC 4 time champion for being scruffy ha ha. Why can't we have a dedicated team of stewards who go around the world with F1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Well yeah. But it gets trickier still because what if, in my senility, your favourite commentator and national treasure goes and has a picnic down at the bus stop? Should Lewis cut the chicane he would surely be penalised for gaining a racing advantage by avoiding a slippery patch of afternoon tea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. And I'd like to see the rule too. Doesn't anyone who cuts a chicane gain an advantage anyway, eg the advantage of not spinning? So every time Kimi went off the track to avoid spinning should be penalised too? And didn't Vettel cut the chicane repeatedly in Canada for example, when otherwise he'd have spun and lost a place?

I thought you can't cut a chicane either (1) to avoid being overtaken or (2) to overtake. In normal circumstances I thought you can't cut a chicane (3) to improve your time sector.

(1) Schumacher did it twice in Hungaroring 2006, he got 1 point and no penalty.

(2) The stewards thought Hamilton made it possible because he had previosly cut the chicane.

(3) I think it is common sense during qualifying.

Maybe because I'm a fanboy I don't trust penalties since Alonso was penalised for blocking Massa in Monza 2006. Then I had to swallow more of the same when they penalised Alonso in Hungaroring 2007 and people were justifying it. Maybe I'm taking revenge now but I still don't trust penalties.

Look at Fuji 2007, very similar incidents between Hamilton-Kubica and Alonso-Vettel. Kubica got a drive through, Vettel didn't. We have so many stupid penalties already I don't think this one is surprising. It's arguable like most of the previous ones. I think it has to change but Alonso was right in 2006 when he said he didn't consider F1 a sport anymore. Two years later it's getting even worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are we talking about sectors as in the 3 timing sectors they use?

I don't really know but I don't think it is just that. You could cut the chicane at the end of one sector and then you could still drive next sector as nothing had happened. I suppose it should be very clear you can't take any advantage by cutting a chicane, no matter it is lap time, defend your position or gain a better position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't really know but I don't think it is just that. You could cut the chicane at the end of one sector and then you could still drive next sector as nothing had happened. I suppose it should be very clear you can't take any advantage by cutting a chicane, no matter it is lap time, defend your position or gain a better position.

Yes it should be clear, but I bet if somebody finds the rule then it will be anything but clear :lol:

The only thing I have ever heard is that you must let the person you overtook back through. Whether that is an official rule, or just a common practice, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very sad what happened yesterday . the best race of the year spoiled by the 'stewarts' and with NO REASON. those a##holes will end up destroying f1 you can be sure.

Edited by chaide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rule simply states that you cannot gain an advantage by cutting across and the stewards decision was that Hamilton had taken advantage of cutting the chicane by getting a drive out of it that allowed to take kimi on the next curve. The logic, it seems, is that Hamilton would not have been able to do challenge kimi on the following curve if he had not jumped the chicane to begin with. I still think they got it wrong. Hamilton was all over kimi because his tyres and setup worked better once the rain hit. Before the rain started, kimi was clear by ~2 secs and holding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In hindsight Hamilton should have stayed behind him until they got through the first corner and then taken him as Kimi, not tof the first time, clearly looked like he couldn't handle the wet conditions. Of course in the c#ckpit with split second timing hindsight is a wonderful thing and Hamilton siezed his chance to get past Kimi ASAP. The longer he stayed alongside of behind him the more chance he had of being taken out by Kimi sliding all over the road. Unfortunately the decision is what it is but I think he could be reversed again. If not, Hamilton will just have to pray for rain from here on in to seal the deal over Ferrari.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lewis dedeucted 25 seconds!!!!!!! For f*cking what???? Last thing I saw with the Lewis-Kimi battle was Lewis make him spin, letting Kimi to take the lead again so that he won't get penalized but gets penalized anywhay!!!!! Load of f*cking b0llox! BTW will not read any of Fed_Ups or abbas' reactions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on that footage (I am no expert, but talk is cheap!): Hamilton is alongside Kimi, right? But he came later to the corner and will inevitably lose the line at the next corner. The usual, the instinctive action would have been to lift off the pedal and wait until next corner to avoid a crash. Or maybe you are caught off guard and think that if you brake at that moment you are going to lock wheels and take both cars out of the race, so you suddenly turn away maybe even getting off the track. But in that case is a sudden, spasmodic action (you must have seen such handling a million times from on board cameras).

In this case, though (please correct me if it is just my bias), Lewis seems to calmly turn left when Kimi closes the line. He then let Kimi retake position, but of course Hammy is already aligned and on traction while Kimi was pushed off by Lewis sudden appareance from the chicane.

Being a subjective call indeed, I am inclined to think that Lewis actually had an unfair advantage. As for the rules and how much is giving back the position and blah blah, well, it says a lot that is the first time we all see a car giving back the position in such an unclear fashion. Usually they brake and give a clear advantage back. I can't recall any specific situation, but I would recommend watching any footage from the old Hockenheim when many drivers used to cut the chicane after that long straight...this situation was usual there. Also at Monza with that chicane after the main straight.

In short, Lewis was wrong and my bet is that he knew he was wrong. On the other hand, the FIA with their sudden attacks of fair play mixed with criminal obliviousness is guilty of interfering too much either by active or passive behavior...

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