Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah

[Schumikonen 2]

- Then why the green lights? Either because Whitting understood it all wrong, or because he had a moment. In any case, the lights themselves were inconsistent with rule 40.13. As far as I know, rules have precedence over colored lights. If anything, Whitting should be penalized for the whole ****up with 20 seconds which will demote him to grid girl. As for Schumi, he obviously saw the lights and went for it. Drivers watch the lights, not the rule books while racing. But that's still not enough to forfeit a rule breach.

There one problem with that statement and is that Whitting is that teh same that post comments on Live Timing and I show you that even that commentor from the official Formula 1 website had clear that "racing" would be resume after the SC went in, he announced to the world that the SC period was over and from the SC line the track would be green and good for racing, the info is still there but for some unkown reason you are avoiding it

Now I am heading to the college before it start to rain, leave your answer here and I'll give you your right answer when I get out of there BTW I missed a lot to have a topic like this I am enjoying it a lot.

[maure 1]

hahahahah!!!! this is hilarious. For once I agree with Cav. FIVE pages of discussion because the GREAt Schumacher, 7-time WDC, bend / broke the rules to pass - for SIXTH place!!! and he had to do it to pass the guy who started from a PIT LANE. Dead last... HAHAHAHA!!!

If this does not prove that Schumacher was a petty little cheat who got to win because a) He drove a Ferrari, Ferrari was the best car at that time, c) he was shielded from any possibility of his teammate kicking his arse by team orders (poor Rosberg...) then I don't know what does. Now, just from a practical point of view, if SC is NEVER to take the checker flag, how do you make sure that race ends under caution? AND, are you (all of you) seriously proposing that FIA, in the most insane moment of their collective minds, would decide that it is a great idea to allow racing - FROM THE ENTRY TO A PIT LANE TO THE FINISH LINE ONLY???? Are you people insane (except Cavallino - his worry about global warming robbed him of any logical thought - he needs to be excused) ????? What sense would it make ???? THink, people! Thinking has a collosal future...

Professor - great explanation of the rule - these were my thoughts exactly.

Well said... amd good jibe at cavallino. He might just accept you into his secret hideout where the unbanned can bask in his insane contradictory glory.

Besides which, I don't think the track was clear of the mess so the SC entry was to allow Webber to cross the finish line first. It makes sense that the rule takes away that win away from a SC, even if on principle. Besides, I hear Alonso was told to hold back while Brawn tried a trick that blew up in his face... and that's what happens when you gift a championship to a guy like Brawn (or similar), they feel entitled to everything and more.

Now that we don't have to collectively apologize for Hamilton's misbehavior and shoddy driving (he did quite well enough this time, considering), we are left to make excuses for Schumacher. It's painful to watch him fall apart but Rosberg is clearly in better shape. Let's hope Mercedes has the sense of rethinking their position and push their best driver forward... that is, none other than Rosberg.

Schumacher shouldn't complain. He had a good run and no shortage or luck or fixed races to get away with 7 world championships. He should be home and fcking his wife like there is no tomorrow (were she willing and available), like a true champion basking on his past glory. The team that rolled the red carpet for him to shine is all going to better lives. Todt is top dog. Brawn stole from the Japanese _a_big_lot_ of money. Meanwhile, Schumacher is just losing with nothing to gain... so midfield for him and, hopefully, the team will unleashed Rosberg with all their support and then more. Given him chance and Rosberg will be up there, no doubt. Just look at the championship table once.

[Quiet One 15]

There one problem with that statement and is that Whitting is that teh same that post comments on Live Timing and I show you that even that commentor from the official Formula 1 website had clear that "racing" would be resume after the SC went in, he announced to the world that the SC period was over and from the SC line the track would be green and good for racing, the info is still there but for some unkown reason you are avoiding it

Now I am heading to the college before it start to rain, leave your answer here and I'll give you your right answer when I get out of there BTW I missed a lot to have a topic like this I am enjoying it a lot.

Don't bother. This horse is already so dead it stinks.

In any case, how could I NOT avoid the live commentary? What does it prove? It could have been written by Todt, Whiting and Pope Benedict XVI under direct instructions from the big bearded guy up in the sky and it will still mean Sh#t.

Ok, here's some quick guide on "How things work":

- Sporting code has precedence over "Summarized Version" of the sporting code as the bit you quoted .

- Sporting Code has precedence over track lights. You can't change the rules just by changing the lights on track. If the lights contradict the rules, then lights are wrong. That might explain why the drivers reacted that way, but it will still not make it more legal.

- Sporting code has precedence on what Schumi's friends and teammates have to say about his manoeuvre.

- Sporting code has precedence over whatever is written on live commentary, whatever Whitting thought, whatever BBC might have said and basically, anything else except national laws and international agreements.

Now, if you are willing to discuss whether Schumi's move was legal or not, please bring a single piece of evidence FROM THE SPORTING CODE, the European Union's Constitution or the Monaco's Criminal Law Digest.

[shields 0]

questions:

Who wrote this f*ck*** rule?

(probably a lawyer...)

How much he was paid to write it?

Can we make him return the money?

I am engineer, and if an engineer design something wrong (like a building not well calculated), it can kill people. In the very least, the engineer will be fired and sued.

I dont think we should blame Damon Hill, he did the best he could with a f*ck*** badly written rule. Even I, with my poor english would have written in better words...

It is said that MS brilliant move has been punished, but I dont think he deserved a 20 sec punishment... At most he should have returned his position... or a small fine. But again, LH has suffered from the same 20 seconds stupid rule in SPA , if I remember correctly, which was not appealed, God knows why...

I completely agree with Professor: that is what the rule says, and, as there are no other rules stablishing wether the SC went to the pits because it would anyway, or wether it was because of the 40.13, your only option is to agree that 40.13 applies here...

FIA stupidity should be quickly revised, as it shows in every rule, every paragraph, every line...

It gives margin to interpretations, which is bad. Too bad... The irony is that MS itself has been helped BIG time in the past in several occasions... seems that now it is his time for paying...

[Schumikonen 2]

Don't bother. This horse is already so dead it stinks.

In any case, how could I NOT avoid the live commentary? What does it prove? It could have been written by Todt, Whiting and Pope Benedict XVI under direct instructions from the big bearded guy up in the sky and it will still mean Sh#t.

Ok, here's some quick guide on "How things work":

- Sporting code has precedence over "Summarized Version" of the sporting code as the bit you quoted .

- Sporting Code has precedence over track lights. You can't change the rules just by changing the lights on track. If the lights contradict the rules, then lights are wrong. That might explain why the drivers reacted that way, but it will still not make it more legal.

- Sporting code has precedence on what Schumi's friends and teammates have to say about his manoeuvre.

- Sporting code has precedence over whatever is written on live commentary, whatever Whitting thought, whatever BBC might have said and basically, anything else except national laws and international agreements.

Now, if you are willing to discuss whether Schumi's move was legal or not, please bring a single piece of evidence FROM THE SPORTING CODE, the European Union's Constitution or the Monaco's Criminal Law Digest.

If you need this sporting code to know that you are allow to overtake under green flags, then I guess you drive with you local driving rules book in your hands and read in every street cross the part that tell you that you are allow to cross the green light if you don't do this then you don't need this evidence from any sporting code.

[Quiet One 15]

If you need this sporting code to know that you are allow to overtake under green flags, then I guess you drive with you local driving rules book in your hands and read in every street cross the part that tell you that you are allow to cross the green light if you don't do this then you don't need this evidence from any sporting code.

Hope you aren't seriosuly expecting me to reply to that.

[pabloh20 1]

Gee, Webber thinks the race ended under SC:

"MW: Yeah, I was on the radio and they said look you have got Jarno (Trulli) and I think it was (Karun) Chandhok in front with a few laps to go. I was nursing the car quite a lot in the last part of the race but with backmarkers you can lose a lot of time when you catch them. I saw Jarno going for a lunge down the inside of Rascasse and I thought ‘what the hell is going to happen here’ and they interlocked wheels, he went flying in the air and I just hoped I had some options to go on the inside and sure enough I did. I was just really hoping that Chandhok was okay as it looked like the car was around the head area and I thought ‘God, now we have another safety car but let’s finish it under the safety car so I don’t have to worry about doing one lap after the restart’. It was good obviously as both of us could just cross the line quite straightforward and get a very good one-two for the team."

Then again, what does HE know? He is just a driver, not an expert, like some on this forum...

I don't think it states that at all. All it says is that he hoped the race was going to finish under the SC.

[AleHop 0]

Hope you aren't seriosuly expecting me to reply to that.

The thread is longer than deserved. The FIA b#####ds!!!!

I didn't manage to find the tin foil hat emoticon for future use against some posts and for my own personal use sometimes.

[pabloh20 1]

Oh for bollocking sake. What's up with you all?? I actually found this a reasonable discussion, for the most part, quite interesting to hear different points of view posted in a sensible and polite way. Well it was when I left it last night

[AleHop 0]

Oh for bollocking sake. What's up with you all?? I actually found this a reasonable discussion, for the most part, quite interesting to hear different points of view posted in a sensible and polite way. Well it was when I left it last night

You are right.

No, seriously. You are right you were replying some new comments that hadn't been discussed and rightly so. That's what a forum is for.

[pabloh20 1]

You are right.

Aha, so there we have it. Something I knew all along

[Schumikonen 2]

Hope you aren't seriosuly expecting me to reply to that.

Not really, I know that it doesn't matter what evidence I present to you, you won't acept it, it looks like Alonso is as infalible as the pope in your opinion, so was the point in giving you serious answers when we won't get anywhere, I know that you understand what I am pointing out but you won't accept it so it is up to you if you answer or not or if you accept it or not, it really doesn't make any difference but will continue to enjoy the situation as long as I can.

[Rainmaster 7]

I see what you're saying, and you argue it very well, but I'm not convinced yet. Firstly, I think you must surely agree that for a sporting regulation that fans and commentators will want to check, it's not exactly well-written because it's open to different interpretations. It's not exactly comparable in its clarity to the offside rule for example. And unlike some technical regs, there's no need for this to be so complicated - would it really be unbearably poor legal form to just add in a few words extra so we didn't have to debate this!

Your argument for interpretation 2 rather than 1 is pretty technical to anyone without a legal background but also it relies on a "SC finish" requiring a definition. In rule 40.13 the wording is "if the race ends whilst the safety car is deployed it will enter the pit lane..." which is not obviously in need of a definition is it? Couldn't you take it as common sense that the SC is deployed if it has not yet been called in according to the procedure outlined in rule 40.11?

The procedure in rule 40.11 seems to have been followed to the letter, although I can't say for sure, and so it seems reasonable to assume the race was back on. If green flags are meant to be shown when the SC is still deployed then that is a very confusing rule, and if they're not meant to be shown then it seems very unfair to penalise Schumacher for a marshaling mistake, though I guess in that case he'd have to be put back to 7th.

I'm not clear what status the flags and lights have in all this. I had a quick look and couldn't find any rules about flags and lights! If you ask me the whole thing's a shambles now that Max's gone.

First off, cheers for reading such a long post! Plenty of people here who argue on the other side but won't bother to read the other side of the argument!

Anyway, yeah I agree the rule could be clearer, e.g. how I rewrote it in my post. I suppose the difference between football and F1 is the amount of rules they have to write for even the most unlikely or different circumstances that can happen. Not that I sympathise because the rule could be written in a clearer way. Also, it would help if the rules had some kind of extra explanation attached like some laws do (I think). Like for example it seems to me that the FIA don't want people racing to the flag on the last lap if a safety car is out during the last lap, so it would be useful if they had the rule "if the race ends whilst...etc" and then an explanation of "This rule is created to prevent overtaking occurring on the last lap unless in exceptional circumstances where it is unavoidable (see rules on formation lap overtaking)" or something similar. That would help.

I guess the problem the FIA had with the rule was having a SC finish where the SC didn't cross the start/finish line on the last lap (as the actual F1 cars must do to be classified), which creates confusion. That is in my opinion why they included the line which explains that on a SC finish, the SC will actually pit at the end of (read: "on") the last lap, just to make sure people understood that it still counted as a SC finish. So they did try to make the rule about an SC finish clear imo (it isn't though). Ferrari got the right interpretation (right in the sense that the stewards agreed), Mercedes took a different one and the green flags and "the track is clear" didn't help anyone (more on that later).

Ironically, overtaking is probably prohibited on the last lap under the SC finish because the FIA wanted to avoid the chance of any racing incidents causing controversies on the last lap. Also, the rule probably has something to do with wanting an F1 car to lead across the line at the actual end of the last lap rather than a safety car (better for the photos in Monday's papers I guess).

As painful as it is after such a brilliant move, I do think now that the FIA have got this decision right.

However, the FIA really do need to re-write this rule so it is clearer and doesn't sound so contradictory.

Stating that the race will end with the safety car deployed then going on to say that the safety car will pit at the end of the last lap is contradictory.

Either keep the SC out until it crosses the start/finish line or keep the track under yellow flag conditions until all cars have finished the race.

Clearly rule 40:13 trumps 40:11 and clearly in this case rule 40:13 trumps the tracks green flag status too.

The Professor has interpreted it correctly, but in simple terms its this:-

IF the SC is still deployed on the last lap it will peel off into the pit lane on that last lap but SC conditions still apply and cars are not allowed to overtake.

But why the green flags/lights then ? Well here's the thing... a lot of you have said 'the green flag means you can race again', however The Official F1 Website describes the green flag as "Green flag - All clear. The driver has passed the potential danger point and prohibitions imposed by yellow flags have been lifted. "

This indicates that the green flag just tells the driver that the previous yellow flag situation is now clear. Normally that goes hand in hand with getting back to racing, BUT... if rule 40:13 is in effect, it takes priority.

So in summary.... rule 40:13 could be better worded by a teenager and for clarity's sake the track should really remain under yellow/SC conditions until the cars have crossed the line if the SC is peeling in on the last lap.

A shame for Michael, I seriously doubt the appeal will have any effect, but damn that was a great opportunistic move and yes if the team told Schumi it was ok to pass then the team should bear the penalty not the driver (or Michaels pass should be annulled and the result be Alonso 6th and Schumacher 7th.

I reckon if Schumi made that pass in a Ferrari he'd have gotten away with it.

Again, cheers for reading the posts. Thank you - if that is what a green flag means, i.e. "the track is clear" then people need to stop confusing a green flag as having the direct opposite meaning of a yellow one. Yes, usually a green flag (track is clear) means the resumption of racing but evidently, under a very specific condition, a green flag is superseded by the sporting code if the safety car is still deployed on the last lap..e.g. the track is clear as indicated by the flags, but overtaking is still prohibited but not because of an on track incident in this case, but the sporting code and safety car finish procedure.

If all that is right then it conflicts with previous logic that green flags always mean overtaking is allowed, in fact overtaking being banned and green flags are not mutually exclusive under a SC finish (confusing as that is to everybody involved).

OR, they (Whiting, FIA) got the flag system wrong OR it wasn't a SC finish as the rule doesn't actually say what I think it does.

[Kopite Girl 0]

Tommy. Dude. It works both ways. Its like an endless tirade that never stops. I see Andres and Alex constantly battling back. You get angry if the same is said for Kimi - I like to banter with you and Brad as you both do with me about Jenson, as does Andres and Alex.

I think I owe you the respect to be really honest. Its not just you but there are quite a few members recently who seem to be biting a lot and some of it is becoming personal. I had a bit of a run in with Jay. Doesn't mean to say I'll carry it on for weeks on end. In fact as far as I'm concerned, its history. No grudges are held.

We will never all agree, I know this. But its getting old.

You're still older than me though so haha!

[LabradoRacer 2]

I had a bit of a run in with Jay.

We did? Neither of us hurled invectives on the other, so how's it quali as a run-in? I think we had a quite decent disagreement!

Edit: I wouldn't mind us getting personal

[pumpdoc 2]

We did? Neither of us hurled invectives on the other, so how's it quali as a run-in? I think we had a quite decent disagreement!

Edit: I wouldn't mind us getting personal

In the short time I've been back it seems like you throw F-bombs out at peeps willy nilly, personally I'd like to see you stop before I have to stop you.

[LabradoRacer 2]

In the short time I've been back it seems like you throw F-bombs out at peeps willy nilly, personally I'd like to see you stop before I have to stop you.

I did drop F-bombs, but never at anyone. Oh,ok, the one telling all & sundry to go eff themselves was an exception, but it wasn't personal. I don't think I've attacked anyone with even a simple 'ninny'. Not for a long time.

Edit: I think Graham should shoulder the blame for my F-bombs. It was him who discovered the loophole in the cuss filtering system.

[Schumikonen 2]

Tommy. Dude. It works both ways. Its like an endless tirade that never stops. I see Andres and Alex constantly battling back. You get angry if the same is said for Kimi - I like to banter with you and Brad as you both do with me about Jenson, as does Andres and Alex.

I think I owe you the respect to be really honest. Its not just you but there are quite a few members recently who seem to be biting a lot and some of it is becoming personal. I had a bit of a run in with Jay. Doesn't mean to say I'll carry it on for weeks on end. In fact as far as I'm concerned, its history. No grudges are held.

We will never all agree, I know this. But its getting old.

You're still older than me though so haha!

That's never going to happen, how would I get angry for something said about Kimi if there isn't anythiing wrong to say about him now going back to my post, it looks like the lack of use of emoticon gave you the wrong idea, I am not getting angry or anything like that, I just been posting from college with a very limited amount of time to do it, what I meant is that it doesn't matter if I respond seriuously or not because like you said we are not going to agree, even if the evidence are there, so if he respond we are not going to agree but if he does respond we are not going to agree, I believe that if he said I am right I will change my opinion at the same time too because sometimes I do that, I keep a stance just because the other person is getting wind up, obviously this is not the case right as I am 100% sure that I am right

[AleHop 0]

Aha, so there we have it. Something I knew all along

No!!! You were wrong on what really matters here: the rule is clear but it is difficult to interpret it correctly. Well, as you know Ferrari wrote the those rules so you know who interpreted it correctly and who didn't.

First off, cheers for reading such a long post! Plenty of people here who argue on the other side but won't bother to read the other side of the argument!

The thread title dosen't make justice to the good posts and deep analysis carried on by some people. The other side just picked the thread title but I'm not too sure they even read it.

Tommy. Dude. It works both ways.

Yes, but one way works better than the other.

I believe that if he said I am right I will change my opinion at the same time too because sometimes I do that, I keep a stance just because the other person is getting wind up, obviously...

If you do that some posters won't bother replying once they realise that's what you are looking for.

[Jean Todt 4]

In the short time I've been back it seems like you throw F-bombs out at peeps willy nilly, personally I'd like to see you stop before I have to stop you.

he threw one one me yesterday.......

[Kopite Girl 0]

We did? Neither of us hurled invectives on the other, so how's it quali as a run-in? I think we had a quite decent disagreement!

Edit: I wouldn't mind us getting personal

JD. Indeed!

[pabloh20 1]

Again, cheers for reading the posts. Thank you - if that is what a green flag means, i.e. "the track is clear" then people need to stop confusing a green flag as having the direct opposite meaning of a yellow one. Yes, usually a green flag (track is clear) means the resumption of racing but evidently, under a very specific condition, a green flag is superseded by the sporting code if the safety car is still deployed on the last lap..e.g. the track is clear as indicated by the flags, but overtaking is still prohibited but not because of an on track incident in this case, but the sporting code and safety car finish procedure.

If all that is right then it conflicts with previous logic that green flags always mean overtaking is allowed, in fact overtaking being banned and green flags are not mutually exclusive under a SC finish (confusing as that is to everybody involved).

OR, they (Whiting, FIA) got the flag system wrong OR it wasn't a SC finish as the rule doesn't actually say what I think it does.

Indeed, according to 40.11 -

As the safety car is approaching the pit entry the yellow flags and SC boards will be withdrawn and replaced by waved green flags with green lights at the Line. These will be displayed until the last car crosses the Line.

So no, green flag doesn't mean it's ok to overtake. Well, I have learnt something new

It would be interesting if anyone has the video of the 2009 Australian Grand Prix, apparently that finished under SC and the SC came into the pits on the last lap. Might be worth seeing what flags/lights were displayed then.

[Schumikonen 2]

Indeed, according to 40.11 -

As the safety car is approaching the pit entry the yellow flags and SC boards will be withdrawn and replaced by waved green flags with green lights at the Line. These will be displayed until the last car crosses the Line.

So no, green flag doesn't mean it's ok to overtake. Well, I have learnt something new

It would be interesting if anyone has the video of the 2009 Australian Grand Prix, apparently that finished under SC and the SC came into the pits on the last lap. Might be worth seeing what flags/lights were displayed then.

where did they found that info? I haven't seen it yet. I'll try to find that video later in the day as i am heading now ot pick up my wife.

[Schumikonen 2]

[quote name='pabloh20' date='17 May 2010 - 04:57 PM' timestamp='1274129855' post='316783']
Indeed, according to 40.11 -

As the safety car is approaching the pit entry the yellow flags and SC boards will be withdrawn and replaced by waved green flags with green lights at the Line. These will be displayed until the last car crosses the Line.

So no, green flag doesn't mean it's ok to overtake. Well, I have learnt something new

It would be interesting if anyone has the video of the 2009 Australian Grand Prix, apparently that finished under SC and the SC came into the pits on the last lap. [b]Might be worth seeing what flags/lights were displayed then.[/b][/quote]
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekdNRjTU21g"]Here[/url] is your 2009 SC finish, I posted a picture of the end of the race under SC, as you can see the Yellow flags are still waving and the SC sign is still displayed and the checkered flag so like I've been saying since the end of the race, this race didn't finished under the SC as the track was green and the SC sign was removed but look at it by yourself and be the judge.

Now let's here form the other side


[img]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs507.ash1/29947_1467625367713_1145913860_1369938_3808987_n.jpg[/img]

[Imatool 0]

I see Yellow flags and SC boarded as Button greats the Checker in the Video 2:01 minute mark.

2009 F1 GP