Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah

[Rainmaster 7]

Here 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

Interesting! Although that could mean 4 things if I can think about this clearly at this time:

1) The Monaco race didn't actually end under the SC, the SC just happened to pit that lap and it happened to be the last lap, the track was green and racing was allowed.

2) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the marshals waved the wrong flags.

3) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the SC procedure has changed since Australia '09, and yellow flags + SC Board are no longer displayed in such a situation.

4) There is no rule relating to on track flags when a SC finish takes place, providing it is a SC finish then no matter what flags are waved drivers are not permitted to overtake as the rule states. The choice of flags is irrelevant and decided on a race by race basis (there is no written procedure about flags and SC finishes).

Looks to me like, unless the SC finish procedure has changed then the Monaco race either didn't end under a SC or the marshals displayed the wrong flag (if we follow precedent, which the FIA don't).

[Schumikonen 2]

Interesting! Although that could mean 4 things if I can think about this clearly at this time:

1) The Monaco race didn't actually end under the SC, the SC just happened to pit that lap and it happened to be the last lap, the track was green and racing was allowed.

2) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the marshals waved the wrong flags.

3) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the SC procedure has changed since Australia '09, and yellow flags + SC Board are no longer displayed in such a situation.

4) There is no rule relating to on track flags when a SC finish takes place, providing it is a SC finish then no matter what flags are waved drivers are not permitted to overtake as the rule states. The choice of flags is irrelevant and decided on a race by race basis (there is no written procedure about flags and SC finishes).

Looks to me like, unless the SC finish procedure has changed then the Monaco race either didn't end under a SC or the marshals displayed the wrong flag (if we follow precedent, which the FIA don't).

If the procedure change it should be stated in the regulation so far noone have found it, if someone does I will accept and will post an I am convinced post

I don't think marshall waved the wrong flags as it was not only one person who did it, there should have been a radio communication for this and someone would have noticed they were going to do it wrong, so far all evidence point at the race not finishing under the SC but again there is a communication problem among the marshalls, stewards, teams and race director, FIA and F1 as they had not clear was going on and took a very long time to come up with the desicion to penalize Schumi, obviously they don't have it clear eather or someone(s) wanted to punish Schumi anyway

[Schumikonen 2]

Take a look at

and listen what Ross Brawn said, they came up with more than one argument against Schumi, listen to what he said and compare it to what I've been saying here, I know, I got the wrong profession

[AleHop 0]

Looks to me like, unless the SC finish procedure has changed then the Monaco race either didn't end under a SC or the marshals displayed the wrong flag (if we follow precedent, which the FIA don't).

AFAIK, there's only one change on that respect. In 2010, when the SC leaves the track, overtakings are allowed after the SC line at the pit-lane entry. In 2009, and as past as my memories can go, overtaking was allowed after the Start/Finish line.

In 2009 the SC leaving the track in the last lap automatically meant the race ends under SC. In 2010 things are not so clear. I understand why Mercedes told their drivers to try to pass the car in front after the SC line, and I understand Ferrari telling their drivers not to try to pass the car in front. Three stewards + Damon Hill thought Ferrari decision was the correct one as I thought initially, now I think there's no correct decision. The SC rules suck big time.

[cavallino 2]

Interesting! Although that could mean 4 things

Oh wow you discovered what I realized and posted about 5 pages and 24 hours ago. Now you can have the debate I had all over again

[Schumikonen 2]

AFAIK, there's only one change on that respect. In 2010, when the SC leaves the track, overtakings are allowed after the SC line at the pit-lane entry. In 2009, and as past as my memories can go, overtaking was allowed after the Start/Finish line.

In 2009 the SC leaving the track in the last lap automatically meant the race ends under SC. In 2010 things are not so clear. I understand why Mercedes told their drivers to try to pass the car in front after the SC line, and I understand Ferrari telling their drivers not to try to pass the car in front. Three stewards + Damon Hill thought Ferrari decision was the correct one as I thought initially, now I think there's no correct decision. The SC rules suck big time.

If that's the case then the race didn't finished under the SC and the penalty was unjustified.

[AleHop 0]

If that's the case then the race didn't finished under the SC and the penalty was unjustified.

If some teams, the stewards and Damon Hill thought the race finished under the SC it was for some good reason. Maybe it's somewhere in the rules or maybe it's called common sense. The penalty should go for the guy who wrote the SC rules.

[Rainmaster 7]

Take a look at

and listen what Ross Brawn said, they came up with more than one argument against Schumi, listen to what he said and compare it to what I've been saying here, I know, I got the wrong profession

Yes Ross Brawn raises the debate we have had here. I don't think his assessment is correct for the reasons I have already explained, regarding the race "ending" under the SC and so on, but it is another interpretation.

AFAIK, there's only one change on that respect. In 2010, when the SC leaves the track, overtakings are allowed after the SC line at the pit-lane entry. In 2009, and as past as my memories can go, overtaking was allowed after the Start/Finish line.

In 2009 the SC leaving the track in the last lap automatically meant the race ends under SC. In 2010 things are not so clear. I understand why Mercedes told their drivers to try to pass the car in front after the SC line, and I understand Ferrari telling their drivers not to try to pass the car in front. Three stewards + Damon Hill thought Ferrari decision was the correct one as I thought initially, now I think there's no correct decision. The SC rules suck big time.

Yes, that is the rule difference, and as far as I can tell Mercedes 1) didn't brush up on the fact that on the last lap under a SC pitting, you can't overtake from the SC line as usual, and 2) this initial mistake was compounded with the waving of green flags (which whether strictly correct or not is definitely misleading since overtaking is not allowed in that situation reading 40.13 in a sensible way).

Oh wow you discovered what I realized and posted about 5 pages and 24 hours ago. Now you can have the debate I had all over again

No discoveries actually, I understood the basic issue pretty quickly it's other people who complicated the issue by reading from the wrong set of rules, over complicating the actual rule in 40.13, looking for ridiculous biases, and claiming that just because green flags were shown means all other rules are null and void

[Schumikonen 2]

If some teams, the stewards and Damon Hill thought the race finished under the SC it was for some good reason. Maybe it's somewhere in the rules or maybe it's called common sense. The penalty should go for the guy who wrote the SC rules.

Not really, if listen to RB in that video you'll find out that Schumi was being blamed for passing under yellow flags but that never happened, it looks to me that they were in a witch hunt and Schumi's chin provided the evidence to hunt him

But seriously, if they were so sure of the rules they case wouldn't have taken so long resolve, they were just looking for the way to take him out of the way.

[yurp 0]

Interesting! Although that could mean 4 things if I can think about this clearly at this time:

1) The Monaco race didn't actually end under the SC, the SC just happened to pit that lap and it happened to be the last lap, the track was green and racing was allowed.

2) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the marshals waved the wrong flags.

3) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the SC procedure has changed since Australia '09, and yellow flags + SC Board are no longer displayed in such a situation.

4) There is no rule relating to on track flags when a SC finish takes place, providing it is a SC finish then no matter what flags are waved drivers are not permitted to overtake as the rule states. The choice of flags is irrelevant and decided on a race by race basis (there is no written procedure about flags and SC finishes).

Looks to me like, unless the SC finish procedure has changed then the Monaco race either didn't end under a SC or the marshals displayed the wrong flag (if we follow precedent, which the FIA don't).

you missed...

5) They got it wrong in Australia 2009.

and...

6) Aliens came down and tampered with the evidence along with our collective memories of it.

But actually I believe it's number 3 as outlined by Alehop...

AFAIK, there's only one change on that respect. In 2010, when the SC leaves the track, overtakings are allowed after the SC line at the pit-lane entry. In 2009, and as past as my memories can go, overtaking was allowed after the Start/Finish line.

Which could mean that green flags are now shown from the first SC line rather than the start finish line. Hences the green flags were waved in Monaco while in Aus 2009 we only saw yellow.

The FIA changed one rule and neglected to realise how it would affect another previous rule (hence the confusion).

It appears that a body of highly paid fools (FIA) have between them, failed to think things through (again).

But then again - that's what the aliens want us to think.

[Schumikonen 2]

you missed...

5) They got it wrong in Australia 2009.

and...

6) Aliens came down and tampered with the evidence along with our collective memories of it.

But actually I believe it's number 3 as outlined by Alehop...

Which could mean that green flags are now shown from the first SC line rather than the start finish line. Hences the green flags were waved.

The FIA changed one rule and neglected to realise how it would affect another previous rule (hence the confusion).

It appears that a body of highly paid fools (FIA) have between them, failed to think things through (again).

But then again - that's what the aliens want us to think.

But if this is a FIA mistake the can nto fix it by penalizing a driver, the best thing they could have done was to invalidate the pass as it was their mistake but they are proceding as if they didn't do anything wrong, and two wrong don't make a right.

[yurp 0]

But if this is a FIA mistake the can nto fix it by penalizing a driver, the best thing they could have done was to invalidate the pass as it was their mistake but they are proceding as if they didn't do anything wrong, and two wrong don't make a right.

First - This is the FIA we're talking about. They don't admit 'mistakes'. They will probably clarify the rule after the event, but that's all you'll get.

Second - The FIA marshalls didn't make a mistake on the track. The green flags were not an error and the SC coming in was not an error. According to their confusing rules the track staff did the correct thing. They waved green flags from the SC line, because that's what they do when the SC comes in - no matter if overtaking is allowed or not - bizarre - yes - stupid - yes.

Third - I agree that the best thing would be to put Alonso 6th and Schumi 7th (I said that way back on page 1 or 2 of this thread) - but that won't happen.

The law and justice are two, often conflicting things in F1 - sad but true.

[Schumikonen 2]

First - This is the FIA we're talking about. They don't admit 'mistakes'. They will probably clarify the rule after the event, but that's all you'll get.

Second - The FIA marshalls didn't make a mistake on the track. The green flags were not an error and the SC coming in was not an error. According to their confusing rules the track staff did the correct thing. They waved green flags from the SC line, because that's what they do when the SC comes in - no matter if overtaking is allowed or not - bizarre - yes - stupid - yes.

Third - I agree that the best thing would be to put Alonso 6th and Schumi 7th (I said that way back on page 1 or 2 of this thread) - but that won't happen.

The law and justice are two, often conflicting things in F1 - sad but true.

Allow me to disagree and let me point at the picture of the 2009 SC finish, the safety car came in the noone, no a single soul waved a green flag automatically because the race indeed finished under the SC but this time the green flags came out because the track, like they(FIA-Marshals,...) said it was cleared the racing was being resume.

[Rainmaster 7]

you missed...

5) They got it wrong in Australia 2009.

and...

6) Aliens came down and tampered with the evidence along with our collective memories of it.

But actually I believe it's number 3 as outlined by Alehop...

Which could mean that green flags are now shown from the first SC line rather than the start finish line. Hences the green flags were waved.

The FIA changed one rule and neglected to realise how it would affect another previous rule (hence the confusion).

It appears that a body of highly paid fools (FIA) have between them, failed to think things through (again).

But then again - that's what the aliens want us to think.

Yes, we have cracked it, go forum monkeys!

Actually, you put it the best way yet with the bold part. The FIA has one rule which says overtaking is allowed from the SC line, but has another which says (based on the most reasonable interpretation), if the safety car is out on the last lap, it will pit, and you can't overtake which therefore supersedes the usual rule (because it is specific).

Like I said before it all seems to depend on the green flags now, usually it means "racing is okay" but I don't think that is strictly always what green flags mean, and even if they do, it doesn't mean it's fine to break the other written rule in 40.13. Also, just because none or not all of the drivers knew about 40.13 isn't a defence, the FIA has to issue a penalty and it only has a limited amount available at the end of a GP. The FIA made a confusing set of rules and then tied it's own hands when someone made the wrong interpretation of them, and now we have a pretty absurd result even if MGP win their "appeal".

Personally I think that Whiting/the marshals were confused here because of their new practice of waving greens at the SC line rather than the start/finish line, they forgot their own rule about a SC finish being different and meaning no overtaking, and failed to keep yellow flags out even though the track had been cleared, to remind drivers that overtaking was still illegal in that situation.

Or they decided that greens were fine because the track was clear, and that drivers/teams should know about 40.13 without being reminded by "no overtaking" warnings or yellows.

Either way, it's not good.

[Max Mosley 2]

Interesting! Although that could mean 4 things if I can think about this clearly at this time:

Very useful summary!

1) The Monaco race didn't actually end under the SC, the SC just happened to pit that lap and it happened to be the last lap, the track was green and racing was allowed.

I think this is the most sensible interpretation. There seem to be 2 main arguments against this view: that rule 40.13 makes more sense as a definition of a SC finish than simply as instructions on what to do if one happens, and that rule 40.13 is very specific and therefore takes precedence over other considerations.

I don't find the first argument entirely convincing because the wording of 40.13 seems clear to me without needing to be read as a definition - or to put it another way, the rules offer an alternative definition of when the SC is deployed and when it is not, according to 40.11.

The other argument doesn't make much sense to me because it seems almost circular. The idea seems to be that 40.13 is more specifically about the final lap than 40.11, therefore if ever the SC pits on the last lap, it must automatically be because of 40.13 and not 40.11. That certainly doesn't follow deductively and it's not what I find the most plausible. Common sense suggests (to me at least) that the rules allow for the SC to pit for 2 different reasons on the final lap, and if you're told 'SC in this lap' then the SC is no longer deployed.

2) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the marshals waved the wrong flags.

Yes it's possible and raises some interesting questions about how to penalise people if they're given incorrect info. However, what would be fun to find out, if someone knows how, is whether in Aus '09 the teams received messages like 'SC in this lap' and 'track clear'. I know nothing about these procedural matters but if those messages come from race control, and didn't appear in previous SC finishes, that might suggest that it was race control that made the 'mistake', which I'm not sure makes sense given that they're the ones who un-deploy the SC.

3) The Monaco race did end under the SC but the SC procedure has changed since Australia '09, and yellow flags + SC Board are no longer displayed in such a situation.

Yes again it's possible but surely this would a really odd procedure change. Back in Aus '09 there was no confusion about what happens under a SC finish because back then, I think, you could never overtake before the start/finish line on a restart. Now you can, and thus surely we need the SC signs etc more than before on the final corner of the race. So if your possibility #3 is true then the rules have really changed in a perverse way imho. And in any case, if it's a SC finish, shouldn't the SC boards be out anyway.

4) There is no rule relating to on track flags when a SC finish takes place, providing it is a SC finish then no matter what flags are waved drivers are not permitted to overtake as the rule states. The choice of flags is irrelevant and decided on a race by race basis (there is no written procedure about flags and SC finishes).

Yes this is possible too. It seems hard to work out what status those flags, boards and lights have, or even what they indicate. That said, rule 40.11 does state what flags to wave in the event of the SC being called in. In fact, I only see one rule mentioning green flags, lights, messages from race control and the SC so my rule is more specific and takes precedence over yours. So ha!

In any case, if those flags and lights etc are just down to whatever some marshal thinks makes sense, that's the most absurd rule I've ever heard. Plus, race control giving messages like 'SC in this lap' must presumably be down to Whiting's whim as well in this interpretation.

[Schumikonen 2]

Yes, we have cracked it, go forum monkeys!

Actually, you put it the best way yet with the bold part. The FIA has one rule which says overtaking is allowed from the SC line, but has another which says (based on the most reasonable interpretation), if the safety car is out on the last lap, it will pit, and you can't overtake which therefore supersedes the usual rule (because it is specific).

Like I said before it all seems to depend on the green flags now, usually it means "racing is okay" but I don't think that is strictly always what green flags mean, and even if they do, it doesn't mean it's fine to break the other written rule in 40.13. Also, just because none or not all of the drivers knew about 40.13 isn't a defence, the FIA has to issue a penalty and it only has a limited amount available at the end of a GP. The FIA made a confusing set of rules and then tied it's own hands when someone made the wrong interpretation of them, and now we have a pretty absurd result even if MGP win their "appeal".

Personally I think that Whiting/the marshals were confused here because of their new practice of waving greens at the SC line rather than the start/finish line, they forgot their own rule about a SC finish being different and meaning no overtaking, and failed to keep yellow flags out even though the track had been cleared, to remind drivers that overtaking was still illegal in that situation.

Or they decided that greens were fine because the track was clear, and that drivers/teams should know about 40.13 without being reminded by "no overtaking" warnings or yellows.

Either way, it's not good.

I would agree with if not for that bold part, had the rule have like that we wouldn't be here talking about this, but the problem is that the reason for the SC was already clear and so the safety came into the pit not to comply with the 40:13 rule but because it was not need it anymore, had the reason for the SC remained unclear the SC would have done exactly the same but the yellow flags and SC signs would be still out and no overtaking would have been allow, but this is not what happened and it looks like Ferrari were the only ones who got it wrong but Alonso almost hit the wall two time trying to keep his position, if they were sure that no passing was allow he would have try to keep his position, believe no drive try to prevent another driver from getting a penalty.

[maure 1]

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.

Well said... and you made me laugh too, Oh Quite One.

[yurp 0]

Allow me to disagree and let me point at the picture of the 2009 SC finish, the safety car came in the noone, no a single soul waved a green flag automatically because the race indeed finished under the SC but this time the green flags came out because the track, like they(FIA-Marshals,...) said it was cleared the racing was being resume.

Rules as to where overtaking can normally occur has changed, thus FIA can cover their arses as to why green flags were waved in Monaco while yellow flags were waved in Aus 2009.

Don't ask me to defend the FIA's position or rules, because I think they're stupid.

Don't ask me to tell you why green flags are the best thing to wave in this circumstance, because they aren't.

I'm simply explaining how the rules have been interpreted in this instance.

It's crap, but that's the way it is.

Yes, we have cracked it, go forum monkeys!

Actually, you put it the best way yet with the bold part. The FIA has one rule which says overtaking is allowed from the SC line, but has another which says (based on the most reasonable interpretation), if the safety car is out on the last lap, it will pit, and you can't overtake which therefore supersedes the usual rule (because it is specific).

Like I said before it all seems to depend on the green flags now, usually it means "racing is okay" but I don't think that is strictly always what green flags mean, and even if they do, it doesn't mean it's fine to break the other written rule in 40.13. Also, just because none or not all of the drivers knew about 40.13 isn't a defence, the FIA has to issue a penalty and it only has a limited amount available at the end of a GP. The FIA made a confusing set of rules and then tied it's own hands when someone made the wrong interpretation of them, and now we have a pretty absurd result even if MGP win their "appeal".

Personally I think that Whiting/the marshals were confused here because of their new practice of waving greens at the SC line rather than the start/finish line, they forgot their own rule about a SC finish being different and meaning no overtaking, and failed to keep yellow flags out even though the track had been cleared, to remind drivers that overtaking was still illegal in that situation.

Or they decided that greens were fine because the track was clear, and that drivers/teams should know about 40.13 without being reminded by "no overtaking" warnings or yellows.

Either way, it's not good.

Spot on.

[Zaz 0]

The decision to overtake "in a brilliant schumi's style" was only Michael's decision because he's not well aware with the rules... and I can't imagine the team is so stupid to instruct Michael to overtake. Such a delay in the appealing explains that.

And I can't see anything brilliant in the manoeuvre when a overconfident driver overtakes a car slowly approaching the checkered flag under the SC conditions.

I see that probably every driver was not confident about the rules in that situation... so the fact that Alonso lost a bit the rear tells me that he did not expect anyone to fight behind him under the SC and at the moment he saw Michael trying to overtake him only at that piont Alonso thought may be the racing was still there.

[JHS 1]

"a car slowly approaching the checkered flag under the SC conditions." What? It looked anything like Alonso was going slowly! He knew he still had to race as did all the other cars. As I've said previously, if the race was truly over, they coould all have tootled their way to the line, waving to the crowd and doing burnouts as they went. But they didn't. They all got back on the pace. They all knew that the race was NOT over until they'd crossed the line.

[Senna's Ghost 0]

Ole Peeps

This is interesting and from what I read in this thread so far (I haven't read the whole thread) every single arguement, permutation and explaination has been explored.

My observations are as follows:

Rule change made by the FIA in 2010 allowing racing to recommence from after the SC line rather than start/finish line. It appears the FIA neglected to look at the other rules governing a safety car finish. The Stewards decision could have gone either way because both arguements are valid.

I am not a blind Schumi fan but I think he and MGP have been penalised harshly for being as sharp as a tack. If the overtake has been judged to be against the rules then, because of the ambiguity of the rules as they stand, he should be classified in his original place behind Alonso rather than the 20 sec penalty that has been handed out. Yes, I know the arguement already is that this would be wrong because he has contravened the rules of the race and therefore he must receive a penalty for that, and of course, it would also create a precedent, but the FIA must take some of the blame here. Will there be a clarification or perhaps an amendment to the rules before the next race? I see that MGP are appealing the decision and not the penalty.

If there is no overtaking on the last lap of an SC finish no-one bothered to tell the RBR because they took off from the last corner to the finish line under full acceleration. If Webber had of coasted from the last corner I bet Vettel and the field would have blasted past him before he knew what was happening.

Question for you. What would of happened if at the final corner if Webber had experienced a failure of some kind that meant he could not continue to the finish line? As has been established there is no overtaking allowed under an SC finish. What a pickle. Gentlemen (and ladies), open your rule books now.

Tchau.

[dribbler 6]

Ole Peeps

This is interesting and from what I read in this thread so far (I haven't read the whole thread) every single arguement, permutation and explaination has been explored.

My observations are as follows:

Rule change made by the FIA in 2010 allowing racing to recommence from after the SC line rather than start/finish line. It appears the FIA neglected to look at the other rules governing a safety car finish. The Stewards decision could have gone either way because both arguements are valid.

I am not a blind Schumi fan but I think he and MGP have been penalised harshly for being as sharp as a tack. If the overtake has been judged to be against the rules then, because of the ambiguity of the rules as they stand, he should be classified in his original place behind Alonso rather than the 20 sec penalty that has been handed out. Yes, I know the arguement already is that this would be wrong because he has contravened the rules of the race and therefore he must receive a penalty for that, and of course, it would also create a precedent, but the FIA must take some of the blame here. Will there be a clarification or perhaps an amendment to the rules before the next race? I see that MGP are appealing the decision and not the penalty.

If there is no overtaking on the last lap of an SC finish no-one bothered to tell the RBR because they took off from the last corner to the finish line under full acceleration. If Webber had of coasted from the last corner I bet Vettel and the field would have blasted past him before he knew what was happening.

Question for you. What would of happened if at the final corner if Webber had experienced a failure of some kind that meant he could not continue to the finish line? As has been established there is no overtaking allowed under an SC finish. What a pickle. Gentlemen (and ladies), open your rule books now.

Tchau.

I believe such a scenario was briefly touched upon by Brundle in the post race forum. He wondered whether if Webber had crashed on the run up to the line and others had over taken him what the result would have been.

On reflection, my personal view is that the rule seems pretty clear. If a race finishes under the safety car (regardless of green flags, the safety car line etc) then no overtaking is allowed. The penalty is therefore fair (especially as it sets out what penalty would be applied). Brawn is a master at exploring and sometimes triumphing when there seems to be rule ambiguity, but I think he's clutching at straws here. None of his evidence applies when the ruling is as clear as it is.

[pabloh20 1]

Here 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

Cheers, matey.

[yurp 0]

Question for you. What would of happened if at the final corner if Webber had experienced a failure of some kind that meant he could not continue to the finish line? As has been established there is no overtaking allowed under an SC finish. What a pickle. Gentlemen (and ladies), open your rule books now.

same thing as anytime a car crashes or fails behind a safety car - others can overtake them.

case in point - vettel crashed into the back of webber when hamilton backed them up behind SC in 2008 (someone help my dodgy memory - where?) the field over took them. no problem there.

if a car has stopped on track then it can be 'overtaken'.

[pabloh20 1]

No discoveries actually, I understood the basic issue pretty quickly it's other people who complicated the issue by reading from the wrong set of rules, over complicating the actual rule in 40.13, looking for ridiculous biases, and claiming that just because green flags were shown means all other rules are null and void

Exsqueeze me!! I think you'll find I was just enjoying the discussion and have no bias!