Mmmmh....

[Kay 0]

The only thing I found was right before the crane phrase, where it says (I am paraphrasing as I am now at work and don't have the regulations at hand) that marshalls can do whatever they deem necessary to ensure that safety is not compromised in their sector. However, as the crane phrase comes right after that, I get the impression that cranes are expressely not included in the first paragraph.

I guess the FIA will find a way to explain that contradiction (I don't believe I am smarter than the FIA, after all) but it surely would not sound too convincing.

Exactly, under dangerous conditions the rules do not specify what can and cannot be used to move the car, therefore it is up to interpretation and therefore there was nothing done that was against the rules.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

FIA now says it was all legal according to their rules. Please explain! Next GP race drivers won't leave their cars until a crane put them back on track. Then we'll see if law is same for everyone.

If Massa did not complain at all it would be even mor dirty penalty for Alonso... But marshals asked Massa and he complained about that. There is only on person that could know wether Alonso was blocking him or not and it was only Massa.

FIA didnt decide to put Hamilton back on track. The marshalls did, and FIA have confirmed its legal. Whats wrong with that? Its not the same as Monza, which also was NOT an FIA decision. At the time, Max Mosley confirmed it was the decision of the race stewards, and then later in the year Max even said if it was up to him he wouldnt have penalised Alonso at all.

Neither of these incidents are FIA decisions. And if I remember correctly, Massa did not say anything about being held up. If you want to prove me wrong, please provide a quote or an article, but I'm pretty positive that Massa did not complain, in fact it even seemed to take Massa by surprise. Here at TF1 we all agreed the penalty was completely ridiculous, no-one agreed with it.

[Null 0]

After what happened, him being pulled out of the gravel and him being allowed to overtake all the cars in the silly new safety car rules, I'm so glad he didn't manage to even get one single point. If he did, it would make a mockery of F1.

[ecapdeville 0]

After what happened, him being pulled out of the gravel and him being allowed to overtake all the cars in the silly new safety car rules, I'm so glad he didn't manage to even get one single point. If he did, it would make a mockery of F1.

I completely agree with you...

and at the same time, those blue flags against Hamilton when he was a kilometer in front of Massa were really weird...FIA is loosing their minds.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

I completely agree with you...

and at the same time, those blue flags against Hamilton when he was a kilometer in front of Massa were really weird...FIA is loosing their minds.

can people please stop blaming the FIA for actions taken by marshalls, stewards etc

[Quiet One 15]

can people please stop blaming the FIA for actions taken by marshalls, stewards etc

They act in accordance to FIA's rules, and the FIA backed up their decision. Who should we blame? Microsoft?

[Jem of the Shire 0]

They act in accordance to FIA's rules, and the FIA backed up their decision. Who should we blame? Microsoft?

If a marshall waves a blue flag too early to Massa, why should we get angry at FIA?

[Quiet One 15]

Rulebook decrees Hamilton`s crane lift illegal

Wednesday 25th July 2007

The debate about whether Lewis Hamilton should have been permitted to continue in the European GP after being lifted out of the gravel by a Nurburgring crane has taken a new - and apparently decisive twist - after a study of the rule-book.

The issue has dominated the P-F1 Mailbox and Forum since Sunday, with several readers outraged at the help afforded to the Englishman. However, while it was thought that Hamilton's good fortune was legal on the basis that a driver could seek assistance if he was deemed to be in a dangerous position, closer inspection of the 2007 F1 regulations - as requested by mailboxer Gareth Bouch from London - provides an entirely different conclusion.

To quote paragraph 6.1, Chapter III of appendix H from the FIA Formula One World Championship Regulations:

'If a car stops: If a car stops on the course, or leaves the track, the first duty of the course marshals in that sector is to take it to a place of safety.

'No driver has the right to refuse to allow his car to be taken off the track, he must do everything he can to help and obey the marshals' instructions. Once the car is in a place of safety the driver may, if the specific regulations of the event permit, work on it in order to re-start. In such cases other means, such as breakdown vehicles, cranes, etc. should not be brought into action until the driver has made it clear that he will not continue. [P-F1's bolding] It is desirable that the driver stays near his vehicle until the end of the race or at least informs the post chief how his car may be lifted, or towed back to the pits.'

Ultimately, the issue was academic as Hamilton finished out of the points despite being lifted back on the track, while the FIA continue to insist that the action was legal.

"We are extremely happy with what happened," spokesman Richards Woods told The Times. "He was in a dangerous spot - he kept his engine running and the quickest and easiest way, under the circumstances, to get him and the car out of the way was to get him back on the track and get him going again and, as far as we are concerned, that was fine."

However, in a separate twist, the newspaper claims that 'Lewis was at one point being told by the marshalls at Turn 1 to get out of his car and get himself to safety', and that, rather than heed the request, not only did he remain in the car but 'Lewis was gesturing to the marshalls to get the crane, organising people to his advantage.'

Source

************************

See? I am not THAT crazy!

[Kay 0]

IF the marshals told him to get out and he ignored then that is a different matter altogether and a very serious one at that. Marshals risk their lives on many occasions to help drivers so they should not be ignored.

[dribbler 6]

Schumacher knew this before and received help from marshals, in 1997 when he hit Villeneuve out he tried to do the samething then. However the marshals refused after seeing what he did.

So you believe that the Marshalls had a discussion, decided that Michael had been to blame and then decided that they would not assist him back onto the track? Do you believe that that the Marshalls think that they have the power to decide such a thing?

You don't think that it had anything to do with the fact that his right front suspension was mangled, making it impossible for him to continue?

Let's get the record straight, not speculatively slur like armchair experts.

[AleHop 0]

and at the same time, those blue flags against Hamilton when he was a kilometer in front of Massa were really weird...FIA is loosing their minds.

I'm quite sure it was Ferrari (Massa again) that complained about Hamilton 1 mile away.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Chapter III - 6.1 "If a car stops" - Appendix "H" to the FIA Sports Code:

"...In such cases other means, such as breakdown vehicles, cranes, etc should not be brought into action until the driver has made it clear that he will not continue"

*******************************

So...

www.formula1.com does not say anything about it...interesting, being the "official site." I quoted a paragraph of FIA's own Code. It clearly states that cranes cannot be put into action UNLESS the driver expresses his will not to continue the race. If he wanted to continue the race, then no crane should have been used. Note that this is not appliable in Schumi's case, as there was no crane involved. I am not objecting the help itself, but the means used. Maybe there is some other part of the code and/or regulations that allow this exception. I couldn't find it.

I didn't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been answered already. The reason Hamilton was able to continue with the race is that there was a re-start. During a re-start, all cars that are running can line up on the grid, regardless if a Marshall touches the car or not (or crane for that matter). That's the only exception to the rule you've quoted.

[Quiet One 15]

I didn't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been answered already. The reason Hamilton was able to continue with the race is that there was a re-start. During a re-start, all cars that are running can line up on the grid, regardless if a Marshall touches the car or not (or crane for that matter). That's the only exception to the rule you've quoted.

Believe it or not, we have two threads going on about this and you are the first person to mention that!

Sounds like a good explanation. I am leaving back home from work now...I will re-read the regulations!

Thanks!

[AleHop 0]

I didn't read the entire thread so forgive me if this has been answered already. The reason Hamilton was able to continue with the race is that there was a re-start. During a re-start, all cars that are running can line up on the grid, regardless if a Marshall touches the car or not (or crane for that matter). That's the only exception to the rule you've quoted.

It wasn't a re-start, Toro Rosso bitterly complained about that because they think the race should have been re-started so they wouldn't have lost both cars at that same corner were Hamilton was helped by a crane. It was not a re-start.

There were 6 cars off the track but only one got help.

WHY?

[mikathegreat2 2]

After what happened, him being pulled out of the gravel and him being allowed to overtake all the cars in the silly new safety car rules, I'm so glad he didn't manage to even get one single point. If he did, it would make a mockery of F1.

True! Even James Allen was surprised at the descisions 7 it's not fair! You woud'nt see Alonso bring lifted by the tractor & allowed to overtake everyone else on the track so that he;s not the only driver that's been lappe ! I feel sorry for Hamilton because of all the descisions given his way because technically, everybody here seemed to dislike him a lot but it's not all his fault!

[AleHop 0]

I feel sorry for Hamilton because of all the descisions given his way because technically, everybody here seemed to dislike him a lot but it's not all his fault!

I think we are talking here about the decision it is not Hamilton's fault that he could continue racing.

[Null 0]

only 1 got help because the others either damaged their car or their engines turned off I assume. Although theoretically I suppose the teams could run down with starters... haha, imagine if they bent the rules that much, I would laugh!

[Quiet One 15]

Believe it or not, we have two threads going on about this and you are the first person to mention that!

Sounds like a good explanation. I am leaving back home from work now...I will re-read the regulations!

Thanks!

I still haven't read the regulations, but I kept thinking on my (very long) way home...If it was a re-start, couldn't the other drivers get their mulettos? I think STR complained, too, becuase the marshalls made Liuzzi stop his engine. Why couldn't he be brought back to the race? Now we knoe his car had a gearshift problem, but the marshalls did not know that at that time and neither did Liuzzi.

And yes, nobody is blaming Hammy here, Mikathegreat2 (well, except for the article I posted) we are discussing whether the marshalls did the right thing or not.

[Silas Talbot 0]

I just have a problem with how ARBITRARY it was...

Those crane guys were working HARD for Lew Ham... you could see the guy waving him on after the crane was removed, like "GO MAN GO FOR IT YOU GOD OF SPEED!"

What about Taku at the USGP.. he spun out in a 'dangerous position'... that turn 4 has people go off all the time... why couldn't he have waited for a crane to come retrieve him? Instead he took a 10 grid penalty the next race since he wasn't able to complete his drive-through penalty.

How dangerous was Lew Ham's position, really? Which is more dangerous to the driver, other drivers, and the race marshalls: Lew Ham exiting his car and hopping over the tire barrier, or having a crane come charging out (making contact with a moving car on the way in to save Lewis, mind you), hook up an F1 car with the driver still inside and travel BACK TOWARDS THE TRACK, PARKING THE CRANE ON THE EDGE OF THE ASPHALT???? This is in the interest of safety?

Who decides if this is going to be done, is it the FIA race control, or is it THE SPECIFIC crane driver who is on the scene?

It's just so arbitrary...

[pumpdoc 2]

The problem is that many a time a driver has gone off into the kitty litter/ beach and it is obvious the other than being beached the engine is running only to be left high and dry so to speak. If I was a driver now I would expect the Marshals/safety crew to come out and crane my arse back on the track.. That is so wrong...................

[Niall McBride 0]

The reason is that a car may receive assistance to be placed back onto the track if it is deemed to be in a dangerous position. i.e. there is no point having Marshals on the track for a healthy car with the engine running to be retired as they push it back if they can run out, push it out and clear the problem. It is in the rules if a car is in a dangerous position then it can be placed back onto the track and continue.

Schumacher knew this before and received help from marshals, in 1997 when he hit Villeneuve out he tried to do the samething then. However the marshals refused after seeing what he did.

But Alonso was in a similar position in Monza 2004 and he go no assistance, lol the the rear of the car was beached while the rest was stranded on the track with cars going by. Seeing as it's Ferrari territory that's being biast for ya

[aussief1 4]

I just have a problem with how ARBITRARY it was...

Those crane guys were working HARD for Lew Ham... you could see the guy waving him on after the crane was removed, like "GO MAN GO FOR IT YOU GOD OF SPEED!"

What about Taku at the USGP.. he spun out in a 'dangerous position'... that turn 4 has people go off all the time... why couldn't he have waited for a crane to come retrieve him? Instead he took a 10 grid penalty the next race since he wasn't able to complete his drive-through penalty.

How dangerous was Lew Ham's position, really? Which is more dangerous to the driver, other drivers, and the race marshalls: Lew Ham exiting his car and hopping over the tire barrier, or having a crane come charging out (making contact with a moving car on the way in to save Lewis, mind you), hook up an F1 car with the driver still inside and travel BACK TOWARDS THE TRACK, PARKING THE CRANE ON THE EDGE OF THE ASPHALT???? This is in the interest of safety?

Who decides if this is going to be done, is it the FIA race control, or is it THE SPECIFIC crane driver who is on the scene?

It's just so arbitrary...

I agree.

The problem is that many a time a driver has gone off into the kitty litter/ beach and it is obvious the other than being beached the engine is running only to be left high and dry so to speak. If I was a driver now I would expect the Marshals/safety crew to come out and crane my arse back on the track.. That is so wrong...................

The FIA need to clear this issue up, your right Bruce the drivers are just going to sit in the cars now and wait for assistance, while the marshals take unnecessary risks in order to put them back on the track.

[Yoda McFly 1]

The problem is that many a time a driver has gone off into the kitty litter/ beach and it is obvious the other than being beached the engine is running only to be left high and dry so to speak. If I was a driver now I would expect the Marshals/safety crew to come out and crane my arse back on the track.. That is so wrong...................

Further proof of the need to ban kitty litter and go to tarmac overruns ...

Or, better yet ... Bring the Armco back to the edge of the track. That'll keep 'em from running wide.

[aussief1 4]

Further proof of the need to ban kitty litter and go to tarmac overruns ...

Good point Yoda, Paul Ricard leads the way, with something like 25 acres of run off area. With a special abrasive asphalt, rather than the conventional and sometimes very dangerous kitty litter.

But like all good things there comes a cost, and the cost of replacing all the kitty litter on the tracks that have a World Championship round would immediately made the idea unviable.

[rodders47 2]

well this incidence just cements the fact that L.H. has either done a HUGE amount of homework, with refernce to rules and the interpretation of them, or his team informed him. Either way you MUST admit for a driver to be stuck in the sand, but have peice of mind to keep the engine running, does show some very smart thinking in a driver so young.

I wonder how many of the other cars in that same sand trap had their engines running ? I suspect none !