Quote from Hyperactive :

Do you actually know much about racing? Kimi's error on Monaco was a genuine driving error. You could put a penalty for Kimi on dangerous driving but even that would be very iffy. Kovalainen's error on the other hand was pure misjudgement on Heikki's behalf and essentially Heikki went for a pass on Wabeer on a place where he was in no place to go for it. The resulting collision was purely Heikki's fault.

If you try a pass in a place where it isn't possible (check Sato's career for this) you get a penalty and deserve it. If you spin and happen to take other car out as a result you hardly deserve a penalty for it simply because it was a genuine mistake.

---
Well, I'm not surprised by the least. FIA has a record of making only totally random and strange decisions, this is just one more. Hamilton clearly deserved the victory even with all the controversy people seem to find in all this. Yet another decision like this from FIA, I can't believe you are actually surprised about it!

And if anyone thinks that the fight for p1 at spa was anything to compare to the Arnoux/Villeneuve fight then you need to see that one again: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=LzCqY8Wg5So. That was two drivers fighting fair and hard for the position - not like two spoiled f1 drivers using all the tarmac in the damn Valley of the Ardennes only ending up annoyed by the fact that the other driver seemed to have managed to use the addon tarmac even more efficiently...

Heikki's misjudgment~?
then surely Kimi's mistake was caused by his misjudgment on the brakes as well~?

so if Heikki didn't dive down the inside but instead he somehow ram straight into the back of Webber would that equal there shouldn't be a penalty~? because then the situation would be basically the same as Kimi in Monaco...

that was what I was thinking when I posted it...

jctk: sorry, can't get behind you on that. Raikkonen either just screwed up or, as I said, had an unlucky accident. He wasn't racing anyone at the time and neither was Sutil. It was purely unlucky.

The situation with Kovalainen was entirely different. The two were racing and he made a completely ill-judged passing attempt; he had no right to be there as he was *clearly* behind entering the corner, and he made the choice to simply punt it straight into Webber when he had all sorts of other options and absolutely no right to intentionally tag Webber. It wasn't a mistake, he didn't overbrake and lose control of the car, he just drove it right up there and tagged him. It was a conscious decision, not an unfortunate consequence of an accident. Penalizing him for it was completely correct and I can't see any problem with it, and it's really not comparable to Raikkonen / Sutil.

Quote from AdamW :

shotglass: at that point in the picture, Hamilton has already been forced off the track. Look at the amount of space Raikkonen has left him: there's not a car's width on the track.

hes still well within the white lines at that point and without any overlap to claim the inside
compare that to hockenheim and youll clearly see the difference between running somebody wide ie making him run out of overlap and running somebody off ie making him run out of road

the important thing is that they were at the entry of a corner and räinlölnenwas on the racing line whith hatemelol having no significant overlap at all

shotglass: we're just going over the same ground now. You consider the second half of the chicane to be a corner in itself, and the position halfway through the chicane to be the 'entry to a corner'; I don't. We're not going to resolve that, so there's no point arguing about it. To my mind the entry point is the entry of the chicane, at which point they were exactly level.

Quote from AdamW :

To my mind the entry point is the entry of the chicane, at which point they were exactly level.

"Chicane" is the name of the feature: two slow or medium-speed corners in alternating directions of travel running consecutively without a clearly distinguishable straight section (you would know this already).

But a chicane is physically made of two corners. There is no escaping that fact.

Even if you were to consider a chicane like just one corner, then the incident at the Bus Stop should be considered as though it was one extended corner, where the overtaker lost his overlap just beyond the entry point. In that case, the overtaker is obliged to back off and give way to the opponent, since the attempt had failed and continuing it would be unsafe.

It's common sense that you cannot expect a driver being overtaken to give way when the overtaker is positioned alongside and slightly to the rear or further behind. There is just not enough visibility. In the case of Hamilton vs Kimi at the Bus Stop, Hamilton was not just slightly behind, but almost half-a-car-length behind: practically in Kimi's blind spot. The onus for safe behaviour rested entirely on Hamilton, who had superior visibility of the situation and greater opportunity to avoid a collision.

Quote :

I don't know if it's codified in the rules, but to my mind a chicane is a single element. It's not two separate corners.

There is no special rule in the regulations redefining a series of corners as more than one corner under the term 'chicane' or any other. It's multiple corners, and yes, you do treat the second corner in the chicane, under the rules, as having it's own turn in point: Usually the apex of the corner before.

Quote :

agreed but in this case hamilton didnt have nearly enough overlap to claim the inside so he wasnt driven off but just plain old behind instead

&

Quote :

thats jsut not what happened
heres a frame a couple of frames before he decided to speer off to the left

If you look at the picture I posted earlier Kimi has already lined his car up for the corner and has angled it sufficiently to reach the apex where he then plans on making a secondary turn, at the apex. That is his turn in point, and it seems extremely early for that corner, but it is his turn in point. Hamilton had been ahead prior and at that point still had significant overlap so visibility is not a sufficient excuse (not that lack of visibility would ever be tolerated as an excuse in the stewards room regarding race rules).

Quote :

a 10sec stop/go = 25sec
a drive through also = 25sec~?

There is definite disparity in the rules here, but those are the rules, so Hamilton has not been treated unfairly in this regard, and you're right, it is something that maybe wants looking at. They introduced the drive through at a team when a certain Mssr Schumacher was getting the benefit of some contraversial decisions, they then gave him a few... just quelling the public maybe? *puts on flame retardant suite*

Quote from Becky Rose :

If you look at the picture I posted earlier Kimi has already lined his car up for the corner and has angled it sufficiently to reach the apex where he then plans on making a secondary turn, at the apex. That is his turn in point, and it seems extremely early for that corner, but it is his turn in point. Hamilton had been ahead prior and at that point still had significant overlap so visibility is not a sufficient excuse (not that lack of visibility would ever be tolerated as an excuse in the stewards room regarding race rules).

ill have to disagree again
if you look closely at this pic i posted earlier
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=65734&d=1220844532
you can clearly see kimis left hand sticking out of the cockpit so hes still turning right (also evident when looking at the cars movement) which means hes still exiting the corner at that point

the first frame where hes turning left is this:
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... mp;stc=1&d=1220857812
you can see a bit of his steering wheel (the white stripe) in front of his helmet
which means that hatemelol was already halfway off the track when kimi turned in

a mere 3 frames earlier kimi was still busy turning right ie exiting the first corner
http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... mp;stc=1&d=1220857958

Quote from Becky Rose :

There is definite disparity in the rules here, but those are the rules, so Hamilton has not been treated unfairly in this regard, and you're right, it is something that maybe wants looking at. They introduced the drive through at a team when a certain Mssr Schumacher was getting the benefit of some contraversial decisions, they then gave him a few... just quelling the public maybe? *puts on flame retardant suite*

IF they bothered to have done something to it in the past perhaps it would have yield a different result yesterday... but oh well rules are rules...

I've seen the replay over and over and it could of been solved by hamilton just slowing down to let kimi past(as he was never going to get ahead), he was never forced out, it was hes judgement that was.

@Shot: I dont think the position of the wheel turn is much use without data from laps when this issue didnt occur, one could argue he let the car run out.

As i've said my view is Hamilton had the left hander but didnt get it, that's the best estimate I can make with the available data. I dont think Kimi was wrong to close the door, i'd have done the same, but I dont see why Hamilton is then obliged to return the position.

I think the manner that Hamilton did return the position was indeed unfair, he let Kimi passed and did not have mommentum but after watching the replay I have to face the fact that he monopolised straight away as part of the same move - albiet a situation which arose from Kimi driving, for the sake of his fans i'll use delicate terminology, "cautiously". Had the track been dry Hamilton would never have been in the position to fight back so soon after yielding the spot in the manner that he did.

In any case he was alongside Kimi in the [right hander] corner prior to the incident and gave back more than he lost, in my view.

So did Hamilton require to yield the position? There is debate here, but my position is that he didnt.

Did Hamilton yield the position back fairly? I would say not, but that it is subjective and dependant on prevailing conditions, and undeserving of a penalty.

Should Kimi have the book thrown at him for other, very serious, safety breaches? Yes, absolutely. That was not the driving of a champion - but it was hella fun to watch them both spinning off left right and centre.

Was there any move, which irrespective of the championship, would warrant investigation by the stewards? Yes, Kimi passing under yellow flag - a serious safety breach.

Was Hamilton's punishment for those particular regulations unfair when Kimi breached the same ones on the following lap? Yes, and shows diabolical bias and a manufactured championship result.

Quote from Becky Rose :

@Shot: I dont think the position of the wheel turn is much use without data from laps when this issue didnt occur, one could argue he let the car run out.

As i've said my view is Hamilton had the left hander but didnt get it, that's the best estimate I can make with the available data. I dont think Kimi was wrong to close the door, i'd have done the same, but I dont see why Hamilton is then obliged to return the position.

I think the manner that Hamilton did return the position was indeed unfair, he let Kimi passed and did not have mommentum but after watching the replay I have to face the fact that he monopolised straight away as part of the same move - albiet a situation which arose from Kimi driving, for the sake of his fans i'll use delicate terminology, "cautiously". Had the track been dry Hamilton would never have been in the position to fight back so soon after yielding the spot in the manner that he did.

In any case he was alongside Kimi in the [right hander] corner prior to the incident and gave back more than he lost, in my view.

So did Hamilton require to yield the position? There is debate here, but my position is that he didnt.

Did Hamilton yield the position back fairly? I would say not, but that it is subjective and dependant on prevailing conditions, and undeserving of a penalty.

Should Kimi have the book thrown at him for other, very serious, safety breaches? Yes, absolutely. That was not the driving of a champion - but it was hella fun to watch them both spinning off left right and centre.

Was there any move, which irrespective of the championship, would warrant investigation by the stewards? Yes, Kimi passing under yellow flag - a serious safety breach.

Was Hamilton's punishment for those particular regulations unfair when Kimi breached the same ones on the following lap? Yes, and shows diabolical bias and a manufactured championship result.

Thats ridiculous, your saying cutting the track and getting an advantage is okay and you don't have to give the position back?



Also, idk why people complain about how kimi used the run off areas, they were never punishable in the first place not to mention he was behind Lewis the whole time.

Also if Kimi had of FINISHED(and make this extra bold) then he would of got a 25 second penalty for overtaking under yellows, the same thing happened with Glock and wasn't set untill after the race.

But i guess you can add 25 sceonds to his retirement.

Quote from Mustafur :

Also if Kimi had of FINISHED(and make this extra bold) then he would of got a 25 second penalty for overtaking under yellows, the same thing happened with Glock and wasn't set untill after the race.

But i guess you can add 25 sceonds to his retirement.

He's actually classified as 18th, so if what you say is right, he really should have got those 25 seconds penalty even if it doesn't have any effect on his finishing position.

Quote from RossUK :

Those last few laps were some of the most exciting I've seen in a long while, its not often you get an adrenalin rush watching F1 to say the least. In fact the incident in question is what I watch racing for. Who cares if things get a bit tight and one car has to go off track? As long as the offending car lets the other back through all is fair, that's the spirit of racing right?

Well put! That's exactly how I experienced it... We were screaming, shouting ánd jumping on the couch at home... especially when Rosberg went off track and almost caused triple mayhem... My heart rate went through the ceiling

Either way, as much as I disagree with the penalty for Hamilton and as much I understand the dissapointment from people here, I think the whole conspiracy thing is being taken too far.. As mythdat already pointed out it's not the first time a penalty has been handed out for an incident like this one (mind you: even with no Ferrari's involved).
Plus, the 25 seconds penalty is just plain and clear in the FIA rules book, so there's no discussion there either..
Plus, and I quote:

Quote :

Q. Was the protest of which we've just seen the penalty, was the protest lodged by Ferrari?

SD: Absolutely not, absolutely not. We were summoned by the stewards at the end of the race.

Source: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70403

Ferrari did not lodge for an appeal, so that's the end of another discussion..

It's just a (in my opinion wrong) decision from the stewards, why would Ferrari have anything to do with that...

Formula1 has become an idot motorsport because of Fia.Fia'a only aim is to make ferrari win to keep ferrari fans watch the all series.(because most of formula1 fans are ferrari fans, as they keep watching formula1's raiting will not decrease)

I hope those fans are happy as long as they keep winning on the table...

I'm pissed about the penalty, LH actually let Kimi pass after the chicane, he was behind him totally at one point, but that overtaking after, was one of the best i've seen, total porn! It's a shame that move now doesn't count, but it does count in my "respect" book...

Quote from ZORER :

Formula1 has become an idot motorsport because of Fia.Fia'a only aim is to make ferrari win to keep ferrari fans watch the all series.(because most of formula1 fans are ferrari fans, as they keep watching formula1's raiting will not decrease)

I hope those fans are happy as long as they keep winning on the table...

Thats plain ol' BS. All the fans are the same. Now one side is bitchin' and the next time the other side will be bitchin'.
And since Hamilton got into F1, all of the sudden we see a whole bunch of GBR hardcore fans here beeing the expert; thats just so cliche, and i dont even mind beeing burned for this bcz it feels damn good

Quote from PwrSlave :

Thats plain ol' BS. All the fans are the same. Now one side is bitchin' and the next time the other side will be bitchin'.
And since Hamilton got into F1, all of the sudden we see a whole bunch of GBR hardcore fans here beeing the expert; thats just so cliche, and i dont even mind beeing burned for this bcz it feels damn good

Most of the people I know who are annoyed are not from Britain. In fact most of the strong anti-Hamilton crew are British.

It's quite CLEAR to any sensible human what's going on here.

Massa is deemed to have performed an unsafe pit release and it's punished with a FINE. Bruno Senna does the same thing and is given a drive through penalty!

Heikki spins Webber and it given a drive through. Pantano takes out fiillipi after out braking himself and is not allowed to race the Sunday sprnit race. Kimi smashes into Sutil and there is ABSOLUTELY NO PUNISHMENT!

hamilton is punished in France for not letting Vettel back past. He has a similar incident and let's the driver past and is still punished!

Always loved races in Spa, regardless of series - that track has some class.

Interesting start, fun to watch team tactics changing during the race and entertaining last few laps.

Regardless of the specifics of the controversial last laps and what-not, what I see as an outcome of all this strict monitoring and rulebook throwing is that seemingly drivers are slowly being forced not to take any risks. And that makes for poor spectator sport IMO.

Gutted for Kimi, he didn't deserve that finish to his race.

In the words of TP's Death - "Theres no such thing as justice, just me"

:doh:

Quote from Intrepid :

It's quite CLEAR to any sensible human what's going on here.

That'll be why you didn't get it, then.

Quote :

Massa is deemed to have performed an unsafe pit release and it's punished with a FINE. Bruno Senna does the same thing and is given a drive through penalty!

Different series, different circumstances - comparison isn't valid.

Quote :

Heikki spins Webber and it given a drive through.

If you're comparing that to Kimi/Hamilton incident, then that's a moot point as Heikki was on the inside, behind throughout, AND touched Webber. Kimi was ahead by apex, and they didn't touch.

Quote :

Pantano takes out fiillipi after out braking himself and is not allowed to race the Sunday sprnit race. Kimi smashes into Sutil and there is ABSOLUTELY NO PUNISHMENT!

Once again, different series. Secondly, and this has been discussed to death in the relevant race topic, Kimi got sideways before the corner, and had nowhere to go. Sutil also got sideways before Kimi touched him. Two drivers recovering from a 'moment' does not equal an outbraking mistake.

Quote :

hamilton is punished in France for not letting Vettel back past. He has a similar incident and let's the driver past and is still punished!

He gained an advantage there and didn't yield it entirely (or at all). He gained an advantage in Spa and didn't yield it entirely, either. Seems pretty similar to me.

GP2 may be a different series but even Bruno Senna was complaining about the inconsistancies in decision making and mentioned the Massa incident! So maybe you can go up to him and call him and idiot... oh you won't because he's there and your not!

Quote from Intrepid :

GP2 may be a different series but even Bruno Senna was complaining about the inconsistancies in decision making and mentioned the Massa incident! So maybe you can go up to him and call him and idiot... oh you won't because he's there and your not!

When have I ever mentioned wanting to be there, or talk to Bruno Senna for that matter?

It's funny what people will post to cover for a lack of a valid point.

Quote from JamesF1 :

When have I ever mentioned wanting to be there, or talk to Bruno Senna for that matter?

It's funny what people will post to cover for a lack of a valid point.

I'll ask you this. If Massa had done that to Hamilton do you SERIOUSLY believe he would have been given the SAME treatment???

Quote from Intrepid :

I'll ask you this. If Massa had done that to Hamilton do you SERIOUSLY believe he would have been given the SAME treatment???

Yes and then everyone would be ranting about how FIA wants to favour their wonder-boy...

Quote from Hyperactive :

Yes and then everyone would be ranting about how FIA wants to favour their wonder-boy...

So please explain the fine he recieved for an unsafe pit release? and then explain to Bruno Senna why his championship hopes have gone up in smoke for doing the same thing

If massa did the same thing as Lewis, it would be "hes not a real championship contender" and 100 points on his negatives. If kimi did it, it would be, Kimi has completely lost it, Massa is a top driver and all the Lewis fans will all be having a go at Kimi.

No matter what happens, there is always going to be the gang throwing comments to the other. He copped a penalty. Inconsistant or not, he gained advantage over the cutting.