[Rules] Sack the stewards / Hamilton Disaqualified

[Dutton]

A video from a guy in the stands will be under copyright the same as anything else. Any images/video/audio you take in the track is the property of the FIA, and FOM has the rights to the rights of its distribution.

[Teretonga]

Relegating Trulli one place would be restoring the situation but 25 seconds is punitive in a way that is unjustified.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Dutton

A video from a guy in the stands will be under copyright the same as anything else. Any images/video/audio you take in the track is the property of the FIA, and FOM has the rights to the rights of its distribution.

Yes sir..... And you work for?

[gachjoel]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Relegating Trulli one place would be restoring the situation but 25 seconds is punitive in a way that is unjustified.

But relegating trulli would have restored the situation,but overtaking under the safety car is deemed as a serious breech of the regs.
And if it was during an early part of the race,a stop/go would have been given.

The safety car is out for a reason,to restore a safe working enviroment for marshals ect.
he knows the rules and only got himself to blame

[mac]

In my opinion the Race Director should also come under fire. He was two laps too late in deploying the safety car after Nakajima's crash. Then took forever to get the field sorted out in the correct order, making the whole safety car period last about three laps longer than it needed to!

As for the first corner, Kovalainen may have made some contact with the back of Barrichello's car, but from the onboard I find it difficult to believe Rubens would have made the corner without whacking the side of Webber's car. I think Kovalainen's touch simply meant he hit harder.

[gachjoel]

Originally Posted by mac

In my opinion the Race Director should also come under fire. He was two laps too late in deploying the safety car after Nakajima's crash. Then took forever to get the field sorted out in the correct order, making the whole safety car period last about three laps longer than it needed to!

totally agee with that,a complete and utter hash on dealing with it,maybe bernie has seen this and given him his opinion.
one good thing was not having to put up with all the gaggle you got on itv

[johnh875]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Yes sir..... And you work for?

It is one of the conditions of the admission ticket. I don't think Dutton was necessarily agreeing with taking the video down!

[Burnsie]

Originally Posted by RaiseYourFist

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/03/2...omment-page-2/

That video shows Hamilton comfortably gaining position when Jarno Trulli ran wide, so it's not as if Toyota can claim that there was any confusion over track position. Having said that, I find it difficult to believe that a driver of Trulli's experience took it upon himself to regain his position under Safety Car conditions, so I wonder if either he or the team were under the impression that he was allowed to overtake before the start/finish line...?

Originally Posted by RaiseYourFist

...also it shows that Vettel did not go in the pitbox when he was going around on 3 wheels

If the grid penalty was for this offence, then I wouldn't have any objections. I agree that it was far too dangerous for competitors and marshals for Vettel to continue, so his team should really have told him to pit in. The penalty for the accident is nonsensical though, it was a racing incident.

[Woolley]

Originally Posted by the.cosmic.pope

If Bernie wants the drivers to race then he needs to speak to Max about how penalties are handed out.

Not entirely sure putting Max in charge of handing out penalties is a great idea, unless they do it on the podium after the race...

F1 continues to make itself look a complete ass. 1) A driver (Kubica) takes the long route around the outside, 2) fails to leave enough space for a driver equally committed to his braking if he gets it marginally wrong and then 3) they penalize that driver (Vettell) who got squeezed for causing the accident. Don't get it. 1) Well done for trying it and pouncing on the mistake, 2) a bit dumb because it ruined both their races when a bit of thought might have avoided it and 3) he didn't cause the accident. Wasn't worth a penalty, two hard chargers got it slightly wrong, but if anyone was to blame it was Kubica.

They can't decide between them if a car is legal or not, having written rules which seem to say that it is legal but it really shouldn't be.

They're completely unable to manage a safety car situation. It was shambolic with all the shuffling of places and the decision on whether tail-enders are let through apparently decided on the toss of a coin, no-one can work out what they're supposed to do if a driver manages to fall off under yellow flags (the situation which occurs on the whole track when the SC is out) and where the drivers get it wrong because they're so desperate not to get it wrong because they'll be penalized, even though the stewards can't tell them what is right.

I'd just about stopped watching F1. I thought 'brave new world, different cars (Ye Gods, they really are ugly) and a bit of a shake up, could be exciting'. Some of it was, but after the race we're back to the same old nonsense. Doesn't matter what happens on the track, the finishing positions will be decided by some blazer pulling balls out of a bag. Shan't bother again.

[Dutton]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Yes sir..... And you work for?

As johnh875 kindly pointed out, I was simply responding to a general question by another poster. I was being entirely neutral, .

If a person was to allege that I routinely breach copyright laws, that person could allegedly have a point, .

[djb]

ditto on Kubica easily could have left a few feet more and still carried his speed well through that corner, but hey, its racing, they both didnt want to give up, it aint the end of the world and for me, 50-50.

driving around with a wheel that could snap off and bounce up and land on someones head (following car I mean) and break their neck, not so cool.

also ditto on the seemingly very uneven penalties from one incident to another in general.

and Wooley, re your e gads they are ugly comment, oddly enough, during the race, I said to my mate how neat it was to be able to more easily see the diff shapes of the cars without all the bargeboards et all all over the body area, so I actually to my surprise found the cars not so ugly as I initially did when we first starting seeing them in photos. (and to another level, the clean non-nutso-amount-of-stickers on the Brawn was refreshing to me)

and yes, the safety car period was just silly how long it went on and on, one would think they could have sorted that out so much faster with all the years experience they have doing this sort of thing (unless it was actually taking that long to clear the track, which for me anyway was actually never shown on the tv)

cheerio wool

[RaiseYourFist]

Originally Posted by Woolley

Not entirely sure putting Max in charge of handing out penalties is a great idea, unless they do it on the podium after the race...

F1 continues to make itself look a complete ass. 1) A driver (Kubica) takes the long route around the outside, 2) fails to leave enough space for a driver equally committed to his braking if he gets it marginally wrong and then 3) they penalize that driver (Vettell) who got squeezed for causing the accident. Don't get it. 1) Well done for trying it and pouncing on the mistake, 2) a bit dumb because it ruined both their races when a bit of thought might have avoided it and 3) he didn't cause the accident. Wasn't worth a penalty, two hard chargers got it slightly wrong, but if anyone was to blame it was Kubica.

They can't decide between them if a car is legal or not, having written rules which seem to say that it is legal but it really shouldn't be.

They're completely unable to manage a safety car situation. It was shambolic with all the shuffling of places and the decision on whether tail-enders are let through apparently decided on the toss of a coin, no-one can work out what they're supposed to do if a driver manages to fall off under yellow flags (the situation which occurs on the whole track when the SC is out) and where the drivers get it wrong because they're so desperate not to get it wrong because they'll be penalized, even though the stewards can't tell them what is right.

I'd just about stopped watching F1. I thought 'brave new world, different cars (Ye Gods, they really are ugly) and a bit of a shake up, could be exciting'. Some of it was, but after the race we're back to the same old nonsense. Doesn't matter what happens on the track, the finishing positions will be decided by some blazer pulling balls out of a bag. Shan't bother again.

I think what were all missing here is the discussion Vettel and Kubica had with the stewards after the race. If Vettel told them that it was all his fault then they wouldn't have had much choice but to give him that penalty.

[Dutton]

Did Vettel say it was all his fault? I cannot imagine he would...what good would it do him?

[ensign14]

Originally Posted by johnh875

It is one of the conditions of the admission ticket. I don't think Dutton was necessarily agreeing with taking the video down!

Although if it is SOLELY on the ticket, such a condition is unenforceable. Because you are only made aware of the condition after the contract is concluded. Unless you are at least warned that certain easily-available conditions apply, it's an attempt to vary the contract to your detriment without any benefit back to you.

[the.cosmic.pope]

Originally Posted by Dutton

Did Vettel say it was all his fault? I cannot imagine he would...what good would it do him?

Well he apologised immediately on the radio and sounded very upset. BBC later showed him apologising to Dr Mario of BMW. Whether or not he accepted 100% responsibility I don't know, but it seems like it.

[p261brm]

Quote
IMHO it isn't the same. Trulli didn't deserve 3rd, he went off under the yellow, didn't he? He didn't deserve 25s, rather just the 4th he should have been.

Did Trulli take anyone out during his excursion? Not from my view, it is a race and the Stewards, FIA and Bernie [and fans]have really got to get away from this American induced culture of sue everybody for anything that dose not comply with one individuals view of a particular situation. SWALK

[ThaRobster]

Regarding both incidents, I have to say the penalties handed out are far too harsh. Vettel vs Kubica was a racing incident. Vettels tyres were well worn, something Kubica would have known having followed him for a few laps. So he would also have known that trying a passing move around the outside of a heavy-braking corner could result in his opponent sliding in to him. Its a risk you take. You can see from the footage how much earlier Vettel brakes for the corner, so he was obviously aware as well of what might happen, and appears to have done his best to slow the car down. 50/50 incident in my view.

Trullis penalty was just crazy. People talk about if the race has gone on longer, he'd have been given a stop / go penalty. I dont think he would have. In these situations where a driver unfairly gains a place, for what ever reason, the first action taken is to contact his team and instruct him to give the place back. If he fails to do so, then more serious action is taken. Trulli should have been relegated to 4th at most. I can understand what happened, and I don't think that this constitutes overtaking under the pace car. Hamilton let him through because he feared a penalty himself. If they were unsure of their correct running order, the teams should have contacted the race director (although no garuntee of a correct answer mind you). If there wasnt enough time to work it out and asses the situation, they should have left the saftey car out and worked it out afterwards. I appreciate this wont work in every situation, but I feel here it would have been fine to do that.

Just my thoughts anyway.

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by ThaRobster

Regarding both incidents, I have to say the penalties handed out are far too harsh. Vettel vs Kubica was a racing incident. Vettels tyres were well worn, something Kubica would have known having followed him for a few laps. So he would also have known that trying a passing move around the outside of a heavy-braking corner could result in his opponent sliding in to him. Its a risk you take. You can see from the footage how much earlier Vettel brakes for the corner, so he was obviously aware as well of what might happen, and appears to have done his best to slow the car down. 50/50 incident in my view.

Trullis penalty was just crazy. People talk about if the race has gone on longer, he'd have been given a stop / go penalty. I dont think he would have. In these situations where a driver unfairly gains a place, for what ever reason, the first action taken is to contact his team and instruct him to give the place back. If he fails to do so, then more serious action is taken. Trulli should have been relegated to 4th at most. I can understand what happened, and I don't think that this constitutes overtaking under the pace car. Hamilton let him through because he feared a penalty himself. If they were unsure of their correct running order, the teams should have contacted the race director (although no garuntee of a correct answer mind you). If there wasnt enough time to work it out and asses the situation, they should have left the saftey car out and worked it out afterwards. I appreciate this wont work in every situation, but I feel here it would have been fine to do that.

Just my thoughts anyway.

Thanks to the Robster for giving us a balanced well thought out common sense view of the situation. If only the stewards could have seen the obvious too.

[mark_l]

The FIA were making a big noise about the openness of the GP stewards before the start of the season, yet no details of the diffuser protests or the FIA Stewards report have been posted on the FIA website.

The details of the diffuser protest will have been made available to all the teams by the stewards so why not tell the public what went on.

The FIA Technical report is available online so what is so contentious in the stewards report that the FIA wont publish it.

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by the.cosmic.pope

Well he apologised immediately on the radio and sounded very upset.

I think there's a difference between apologizing to the team for unnecessarily putting yourself into a situation where an accident is likely (he knew he couldn't hold Kubica off anyway) and actually taking the blame for that accident (which was at least as much Kubica's fault as it was Vettel's).

[mark_l]

Toyota are still considering if they should appeal to the FIA court of appeal against Trulli's time penalty, despite the stewards pointing out that a stop/go penalty (converted to a time penalty) cannot be appealed against.

I wonder why the FIA bother having stewards when they are so spineless and every team appeals every decision.

[Chiefy]

Did RBR not think to appeal the stewards' decision to penalise Vettel in Malaysia?

I know Theissen says Vettel ruined Kubica's race - but after a little cooling down time he might consider relenting and being a decent sport.

[elspethhardie]

I haven'y seen any footage of the aftermath of Lewis vs Trulli but I think it was the case of neither knew who legally had track position.

IF.....lewis hadn't let Trulli back through would he have received a penlty for overtaking / gaining a place under the safety car?

I would unfortunalty answer this question as a yes - I think the stewards would have looked on it as unfair.

Just found this news link - Mac told Lewis to let Trulli through http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/...told-hamilton/ so Lewis let him through - it wasn't as if Trulli pushed his way through.

As for Vettle vs Kubica it's 6 to 1 half a donzen to the other - racing incident - thats what I want to see racing. Not finishing in crashes but they happen when drivers are pushing to the limit, the trip over the line. It's either punish both or neither I'd prefer neither as the penalty discourages racing!

[Burnsie]

Originally Posted by elspethhardie

Just found this news link - Mac told Lewis to let Trulli through http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/...told-hamilton/ so Lewis let him through - it wasn't as if Trulli pushed his way through.

In that case, surely Trulli shouldn't have been penalised. If Hamilton moved over and/or slowed down, then Toyota could make the point that Trulli took his position back because he thought that Hamilton had a mechanical problem. Having said that, I didn't see any TV footage of the overtaking move so I can't really comment on whether or not this could be argued. However, if Trulli had stayed behind, then presumably Hamilton would have eased off more, and at what point would the stewards consider a pass to be acceptable...?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by burnsie

In that case, surely Trulli shouldn't have been penalised. If Hamilton moved over and/or slowed down, then Toyota could make the point that Trulli took his position back because he thought that Hamilton had a mechanical problem. Having said that, I didn't see any TV footage of the overtaking move so I can't really comment on whether or not this could be argued. However, if Trulli had stayed behind, then presumably Hamilton would have eased off more, and at what point would the stewards consider a pass to be acceptable...?

Trulli took the place back. He drove around the McLaren. Some have suggested he then decided to give the place back but Lewis was having none of it because of the possibility the officials would 'Spa' him again. that may also have been the reason the McLaren pit originally told him to let Jarno through.

After all Bernies staggering around advocating more racing and race to the finish it may be that the ridiculous decisions of the stewards in the past created a situation on Sunday where neither driver wanted the third place on the podium and were in fact trying to give it away in case they were further penalised, as indeed one one of them was.

If that is true it can't get any worse than that.