Hamilton's Spa penalty - fair?/ Massa Handed Win..Merged

[Pingguest]

I don't understand this penalty. Especially if I remember Massa not getting any penalty for his unsafe behaviour in the pits two weeks ago.

[JamesH]

re: benchmarks. It would be impossible for the driver to make that judgement - ie how much to let the car back.

LH was clear behind KR after letting him past (so he MUST have slowed)

I fail to see how that is gaining an advantage - unless you count just being better than the other driver in the conditions. Or driving a silver car.

[Super Hans]

Originally Posted by Shoe-maker

The next race is only a week away. I wonder if they'll have the matter sorted by then.

Well, it's Monza, so Lewis's 25 sec penalty will probably be increased on a appeal to a 2 race ban and lifetime 5 place grid penalty.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by brands

If that is true then it makes you wonder how the same race director who Oked the move with McLaren then went to the stewards after the race and reported it to them ?

http://www.fia.com/belgiumgp/documen...ocument_49.pdf

I think it is perfectly normal that the race director goes to the stewards for the wrap-up of the race.....should happen at each race.

[Duff_44]

Just a quick question (and please be objective/impartial, no 'Ferrari bias' stuff)

Who actually makes the decision to apply a penalty? Are there separate stewards for each race which only work at that particular race (and then the FIA is the official 'appeals board'), or is it one set that the FIA assigns to all Grands Prix?

[John Robinson]

No. Farcical.

[White flag man]

According to itvsport.com, McLaren radioed Lewis to let Kimi back past him. They then asked Charlie Whiting if that would be OK, and he replied, not being a steward, that they would probably get away with it.

Can't wait to see what sort of penalties are handed out at Monza!

[Peter Mallett]

If a car follows another along a straight following an incident and the one behind is the one supposedly to have gained an advantage then surely honours are even. It seems though that there has to be a certain distance. That is an absurdity because it cannot be measured by the participants.

[littlefarny]

Originally Posted by Duff_44

Just a quick question (and please be objective/impartial, no 'Ferrari bias' stuff)

Who actually makes the decision to apply a penalty? Are there separate stewards for each race which only work at that particular race (and then the FIA is the official 'appeals board'), or is it one set that the FIA assigns to all Grands Prix?

There used to be stewards at each course, but the FIA introduced a rovving panel to make the sport more consistent (not neccessarily more 'fair')

[brands]

Originally Posted by henk4

I think it is perfectly normal that the race director goes to the stewards for the wrap-up of the race.....should happen at each race.

and report an incident that he is happy about......his report must take longer than the races

[trevisio]

No, not fair. To put it mildly.

[bastinscully]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I don't understand this penalty. Especially if I remember Massa not getting any penalty for his unsafe behaviour in the pits two weeks ago.

Yet Bruno Senna DID for the Same thing in the Feature GP2 Race on Saturday. Wake up FIAt (owners of Ferrari)

[Pingguest]

I don't think the FIA is biased. Remember Schumacher's penalty in Monaco 2006. Remember the 2003 rule changes. The FIA is an organization with incompetence and is only interested in making the championship artificially entertaining.

[strider]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Been overtaken and overtaken others on that line. It isn't that difficult. However if you want to defend then it is easier to do it from the inside of the first part.

I would expect the nature of the cars involved to make a difference.

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

So, if I understand everyone, we are now really discussing how much a driver should drop back before it becomes a legitimate "give"? Never heard of anything so absurd in my life.

I don't see why it should be so absurd. There has to be a definition of a legitimate "give", otherwise why have the rule in the first place?

Anyway, I have had my say and if you disagree, that's fine. It's your opinion. This thread seems to be generating way too much heat.

FWIW, I'm glad McLaren have appealed.

[runshaw]

This penalty is ridiculous. There is no consistency with previous incidents. If this was Fisichella battling Sutil, no enquiry would even be made.

So it makes you wonder why the penalty has been applied. The only reason I can think of is if the stewards have looked at Hamilton's telemetry which will tell them whether or not he lifted his foot off the throttle slightly down the straight.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by JamesH

re: benchmarks. It would be impossible for the driver to make that judgement - ie how much to let the car back.

LH was clear behind KR after letting him past (so he MUST have slowed)

I fail to see how that is gaining an advantage - unless you count just being better than the other driver in the conditions. Or driving a silver car.

The rule says that you cannot gain an advantage from "cutting corners". So somebody must have thought out what an "advantage" would have been in this case (or in any case for that matter). Without such a consideration/benchmark the rule becomes very difficult to enforce.
When I saw things unfolding I thought that the way Hamilton got behind and immediately in front again was in for some debate. However, if Hamilton had just kept his cool, and, knowing from the way he had gained time on Raikonen during the previous lap, he could have simply stayed behind him at La Source, and probably at the Raidillon he would have already taken him, or latest at the end of the straight.

[littlefarny]

I think a 'give' should be dropping the tip of your car behind the rearmost point of the others' car. It makes sense that way, and is measurable by the stewards and drivers.

[Caramba]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

It is if the cars go past a spot with the "advantaged car" behind. Which was the case. It shouldn't matter how much space there is between them. If it does then you've got the absurdity because you cannot legislate for the distance.

FWIW neither driver was wrong, it was racing.

I'd agree with every word of that.

[staid davenport]

What is the betting that it will go to the court of appeal, but they will only decide whether or not McLaren have the right to appeal a 'drive through penalty'?

[Clunk or Zilly]

Can anyone explain to a non F1 fan how this alleged sport is umpired in a fair & consistent manner ? No, thought not.
From my recollection LH & KR both took evasive action to avoid a Williams, Lewis cut the chicane & let KR re take the lead.
Any penalty against Lewis merely reinforces the suggestion that FIA may actually stand for Fiddled It Again.

[brands]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70404

The last paragraph is the get out clause for the FIAt

[henk4]

Originally Posted by littlefarny

I think a 'give' should be dropping the tip of your car behind the rearmost point of the others' car. It makes sense that way, and is measurable by the stewards and drivers.

I think dropping back to the place where the car would have been if it had followed the "correct" track is more appropriate, but also more difficult to establish.

[hitchcockm00]

Originally Posted by runshaw

The only reason I can think of is if the stewards have looked at Hamilton's telemetry which will tell them whether or not he lifted his foot off the throttle slightly down the straight.

Apparently he did lift and was 6 kph slower over the start/finish line

[Ted bennett]

Originally Posted by EERO

b) Stay straight across onto the small patch of grass at the apex. We all know what happens when slicks hit wet grass, don't we? Hamilton would havebeen launched up and slid across the apex to tee-bone the Ferrari on the exit-both cars out.

The 'grass' is actualy concrete painted green, and is quite a bit higher than the kerb beside it. You would not intentionaly drive over it.

[staid davenport]

Should the other teams bother turning up to monza? If they are not going to be given the chance to win why would they bother?