Full Version: Hamilton penalized, Massa wins the race!
We all know how it works, Red cars beat the Silver cars, even if they don`t really !! Hamilton had him, Hamilton is the winner, he did`nt crash either !!
Originally posted by Slyder
So why didn't Kimi defend? He was the leader, he was entitled to defend his position wasn't he?
So why didn't Kimi defend? He was the leader, he was entitled to defend his position wasn't he?
I don't know what the hell you are talking about. Is your argument "Lewis made the pass -> Lewis is the better driver -> Penalty is uncalled for" or what?
Originally posted by AndyW35
The interesting thing here is that there seems to be no concensus on this forum about what the rule implicitely states and what the penalty should be. The general concensus before today both for us here and the teams that if you gained a place by having to run off track then as long as you let the other person back in front then you were OK and let battle commence again, if you did not then that was unsporting and you normally got a penalty for making gain. Would we agree that was the common concensus?
Now though it seems that just giving back the place is not enough, you have to work out how many seconds to give them as well, or perhaps metres. Or perhaps corners! Even if you make a second/metre/corner decision it still may be wrong.
Are we really expecting drivers who are racing in the rain on dry tyres without traction control to start working out what the stewards will think best after 3 hours of looking at a screen with a cup of tea? It's rather unrealistic and something needs to be set in stone, however setting things in stone takes away the FIA's power of judgement and punishment of course.
Still a race to be remembered though
Will be interesting to see what the newspapers in Italy and the UK say tomorrow!
Regards
Andy
Excellent post. The interesting thing here is that there seems to be no concensus on this forum about what the rule implicitely states and what the penalty should be. The general concensus before today both for us here and the teams that if you gained a place by having to run off track then as long as you let the other person back in front then you were OK and let battle commence again, if you did not then that was unsporting and you normally got a penalty for making gain. Would we agree that was the common concensus?
Now though it seems that just giving back the place is not enough, you have to work out how many seconds to give them as well, or perhaps metres. Or perhaps corners! Even if you make a second/metre/corner decision it still may be wrong.
Are we really expecting drivers who are racing in the rain on dry tyres without traction control to start working out what the stewards will think best after 3 hours of looking at a screen with a cup of tea? It's rather unrealistic and something needs to be set in stone, however setting things in stone takes away the FIA's power of judgement and punishment of course.
Still a race to be remembered though
Will be interesting to see what the newspapers in Italy and the UK say tomorrow!
Regards
Andy
If they uphold the penalty, I'd love the hear the clarification.
Originally posted by Nick Planas
Well I've been watching F1 since 1966, and I am a fan of RACING, not particularly any one team or driver, just good racing. But after last year's unbelievable 'court case' and way over-the-top fine against McLaren I had some sympathy for them in what was clearly a witch-hunt against them / Ron Dennis. (This was confirmed after the Renault v McLaren 'spy' non-punishment at the end of the year.)
So, I settle down to watch what became a good race, and hats off to all the drivers who managed to pass anyone today without taking another car off! Sadly Kimi loses it when the weather goes mad; could have been any one of those drivers, but today it was Kimi - sheer bad luck. It was so nearly Lewis when Rosberg came back on in front of them both, so nearly half the field at the start(!) - but anyway such is the stuff of RACING.
I enjoyed watching a good race, not only at the front, but all the way down the field. When you don't support any particular team or driver you can generally have much more enjoyment watching a race - e.g. watching Coulthard vs. Barrichello with a bit of Kovy and Button thrown in... all of that good entertaining racing.
So now I check the net and find that Hamilton, the RACE WINNER, is no longer the race winner, because of a questionable stewards' decision about a move which has been played out over and over again on circuits throughout the years, by many many drivers, good, bad and indifferent. Depending on your support, you can argue both sides of the case, and I notice many on this thread doing just that.
But what does matter, if the RACING is going to be killed off by the stewards - again?
Following on from the questionable stewards' 'non' decision in the last race (did you hear all that crap about "no advantage gained" - well, duh, isn't it a safety rule? - I would have added "nobody mown down in the pitlane - wow - that's OK then" - I realised that after all these years I really don't want to watch another Grand Prix - I'm just being fooled into thinking I'm being entertained when I'm not. I don't want to see bias towards any driver or team, in any situation, in any country - I just want to see a good race!
So I won't watch another grand prix.
Ever.
So bye bye F1, I'm 110% sure you won't miss me! You won't miss my little TV signal, or my £xxx on the gate at the grands prix. After 42 years of watching RACING, this circus no longer appeals. I will also be cancelling my various magazine subscriptions - there's more interesting things do be doing with my life than wasting a few hours a week reading about this crap.
Well I've been watching F1 since 1966, and I am a fan of RACING, not particularly any one team or driver, just good racing. But after last year's unbelievable 'court case' and way over-the-top fine against McLaren I had some sympathy for them in what was clearly a witch-hunt against them / Ron Dennis. (This was confirmed after the Renault v McLaren 'spy' non-punishment at the end of the year.)
So, I settle down to watch what became a good race, and hats off to all the drivers who managed to pass anyone today without taking another car off! Sadly Kimi loses it when the weather goes mad; could have been any one of those drivers, but today it was Kimi - sheer bad luck. It was so nearly Lewis when Rosberg came back on in front of them both, so nearly half the field at the start(!) - but anyway such is the stuff of RACING.
I enjoyed watching a good race, not only at the front, but all the way down the field. When you don't support any particular team or driver you can generally have much more enjoyment watching a race - e.g. watching Coulthard vs. Barrichello with a bit of Kovy and Button thrown in... all of that good entertaining racing.
So now I check the net and find that Hamilton, the RACE WINNER, is no longer the race winner, because of a questionable stewards' decision about a move which has been played out over and over again on circuits throughout the years, by many many drivers, good, bad and indifferent. Depending on your support, you can argue both sides of the case, and I notice many on this thread doing just that.
But what does matter, if the RACING is going to be killed off by the stewards - again?
Following on from the questionable stewards' 'non' decision in the last race (did you hear all that crap about "no advantage gained" - well, duh, isn't it a safety rule? - I would have added "nobody mown down in the pitlane - wow - that's OK then" - I realised that after all these years I really don't want to watch another Grand Prix - I'm just being fooled into thinking I'm being entertained when I'm not. I don't want to see bias towards any driver or team, in any situation, in any country - I just want to see a good race!
So I won't watch another grand prix.
Ever.
So bye bye F1, I'm 110% sure you won't miss me! You won't miss my little TV signal, or my £xxx on the gate at the grands prix. After 42 years of watching RACING, this circus no longer appeals. I will also be cancelling my various magazine subscriptions - there's more interesting things do be doing with my life than wasting a few hours a week reading about this crap.
Bye Bye
If it's Silver, it up the ass. Good job Max.
Originally posted by Slyder
So why didn't Kimi defend? He was the leader, he was entitled to defend his position wasn't he?
So why didn't Kimi defend? He was the leader, he was entitled to defend his position wasn't he?
im not saying lewis wasnt faster at that time, did i? lol
kimi defended, he tried to do a scissor move on hamilton, but hamilton managed to mantain the car on the inside and kimi couldnt get past him, that why they actually touched at la source. it was a great overtake, mate.
Originally posted by ZooL
He was Full Time Steward (Lawyer) that attended all the F1 races before.
The FIA replaced him this year with Donnelly, a known close friend of Mosley and Business Associate.
He's probably why McLaren seem to be drawing the short straw all the time.
He was Full Time Steward (Lawyer) that attended all the F1 races before.
The FIA replaced him this year with Donnelly, a known close friend of Mosley and Business Associate.
He's probably why McLaren seem to be drawing the short straw all the time.
You missed out that he used to be a Ferrari media boss
Originally posted by K-One
For me it would seem that Hamilton had more speed cutting chicane instead of taking it normal way - thus he gained advantage
For me it would seem that Hamilton had more speed cutting chicane instead of taking it normal way - thus he gained advantage
Simple, really.
Originally posted by jimpo
The fact that (McLaren are claming their telemetry shows) Lewis was 6km/h slower at the line means nothing.
If Lewis would have been 20km/h, hell, even 7km/h slower than Kimi if he would have stayed on track, he gained an advantage by cutting the chicane. And that deserves the penalty.
Sure, Lewis was miles faster (following the leading car running into unknown track conditions) at that phase and would have overtaken Kimi later anyway. And sure, Kimi did not leave room for Lewis in the chicane. None of that changes that fact that Lewis gained an advantage cutting the chicane and a penalty is in order.
The fact that (McLaren are claming their telemetry shows) Lewis was 6km/h slower at the line means nothing.
If Lewis would have been 20km/h, hell, even 7km/h slower than Kimi if he would have stayed on track, he gained an advantage by cutting the chicane. And that deserves the penalty.
Sure, Lewis was miles faster (following the leading car running into unknown track conditions) at that phase and would have overtaken Kimi later anyway. And sure, Kimi did not leave room for Lewis in the chicane. None of that changes that fact that Lewis gained an advantage cutting the chicane and a penalty is in order.
Can you at least accept the possibility that due to Kimi defending himself at the chicane that he lost a ton of exit speed and that compromised his advantage of edging clear of Lewis?
Also, why can't you accept the fact that Lewis slowed to let Kimi completely by. the video proves it, so..?
And also, if Lewis deserve a penalty, why wasn't Raikkonen penalised for taking an advantage by going wide at the Pouhon run-off area?
Originally posted by FonzCam
OK I just timed it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TZngbIS9I
Hamilton rejoins track at 1:01
Kimi's nose is ahead at 1:05
Hamilton is fully behind at 1:08
So 7 seconds total, how much more immediate do you want?
OK I just timed it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TZngbIS9I
Hamilton rejoins track at 1:01
Kimi's nose is ahead at 1:05
Hamilton is fully behind at 1:08
So 7 seconds total, how much more immediate do you want?
You definitely need to see that optician! You are so blinkered that you are quoting meaningless statistics! Here are the important ones:
1:01 Hamilton takes up the lead after cutting the track.
1:09 A full 8 seconds later (all the while battling Kimi into the dirty side from his illegaly obtained position), Hamilton finally slots back behind into 2nd place, where he was before his ill-fated overtaking and chosen evasive action.
1:09.5 Less than a second later, Hamilton begins diving down the inside.
You cannot just battle and string someone into the dirty side from your illegal position, right up to the braking zone. Kimi must be thinking WTF, am I actually going to get the outside line here, do I need to risk braking down the slippery inside or what?
Hamilton's behaviour was unacceptable and he was right punished, I'm amazed that you see nothing wrong with his behaviour.
Originally posted by inca_roads
So any news of Kimi/Alonso/Heidfeld/Kubica investigations?
Or do we just give penalties to silver cars? Oh, and Timo Glock, sorry.
So any news of Kimi/Alonso/Heidfeld/Kubica investigations?
Or do we just give penalties to silver cars? Oh, and Timo Glock, sorry.
white in a bad light, easy mistake to make
Hey, I just wanted to remind all of you that I was the first one who said it was illegal move while we were commenting on the forum during the race. So if you're not sure what decision should be made be stewards ask me ;)
Declare my side - I am a Hamilton fan and i think Kimi is the most over-rate Champion in many years. Alonso / Hamilton lost last year's title, Kimi did not win it.
My assessment after thinking about this was that there was no case to answer from Hamilton that he raced hard but fair and that if there was any penalty to answer it was Kimi's ham-fisted weaving into La Source after Lewis had let him by. I still think this. I still think that Kimi had plenty (too many under the one move rule) of chances to defend into La Source. However if i am to believe that the FIA are not biased in favour of Ferrari it is :-
Having looked at it again and factored into it Martin Brundle's track guide before the race. He highlighted the height of the concrete inner kerb at the revised "bus stop". Lewis did not run over that kerb. When he cut across the chicane he instinctively avoided it.
Hence whilst he did give the place back to Kimi he came out of the chicane faster than he would have been if he had run over that kerbing. Hence he gained an advantage. I am assuming this is the FIA's reasoning
But that is it and it is pretty tenuous reasoning because he gave the place back to Kimi and Kimi had the opprtunity (if not the ability) to defend into La Source.
This is an investigation that shouldn't have happened. We are getting the "Health and Safety" killjoy approach to racing now. The FIA wants overtaking and they want racing on the limit. As Montoya said a couple of years ago - the stewards don't understand what it is like to race on the very limit.
My assessment after thinking about this was that there was no case to answer from Hamilton that he raced hard but fair and that if there was any penalty to answer it was Kimi's ham-fisted weaving into La Source after Lewis had let him by. I still think this. I still think that Kimi had plenty (too many under the one move rule) of chances to defend into La Source. However if i am to believe that the FIA are not biased in favour of Ferrari it is :-
Having looked at it again and factored into it Martin Brundle's track guide before the race. He highlighted the height of the concrete inner kerb at the revised "bus stop". Lewis did not run over that kerb. When he cut across the chicane he instinctively avoided it.
Hence whilst he did give the place back to Kimi he came out of the chicane faster than he would have been if he had run over that kerbing. Hence he gained an advantage. I am assuming this is the FIA's reasoning
But that is it and it is pretty tenuous reasoning because he gave the place back to Kimi and Kimi had the opprtunity (if not the ability) to defend into La Source.
This is an investigation that shouldn't have happened. We are getting the "Health and Safety" killjoy approach to racing now. The FIA wants overtaking and they want racing on the limit. As Montoya said a couple of years ago - the stewards don't understand what it is like to race on the very limit.
Get a life Bud (the one above the last post)
Originally posted by Timstr11
The stewards say Lewis made use of Kimi's slipstream to pass him again, after he gave up the lead...which was unfair in their eyes.
This is the strangest ruling ever.
The stewards say Lewis made use of Kimi's slipstream to pass him again, after he gave up the lead...which was unfair in their eyes.
This is the strangest ruling ever.
How is it strange? That means he never fully surrendered his advantage after cutting the track.
Originally posted by Cenotaph
When i talk about momentum is that Hamilton kept right behind Kimi and on an offensive position, which he would not been able to have if he had braked.
When i talk about momentum is that Hamilton kept right behind Kimi and on an offensive position, which he would not been able to have if he had braked.
Can you prove it?
Because I think Hamilton was already on Raikkonen's gearbox the corner before the chicane. The Mac had better braking and traction at this moment and had Hamilton folowed KR through the chicane he'd be in a better position to attack with longer distance in front of them.
Raikkonen went too much outside maybe because he knew he wouldn't make it through the real defensive line on corner 1. In fact Hamilton took it braked late and went through fast.
F1 today is made up of a bunch of sissies and lawyers. Hamilton backed off and got behind Kimi after he cut the chicane. Case closed.
No wonder Montoya left F1: it's not fun any more.
* I'm no Hamilton fan-boy.
No wonder Montoya left F1: it's not fun any more.
* I'm no Hamilton fan-boy.
Obviously the stickers on the Ferrari are worth far more to F1 than those on the Mclaren.
Originally posted by AndyW35
The interesting thing here is that there seems to be no concensus on this forum about what the rule implicitely states and what the penalty should be. The general concensus before today both for us here and the teams that if you gained a place by having to run off track then as long as you let the other person back in front then you were OK and let battle commence again, if you did not then that was unsporting and you normally got a penalty for making gain. Would we agree that was the common concensus?
Now though it seems that just giving back the place is not enough, you have to work out how many seconds to give them as well, or perhaps metres. Or perhaps corners! Even if you make a second/metre/corner decision it still may be wrong.
Are we really expecting drivers who are racing in the rain on dry tyres without traction control to start working out what the stewards will think best after 3 hours of looking at a screen with a cup of tea? It's rather unrealistic and something needs to be set in stone, however setting things in stone takes away the FIA's power of judgement and punishment of course.
Still a race to be remembered though Will be interesting to see what the newspapers in Italy and the UK say tomorrow!
Regards
Andy
The interesting thing here is that there seems to be no concensus on this forum about what the rule implicitely states and what the penalty should be. The general concensus before today both for us here and the teams that if you gained a place by having to run off track then as long as you let the other person back in front then you were OK and let battle commence again, if you did not then that was unsporting and you normally got a penalty for making gain. Would we agree that was the common concensus?
Now though it seems that just giving back the place is not enough, you have to work out how many seconds to give them as well, or perhaps metres. Or perhaps corners! Even if you make a second/metre/corner decision it still may be wrong.
Are we really expecting drivers who are racing in the rain on dry tyres without traction control to start working out what the stewards will think best after 3 hours of looking at a screen with a cup of tea? It's rather unrealistic and something needs to be set in stone, however setting things in stone takes away the FIA's power of judgement and punishment of course.
Still a race to be remembered though
Will be interesting to see what the newspapers in Italy and the UK say tomorrow!
Regards
Andy
Great post
Originally posted by RodrigoL
How is it strange? That means he never fully surrendered his advantage after cutting the track.
He fully surrendered his advantage because he was practically in Raikkonen's gearbox before it all happened.
How is it strange? That means he never fully surrendered his advantage after cutting the track.
Originally posted by jimpo
I don't know what the hell you are talking about. Is your argument "Lewis made the pass -> Lewis is the better driver -> Penalty is uncalled for" or what?
I don't know what the hell you are talking about. Is your argument "Lewis made the pass -> Lewis is the better driver -> Penalty is uncalled for" or what?
Your the one that's saying that Lewis took advantage of cutting the chicane, despite the fact that it was a split-second decision due to Raikkonen shutting the door.
Lewis made the pass at La Source because he managed to minimize the damage and because maybe Raikkonen's exit was compromised. The penalty was uncalled for and Lewis's pass was legit IMO. And before you ask: no, I'm not a Lewis fan at all. I just hate the fact that a great finish was pissed to smithereens by this call.
If you don't see that way, then let's just agree to disagree then.
do you think kimi has the balls enough, is independent enough, and a racer enough, to come out and call this what it is? or will the mafia silence him? i hope he speaks up, he has nothing to lose.
cutting the chicane caused lewis no advantage, he HAD to accelerate along the straight slower than kimi, in order to tuck in behind him. that he could brake later should give him kudos, not penalties. plus they should have warned him about the penalty so he could have pushed, meanwhile felipe should have been given a stop/go in valencia, seeing as he was found guilty and he wasn't in the part of the race where they could decide upon it post race. stupid shit. i had hoped we'd get thru the season without this bollox, but then max is back in a week, and well, he wouldn't want to be the centre of attention would he?
cutting the chicane caused lewis no advantage, he HAD to accelerate along the straight slower than kimi, in order to tuck in behind him. that he could brake later should give him kudos, not penalties. plus they should have warned him about the penalty so he could have pushed, meanwhile felipe should have been given a stop/go in valencia, seeing as he was found guilty and he wasn't in the part of the race where they could decide upon it post race. stupid shit. i had hoped we'd get thru the season without this bollox, but then max is back in a week, and well, he wouldn't want to be the centre of attention would he?
Massa fan here... Race is Hamilton's, no doubt... if much the penalty should be on the next grid but not change a result that was built and done on the track... 
Originally posted by TailG
Well, had Hamilton not cut the chicane, he wouldn't have been able to get past Kimi in the hairpin.
Fact: Hamilton benefited from cutting the chicane.
Another fact: You get drive-through penalty for doing that.
And a 3rd fact: If that happens in the final laps of the race, you get a time penalty.
Well, had Hamilton not cut the chicane, he wouldn't have been able to get past Kimi in the hairpin.
Fact: Hamilton benefited from cutting the chicane.
Another fact: You get drive-through penalty for doing that.
And a 3rd fact: If that happens in the final laps of the race, you get a time penalty.
It is actually as simple as above comments.
Why can't people understand that?
Just because it is Hamilton?
You are full of shit, I am afraid.
He was 2-1.5 sec behind Kimi and by cutting the chicane he gain an advantage.
He should have lived with 2nd and shut the up. Just like Massa decided to stay in 3rd.
I think justice have been done.
Anyone fancy setting up one of those online petitions?
Originally posted by le chat noir
do you think kimi has the balls enough, is independent enough, and a racer enough, to come out and call this what it is? or will the mafia silence him? i hope he speaks up, he has nothing to lose.
do you think kimi has the balls enough, is independent enough, and a racer enough, to come out and call this what it is? or will the mafia silence him? i hope he speaks up, he has nothing to lose.
He already spoke up - he thinks Hammy gained
Imagine they investigated every challenge in every sport....where would we be? Race finishes, results stand. Period.
Originally posted by Schumeister
Bye Bye
Bye Bye
Yes, bye bye racing, it was good while it lasted.
I just knew it would happen. I just cannot believe how blatently biased the FIA is. Whatever anyone says, the fact is when it gets to a point where even I know what the stewards are going to do before they do it, regardless of type if incident, but dependant solely on it being either a Ferrari or a Maclaren, then I know there's dirty work afoot. 
A sad end to a good race.
A sad end to a good race.
Originally posted by RodrigoL
How is it strange? That means he never fully surrendered his advantage after cutting the track.
How is it strange? That means he never fully surrendered his advantage after cutting the track.
He was alongside Kimi in the chicane! What "advantage" did Kimi deserve to have? If KR hadn't shoved him off the track Hamilton would have been in a much better position relative to Raikkonen than he ended up after going through the run-off. And he passed him easily. Kimi responded by hitting him, taking a huge amount of run-off round the outside of a corner, and then passing Lewis under yellow flags. So where's his penalty?
This was racing. Great racing from both of them which has been spoiled.
The FIA and the stewards have turned Formula 1 into a fuckin' joke...
Originally posted by paulsky
He was 2-1.5 sec behind Kimi a
He was 2-1.5 sec behind Kimi a
are you serious, if that is 1.5-2 sec then i wouldnt want to be.5 sec behind, that would mean wright on top, 
Originally posted by le chat noir
do you think kimi has the balls enough, is independent enough, and a racer enough, to come out and call this what it is? or will the mafia silence him? i hope he speaks up, he has nothing to lose.
do you think kimi has the balls enough, is independent enough, and a racer enough, to come out and call this what it is? or will the mafia silence him? i hope he speaks up, he has nothing to lose.
It's not really realistic to expect that in todays F1...
I'd like Massa to do it.. simply say something like: "For sure, In my mind I'm gonna fight this championship like there's 4 point more in Lewis' pocket."
Originally posted by Slyder
Can you at least accept the possibility that due to Kimi defending himself at the chicane that he lost a ton of exit speed and that compromised his advantage of edging clear of Lewis?
Also, why can't you accept the fact that Lewis slowed to let Kimi completely by. the video proves it, so..?
And also, if Lewis deserve a penalty, why wasn't Raikkonen penalised for taking an advantage by going wide at the Pouhon run-off area?
Can you at least accept the possibility that due to Kimi defending himself at the chicane that he lost a ton of exit speed and that compromised his advantage of edging clear of Lewis?
Also, why can't you accept the fact that Lewis slowed to let Kimi completely by. the video proves it, so..?
And also, if Lewis deserve a penalty, why wasn't Raikkonen penalised for taking an advantage by going wide at the Pouhon run-off area?
The first point, I don't know what that has to anything? Sure Kimi lost speed defending his position, like duh obviously. What about it?
I agree Lewis let Kimi by. I am not blind. That does not matter, reread my posts if you want more about the logic behind "Lewis gaining an advantage". You can let someone pass and still have gained an unfair advantage by breaking the rules.
Finally, I am not saying anything about Raikkonen deserving a penalty or not, am I? That has no relevance either, I've only talked about Lewis' penalty and whether that was correct or not, is not at all linked to how Kimi drove at Pouhon or what kind of cereal Kimi ate for breakfast.
Originally posted by paulsky
It is actually as simple as above comments.
Why can't people understand that?
Just because it is Hamilton?
You are full of shit, I am afraid.
[b]He was 2-1.5 sec behind Kimi and by cutting the chicane he gain an advantage.
He should have lived with 2nd and shut the up. Just like Massa decided to stay in 3rd.
I think justice have been done. [/B]
It is actually as simple as above comments.
Why can't people understand that?
Just because it is Hamilton?
You are full of shit, I am afraid.
[b]He was 2-1.5 sec behind Kimi and by cutting the chicane he gain an advantage.
He should have lived with 2nd and shut the up. Just like Massa decided to stay in 3rd.
I think justice have been done. [/B]
Are you COMPLETELY blind?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4TZww5f6ko
Originally posted by jimpo
Simple, really.
Simple, really.
On the other hand:
McLaren have revealed that Hamilton was 6 km/h slower than Raikkonen as they crossed the start/finish line - which is why they felt they needed to register their intention appeal.
Originally posted by jimpo
Simple, really.
Simple, really.
If he gained an advantage how did Kimi get back in front?
How was he 6 KMPH slower than Kimi at the finish line?
Kimi was in front of Hamilton TWICE after Hamilton cut the chicane.
Once he was passed and the second time he threw it away and then threw it into the wall for good measure
This isn't the biggest farce of an FIA decision - or non-decision - but it ranks up there
Richard Dawkins has published a new book...The F1 Dillusion.
One thinks jokes must be funny.
One thinks last FIA's joke wasn't funny at all.
One thinks last FIA's joke wasn't funny at all.
Boo hoo. The penalty was completely justified.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
Originally posted by fatbaldskint
Richard Dawkins has published a new book...The F1 Dillusion.
Richard Dawkins has published a new book...The F1 Dillusion.
Originally posted by Mike Hunt
Boo hoo. The penalty was completely justified.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
Boo hoo. The penalty was completely justified.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
You do realise he backed off right? Ferrari wants him to back off into Portugal.
Originally posted by GerardF1
If he gained an advantage how did Kimi get back in front?
How was he 6 KMPH slower than Kimi at the finish line?
Kimi was in front of Hamilton TWICE after Hamilton cut the chicane.
Once he was passed and the second time he threw it away and then threw it into the wall for good measure
This isn't the biggest farce of an FIA decision - or non-decision - but it ranks up there
If he gained an advantage how did Kimi get back in front?
How was he 6 KMPH slower than Kimi at the finish line?
Kimi was in front of Hamilton TWICE after Hamilton cut the chicane.
Once he was passed and the second time he threw it away and then threw it into the wall for good measure
This isn't the biggest farce of an FIA decision - or non-decision - but it ranks up there
Can you gain an advantage while still letting the other driver reclaim his position? I know this is complicated, I am giving you some time to think about this....
Originally posted by Mike Hunt
Boo hoo. The penalty was completely justified.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
Boo hoo. The penalty was completely justified.
You cut a chicane, you back off. Every single retard knows that, with the exception of Hamilton and his daddy.
and what race did you watch then where he didn't give the place back?
try a fact hunt, mike hunt (you're so witty)
Petition online here: http://www.petitiononline.com/belgp08/petition.html
I have to admit the penalty looks pretty stupid, are they ruling Hamilton should have fallen entirely behind Kimi? Whether or not Hamilton would have passed is irrevelant since he would have anyway, but they need to issue precise guidelines for the future. What they really should do is cut rumble strips into the asphalt run off areas to prevent drivers from maintaining any speed at all. When Kimi ran wide on another corner, he found loads of traction and kept it going. Drivers have to realize they cannot use the run off areas to their advantage and have to stay on the road, so make the runoff areas slower and that will make them think twice.
Originally posted by jimpo
Can you gain an advantage while still letting the other driver reclaim his position? I know this is complicated, I am giving you some time to think about this....
Can you gain an advantage while still letting the other driver reclaim his position? I know this is complicated, I am giving you some time to think about this....
no. his advantage was in his breaking prowess at la source, the run into that corner did not help him in the slightest. even so, he gave the place back again within half a lap, which is still usually enough. kimi thought lewis move fair, so he span and then drove into a wall / or kimi was so much a team player, he drove into a wall to make felipe the beneficiary from a corrupt fia
why couldn't he wait and pass him on the straight?
why is he so impatient?
why is he so impatient?
If it is true that the FIA have penalised for Hamilton "slipstreaming" as it seems then it does make you wonder how much gain he made while slipstreaming.
If you watch this tell me how much time Hamilton spent actually slipstreaming after the chicane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5XL_UXd3Pk
Perhaps you can slipstream to the side of a car nowadays now due to the fancy aero packages
Regards
Andy
If you watch this tell me how much time Hamilton spent actually slipstreaming after the chicane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5XL_UXd3Pk
Perhaps you can slipstream to the side of a car nowadays now due to the fancy aero packages
Regards
Andy
First I thought the penalty was too harsh, but by watching it again I'm not sure Hamilton didn't gain any advantage.
Well, the FIA Court will decide it, I don't know...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.