Schumacher was ahead of de La Rosa at Hungary. The 2 situations do not compare.

It wasn't "run off or collide", it was "run off, yield or collide".

Kimi had position and won the corner. It was on Lewis to avoid the collision, and he needed to do so without gaining an advantage. Lift/brake to yield the position or take the run-off and make damn sure you make it obvious that you didn't gain an advantage over the yield situation.

He VERY clearly did.

The more I think about this, the more I understand why Lewis was penalised. He could easily have backed off (which is what he should have done) and followed Kimi around the corner. Instead he chose to cut across the chicane. There was a definite advantage in this move, in that it allowed him to be right up behind Kimi in the braking zone for the hairpin. Had he followed and not cut, the concertina effect would have given Kimi a bit of a cushion and Lewis would (probably) not been in a position to take the lead. I think he would have got him some time later in the lap, but that is irrelevant to what happened in the chicane.

Check the replays again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYNAB6xIbx8
I don't see that Kimi gained an advantage at the start for that reason.
Felipe Massa said that he was conservative evaluating the rain on Eau Rouge, and that was the reason for Kimi overtaking him.

Lewis and Kimi weren't going to be penalized for their excursions at the end of the race, as this hasn't been the case for a long time (Lewis has taken advantage of this multiple times before Spa). Of course, Kimi gained time over Lewis by taking more run-off area than Lewis, but he didn't use that advantage to overtake, so it was expected not to be penalized. He would probably be penalized if he repeated it again on purpose.

I have to say yes. Lewis could have avoided collision quite easily. But it would have meant backing off, which is something he didn´t want to do. By now we know that is something he SHOULD have done.

The "long route" is becoming a tactic of drivers at spa (last year and this year) and in my opinion is a more serious offense than what we saw with LH yesterday.

I thought that, at the point it became obvious the corner was Kimi's (i.e. a split second before Lewis went on the run off), yielding wasn't an option (i.e. that hitting the breaks wouldn't have prevented a collision) - I take it you think I am wrong in this thought?


Well he could have backed off before the entrance to the bus stop, or on the apex of the first part of the chicane, and yielded. But I don't think he ought to have - I'd rather see someone going for a move than not, even if going for it is a mistake, as long as it's a genuine attempt then fair enough. And once he realised it hadn't come off, that Kimi had the second apex, I think it was too late to back off, leaving run off or collision as the only options.

Do you think that, at the point Lewis turned left to take to the run off, if he'd hit the brakes instead, he could have avoided a collision with Kimi?

Gareth, you need to check out the replay

I don´t think they would have collided had Lewis simply lifted. He obviously thought he might not get another chance and decided not to. We now know that was a mistake on his part.

If he just lifted he would touch kimi's left rear tyre...

He didnt turn away to avoid a collision as he was already behind Kimi, he cut the chicane to not lose too much ground., although Im sure it was just instinctive. You should post some screen shots of this immenient collision your speaking of. I didnt see it.

Alonso v Webber Monaco 2005. Alonso's tyres were going off and he cut the chicane twice in a row, one time followed by Webber.

Exactly the whole point of giving back position is to clearly show that you donot take any advantage from cutting a corner.
Lewis did give back the position (barely) but used the advantage obtained to pass Kimi in the hairpin anyway.

Very simple and most of all very avoidable, now you can't really blame Lewis he's a racer and making split-second decisions, but certainly one of the idiots on the McLaren pitwall could have told Lewis that only briefly handing the position back was not good enough.

But no McLaren thought that they would get away with it, again.

If my old memory serves me correctly, there were quite a few chicane jumping incidents last year at Monza weren´t there? And I seem to recall Hamilton pulling a similar stunt there as well. Didn´t he also excuse himself by claiming he had nowhere else to go, or something to that effect?
With Kimi virtually out of the reckoning, I don´t think he´ll think twice about taking Lewis out if he tries to pull a similar move in Monza. If I were Lewis I would be very, very careful.

Where does this "not gaining an advantage" thing come from?

Kimi went off track and gained an advantage at the first corner - no issue. Schumacher went off track and gained an advantage (retained a place) at Hungary '06 - no issue. Montoya at Suzuka '01 gained an advantage (set his fastest lap) - no issue.

It is not a question of whether an advantage is gained or not (this is not mentioned in the rules and, as can be seen from the previous incidents, isn't the important thing) it is a question of whether a place is gained or not. And if a place is gained, returning that place is the acceptable "cure" - as was shown in the Alonso/Klien incident (stewards said this was ok, albeit too late for Alonso) and by Whiting's opinion provided to McLaren.

Utterly and totally moronic and unjustified decision from the FIA there. The penalty is supposedly being applied because Hamilton "gained an advantage". Hamilton let Raikkonen past again after cutting the chicane as he should have and then passed him again fair end square. In that move, if anything it was Raikkonen that was out of order as he ran into Hamilton on the exit.

If the FIA rationalize that this supposed advantage is that cutting the chicane got Hamilton any closer to Raikkonen than he was, that is flawed as well as Hamilton was already all over him before they got to that chicane.

For these reasons, this decision to penalise Hamilton is idiotic, illogical and unwarranted and suggests the FIA want to rig the championship so that it goes Ferrari's way.

I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that Hamilton didn't get an advantage by cutting the corner but I don't see how losing momentum and speed compared to Kimi does not hand back at least some of the advantage.

Maybe it wasn't enough of a hand back for some, which is a view I respect but don't agree with, but he unquestionably did hand that position back when he could have just floored it and been across the start/finish first, at a faster speed and at La Source first without question.
Massa hit Hamiltons rear tyre.

Source?
Alonso says otherwise.

Pretty balanced view of the situation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A40707876?s_f...port=motorsport

Autocourse.

The Times.

F1Fanatic.co.uk

Yes - I believe a lift would have cleared the issue. No hard braking needed, and definately no action more difficult than making the decision to turn through the run-off.

Watching the onboard, it looks a lot more like deliberate deviation than an attempt to avoid a collission.

That - of course - is just my opinion. I wasn't in the car. But even if it was just a matter of avoiding collission, this is still not a situation where Lewis runs out of road trying to make the corner. He makes a very obvious left turn to actively cut the corner, and at that moment - in my opinion - he gains a VERY clear advantage over having to make the corner.

I don't post much at all but even I have to say F1 has now reached an all time low.

No, exactly that assumption is very, very correct. There is no way Lewis - had he been forced to make the corner in a correct manner from the position he was in - would be able to stay on Kimi's gearbox coming down the straight.

He was close coming into the chicane, but put himself in a position that was poor from a racing line point of view and which would definately have cost him.

There is no doubt in my mind, that Lewis would have passed Kimi before Les Combes anyway, but not at La Source.

really, did you see the speed difference of the mclaren in the rain, theres no way you can make that assumption.

It's no worse than any of the many other assumptions Mox's version of events makes.

Indeed, very well written.

Were it changed to 'gaining an advantage' the rule would lead to such forensic race post mortems that every race would need to be followed by a coroners report. The rule is that if you gain a position (or retain it) by cutting the circuit you must 'quickly' cede it to the other driver. Hamilton did exactly what was required of him.

Two lovable chaps:


2008 - Spa
Massa (Ferrari) gifted the win from LH (McLaren)



1998 - Silverstone
MS (Ferrari) gifted the win from Mika (McLaren)




Anniversary, yey ...
History repeating itself. Hopefully also in the end result.

In a straight line - on fairly dry tarmac (there wasn't all that much rain at the start/finish line at that point) - from the position on the inside of the exit of the chicane and the worst possible racing line - I think there is very good reason to assume, that he would not have been able to make that pass at La Source.

Actually - the rule is "You have to race ON THE TRACK".

Hamilton didn't!

There is no mention og "gaining advantage" or "gaining positions". Those are introduced to offer some fairness to Hamilton. If there is no soft interpretation, then the clase is open and shut!

So much has been said about how the sport will be damaged by this, etc etc. In truth this incident will attract new muppets to the sport, as it´s even got old grannies giving their 2 cents worth. Far more people will tune in to the next clash, just to see what´s it´s all about.
Max and Bernie aren´t stinking rich because they´re fools. They are rich because they keep F1 in the spotlight. What´s that old saying? There´s no such thing as bad publicity. Any publicity is good publicity?
Clever cookies they are.

If those sources are correct and the stewards actually rectified later, then I think the stewards got it right the first time and were wrong to rectify, and it shows that it's a really complicated matter.
What Alonso did to Klien was unfair, and what Lewis did to Kimi was unfair.
If you're lucky enough not to be penalized, then congratulations, but you know that you're risking a penalty when doing that. Alonso finally did have to surrender to Klien and it think it was the fair thing to do.


That's not in the rules either.



Yes, it could be another example that shows that if you cut the chicane to keep your position (Alonso was in front), you won't be penalized, probably, like Schumacher at Hungary'06.
Anyway, it can be argued that Webber also cut the chicane both times, even if it was much less blatantly than Alonso.

It is a complicated matter, which is why McLaren discussed it with Whiting.

Given it is complex and given there is precendent of the stewards okaying this type of move (Alonso/Klien), you would have hoped the stewards would have taken into account the advice the race director gave the team.


No but that is the practice.

"Unfair advantage" is neither in the rules nor the practice (see Kimi at la source on lap one of Spa, Schumacher at Hungary '06, Montoya at Suzuka '01 etc - all instances where an unfair advantage was gained but there was no penalty).

Yep, well written, and exactly my view of the whole situation.

I don't know if it's been mentioned because I can't be bothered to read back through the last 10 pages but Kimi wasn't even questioned on why he didn't slow down and overtook Lewis in the yellow because of Rosberg's spin.

I don't know what the stewards are up to but i'd like to know why he wasn't even asked about the incident.

Thing is Lewis gained both a position and the advantage of being closer to Raikonnen so being able to pass him at the hairpin. He only gave back the position and used the advantage of being closer.

Now we can't have drivers getting closer to their opponents by cutting corners can we, hence the stewards using article 30.3 to punish him.
Plain and simple, a very good decision by the stewards imo.

When Lewis gains more experience he will find that he has a brake pedal.

Can we not? So Kimi ought to have been given a drive through for his off at La Source on lap 1 that allowed him to get a run on Massa ...

He did race on the track. He let Raikkonen fully in front and then fought for position into T1.

He took evading action through the chicane, slowed to let Raikkonen re-pass, was travelling 6km/h slower as they crossed the line; Raikkonen was fully ahead at that point and chose the grippier outside line, Hamilton out-braked him on the inside. Those are the facts. The bit about slowing to allow Raikkonen back ahead is the salient bit.

As has been pointed out before. What was Fuji Massa vs Kubica then?

Sport will be damaged by this? must be a joke .. Seems to be a lot of new F1 fans.
There is rules in F1, and rules are interpretated by comisairs. This year is different for Hamilton for one thing, and this thing has a name ... Tony Scott Andrew.

All the world see how Hamilton wasnt penalized at least 4 times last year, how he get help for comisairs, how his rivals was penaliced without any rule like now.

At least, if Hamilton wins this year, perhaps he deserved it, not like last year. I know you only reading English Press and how English Press is with anyone that can beat an english, but people, be serious, something like that cant damage this sport more than was damaged last year by Tony Scoot Andrew to help Hamilton to win.

Raikkonen did not race on the track on at least 3 occasions, if there is no soft interpretation, then the case is open and shut!

The point is there is a "soft interpretation". And that interpretation is not "unfair advantage" as people here have claimed - that has never been the "soft interpretation" as shown by numerous incidents (Kimi in turn 1 at La Source, Schumacher at Hungary '06, Montoya at Suzuka '01 - to name but a few).

The "soft interpretation" is that if you don't gain a place, you are ok, but if you do gain a place, if you give it back you are ok. That was why Whiting gave the advice he did to McLaren. Well, that was the soft interpretation of every incident prior to this one ...

Using the outside of a corner seems to be generally acceptable (see eg Hockenheim), cutting a chicane to get closer to your opponent clearly isn't.

You cannot say that it's practice to give back the position you unfairly gained and overtake at the following corner, because it has happened very few times and most of them were penalized: Alonso was penalized to surrender to Klien at least during some minutes, and Lewis was penalized.

All the other cases are not comparable because the drivers that unfairly gained the advantage were already in front of their opponents.


About the first lap, check the replays again. According to Massa, Kimi overtakes Massa because he was too cautious at Eau Rouge.

He didn't get closer to Kimi by cutting the corner. He was already alongside him going into the corner so that is nonsense. If getting run off the road by your opponent was punishable then we would never see a race without penalties. The point is he gain a position and gave it back. This whole situation is ridiculous and F1 suffers because of it.

There are those of us who care more about F1 than either Lewis, Kimi or Massa.

We want to see hard, fair and exciting racing on great circuits.

For the first time in ages, we've had a fantastic race that kept us excited. The best drivers in the world were pushing themselves to the extremes of their ability on a track that would be a pleasure to watch even a procession on.

There was no malice or cheating involved in LH's move. Quite the opposite. It was racing.

The FIA no longer reward great racing, they punish it and seem to look to destroy the sport. They would much prefer a boring race on another Tilke infested circuit like Valencia instead.

The FIA and stewards are morons who can only think in terms of dollar signs. They would have banned Villenueve and Arnoux after Dijon '79.

Keep treating us this way and we will all stop watching. Simple as that.

Closer?

Seriously? You can gain an advantage by using the outside of a corner but if you use the inside you are not allowed? Joke.

So does every other driver i've seen get pushed off the track defending a position or trying to overtake. What about their experience?