So Whitmarsh says they were given the o.k. by "Race Control" that Lewis had fairly given the position back. Shouldn't that have been the end of it?


1) Who is "Race Control" - Whiting? Max?

2) Can any marshal retroactively do this? What is the authority hierarchy?

"does their authority trump a marshal?"

The answer is absolutely because a marshal can't wave any flag without Race Control authorization.

Well, yeah. It's race control afterall. And I think you may have gotten your question wrong as marshalls don't make any decisions. They make reports back to race control on what's happening in individual corners.

From ITV's Kravitz:

Just after Lewis took the lead, having given Raikkonen back one car length’s lead on the start/finish straight, McLaren’s sporting director Dave Ryan called FIA race director Charlie Whiting. This is done by means of a hard-wired intercom that all teams have between their pit wall gantries and Charlie’s desk in race control.

“We think that’s okay, Charlie, what do you think?” Ryan asked. I am told that Charlie replied, “Yes, I think that’s okay”.

Hence my question to Ron Dennis: Was it normal for an opinion given by the race director mid-race later to be overturned by the stewards? Ron replied that yes, since it is only Charlie’s opinion, it is possible.

But if Charlie thought what Lewis did was okay at the time, why was the incident put under investigation at all? Did Whiting change his mind? Did the stewards instigate the investigation? (They are allowed to do this, by the way.) Or did someone else in the FIA advise Whiting to have another look at the incident in detail?

I think you mean stewards rather than marshals there.

Stewards: Men in blazers who are ostensibly in charge of seeing that rules are complied with.

Marshals: Men and women who wave flags, remove cars, rescue drivers and put out fires.

I think the poster needs to distinguish between marshals (the guys that wave the coloured flags) and stewards, the guys who are responsible for enforcing the rules laid down by the FIA during the race*.

Given the de rigeur nature of the Spa/Hamilton discussion, is it fair to assume you are referring to that particular case?

Whether race control trumps a steward, however, I have no idea...


* I am sure somebody can clarify their role with greater clarity.

I would think stewards trump race control. Stewards jump in when there's something race control can't decide on it's own(?) and if there's issues beyond the stewards it goes to the court of appeal.

Marshall's communicate events that occur on the track, communicate track conditions and, if allowed to, wave flags.

Their reports go to race control, who is in charge of the marshalls and the events on the track.

The stewards then use the information provided my the marshalls to race control to make decisions about rules.

TBH I can't see that happening in an F1 race, certainly during the race, given that television replays are immediately available and generally reliable.

I find it hard to believe the marshals placed nearest the final chicane and along the start/finish straight in Spa (for example) would have had much bearing on the decision.

marshalls are nobody's, jsut general public trained to wave flags, i could be a marshall at the melbourne grand prix if i wanted to be.

I find this a little bit scary.
If every team is hard-wired to "Race Control", and that's Charlie Whiting, the only official, permanent, FIA representative at every race, and he says “Yes, I think that’s okay”, and then the stewards decide otherwise, who should the team have asked???
Should they put in a private call to Max on his cell-phone?
Because he is the one who ultimately decides.
When the stewards decided that Bar's fuel tank was legal, Max was the one who over-ruled his own stewards.
And he was the one who presided over the subsequent proceedings.
Who will preside over McLaren's appeal?

WMSC court of appeal judge? That isnt Max. But if Max is FOR the penalty then i guess he will be there stating his case.

Somebody find out who was the F1 Clerk of Course for this meeting...he was probably the one who made the call. He could have consulted the Driving Standards dude I suppose.

I doubt if the Stewards were consulted, they usually consider indescretions a little while later and where written reports from the "nobodys" out on the Flag Points are available.

The stewards are the ones listening to Max. They validate the outcome of a race. So if Max doesn't like what he sees, while taking a tea break in his chamber with his five hookers, either he takes it out on a hooker OR he calls the stewards... it depends on his mood.

Race control is Charlie, and the track marshalls fall under his supervision.

M A R S H A L is correct spelling

NOT marshall


pet peeve of mine, sorry

Maybe in Australia you could be, but in the United States and, I believe, in the UK, you must be at the top ranks of marshaling to be appointed by the sporting body to work an F1 race. In the US, that's an SCCA National license and it usually takes 4 to 5 years of race experience and travel to gain a National license. Wasn't it at Melbourne that a marshal was killed...and didn't the investigation determine he was where he shouldn't have been? So perhaps you could be a marshal.

To say marshal's are nobodies displays a general lack of knowledge about the training and experience they get. In my old region, it was 8 hours of training in first aid, firefighting, flags, and communications, plus about 200 hours a year of working races.

The FIA use a lot of camera's and sensors to determine track and race conditions - but the marshal's still make decisions about certain conditions.

Edited to avoid pet peeves.

Race control is not just Charlie, from the sporting regs it seems to be more of a central place rather than a body with decision making authority. Search for 'race control' in the sporting regs.

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/4...25744F004312F4/$FILE/F1.SPORTING.REGULATIONS.19-05-2008.pdf

Marshal vs. steward: I think it's obvious what I meant, curious the need to ignore that...

Geez, at least I got that part right. But mine go up to 11.

See, that's what I thought - that it would be something for a steward to jump in to correct an *action* race control erroneously took, not *create* an action. I mean, I bet if they wanted to they could scour every lap of a race, watching every single car, and be able to hand down all sorts of post-race penalties, but WTF?

It sounds like the way the hierarchy works right now, each STEWARD could post-race alter it's outcome based on his own interpretation of the rules. That's not racing, that's a bureaucracy. We can't have this, because effectively speaking from here on out we can't really know who won the race until a long time *after* the race.

That is a fundamental problem for me and a lot of people if we are to enjoy a race!!! I think the ruling was absurd, but the important thing is that the *nature* of the way an F1 race is managed almost makes it not a race at this point.



Who wants to watch a "race", knowing they can't immediately rejoice or be disappointed with the outcome they'll see??????

ANNOUNCER: "well, it *looks* like Lewis Hamilton has won the race! We'll have to wait until tomorrow to be certain, though, or maybe next week... in the meantime, let's watch the possible podium finishers get out of their car and walk to the Possible Winner's Podium for the Possible Podium Ceremony!"


WTF does the podium ceremony mean if we don't know for sure who actually won? How can I really get excited if someone passes in the last lap, if I've got to think "well.... maybe a steward disagrees about something"???? This situation has to be remedied IMO

Race control is different to the stewards. Race control direct the race and watch for safety. The stewards however are a separate group watching the race and are there to enforce the rules.

Charlie is separate to the stewards.

Only if Max wants them to.

Race Control is Charlie and the Stewards. They make judgements during a race "Stewards investigating an incident with car number 99" and it is Race Control who notify teams on the pitwall of any penalty.

RC is acting as an agent for the FIA and whatever it decides is upheld and supported by the FIA. If the Sewards/RC decide that a charge needs to brought against a team or driver, the FIA announce a hearing which is administered by the WMSC with Max in the Chair. A hearing is held in private. If an appeal is lodged, an appeal court is convened and is made up of lawyers. Max is not involved in the judgement and the Appeal is held in public.

Australia also requires lots of training, and experience. The minimum marshal standard only allows one to do things under supervision. That person is called a Trainee.

There are then further status and training is required for all (including the Trainee) :
General Official
Bronze
Silver
Gold
There's a club chief status too I think and such status is required to run an event.

Tonnes of experience and courses are required to get up the ladder - and a general official requires lots of training too.

I think CAMS - our Aussie parent motor body - is assisting the Singapore GP and I think providing marshalls, and maybe trained marshals there too ( did I get you with the typo ? ).

have you still got a WRX Mark?

Rubens & anyone else who might have misspelled marshal... my post was not meant towards anyone in particular, nothing personal at all. Just irritates me seeing it spelled incorrectly... I picked up this peeve from another board from a guy who does marshal duties.

As far as the topic at hand, Charlie Whiting is completely useless if teams cannot depend on his words during a race. To me this is just opposite of what should be.

ps- I read where Charlie was the one who instigated the stewards investigation. This after telling McLaren twice it was ok in his eyes.

Excuse me you need to get your facts right. Yes we are volunteers that give our time freely for the love of the sport. But we have to follow strict training and grading as you would in any profession. We are not allowed to marshal at GP's until we reach a certain level of experience, and then we have to have done so many events in a calander year to be able to apply. Post chiefs which are the ones that file reports on track action are again trained to do so. To call us nobodies shows a total lack of understanding.