I am not asking whether he should have been penalized. I am reacting - somewhat - to the drivers' comments from Monza and wondering what an appropriate penalty would be.
Or should it have been a drive-through at Monza or something else entirely.
Full Version: OK! So what would have been a fair penalty on Lewis?
There should have been no penalty. Period.
race ban for cheating
5 place grid penalty for Monza
No penalty. Lewis did absolutely nothing wrong.
Grid penalty.
The rules are -for once!-clear: it's either nill (if there's no reason for penalty) or 25 seconds.
I don't think he deserved a penalty. But if so, it should of course be 25 seconds - that is the rulebook.
I don't think he deserved a penalty. But if so, it should of course be 25 seconds - that is the rulebook.
Originally posted by dgduris
I am not asking whether he should have been penalized. I am reacting - somewhat - to the drivers' comments from Monza and wondering what an appropriate penalty would be.
Or should it have been a drive-through at Monza or something else entirely.
I am not asking whether he should have been penalized. I am reacting - somewhat - to the drivers' comments from Monza and wondering what an appropriate penalty would be.
Or should it have been a drive-through at Monza or something else entirely.
What a waste of valuable internet space
I am tired of these hamilton, spa threads. Why the heck can't you post in the existing thread? I also think there is a figure you want to see and you would be happy if the first is choosen, which threfore makes this thread even more useless. Moderator please lock this thread.
He should submit to Max for ze punishment 
There are no 10, 15 and 20 second penalties.
There is a 25 second penalty that is a simulated/predicted stop and go. It's given after the race if there were not enough laps for the driver to serve his penalty in the race.
There is a 25 second penalty that is a simulated/predicted stop and go. It's given after the race if there were not enough laps for the driver to serve his penalty in the race.
if you accept lewis did wrong at la source (and i don't), any penalty ensuing should have been reprieved when he relinquished position for a second time and also clearly relinquished advantage. this has always been the way its done previously.
if the stewards still want to make an example that this will not be happening in future, they should invoke a fine. it may not be in the rules, but none of that seems to matter and it didn't in valencia either.
the reason being that a drive-thru or time penalty is used to assuage the cheated driver. it was not possible in this case, plus this was a new understanding of the rule (whether you think so or not, you cannot deny that a vast majority in the talk about this understand it to be a new understanding, and these include world champions at the top of the sport - and i don't mean kimi). plus they had clearly shown they didn't want to affect the WDC over niggly, small infractions that had no consequence on the closely fought fight, even if they were clear and guilty of them. they should have used the same policy, if not only for fairness, then also for transparency.
if they think it worse than valencia (and how they would i don't know, seeing as valencia was potentially endangering life and spa was not) but if they do, then anything up to £/$25000 would be acceptable.
i'd still argue that he did nothing wrong in the first place, and that if he had he relinquished it within a minute or so, and all precedents point to that being fine, but at least it wouldn't affect the battle or leave a sour taste, or potentially harm future overtaking. there's now more to lose than there is to gain, a greater reduction even than the drop from 4 to 2 points.
if the stewards still want to make an example that this will not be happening in future, they should invoke a fine. it may not be in the rules, but none of that seems to matter and it didn't in valencia either.
the reason being that a drive-thru or time penalty is used to assuage the cheated driver. it was not possible in this case, plus this was a new understanding of the rule (whether you think so or not, you cannot deny that a vast majority in the talk about this understand it to be a new understanding, and these include world champions at the top of the sport - and i don't mean kimi). plus they had clearly shown they didn't want to affect the WDC over niggly, small infractions that had no consequence on the closely fought fight, even if they were clear and guilty of them. they should have used the same policy, if not only for fairness, then also for transparency.
if they think it worse than valencia (and how they would i don't know, seeing as valencia was potentially endangering life and spa was not) but if they do, then anything up to £/$25000 would be acceptable.
i'd still argue that he did nothing wrong in the first place, and that if he had he relinquished it within a minute or so, and all precedents point to that being fine, but at least it wouldn't affect the battle or leave a sour taste, or potentially harm future overtaking. there's now more to lose than there is to gain, a greater reduction even than the drop from 4 to 2 points.
No penalty, rule clarification, closure of possible loopholes.
Originally posted by Enzo#1
There are no 10, 15 and 20 second penalties.
There is a 25 second penalty that is a simulated/predicted stop and go. It's given after the race if there were not enough laps for the driver to serve his penalty in the race.
There are no 10, 15 and 20 second penalties.
There is a 25 second penalty that is a simulated/predicted stop and go. It's given after the race if there were not enough laps for the driver to serve his penalty in the race.
except of course if you're in a red car. when you can take a stop go after the chequered flag.
Originally posted by le chat noir
except of course if you're in a red car. when you can take a stop go after the chequered flag.
except of course if you're in a red car. when you can take a stop go after the chequered flag.
Anyone can do that(if the penalty is late enough in the race), you just get the time added to your total race time
Originally posted by le chat noir
except of course if you're in a red car. when you can take a stop go after the chequered flag.
except of course if you're in a red car. when you can take a stop go after the chequered flag.
That was the very thing that changed the rule.
Besides, Lewis did take a simulated stop and go at Spa.
Originally posted by SchumiBoy
Anyone can do that(if the penalty is late enough in the race), you just get the time added to your total race time
Anyone can do that(if the penalty is late enough in the race), you just get the time added to your total race time
that's not what happened in the case i was referring to, and won't happen again. it was one time, for one team, for one man. the penalty handed to lewis is what you refer to, i refer to an actual drive into pits stop and go. you drive into pits on final lap, cross line, then wait 10 seconds after you've won, then do a slow down lap to parc ferme. it cost schumi about 3 seconds or less.
Originally posted by le chat noir
that's not what happened in the case i was referring to, and won't happen again. it was one time, for one team, for one man. the penalty handed to lewis is what you refer to, i refer to an actual drive into pits stop and go. you drive into pits on final lap, cross line, then wait 10 seconds after you've won, then do a slow down lap to parc ferme. it cost schumi about 3 seconds or less.
that's not what happened in the case i was referring to, and won't happen again. it was one time, for one team, for one man. the penalty handed to lewis is what you refer to, i refer to an actual drive into pits stop and go. you drive into pits on final lap, cross line, then wait 10 seconds after you've won, then do a slow down lap to parc ferme. it cost schumi about 3 seconds or less.
He got the 10 seconds added to his race time and his lead dropped from 22 to 12 seconds, just as the 1998 rules said
Originally posted by Enzo#1
That was the very thing that changed the rule.
Besides, Lewis did take a simulated stop and go at Spa.
That was the very thing that changed the rule.
Besides, Lewis did take a simulated stop and go at Spa.
rule was the same before actually, but that time they chose to ignore that they couldn't issue a stop go in final laps (even tho the infraction happened way earlier they waited to this time so had plenty of time to consider what they were doing), and issue one anyway. it has happened since due to the uproar that caused.
of course in valencia they did it the other way round and should have issued a stop go immediatley, could have imposed the time penalty afterwards (even tho they weren't really supposed to be able to wait til afterwards to make a judgement), and instead invoked something they weren't really able to. you know the colour of the car there too right?
lewis' simulation was not a simulation of stop-going on the final lap. if it was he'd have a 3 second penalty and still be the winner
Originally posted by SchumiBoy
He got the 10 seconds added to his race time and his lead dropped from 22 to 12 seconds, just as the 1998 rules said
He got the 10 seconds added to his race time and his lead dropped from 22 to 12 seconds, just as the 1998 rules said
could you provide a link to show this please?
Originally posted by le chat noir
rule was the same before actually, but that time they chose to ignore that they couldn't issue a stop go in final laps (even tho the infraction happened way earlier they waited to this time so had plenty of time to consider what they were doing), and issue one anyway. it has happened since due to the uproar that caused.
of course in valencia they did it the other way round and should have issued a stop go immediatley, could have imposed the time penalty afterwards (even tho they weren't really supposed to be able to wait til afterwards to make a judgement), and instead invoked something they weren't really able to. you know the colour of the car there too right?
lewis' simulation was not a simulation of stop-going on the final lap. if it was he'd have a 3 second penalty and still be the winner
rule was the same before actually, but that time they chose to ignore that they couldn't issue a stop go in final laps (even tho the infraction happened way earlier they waited to this time so had plenty of time to consider what they were doing), and issue one anyway. it has happened since due to the uproar that caused.
of course in valencia they did it the other way round and should have issued a stop go immediatley, could have imposed the time penalty afterwards (even tho they weren't really supposed to be able to wait til afterwards to make a judgement), and instead invoked something they weren't really able to. you know the colour of the car there too right?
lewis' simulation was not a simulation of stop-going on the final lap. if it was he'd have a 3 second penalty and still be the winner
1998 rules
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998Sp...Regulations.htm
e) If an Incident for which a time penalty is imposed occurs with 12 or less complete laps remaining to the finish of the race, the stewards shall have the right to add the time penalty to the elapsed time of the driver concerned.
The penalty in question was 10 seconds
It was a very clear case, everything that happened was by the book.
ITV report the penalty here around 6:50
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOb7jMdKLLg
The stop&go is here, Brundle immediately calls the race when he crosses the line
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgUmjJQkIHY
Atlasf1 report with 10 seconds removed from Schumachers lead, down to 12
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/burley.html
Final result with Schumacer 22 seconds in the lead after the penalty was removed
http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1998/172/
Article from the archive discussing this race and the rules involved
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/gordon.html
10 seconds. It's a punishment, a slap on the wrist. Ok so what if the 2nd place guy is more than 10 seconds behind, their loss.
Originally posted by SchumiBoy
1998 rules
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998Sp...Regulations.htm
e) If an Incident for which a time penalty is imposed occurs with 12 or less complete laps remaining to the finish of the race, the stewards shall have the right to add the time penalty to the elapsed time of the driver concerned.
The penalty in question was 10 seconds
It was a very clear case, everything that happened was by the book.
ITV report the penalty here around 6:50
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOb7jMdKLLg
The stop&go is here, Brundle immediately calls the race when he crosses the line
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgUmjJQkIHY
Atlasf1 report with 10 seconds removed from Schumachers lead, down to 12
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/burley.html
Final result with Schumacer 22 seconds in the lead after the penalty was removed
http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1998/172/
Article from the archive discussing this race and the rules involved
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/gordon.html
1998 rules
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998Sp...Regulations.htm
e) If an Incident for which a time penalty is imposed occurs with 12 or less complete laps remaining to the finish of the race, the stewards shall have the right to add the time penalty to the elapsed time of the driver concerned.
The penalty in question was 10 seconds
It was a very clear case, everything that happened was by the book.
ITV report the penalty here around 6:50
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOb7jMdKLLg
The stop&go is here, Brundle immediately calls the race when he crosses the line
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgUmjJQkIHY
Atlasf1 report with 10 seconds removed from Schumachers lead, down to 12
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/burley.html
Final result with Schumacer 22 seconds in the lead after the penalty was removed
http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1998/172/
Article from the archive discussing this race and the rules involved
http://atlasf1.autosport.com/98/bri/gordon.html
good stuff. the first link doesn't work, so its only whether 10 seconds is the written penalty i wonder about still, or decided upon on the hoof.
presumably the ammended result to take the time from 22 to 10 seconds was done following mclaren's appeal though, rather than as a result of the fia themselves instigating the correction to their own error of first officialising the 22 second result? which would suggest they would allow them to do it... unless they are called on it by appeal process.
excellent linkage tho. this stemmed from a throwaway line of mine, what's your view on my first post in this thread, just out of curiosity?
DQ. At first I thought it was unjustified, but listening to the other drivers, they are all pretty unanimous in saying that he gained an advantage, (even Lewis said so, but thought that it was his god given right given the fact that he thinks that he is God).
He should have scored null points in Spa.
He should have scored null points in Spa.
Originally posted by Josta
DQ. At first I thought it was unjustified, but listening to the other drivers, they are all pretty unanimous in saying that he gained an advantage, (even Lewis said so, but thought that it was his god given right given the fact that he thinks that he is God).
He should have scored null points in Spa.
DQ. At first I thought it was unjustified, but listening to the other drivers, they are all pretty unanimous in saying that he gained an advantage, (even Lewis said so, but thought that it was his god given right given the fact that he thinks that he is God).
He should have scored null points in Spa.
that is brilliant. force an approaching driver off, then slow excessively when ahead, threat disqualified. welcome to the f1 train.
Originally posted by rolf123
race ban for cheating
race ban for cheating
I gave you the benefit of doubt, but say hello to Enzo#1, DoubleWDC, MS KR and Mat Rempit
Yep he should have been DQ'd.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
Originally posted by Ricardo F1
There should have been no penalty. Period.
There should have been no penalty. Period.
What he said!!
Originally posted by le chat noir
good stuff. the first link doesn't work, so its only whether 10 seconds is the written penalty i wonder about still, or decided upon on the hoof.
presumably the ammended result to take the time from 22 to 10 seconds was done following mclaren's appeal though, rather than as a result of the fia themselves instigating the correction to their own error of first officialising the 22 second result? which would suggest they would allow them to do it... unless they are called on it by appeal process.
excellent linkage tho. this stemmed from a throwaway line of mine, what's your view on my first post in this thread, just out of curiosity?
good stuff. the first link doesn't work, so its only whether 10 seconds is the written penalty i wonder about still, or decided upon on the hoof.
presumably the ammended result to take the time from 22 to 10 seconds was done following mclaren's appeal though, rather than as a result of the fia themselves instigating the correction to their own error of first officialising the 22 second result? which would suggest they would allow them to do it... unless they are called on it by appeal process.
excellent linkage tho. this stemmed from a throwaway line of mine, what's your view on my first post in this thread, just out of curiosity?
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998SportingR...Regulations.htm
10 sec stop and go was the default penalty at the time, and the rules say that if a penalty happens late it will be added to your time. Of course the rules didn't take into account the cost of the pit stop and after this the rules were changed and the now infamous 25 second penalty added as requested by McLaren.
The race finished with a 22 second gap, after the race the stewards added 10 seconds to Schumachers time to bring it down to 12 since he never did the stop and go. Sometime later after discussions with the drivers involved including Wurz who I think was the other car in the incident it was decided that there never should've been a penalty in the first place and the gap was restored to 22 seconds. But all this was purely academic since Hakkinen wasn't close enough.
I'll read your post better and comment on it
Originally posted by DiStefano
Yep he should have been DQ'd.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
Yep he should have been DQ'd.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
er, kimi didn't have to overdrive because of that move. he started overdriving when leading, and continued to after his spin. beforehand he drove well within himself, which is why lewis passed him at the chicane entry and at la source.
kimi moved lewis off track, which is also illegal. and very nearly did the same to felipe. he also double swerved going into la source.
if kimi had gone off or spun when behind lewis before taking the lead for a third time, you may have a point
if lewis is little, what are nick and robert?
a fair penalty... Thats exactlly the sticking point isnt it.
Say we go by the rules which exist:
Its either a 25 sec deduction or a 10 place grid penalty for the next race.
With the hindsight of the whole race et all.... maybe the next race grid penalty..maybe.
but somehow i feel the way that he cut the chicane may have influenced the stewards to
hand it out in the race itself
Say we go by the rules which exist:
Its either a 25 sec deduction or a 10 place grid penalty for the next race.
With the hindsight of the whole race et all.... maybe the next race grid penalty..maybe.
but somehow i feel the way that he cut the chicane may have influenced the stewards to
hand it out in the race itself
Originally posted by revvhead
a fair penalty... Thats exactlly the sticking point isnt it.
Say we go by the rules which exist:
Its either a 25 sec deduction or a 10 place grid penalty for the next race.
With the hindsight of the whole race et all.... maybe the next race grid penalty..maybe.
but somehow i feel the way that he cut the chicane may have influenced the stewards to
hand it out in the race itself
a fair penalty... Thats exactlly the sticking point isnt it.
Say we go by the rules which exist:
Its either a 25 sec deduction or a 10 place grid penalty for the next race.
With the hindsight of the whole race et all.... maybe the next race grid penalty..maybe.
but somehow i feel the way that he cut the chicane may have influenced the stewards to
hand it out in the race itself
If it were a grid penalty everybody would be crying here about a mistake in Belgium costing Hamilton a chance of a good race in Italy
His penalty should have been.... to read all the predetermined assignment of guilt these idiots post on here.
Nah...second thought, that's WAY to harsh.
NOBODY should have to be subjected to that crap
Jp
Nah...second thought, that's WAY to harsh.
NOBODY should have to be subjected to that crap
Jp
Originally posted by SchumiBoy
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998SportingR...Regulations.htm
10 sec stop and go was the default penalty at the time, and the rules say that if a penalty happens late it will be added to your time. Of course the rules didn't take into account the cost of the pit stop and after this the rules were changed and the now infamous 25 second penalty added as requested by McLaren.
The race finished with a 22 second gap, after the race the stewards added 10 seconds to Schumachers time to bring it down to 12 since he never did the stop and go. Sometime later after discussions with the drivers involved including Wurz who I think was the other car in the incident it was decided that there never should've been a penalty in the first place and the gap was restored to 22 seconds. But all this was purely academic since Hakkinen wasn't close enough.
I'll read your post better and comment on it
http://www.jomenvisst.de/fia/1998SportingR...Regulations.htm
10 sec stop and go was the default penalty at the time, and the rules say that if a penalty happens late it will be added to your time. Of course the rules didn't take into account the cost of the pit stop and after this the rules were changed and the now infamous 25 second penalty added as requested by McLaren.
The race finished with a 22 second gap, after the race the stewards added 10 seconds to Schumachers time to bring it down to 12 since he never did the stop and go. Sometime later after discussions with the drivers involved including Wurz who I think was the other car in the incident it was decided that there never should've been a penalty in the first place and the gap was restored to 22 seconds. But all this was purely academic since Hakkinen wasn't close enough.
I'll read your post better and comment on it
more good stuff. the one thing i really remember about the incident when watching was being outraged by the penalty and enormously pleased with the way ferrari were so cunning about it. i was on schumi's side at the time, and usually was throughout his career misdemeanours.
they should have kept post race stop/gos. imagine how those last few laps you could go balls to the wall. chicane cutting becoming the norm until they build speed bumps or anchored flappy bollards. (not really of course)
10,000 euro fine, same as Massa got in Valencia...
He got about the same advantage as Massa did leaving the pit early IMO.
He got about the same advantage as Massa did leaving the pit early IMO.
a fine or nothing
Originally posted by Ricardo F1
There should have been no penalty. Period.
There should have been no penalty. Period.
+1
Originally posted by DiStefano
Yep he should have been DQ'd.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
Yep he should have been DQ'd.
If it wasn't for his illegal move, Kimi wouldn't have had to overdrive and wouldn't have crashed out.
He deserves 0 points for his cheating antics.
Little Lewis should consider himself lucky he got 6 points despite being a cheat.
That's what I've been saying as well. I truly believe Lewis' behavior at the Bus Stop and La Source rattled Kimi. Kimi was under a lot of pressure to win this race. He had Montreal fresh in memory as well. When you feel you've been cheated even someone as cool as Kimi can make errors. He made them because of Lewis' unfair driving. And we still don't know where Kimi picked up the puncture.
Originally posted by Enzo#1
And we still don't know where Kimi picked up the puncture.
And we still don't know where Kimi picked up the puncture.
Originally posted by jonpollak
His penalty should have been.... to read all the predetermined assignment of guilt these idiots post on here.
Nah...second thought, that's WAY to harsh.
NOBODY should have to be subjected to that crap
Jp
His penalty should have been.... to read all the predetermined assignment of guilt these idiots post on here.
Nah...second thought, that's WAY to harsh.
NOBODY should have to be subjected to that crap
Jp
So anyone who believes the penalty was justified is an idiot?
Originally posted by Enzo#1
So anyone who believes the penalty was justified is an idiot?
So anyone who believes the penalty was justified is an idiot?
Originally posted by Mika Mika
10,000 euro fine, same as Massa got in Valencia...
He got about the same advantage as Massa did leaving the pit early IMO.
10,000 euro fine, same as Massa got in Valencia...
He got about the same advantage as Massa did leaving the pit early IMO.
Nope. Try again. Second attempt.
Originally posted by le chat noir
Look at Kimi's left rear.
i dont think you will find a single article in this weeks autosport
from any of their writers that
says hamilton was blameless
infer: Therefore deserving of some penalty
the only part where its thrown up for dicusiin is the extent of the penalty.
Whereas i would agree a fine for any sort of dangerous driving / flag or speed infraction
(which basically affects a single driver doing stuff by himself mostly --- yes even the massa incident which put the pit lane at risk, but the reason why i feel he escaped a race penalty was the he ceded, and did not get ahead of Sutil )
a penatly for an "illegitimate" pass / advantage over another driver would have to be either in time or grid places for some natural justice IMO
from any of their writers that
says hamilton was blameless
infer: Therefore deserving of some penalty
the only part where its thrown up for dicusiin is the extent of the penalty.
Whereas i would agree a fine for any sort of dangerous driving / flag or speed infraction
(which basically affects a single driver doing stuff by himself mostly --- yes even the massa incident which put the pit lane at risk, but the reason why i feel he escaped a race penalty was the he ceded, and did not get ahead of Sutil )
a penatly for an "illegitimate" pass / advantage over another driver would have to be either in time or grid places for some natural justice IMO
No penalty.
New clarification on rule that includes either or both of the following:
a) Advantage clause - advantage before attempted move is restored in full (time or distance, whichever is less).
b) Place is conceded. This stipulates that if you took advantage (cutting etc) when defending you give the position to the attacker (schumi hung 06). If you are the attacker you give the position back to the defender (Lewis Spa 08).
Anyone got Max's phone number? Id do a better job than current stewards.
New clarification on rule that includes either or both of the following:
a) Advantage clause - advantage before attempted move is restored in full (time or distance, whichever is less).
b) Place is conceded. This stipulates that if you took advantage (cutting etc) when defending you give the position to the attacker (schumi hung 06). If you are the attacker you give the position back to the defender (Lewis Spa 08).
Anyone got Max's phone number? Id do a better job than current stewards.
I love the options on this poll.
Originally posted by Enzo#1
Nope. Try again. Second attempt.
Nope. Try again. Second attempt.
....... Okay no penalty
Originally posted by Enzo#1
Nope. Try again. Second attempt.
Nope. Try again. Second attempt.
So let me get this straight:
- Lewis cuts corner and gains maybe 1 or 2 seconds max that he then gives back
- Massa goes out a long side Sutil. If he went after him (which he should have) he would have lost 1 or 2 seconds
Erm...I fail to see how they aren't the same "advantage". I just wonder how your tune would change if it was two BMWs at the front with Lewis and not two Scarlet FIA-mobiles.
Originally posted by Enzo#1
Look at Kimi's left rear.
Look at Kimi's left rear.
Kimi crashed.... I like kimi but he crashed due to no-ones faul but his own...
Originally posted by Scotracer
So let me get this straight:
- Lewis cuts corner and gains maybe 1 or 2 seconds max that he then gives back
- Massa goes out a long side Sutil. If he went after him (which he should have) he would have lost 1 or 2 seconds
Erm...I fail to see how they aren't the same "advantage". I just wonder how your tune would change if it was two BMWs at the front with Lewis and not two Scarlet FIA-mobiles.
So let me get this straight:
- Lewis cuts corner and gains maybe 1 or 2 seconds max that he then gives back
- Massa goes out a long side Sutil. If he went after him (which he should have) he would have lost 1 or 2 seconds
Erm...I fail to see how they aren't the same "advantage". I just wonder how your tune would change if it was two BMWs at the front with Lewis and not two Scarlet FIA-mobiles.
Exactly some Fanboys take it too far remember MS KR.....
Originally posted by Scotracer
So let me get this straight:
- Lewis cuts corner and gains maybe 1 or 2 seconds max that he then gives back
- Massa goes out a long side Sutil. If he went after him (which he should have) he would have lost 1 or 2 seconds
Erm...I fail to see how they aren't the same "advantage". I just wonder how your tune would change if it was two BMWs at the front with Lewis and not two Scarlet FIA-mobiles.
So let me get this straight:
- Lewis cuts corner and gains maybe 1 or 2 seconds max that he then gives back
- Massa goes out a long side Sutil. If he went after him (which he should have) he would have lost 1 or 2 seconds
Erm...I fail to see how they aren't the same "advantage". I just wonder how your tune would change if it was two BMWs at the front with Lewis and not two Scarlet FIA-mobiles.
In Massa's case it doesnt matter if there is an advantage or not. It was a safety matter pure and simple and should have been subject to the same rules.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.