Key question: Where was Rosberg on the track at the time the SC was deployed?

Because as we know, F1 stewarding is completely inconsistent. Perhaps they didn't want to be responsible for deciding the constructor's championship.

Agreed, and, is it also possible for the teams to send a message like 'low fuel' to over ride the SC Delta time on the steering wheel?...

the decision was fine if what we were told is true. You can't really punish Nico if he has no way of knowing what the delta was, and if he respect yellow flags then he did everything right. Of course, this shouldnt happen again, but its a software mistake that need to be corrected, not the drivers fault

Watching it back on BBC iPlayer:

- I'd say Rosberg is at the end of S1 when the yellow flags come out.
- I'd say Rosberg's probably approaching Spoon when the SC is actually deployed.

Rosberg pitted at the end of that lap.

Call me a cynic, but I'm not convinced about the truth of that. There was no mention of that from him during the interview on the BBC. He was asked more than once about the delta, and never said it wasn't visible.

So maybe we'll get liegate revisited in the coming days?

I hope so. I can't agree to the rules being broken, an advantage taken (and saying he didn't gain one is pure BS) and then no punishment.

One possible explanation would be if the low fuel indicator is in the same style as the delta display - there's not a lot of room there and a +2,9 sign might mean just about anything.

Just speculating, as we have to do with not enough information. Someone should ask Rosberg.

It's consistent with their past approach of measuring things like bargeboards and fuel temperatures.

I was just thinking exactly the same thing.

In the BBC quotes on the Autosport site Rosberg talks about knowing he was in the clear because the delta time is displayed on the steering wheel and he says he stayed above it when he hit the pitlane.

But Sam Michael and Rosberg argued to the stewards that he couldn't see the delta time because of a low fuel message.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this kind of fibbing is what had Lewis Hamilton (and McLaren) hammered after the Australian Grand Prix.

Seems pretty clear cut. Either Rosberg lied to the BBC or the team lied to the stewards...

If this is another liegate, they deserve no less than what happened to LH...but I'm afraid we'll never know.

It is possible that Williams decided that a safer way to get away without penalty would be to tell them about the fuel message, instead of trying to prove that Nico stayed above the delta anyway and/or only violated it when he entered the pitlane.

You've raised a valid point there. I suppose the only question then is - can data be used to confirm that Rosberg received a low fuel message? I'm assuming it can. In any case the stewards accepted that even though he did go too fast, he still backed off sufficiently. I do honestly think this maybe is a non-event because I still reckon Rosberg would have come out ahead of Heidfeld, Barrichello and Button owing to him pitting at just the right time. It was his turn to have some luck this weekend.

And in case of seeing yellows in the last moments on Q3 or Q2, just press ahead and hope other guys did the same moments before or after you.

If you're the sort of person who believes that the FIA (i.e. Max) hate McLaren (and, occasionally, the old Renault) then you will probably also believe that the FIA loves Williams. They are the epitome of Max's [perverted] idea of a proper F1 team, of course. The one fly in the ointment is that their engine isn't a Cosworth, but I'm sure they could sort that little bit out.

The stewards said it was based partially on television evidence wasn't it?

So perhaps the message on the steering wheel -or lack thereof- is free for the whole world to see.

Lets say the fuel message only came on when he was going down the pitlane rather than out on the track...

The only way this decision makes any sense is if the delta wasn't showing thanks to some feature in software provided by the FIA. But then why didn't Rosberg mention it in the BBC interview?

Because it is as true as Alonso not seeing the first yellow flag in Q2...

Post race -

""When the safety car comes out we have a lap delta, that comes into our steering wheel and we have to drive to that," said Rosberg. "There is a line just at the beginning of the pit entry and to ensure that we go slowly all the way back to the pits, slowly past the accident, we have to be exactly spot on for that minimum time.

"It says plus or minus and you just have to follow that and so long as you are in plus by the time you get to that line there then you are fine.

"As far as I am concerned I definitely did what I should do so I think it should be fine.""

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79233


Post stewards decision :

"Q. You were coming out of Spoon when the safety car came out. When did you realise that the fuel light was over-riding the delta time?

NR: Well, I never had the delta time. I realised pretty soon - but I thought it would still come. I just wasn't sure.

Q. So what was your reaction?

NR: Well, the reaction was that first of all, drive safely – which I did to 100 per cent. I slowed down and was very slow through the accident and everything. Then, my reaction was – let's give it a guess where we are now. I had no clue where I was in terms of the time, and I was very close actually.

Q. So where did you lift off?

NR: I lifted off on the straight well before the accident corner, and I didn't know where the accident was when I lifted off. I drove through there, saw the accident, drove slowly and that was it.

Q. Were you worried about it though?

NR: No. At the time, no, because I could not see anything. I knew I went very slowly and safely, and when I could not see anything then that was the important thing – to drive safely, which is the whole purpose. I did that 100 per cent. I was very safe."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/79259

Anyone can draw their own conclusions.

However if the software is their own, it says that the team has made software that prioritises convinience over safety? And since Rosberg KNEW that there was a safety car, he should be able to scroll to the relevant information. Why didn't he? And again, what changed between the BBC interview and the stewards room?

But I must give kudos to the Williams team for getting Rosberg of the hook for this breach.

Once again the FIA have shown the inconsistent manner in which the apply the rules. They havent said that he is innocent of the offence, they have found an excuse to let him off.

I guess this is the real situation.

Because there are so many examples of drivers being penalised when they gained no benefit that this one stands out.

There were at least four examples only yesterday....................................

If you read his immediate post-race comments carefully, and stick to them, then he does not contradict himself anywhere with what he said after meeting the stewards. Immediately after the race, he basically said

"As far as I am concerned I definitely did what I should do"

After meeting the stewards he explains that "I did what I should do" meant that, laptime delta being absent, he slowed down as much as he thought he should have done, and that was that.

Don't get me wrong, it's still fishy, he had no reason not to be more specific from the beginning...

No need for that. WDC is much more important. Next race is Brazil, and Rubens is still in the WDC hunt. And after that a new track.

Just maybe JB should focus on his driving, rather than worrying about other drivers how fast they drive under warning flag. Is that's how he wants to win that championship?

Button got penalised for breaking a regulation, why shouldn't Rosberg possibly have done so as well?

The only thing you get from sour grapes, is sour wine.

He doesnt want to lose it that way either. I'm sure he only found out about after he got out of the car, so he was only relating what the team had told him. Rosberg broke the rules so it's not unreasonable to have expected him to get a penalty. How could anyone have known that they would find a new excuse in the book that had never been used before!

Come off it, rules are rules and clearly Rosberg was worth investigating. Does also kinda leave a bit of a grey area too. So if a driver doesn't get his 'delta' and just drives slowely and safely through the accident area he's in the clear. Remember the rule was created to stop drivers 'racing' back to the pits. Other drivers will have made a mental note of that explanation, for possible future use, thanks to Jenson.

I thought the software was made by McLaren. If it was Williams' own software that essentially failed to do what it should, then the case for giving them the benefit of the doubt would be much weaker.

If it's really true that a low-fuel message over-rides the safety car delta, then that is surely a software glitch that needs to be corrected. I can't see why he can't receive both messages - there's certainly a lot of info on there, why should two messages be too much?

I'm not sure why the stewards are giving Rosberg the benefit of the doubt here. If a driver speeds in the pitlane he gets a penalty, even if there are extenuating circumstances. Rosberg may not have been at fault but he still gained an advantage.

every team has different display, so I would imagine that the ecu gives the same output to everyone, but its up to the teams to integrate into a digital readout system, if true, williams fault.

JB isn't the only guy who should a bit grumpy about this IMO.

Quick Nick was having one of his best races of the year.

He lost 4th to Raikkonen because of a dud pitstop, then got nailed by Rosberg thanks to the Safety Car.

The way I see it Rosberg either fibbed to the BBC or the team fibbed to the stewards.

I can't see how this is much different to Hamilton's case, other than the team involved not being McLaren.

They need to get together and rewrite the rule book and clear everything up. From the nonsensical, the confusing and a introducing a set penalty.

Hamilton was not the first, and won't be the last, to tell porkies to the stewards (did Schumacher hold his hands up and admit to parking in Monaco? nope!). The similarities between his and Rosberg's case seem to be that the stewards have accepted the team and driver's explanation without much further investigation. The problem being that there appear to be conflicting accounts....

Jamesallenonf1: #f1 Rosb didn't get done for speed under safety car because it was a problem on standard ECU, never happened before. Not Williams problem - 42 minutes ago from web

There's no rule against misleading the BBC is there?

Yea, the ECU error conveniently appeared when he needed it.

I think the stewards didn't want to gt involved in the WDC/WCC fight.

A question for ATM andy then to see if the ECU can be at fault or Williams integration.

If there was I think Eddie Jordan would be banned for life!

@P123: You're right, drivers and teams have been trying to 'maximise their advantage' with the stewards by bending the truth for as long as men have raced cars. Will always happen, all over the world. Which is why Hamilton and McLaren's penalty from March still irks. Wildly disproportionate. Anyway...

@D.M.N: I guess the ECU think seals it then, case closed...

Exactly, let's move on to the next race. Judgment passed.

Yep, in any case Rosberg certainly got lucky with the safety car, otherwise he'd have lost a bunch of places.

What's the personal connection between Rosberg and Alguersuari?

That spin looked deliberate to me..

We won't be hearing the last of this. This is EXACTLY the same as the Hamilton incident in Australia earlier this season. Rosberg said one thing to the press, and a totally different story to the stewards.

We won't hear anymore other than on the forum.

And we thought that after Australia too....

Unless 'new evidence' is forthcoming.....

I think that the issue with Hamilton had nothing to do with what was said to the press, and all about what was said to the Stewards, which was a lie.

Seems that Rosberg / Williams have told the truth to the Stewards, and the Stewards in their 'wisdom' have decided that you can brake the rules, gain an advantage but not be found guilty.

So very different from Hamilton / McLaren matter.

I simply do not understand why everything is made so complicated in F1, when there is no need. It creates controversy and ill feelings across the board when we see that rules are not always rules.

How do you know that, all we know at the moment is the two statement contridict each other.

But wasn't it more of a case with Hamilton that he initially said the same to the stewards in Australia that he'd been saying to the press...

Also with Rosberg, when interviewed by the BBC he didn't actually lie... He mentioned the lap delta because he'd been asked the question about how it works. Then when pressed on it his answer was vague rather than a definitive confirmation that he'd kept to the delta (which we now know is because he didn't see the delta)

1) he said 'seems'
2) we don't know the technical evidence Williams provided
c) KWSN is the greatest Nico supporter on these boards, so I think it was a very fair post.

Exactly what I said, WE DON'T KNOW

"Suzkagate!!!!!!"

from my recollection of Australia. The stewards came to a decision, however that decision was overturned when post-race intervews showed Hamilton saying different things to the press.

This is EXACTLY the same. Rosberg said he was doing the deltas to the BBC, yet told the stewards that the deltas were obscured by the low fuel warning...

Regardless of the porkies being told to the stewards, if he couldn't see the deltas, he would have still noticed himself pulling away from everyone else.. It's HIS responsibility to ensure he is doing the deltas, if he can't see them, then he needs to go sufficiently slower than them to ensure he is not exceeding this.

A low fuel warning message on the wheel is not a free ticket to go as fast as you like. If I got stopped for speeding, can I argue the same, I was too busy looking at my fuel gauge to notice the speed? That won't wear with the traffic cops we have here...