Jump to content


Photo

Grand Prix de Magny-Cours 2008 thread


  • Please log in to reply
589 replies to this topic

#501 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 07:56

Originally posted by HP
So RK isn't entitled to have problems with the tires an the car? Interesting concept.



:lol:

Yes, and IMO RK is one of the few in F1 at the moment who is not making large mistakes. IMO he's the best at the moment, as he regularly outperforms the car, and I can't think of a big mistake this year. He had some issues last year, which also shows he's stepped up to another level. Which is why IMO Nic is having issues this year.

Incredibly, if Trulli and Kova had of had a more solid touch, Kubica would have taken a podium, and would be still leading the WDC, in a clearly inferior car.



Advertisement

#502 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:17

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Why? He passed Vettel before the corner. .



No he hadnt. He was slightly ahead because he didnt brake to take the chicane but the pass was not able to be completed without missing the chicane and thats cheating. Take off your fan boy glasses.

#503 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:26

Originally posted by Italiano Tifoso


I thought the calibre of this board would see this punishment as just and fair and not debate it...guess not.


I knew the calibre of this board would result in another 50 page thread debating the bleeding obvious. Fan boy infestation.

#504 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:26

The FIA should simply confirm their mission, and make it illegal to pass on the track.

#505 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:29

Originally posted by bond
If you look at the cockpit video i posted around sec 21 you should see that there's no way that vettel could be along side hamilton...
He lost the rear when he was well inside the chicaneand only misses the exit apex because he had to correct it.
He didn't cutr the chicane like people here are trying to make us believe.
If he had cut the chicane, then why did he made the first turn to the right? you can see him clearly making that turn and only after that he misses the exit turn to the left.
He had already gained the position before the chicane...


Why are you denying he cut the chicane when the video footage shows he did? If Vettel was not along side why didnt Hamilton take the normal line into the chicane and make it?

#506 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:34

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Uh, with what? You mean Vettel? Who's nose was about level with Lewis's back wheels. Which means the blame is on Vettel for not letting off a touch.


So its vettels fault now :lol:

#507 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:34

Originally posted by Blueray



No he hadnt. He was slightly ahead because he didnt brake to take the chicane but the pass was not able to be completed without missing the chicane and thats cheating. Take off your fan boy glasses.


Take your glasses instead. Fan boy.
Stop lying.
Here's the proof that hamilton was ahead. If you can fit vettel there, please tell us how...

Posted Image

#508 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:35

Originally posted by Blueray


Why are you denying he cut the chicane when the video footage shows he did? If Vettel was not along side why didnt Hamilton take the normal line into the chicane and make it?


I didn't see it properly, but if your on the outside of the corner, you will have to corner slower, so if you step across the car behind, he might hit you. Also even if you are not clear in front does not mean that you are behind. Cars run wide lots of the time too, especially since TC has gone. From the sound of it with TC, Hamilton would not have lost his rear end and thereby got around cleanly?

I have not see it from above, only from the TV view, which was not clear enough to prove either way. No doubt the stewards had those overhead shots.

#509 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:40

Originally posted by bond


Take your glasses instead. Fan boy.
Stop lying.
Here's the proof that hamilton was ahead. If you can fit vettel there, please tell us how...

Posted Image


Of course he was ahead, because he didnt brake to take the chicane legally. Its very easy to get ahead of people when you can miss corners. Too many people around here simply dont understand racing.

#510 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:44

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


I didn't see it properly, but if your on the outside of the corner, you will have to corner slower, so if you step across the car behind, he might hit you. Also even if you are not clear in front does not mean that you are behind. Cars run wide lots of the time too, especially since TC has gone. From the sound of it with TC, Hamilton would not have lost his rear end and thereby got around cleanly?

I have not see it from above, only from the TV view, which was not clear enough to prove either way. No doubt the stewards had those overhead shots.

he looked to be understeering more than oversteering at first..he was way too fast to make the turn

#511 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:44

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


I didn't see it properly, but if your on the outside of the corner, you will have to corner slower, so if you step across the car behind, he might hit you. Also even if you are not clear in front does not mean that you are behind. Cars run wide lots of the time too, especially since TC has gone. From the sound of it with TC, Hamilton would not have lost his rear end and thereby got around cleanly?

I have not see it from above, only from the TV view, which was not clear enough to prove either way. No doubt the stewards had those overhead shots.


There is no need for over head shots. Its clear from onboard that Hamilton completed the pass by missing the chicane. I cant see whats hard to understand here. Arguing whethere he was 'ahead' is irrelevant and just a diversion, a red herring, because even if he was it was only because he braked too late to take the chicane legally.

#512 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:46

Originally posted by Blueray


Of course he was ahead, because he didnt brake to take the chicane legally. Its very easy to get ahead of people when you can miss corners. Too many people around here simply dont understand racing.


Haaa now you say he was ahead ... :lol:

Before the picture you said he hadn't passed vettel:

"Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Why? He passed Vettel before the corner. .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No he hadnt.. He was slightly ahead because he didnt brake to take the chicane but the pass was not able to be completed without missing the chicane and thats cheating. Take off your fan boy glasses.


Right...

#513 emburmak

emburmak
  • Member

  • 2,353 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:52

Originally posted by airwise


That Kimi never was a patch on MS.



And they would not be wrong! :lol:

#514 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 08:57

Originally posted by bond


Haaa now you say he was ahead ... :lol:

Before the picture you said he hadn't passed vettel:

"Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Why? He passed Vettel before the corner. .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No he hadnt.. He was slightly ahead because he didnt brake to take the chicane but the pass was not able to be completed without missing the chicane and thats cheating. Take off your fan boy glasses.


Right...


Your problem is that you dont understand the most basic things about racing. Waste of time arguing with you.

#515 airwise

airwise
  • Member

  • 2,001 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:00

Of course the Stewards could have avoided all this by simply telling Mclaren "cede the place or take a stop go". But instead they deliberate for 10 laps then decide to hand out a penalty totally disproportionate to the offence and without the option to appeal.

The rules of F1 are an arse currently - completely missing the point of just how difficult the latest F1 cars are to control on the limit. Sit back. Don't try anything risky and pick up the points. Drive at 90% for the duration. I noticed Wurz on TV commenting that the stewards had missed the point in Canada that the drivers were at their mental limits with the amount of input required at that stage in modern F1 cars. Here they are missing the point that virtually no one has managed an overtake this season without someone going off circuit or locking all wheels. It's bloody difficult with these stupid cars. Give the drivers a bit of leeway FFS. Anyone want to see racing or would you prefer FIA controlled processions. Let's have the stewards from Fuji last year - that last lap was pure entertainment.

#516 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:00

Originally posted by Blueray


Your problem is that you dont understand the most basic things about racing. Waste of time arguing with you.


Your problem is that you lie...
And can't even admit it...

#517 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:05

Originally posted by airwise
Of course the Stewards could have avoided all this by simply telling Mclaren "cede the place or take a stop go". But instead they deliberate for 10 laps then decide to hand out a penalty totally disproportionate to the offence and without the option to appeal.

The rules of F1 are an arse currently - completely missing the point of just how difficult the latest F1 cars are to control on the limit. Sit back. Don't try anything risky and pick up the points. Drive at 90% for the duration. I noticed Wurz on TV commenting that the stewards had missed the point in Canada that the drivers were at their mental limits with the amount of input required at that stage in modern F1 cars. Here they are missing the point that virtually no one has managed an overtake this season without someone going off circuit or locking all wheels. It's bloody difficult with these stupid cars. Give the drivers a bit of leeway FFS. Anyone want to see racing or would you prefer FIA controlled processions. Let's have the stewards from Fuji last year - that last lap was pure entertainment.


Sorry but you cant condone cutting chicanes to overtake. Think of the mayhem it would cause if everyone started doing it.

#518 airwise

airwise
  • Member

  • 2,001 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:12

Originally posted by Blueray


Sorry but you cant condone cutting chicanes to overtake. Think of the mayhem it would cause if everyone started doing it.


I can condone common sense. Do you understand that?


Where were the penalties?

#519 emburmak

emburmak
  • Member

  • 2,353 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:18

Originally posted by airwise


I can condone common sense. Do you understand that?


Where were the penalties?



Oh Dear! :cool:

Advertisement

#520 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:23

Originally posted by airwise


Hamilton's race was effectively ruined by receiving a stop go for trying to avoid contact by running off the road. After that, the drive was that of a frustrated young man with nought to lose. A podium was there for the taking. He managed to overtake a fairly large number of cars cleanly but he was on a hiding to nothing and horribly out of position on the race track.

Lewis was penalized with a drive through penalty; it was not a stop n go. Just want to set the record straight.

-KB

#521 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:29

Originally posted by airwise
The rules of F1 are an arse currently - completely missing the point of just how difficult the latest F1 cars are to control on the limit. Sit back. Don't try anything risky and pick up the points. Drive at 90% for the duration. I noticed Wurz on TV commenting that the stewards had missed the point in Canada that the drivers were at their mental limits with the amount of input required at that stage in modern F1 cars. Here they are missing the point that virtually no one has managed an overtake this season without someone going off circuit or locking all wheels. It's bloody difficult with these stupid cars. Give the drivers a bit of leeway FFS. Anyone want to see racing or would you prefer FIA controlled processions. Let's have the stewards from Fuji last year - that last lap was pure entertainment.


I agree about the cars, but allowing drivers to overtake poorly is not the way to go. However the FIA allows that a lot of the time - consider Alonso in Monaco, when he admitted that he tried to overtake Heidfeld "when it was impossible". Heidfeld then had a damaged car, and looked poorly compared to his team mate. FA got off with a "racing incident".

I do wonder, if Hamilton had of had a collision, whether it would simple have been the same as FA in Monaco, and that it would have been a racing incident?

How about Sutil in Monaco, overtaking under yellow flags - he was not disciplined at all. If he had of been (it was later investigated and it was found he was OK) - but if he had of been stop go'ed - then KR would not have over driven on the restart, and KR would now be right up there in the WDC.

Its the rules governance that is so wrong - in a whole lot of ways.It simply no longer handles a formula which allows a much slower car to prevent you overtaking and hence destroys your ability to "race".

#522 pRy

pRy
  • Member

  • 10,962 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:31

Did Alonso give any reasoning as to why he seemingly moved over to let Hamilton pass him twice?

#523 Italiano Tifoso

Italiano Tifoso
  • Member

  • 1,888 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:33

It's no use trying to convince those intent of being blind about certain issues.

At the end of the day, we all have our opinions and if you opinion is supported by the stewards ruling, chances are you are right, if it is not...have a cry. :cry:

I'm tired of trying to educate people on this forum who do not have a grasp of racing and have probably never competitively raced in their lives.

So to all those people, yes Lewis was a victim yet again, he does nothing wrong, he is a saint, does that make you feel better?

He had another bad race, made errors, so what, move on to the next race, this one is over now.

I'm still waiting to see that awesome Mclaren speed Whitmarsh and Lewis keep telling us about.

#524 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:34

Originally posted by pRy
Did Alonso give any reasoning as to why he seemingly moved over to let Hamilton pass him twice?


He didn't moved over, he went wide and lost traction.

#525 yr

yr
  • Member

  • 5,970 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:35

Originally posted by airwise


I can condone common sense. Do you understand that?


Where were the penalties?


First of all, all but last pass which Massa made are irrelative because they swiched positions again in next corner, so basically the one who left the track and overtook driver ahead was passed in next corner. That leaves only last pass by Massa open for debate. I´m not sure how the rule is written, but yesterday LH cut the chicane which means he took short cut and gained advantage, Massa OTOH didn´t take any short cut so I´m not sure if these two cases are comperable. Really it depends heavily how the rule is written.

#526 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:39

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


I agree about the cars, but allowing drivers to overtake poorly is not the way to go. However the FIA allows that a lot of the time - consider Alonso in Monaco, when he admitted that he tried to overtake Heidfeld "when it was impossible". Heidfeld then had a damaged car, and looked poorly compared to his team mate. FA got off with a "racing incident".

I do wonder, if Hamilton had of had a collision, whether it would simple have been the same as FA in Monaco, and that it would have been a racing incident?

How about Sutil in Monaco, overtaking under yellow flags - he was not disciplined at all. If he had of been (it was later investigated and it was found he was OK) - but if he had of been stop go'ed - then KR would not have over driven on the restart, and KR would now be right up there in the WDC.

Its the rules governance that is so wrong - in a whole lot of ways.It simply no longer handles a formula which allows a much slower car to prevent you overtaking and hence destroys your ability to "race".

I don´t believe the stewards saw Hamilton´s move as a, "racing incident", but rather as a blatent attempt to gain a position unfairly. There is a world of difference.
In this instance, they were exactly right IMO.

#527 airwise

airwise
  • Member

  • 2,001 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 09:53

Originally posted by Melbourne Park


I agree about the cars, but allowing drivers to overtake poorly is not the way to go.


I'm in agreement here - what I am suggesting is that the stewards cut the drivers some slack given the difficulties involved. A simple instruction to cede the position would have been suffice - there is no need to further penalise a driver for making an error trying to control the car on the limit whilst racing IMO.

#528 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:12

Originally posted by bond


Take your glasses instead. Fan boy.
Stop lying.
Here's the proof that hamilton was ahead. If you can fit vettel there, please tell us how...

Posted Image


This is a good shot. In the preceding frame also you can see that he's within a foot of the apex, so no way was Vettel inside him at all. He had done the sensible thing and backed off.

However Hammy was carrying far too much speed to take the corner on track (it looked like he'd have run into DC), so in that sense he needed to shortcut the chicane as part of the overtaking manoevre.

I'd accept that much. What I don't understand is that normally afaik in these situations the team asks Charlie if they need to let the overtaken car through again and he says yes or no. Ted Kravitz said this too.

Also I'm sure that level of shortcutting, after the basic pass, has been allowed in the past.

It's one of those situations that can go either way, and the pattern is that in these situations the current stewards regime goes against McLaren and for Ferrari. Because the clear-cut decisions are taken correctly (like Kimi in Monaco) it's not that easy to point to a bias, but I think there is one - when McLaren can be penalised they are, and when Ferrari can be given the benefit of the doubt, they are (like the exhaust, or Kimi setting up a race out of the pitlane in Canada).

In this case it seems that Charlie and the stewards did not give a ruling in time to have Lewis undo the pass, but waited a 14 laps and then issued a drive-through.

The stewards being managed, let us remember, by Alan Donnelly who is an ex Ferrari PR consultant and Max's right-hand man. Max being a vindictive enemy of Ron.

Of the various things that are wrong with the sport at the moment, this bias by the governing body is the worst.

#529 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:21

Originally posted by ex Rhodie racer


Even my lovely wife, who knows F all about F 1 said, "Oooh, he wasn´t even thinking about taking that corner".
That said it all IMO.

My initial impression was that Lewis had too much speed going into that chicane, missing his braking point as the result. It took the Stewards far too long to issue a drive through penalty to Louis. A clear cut penalty to me.

-KB

#530 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:21

Originally posted by bond


Take your glasses instead. Fan boy.
Stop lying.
Here's the proof that hamilton was ahead. If you can fit vettel there, please tell us how...

Posted Image


This is a good shot. In the preceding frame also you can see that he's within a foot of the apex, so no way was Vettel inside him at all. He had done the sensible thing and backed off.

However Hammy was carrying far too much speed to take the corner on track (it looked like he'd have run into DC), so in that sense he needed to shortcut the chicane as part of the overtaking manoevre.

I'd accept that much. What I don't understand is that normally afaik in these situations the team asks Charlie if they need to let the overtaken car through again and he says yes or no. Ted Kravitz said this too.

Also I'm sure that level of shortcutting, after the basic pass, has been allowed in the past.

It's one of those situations that can go either way, and the pattern is that in these situations the current stewards regime goes against McLaren and for Ferrari. Because the clear-cut decisions are taken correctly (like Kimi in Monaco) it's not that easy to point to a bias, but I think there is one - when McLaren can be penalised they are, and when Ferrari can be given the benefit of the doubt, they are (like the exhaust, or Kimi setting up a race out of the pitlane in Canada).

In this case it seems that Charlie and the stewards did not give a ruling in time to have Lewis undo the pass, but waited a 14 laps and then issued a drive-through.

The stewards being managed, let us remember, by Alan Donnelly who is an ex Ferrari PR consultant and Max's right-hand man. Max being a vindictive enemy of Ron.

Of the various things that are wrong with the sport at the moment, this bias by the governing body is the worst.

#531 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:22

Originally posted by bond


He didn't moved over, he went wide and lost traction.

the second time he moved over quite clearly
it was the wise thing to do, lewis was due to pit anyway, alonso was losing time if he was defending.

#532 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:28

Originally posted by potmotr


:up: Agreed. He should have handed back the place at the next corner. If he'd been pushed off by another car jinking around on the first lap, a different story, but it was an unforced mistake which he shouldn't have benefitted from.

You can't expect Lewis to figure everything out by himself; the whole thing happened too fast. The blame should go squarely on Ron Dennis and McLaren's team for not instructing Lewis to give up his place to Vettel in the next couple of corners. He was so much faster than Vettel that he could have executed another overtaking maneuver in the next lap or so.

Somebody at McLaren needs to tell this kid to switch his brain "ON" when fighting for positions. He is excellent when leading the race, but going through traffic, he almost always makes the same mistake.

-KB

#533 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:34

Originally posted by MikeTekRacing

the second time he moved over quite clearly
it was the wise thing to do, lewis was due to pit anyway, alonso was losing time if he was defending.


Sorry, i was talking the first time.
Didn't recall the second.

#534 Johny Bravo

Johny Bravo
  • Member

  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:39

One question: what if this super-overtake of Hamilton happened on a street-track?

Yes. He would have crashed his car into the wall. Or yielded to Vettel.

#535 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:03

Originally posted by airwise


I'm in agreement here - what I am suggesting is that the stewards cut the drivers some slack given the difficulties involved. A simple instruction to cede the position would have been suffice - there is no need to further penalise a driver for making an error trying to control the car on the limit whilst racing IMO.

i wasn't aware that that was the process though. I thought that when a driver overtook incorrectly, he should know and should straight away allow the car he incorrectly passed straight by again. I could be wrong though.

#536 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:08

Originally posted by ex Rhodie racer

I don´t believe the stewards saw Hamilton´s move as a, "racing incident", but rather as a blatent attempt to gain a position unfairly. There is a world of difference.
In this instance, they were exactly right IMO.


That's not what I said though. What I said was that if Lewis had collided with the left side of Vettel's car, then IMO the stewards would have declared it a racing incident.

Don't you agree?

#537 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:11

Originally posted by bond


Sorry, i was talking the first time.
Didn't recall the second.

it was just before lewi's second pitstop (a few laps before)....lewis came down on alonso in the hairpin, on the inside from quite some way back without alonso making any obvious mistake or showing any sign of defense

#538 Only Massa

Only Massa
  • Member

  • 783 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:32

Originally posted by pRy
Did Alonso give any reasoning as to why he seemingly moved over to let Hamilton pass him twice?


He had just pitted, so his car was really heavy, while Hamilton was light, since he was on the last laps of his stint both times.
So there was no point in taking unnecessary risks holding Hamilton, since he almost ran into Alonso on the first passing attempt.
Alonso was wise. One could not like him as a person, but he's a brilliant and mature driver. Hamilton is not.

#539 airwise

airwise
  • Member

  • 2,001 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:38

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
i wasn't aware that that was the process though. I thought that when a driver overtook incorrectly, he should know and should straight away allow the car he incorrectly passed straight by again. I could be wrong though.


The point is the driver and his team didn't feel he'd overtaken incorrectly. In that case, couldn't the Stewards advise them that in their opinion he had and to cede the position or risk a penalty? Given that option, Hamilton would have dropped back a place and carried on. Instead, the stewards took 10 laps to decide to ruin the driver's race for a questionable indiscretion. I really don't think such draconian policing encourages good racing given the knife edge behavior of todays cars.

Advertisement

#540 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,877 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:39

Originally posted by Kelateboy
You can't expect Lewis to figure everything out by himself; the whole thing happened too fast. The blame should go squarely on Ron Dennis and McLaren's team for not instructing Lewis to give up his place to Vettel in the next couple of corners. He was so much faster than Vettel that he could have executed another overtaking maneuver in the next lap or so.

Somebody at McLaren needs to tell this kid to switch his brain "ON" when fighting for positions. He is excellent when leading the race, but going through traffic, he almost always makes the same mistake.

-KB


I agree. The team had a better overall view of the incident and should have advised him better. Which makes me a bit confused. Ron was clearly shown on the ITV coverage talking to the FIA immediately after the incident, I assumed at the time he was clarifying whether Hamilton should relinquish his position or not. Obviously he didn't and then was penalised for it. Anybody else see it?

#541 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:44

Originally posted by Peter Perfect


I agree. The team had a better overall view of the incident and should have advised him better. Which makes me a bit confused. Ron was clearly shown on the ITV coverage talking to the FIA immediately after the incident, I assumed at the time he was clarifying whether Hamilton should relinquish his position or not. Obviously he didn't and then was penalised for it. Anybody else see it?

According to Ron in his interview with ITV after the race, he wasn't asking the FIA their view of the incident but was, instead, advising them of his view: that the trip off track occurred after the pass, so therefore no position was gained from the trip off.

Had he been more willing to listen, perhaps the penalty could have been avoided.

#542 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:49

Wow now you're saying that fia gave him the option to give a place back and he didn't take it?
How come?
They were discussing the penalty, fia tells them they will penalise and ron tell that he feels it's not their fault.
that's the way i see it.
Why would they refuse to give a place if they knew that if they didn't do it , they would be given a drive through and ruin lewis race?

#543 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:51

Originally posted by Blueray
Of course he was ahead, because he didnt brake to take the chicane legally. Its very easy to get ahead of people when you can miss corners. Too many people around here simply dont understand racing.

It's also very easy to stay ahead of people when you can miss corners ... but that's allowed.

I don't particularly have a problem with the Hamilton penalty - I would prefer an F1 where that kind of thing is not allowed. My problem with it is that when someone cuts a chicane and stays ahead of someone because of it, that's all fine and dandy. Which is silly but, if thems the rules then what Hamilton did was fine. He was ahead and then he managed to keep his place by cutting the corner.

#544 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:53

Originally posted by bond
Wow now you're saying that fia gave him the option to give a place back and he didn't take it?
How come?
They were discussing the penalty, fia tells them they will penalise and ron tell that he feels it's not their fault.
that's the way i see it.
Why would they refuse to give a place if they knew that if they didn't do it , they would be given a drive through and ruin lewis race?

No, not saying that's what happened. Just saying that instead of hitting the FIA radio button and saying "guys, what do you think? Should we give the place back? Our view is [X]." Ron hit the button and said "Our view is [X]". Kind of classic Ron really - it's this kid of "black and white" view of the world that so often gets him into difficult situations.

#545 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:57

Originally posted by airwise


The point is the driver and his team didn't feel he'd overtaken incorrectly. In that case, couldn't the Stewards advise them that in their opinion he had and to cede the position or risk a penalty? Given that option, Hamilton would have dropped back a place and carried on. Instead, the stewards took 10 laps to decide to ruin the driver's race for a questionable indiscretion. I really don't think such draconian policing encourages good racing given the knife edge behavior of todays cars.


I don't think the Stewards do advise like that. They will examine something, and then act by following the rules. Hence if the driver failed to let an overtaken car back passed, then the Stewards would investigate the issue, at their leisure, and if nothing wrong was done, they say so. But if something was wrong, they'd follow the rule breaking with a punishment.

I think its not workable for stewards to have to make decisions "on the fly". They are there to establish if a rule has been broken. And then if it has, to apply the appropriate penalty. Logistically it would be a nightmare if stewards had to make quick decisions. Their decisions with lots of time up their sleeves are sometimes poor IMO, and the things they let go give me the impression they are inconsistent. Making them do such things "on the fly" would be a nightmare.

Although if it was done properly, with a panel of experienced ex racers and rules experts, who were at every race, and who had full access to a comprehensive video appraisal system, maybe it would be good TV if the penalties were tabled and fare. But for such a thing to happen, we'd need some innovative thinking from the FIA, and that is not going to happen for some time IMO.







#546 bond

bond
  • Member

  • 2,554 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 11:59

That depends on how the FIA approached ron.
If the FIA said "we are going to give him a penalty" it's different than saying "we are considering a penalty"...
That would give ron a open window to take the place back and not ruin the race.

#547 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 12:10

Originally posted by bond
That depends on how the FIA approached ron.
If the FIA said "we are going to give him a penalty" it's different than saying "we are considering a penalty"...
That would give ron a open window to take the place back and not ruin the race.

The point is that Ron approached the FIA immediately after the "pass", and he should have asked at that point "ought we to give that place back".

MP - you say "I don't think the Stewards do advise like that". Brundle certainly said that they do advise like that in his commentary. Whether he's right or wrong, I have no idea.

#548 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 12:27

Hallo, am I missing something here?
If Hamilton wasn´t so far up his own arse he would have backed off, waved his apologies, and given the place back to Vettel. Since when do drivers need someone to think for them? If the guy lacks the basic intelligence to understand what he´s just done is against the rules (and if you disagree with that, then, at least against the spirit of fair competition), then he has no right being involved in a sport where an average IQ is a minimum requirement.
Lordy, if we´ve come this far down the road, we´re in big trouble.

#549 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 23 June 2008 - 12:30

Originally posted by ex Rhodie racer
Hallo, am I missing something here?
If Hamilton wasn´t so far up his own arse he would have backed off, waved his apologies, and given the place back to Vettel. Since when do drivers need someone to think for them? If the guy lacks the basic intelligence to understand what he´s just done is against the rules (and if you disagree with that, then, at least against the spirit of fair competition), then he has no right being involved in a sport where an average IQ is a minimum requirement.
Lordy, if we´ve come this far down the road, we´re in big trouble.

The team are:

1. not having to drive a car at a couple of hundred mph

2. able to apply the thoughts of a number of people to the problem and

3. in communication with the FIA.

They are obviously the best people to make such a decision. To blame Hamilton for not giving the place back would be as silly as blaming a driver for the wrong pit stop strategy - it's a decision for the team.

#550 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 23 June 2008 - 12:41

Originally posted by Gareth
The team are:

1. not having to drive a car at a couple of hundred mph

2. able to apply the thoughts of a number of people to the problem and

3. in communication with the FIA.

They are obviously the best people to make such a decision. To blame Hamilton for not giving the place back would be as silly as blaming a driver for the wrong pit stop strategy - it's a decision for the team.

Gareth, we´re taking about people who should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Travelling at 200 MPH doesn´t suddenly rob you of the ability to think. This wasn´t about whether or not he should drop the atom bomb, so I´m sure he didn´t need Papa Ron and company to work it out with slide rules before understanding the situation.
And finally, the FIA would not have been involved had he acted correctly. There were many similar manoeuvres in Monza where the offending parties immediately gave the place back, and nothing further was said.