26 replies to this topic

[DigDig]

Many are up in arms about the recent Hamilton penalties and weather they are fair (I personally think they are), I have been reading a couple of articles on f1 sites here and there and the ones that support Hamilton would bring examples of similar incidents by other drivers that they did not get penalized for.

But then again does the race steward have any source about the infringements besides the tv broadcast? or does he have a feed from all cameras on track? if not that latter wouldn't that constant tv coverage on Lewis through out the track shed a spotlight on all his mishaps and ignore the others (for example the start of the French GP mostly focused on Lewis's lap). Kind off like the movies scene, the bigger the movie gets, the more people watching every inch of the screen spotting continuation and production errors.

Please comprehend that this is a genuine thread that tries to start some sort of unpolitical analysis on the topic.

[mach4]

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

[Mat]

Originally posted by mach4
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Touche.

[osj]

Originally posted by mach4
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

depends whether it's a ferrari tree or a mclaren tree.

and please don't flame me...i'm just kidding.

[Ricardo F1]

Can't see it myself. Canada penalty well warranted, France penalty complete horseshit. If there was a TV issue it would be consistent.

[armchair expert]

If the coverage wasn't focussing on Hamilton so much, some of his indiscretions may not be noticed.

Alternatively, if say, Button dived down the inside of Sutil and straightlined a corner, but it wasn't on TV, would he have copped the same penalty? Would the Stewards have noticed?*



*Would they have cared?

[Most Fastest]

Hamilton penalties and weather they are fair (I personally think they are),

Rosberg very candiddly stated that he and Hamilton fully deserved the penalty for an infraction that saw Massa and Fisichella black flagged last year without crashing into anyone. The difference between Nico and Lewis is that one of them is taking responsibility for his mistake.

[DigDig]

Well Hamilton did own up to his mistake...kinda.

Point is such incidents as passing the chicane deserves a penalty if an advantage was warranted from it, this is not to argue whether a mistake took place or not but whether the attention on Hamilton makes him more prone to being penalized as he's more likely to be caught.

We always catch the end of the chaos at the tail of the grid during the first few corners and it looks really messy, if he had more time given to them at the beginning wouldn't that logically translate into penalties being awarded for clear evidence of infringements?

[y2cragie]

The stewards had access to the CCTV cameras around the track apparently. And they claim these were used aswell as the TV coverage. With how much time the Mclarens and Lewis were given by the French director its not surprising he/she chose not to show the incident from another camera angle if there was any question as to whether the pass was legit. (observation, not bashing) There should have been camera replays from at least 6 angles, 3 cameras I believe are aimed at that part of the track from track side, the helicopter would have been watching that part of the track as it was still bunched up from the start, Lewis' onboard, Vettel's onboard, and the onboard of the car behind those two. Put them together and you would have gotten a clear picture of what happend. They all would have been recording and I know for a fact there is a hard copy of it stored, so if I were Mclaren and so sure he didn't deserve the penalty i'd be asking for a copy, and same goes for the FIA(who have a right to all video footage) who may want to show the decision was a valid one.

[undersquare]

Well the Heikki penalty footage showed it was in fact Nakajima on line in Webbo's way and Heikki off-line on the outside, and that didn't stop the stewards penalising Kovy and not Nakajima.

But it does seem that if an incident is shown in replay then a penalty normally follows, as though the stewards feel there is an expectation of a penalty.

[y2cragie]

My only concern is that the stewards are listening to the TV feed with commentary. They could then sense the fact that expectations are for a penalty or that a penalty would change the excitement levels and base their decision on that.
I dont think they have that access so who knows?

[The Lonely]

If we had gravel traps instead of stupid tarmac run offs this debate would be null and void tbh.

[Perigee]

Originally posted by mach4
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

A fun variation I heard was:

If a woman says something and no man is around to hear it, is she still wrong?

[Risil]

Originally posted by Most Fastest


Rosberg very candiddly stated that he and Hamilton fully deserved the penalty for an infraction that saw Massa and Fisichella black flagged last year without crashing into anyone. The difference between Nico and Lewis is that one of them is taking responsibility for his mistake.

Nico didn't lose an almost certain win and with it possibly a realistic shot at the World Championship this year, though. He was bound to be able to see things more objectively.

[Perigee]

Originally posted by Risil


Nico didn't lose an almost certain win and with it possibly a realistic shot at the World Championship this year, though. He was bound to be able to see things more objectively.

I have no idea where we get this "almost certain" win from Lewis in Canada. My money was on Kimi at that stage.

[DigDig]

Here is why I dont think the race stewards watch the CCTV cameras all the time, remember last year the safety car incident involving Vettel and Webber in the Japanese grand prix? Hamilton's "involvement" in causing that incident only came to the attention by a YOUTUBE VIDEO a few days later.. what were they doing when they had that footage across several monitors in front of them then?

We really need more insights into the inner-processes of that race control room...

[pingu666]

that was fan footage i think...
also they didnt use that bollad? camera much during the race, one in the fast chicane... that would of been epic at the start

[wingwalker]

I think it's stewards being as incosistent as ever. After Hungary 2006 FIA pretty much gave chicane cutting a green light in an official clarification. Look at Alonso blatantly winning a position over Heidfeld thanks to cutting a chicane in Monza 2006, that was not a penalty. Hamilton penalty? 100% BS, but I don't think it has anything to do with TV coverage or a conspiracy. Stewards were always chaotic in their actions, it's always been like that.

[wingwalker]

Originally posted by DigDig
Here is why I dont think the race stewards watch the CCTV cameras all the time, remember last year the safety car incident involving Vettel and Webber in the Japanese grand prix? Hamilton's "involvement" in causing that incident only came to the attention by a YOUTUBE VIDEO a few days later.. what were they doing when they had that footage across several monitors in front of them then?

We really need more insights into the inner-processes of that race control room...

And they announced that weather was so bad they won't give a penalty. Complete horseshit.

[stormshadow]

Originally posted by Risil


Nico didn't lose an almost certain win and with it possibly a realistic shot at the World Championship this year, though. He was bound to be able to see things more objectively.

How on earth was Lewis' a certain win??
jees the guy was only 6 secs ahead not 60!

[Hacklerf]

Originally posted by Risil


Nico didn't lose an almost certain win and with it possibly a realistic shot at the World Championship this year, though. He was bound to be able to see things more objectively.

I think you will find that both Kimi and Lewis lost pretty much about the same from Canada

[Ricardo F1]

Originally posted by wingwalker
And they announced that weather was so bad they won't give a penalty. Complete horseshit.

Penalizing Vettel would have been ultra harsh IMHO.

[DigDig]

Why does this need to be an argument whether this driver deserved what? heck even the Vettel-Webber incident is back in focus now?

I repeat

This is about what ever the hell the race Stewards have access to in terms of footage, does that have an influence on penalties handed out OR NOT, either provide an opinion or piece of information on the above or feel free to start your own is this penalty fair thread.

[wingwalker]

Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Penalizing Vettel would have been ultra harsh IMHO.

That's what they did. They penalized Vettel, than the youtube video popped up, Toro Rosso hinted FIA about it and that they feel Hamilton is the one who was at fault and FIA said it was too wet so no penalties will be given (so the Vettel penalty was canceled) You couldn't make that one up.

sorry for going OT.

[mach4]

Originally posted by Perigee

A fun variation I heard was:

If a woman says something and no man is around to hear it, is she still wrong?

It's actually "If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman there to hear it, is he still wrong?"

(and it's from George Carlin, who coincidentally died today)

[uffen]

Hamilton's panelty was deserved, TV coverage or not.
He may have been past Vettel but he shot straight through the chicane because he couldn't manage the corner.
If they allowed the pass then every other driver would pass the guy in front, forget about braking, sail through the chicane "run off" and say "the pass was already made." Not so hard to pass if you don't bother about the brakes.
There is no other way to judge the matter. Anyone can justifably say they were "avoiding a crash."

[Perigee]

Originally posted by mach4


It's actually "If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman there to hear it, is he still wrong?"

(and it's from George Carlin, who coincidentally died today)

Ah! I had read the Viz version, but I am happy to learn they were paraphrasing the late Mr Carlin.

(Edit - this link claims it is incorrectly attributed to Carlin, so who knows! Link)