Jump to content


Photo

Inconsistencies in F1 Stewards Rulings?


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#1 Dick_Dastardly

Dick_Dastardly
  • Member

  • 262 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 13:53

As a Macca fan, the I cannot help but view the recent penalties imposed by the F1 Stewards with suspicion (Magny-Cours). Hamilton got what he deserved in Canada for what was a complete and utter brainfade. However, his incident with Vettel was not 100% clear cut and I can see both sides of the argument but I cannot help but feel if that had been a Ferrari then the benefit of the doubt would have been given to the driver. Also, why the delay in informing Mclaren that the incident was under investigation? I acknowledge that Macca must also carry some of the blame as given the current climate, any racing incident involving themselves is only going to end in a penalty of some sort. They should have ordered Hamilton to immediately concede the place back to Vettel. As for the stewards consistently, impartially and rigourously applying the rule-book, Kimi's penalty at Monaco was a clear infringement of the regulations so the stewards were forced to act. On the other hand when there is a grey area, why wasn't Kimi blackflagged for his flailing exhaust? The potential danger was apparent for all to see and any other manufacturer would have been pulled into the pits to resolve the issue. Yet no action was taken, so safeguarding Ferrari's chances of maximising their points haulage for the race. As for Heikki 5 grid-position penalty drop during qualifying, Webber lost no time at all during his run and where was Kova supposed to go? Another BS decision.

Given the composition of the F1 stewards panel, Alan Donnelly's links to Mosley and the intense mutual dislike that exists between Max and Ron Dennis the perception persists of FIA manipulation of the sporting regulations to suit Max's personal agenda. Also, would not former GPDA members be better placed to adjudicate on racing-incidents rather than FIA representatives with zero racing F1 experience? Ultimately, consistency, transparency in the application of FIA's sporting regulations would be of benefit to all of F1.

Advertisement

#2 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:08

Totally agree about the inconsistency and that's why these arguments rage.

Couple of things. The penalty Kimi got in Monaco was incorrect, he should have started from the back of the grid, he got off lightly. Black flag would have been wrong in France, Black and Orange would have been the correct thing to do.

#3 tidytracks

tidytracks
  • Member

  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:10

Pretty much agree, although I disagree on Heikki. He was on his outlap and should have heeded.

The issue, as you point out, continued to be Donnelly and the lack of anyone up in race control with even the slightest modicum of race experience.

It's been argued for a long time that what is needed is a racer up there to make an informed decision on the rules and whether the punishment would fit the crime.

#4 stevvy1986

stevvy1986
  • Member

  • 3,168 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:12

disagree about the kimi penalty in monaco,that was the right decision-they likely wudnt have even had time to notify the stewards,let alone let them examine the evidence,inform the team of the penalty and have them confirm they've received official confirmation of the penalty in the time between when the team put the tyres on,and the start of the race itself (let alone the start of the formation lap)-black and orange flag in france for kimi would have been a sensible decision,especially as it was flying all over

#5 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,412 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:15

FIArrari ;)

Need I say more...

#6 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:18

Originally posted by stevvy1986
disagree about the kimi penalty in monaco,that was the right decision-they likely wudnt have even had time to notify the stewards,let alone let them examine the evidence,inform the team of the penalty and have them confirm they've received official confirmation of the penalty in the time between when the team put the tyres on,and the start of the race itself (let alone the start of the formation lap)-black and orange flag in france for kimi would have been a sensible decision,especially as it was flying all over


It's 100% clear in the rules what should have happened.

138) When the three minute signal is shown all cars must have their wheels fitted, after this signal (other than on the grid if the race is suspended) wheels may only be removed in the pit lane.

Any car which does not have all its wheels fully fitted at the three minute signal must start the race from the
back of the grid or the pit lane. Under these circumstances a marshal holding a yellow flag will prevent the
car (or cars) from leaving the grid until all cars able to do so have left to start the formation lap.

#7 stevvy1986

stevvy1986
  • Member

  • 3,168 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:21

fair enough,cant argue with that,i didnt take the time to actually look up that rule,so fair play,you were right actually

#8 prxty

prxty
  • Member

  • 427 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:25

Originally posted by Dick_Dastardly
As a Macca fan, the I cannot help but view the recent penalties imposed by the F1 Stewards with suspicion (Magny-Cours). Hamilton got what he deserved in Canada for what was a complete and utter brainfade. However, his incident with Vettel was not 100% clear cut and I can see both sides of the argument but I cannot help but feel if that had been a Ferrari then the benefit of the doubt would have been given to the driver. Also, why the delay in informing Mclaren that the incident was under investigation? I acknowledge that Macca must also carry some of the blame as given the current climate, any racing incident involving themselves is only going to end in a penalty of some sort. They should have ordered Hamilton to immediately concede the place back to Vettel. As for the stewards consistently, impartially and rigourously applying the rule-book, Kimi's penalty at Monaco was a clear infringement of the regulations so the stewards were forced to act. On the other hand when there is a grey area, why wasn't Kimi blackflagged for his flailing exhaust? The potential danger was apparent for all to see and any other manufacturer would have been pulled into the pits to resolve the issue. Yet no action was taken, so safeguarding Ferrari's chances of maximising their points haulage for the race. As for Heikki 5 grid-position penalty drop during qualifying, Webber lost no time at all during his run and where was Kova supposed to go? Another BS decision.

Given the composition of the F1 stewards panel, Alan Donnelly's links to Mosley and the intense mutual dislike that exists between Max and Ron Dennis the perception persists of FIA manipulation of the sporting regulations to suit Max's personal agenda. Also, would not former GPDA members be better placed to adjudicate on racing-incidents rather than FIA representatives with zero racing F1 experience? Ultimately, consistency, transparency in the application of FIA's sporting regulations would be of benefit to all of F1.

Probably you were used to Tony Scott Andrews partiality and now you are surprised about Alan Donnelly impartiality.

#9 Lukin83

Lukin83
  • Member

  • 753 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:26

Originally posted by Nobody
FIArrari ;)

Need I say more...

A crane put Hamilton back on track + Kubica got penalty for overtaking Hamilton + Hamilton didn't keep safe distance to a Safety Car = McFIA ;)

#10 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:29

Given that Martin Whitmarsh himself has accepted that McLaren have not been the victim of any kind of bias or inconistency (LINK) , I am not really sure of the purpose of this thread. :rolleyes:

Seems to me some people are trying to create an environment where punishing one team for any wrongs it does is somehow "unacceptable", whereas other teams are Ok to be punished.

It's natural for people (or supporters) to feel their team is somehow the victim of bias or inconsistency when 'their' team gets punished, but the grown-up thing to do is, like Martin Whitmarsh, accept your punishment when you have made mistakes, and to work hard not to repeat the same mistake. Not to lash out at the body who's responsibility it is to penalise when rules have been broken.

The vast majority in the "Was Lewis' Magny Cours stop-go penalty fair?" poll thought it was fair, which might give an indication of hoiw most knowledgeable F1 fans think about the offence that was punished.


Originally posted by Lukin83

A crane put Hamilton back on track + Kubica got penalty for overtaking Hamilton + Hamilton didn't keep safe distance to a Safety Car = McFIA ;)

:up:

Unfortunately the thread was started by somebody with Goldfish Memory Syndrome...

#11 Sébastien

Sébastien
  • Member

  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:31

Originally posted by Dick_Dastardly
As a Macca fan.........................

Ahh that's where I stopped reading, this thread will become nothing but a big cesspool full of whining and conspiracy theories.
Boohooo big bad world all against innnocent little mclaren and favouring Ferrari.
Have fun :wave:

#12 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,304 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:31

Originally posted by Perigee
Given that Martin Whitmarsh himself has accepted that McLaren have not been the victim of any kind of bias or inconistency (LINK) , I am not really sure of the purpose of this thread. :rolleyes:


Don't worry about any particular teams, the discussion around the inconsistent manner the rules are applied is still valid.

#13 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,412 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:52

Originally posted by Lukin83

A crane put Hamilton back on track + Kubica got penalty for overtaking Hamilton + Hamilton didn't keep safe distance to a Safety Car = McFIA ;)


Lets not go back to '07, I don't have all night ;)

#14 LostProphet

LostProphet
  • Member

  • 1,175 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 25 June 2008 - 14:58

Originally posted by Sébastien

Ahh that's where I stopped reading, this thread will become nothing but a big cesspool full of whining and conspiracy theories.
Boohooo big bad world all against innnocent little mclaren and favouring Ferrari.
Have fun :wave:


And given your posting history (and indeed that very comment), how are your posts on this topic any more relevant?

#15 mursuka80

mursuka80
  • Member

  • 5,106 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:03

There is incontistency with what threads are closed and what threads stay open :down: What a complete bullshit :mad: What can you do about the penalties that have been given? Nothing,zip,nada.....rant over ;)

#16 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,856 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:12

There are quite a few things that trouble me in F1 nowadays, but this would have to be one of the biggies.

Sometimes F1 feels more like WWF...

#17 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:21

Originally posted by Peter Perfect
There are quite a few things that trouble me in F1 nowadays, but this would have to be one of the biggies.

Sometimes F1 feels more like WWF...


Certainly felt that way when Lewis got away with baulking Kimi in qualifying in Brazil, didn't get penalised for having received assistance to rejoin the track at the Nurburgring. Oh and of course Fuji where he broke the safety car regs leading to an accident. Faced with having to give Lewis a penalty the FIA chose to rather take Vettel's away...

Then of course there are the penalties given to Ferrari at Monaco for not having the tyres on in time, they were just 13 seconds slow, and even then it was just a matter of tightening nuts. Not benefit was had by it. Then of course in Fuji where Ferrari were punished for not complying with an email they never received.

Seems the McLaren fans are quick to act the martyr when it's the same for every team, Ferrari included. But they never see fit to point out where Ferrari are hard done by. Just every instance where McLaren break the rules that it's proof of some gross master conspiracy to benefit Ferrari. :rolleyes: :down:

For once the daily mail gets it right

http://www.dailymail...Grand-Prix.html

Asked if it was just coincidence that he had been penalised again by the FIA, who gave him a 10-place grid penalty for this race after he crashed into the back of Kimi Raikkonen’s Ferrari in the pit lane in Canada two weeks earlier, he was evasive. ‘I’m not answering that one,’ he said.

His boss, Ron Dennis, went further with the insinuation. ‘I think Lewis had passed him,’ he said. ‘There’s no point saying anything else. Draw your own conclusions from that. We are now looking ahead to Silverstone.’

The unspoken gripe from within McLaren is that the FIA, under president Max Mosley, are against them. Dennis and Mosley do not get on, it is true, but the British team must deal in facts rather than look for scapegoats.
Lewis Hamilton

It is no good claiming Ferrari get special treatment, considering that Raikkonen was given a drive-through penalty in Monaco when his tyres were not fully fitted in time. The same treatment was meted out to Honda’s Rubens Barrichello for speeding in the pit lane in Malaysia.

McLaren’s readiness to point fingers rather than accept responsibility was not confined to smearing the FIA. Hamilton also aimed his scattergun at the press, saying: ‘That’s what they do: they build you up and then they break you down, but they can’t break me.



#18 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:25

It's ridiculous to have Alan Donnelly there. He's an ex Ferrari PR consultant and a henchman of Max. His supposed role of liaison is an obvious non-starter, he will lead the stewards to their decisions as PlanetF1 reported at the weekend. He represents Max, Max appoints the stewards and if a steward doesn't do what he's told he'll be replaced.

So now the rulings that can go against McLaren will go against them, and those that can go for Ferrari will go for them. There will be enough hard-and-fast rulings for Ferrari fans to be able to point to examples of Ferrari being punished and McLaren not punished.

But overall, McLaren will lose and Ferrari will gain.

#19 Garagiste

Garagiste
  • Member

  • 3,795 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:32

Originally posted by kar
..., didn't get penalised for having received assistance to rejoin the track at the Nurburgring...


Nor did MS when he was pushed out of the gravel by the marshals. Up until that point everybody understood that if you received outside assistance that was your race over. Turned out not to be the case.
Crane business was a bit extreme but that rule has now been clarified - can't blame anybody for exploiting the loophole while it existed.

Advertisement

#20 Peter Perfect

Peter Perfect
  • Member

  • 4,856 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:34

Originally posted by kar


Certainly felt that way when Lewis got away with baulking Kimi in qualifying in Brazil, didn't get penalised for having received assistance to rejoin the track at the Nurburgring. Oh and of course Fuji where he broke the safety car regs leading to an accident. Faced with having to give Lewis a penalty the FIA chose to rather take Vettel's away...

Then of course there are the penalties given to Ferrari at Monaco for not having the tyres on in time, they were just 13 seconds slow, and even then it was just a matter of tightening nuts. Not benefit was had by it. Then of course in Fuji where Ferrari were punished for not complying with an email they never received.

Seems the McLaren fans are quick to act the martyr when it's the same for every team, Ferrari included. But they never see fit to point out where Ferrari are hard done by. Just every instance where McLaren break the rules that it's proof of some gross master conspiracy to benefit Ferrari. :rolleyes: :down:

For once the daily mail gets it right

http://www.dailymail...Grand-Prix.html


I wouldn't argue with that at all. As I said, my problem with F1 at the moment is inconsistant rulings.

#21 Only Massa

Only Massa
  • Member

  • 783 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:49

McLarenholics Anonymous' self-help thread.

Eventual stewards' unconsistency should be discussed in a less-biased context. This is the usual pathetic bashing thread. :down:

#22 Mat

Mat
  • Member

  • 7,674 posts
  • Joined: January 99

Posted 25 June 2008 - 15:54

The problem with a lot of incidents is that they are all so different.

No two incidents are identical. Unless it is something clear cut obviously, like not having tyres fitted before the signal, or speeding in pitlane.

#23 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,616 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:00

Originally posted by kar

For once the daily mail gets it right

http://www.dailymail...Grand-Prix.html

They did? What readiness to point fingers are they talking about? Lewis refused to answer the question, Dennis offered his opinion but refused to criticise, and Whitmarsh has said they were not subject to victimisation.

For someone who likes to denounce opinion pieces so readily it seems strange for such a very wrong one to be used to support your position.

As for the skilfully bolded Lewis quote it was a direct response to the 'LEW1S' question, taken carefully out of context. They might as well have called him a Nazi sympathiser.

#24 Blueray

Blueray
  • Member

  • 407 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:04

Originally posted by kar


Certainly felt that way when Lewis got away with baulking Kimi in qualifying in Brazil, didn't get penalised for having received assistance to rejoin the track at the Nurburgring. Oh and of course Fuji where he broke the safety car regs leading to an accident. Faced with having to give Lewis a penalty the FIA chose to rather take Vettel's away...

Then of course there are the penalties given to Ferrari at Monaco for not having the tyres on in time, they were just 13 seconds slow, and even then it was just a matter of tightening nuts. Not benefit was had by it. Then of course in Fuji where Ferrari were punished for not complying with an email they never received.

Seems the McLaren fans are quick to act the martyr when it's the same for every team, Ferrari included. But they never see fit to point out where Ferrari are hard done by. Just every instance where McLaren break the rules that it's proof of some gross master conspiracy to benefit Ferrari. :rolleyes: :down:


Very true and thats why it was so important to get rid of Mosley, the man who has been orchestrating this corruption since he entered office. But sadly it didnt happen and now we will have to continue to suffer with the circus he conducts.

#25 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:08

Originally posted by Buttoneer
As for the skilfully bolded Lewis quote it was a direct response to the 'LEW1S' question, taken carefully out of context


Are you sure about that? If so you might wanna hit youtube and watch the weekend's ITV interview with Lewis again.

#26 Sébastien

Sébastien
  • Member

  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:14

Originally posted by undersquare
But overall, McLaren will lose and Ferrari will gain.

Well that's just the way of the world you know :lol:

#27 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,616 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:21

Originally posted by kar


Are you sure about that? If so you might wanna hit youtube and watch the weekend's ITV interview with Lewis again.

I'm at work so am happy to take your word for it. But I'm still not sure of its relevance here or the need to particularly draw our attention to the writers opinion of Lewis.

#28 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 June 2008 - 16:38

Originally posted by Sébastien

Well that's just the way of the world you know :lol:


The world as ruled by Max :p

#29 Crazy Ninja

Crazy Ninja
  • Member

  • 1,370 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 26 June 2008 - 13:03

The FIA are consistent with Mclaren, its just a pity about the other 9 teams.

#30 jk

jk
  • Member

  • 1,750 posts
  • Joined: November 00

Posted 26 June 2008 - 13:42

Yes, they are inconsistant. They should have come down on Lewis last year with the dodgy moves he made. Lewis got the sense that he could get away with almost anything, and as such cannot understand why he is not allowed to pass by straightlining a chicane.
Had he got the straightlining penalty at Monza, he would probably not have tried it again. But since it went unnoticed then, why not now?

#31 Bernd Rosemeyer

Bernd Rosemeyer
  • Member

  • 1,296 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 26 June 2008 - 13:52

Originally posted by Dick_Dastardly
any other manufacturer would have been pulled into the pits


Anything to back up your claim or is this just the usual Ferrari bashing.

#32 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,276 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 26 June 2008 - 13:52

Originally posted by jk
Yes, they are inconsistant. They should have come down on Lewis last year with the dodgy moves he made. Lewis got the sense that he could get away with almost anything, and as such cannot understand why he is not allowed to pass by straightlining a chicane.
Had he got the straightlining penalty at Monza, he would probably not have tried it again. But since it went unnoticed then, why not now?


// Conspiracy mode on //

Last year basically everyone would have loved the sensation of a rookie WDC, so Lewis was given a fair (or should that be un-fair?) bit of leeway.

This year he's become just another driver and therefore has to live by the same rules as the monkeys...;)

// Conspiracy mode off //

Evidently he finds the transition from wonderboy to ordinary driver a bit hard to swallow... but OTOH he should be glad, it also means that he has finally arrived, out of "the dream" into the real F1 world (or as real as F1 gets, anyway).

#33 Zoe

Zoe
  • Member

  • 2,716 posts
  • Joined: July 99

Posted 26 June 2008 - 15:09

Originally posted by Blueray

Very true and thats why it was so important to get rid of Mosley, the man who has been orchestrating this corruption since he entered office. But sadly it didnt happen and now we will have to continue to suffer with the circus he conducts.


I'm not here to gather votes for Max, but do you by any chance remember the times of Balestre? It was indefinitely much worse back then.

Zoe

#34 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 15:45

Originally posted by Zoe


I'm not here to gather votes for Max, but do you by any chance remember the times of Balestre? It was indefinitely much worse back then.

Zoe


I'm sure you mean definitely, but no, it wasn't.

#35 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 15:49

Yes, it definitely was.

#36 rfus

rfus
  • Member

  • 648 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 26 June 2008 - 15:49

The one that gets me is the whole j-damper scenario, it quite clearly stinks, why should renault be allowed to race with it ?

#37 steelyman

steelyman
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:03

im surprised nobody brought up mclaren sending mechanics into pitlane during the french GP in what looked like an attempt to trick renault into pitting NP ahead of HK during their battle. this is clearly against the rules and you cannot have mechanics in pit lane unless they are there to work on the car - no mind games are allowed anymore.

im not saying they should get a penalty but people say FIA punish mac whenever they get the chance but not in this case. what is the opinion of the conspiracy theorists on this one? im sure if kimi was racing lewis and ferrari did this there would be quite a different reaction.

#38 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:11

Originally posted by kar
Yes, it definitely was.


no it wasn't - that's just the old Max-tinted glasses taking over. Dig out your old Autosports and such and find me inconsistincies in teh application of regulations as freuqnet as they are now from the Balestre years. That is what we're talking about, after all - not whether you love Max more than JMB.

wasn't it Frank Williams who summed it up that time, telling the story of the time Williams were publically threatened with exclusion from the championship when an administration bungle meant the application didn't get to the FIA in time? Yes, it was - that's right, Max went all high and mighty, threatening them with not being able to take part, telling the press how naughty Williams had been, etc, etc.

What wa sit Frank said? Balestre would have rung him up, and asked him where it was. Problem solved.

You see, that's the difference - Balestre may have been a tyrant and on occasions an idiot (no difference there, then) but he was interested in the sport, not himself.

#39 Sébastien

Sébastien
  • Member

  • 1,267 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:22

Originally posted by Lifew12
I'm sure you mean definitely, but no, it wasn't.

From a maczealot's perspective I am sure it wasn't. :D

Advertisement

#40 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,919 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:28

Originally posted by steelyman
im surprised nobody brought up mclaren sending mechanics into pitlane during the french GP in what looked like an attempt to trick renault into pitting NP ahead of HK during their battle. this is clearly against the rules and you cannot have mechanics in pit lane unless they are there to work on the car - no mind games are allowed anymore.

im not saying they should get a penalty but people say FIA punish mac whenever they get the chance but not in this case. what is the opinion of the conspiracy theorists on this one? im sure if kimi was racing lewis and ferrari did this there would be quite a different reaction.


You will surely provide us with the fitting passage from the rule book?

#41 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:38

Originally posted by Sébastien

From a maczealot's perspective I am sure it wasn't. :D


let's see - my favourite era, the late 70's and early eighties; who did I support? Oh yes, Gilles at ferrari, Rene at Renault, then at Ferrari; Didier and Jaques at Ligier; did I give two hoots for McLaren? No, not at all.

See, on another thread you make a comment about looking at things for their merit, and not where they came from; here, you look entirely at my comments as those of a 'maczealot', yet I don;t bother with burgers.

i'm talking historically. If you wish to respond with a historical angle, then do so; if you don't, don;t bother.

the truth is that things in JMB's day were not worse than they are today; some bits were ludicrous - as they are now, but some bits were much easier in transition than you find today.

i presume you were around then, hence you'd know.

#42 steelyman

steelyman
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:39

Originally posted by peroa


You will surely provide us with the fitting passage from the rule book?



i dont think we need to read this for it to be true. i think most people know of this rule and it was mentioned on tv when it happened.

but.....since you asked:

h) Team personnel are only allowed in the pitlane immediately before they are required to work on a car and must withdraw as soon as the work is complete.


taken from the 2008 sporting regulations from FIA site: http://www.fia.com/e...ampionship.aspx





#43 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,919 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:40

Thank you very much, very informative!
:wave:

#44 Lifew12

Lifew12
  • Member

  • 4,551 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 16:41

I've just realised what sebastiens on about with his maczealot comment - you think it was EASIER for McLaren, and the British teams, under Balestre??

#45 Suntrek

Suntrek
  • Member

  • 1,796 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 17:03

Originally posted by peroa


You will surely provide us with the fitting passage from the rule book?


23.1

h) Team personnel are only allowed in the pit lane immediately before they are required to work on a
car and must withdraw as soon as the work is complete.



http://argent.fia.co...19-05-2008.pdf

#46 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 17:24

Originally posted by Zoe


I'm not here to gather votes for Max, but do you by any chance remember the times of Balestre? It was indefinitely much worse back then.

Zoe


Not if you were a Prost fan it wasn't :lol: :lol:

#47 kar

kar
  • Member

  • 10,307 posts
  • Joined: January 06

Posted 26 June 2008 - 17:37

Originally posted by Mika Mika


Not if you were a Prost fan it wasn't :lol: :lol:


Not really, I adored Alain but I didn't want to see him win on the back of a German collaborator's belated patriotism.

#48 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,919 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 26 June 2008 - 17:57

Originally posted by Suntrek


[/i]

http://argent.fia.co...19-05-2008.pdf



:rotfl: :rotfl:

#49 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 26 June 2008 - 18:09

Originally posted by kar


Not really, I adored Alain but I didn't want to see him win on the back of a German collaborator's belated patriotism.


Nah mosley didnt take over till after!!! :lol: :rotfl: :lol:

#50 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 8,159 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 26 June 2008 - 19:08

Originally posted by Dick_Dastardly
As a Macca fan, the I cannot help but view the recent penalties imposed by the F1 Stewards with suspicion (Magny-Cours). Hamilton got what he deserved in Canada for what was a complete and utter brainfade. However, his incident with Vettel was not 100% clear cut and I can see both sides of the argument but I cannot help but feel if that had been a Ferrari then the benefit of the doubt would have been given to the driver. Also, why the delay in informing Mclaren that the incident was under investigation? I acknowledge that Macca must also carry some of the blame as given the current climate, any racing incident involving themselves is only going to end in a penalty of some sort. They should have ordered Hamilton to immediately concede the place back to Vettel. As for the stewards consistently, impartially and rigourously applying the rule-book, Kimi's penalty at Monaco was a clear infringement of the regulations so the stewards were forced to act. On the other hand when there is a grey area, why wasn't Kimi blackflagged for his flailing exhaust? The potential danger was apparent for all to see and any other manufacturer would have been pulled into the pits to resolve the issue. Yet no action was taken, so safeguarding Ferrari's chances of maximising their points haulage for the race. As for Heikki 5 grid-position penalty drop during qualifying, Webber lost no time at all during his run and where was Kova supposed to go? Another BS decision.

Given the composition of the F1 stewards panel, Alan Donnelly's links to Mosley and the intense mutual dislike that exists between Max and Ron Dennis the perception persists of FIA manipulation of the sporting regulations to suit Max's personal agenda. Also, would not former GPDA members be better placed to adjudicate on racing-incidents rather than FIA representatives with zero racing F1 experience? Ultimately, consistency, transparency in the application of FIA's sporting regulations would be of benefit to all of F1.


If you have an agenda, then you should not open a thread, discussing inconsistencies. Call it what you actually think, a conspiracy between FIA and Ferrari, as well as a hunt being out to get McLaren.

This thread have been wasted, since it was not opened for a true discussion about penalty inconsistencies, but simply made to air a personal grievance.

:cool: