Jump to content


Photo

Should Hulkenberg have got a penalty?


  • Please log in to reply
141 replies to this topic

#1 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:20

It wasnt just once he cut corners I counted three times, and that's only what was shown on TV.

Advertisement

#2 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,509 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:22

Yes.

And therefore so should Alonso on the basis that he too gained an advantage by missing out a chicane. :wave:

#3 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,817 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:22

I had no problem with the first two cuts but the third was ABSURD. Mark was right on him an dhe cut the chicane to keep the place. Potentially cost Mark 2 places.

#4 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,556 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:23

Of course. Alg got a DT for cutting once. Wtf?

#5 JackTorrance

JackTorrance
  • Member

  • 2,065 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:23

The title of this thread should say: Should the FIA ban themselves for a few races?

#6 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:23

Yes.

And therefore so should Alonso on the basis that he too gained an advantage by missing out a chicane. :wave:


Alonso did it once, Hulk was a repeat offender.

#7 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,640 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:24

Yes.

Webber got screwed over. As we're used to.

#8 krapmeister

krapmeister
  • Member

  • 5,589 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:24

3 goes at it and the last one he definately gained an advantage from it - so at least he should have been told to yield the place.

#9 harrows

harrows
  • Member

  • 980 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:24

Yes.

And therefore so should Alonso on the basis that he too gained an advantage by missing out a chicane. :wave:


5-6 times?

#10 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,509 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:25

Alonso did it once, Hulk was a repeat offender.

Hulk lost the advantage he gained though. Alonso didn't.

#11 HMV

HMV
  • Member

  • 488 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:25

Obviously yes. What happened to warnings for cutting chicanes?

#12 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:25

Not a penalty.
He should have been "advised" by RC to yield the position to Webber.

#13 sir jackie walker

sir jackie walker
  • Member

  • 622 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:26

Yes, he gained advantage from at least two cuttings. When he cut the chicane while rejoining, I instantly thought whether it was intentional, as he handily got some extra gap with his cold tires.

#14 RedBaron

RedBaron
  • Member

  • 2,799 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:26

Yes no doubt about it. Forget if he saved position... the drivers were warned if they use the run off area into turn 1 too often they'd be penalized... all talk. They did nothing. Hulk definitely saved his position the last time he did it...

His cut across Webber too. I hate saying this but imagine if Schumacher did it, there would be hell to pay.

#15 majkel

majkel
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:26

Hulk lost the advantage he gained though. Alonso didn't.

Hulk didn't lose the advantage, he should've lost place

#16 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,509 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:27

Hulk didn't lose the advantage, he should've lost place

He did, Webber wouldn't have got past had Hulk stayed on the 2010 circuit rather than the 1971 one.

Edited by ensign14, 12 September 2010 - 13:27.


#17 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:28

As long as the stewards, at an Italian race, assisted a driver driving for an Italian team to bridge the gap to the points leader - can't see a problem with that..... the FIA are just continuing their assistance to the Scuderia .... nothing new to see .... really.

Has nobody noticed the FIA is now officially run by Ferrari? That short French fellow ... What's his name ....you know the one....

#18 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:28

He did, Webber wouldn't have got past had Hulk stayed on the 2010 circuit rather than the 1971 one.

:stoned:

#19 majkel

majkel
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:30

He did, Webber wouldn't have got past had Hulk stayed on the 2010 circuit rather than the 1971 one.

Hulk would lost tons of time if he'd try to stay on track. Webber would have overtaken him easily if he tried to comeback to the track without cutting chicane

Advertisement

#20 F.M.

F.M.
  • Member

  • 5,577 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:31

I thought 3 times = drive through was the rule....................... Under pressure or not shouldn't make a difference.

#21 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,407 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:31

As long as the stewards, at an Italian race, assisted a driver driving for an Italian team to bridge the gap to the points leader - can't see a problem with that..... the FIA are just continuing their assistance to the Scuderia .... nothing new to see .... really.

Has nobody noticed the FIA is now officially run by Ferrari? That short French fellow ... What's his name ....you know the one....



Err. This significantly advantages McLaren over Ferrari.

#22 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:34

This is amazing.

Alonso jumps a chickane 1 time => punished.
Jaime jumps a chickane 1 time => punished.


Hulkenberg jumps the chickane 3 times. => not punished.


What kind of stuff is this?

#23 mtknot

mtknot
  • Member

  • 691 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:35

This is amazing.

Alonso jumps a chickane 1 time => punished.
Jaime jumps a chickane 1 time => punished.


Hulkenberg jumps the chickane 3 times. => not punished.


What kind of stuff is this?


agreed, and he actually made up time per lap by cutting...

#24 TURU

TURU
  • Member

  • 2,786 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:35

It wasnt just once he cut corners I counted three times, and that's only what was shown on TV.


Yes, he should have get drive throu. Not just for that one move, but for all this retard cutting corners, waving in front of Webber. It was an awful, dirty drive of mr. Hulkenberg.

#25 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:36

Err. This significantly advantages McLaren over Ferrari.

Webber scoring less points is an advantage to Webber and not an advantage to Alonso?
Hmmmm. The number line isn't what it used to be....

#26 williams96

williams96
  • Member

  • 980 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:36

They were very stupid not to intervene based on previous decisions and the earlier decision in the race to penalise for the same rule break only a different driver.

The fact he kept doing it shows blatant disregard for the rules which now just looks like a joke.

#27 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 6,274 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:37

Punishment no doubt about it. Ridiculous the amount of times he cut those chicanes.

#28 mkoscevic

mkoscevic
  • Member

  • 645 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:37

Yes.

#29 Cenotaph

Cenotaph
  • Member

  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:37

good old FIA. Today Webber had the championship lead guaranteed, so obviously they don't want him to get too far ahead :p

Edited by Cenotaph, 12 September 2010 - 13:37.


#30 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,407 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:39

Webber scoring less points is an advantage to Webber and not an advantage to Alonso?
Hmmmm. The number line isn't what it used to be....



Hamilton has a much better chance of winning the WDC than Alonso IMO considering the points differential.

It aids both Hamilton and Alonso but come the end of the season, it may well hand Hamilton a championship that he might not have won otherwise.

I personally don't think that Ferrari will have to pace compared to RBR for the remaining races but we'll have to see.

#31 phil1993

phil1993
  • Member

  • 1,933 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:39

No. Webber wasn't close enough to gain an advantage.

#32 PoliFanAthic

PoliFanAthic
  • Member

  • 642 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:40

I couldn't believe he didn't get a penalty.

#33 primer

primer
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:40

Should Hulkenberg have got a penalty?


I cannot see the poll.

#34 jmkaos

jmkaos
  • Member

  • 120 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:41

Yes.

And therefore so should Alonso on the basis that he too gained an advantage by missing out a chicane. :wave:


Of course. Specially when Alonso lost 0.5 by cutting the chicane and Hulkenberg was able to kept his position everytime he did the same thing.

Yeah, same circunstances...

Hulkenberg will get the same penalty that Schumacher got back in Hungary '06.

-EDIT-

Though I would have given him a DT

Edited by jmkaos, 12 September 2010 - 13:42.


#35 Carlo's

Carlo's
  • Member

  • 999 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:42

Of course he should.

#36 primer

primer
  • Member

  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:42

Anyway, it was marginal. A penalty would be too harsh. Perhaps they can do what they do with Lewis in such situations: give him a (meaningless and useless) verbal warning.

#37 Viktor

Viktor
  • Member

  • 3,391 posts
  • Joined: February 99

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:45

No. Webber wasn't close enough to gain an advantage.

:up:

Anyway, it was marginal. A penalty would be too harsh. Perhaps they can do what they do with Lewis in such situations: give him a (meaningless and useless) verbal warning.

:up:

Nothing like Alonso at Silverstone.

/Viktor

Edited by Viktor, 12 September 2010 - 13:46.


#38 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,407 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:45

Anyway, it was marginal. A penalty would be too harsh. Perhaps they can do what they do with Lewis in such situations: give him a (meaningless and useless) verbal warning.


WOuldn't be the only situation in Lewis' case.

#39 TURU

TURU
  • Member

  • 2,786 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:46

Anyway, it was marginal. A penalty would be too harsh. Perhaps they can do what they do with Lewis in such situations: give him a (meaningless and useless) verbal warning.


He didn't do it once. He did it 3 times.

Advertisement

#40 Lord Snooty

Lord Snooty
  • Member

  • 800 posts
  • Joined: January 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:46

It wasnt just once he cut corners I counted three times, and that's only what was shown on TV.



Have to say, as a Williams fan, Hulkenberg was a bit naughty and, using the "three strikes and you're out" model, a drive through probably should have been given. I wouldn't say it ruined Mark's race but I could understand if he was unhappy.

#41 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:47

Jaime didn't gain anything, and he jumped the chickane on starting, as MANY OTHERS DID without gainning positions there, yet he was punished.



#42 Melbourne Park

Melbourne Park
  • Member

  • 19,197 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:49

The problem always is that the time delays take forever.

its always been a touch grey; they should have warned him too, I presume they did not.

I've pretty much given up on the Stewards anyway ... there is no consistency. In decisions, or in the amount of time they take. I've seen worse though than today. It probably cost Webber two places only.

Still Webber won a race this year I think, when the Stewards call took so long, he was able to get enough in front to fulfil his penalty. I was greatful there wasn't a collision when the overtake finally happened!

Edited by Melbourne Park, 12 September 2010 - 13:50.


#43 Redstorm

Redstorm
  • Member

  • 343 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:51

As long as the stewards, at an Italian race, assisted a driver driving for an Italian team to bridge the gap to the points leader - can't see a problem with that..... the FIA are just continuing their assistance to the Scuderia .... nothing new to see .... really.

Has nobody noticed the FIA is now officially run by Ferrari? That short French fellow ... What's his name ....you know the one....


Hulk was going to be passed. Fred was two or three seconds clear and not exactly under duress from behind. A balk on a pass doesn't equal braking too late and missing a corner.

Wow I pop in here for a bit of sanity and are once again met with moronic comments by those out to spew hatred. :rolleyes:

#44 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 2,483 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:51

Let's be brutally honest though, Hulkenberg's holding up of Kubica after his pitstop gave Mark the chance he needed to overtake him, so I'd say it's pretty balanced when we look at what Mark lost and/or gained.

#45 froggy22

froggy22
  • Member

  • 803 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:52

lets be fair. only the 3rd time he cut the chicane you could argue he gained an advantage and even then, Webber was close to him. the 1st 2 times, noone was near him

#46 Supersleeper

Supersleeper
  • Member

  • 1,441 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:52

No. Webber wasn't close enough to gain an advantage.

Which is why Hulkenberg made the mistake .... Because he wasn't under pressure .... Because Webber was so far behind.

Dear me - detective Phil....


#47 Hole

Hole
  • Member

  • 2,232 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:52

No. Webber wasn't close enough to gain an advantage.


Are you being serious?

Do you mean all drivers can jump that chickane if they are more than a second far off from their competitors?



#48 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,164 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:53

Yes.

And therefore so should Alonso on the basis that he too gained an advantage by missing out a chicane. :wave:


Alonso had a 1 second slower than usual first sector so try again  ;)

#49 KateLM

KateLM
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:53

The last time, Hulkenburg definitely gained an advantage, he should have been told to yield, or have gotten a drive through. It seems unfair that Jaime got one when Hulk didn't. We saw him doing it 3 times, and that was only what the TV cameras caught. That isn't just losing it every single time, thats taking an unfair advantage.

The recovery "weave" wasn't intentional but tbh it looked a bit dangerous, he probably should have just conceded then instead of risking an accident.

#50 Redstorm

Redstorm
  • Member

  • 343 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 September 2010 - 13:54

The problem always is that the time delays take forever.

its always been a touch grey; they should have warned him too, I presume they did not.

I've pretty much given up on the Stewards anyway ... there is no consistency. In decisions, or in the amount of time they take. I've seen worse though than today. It probably cost Webber two places only.

Still Webber won a race this year I think, when the Stewards call took so long, he was able to get enough in front to fulfil his penalty. I was greatful there wasn't a collision when the overtake finally happened!

Exactly. There needs to be a perminant steward board and their decisions need to be in plain view for the public so they can be held accountable. Will never happen but that's what I see needs to be done.