You can doubt whatever you want, and you're probably correct, because I don't usually feel I have anything worthwhile to contribute to 99% of the threads on this board. But from time to time one like this is made, a thread that is peppered with people showing an active unwillingness to understand the context of the story, and it is supremely important to take it slow and try to create a well-reasoned argument, whichever side of the story you fall on. 3/4ths of the first few pages of this thread were from people who clearly just wanted an excuse to whine about rules ruining racing and revealing themselves to be the same kinds of people who get mad at soccer referees who have to stop the game 20 times to hand out yellow cards because the players aren't playing by the rules.
When something like this happens you need that grace period to take in as many different angles as you can and that is never done on here by the majority of the posters. They see "Webber gets 10 place grid drop" and instantly assume it was because he got a ride back to the pits. Well, no, it's because he ran across a live race track and got a reprimand, and was unlucky enough to already have a pair of them. In the haste to **** on the stewards that flows in from all corners of this sport's fan base that succedes nearly every penalty of any kind, very few people could be bothered to spend literally two or three minutes to check what the penalty was for. The penalty was for having 3 repremands. There are people on the 11th page of this thread still saying what a shame it is the evil anti-fun demons that run F1 handed out a penalty for something it was established a week and a half ago wasn't the case.
I have far less of a problem with anything that happened at the Singapore GP than I do with people going out of their way to be ignorant. It's much easier to think "stupid old FIA" and leave it at that, so that's what a lot of people do. And the FIA is stupid and old, as I mentioned a few times in this thread already. So those people aren't wrong about that. But it can be immensely frustrating to see anyone drag out the same old "modern day F1 is a nanny state" type of arguments in situations that don't call for it, and this didn't call for it. The only people who think it is are the ones who don't understand what the penalty was for, or those that are under the ridiculous impression that walking across a race track could never possibly be dangerous. I provided examples that show this not to be the case.
Those arguments bug me because they are the same kind of lazy attacks that will discourage support and prevent people agreeing with that argument when it is actually correct. It's like the crazy feminist figures that shriek about misogyny at every opportunity, desensitizing their allies and alienating people who would potentially support them. It's stopping to crush every ant you see and then you can't fight the elephant when it shows up.The same happens in these kinds of situations when people squawk about nanny states: the next time we see the F1 powers that be do something deserving of being questioned or mocked, the nanny state argument has lost a bit of it's power.
I don't particularly like or dislike any driver. I don't have a dog in this race, and the people who continuously turn every debate into my driver vs. your driver are cancerous to the real debate, and from both directions. Wanting a harsh penalty on Webber because you think he's a sulky, petty git is just as bad as wanting no penalty because you feel sorry for him or because you like Australians or whatever else.
You should never overlook an action from any driver deserving of praise, but you shouldn't be afraid to call shenanigans when something looks a lot like bullshit to you. And I'm sorry, but a lot of the reaction to this looked like bullshit to me. I know the examples I talked about were more serious than what happened here, as evidenced by the fact I repeatedly said that while I was listing them. The whole point of mentioning those incidents from years past was to show that Bad **** happens on the regular when you drive really fast, and that when people are putting their lives on the line even for something as frivolous and ultimately meaningless as car racing, we had all damn well be prepared to understand and recognize a potential disaster and to make sure it doesn't happen again. And there are at least two sides to all of it, which is one more than just saying "**** the FIA" takes into account. Webber riding on Alonso's car endangers only Webber: that means it's okay. Probably why the penalty wasn't for that. It was for the things he did which weren't okay, and hating the nanny state that doesn't want fancy helmet designs and donuts after races doesn't make them so.