FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[WallKart]

Just read the news on Hamilton and Alonso and them both getting 20 second penalties in Malaysia, Hamilton's apparently for moving twice to defend. I just can't see how he could orchestrate that around multiple curves deliberately.

This just goes to show that even though I've watched F1 for years, I still don't get that rule. After seeing Hamilton's penalty I find myself wondering if Vettel should warrant a penalty as, as far as I could make out he defended twice from Hamilton at the start. Is this incorrect? If so please explain. My faith in understanding the rules on this is depending on you guys. I need an expert to point out what the difference is if he didn't deserve one.

[bud]

Hamilton moved twice on the pit straight the lap before they came together. As for the start, this is kinda exempt from this rule as drivers are taking off from the staggered grid which means there is no exact line yet. Some are on the inside some outside.

[Hammer278]

I would advice you to go through the "MALAYSIAN GP THREAD"...its got a lot of opinions and videos in that thread. Instead of starting it all over again here.

[WallKart]

Thanks... Just new here. I'll check out the thread you pointed out.

[Hammer278]

No worries. Welcome mate...never noticed your post count!

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

Origin of the rule explained here.

The "one move" rule is a lot like MLB's "infield fly" rule in that exactly how it's interpreted/enforced depends largely on who the official is.

[WallKart]

I would advice you to go through the "MALAYSIAN GP THREAD"...its got a lot of opinions and videos in that thread. Instead of starting it all over again here.

I read the entire thread and although the Vettel defending at start was a question in the thread no-one really definitively said why he shouldn't have had a penalty. Someone also stated there's no relaxing of that weaving rule at the start and the same rule applies throughout the GP including the start. So... still don't understand. I have nothing against Vettel (One of my favourite drivers) but wonder why the leader wouldn't be scrutinized to the same degree as other penalties issued.

Not gonna break my day or anything. Race is over but would like to at least appreciate the whys of it all.

[spankyham]

I would advice you to go through the "MALAYSIAN GP THREAD"...its got a lot of opinions and videos in that thread. Instead of starting it all over again here.

I read the entire thread and although the Vettel defending at start was a question in the thread no-one really definitively said why he shouldn't have had a penalty. Someone also stated there's no relaxing of that weaving rule at the start and the same rule applies throughout the GP including the start. So... still don't understand. I have nothing against Vettel (One of my favourite drivers) but wonder why the leader wouldn't be scrutinized to the same degree as other penalties issued.

Not gonna break my day or anything. Race is over but would like to at least appreciate the whys of it all.

The why is easy - inconsistent and poor officiating coupled with a stupid rule.

(and yes, the rule is stupid, but also very clear, and there is absolutely no exception for the start)

[WallKart]

Cool... Sounds like a rule that should be looked at otherwise it'll ruin F1 completely. I understand it's there for a reason (to stop overly defensive driving killing the action) but it's not right, it's not working and they don't appear to be able to judge it fairly.

I'd rather see drivers allowed more leeway in defensive manoeuvres. Allow them to defend a few times before a move aside rule is enforced. Still leaves the issue of them not being able to fairly apply it to 20+ drivers for 2 hrs of racing though. Is there a better way ? There must be.

[sennasational]

Cool... Sounds like a rule that should be looked at otherwise it'll ruin F1 completely. I understand it's there for a reason (to stop overly defensive driving killing the action) but it's not right, it's not working and they don't appear to be able to judge it fairly.

I'd rather see drivers allowed more leeway in defensive manoeuvres. Allow them to defend a few times before a move aside rule is enforced. Still leaves the issue of them not being able to fairly apply it to 20+ drivers for 2 hrs of racing though. Is there a better way ? There must be.

Theres something annoying about officials trying to make f1 safer by dictating how the drivers race. I'm all for safety but keep it in the technology and out of the drivers heads. Accidents in F1 today often leave the drivers with fairly minor injuries, if anything i'd rather see drivers encouraged to race, it's not natural that as the sport as gotten safer, the drivers have more rules than ever to restrict how they race. Ridiculous.

[Jensonb]

Forget Vettel at the start, Massa's been pulling this crap in both races of the season and gone completely unpunished for it. If you're going to make it a rule, enforce it absolutely. Otherwise it shouldn't be a rule.

[myownalias]

Forget Vettel at the start, Massa's been pulling this crap in both races of the season and gone completely unpunished for it. If you're going to make it a rule, enforce it absolutely. Otherwise it shouldn't be a rule.

Exactly; a rule is a rule; this has been my biggest annoyance with F1 in recent years; the poor stewardship at the races; there is too much ambiguity; it should be refer to rulebook, did the driver break the rule, YES or NO; if YES punishment is implemented, simple... but if you look up inconsistent in the dictionary, you'll see FIA stewards immediately under INCONSISTENT!

[Jensonb]

Forget Vettel at the start, Massa's been pulling this crap in both races of the season and gone completely unpunished for it. If you're going to make it a rule, enforce it absolutely. Otherwise it shouldn't be a rule.

Exactly; a rule is a rule; this has been my biggest annoyance with F1 in recent years; the poor stewardship at the races; there is too much ambiguity; it should be refer to rulebook, did the driver break the rule, YES or NO; if YES punishment is implemented, simple... but if you look up inconsistent in the dictionary, you'll see FIA stewards immediately under INCONSISTENT!

Indeed, it's not even listed as an example - it's one of the definitions

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

I find it amusing that you would hold the race stewards guilty for trying to protect the other racers from MSC's sportsmanship deficit.

[vlad]

They gave Hamilton a punishment this year, but last year, when he deserved one blocking Petrov on the straight, he just recieved a warning...