FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[myownalias]

I have also seen lots of angles on the replays and in neither case was Hamilton alongside; he had his front wheels just inside Maldonado's rear wheels; It's not easy to pass in Monaco; the only real overtaking places is coming out of the tunnel and going into turn one. Maldonado was ahead and had the right to turn in to the apex; clearly that's the view the steward had!

It made no difference; the penalty is null and void as Hamilton was a lap ahead of everyone else behind, I wonder if there would have been a penalty if Hamilton would have lost an position?

Maybe the stewards need to lok at things differently. maybe the rules need changing/clarifying. Or maybe they just dont like real overtaking
You cant argue the case that Maldonado and Massa didnt know lewis was there, he was all over both of them like a rash, in the case of massa had been for several laps. So what, you know your about to be overtaken so you blindly turn in? I was watching some footage the other night-on the murry walker programme, senna and mansell going at it, swapping places, defending, it was fantastic. What about the Schumacher incident near the start. Why wasnt he punished for causing an 'avoidable accident' with Lewis? Im putting that out as a lack of consistency rathe than because I think Schumacher should be punished.

Rules are rules; the stewards are bound by them; they can't really look at the incident differently; don't forget that Di Resta was punished for doing the exact same thing at the hairpin; so in that respect the stewards were being consistent. How can you say that Massa and Maldonado saw Hamilton; we don't know that; only Massa and Maldonado can say that for sure. Yes, Lewis was swarming over the back of them but once Lewis pulls into the blind spot; Massa and Maldonado doesn't know where Hamilton is; he could have crashed; he could have been right behind, going by driving on the road I can not see another car when roughly in that position in my mirrors; I have to turn my head to see the car.

We can not compare today's racing with that of the early ninties, very different environment; today's racing is Health & Safety Formula 1, hence the penalties for dangerous driving, If any driver can not operate within the modern day rules then they need to look elsewhere to race, if Lewis continues driving like he has been, he will be penalised further, simple as that!

[texasmr2]

^^^^ What he said .

[vlad]

Well, we'll have 2 DRS zones this weekend... I think there will be enough overtaking and crashes to discuss...

[f1ea]

Yup.

its no big deal actually... its not that Lewis made a kamikaze move (a kamikaze move was what Schumacher did on Rubens, and the penalty was something else). Lewis simply tried a highly unlikely move that required the defender to yield, or himself to abort in order to avoid contact. In all other scenarios there would have been contact. The stewards seemingly agree they don't like these moves. Therefore = penalty. A simple penalty... no big deal.

[texasmr2]

Lewis is a racer through and through so I do not fault him one bit for the attemp but his penalty was justified. A simple racing incident imo and as F1ea said it was just a simple penalty and the season is still young so I honestly do not think it will effect Lewis's chase for the WDC.

[F1er]

Tex that's a bad arse gun you got there.

[texasmr2]

Tex that's a bad arse gun you got there.

lol

It's an old avatar but I love it.

[racechick]

I have also seen lots of angles on the replays and in neither case was Hamilton alongside; he had his front wheels just inside Maldonado's rear wheels; It's not easy to pass in Monaco; the only real overtaking places is coming out of the tunnel and going into turn one. Maldonado was ahead and had the right to turn in to the apex; clearly that's the view the steward had!

It made no difference; the penalty is null and void as Hamilton was a lap ahead of everyone else behind, I wonder if there would have been a penalty if Hamilton would have lost an position?

Maybe the stewards need to lok at things differently. maybe the rules need changing/clarifying. Or maybe they just dont like real overtaking
You cant argue the case that Maldonado and Massa didnt know lewis was there, he was all over both of them like a rash, in the case of massa had been for several laps. So what, you know your about to be overtaken so you blindly turn in? I was watching some footage the other night-on the murry walker programme, senna and mansell going at it, swapping places, defending, it was fantastic. What about the Schumacher incident near the start. Why wasnt he punished for causing an 'avoidable accident' with Lewis? Im putting that out as a lack of consistency rathe than because I think Schumacher should be punished.

Rules are rules; the stewards are bound by them; they can't really look at the incident differently; don't forget that Di Resta was punished for doing the exact same thing at the hairpin; so in that respect the stewards were being consistent. How can you say that Massa and Maldonado saw Hamilton; we don't know that; only Massa and Maldonado can say that for sure. Yes, Lewis was swarming over the back of them but once Lewis pulls into the blind spot; Massa and Maldonado doesn't know where Hamilton is; he could have crashed; he could have been right behind, going by driving on the road I can not see another car when roughly in that position in my mirrors; I have to turn my head to see the car.

We can not compare today's racing with that of the early ninties, very different environment; today's racing is Health & Safety Formula 1, hence the penalties for dangerous driving, If any driver can not operate within the modern day rules then they need to look elsewhere to race, if Lewis continues driving like he has been, he will be penalised further, simple as that!

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

[texasmr2]

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

Sorry but your outlook is totally biased because Lewis was penalized and the rest I won't even bother to comment on out of respect.

[racechick]

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

Sorry but your outlook is totally biased because Lewis was penalized and the rest I won't even bother to comment on out of respect.

Oh really? You have no idea why my outlook is what it is. Dont presume to know why i think as i do. Your presumption is incorrect.

[myownalias]

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

The point I am making is that Lewis' driving style doesn't suit modern F1; 20 years ago he would have fitted in just fine as that was the norm at the point in time. Today, that sort of uber aggressive driving is not tolerated; F1 is a non-contact sport these days, rules can be changed but don't expect them to change towards allowing for more aggressive (and seemingly dangerous) driving; if anything the powers that be will enforce the "causing an avoidable accident" rule more strictly. Don't get me wrong, I would rather see more wheel to wheel aggressive driving in F1 but that's not the climate we live in, the thing that bothers me is that Lewis seems to be completely unrepentant vowing to keep driving the way he does despite it being against what the sport has become. It really is health and safety Formula 1 these days. If Lewis keeps on clattering into other drivers trying to make an ambitious pass he will get penalised; he won't do himself any favours.

[racechick]

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

The point I am making is that Lewis' driving style doesn't suit modern F1; 20 years ago he would have fitted in just fine as that was the norm at the point in time. Today, that sort of uber aggressive driving is not tolerated; F1 is a non-contact sport these days, rules can be changed but don't expect them to change towards allowing for more aggressive (and seemingly dangerous) driving; if anything the powers that be will enforce the "causing an avoidable accident" rule more strictly. Don't get me wrong, I would rather see more wheel to wheel aggressive driving in F1 but that's not the climate we live in, the thing that bothers me is that Lewis seems to be completely unrepentant vowing to keep driving the way he does despite it being against what the sport has become. It really is health and safety Formula 1 these days. If Lewis keeps on clattering into other drivers trying to make an ambitious pass he will get penalised; he won't do himself any favours.

I know, and I think it's a sorry state of affairs and a real shame. It comes full circle to my first comment about the monaco GP. lewis is racing in the wrong era. This nanny state racing is not suited to him. But you know what I'm right with him on his vowing to keep racing as he does. Thats his decision to make. And I wouldn't be suprised if he walks away if this continues.

[Hammer278]

Yes rules are rules and rules can be changed, as they frequently are. Di Resta shouldn't have had a penalty either, then it would still have been consistent but cosistently in favour of overtaking rather than consistently in favour of playing follow the leader. Those moves were not deliberately dangerous. Schumacher driving barichelo into a wall was dangerous. Two very different manoevers. When you race at speed and engage in overtaking moves then there will be crashes. Racing is dangerous, it says so when you enter race tracks. What the stewards and the rules seem unable to distinguish is an attempt to overtake the car in front with a deliberately dangerous move purely to intimidate. Health and safety F1 motor racing! Now there's an oxymoron! lewis has been driving just fine and I hope he doesnt give in to the idiots and change.

The point I am making is that Lewis' driving style doesn't suit modern F1; 20 years ago he would have fitted in just fine as that was the norm at the point in time. Today, that sort of uber aggressive driving is not tolerated; F1 is a non-contact sport these days, rules can be changed but don't expect them to change towards allowing for more aggressive (and seemingly dangerous) driving; if anything the powers that be will enforce the "causing an avoidable accident" rule more strictly. Don't get me wrong, I would rather see more wheel to wheel aggressive driving in F1 but that's not the climate we live in, the thing that bothers me is that Lewis seems to be completely unrepentant vowing to keep driving the way he does despite it being against what the sport has become. It really is health and safety Formula 1 these days. If Lewis keeps on clattering into other drivers trying to make an ambitious pass he will get penalised; he won't do himself any favours.

I know, and I think it's a sorry state of affairs and a real shame. It comes full circle to my first comment about the monaco GP. lewis is racing in the wrong era. This nanny state racing is not suited to him. But you know what I'm right with him on his vowing to keep racing as he does. Thats his decision to make. And I wouldn't be suprised if he walks away if this continues.

This^, agree with both myownalias and racechick.

As safety as come in leaps and bounds, its just a shame the racing itself has been dumbed down when there's no reason for it to be..

[bud]

There is a fine line between a racing incident and causing an avoidable collision. Depends on the stewards of the meeting.

[What's Burning?]

There is a fine line between a racing incident and causing an avoidable collision. Depends on the stewards of the meeting.

...and whether or not Lewis is involved.