FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[bud]

Although the Magny-Cours stewards have insisted that their decision to hand Lewis Hamilton a race-wrecking drive-through penalty during the French GP was the result of a "clear" infringement, conspiracy theorists are bound to have noticed that Max Mosley's close associate, Alan Donnelly, was part of the decision-making process.

The penalty, which both Hamilton and McLaren, along with a number of neutral observers, deemed unjust, was the third the Englishman has endured this season and the second McLaren suffered over the weekend after Heikki Kovalainen was deducted five grid-places after being adjudged to have "hindered" Mark Webber.

While Ron Dennis' hint that McLaren, no friends of the discredited FIA President Mosley, felt they were being victimised was played down by his number two Martin Whitmarsh, it has emerged that Donnelly, Mosley's 'official representative' at grands prix and a consultant to the FIA, 'led' the stewards when they studied footage of the incident. In January, it was announced that retiring permanent steward Tony Scott-Andrews would not be replaced and his place would instead by filled by Donnelly acting as a 'administrator'.

There is, of course, no suggestion that Donnelly and the Magny-Cours stewards were anything but impartial when the judgement was made. As well as working for the FIA, Donnelly is the Executive Chairman of a Sovereign Strategy, a company that lists both the FIA and Formula One Management Ltd among its clients. It has previously boasted of working for Ferrari but has since removed the announcement from the client list on their website.

According to ITV, who supply coverage of F1 in Britain, the only footage of the Hamilton incident provided by the FOM TV host broadcast was an on-board shot from the Englishman's McLaren that apparently showed Hamilton past Vettel before he approached the Nurburgring chicane.

They claim that 'No exterior shot of the incident was offered', but cite the FIA reporting that 'its stewards, led by Max Mosley's number two Alan Donnelly, had access to the circuit's closed circuit TV cameras when making their decision'. The Times reports that the stewards adjudged Hamilton's offence to be "very clear".

It is unclear, however, why this footage has not been made available.

[Lem]

The penalty was extremely borderline. I'd have liked to have seen how it affected the next corner because Hamilton was 12th after he passed Vettel, yet was 10th at the second sector which is on the straight just after the corner that follows where he 'took' the chicane.

I like Vettel but Christ, that's hypocracy at it's finest.

[EwanM]

Although the Magny-Cours stewards have insisted that their decision to hand Lewis Hamilton a race-wrecking drive-through penalty during the French GP was the result of a "clear" infringement, conspiracy theorists are bound to have noticed that Max Mosley's close associate, Alan Donnelly, was part of the decision-making process.

The penalty, which both Hamilton and McLaren, along with a number of neutral observers, deemed unjust, was the third the Englishman has endured this season and the second McLaren suffered over the weekend after Heikki Kovalainen was deducted five grid-places after being adjudged to have "hindered" Mark Webber.

While Ron Dennis' hint that McLaren, no friends of the discredited FIA President Mosley, felt they were being victimised was played down by his number two Martin Whitmarsh, it has emerged that Donnelly, Mosley's 'official representative' at grands prix and a consultant to the FIA, 'led' the stewards when they studied footage of the incident. In January, it was announced that retiring permanent steward Tony Scott-Andrews would not be replaced and his place would instead by filled by Donnelly acting as a 'administrator'.

There is, of course, no suggestion that Donnelly and the Magny-Cours stewards were anything but impartial when the judgement was made. As well as working for the FIA, Donnelly is the Executive Chairman of a Sovereign Strategy, a company that lists both the FIA and Formula One Management Ltd among its clients. It has previously boasted of working for Ferrari but has since removed the announcement from the client list on their website.

According to ITV, who supply coverage of F1 in Britain, the only footage of the Hamilton incident provided by the FOM TV host broadcast was an on-board shot from the Englishman's McLaren that apparently showed Hamilton past Vettel before he approached the Nurburgring chicane.

They claim that 'No exterior shot of the incident was offered', but cite the FIA reporting that 'its stewards, led by Max Mosley's number two Alan Donnelly, had access to the circuit's closed circuit TV cameras when making their decision'. The Times reports that the stewards adjudged Hamilton's offence to be "very clear".

It is unclear, however, why this footage has not been made available.

It's the same story with the footage of Senna, these things either don't exist, or are withheld
Conspiracy theory... I don't think so.

[McLaren Fan]

Although you need exterior shot of the incident to be certain, Hamilton did look to be well past Vettel, for he was able to turn into the first part of the chicane pretty early. With Vettel close by, there is no way Hamilton could've done that.

[EwanM]

Although you need exterior shot of the incident to be certain, Hamilton did look to be well past Vettel, for he was able to turn into the first part of the chicane pretty early. With Vettel close by, there is no way Hamilton could've done that.

He took too much speed into the corner and couldn't turn in, tbh I don't think there was anything wrong with doing it, if it avoided a racing incident.
Would probs have been different if it had happened well into the race.

[bud]

I dont think he took too much speed as i see it he was squeezed out by Vettel like i said earlier you dont see where vettel is from the onboard but you can see that Hamilton does turn in but aborts as to not collide with Vettel. this coincides with what Hamilton claimed to happen. but hey he could have turned in and hit Vettel and been penalized for causing an avoidable accident either way he was screwed

and i would really like to see an exterior shot i think it would change a few peoples minds. probably why its not been shown oooo conspiracy

[RedStable]

Have you re-played the part of the race or seen this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24c2GVlP2Ck

It is strange Brundle almost said "completed the pass and kept his position by cutting the chicene" but he stopped at "completed the pass and kept his position by..." and started saying "I do not know, that's a tough call..."

I am not saying this because I am a Ferrari fan, but I think Hamilton did gain an advantage over Vettel by cutting the chicane.

BTW, hello, I am a new member who has been lurking for a while. Thought I chime in an point out this video.

[Mikep99]

Have you re-played the part of the race or seen this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24c2GVlP2Ck

It is strange Brundle almost said "completed the pass and kept his position by cutting the chicene" but he stopped at "completed the pass and kept his position by..." and started saying "I do not know, that's a tough call..."

I am not saying this because I am a Ferrari fan, but I think Hamilton did gain an advantage over Vettel by cutting the chicane.

BTW, hello, I am a new member who has been lurking for a while. Thought I chime in an point out this video.

Looks clear cut to me. Penalty deserved
No way in hell hammy would have made that stick without cutting the chicane.

[stonemonkey]

When I first heard his explanation I wasn't really believing it but after seeing that clip I'm not so sure, I'm not arguing with the penalty although I think there's been times when other drivers have got away with similar or more.

At this point he's off the racing line which'll give him less grip, moments later he turns sharply to the left which he'd do if the rear started sliding out:



If he hadn't lost rear grip would he have been able to keep the right hand wheels on the right side of the line?

[Jensonb]

Vettel is perfectly right. He had the racing line. So Hamilton carried more speed in to try and get around the outside. In order to do that, he had to either lose the car or cheat the chicane to complete the move. He cheated the chicane to complete a pass, an illegal move, penalty. Doesn't matter that he was avoiding a collision or whatever because he shouldn't have been in that position. It was his own arrogance that told him he could get around there at substantially increased speed, so whether he was deliberately cheating or just did so to keep the car in the race is irrelevant.

And let's face it, there's nothing admirable about cheating to cover your own mistake and not make it worse by crashing.

[racechick]

Vettel is perfectly right. He had the racing line. So Hamilton carried more speed in to try and get around the outside. In order to do that, he had to either lose the car or cheat the chicane to complete the move. He cheated the chicane to complete a pass, an illegal move, penalty. Doesn't matter that he was avoiding a collision or whatever because he shouldn't have been in that position. It was his own arrogance that told him he could get around there at substantially increased speed, so whether he was deliberately cheating or just did so to keep the car in the race is irrelevant.

And let's face it, there's nothing admirable about cheating to cover your own mistake and not make it worse by crashing.

[Jensonb]

Vettel is perfectly right. He had the racing line. So Hamilton carried more speed in to try and get around the outside. In order to do that, he had to either lose the car or cheat the chicane to complete the move. He cheated the chicane to complete a pass, an illegal move, penalty. Doesn't matter that he was avoiding a collision or whatever because he shouldn't have been in that position. It was his own arrogance that told him he could get around there at substantially increased speed, so whether he was deliberately cheating or just did so to keep the car in the race is irrelevant.

And let's face it, there's nothing admirable about cheating to cover your own mistake and not make it worse by crashing.

Meanie!

Oh, wait, you're just flipping me off because you don't have a response.

[darwin dali]

Vettel is perfectly right. He had the racing line. So Hamilton carried more speed in to try and get around the outside. In order to do that, he had to either lose the car or cheat the chicane to complete the move. He cheated the chicane to complete a pass, an illegal move, penalty. Doesn't matter that he was avoiding a collision or whatever because he shouldn't have been in that position. It was his own arrogance that told him he could get around there at substantially increased speed, so whether he was deliberately cheating or just did so to keep the car in the race is irrelevant.

And let's face it, there's nothing admirable about cheating to cover your own mistake and not make it worse by crashing.

Meanie!

Oh, wait, you're just flipping me off because you don't have a response.

[deMuRe]

Vettel is perfectly right. He had the racing line. So Hamilton carried more speed in to try and get around the outside. In order to do that, he had to either lose the car or cheat the chicane to complete the move. He cheated the chicane to complete a pass, an illegal move, penalty. Doesn't matter that he was avoiding a collision or whatever because he shouldn't have been in that position. It was his own arrogance that told him he could get around there at substantially increased speed, so whether he was deliberately cheating or just did so to keep the car in the race is irrelevant.

And let's face it, there's nothing admirable about cheating to cover your own mistake and not make it worse by crashing.

Meanie!

Oh, wait, you're just flipping me off because you don't have a response.