FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[darwin dali]

Here is the video Clicky to see

Speed commentators never really heard them before but from that id take it they are firm Ferrari sheep.... go get him Kimi

What a load of Ferrari-supporting w**kers.

Actually not the case. This was just an example - Steve Matchett does that with other drivers as well! He just gets very excited about passing in the rare cases it happens, so he wants to see it happen again and again, hence his firing on of drivers irrespective of the team.
This year actually the commentators turned very favorable to LH, praising him left and right, almost British Media-esque

[bud]

ill take your word for it then, we get ITV here in Oz

[TomZ]

I would rather see a real race, rather than a sham where random adherence to the regulations seems to be more important than providing a fair sporting spectacle for the viewers.

The regulations are quite clear, and it is up to the Race Director and Stewards to enforce them in such as way as to result in a fair sport. I could argue that Hamilton's penalty is unfair and contrary to regulations. Instead I would like to suggest that the FIA adopts a sporting and fair position by analysing the Spa race further and handing out several other retrospective penalties for offences that occurred in the last 5 laps of the race (as provided for by the regulations).

For example:

APPENDIX L TO THE INTERNATIONAL SPORTING CODE, Chapter 4, Art. 2, Overtaking, states (I've snipped and replaced non-relevant bits with ". . . "):
"c) . . . Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left.
However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as . . . deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve . . . are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race."
- So it would be fair to exclude or fine Raikkonen for deliberately pushing off Hamilton on the very bend that has caused the controversy. I call upon the Race Director to call for an investigation of this incident.

Also :
"g) The race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the race."
. . . so it would be fair to hand a penalty to Raikkonen when, during the dual between Raikonnen and Hamilton a short while before Hamilton's apparent breach of the regs, when Raikkonen and Hamilton both went off to the outside of the circuit, and Hamilton bumped over a kerb to rejoin the track and Raikonnen continued for some distance around the outside of the bend before rejoining the track further along thus gaining traction and speed off the track on dirt thus closing on Hamilton. I call upon the Race Director to call for an investigation of this incident.

I could go on and suggest many other infringements in this race and earlier ones that went unpunished - but perhaps it would be better if the Race Director simply let the race proceed fairly by not giving out penalties which appear to be one-sided and biased? I want to see real racing of the sort that we saw at Spa in the last few laps, and not over zealous implementation of the regs. I want to see the regs used as a tool for fairness and not as a way of apparently punishing the same team over and over again.

[scotty]

Right, apologies if these points have been made already, but 12 pages is a lot of reading.

For starters, anyone who has seen the replay of Hamilton's onboard camera can see he wasn't forced off the track per se, Raikkonen had the corner and Hamilton could, and should have yielded - he really could have easily made the corner without causing any collisions. However, that would most likely have dropped him back to a gap whereby he wouldn't have a chance going down to La Source. Instead he cut the corner, which, despite him coming off the power briefly, resulted in him being able to get right back into Raikkonen's tow - or at the very least getting a more effective tow by being closer to the Ferrari.

Facts: Cut the chicane and gained an advantage

So that's what he did, fair enough, but there were other incidents that have not been looked into, one is the alleged weaving going into La Source, the other being Raikkonen going off track later that lap. The 'weaving' is a tough one, and i can't remember the exact ruling so am not sure. Raikkonen appeared to be all over the place, from the tv camera shot, and on Hamilton's onboard camera you see him flick his wheel left before moving to the right... although that isn't illegal weaving, i think.

Offence: Breach of Article 30.3(a) of the 2008 FIA Formula 1 sporting regulations and Appendix L chapter 4 Article 2 (go) of the International Sporting Code.

Penalty: Drive-through penalty (Article 16.3 (a)), since this is being applied at the end of the race, 25 seconds will be added to the driver’s elapsed race time.

That is freaking retarded as hell, maybe 10 years ago it would've been 25 seconds in total for a stop-go penalty, but a drive through definately doesn't take that long, especially at Spa. The FIA are pretty incompetent really, this ruling is very outdated now and i'm surprised they didn't bother to update it to actually make it relevant and consistent to the length of time a drive through really takes. I hope this will be rectified to avoid another travesty like this. The punishment didn't fit the crime at all. It's all the more infuriating when you consider that Raikkonen 'gained an advantage' by going off track later - the 'facts' are the exact same under the FIA's interpretation, so why not the same conclusions?

Once again, the FIA are proving themselves to have questionable and inconsistent judgement - a half chance of helping Ferrari out seems to be all they need, and some people obviously don't care about the integrity of the sport. Monza '06 all over again, but with bigger consequences. Oh dear.

[al4x]

I'm not argueing anything gent's I'm dismayed at the FIA's decision as to how Lewis gained an advantage, I'm on your side.

We know you and appreciate it, but that still doesn't mean Hamilton had momentum; it's against the laws of physics!

Now I know alittle bit about physic's especially in a car so allow me to elaborate/explain myself alittle better. Hamilton only lifted and vered left to avoid a potential disaster and got right back on the accelerator while Kimi had to lift to make the final turn onto the straight That's just how I see it as Lewis had his car pointed straight already which possibly allowed him to get into 100% throttle sooner than Kimi.

Regardless it's all hogwash because Lewis did everything right and I'm very disheartened for him and the team.

i agree with you there completely,

[stonemonkey]

I'm not argueing anything gent's I'm dismayed at the FIA's decision as to how Lewis gained an advantage, I'm on your side.

We know you and appreciate it, but that still doesn't mean Hamilton had momentum; it's against the laws of physics!

Now I know alittle bit about physic's especially in a car so allow me to elaborate/explain myself alittle better. Hamilton only lifted and vered left to avoid a potential disaster and got right back on the accelerator while Kimi had to lift to make the final turn onto the straight That's just how I see it as Lewis had his car pointed straight already which possibly allowed him to get into 100% throttle sooner than Kimi.

Regardless it's all hogwash because Lewis did everything right and I'm very disheartened for him and the team.

Erm.... Kimi could go full throttle (or as close as traction would allow) as he exited the chicane, if Lewis hadn't held off Kimi would not have passed him, Lewis did hold off, Kimi got past and when Lewis tucked in behind he was then accelerating to match Kimis speed, all this talk of carrying momentum out of the cut corner to use in the pass at the hairpin is complete nonsense. Kimi or his Ferrari was struggling on the now wet track and that's what Lewis took advantage of and how he got past at the hairpin.

[headless]

To be honest I think the penalty was right.

[al4x]

with my above comment, i read te original comment wrong, i dont agree completely! whoops

[scotty]

Erm.... Kimi could go full throttle (or as close as traction would allow) as he exited the chicane, if Lewis hadn't held off Kimi would not have passed him, Lewis did hold off, Kimi got past and when Lewis tucked in behind he was then accelerating to match Kimis speed, all this talk of carrying momentum out of the cut corner to use in the pass at the hairpin is complete nonsense. Kimi or his Ferrari was struggling on the now wet track and that's what Lewis took advantage of and how he got past at the hairpin.

But the point is that he ended up much closer to Raikkonen than if he'd backed off and actually gone round the corner.

[al4x]

its not as clear cut as i first thought, i can see the reason it went for a decision,

if lh had not have attempted the overtake he would have been right on kr gear box and would surely have had him into the first crner so i dont think really think he got an advantage,

the only way i can see it being even considered a penalty is;
he made a mistake by not making the pass at the chicane [but there he may have been squeezed]
didnt get an advantage, but also it didnt cost him anything,
maybe the thinking is cause he made a mistake that didnt cost him anything he got the penalty, if you catch my drift,
but this has happened many times without penalty before

he wouldve been even closer to kimi had he not made any attempt at a pass at the chicane, he was slower over the line from letting him back through

setting a dangerous president that its better not to risk an on track overtake, bad!

[bud]

Erm.... Kimi could go full throttle (or as close as traction would allow) as he exited the chicane, if Lewis hadn't held off Kimi would not have passed him, Lewis did hold off, Kimi got past and when Lewis tucked in behind he was then accelerating to match Kimis speed, all this talk of carrying momentum out of the cut corner to use in the pass at the hairpin is complete nonsense. Kimi or his Ferrari was struggling on the now wet track and that's what Lewis took advantage of and how he got past at the hairpin.

But the point is that he ended up much closer to Raikkonen than if he'd backed off and actually gone round the corner.

NO he wouldnt have, Kimi went defensive and did not take the bus stop as he normally would in doing so costing him time, if Lewis had followed Kimi through the corner instead of trying the overtake he would have easily had the better exit speed because
A. he had the racing line, while kimi covered the inside!
B. His car was handling better in those conditions he would have passed him in at la course



im appalled that some of you actually agree with this i thought we are all racing fans here? feel ashamed of yourself as i am ashamed to follow such a sport which funnily always leads us to these kinds of debates

[al4x]

just to make it 100% clear, i can see why it went to a decision but dont agree with the result of the decision

[EwanM]

Here is the video Clicky to see

Speed commentators never really heard them before but from that id take it they are firm Ferrari sheep.... go get him Kimi

What a load of Ferrari-supporting w**kers.

Actually not the case. This was just an example - Steve Matchett does that with other drivers as well! He just gets very excited about passing in the rare cases it happens, so he wants to see it happen again and again, hence his firing on of drivers irrespective of the team.
This year actually the commentators turned very favorable to LH, praising him left and right, almost British Media-esque

I think this forum has gotten a bit too personal. There isn't any respect of views from either side of the argument. Instead its replaced with people offending other users, and vias versa.

[al4x]

looking at the vid a few more times, hamilton was just plain faster and didnt really use kr slipstream for more than a fraction of a second when he dived from outside to inside, and if indeed he was slower than kr over the line he was just plain faster down the hill

[stonemonkey]

Erm.... Kimi could go full throttle (or as close as traction would allow) as he exited the chicane, if Lewis hadn't held off Kimi would not have passed him, Lewis did hold off, Kimi got past and when Lewis tucked in behind he was then accelerating to match Kimis speed, all this talk of carrying momentum out of the cut corner to use in the pass at the hairpin is complete nonsense. Kimi or his Ferrari was struggling on the now wet track and that's what Lewis took advantage of and how he got past at the hairpin.

But the point is that he ended up much closer to Raikkonen than if he'd backed off and actually gone round the corner.

Tough call that, Lewis was getting much better traction at that point and could've been at Kimis gearbox halfway along the straight (at the point where he tucked in behind him anyway) but with a higher speed as opposed to matching his speed.

What I really mean is that it's impossible to say what could've been or what would've been.