FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[peacehats]

P.s. I agree with Capdude and Mudd. In fact, if Lewis' driving was just a mistake that's fair enough, an apology/admission would be nice though.

Lewis have nothing to apology for. I personally don't believe anyone to blame. In my opinion mark was far to close to Lewis car. Lewis was backing away from the SC. Mark should have been 5 car length away from Lewis car something webber conveniently forgotten.

Vettel 2
Lewis 0

Condition raining heavily, Mark to close to Lewis car the rule books say in these condition the car behind the leader should have been 5 car Length away from the leader of the race Mark Webber, was no where near 5 Length.

[Ruby]

It's possible, but I find it odd that he backed way over 5 car lengths away from the SC and on the outside line which no-one else took.

[peacehats]

How stupid is mark, can you imagaine this was done on a normal street.

The police approach your car and you explain to the police officer the person that hit me in the back of my car wasn't in the wrong but the man that never touch my car IS TO BLAME.

Also Lewis radio to his team to ask Mark team to tell mark he far to close I heard Lewis saying this before the accident. Mark know HE is the wrong.

[Lewisfan]

P.s. I agree with Capdude and Mudd. In fact, if Lewis' driving was just a mistake that's fair enough, an apology/admission would be nice though.

Lewis have nothing to apology for. I personally don't believe anyone to blame. In my opinion mark was far to close to Lewis car. Lewis was backing away from the SC. Mark should have been 5 car length away from Lewis car something webber conveniently forgotten.

Vettel 2
Lewis 0

Condition raining heavily, Mark to close to Lewis car the rule books say in these condition the car behind the leader should have been 5 car Length away from the leader of the race Mark Webber, was no where near 5 Length.

I agree totally

[Ruby]

P.s. I agree with Capdude and Mudd. In fact, if Lewis' driving was just a mistake that's fair enough, an apology/admission would be nice though.

Lewis have nothing to apology for. I personally don't believe anyone to blame. In my opinion mark was far to close to Lewis car. Lewis was backing away from the SC. Mark should have been 5 car length away from Lewis car something webber conveniently forgotten.

Vettel 2
Lewis 0

Condition raining heavily, Mark to close to Lewis car the rule books say in these condition the car behind the leader should have been 5 car Length away from the leader of the race Mark Webber, was no where near 5 Length.

I agree totally

Thanks for clarifying.

[McLaren Fan]

P.s. I agree with Capdude and Mudd. In fact, if Lewis' driving was just a mistake that's fair enough, an apology/admission would be nice though.

Lewis have nothing to apology for. I personally don't believe anyone to blame. In my opinion mark was far to close to Lewis car. Lewis was backing away from the SC. Mark should have been 5 car length away from Lewis car something webber conveniently forgotten.

Vettel 2
Lewis 0

Condition raining heavily, Mark to close to Lewis car the rule books say in these condition the car behind the leader should have been 5 car Length away from the leader of the race Mark Webber, was no where near 5 Length.

I agree. From the TV it looked like Hamilton ran wide (due to wet conditions?) and got too close to the safety car. Webber then braked to avoid overtaking him and, finally, Vettel ran into the back of Webber. A racing incident, as I think the footage proves. This is a move by the FIA to have an exciting, title decider in Brazil.

[certom]

don't know if this video has been already posted.. http://sport.alice.it/it/cmc/motori/200 ... spostr2a_6

[Ruby]

Every time I watch that I am more and more convinced that Hamilton is at fault. He just stops following the safety car for a full 6/7 seconds and just drifts off course!! What idiot slows down like that when they know people are behind and can't overtake?? Webber obviously had to brake quickly and that's why Vettel ran up the back of him. Bad, irresponsible driving !

[ArtHowe]

Hamilton was on the other side of the track, probably because he was in danger of becoming the filling for a Webber/ Safety car sandwich. The track is the track and a driver is perfectly entitled to be on any part of the track he chooses, as long it is not a part of the track that happens to occupied by another driver at the time... ergo, it was ultimately Vettle's fault. Get over it . Lewis could not possibly be "off course" as long as he was on the track, which defines the limits of the "courses" a driver is entitled to take.

[ArtHowe]

For example Ruby... if a driver were to attempt to deliberately drive through the spectators, he would technically be "off course", "off track" and " out to lunch". If a driver shortcuts a chicane, he is "off course" and "off track". If a driver takes advantage of the "course" options provided by a "track", he is neither "off course" nor "off track". I hope some of this is permeating!

[TheDarkSide10]

U know I thought it was "drove " like a rookie, not driven. Also "Webber know he wrong"? eh? You sound like a child peacehat, probably cos u are. The person who didn't hit him was at fault for DANGEROURS DRIVING, much the same way if on a mottorway there is a drunk who finds it funny to suddenly brake, then the guy behind has to sundenly brake and the guy behind him crashes into him, of course its not the guy behinds fault or the guy behind him, its the drunk. Too use your analogy.

[Ruby]

For example Ruby... if a driver were to attempt to deliberately drive through the spectators, he would technically be "off course", "off track" and " out to lunch". If a driver shortcuts a chicane, he is "off course" and "off track". If a driver takes advantage of the "course" options provided by a "track", he is neither "off course" nor "off track". I hope some of this is permeating!

It's permeating fine thanks, but why slow down so much??? I don't understand why he did that. He was at an absolute crawl. Which in turn meant he went over 5 car lengths behind the safety car. I'm not saying he did it deliberately, just thought it was a bit odd to do what he did.

[ArtHowe]

I see it still hasn't percolated into the parts that are hard to reach. Hamilton took the longest possible "course" around that particular corner of the "track" because:
A) He was in danger from Webber driving too close to him under the prevailing atrocious conditions. B) Because by doing so, he could distance himself from the safety car, which he was in danger of overtaking, without the necessity of braking. If Webber had followed Hamilton, or at least taken a different line around the corner than the safety car, which took the shortest possible route, then he would not have had a problem when he braked. Unfortunately for Webber, Vettle was in the process of having an orgasm because the poor lad thought that Hamilton was out of the race and just wasn't watching where he was going, which was into the back of the braking Webber. "Quelle catastrophe!" as the frogs say. "Tough ti*ties" as the Brits say. "Hamilton cheated!" as the Spaniards and Italians say. "I don't think so" as the FIA say.

Someone else on this forum eloquently summed up the situation in words to the effect of "This must be the first time that a leading driver has faced being penalised for driving too close to the car behind him." That was certainly "Thought of the Week" and summed up the situation perfectly.

[Stephen]

Thinking about this some more, Webber would do well to remember the utter idiocy of Spa 2004 and his subsequent apology!

[racechick]

Thinking about this some more, Webber would do well to remember the utter idiocy of Spa 2004 and his subsequent apology!

I used to like Webber, still think he's a good driver! However he has now joined the 'mardies' (northern word which perfectly describes Alonso's recent behaviour- sulky and petulant) Shame. Thought he was a down to earth guy. Ah well guess he's blown any outside chance he had of the second McLaren seat.