Go to Ultimatecarpage.com

Go Back   Ultimatecarpage.com forums > Automotive forums > Racing forums


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 09-08-2008, 11:30 PM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,306
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinspark View Post
By the rules I suppose Heidfeld should also be penalised for overtaking under yellows, but were those yellows out only because of the rain? If so, I find it somewhat stupid when there's cars out on wet tyres.
there was at least a yellow at the location of Kimi's crash. I am not aware of any other spots, but probably people were spinning off (and getting on again) in a number of places, causing very short periods of yellow there.
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 09-09-2008, 12:22 AM
Kitdy's Avatar
Kitdy Kitdy is offline
Furniture
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by fpv_gtho View Post
I dont recall the specifics myself, but ive read others bring up Suzuka 2005 where Alonso made a botched pass on Klien, gave it back and re-overtook him, just for the FIA to order him to give it back again.

Theres almost a precedent set there, and had it been lap 20 instead of the 2nd last or whichever it had been, the FIA wouldve had the means to re-adress the issue without the need for a penalty.
I suppose they still made in error in not telling Lewis to let Kimi past immediately.

Of note, here's the offence:

Quote:
Breach of article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and Appendix L chapter 4 article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code.
Here is article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations:

Quote:
During practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe the
provisions of the Code relating to driving behaviour on circuits.
Here is article 2 (g) of Appendix L chapter 4 of the International Sporting Code:

Quote:
The race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the
race.
I don't see anything at all mentioned about the corner cutting.

Here's the links for proof:

2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations

International Sporting Code

Belgium GP Stewards Decision
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 09-09-2008, 01:45 AM
Badsight Badsight is offline
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 436
N.Z.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Bauer View Post
By that point LH had no choice but to cut the chicane.
thats not even true for online racing wreckers

he could have lifted & let the lead car go thru its line without LH wrecking them both

& if he did stay on the track by lifting & slotting in behind the LEAD CAR , then he wouldnt have been in an attack position at the following corner

he backed off just enough to be on kimi's date at the next brake point

a deserved penalty for Lewis Hamilton
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 09-09-2008, 05:00 AM
motorsportnerd's Avatar
motorsportnerd motorsportnerd is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,759
Haberfield, Sydney
Send a message via MSN to motorsportnerd Send a message via Yahoo to motorsportnerd
So, if 25 seconds is a deserved penalty for missing a section of the track, can someone tell me why Rosberg wasn't penalised? Or was it just because there was no perceived advantaged gained by Rosberg?
And going back to Valencia, why were Ferrari and Massa only fined for an unsafe release into the pit lane? That was clearly a breach of the rules as well. Why no 25 second penalty there?
I still say Lewis' win should have stood. The penalty should have been the same as that faced by Ferrari and Massa for the Valencia incident. A fine and a warning.
__________________
UCP's biggest Ford Sierra RS500 and BMW M3 E30 fan. My two favourite cars of all time.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 09-09-2008, 05:27 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,306
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by motorsportnerd View Post
So, if 25 seconds is a deserved penalty for missing a section of the track, can someone tell me why Rosberg wasn't penalised? Or was it just because there was no perceived advantaged gained by Rosberg?
And going back to Valencia, why were Ferrari and Massa only fined for an unsafe release into the pit lane? That was clearly a breach of the rules as well. Why no 25 second penalty there?
I still say Lewis' win should have stood. The penalty should have been the same as that faced by Ferrari and Massa for the Valencia incident. A fine and a warning.
The normal punishment for the "infringement" committed by Hamilton would have been a drive through. According to the rules when such an infringement takes place during the last five laps, a 25 second time penalty will be issued. (Apparently this was introduced when M. Schumacher once finished (and won) a race by doing his drive through during the final lap, taking the flag in the pitlane). So only during the 5 final laps the 25 seconds is the standard penalty. The case of Rosberg seems to be that he did not gain any direct advantage vis-a-vis somebody he was chasing. It was a stand-alone action. You see "missing" the chicane happening many times during races, and only rarely or not all will that be followed by a drive through.
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams

Last edited by henk4; 09-09-2008 at 05:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 09-09-2008, 06:28 AM
twinspark twinspark is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 817
Tampere
Quote:
Originally Posted by motorsportnerd View Post
And going back to Valencia, why were Ferrari and Massa only fined for an unsafe release into the pit lane? That was clearly a breach of the rules as well. Why no 25 second penalty there?
I think Massa might have faced a penalty in Valencia, if he hadn't given up on the pit lane. Also I don't think they were even close to crashing, Massa seemed to be well aware of Sutil coming from behind. There's no comparison there.

What the pit lane incident made me think though, is now that Ferrari has the light system operated by the crew member operating the fuel hose (if I remember correct) instead of a lollipop man, is there anyone observing the traffic on the pit lane, who can override the green light if necessary?
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 09-09-2008, 06:36 AM
motorsportnerd's Avatar
motorsportnerd motorsportnerd is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,759
Haberfield, Sydney
Send a message via MSN to motorsportnerd Send a message via Yahoo to motorsportnerd
I actually think the penalty applied to Massa and Ferrari at Valencia was the correct one.
I think the same penalty should have applied to Lewis at Spa - a fine and warning.
Another option would have been for Charlie Whiting to advise McLaren that Lewis had to let Kimi back past properly after Eau Rouge and start again (as Alonso was required to do back in the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix).
What I do hope is that a. the rules regarding giving a place back after missing a chicane (ie: lifting and slotting in behind is not necessarily enough if you end up in the slipstream) and b. the rules regarding when a new attempt at overtaking is allowed are clarified.
Also, I'd prefer to see the rules applied more consistently. Controversy like this doesn't help F1's reputation.
From my point of view, I was looking forward to a Massa-Lewis showdown for the title with perhaps Kubica as a spoiler. My gut feeling is that Massa would win the title anyway (esp if Kimi helps him), and that is starting to look more certain now. Strangely, I don't see a McLaren driver winning the title in the near future.
__________________
UCP's biggest Ford Sierra RS500 and BMW M3 E30 fan. My two favourite cars of all time.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 09-09-2008, 10:59 AM
Jack_Bauer's Avatar
Jack_Bauer Jack_Bauer is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,161
UK
Send a message via MSN to Jack_Bauer
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinspark View Post
I'm sure it's allowed to run wide to avoid hitting another car when there's no other options. Sure, Räikkönen ran wide again after Hamilton's pass, but he gained nothing because of it.
I have to disagree there. Tarmac run-off areas provide plenty of grip and running wide definitely gives you an advantage. People have said that Lewis could have backed off/braked to avoid leaving the circuit at the chicane. The exact same thing could be said for Raikkonen when he ran wide at La Source (twice) and at Pouhon. He could have backed off to make sure he stayed on the circuit but didn't, and he certainly didn't ease off on the straight to undo any advantage he gained by running wide.

Therein lies the problem with tarmac run-off areas. With gravel traps a driver would always do anything possible to avoid running wide as they invariably ruin your race. With tarmac run-offs drivers aren't really that bothered about running too wide because there's no major downside.

Quote:
Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
The normal punishment for the "infringement" committed by Hamilton would have been a drive through. According to the rules when such an infringement takes place during the last five laps, a 25 second time penalty will be issued. (Apparently this was introduced when M. Schumacher once finished (and won) a race by doing his drive through during the final lap, taking the flag in the pitlane). So only during the 5 final laps the 25 seconds is the standard penalty. The case of Rosberg seems to be that he did not gain any direct advantage vis-a-vis somebody he was chasing. It was a stand-alone action. You see "missing" the chicane happening many times during races, and only rarely or not all will that be followed by a drive through.
I think what MSN was referring to is the fact that the normal punishment for "unsafe release" is a 10 second stop-and-go penalty (a penalty which in practice would be more like a 35-second post race penalty). But the stewards were lenient and gave him just a monetary fine, which in the grand scheme of things meant absolutely nothing.

It's all a question of consistency. Being lenient and not applying a full penalty to someone one race (which I thought was the correct decision by the way), and then being harsh and applying the full letter of the law to another driver the next race simply will not do. It needs to be as consistent and level a playing field as possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by twinspark
I think Massa might have faced a penalty in Valencia, if he hadn't given up on the pit lane. Also I don't think they were even close to crashing, Massa seemed to be well aware of Sutil coming from behind. There's no comparison there.
They were extremely close to crashing. The point is that for safety reasons the pitlane needs to be strictly single file. If for example that had occured further back in the pitlane there could easily have been another team's pitcrew in front of Massa. He was released far to early and would likely not have been able to avoid hitting someone.

It was definitely an unsafe release, but as I said earlier I think the stewards made the right choice in applying a light penalty.
__________________
uәʞoɹq spɹɐoqʎәʞ ʎɯ
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 09-09-2008, 12:51 PM
twinspark twinspark is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 817
Tampere
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Bauer View Post
I have to disagree there. Tarmac run-off areas provide plenty of grip and running wide definitely gives you an advantage. People have said that Lewis could have backed off/braked to avoid leaving the circuit at the chicane. The exact same thing could be said for Raikkonen when he ran wide at La Source (twice) and at Pouhon. He could have backed off to make sure he stayed on the circuit but didn't, and he certainly didn't ease off on the straight to undo any advantage he gained by running wide.

Therein lies the problem with tarmac run-off areas. With gravel traps a driver would always do anything possible to avoid running wide as they invariably ruin your race. With tarmac run-offs drivers aren't really that bothered about running too wide because there's no major downside.
I admit, I was a bit hasty saying he gained nothing. But I still can't consider it the same as cutting a chicane. Kimi didn't end up in front of Lewis either, thus there was no position to even consider giving back to him.

I totally agree with you on the tarmac run-off area issue, it should be clear that the fastest way around a curve is between the white lines. If they start giving penalties for running wide, especially in wet conditions, it just gets out of hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Bauer View Post
They were extremely close to crashing. The point is that for safety reasons the pitlane needs to be strictly single file. If for example that had occured further back in the pitlane there could easily have been another team's pitcrew in front of Massa. He was released far to early and would likely not have been able to avoid hitting someone.

It was definitely an unsafe release, but as I said earlier I think the stewards made the right choice in applying a light penalty.
Looking at the onboard footage from Massa's car, I didn't see him making any quick corrections with steering, nor heavy braking. To me he just seemed to calmly slot next to Sutil. Sure, had they been further back on the pit lane, there might have been other teams' crew on his way and that might have gotten ugly. So I think it was right not to penalise Massa at all, but Ferrari for sending him off unsafely. I would have been happy with a tougher penalty than a fine and a warning, but I don't know if they're able to remove team points or something like that.


Either way, the reason I think these two situations shouldn't be compared, or called for equal penalties for all, is that one was an intentional battle on positions, the other a mistake by whoever released Massa from the pits, albeit it was potentially more dangerous. So I don't see why they should have similar penalties.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 09-09-2008, 02:29 PM
Kitdy's Avatar
Kitdy Kitdy is offline
Furniture
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
The normal punishment for the "infringement" committed by Hamilton would have been a drive through. According to the rules when such an infringement takes place during the last five laps, a 25 second time penalty will be issued. (Apparently this was introduced when M. Schumacher once finished (and won) a race by doing his drive through during the final lap, taking the flag in the pitlane). So only during the 5 final laps the 25 seconds is the standard penalty. The case of Rosberg seems to be that he did not gain any direct advantage vis-a-vis somebody he was chasing. It was a stand-alone action. You see "missing" the chicane happening many times during races, and only rarely or not all will that be followed by a drive through.
Well, the rules frankly aren't clear on this (see my post above), and I've heard people reference situations where a driver was told to cede the position (Alonso) and others where the driver was not forced to give back the position (Schumacher).

I disagree with your statement that the normal penalty for this infringement would be a 25 second penalty as it is usually just giving back the place.

Finally, isn't it strange that if the stewards had made their mind up fast enough before Kimi crashed and the race ended that in all likelihood (if things were fair) that the penalty on Lewis would have been just to let Kimi past?

Instead, the decision took too long (the fault of the stewards potentially) and Lewis received a penalty that was larger than the precedents have been set.

Then again, I don't see it written in the rules anywhere that if you go off the track and get an advantage you will not get a penalty if you let the person you passed infront again, so maybe this is all based on unwritten rules.

Anyways, does the fact that the stewards decision taking so long ended up costing Lewis the race bother anyone else? I mean, in other situations, the decision to let the person by is made very quickly after the event, this time it took ages.

Is my argument illogical or does it make a lot of sense?
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 09-09-2008, 05:17 PM
f6fhellcat13's Avatar
f6fhellcat13 f6fhellcat13 is offline
Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,159
└A & Connecticlump
Send a message via AIM to f6fhellcat13 Send a message via MSN to f6fhellcat13
Makes perfect sense.
I was also wondering if we are basing our assumptions on false, or not wholly true, reportings of segments of the rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitdy
Well, the rules frankly aren't clear on this (see my post above), and I've heard people reference situations where a driver was told to cede the position (Alonso) and others where the driver was not forced to give back the position (Schumacher).
Not to be a conspriracy theorist, but, what make of car did Schumacher drive for most of his F1 career?
__________________
"Kimi, can you improve on your [race] finish?"
"No. My Finnish is fine; I am from Finland. Do you have any water?"
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 09-09-2008, 05:21 PM
f6fhellcat13's Avatar
f6fhellcat13 f6fhellcat13 is offline
Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,159
└A & Connecticlump
Send a message via AIM to f6fhellcat13 Send a message via MSN to f6fhellcat13
Sorry, Jack. I know this is your job. But...
Quote:
Originally Posted by F1.com - The Official Formula One Website
09 Sep 2008
McLaren lodge Belgian Grand Prix appeal
McLaren confirmed on Tuesday that they have lodged an appeal against the penalty handed to driver Lewis Hamilton following Sunday’s Belgian Grand Prix. Hamilton was given a 25-second time penalty by race stewards at Spa-Francorchamps, after they decided he had gained an advantage by cutting a chicane during his late battle with Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen.

"Following our decision to register our intention to appeal the penalty handed out to Lewis Hamilton by the FIA Stewards at the 2008 Belgian Grand Prix, we hereby confirm that we have now lodged notice of appeal,” explained McLaren’s Formula One CEO Martin Whitmarsh in a statement released by the British squad.

As a result of the time penalty, Ferrari’s Felipe Massa was declared the winner of the Belgian race, while Hamilton was dropped to third place.

McLaren’s statement in full:
Martin Whitmarsh said: "Following our decision to register our intention to appeal the penalty handed out to Lewis Hamilton by the FIA Stewards at the 2008 Belgian Grand Prix, we hereby confirm that we have now lodged notice of appeal. Lewis describes the incident as follows."

Lewis Hamilton said: "In the closing stages of the race I was catching Kimi (Raikkonen) consistently, lap by lap, and with three laps remaining I got close enough to attempt to overtake him on the entry to the last chicane. I managed to get slightly ahead of him in the braking area for the first apex of the chicane. He fought back approaching the second apex - but, in doing so, he left no room for me on the inside line. The only way for me to avoid a collision was therefore to cut inside the second apex.

"I came out of the second apex in front of Kimi and so I momentarily lifted-off on the straight, to ensure that Kimi got back in front. The team also came on the radio and instructed me to allow Kimi to repass, which I had already done. As a result, Kimi crossed the start/finish line ahead of me and 6.7km/h quicker than me.

"After allowing Kimi to completely repass, I crossed from the left side of the track to the right side of the track, passing behind Kimi in the process. I then attacked Kimi on the inside of the first corner, and successfully outbraked him."

Martin Whitmarsh added: "From the pit wall, we then asked Race Control to confirm that they were comfortable that Lewis had allowed Kimi to repass, and they confirmed twice that they believed that the position had been given back in a manner that was 'okay'.

"If Race Control had instead expressed any concern regarding Lewis’s actions at that time, we would have instructed Lewis to allow Kimi to repass for a second time."
__________________
"Kimi, can you improve on your [race] finish?"
"No. My Finnish is fine; I am from Finland. Do you have any water?"
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 09-09-2008, 05:46 PM
ringle ringle is offline
Rookie
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 224
town
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badsight View Post
good job on losing the win

what do you do when your overtake manouver didnt put you in the lead ?

you cut across the track & hardly slow so that your right on the person at the coming brake point


.



face it , he would have had to back off & slot in behind the leading car to stay on the track , & he didnt want too so kept the throttle nailed as he cut across ahread

kimi was the lead car following his line in his corner

at no point was Hamilton in control of the line going in , it was all kimi's . lewis just didnt want to back off enough for the corner = desperation

Having watched it I fully agree that Lewis cut the corner to gain an advantage or more correctly so as to lose less time than getting immediately back behind Kimi. That first corner he cut definitely gave him a advantage down the straight even after falling in behind Kimi. Perhaps even more so as he then got a fantatic draft that he never would have been able to get following Kimi around the track corners.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 09-09-2008, 07:39 PM
Zytek_Fan's Avatar
Zytek_Fan Zytek_Fan is offline
Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,369
Idaho
YouTube - Hamilton Raikkonen Spa 2008 onboard camera
YouTube - Lewis Hamilton Kimi Raikkonen Spa 2008 Battle Belgian controversy

Kimi did pretty much yield the position with a bad defensive move...
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 09-09-2008, 07:46 PM
fpv_gtho fpv_gtho is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 20,953
St Marys Western Sydney
Send a message via MSN to fpv_gtho
Hows this for an idea: The current system at the end of the race seems to be no performance penalty, or straight to a 25s penalty. Why not just break that down to smaller time penalties so its less controversy involved whenever one is handed out. Maybe Massa and Hamilton were more deserving of only 10s penalties, rather than getting off easy or getting the full 25s.
__________________
I am the Stig
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
belgium, controversy, eau rouge, ferrari, formula 1, formula one, lewis hamilton, lolocaust, mclaren, penalty, skill, spa, talent


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Renault (F1-2008) R28 Sledgehammer Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out 14 08-20-2008 04:31 PM
2008 Formula One Monaco Grand Prix Jack_Bauer Racing forums 64 06-21-2008 08:02 AM
Planned 2008 Superleague Formula with 750 hp V-12s togos452 Racing forums 2 05-08-2008 12:08 PM
2008 NASCAR Sprint Cup Schedule DanicaFan Racing forums 0 12-31-2007 05:06 AM
2008 Formula 1 Technical Regulations Jack_Bauer Racing forums 7 12-22-2005 02:32 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:17 AM.

 

© 1998 - 2018 Ultimatecarpage.com