And there's nothing really wrong with that to be honest. Though I'd usually by instinct line up to puncture a myth, I'm really loving the fact the people are getting passionate about F1; the series has been somewhat bloodless in recent years...
But for my tuppence worth... shit, I wouldn't have liked to call that judgement: technically I think it was correct, but it was so borderline. Lewis yielded the position only to crowd Kimi's line into La Source.
If Kimi had been a bit more positive about moving into position, instead of flapping about the track like an electrocuted reindeer, then there would have been no problem.
If Lewis had been a little cooler and waited to pass Kimi after La Source then there would have been no problem.
Technically Lewis was left carrying a penalty. But is 'crowding' a line, the same as blocking it? And since Kimi stuffed it into the wall later on, isn't it all a bit academic? After all, no other cars were involved in the incident and a 25 second penalty merely gives advantage to those cars behind the incident.
Frankly, Lewis Hamilton won the race, no doubt in my mind, but something was necessary to recognise the (borderline) technical infringement. Twenty-five seconds however, just makes no sense. The FIA screws around with the rules so much, even as a follower of the sport I have no idea if there is such a thing as discretion. If there is, I would have used it and clearly articulated why.
TBH i dont think Hamilton gained an advantage from cutting he avoided contact, gave the position back then passed Kimi before T1.
Honestly thats what i saw, and thats my oppinion.
No replays, no caps, the impression I got while watching live - Hamilton was very reluctant to give the position back and in my opinion did not do it properly.
The replays and caps that people posted only confirmed my initial reaction.
Overall, a technically good decision, but very bad for the sport itself.
Unexpectedly Kimi did not keep his cool under pressure.
As usual Lewis was too eager.
To those who claim that FIA favours Ferrari, think about the time and consequences of the 3.0 -> 2.4 engine reduction after 2004.
IMO you can only win on the track, not off the track cutting corners.
Lewis wasn't pushed-off, he decided to go that way, but as I wroted previously, it was very comfortable move: "I failed at this overtaking, so I'll put myslelf to same situation before next corner, and try again, without silly braking and loosing distance, yay!"
Kimi used to OLDEST trick in the book. He let of the brakes when he saw lewis on the outside and ran him off the track. I do it all the time. Call it unfair or whatever you want.
Now it's the same people here calling it fine what Kimi did who argued with me when I said that's what a driver should do...squeeze people wide... especially you Tristan. But double standards are your thing!
Kimi HIT Lewis and forced him wide, FULLY aware of what he was doing. Lewis let him back through and then did him T1. He would have done him either way Kimi was just complete JUNK there.
Completely fine from both drivers... real men.. real racing!
If Becky Rose thinks it's fine then it must be. I have been banned from CTRA for less!
I thought that if a driver is on the outside trying to pass like that then the normal thing to do would be to edge them to the kerbs or grass, give him no where to go. I'm pretty sure there wasn't any contact at that point.
I don't think Kimi did anything wrong, thats even if he meant to do that, he could have just run wide. I didn't even think that was an issue.
For crying out aloud, go to utube or whereever and watch the videos of these incidents.
Pantano tried a very desperate pass and really had no way of making it happen and as a result he caused an innocent car to spin. But he chose to deliberately the inside line and tried outbraking several other cars. Comparing this to Kimi rearending Sutil after he had lost the control of his car and wasn't able to slow down or avoid Sutil, who was too a bit out from the racing line is just totally strange, to put it politely.
I'll write it once one to just mention that Pantano tried to pass that other fellow just as kovalainen tried but weren't in a place to attempt such move without clear chance of collision. Kimi just lost it on top of that hill and wasn't able to stop in time or avoid. I dunno, I guess I should write it once more...
They actually are, under the exact same regulations that Hamilton has been penalised for, they're linked earlier in this thread and go something like "The driver must use the track and only the track blah blah blah".
Indeed, but under FIA regulations the punishment is for the team and Massa is a part of the team and it's a drive through - which is why the two other recent incidents, 1 with mittigating circumstances, both resulted in drive throughs when Massa's didn't.
Hamilton had the inside for the left hander, whether he had significant overlap is a matter of debate of where you think the turn in point is.
Specifically, it's the normal point of turn in that is used, otherwise the rules would have too great a grey area (counter steer, letting the car run wide etc.). Normally in a chicane this would be considered to be the apex of the previous turn, in some longer chicanes such as the one in question, it's a blurry grey area somewhere in between - hense there is room for debate, and consequently controversy. I feel it was Hamilton's corner, but I wouldnt go protesting asking Kimi to give the place back for it, it was sufficiently in the 'grey' area that had I been Hamilton I would let him off. Had I been Kimi, i'd probably have done the same thing too (assuming I didnt stall off the line, as is more likely should I ever get into an F1 car!).
Because, in my view, Hamilton did not gain the position through cutting. He was avoiding an accident and the position was already his. Under FIA rules that's legitimate.
If it's a safety issue that needlessly endangers the lives of marshalls, other competitors, or spectators for the sake of a possible position gain then it should become a much more serious and grave issue than the result of the race that just occurred. Then again, F1 does not have a track record of acting in such circumstances.
roflz. I dont think I banned you and i'm not part of CTRA anymore, I banned very few drivers and usually sat back from stewarding decisions unless they got escalated (I dodged that workload!). I have clerked two club level meetings though and marshalled some more, but that doesnt in itself imply I did a good job .
I finally watched the Alonso/Klien(?) incident from Suzuka 2005, and it's basically the exact same situation. Alonso got a drive-through then, so FIA is definitely consistent on this one. I don't really agree with the stewards (in both cases), but it's consistent and therefore "right", I guess.
There wasn't, but only because Lewis took evasive action. There's no way they could both have stayed on the track without contact, I'm not sure what you're seeing in your screenshots.
At the apex of the right hander? Are you kidding? He was trying to overtake and had much more momentum and braked much later. Are you saying he wasn't even supposed to try to overtake? When you're this far in front at the entry I don't see how or why you could possibly slow down enough to tuck in behind the other guy at the apex:
Yep, and at that point Kimi lets the brakes off because he realises he's being a pansy. If you take that screen shot, and remember that Kimi is a pansy with no wet weather control , then Lewis is in the lead, and Kimi made a poorly judged effort at taking the place back. If the roles were reversed from that screenshot onwards, with Lewis making the pass on the inside, pushing Kimi wide, then Kimi would have been allowed to continue in the lead.
The FIA seem to ignore this, and think that because Kimi was ahead when he started braking, that he should be granted a 2 second lead after the corner. I think it was a harsh decision personally.
Right, but the cars are much too close to each other for such an effect to be relevant. I didn't see rowing but I know they don't race right next to each other.
.
