Jenson didn't choose the middle. He was always angled towards the left as the racing line dictates. If he did make his one move, it was a minute twitch and it was before Hamilton had any overlap.
Button chose to drive to the left. He kept going to left and didn't make any move to stay in the middle or go right. He did what the rules let him do.
JTCK; he lifted just before they touched and I can't see how they both would've hit the wall had he kept his foot on throttle. What I meant was that he has never actually let go in a situation like that. He either makes the pass or crashes.
Hyperactive; I don't believe for a second that the driver in front is responsible every time 2 drivers crash. Cause that's what some of you are suggesting. The driver behind is responsible until he gets side by side. Hamilton never got side by side so you can't blame Button.
Mika Salo said recently that Button's line was perfectly normal and he needed to drive like that to get a good line for the first corner. Niki Lauda has commented that Hamilton is a maniac. I haven't seen any former F1 driver comment that it was Button's fault. Only that it was a racing accident or that it was Hamilton's. Still there are some in these forums who believe Hamilton's always right and it's the other guy's fault no matter what happens. Neither deserved penalty and neither got one. Hamilton could've prevented the collision but didn't because he didn't see it coming before it was too late for some reason.
Ok I'm certain then...
:ROFL: The funniest thing about that in my opinion is he is basically saying Senna never did any of that when he was the original dirty bastard... very amusing.
Who here said Hamilton was always right? You are making it sound like Hamilton was always in the wrong.
And FYI Button had actually appologised to Hamilton, basically something along the line of sorry he didn't saw Lewis in his mirrors and if he had he wouldn't have stick to the normal racing line which resulted in pushing Lewis into the wall.
Fact was, Lewis didn't need to lift in a situation like this. And it was unfortunately that because of the circumstances (apparantly thanks to the spray), Jensen couldn't see Lewis in his mirrors, which was the cause of the accident.
If someone is a maniac for pulling alongside another driver on the straight for trying to pass, then why the heck do we even have a "race"?
It's because it almost never happens. You think Schumacher could have legitimately run Webber off the road at 180mph or forced him to brake as long as he did it before he was too far alongside? Nobody would ever be able to pass anybody if that sort of thing is allowed.
You cannot squeeze someone off the road or force them to brake to avoid a side-to-side contact on a straight!
There are reasons why Button will probably not be penalised, but simply being allowed to run someone into the wall is not one of them!
Not sure why I'm arguing with you anyway, you have this idea that a car which is ahead can do whatever the hell they want.
Let me follow your pattern. Since banks are almost never robbed it should be allowed? Schumacher was penalized for pushing Villneuve -97 and they shouldn't have penalized him because his move almost never happens? Button never squeezed Hamilton. He drove straight where his front end was pointing and Hamilton ran out of road. That's what happened. Not Button's fault. Had Hamilton tried overtaking from right Button couldn't have blocked it since he was already going to left and had made his move already.
JTCK; If I've sounded like Hamilton's always wrong I apologize but he's sure made a lot of mistakes in the last races. I said he never backs down. That's a positive and a negative thing at the same time. I've said he's overly agressive - which he is - but I don't remember saying Hamilton is always wrong. The thing is that when he's wrong it's always ''someone else's fault'' and that's what bothers me.
We do have a disagreement in how to judge the rules but that's not going to change. I'd like to see a former F1 driver take your stand though, since if no professional driver thinks it was Button's fault I'd like to know why do you know better than former F1 drivers?
Always "someone else's fault", to quote from DC, is a quality that most of the drivers that managed to win multiple championships had.
Why do I know better than former F1 drivers? You have only quoted very few former F1 drivers who spoke out, and there were plenty more that wasn't interviewed. And fact was, Button HIMSELF felt the need to apologised to Hamilton. So Button must be a stupid idiot to go and apologise when everyone think it wasn't his fault?
And for god sakes, the track was a good 6-8 car lengths wide, and Button for going where his nose was pointing, was actually pushing another driver towards the wall in that circumstances. Check out what happened to Michael Schumacher and Rubens Barrichello at Hungary last year, Michael was also going where his nose was pointing, and had he not retired from the race the stewards would have black flagged him for doing that and pushing Barrichello into the wall, and Michael did received a 10 positions grid penalty for the next race.
To quote from the autosport article:
I never said anything absolute like the driver in front is always wrong. But once someone is next to you (hamilton's front tire was ahead of buttons rear) you don't have the right to drive into him.
I don't care if salo/lauda/ says this or that. Lauda isn't exactly doing the talk the talk walk the walk thing. Most of his opinions looks very bizarre if you look at the same incidents he did on his own career. Imho it is a racing incident and that makes it so controversial and kind of hard to agree to disagree. I still do not like how people are so hell bent on finding someone to blame.
It is kind of amusing though. Button drove to the rear tire of alonso from behind and it's alonso's fault. Then button drives almost side by side (in the stricktest terms of being side by side) and puts hamilton into the wall and it's hamilton's fault. Then the same people watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN4AWsMn0Ww and say it is fully vettel's fault. I think even fia is more consistant than some of you. I don't see anything especially naughty or stupid in those situations. Mostly just driving errors in difficult conditions. Racing incidents. Meaning both have to take some fault.
Jenson apologising is not the same as admitted guilt. I think had Jenson seen him he would have given more room. He didn't see him, so didn't give him the room, and was apologising for that. He certainly wasn't apologising because he felt he was at fault for not seeing him.
Anyway, using your logic, Lewis apologised in Monaco. Thus it is 100% without doubt his fault. He apologised after all, so must be to blame. And he apologised for his racist comments, which means he is admitting guilt for people having black skin... :spin::smash3d:
Anyway, using your logic, Lewis apologised in Monaco. Thus it is 100% without doubt his fault. He apologised after all, so must be to blame. And he apologised for his racist comments, which means he is admitting guilt for people having black skin... :spin::smash3d:
The point was had Jensen saw Lewis in the mirrors, and judging from the wording of the stewards that if they had reasonable ground to believe Jensen did saw Lewis in the mirrors (aka if the race was dry), then Jensen would have got the penalty.
But the circumstances was that it was wet and it was a racing incident, not Button's fault for not seeing Lewis, and not Lewis' fault for "being overly agreesive".
It is singleseaters. In touring cars Button would have clipped off the bumper if he didnt notice a smallest overlap
Schumacher - Barichello incident was different. Shumi kept on squeezing when Rubens was already alongside. A bit too much. Even Michael admitted that.
Button was just keeping his line with nobody alongside. Hamilton was too optimistic and reckless. Why stick his nose in there? The only reason Button went to apologize is because they are team mates. This incident could have been avoided but I'm happy it wasn't. Why should Button let Hamilton do whatever he wants?
It is nice seeing him being aggressive on the track but sometimes it should be kept down until the right moment.
Best point ever.
Button was just keeping his line with nobody alongside. Hamilton was too optimistic and reckless. Why stick his nose in there? The only reason Button went to apologize is because they are team mates. This incident could have been avoided but I'm happy it wasn't. Why should Button let Hamilton do whatever he wants?
It is nice seeing him being aggressive on the track but sometimes it should be kept down until the right moment.
Best point ever.
Yes I have quoted only a few F1 drivers since I haven't seen anyone else take sides in press. (I was hoping you'd have seen someone to back you up and we'd have ended up in a draw) That either means they have nothing to add or they don't care.
Schumacher's and Barrichello's incident was different, Barrichello was about side by side when Schumacher made his move. Comparing Button's move to it is pointless and stupid. Had Hamilton been as far as Barrichello was Button would've gotten himself a penalty for sure.
I had not seen the stewards' decision but I don't see it as an answer to ''what if Button saw him? or was he allowed to do his move?'' They just concluded that Button didn't see Hamilton and that Hamilton thought he was to be left some room. Button had not yet moved to the side - true but he was moving towards the side all the time. So it's no wonder he eventually got to the side. To me it doesn't say much. Only that no one should be blamed and I agree with that.
The steward's decision said that Button was not penalised because they had reasonable ground to believe Button hadn't saw Hamilton in the mirrors. It would have been different had it been reasonable to believe Jensen could saw Lewis in the mirrors.
And mind you, journalists dont' go up and down the pitlane to interview every single one and ask them "what do you think of that incident"? And people don't go upto the journalists to actively offer to them their views would they? And some journalists do know who they are after to grab the "correct" headline.
I will wait a couple more days before letting you off with the last laugh. (Aka waiting for the blogs on BBC F1 site)
Because in racing you are not allowed not to.
Yes it would've been different but they don't tell straight if they would've given any penalty were it different.
And no, journalists do not go interview every one and ask them how they feel about it. Neither Salo nor Lauda were even interviewed but instead gave their opinion to the media and since they are famous in their representative countries they did get media's attention as would've gotten every other former F1 driver.
But let's wait for few days and see if someone in BBC rules it to be Button's fault. I'll be waiting. (Mind you the F1 expert from MTV3 in Finland has said that Hamilton was more to blame than Button in their collision)
Mind you, I wasn't saying it was Button's fault, because in the circumstances he wouldn't have saw Lewis in his mirrors.
It was a racing incident, nothing to do with Lewis being too agreesive (in that instance anyway, Lewis was a bit too agreesive in a few other occasion, but not that one) and nothing to do with being Jensen's fault for not being able to see Lewis.
This text above seemed to me that you were accusing Button. Well if we're not disagreeing about the steward's decision we must agree that neither deserved any penalty since it was neither's fault 100% and stop this useless conversation
There have been several theories put forward about the circumstances leading up to the Button-Hamilton incident. Reading through those posted here, there is consensus, but for some bizarre reason, the minutiae seem to be the hot topics of debate.
Here is the Stewards decision for those that haven't read it.
The drivers spoke to each other following the incident during the race suspension, and had there been any further disagreement between them, I think Lewis would not have remained in the pit area, and more telling, would have been unlikely to be cheering and clapping his team mate during his progress.
In summary; The stewards deemed it to be a racing incident caused by the conditions, and the body language and sound bites of both drivers and team confirms this.
This really is a moot point now, so why is it still being hotly debated?
Here is the Stewards decision for those that haven't read it.
The drivers spoke to each other following the incident during the race suspension, and had there been any further disagreement between them, I think Lewis would not have remained in the pit area, and more telling, would have been unlikely to be cheering and clapping his team mate during his progress.
In summary; The stewards deemed it to be a racing incident caused by the conditions, and the body language and sound bites of both drivers and team confirms this.
This really is a moot point now, so why is it still being hotly debated?
Because the name Hamilton is involved.
Fixed.
A good and fair article really, especially John Watson's quotes.
There you go.
Yet people still call him "arrogant" and say he, "never claims his own mistakes" - Just choosing to ignore articles like these.
Bah, anyway, not the first time he had a crap couple of races... Hopefully with Button winning he will pick himself up.
Vettel is off in the distance already though so... Button already needs 3 wins and for Vettel to DNF or not finish in points, which is highly unlikely.
FORMULA 1 GRAND PRIX DU CANADA 2011 (Montreal)
(439 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG