Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Hamilton demoted to 3rd
Topic Started: Sep 7 2008, 04:16 PM (5,645 Views)
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
Having just watched with clip again on youtube.....

Hamilton was briefly ahead but decided better of the move before they turned in as he was on the outside.
Kimi was ahead when they turned in to the righthand turn.
Kimi squeezed very hard, but there was still room on the inside for Hamilton at the point he took to the runoff. Very, very little room, but he would have fitted had he breathed off the gas for a gnat's knacker.
Hamilton takes to the runoff before Kimi gets to the apex. In fact, Kimi barely brushed the kerb, which also has a nice big green extension on the inside.
Hamilton emerges infront of Kimi, going a little slower, and immediately nails the gas.

I still think the penalty is OTT, but I'm now a little less convinced that Lewis is entirely innocent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bear
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70rXr2Mkq_M

Looks like he chose not to take the corner at all from this angle.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
stradlin24
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
12:54 PM
Norbert,Sep 8 2008
11:45 AM
TheCompleteGuitarist,Sep 8 2008
12:35 PM
On the first corner of the chicane wasn't Lewis ahead, shouldn't Kimi therefore have backed off? Instead he noses forward and on the second corner, it's Kimi who is ahead and unlike Lewis, leaves Lewis with 1 of three options, crashe, back off or cut the chicane. Which option do think Kimi would have taken in a similar situation.

Aha - the first McLaren fan to admit that Lewis could have backed off. Go to the top of the class. This is what the stewards would have reasoned. It is not what a racing driver would reason, because they don't want to give an inch. However, the fact that Lewis *could* have backed off and made the chicane, and the fact that he didn't, is what the enquiry would have been based upon. I don't doubt that Kimi would have done the same in Hamilton's shoes, but you can also bet you bottom Dollar that Lewis would also have squeezed Kimi for all he was worth too.

And Schumacher at the 2006 Hungarian GP? He went off the circuit to defend his position, yet received no penalty (and in fact managed a point from another driver's DQ). Nice to see consistency.

Nicely forgotten by the Ferrari crew
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bear
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
11:52 AM
And then let kimi back past, as stated in the rules, so why the penalty, or is justice reserved for red cars. <sarcasm>

He gave back the position, but not the gap and so had an advantage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheCompleteGuitarist
Driver
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Norbert,Sep 8 2008
11:45 AM
TheCompleteGuitarist,Sep 8 2008
12:35 PM
On the first corner of the chicane wasn't Lewis ahead, shouldn't Kimi therefore have backed off? Instead he noses forward and on the second corner, it's Kimi who is ahead and unlike Lewis, leaves Lewis with 1 of three options, crashe, back off or cut the chicane. Which option do think Kimi would have taken in a similar situation.

Aha - the first McLaren fan to admit that Lewis could have backed off. Go to the top of the class. This is what the stewards would have reasoned. It is not what a racing driver would reason, because they don't want to give an inch. However, the fact that Lewis *could* have backed off and made the chicane, and the fact that he didn't, is what the enquiry would have been based upon. I don't doubt that Kimi would have done the same in Hamilton's shoes, but you can also bet you bottom Dollar that Lewis would also have squeezed Kimi for all he was worth too.

I'm not a Mclaren Fan
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Bear,Sep 8 2008
12:16 PM
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
11:52 AM
And then let kimi back past, as stated in the rules, so why the penalty, or is justice reserved for red cars. <sarcasm>

He gave back the position, but not the gap and so had an advantage.

Unless you analyse the cars throughout the entire corner,you can not possibly judge whether there was an advantage gained or not. The judgement can only be quantified by actual positions gained, hence the stipulation to relinquish the place back to kimi. That is all hamilton coulsd have done and I feel that the penalty is pure manipulation of unenforcable rules, like what happened to Alonso in quallie at Monza in 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dazzerjp
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The ruling is a mistake.

http://www.planet-f1.com/story/0,18954,3265_4116523,00.html

No where do the articles they refer to mention gaining momentum.

The article thus deduces from the laws cited that Hamilton was in fact punished for... wait fot it











LEAVING THE TRACK.


@Technically, as the team cannot dispute that Hamilton left the racetrack, the citation of Articles 30.3 (a) and chapter 4 Article 2 (g) leave McLaren with no room for manoeuvre or appeal.

However, their legal team is instead bound to focus upon the line in the stewards' ruling that reads 'Fact - Cut the chicane and gained an advantage'. In fact, the question of whether Hamilton gained an advantage remains a matter of dispute rather than 'fact' - the only 'fact' is that it is the stewards' opinion that Hamilton gained an advantage. By claiming otherwise, and seemingly basing their right to impose a penalty upon their claimed 'fact', the stewards may have made an error that will enable McLaren to contest their ruling. @
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
dazzerjp,Sep 8 2008
12:36 PM
LEAVING THE TRACK.

So how come most of the field haven't been punished for exactly the same offense? Surely Kimi needs a grid drop for his banzi run on the run off on the outside of Pouhlon.

Like I said before, they are making it up as they are going along. <no>

I am seriously considering whether F1 is worth watching if the officials are only going to tamper with the results all the time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dazzerjp
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
09:42 PM
dazzerjp,Sep 8 2008
12:36 PM
LEAVING THE TRACK.


I am seriously considering whether F1 is worth watching if the officials are only going to tamper with the results all the time.

I said to Misses Dazzer last night, that were it not for Hammy, I would turn my back on f1.

Fortunately, Lewis continues to amaze me and we cant let f1 turn into Ferrari 1 any more than it all ready is.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
True, it is a shame that when a driver dares to be exciting that the authorities seem to disapprove and pull stupid stunts like this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PiquetFan
Member Avatar
Driver
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Niki Lauda echoes the feelings of many contributors to this thread:

Niki's views
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AndyW76
Member Avatar
Team Boss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
PiquetFan,Sep 8 2008
01:03 PM
Niki Lauda echoes the feelings of many contributors to this thread:

Niki's views

Well, it is the only logical conclusion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bear
Member Avatar
Chief Engineer
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
12:32 PM
Bear,Sep 8 2008
12:16 PM
AndyW76,Sep 8 2008
11:52 AM
And then let kimi back past, as stated in the rules, so why the penalty, or is justice reserved for red cars. <sarcasm>

He gave back the position, but not the gap and so had an advantage.

Unless you analyse the cars throughout the entire corner,you can not possibly judge whether there was an advantage gained or not. The judgement can only be quantified by actual positions gained, hence the stipulation to relinquish the place back to kimi. That is all hamilton coulsd have done and I feel that the penalty is pure manipulation of unenforcable rules, like what happened to Alonso in quallie at Monza in 2006.

You only have to look to see that it took Kimi much longer to get round the corner than Hamilton did by cutting it ... and Kimi had the better line. Hamilton would clearly have lost time to Kimi if he had stayed on the track.

But actually, I have changed my mind.

I thought originally it was a fair but harsh decision, given that it was a rule infringement in the heat of the action and that Lewis going over the chicane was because he lost control of the overtaking movement and he left himself with no other option.

But looking at it from on board:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70rXr2Mkq_M

... he clearly could have made the corner but clearly chose not to ... in much the same way as Schumi made a clear and cold choice to park the car mid track in Monaco.

I no longer think the punishment was fair but harsh.

I now think it was fair but lenient in that it wasn't a simple racing incident but in all probability an out and out decision by Hamilton to chop the corner (as if playing an F1 arcade game - come on, we've all done it from time to time) and to cheat. Think, if the info in this clip is true, that he is lucky to have only got a 25 second penalty.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
u4coffee
Member Avatar
Just Married
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
dazzerjp,Sep 8 2008
01:36 PM
The ruling is a mistake.

http://www.planet-f1.com/story/0,18954,3265_4116523,00.html

No where do the articles they refer to mention gaining momentum.

The article thus deduces from the laws cited that Hamilton was in fact punished for... wait fot it











LEAVING THE TRACK.


@Technically, as the team cannot dispute that Hamilton left the racetrack, the citation of Articles 30.3 (a) and chapter 4 Article 2 (g) leave McLaren with no room for manoeuvre or appeal.

However, their legal team is instead bound to focus upon the line in the stewards' ruling that reads 'Fact - Cut the chicane and gained an advantage'. In fact, the question of whether Hamilton gained an advantage remains a matter of dispute rather than 'fact' - the only 'fact' is that it is the stewards' opinion that Hamilton gained an advantage. By claiming otherwise, and seemingly basing their right to impose a penalty upon their claimed 'fact', the stewards may have made an error that will enable McLaren to contest their ruling. @

Just read the article. It looks like the stewards indeed quoted the regulation:

Article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 Formula One Sporting Regulations' makes no mention of whether an advantage had been gained and instead states that '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'. The near-identical Appendix L chapter 4 Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code adds that 'The racetrack alone shall be used by drivers during the race'.

As the rule Lewis broke. In which case can anyone provide a list of drivers that didn't leave the track during the race, and therefore not be punished?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norbert
Member Avatar

Admin
No, it's the only logical conclusion if you're a McLaren fan. I do think the decision was very harsh, but I also think that Lewis did gain a small advantage by not simply backing off and letting Kimi have the corner. It wasn't like he wasn't going to pass him, was it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic »
Add Reply