Hamilton & Rosberg penalised ten grid places for France after pit lane incident

[Somebody]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20453.html
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=35045

The least they deserve.

[SparkyKate]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20453.html
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=35045

The least they deserve.

Definately.

[gloomyDAY]

Woah!


Definately.
Definitely not.

10 grid places is going to butcher Hamilton's chances of a good result.
A bit out of hand.

[F1boat]

Bit harsh IMO. 5 places was enough. 10 places is big. Now victory looks hard to achieve for Lewis.

[BDunnell]

Given that penalties in F1 are so totally arbitrary, I hesitate to say that this is fair, but I think it basically is. One of the more stupid incidents I've seen in recent years.

[N. Jones]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20453.html
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=35045

The least they deserve.

Wow. I thought five would be deserving but ten? Not so sure about that...

[Daika]

Woah!


Definitely not.

10 grid places is going to butcher Hamilton's chances of a good result.
A bit out of hand.

Doesn't sound like a valid argument. Unless FIA wants to hand him the championship. What's the point of a penalty if they have to consider wheter Hamilton has a good chance of winning the race?!

[elinagr]

very nice , they destroy kimis race

[SparkyKate]

Woah!


Definitely not.

10 grid places is going to butcher Hamilton's chances of a good result.
A bit out of hand.

I think thats the point.

10 place may be harsh but Kimi was running anywhere from 1st to third and in a non racing incident and following the rules he was taken out by Hamilton. Id expect the same in any situation, only wish Schumacher had been dealt with similarly during his 'reign'.

[gloomyDAY]

McLaren is probably going to appeal.

This is going to get ugly.
"Battle stations!"

[Daniel]

10 places is fair I think. It screws Lewis' title up a bit and that's a fair thing to do. After a few more races Kubica will probably be back to 3rd or 4th so it restores the balance of things :)

[SparkyKate]

McLaren is probably going to appeal.

This is going to get ugly.
"Battle stations!"

As long as if they win, Ferrari get to bill them for a new car and Hamilton has to have a sight test, in public and preferably specsavers!

[gloomyDAY]

As long as if they win, Ferrari get to bill them for a new car and Hamilton has to have a sight test, in public and preferably specsavers!No, one driver with spectacles is enough. Let's not get carried away. Hamilton made a huge mistake and now it's time to bite the bullet.

[F1boat]

SparkyKate, they were severe with MS when he broke the rules as in 1994 British GP and 2006 Monaco GP. Daniel, I am not sure. IMO the BMW improve constantly and Kubica is flawless recently.

[Viktory]

very nice , they destroy kimis race

Yup, I think it's fair.

[pettersolberg29]

Good!

Gives Kubica a chance to extend his lead perhaps!

[aryan]

McLaren and Hamilton fan speaking here:

10 places is fair. They should just accept it and get on with their races.

oh, and maybe not mess up Heikki's races as well, what strategy where they playing with him? Guinea pig?

[Ghostwalker]

i think the penelty wasn't hard enough. IMO Hami should have been stripped of minimum 5 points aswell for dangerous driving.

I also think that that Mac with the help of good strategy and a fast car will be able to bring atleast one of the cars to a top 5 finish. Coz' the can prepare their strategy in adavance for fewer pitstops and etc..

[SparkyKate]

SparkyKate, they were severe with MS when he broke the rules as in 1994 British GP and 2006 Monaco GP. Daniel, I am not sure. IMO the BMW improve constantly and Kubica is flawless recently.

And i assume the countless other infractions by him dont count in your opinion then? And yes i know my F1 history too thankyou.

[SparkyKate]

McLaren and Hamilton fan speaking here:

10 places is fair. They should just accept it and get on with their races.

oh, and maybe not mess up Heikki's races as well, what strategy where they playing with him? Guinea pig?

Yep he's their Guinea Pig. Feel really sorry for him as he honestly thought he would get the same chance as Hamilton as they are friends and he had McMerc's assurances that there was no lead driver. Unfortunately there is, and its a damn shame cos Kovy is one of the best drivers out there on his day.

[truefan72]

i think the penelty wasn't hard enough. IMO Hami should have been stripped of minimum 5 points aswell for dangerous driving.

I also think that that Mac with the help of good strategy and a fast car will be able to bring atleast one of the cars to a top 5 finish. Coz' the can prepare their strategy in adavance for fewer pitstops and etc..

man Ghostwalker, lets get real. You don't like Hamilton and can't even accept a stiff penalty levied on him. Why don't we make him drive on 3 wheels while we are at it, and stirp him of even more points, this is just absurd.

The guy lost his WDC lead, a more than likely win at Canada, and is now getting a 10 grid penalty and you want more????

after reading a number of your posts, its obvious that you don't like the driver, which is your prerogative, but try to at least show some semblance of understanding how the F1 mets out punishement and stop looking for them and other ways to figure some way to hamper his chances for the WDC.
laughable

[Daniel]

a more than likely win at Canada

Everyone (Lewis included) seems to forget that Lewis was behind two very fast drivers at the time the incident happened.

[truefan72]

Yep he's their Guinea Pig. Feel really sorry for him as he honestly thought he would get the same chance as Hamilton as they are friends and he had McMerc's assurances that there was no lead driver. Unfortunately there is, and its a damn shame cos Kovy is one of the best drivers out there on his day.

which are seldom this year. He does a great job qualifying, but seems to lack something during the races. Strategyor not,I expectred him to get past the Torro Rosso and Honda. Something that Massa did and he couldn't

[mirek01]

I agree with that penalty but i thought that will be a 5 place grid penalty.

[wedge]

Is Rosberg being harshly treated. It was almost as if he was being brake-tested by Hamilton?

Probably need to watch it again.

[Breeze]

Frickin Hamilton is an idiot and cost me the lead in our forum FGP this weekend with little hope of recovery next weekend unless Kovi wakes up and starts driving the Mac like he just stole it. :angryfire :

Oh, and I'm a tad sad for Kimi too.

[Daniel]

Daniel, I am not sure. IMO the BMW improve constantly and Kubica is flawless recently.

The problem is without the incident today Kubica wasn't really on for the win for sure. BMW have shown they're consitent but they've not shown they're consistent winners which Ferrari and McLaren have done. Without Kimi's brainfart last race and Lewis forgetting what red means Kimi would be in front of Kubica still. Kimi was on for 3rd at the very least in this race and and a 4th in Monaco.

I make that 11 points more that Kimi could have had just in the last 2 races. So Kimi leads on 46 and Kubica on 42. Or if Kubica had won and Kimi had got 3rd Kimi would be on 41 points. Kimi's been unlucky recently but that luck won't stay for the rest of the season.

[jens]

I'd say that it was a poor job by Lewis. :D He could have hit both of the title rivals and taken them out, but instead of this chose only one. :laugh:

Strange that in Canada there are always some drivers, who forget the red light like we also saw in 2005 and 2007.

By the way, this race proves again that they need to change the safety car rule, because it was meant to make racing safer, but it's actually not doing that! :p : Also Lewis was going to exit the pitlane in third position as before the SC he was in a clear lead. So his race lead was lost only because the pit crew worked longer by a second. :rolleyes:

[Daniel]

By the way, this race proves again that they need to change the safety car rule, because it was meant to make racing safer, but it's actually not doing that! :p :

The only thing that makes it dangerous is inattentive people like Lewis and Nico. Not a problem with the rules. More of an issue with brains not being in gear. I mean how many other drivers have sat at a red light and not rear ended the person in front? Billions I would say....... You can't make rules to compensate for idiocy sadly. Though you can penalise idiocy.


So his race lead was lost only because the pit crew worked longer by a second. :rolleyes:

I agree. I think they should slow the rest of the field down while another car is in the pits. Can't have overtaking in the pits because one team does a better job than another :)

[markabilly]

. Why don't we make him drive on 3 wheels while we are at it, and stirp him of even more points



Sounds okay to me.............but let us all "get real". SC is out. Everyone knows the problems of the red light, and both Kimi and LH were stopped at the line for more than enough time for the accident not to have happened, regardless of the visibility of the red light.

And when LH swerved from behind Kube to crash into Kimi, well that says something to me about the mind set of LH as to who he choose to take out.

In any event, it means that LH will score more points at the next race than Kimi scored today. LH will get a fourth or fifth by the time the race is done or more.


And what is amazing is that despite a couple of races last year where he truly deserved to be penalized(for example his very unsafe and careless driving behind a certain safety car, the crane, and to say nothing of the mess in Hungary) He finally gets TAGGED.

Well, I am very surprized ...........

[SparkyKate]

man Ghostwalker, lets get real. You don't like Hamilton and can't even accept a stiff penalty levied on him. Why don't we make him drive on 3 wheels while we are at it, and stirp him of even more points, this is just absurd.

The guy lost his WDC lead, a more than likely win at Canada, and is now getting a 10 grid penalty and you want more????

after reading a number of your posts, its obvious that you don't like the driver, which is your prerogative, but try to at least show some semblance of understanding how the F1 mets out punishement and stop looking for them and other ways to figure some way to hamper his chances for the WDC.
laughable

Im sorry, can you hear yourself? For the record, running into the back of someone is a pretty good way of hampering your lead all by yourself, the problem with this case however is the fact that it didnt happen under race conditions and yet screwed up the main championship contenders race as well. So, in the opinions of those who think this was a great bit of chump driving and that Ham should open his eyes and take responsibility once in a while, maybe even earn this amazing status some people hold him in, we want to see him punished to fit the crime.

But then i obviously dont like him either and support Kimi so my opinion is obviously irrelevant too...

[Jag_Warrior]

Is Rosberg being harshly treated. It was almost as if he was being brake-tested by Hamilton?

Probably need to watch it again.

I think Hamilton "brake-tested" Rosberg because the nose Lewis' car was about to consumate a marriage between him and Kubica. If Rosberg had been on the binders sooner, he wouldn't have had a worry.

Hamilton and Rosberg weren't paying attention and screwed up a great racing weekend for a lot of people.

[SparkyKate]

The only thing that makes it dangerous is inattentive people like Lewis and Nico. Not a problem with the rules. More of an issue with brains not being in gear. I mean how many other drivers have sat at a red light and not rear ended the person in front? Billions I would say....... You can't make rules to compensate for idiocy sadly. Though you can penalise idiocy.



I agree. I think they should slow the rest of the field down while another car is in the pits. Can't have overtaking in the pits because one team does a better job than another :)

lol totally agree with daniel

[Jag_Warrior]

So, in the opinions of those who think this was a great bit of chump driving and that Ham should open his eyes and take responsibility once in a while, maybe even earn this amazing status some people hold him in, we want to see him punished to fit the crime.

Firing squad or lethal injection?

:D

[VkmSpouge]

It is right that Rosberg and Hamilton are punished but I think 10 grid places is a bit too harsh.

[markabilly]

I just love to quote him (and actually I think it is his mouth that causes so many to dislike him whereas with Kimi, it is the absence of mouth that so many like him...) BUT ANYWAY from yesterday, while humbly describing his ability to deal with conditions, and from the mouth himself comes:

"For me, more of a concern is the safety cars that there probably will be tomorrow, and not getting caught out like some of the drivers were last year. I know Fernando was caught out, and in the last few years Juan Pablo Montoya came out of the pits with the red light, and also Felipe (Massa) last year."

Well duh, at least they weren't crashing out in pit lane....

[gm99]

I think the penalty on Hamilton is fair - the act he committed was one of extraordinary stupidity. I don't think there's a precedent for taking points away from him.

However, I think that Rosberg should have been less severely punished (by a five place penalty perhaps) than Hamilton: First of all, he had less time to react to the stoppage than Lewis had (and he did a better job of slowing down, too) and secondly, he didn't really cause any further damage to cars other than his own. Hamilton on the other hand did effectively take out his major opponent in the world championship (though on second reflection, it just may have been better to take out Kubica ;) )

[truefan72]

Im sorry, can you hear yourself? For the record, running into the back of someone is a pretty good way of hampering your lead all by yourself, the problem with this case however is the fact that it didnt happen under race conditions and yet screwed up the main championship contenders race as well. So, in the opinions of those who think this was a great bit of chump driving and that Ham should open his eyes and take responsibility once in a while, maybe even earn this amazing status some people hold him in, we want to see him punished to fit the crime.

But then i obviously dont like him either and support Kimi so my opinion is obviously irrelevant too...

Take responsibility once in a while for who? for what?
did he not explain himslef and apologize to Kimi, or is that not good enough for you. If you don't like the way he said it based on semantics or your opinion on the way you read his comments then I suggest the issue lies with you and not him. neither you nor I or the press are anybody Lewis has to answer to.

As to his status, which you obviously can't come to grips with, is purely based no his racing skill and achiervements in his short F1 career and how many of you folks out there simply hate on him for either his success, his ascension to one fo the top 3 drivers after just one year in F1 or the the fact that he is black and has an ego.

I think 10 place penalty for the next race is more than enough.Anything more you folks are asking for only tells me about your own bias than actual FIA penalties handed out to many more egrious preceding incidents.

Nevermind, I'm sure you'll be off this forum until the next opportune time comes to lampoon Hamilton in the name of "those who want to see him punished to fit the crime"

LOL

I think the matter concluded now with the handing out of fines.
but feel free to continue your grievances about LH.

[jens]

I agree. I think they should slow the rest of the field down while another car is in the pits. Can't have overtaking in the pits because one team does a better job than another :)

What I mean here is that before the SC he had a clear lead and with the previous SC rule he wouldn't have lost the lead just because the pitstop would have lasted a second longer. Now all the time advantage is lost, many drivers pit at the same time and if the pit crew slightly messes it up (even for a couple of seconds), then a driver drops from first to last. Unfair, especially as the order of the drivers exiting the pitlane will be determined pretty much by the speed of the pitcrew. A pitstop should decide the whole race? :rolleyes:

[Daniel]

What I mean here is that before the SC he had a clear lead and with the previous SC rule he wouldn't have lost the lead just because the pitstop would have lasted a second longer. Now all the time advantage is lost, many drivers pit at the same time and if the pit crew slightly messes it up (even for a couple of seconds), then a driver drops from first to last. Unfair, especially the order the drivers exit the pitlane will be determined pretty much by the speed of the pitcrew. A pitstop should decide the whole race? :rolleyes:
Safety comes first. Sport means nothing when it comes to simple common sense safety measures.

[jens]

Safety comes first. Sport means nothing when it comes to simple common sense safety measures.

It has been said several times before that there were no problems with the previous safety car rule. I have always been a vocal critic of the current SC rule and life consistently proves that this needs changing. With the magical word "safety" (even if in this case there even isn't a serious reason for the use of this word) they are really hampering "sport".

[ioan]

SparkyKate, they were severe with MS when he broke the rules as in 1994 British GP and 2006 Monaco GP.

Exactly, and there were other occasions too!

[Daniel]

It has been said several times before that there were no problems with the previous safety car rule. I have always been a vocal critic of the current SC rule and life consistently proves that this needs changing.
I agree that the rule governing the opening of the pits is a crap one. But I think there is no problem with the pit exit rule.

[philipbain]

Thats funny, in the very last race a certain car took out another with a punt from behind yet I don't seem to remember them getting any sort of penalty! One rule for when a Ferrari takes someone out, another for when someone takes a Ferrari out it would seem.

[Daniel]

Thats funny, in the very last race a certain car took out another with a punt from behind yet I don't seem to remember them getting any sort of penalty! One rule for when a Ferrari takes someone out, another for when someone takes a Ferrari out it would seem.
If you'd actually watched the last race you'd know that that was a racing incident.

[jens]

I agree that the rule governing the opening of the pits is a crap one. But I think there is no problem with the pit exit rule.

Agreed that there indeed isn't a problem with the pit exit rule, but if the pits are never closed, there won't be any problems with the red light either. Why? Because red light exists to prevent drivers from starting to fight for position behind safety car, hence keeping them in the pitlane until everyone has passed and they can peacefully join the back of the grid. But with the previous SC rule everyone pitted before joining SC lead and no-one had to wait for green light, but could exit the pits immediately.

[philipbain]

If you'd actually watched the last race you'd know that that was a racing incident.

I would accept that it wasn't intentional, yes, but I don't think that Hamilton taking himself and Raikonnen was intentional either. Raikonnen should have been penalised at Monaco all the same, he was let off the hook and when he's hit a week later penalties are handed out, doesn't exactly show the stewards as unbiased, particularly in light of past incidents involving decisions made in favour of Ferrari.

[philipbain]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

[donKey jote]

that's done it :up:
bedtime for me :laugh:
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[Daniel]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

:rotflmao:

Try telling that to your insurance company when you rear end someone at the lights :laugh:

Edit: You did mean that as a joke right?

[markabilly]

What I mean here is that before the SC he had a clear lead and with the previous SC rule he wouldn't have lost the lead just because the pitstop would have lasted a second longer. Now all the time advantage is lost, many drivers pit at the same time and if the pit crew slightly messes it up (even for a couple of seconds), then a driver drops from first to last. Unfair, especially as the order of the drivers exiting the pitlane will be determined pretty much by the speed of the pitcrew. A pitstop should decide the whole race? :rolleyes:
Pitstops determine almost every race where there is a pass for the lead, because the pass occurrs while the car is in the pits.......regardless of the SC.

gee, when did pitstops for about the last ten years not decide all races? So what if the SC was out??

And hamilton said the day before the race:

"For me, more of a concern is the safety cars that there probably will be tomorrow, and not getting caught out like some of the drivers were last year. I know Fernando was caught out, and in the last few years Juan Pablo Montoya came out of the pits with the red light, and also Felipe (Massa) last year."

[SparkyKate]

Take responsibility once in a while for who? for what?
did he not explain himslef and apologize to Kimi, or is that not good enough for you. If you don't like the way he said it based on semantics or your opinion on the way you read his comments then I suggest the issue lies with you and not him. neither you nor I or the press are anybody Lewis has to answer to.

As to his status, which you obviously can't come to grips with, is purely based no his racing skill and achiervements in his short F1 career and how many of you folks out there simply hate on him for either his success, his ascension to one fo the top 3 drivers after just one year in F1 or the the fact that he is black and has an ego.

I think 10 place penalty for the next race is more than enough.Anything more you folks are asking for only tells me about your own bias than actual FIA penalties handed out to many more egrious preceding incidents.

Nevermind, I'm sure you'll be off this forum until the next opportune time comes to lampoon Hamilton in the name of "those who want to see him punished to fit the crime"

LOL

I think the matter concluded now with the handing out of fines.
but feel free to continue your grievances about LH.

Dear lord, what is it with those of you that don't understand that you can just have a driver that rubs you up the wrong way? There always has to be some deep seated psychological reason as to why you dont like them with u lot, the fact that you dont like the way they behave is just not good enough.

I am a Brit, who was so excited about getting a Brit driver who could actually drive after years of putting up with Jenson Button, someone else i can't stand because of the way they behave, and do you know why i don't like the way either of them behave? They believe their own hype and that dear friends is never good. At least with Hamilton over someone like Jenson, Hamilton has the skill to, to a degree, get away with it.

He didnt apologise to Kimi, he said im sorry IF i ruined ur race n that is not semantics that is very clever word play, something he is good at. He didnt explain himself, he claimed he did not know what happened and blamed everything but the fact he messed it up. A bit of humility once in a while and i would like the guy alot more. And as for him being black, as i think i have addressed in a previous post to you infact, is just utter crap. As i said to you then, i was excited about him coming to F1 and i knew then he was black so now that hes annoying me suddenly im a rascist? Grow up.

Oh and i'll post when i have something to say, thanks.

At the end of the day though, this forum is here for peoples opinions on motorsport and not their opinions on each other, so maybe you should try getting over this quite obvious problem you have with people that dont agree with you and just get on with it?

[ioan]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

You'll never stop surprising us!

There was a quote in a movie I saw 2 days ago along these lines:

"Some people are incorrigible to the point that even when you thought that they sunk to the bottom of it they still keep digging!" ;)

Good night to everyone! :)

[jens]

Pitstops determine almost every race where there is a pass for the lead, because the pass occurrs while the car is in the pits.......regardless of the SC.

gee, when did pitstops for about the last ten years not decide all races? So what if the SC was out??


In "normal conditions" pitstops decide battles, when drivers are close to each other on the track, but if there is a huge time gap between them, then there is nothing to decide. Heck, with the SC rule even a lapped guy (he's allowed to take the whole lap back) can pass the leader in the pits...

[Daniel]

I would accept that it wasn't intentional, yes, but I don't think that Hamilton taking himself and Raikonnen was intentional either. Raikonnen should have been penalised at Monaco all the same, he was let off the hook and when he's hit a week later penalties are handed out, doesn't exactly show the stewards as unbiased, particularly in light of past incidents involving decisions made in favour of Ferrari.

A week later? :confused: Where did they race last week? I think I must have missed that race......

The point is that Kimi's incident was a racing incident and Lewis' wasn't. On the racetrack stuff happens and that's life. People have died on the track. It's a harsh place and everyone needs to accept that. But in a controlled area like the pits or behind the safety car this sort of thing just isn't tolerated and for good reason. The regulations regarding the pit lane and the safety car are there for the safety of everyone at the track and should be strictly adhered to. If they are not followed then the penalty should be there and it shouldn't be a small one. 10 grid places is fair enough IMHO. You could ask is it fair for Kimi? Not really but then again life isn't always fair. But at least Hamilton has been taught a lesson and will take the rules more seriously next time.

[Daniel]

In "normal conditions" pitstops decide battles, when drivers are close to each other on the track, but if there is a huge time gap between them, then there is nothing to decide. Heck, with the SC rule even a lapped guy (he's allowed to take the whole lap back) can pass the leader in the pits...

The fact of the matter is that the cars were bunched up and Lewis' crew didn't do it's thing as quickly so in any situation Lewis got passed. Sport will never be 100% fair.

[Sleeper]

It has been said several times before that there were no problems with the previous safety car rule. I have always been a vocal critic of the current SC rule and life consistently proves that this needs changing. With the magical word "safety" (even if in this case there even isn't a serious reason for the use of this word) they are really hampering "sport".
I've mentioned it several times before, watch Brazil 03, Alonso was hospitalised when he hit Webbers stray wheel racing back to the pits. Its the reason we have the rule, its not perfect but Its hard to imagine something that could be (though the proposed electronic system that will update a driver on his laptime relative to a pre-set minimum every 50 metres could do that).

[Daniel]

I've mentioned it several times before, watch Brazil 03, Alonso was hospitalised when he hit Webbers stray wheel racing back to the pits. Its the reason we have the rule, its not perfect but Its hard to imagine something that could be (though the proposed electronic system that will update a driver on his laptime relative to a pre-set minimum every 50 metres could do that).

:up:

Safety should always come first. I'm sure we'll see fatalities in F1 in the future from racing incidents, it's simply the nature of the beast but we should never see someone hurt in the pits or behind a safety car or in any situation like that. I guarantee that next race if there is a safety car period and drivers are in the pits they'll be checking whether the light is red or green for sure and that's a good thing.

[jens]

I've mentioned it several times before, watch Brazil 03, Alonso was hospitalised when he hit Webbers stray wheel racing back to the pits. Its the reason we have the rule, its not perfect but Its hard to imagine something that could be (though the proposed electronic system that will update a driver on his laptime relative to a pre-set minimum every 50 metres could do that).

Wasn't it a communication error, because all the other drivers managed to get around the debris fine. Such collisions could happen with current rules too if driver hasn't got information, where has the accident happened and can't see the wreckage as it lies in a blind corner.

I hope the SC proposals will be implemented for the French GP, so we'll finally get rid of the current mess!

[grantb4]

How many places was Kimi penalized for his driving in Monaco. Lewis already lost a possiblt 10 points and he didn't do on purpose, so I don't see the point in the extra penalty.

Having said that I will be happy when we get rid of all the SC nonsense.

[Daniel]

How many places was Kimi penalized for his driving in Monaco. Lewis already lost a possiblt 10 points and he didn't do on purpose, so I don't see the point in the extra penalty.

Having said that I will be happy when we get rid of all the SC nonsense.

Seriously there should be a sticky for this....

Kimi incident= Losing it at high speed on the track and hitting an unfortunate driver. You can't penalise a driver for losing control. You simply can't......
Lewis incident = Boneheaded driving IN THE PITS. Totally unacceptable and he's been penalised appropriately.

[osg]

As i said minutes after the GP in the race thread............. as a non racing incident i expected 5 spots minimum. 10 spots is just an fair for that ridiculous display of driving from the self proclaimed "best and fastest out there".

As for Nico..... i dunno how he comes into it.

[Daniel]

As i said minutes after the GP in the race thread............. as a non racing incident i expected 5 spots minimum. 10 spots is just an fair for that ridiculous display of driving from the self proclaimed "best and fastest out there".

As for Nico..... i dunno how he comes into it.

The problem is some people see this like a criminal case. In the real world if you kill someone you'd expect more of a punishment than if you drove into the back of them at the lights. But in F1 you could get involved in an unlucky racing incident and kill someone and not get penalised. Just because Hamilton didn't hurt anyone doesn't mean there shouldn't be a penalty.

[Tazio]

I think the penalty is fair and deserved.
I might not feel that strongly about it if these two hot shots hadn't been so unrepentant when it happened. I think the stewards saw two guys trying to put a spin on a very serious and obvious disregard for a very basic rule. Their preoccupation of avoiding self-incrimination closed the deal! IMHO

[ShiftingGears]

A fair penalty for both drivers. Hamilton's gonna have his work cut out in France.

[Hawkmoon]

Hamilton's incident was the same as Nakajima hitting Kubica in Australia. Nakajima hit Kubica whilst behind the safety car. It was completely avoidable and Nakajima was hit with a 10 place penalty. Hamilton hits Raikkonen in the same circumstances, ie. under controlled conditions, and gets a 10 place penalty. Seems pretty fair to me.

Raikkonen's little snafu in Monaco is totally different and deserved no penalty. This incident was the same as Massa/Coulthard and Button/Coulthard earlier in the year. All these incidents occurred on the track under full racing conditions, hence no penalty.

Martin Whitmarsh's attempts to equate the Raikkonen/Sutil incident with this one are out of line. I'm sure he knows the difference so trying to make out like the Stewards are being inconsistent leaves him sounding a little petulant.

[aryan]

By the way, this race proves again that they need to change the safety car rule, because it was meant to make racing safer, but it's actually not doing that!

It is very much doing that, by keeping cars behind SC.

If a driver decides not to pay attention to simple racing rules, such as the colour of flags or the pit entry/exit lights, no amount of rule change can make the sport any safer.

[aryan]

Thats funny, in the very last race a certain car took out another with a punt from behind yet I don't seem to remember them getting any sort of penalty!

Because that was during racing.

This is in pit lane.

One is avoidable, the other is not.

Nakajima took out someone in Australia behins SC, and also received the same penalty.

[aryan]

What I mean here is that before the SC he had a clear lead and with the previous SC rule he wouldn't have lost the lead

He took on more fuel than Kimi and Kubica, or his team were slower than BMW and Ferrari, plain and simple.

Either of which is a fair enough reason why he lost the lead at that point.

I honestly can't connect this with the rule changes.

[CNR]

i think he should be made sit out 3 races for something like that.
reckless driving in pitlane.

LEW-SER

color blind driver should not be in f1.

[ShiftingGears]

i think he should be made sit out 3 races for something like that.
reckless driving in pitlane.

LEW-SER

color blind driver should not be in f1.

Total overreaction.

He got a deserved penalty for it, nothing more needed. Really shows how a brain fade for just a moment will completely change the race. I was never expecting it.

[aryan]

Agreed that there indeed isn't a problem with the pit exit rule, but if the pits are never closed, there won't be any problems with the red light either. Why? Because red light exists to prevent drivers from starting to fight for position behind safety car, hence keeping them in the pitlane until everyone has passed and they can peacefully join the back of the grid. But with the previous SC rule everyone pitted before joining SC lead and no-one had to wait for green light, but could exit the pits immediately.

I distinctly remember a certain Juan Pablo Montoya being penalised on this exact same circuit for exiting pit lane when the light was red.

That Juan Pablo Montoya, as fas as I remember, raced in F1 under your favourite SC rules.

Just an example that, at certain times when the train is passing, the pit lane light is red. This is specially the case in Canada where cars reenter the circuit in second corner in a position they can challenge those already running on the track.

[Valve Bounce]

One has to consider that this incident took place within the pit lane. Fortunately it happened beyond the last pit, where there could have been pit crews involved, but there should be a standard penalty for anyone causing an accident within the confines of the pit lane, whether it's before the pits or after.

Maybe they should have an overhead bank of lights which can turn red, green or even yellow at the end of the pits. The advent of night races would make this mandatory.

10 grid places is not too much, because he'll make up some places in France and score a few points there anyway. The guy buggered up my pickems, so I can't say I feel sorry for him.

[Valve Bounce]

i think he should be made sit out 3 races for something like that.
reckless driving in pitlane.

LEW-SER

color blind driver should not be in f1.

You sound like a Port Adelaide supporter. :rolleyes:

[wmcot]

Thats funny, in the very last race a certain car took out another with a punt from behind yet I don't seem to remember them getting any sort of penalty! One rule for when a Ferrari takes someone out, another for when someone takes a Ferrari out it would seem.

Oh, I didn't realize Sutil was stopped in the pitlane by a red light at Monaco??? So yes, I see the situations are very similar! :)

[wmcot]

Woah!


Definitely not.

10 grid places is going to butcher Hamilton's chances of a good result.
A bit out of hand.

Try running your feelings by Kimi - I doubt he would agree that the penalty is harsh! How about "if you take a driver out of a race, you are taken out of the next race(DQ'd)?" Seems fair!

[Big Ben]

Maybe now LH found an answer to his dilemma: did he ruined KR's race?

[Mark]

On first inspection it seems to be harsh, as he's already lost a probable win by this. But when you look at it from the point of view that Kimi's race was also spoiled through no fault of his own then to hand Kimi an advantage for the next race is right and proper. Somewhat like a free kick in football.

[Mark]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

Eh? So when I'm driving down the road its fine for me to run into the back of someone waiting at a red light, because he's blocking my path?

[Bezza]

There is nothing wrong with the safety car rules. It is the same for everybody and it is the fault of the driver if he can't stop for a red light! The light caught out Montoya in 05 and Massa and Fisichella in 07. It is basic stuff. Hamilton made a schoolboy error.

I think the safety car rules are improved personally, especially letting lapped cars overtake so the snake is in correct order. This adds to the racing.

[ArrowsFA1]

Absolutely right that Hamilton gets penalised. He caused an avoidable accident. It's about as clearcut as you can get.

I suspect he was frustrated at having lost places to KR & RK at the pitstop, particularly as he'd built up a good lead, and was probably looking to make up places asap. Maybe he was unsighted, or simply distracted, but none of that is any excuse. He ****** up.

[SGWilko]

Is Rosberg being harshly treated. It was almost as if he was being brake-tested by Hamilton?

Probably need to watch it again.

You what? Lewis saw the stopped cars and red light too late, and braked as soon as he saw them. You actually believe he also had time for a brake test: Feck me, thats crazy. :down:

[SGWilko]

If you'd actually watched the last race you'd know that that was a racing incident.

Ah, now I understand, today's collection of F1 cars going round the track was just a 'friendly', and they were not racing?

If they were not racing, why were Kimi and Kubica side by side? Not going to 'race' out the pit lane were they?

[Storm]

10 places grid penalty is not enough in my opinion...
.
Driving into the back of stopped cars when the light is red that too in the pit-lane could have led to a more serious accident...

[jens]

It is very much doing that, by keeping cars behind SC.

If a driver decides not to pay attention to simple racing rules, such as the colour of flags or the pit entry/exit lights, no amount of rule change can make the sport any safer.

Doesn't it sound like if the drivers don't crash out at any part of the circuit, then we won't have any safety cars at all and it would be all right. Surely it's easier to avoid mistakes on the pitlane than on the circuit, but mistake is a mistake. Looking at the amount of mistakes made with the red light (Montoya, Barrichello, Massa, Fisichella, Hamilton, Rosberg - like what, 6 drivers?!?! And there are surely more of them, who I have forgotten) then it shows that the problem persists.

The safety car rule is making the pits more dangerous - fact. If almost every time someone misses the red light, then I'm becomic sceptical about always saying, how stupid and idiotic the drivers are. Well, are really so many of them brainless then? Yeah, we all on the Internet are a lot smarter than those drivers and know exactly, what to do, sure. :rolleyes: I think the red light is not seen well. Look, Kimi and Kubica breaked quite late. Hamilton and Rosberg probably would have slowed down too before the white line if there hadn't been any cars in front of them. But they saw that light too late and hadn't time to react.

With a lot of drivers coming into the pits at the same time, - like it or not - we will see more crashes in the pits in the future as the drivers at the back don't react and drive into the drivers ahead of them. Safer? Cutting costs? No way. By the way, I even don't think we will see crashes just because of the red light, but simply because the pits are so overcrowded with cars moving everywhere and the possibility of a crash is high anyway. Safer?

With the keyword "safety" FIA has implemented a lot of rules. One of the reason for grooved tyres was safety (reducing speeds), one of the reasons for V8's was safety (again reducing speeds). I don't think folks quite like those rules. I am seriously suspicious that the real reason behind the current SC rule is simply making F1 less dull by creating some mess with dropping frontrunners to the back of the field. And they are succeeding in it perfectly. The word "safety" is just a cover. Nothing is safer now.

[K-Pu]

Well, it would have been more dangerous if this had happened at the start, when the cars at tha last row would reach a stalled car at tha front at... quite a high speed.

In this case, hitting someone at less than 80 km/h (I want to think Hamilton started to brake before hitting Kimi) with a F1 car is far from being a terrible accident. The problem, as said before, would have come if it´d happened in front of some bunch of mechanics.

F1 cars are, thanks to the engineers, very safe places to be into when you have an accident. Even Pedro de la Rosa said that. So I can´t see how could this have lead to a more serious accident, but anyway, the penalty seems fair to me. Things like this must be penalised, and no doubt there are (and has been and will be) things you should be penalised for and you aren´t.

When people say this is unfair because LH gets his next race ruined, it seems to me that they miss the point of Hamilton being the one who caused this accident. If it were the other way round, I wonder if they´d be just happy with the other pilot just getting a "don´t do it again".

[jens]

He took on more fuel than Kimi and Kubica, or his team were slower than BMW and Ferrari, plain and simple.

Either of which is a fair enough reason why he lost the lead at that point.

I honestly can't connect this with the rule changes.

Hamilton had at least a 6-second lead before pitstops.

I don't think his pitstop lasted for more than 6 seconds longer than the pitstops of his chief rivals. So the connection to the rule change is simple. Even with a longer pitstop he would have remained in the race lead as he wouldn't have lost all his 6-second advantage just due to a pitstop.

[Knock-on]

When people say this is unfair because LH gets his next race ruined, it seems to me that they miss the point of Hamilton being the one who caused this accident. If it were the other way round, I wonder if they´d be just happy with the other pilot just getting a "don´t do it again".


Totally agree. As a lewis supporter, I obviously dissapointed but as a fan of Motorsport, I agree with the penalty for the same reason I didn't support a penalty for Kimi in Monaco.

This was an avoidable accident from both of them. I do wonder what Kimi was doing side by side and you have to say this was a huge contributing factor but ultimatly, it's Lewis's job to know there could be a red light at the end of the Pit.

I would guess he wont do it again :D

[Big Ben]

I agree that SC rules aren't that good but it doesn't excuse LH at all. I think it was a much better situation that KR and RK. He had 2 cars in front of him waiting for the light to change but somehow he missed the chance to understand what was going on.

[Garry Walker]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

That could very well be argued, but only if one has had 24 beers and 2 litres of vodka.


How many places was Kimi penalized for his driving in Monaco. Lewis already lost a possiblt 10 points and he didn't do on purpose, so I don't see the point in the extra penalty.
Comparing those two incidents is stuff that a child would be embarrassed about. Nonsense.



Having said that I will be happy when we get rid of all the SC nonsense.
Whilst I hate these SC rules we have now, it wasn`t those that caused the crash this time.

[BDunnell]

Doesn't it sound like if the drivers don't crash out at any part of the circuit, then we won't have any safety cars at all and it would be all right. Surely it's easier to avoid mistakes on the pitlane than on the circuit, but mistake is a mistake. Looking at the amount of mistakes made with the red light (Montoya, Barrichello, Massa, Fisichella, Hamilton, Rosberg - like what, 6 drivers?!?! And there are surely more of them, who I have forgotten) then it shows that the problem persists.

The safety car rule is making the pits more dangerous - fact. If almost every time someone misses the red light, then I'm becomic sceptical about always saying, how stupid and idiotic the drivers are. Well, are really so many of them brainless then? Yeah, we all on the Internet are a lot smarter than those drivers and know exactly, what to do, sure. :rolleyes: I think the red light is not seen well. Look, Kimi and Kubica breaked quite late. Hamilton and Rosberg probably would have slowed down too before the white line if there hadn't been any cars in front of them. But they saw that light too late and hadn't time to react.

With a lot of drivers coming into the pits at the same time, - like it or not - we will see more crashes in the pits in the future as the drivers at the back don't react and drive into the drivers ahead of them. Safer? Cutting costs? No way. By the way, I even don't think we will see crashes just because of the red light, but simply because the pits are so overcrowded with cars moving everywhere and the possibility of a crash is high anyway. Safer?

In the past, wasn't someone also positioned at the end of the pit lane to make it even more clear that the exit was closed, or am I imagining that? I have certainly seen that in UK racing.

It seems to me that while the new safety car and pitlane rules do make the possibility of incidents like this even stronger, and must shoulder some of the blame for what happened yesterday, this one was another example of drivers/teams maybe not paying enough attention to the basics. We've had it before with people saying they didn't see caution flags, and then calling for them to be altered in some way, when they were apparently fine prior to this.

[BDunnell]

Comparing those two incidents is stuff that a child would be embarrassed about. Nonsense.

While we may well disagree with the views of others, is there any need to put that disagreement in this way?

[Robinho]

pretty fair punishment - i was expecting 5 places, but i don't think 10 is excessive, it makes the race a lot harder just to get points after meaning someone else lost theirs this time.

Glad Rosberg got the same, both were guilty of brain fade, but i think some of the bile flowing in Lewis's direction is a bit excessive, although i agree he deserves a good deal of criticism for the move.

won't be the last time someone makes a mistake and causes an avoidable accident, probably not even the last pit/sc related crash - i look forward to everyones outpourings next time any of the drivers makes a mistake, and i particularly enjoyed reading all the pages of stuff written about Rosberg in the same incident ;)

Absolutely right that Hamilton gets penalised. He caused an avoidable accident. It's about as clearcut as you can get.

I suspect he was frustrated at having lost places to KR & RK at the pitstop, particularly as he'd built up a good lead, and was probably looking to make up places asap. Maybe he was unsighted, or simply distracted, but none of that is any excuse. He ****** up.

Bloody hell, we completely agree on something!

However, I suspect you might not agree with me on this......

I saw this on Autosport..

Q: It's quite severe isn't it?

Whitmarsh: "It is. There was a different view taken in Monaco [with Adrian Sutil being hit by Kimi Raikkonen] so we've got to work with what we're given."

Erm, Whitmarsh, we know that you are a born liar, but the Kimi/Sutil incident was when the cars were racing....not when the safety car was out and not in the pitlane.

The arrogance of the cheat and a liar is breathtaking. Funny how he doesn't mention how Hamilton wasn't punished for rear-ending Alonso in Bahrain.

Nakajima was penalised 10 places for hitting Kubica behind the safety car, the same penalty now applied to Hamilton & Rosberg.

That's fair and that is the only equivalent incident to judge it by.

But, once again, we have the hypocrisy & deceit of a Mclaren boss to put up with.

If only the FIA had thrown them out last year. Then we'd have decency in the paddock.

[Garry Walker]

While we may well disagree with the views of others, is there any need to put that disagreement in this way?

You know me, I am not very good at diplomacy :D

[BDunnell]

Bloody hell, we completely agree on something!

However, I suspect you might not agree with me on this......

I saw this on Autosport..

Q: It's quite severe isn't it?

Whitmarsh: "It is. There was a different view taken in Monaco [with Adrian Sutil being hit by Kimi Raikkonen] so we've got to work with what we're given."

Erm, Whitmarsh, we know that you are a born liar, but the Kimi/Sutil incident was when the cars were racing....not when the safety car was out and not in the pitlane.

The arrogance of the cheat and a liar is breathtaking. Funny how he doesn't mention how Hamilton wasn't punished for rear-ending Alonso in Bahrain.

Nakajima was penalised 10 places for hitting Kubica behind the safety car, the same penalty now applied to Hamilton & Rosberg.

That's fair and that is the only equivalent incident to judge it by.

But, once again, we have the hypocrisy & deceit of a Mclaren boss to put up with.

If only the FIA had thrown them out last year. Then we'd have decency in the paddock.

Is it possible we could stop going over the same ground over and over again? I would also be interested in seeing some sort of clinical medical proof of Martin Whitmarsh being a 'born liar' if comments like that are to be thrown around.

[Valve Bounce]

Bloody hell, we completely agree on something!

However, I suspect you might not agree with me on this......

I saw this on Autosport..

Q: It's quite severe isn't it?

Whitmarsh: "It is. There was a different view taken in Monaco [with Adrian Sutil being hit by Kimi Raikkonen] so we've got to work with what we're given."

Erm, Whitmarsh, we know that you are a born liar, but the Kimi/Sutil incident was when the cars were racing....not when the safety car was out and not in the pitlane.

The arrogance of the cheat and a liar is breathtaking. Funny how he doesn't mention how Hamilton wasn't punished for rear-ending Alonso in Bahrain.

Nakajima was penalised 10 places for hitting Kubica behind the safety car, the same penalty now applied to Hamilton & Rosberg.

That's fair and that is the only equivalent incident to judge it by.

But, once again, we have the hypocrisy & deceit of a Mclaren boss to put up with.

If only the FIA had thrown them out last year. Then we'd have decency in the paddock.

Aren't we going over old ground which has absolutely nothing to do with this incident? I mean I can tell you what happened in Boston Legal tonight, about revenge and so on, but that has nothing to do with this case either.

Lewis was penalised deservedly; those closely affected obviously think otherwise. Fine!! Let's move on!!

[BDunnell]

Lewis was penalised deservedly; those closely affected obviously think otherwise. Fine!! Let's move on!!

:up:

Again, I note that those who are enthusiasts are tending to take this view, whereas those who are what I call 'fans' are rather more vehement.

[ArrowsFA1]

Bloody hell, we completely agree on something!
:p

However, I suspect you might not agree with me on this......
Actually no. I agree that the KR/AS incident was very different to what we saw on Sunday. I don't think Whitmarsh is right to compare both incidents, although I believe the the pitlane is considered to be a part of the race track as far as the rulebook is concerned ;)

[Valve Bounce]

I just wonder if it had been Sato who hit Lewis Hamilton and put him out of the race, I just wonder whether some would have demanded Sato be banned for a number of races.

Jest a thought!!

[Somebody]

Seriously there should be a sticky for this....

Kimi incident= Losing it at high speed on the track and hitting an unfortunate driver. You can't penalise a driver for losing control. You simply can't......
Lewis incident = Boneheaded driving IN THE PITS. Totally unacceptable and he's been penalised appropriately.

Exactly. Incidents happen on the track, where drivers lose control. You can mitigate that to a certain extent, but - unless you allow driver aids to the point that it's just point & squirt and the electronics do the rest - you can't avoid it. Kimi lost control in the tunnel, retrieved the car twice, but if he braked any earlier he'd have spun and STILL hit Sutil.

Lewis rear-ended a STATIONARY car IN THE PIT LANE, when the car was fully under his control. If anything, ten places isn't enough for that - any incident involving a car hitting another IN THE PITS should be an automatic back-of-the-grid at the next race.

[Ghostwalker]

Ah, now I understand, today's collection of F1 cars going round the track was just a 'friendly', and they were not racing?

If they were not racing, why were Kimi and Kubica side by side? Not going to 'race' out the pit lane were they?

When the SC car is out there is no racing on track since racing means fight for places which is a violation the SC rules (no overtaking during yellow flag or SC). So technically the cars werent racing they were just following the SC.

The one of Kubica and Kimi who would have gotten out first from the pit would have had an advantage. But IMO Kuibica should have been first out followed by Kimi and Hamilton since. For Lewis there were no such benefits he was clearly 3rd and would have caught up with Robert and Kimi in no time since the SC was out.

[Sleeper]

Doesn't it sound like if the drivers don't crash out at any part of the circuit, then we won't have any safety cars at all and it would be all right. Surely it's easier to avoid mistakes on the pitlane than on the circuit, but mistake is a mistake. Looking at the amount of mistakes made with the red light (Montoya, Barrichello, Massa, Fisichella, Hamilton, Rosberg - like what, 6 drivers?!?! And there are surely more of them, who I have forgotten) then it shows that the problem persists.

The safety car rule is making the pits more dangerous - fact. If almost every time someone misses the red light, then I'm becomic sceptical about always saying, how stupid and idiotic the drivers are. Well, are really so many of them brainless then? Yeah, we all on the Internet are a lot smarter than those drivers and know exactly, what to do, sure. :rolleyes: I think the red light is not seen well. Look, Kimi and Kubica breaked quite late. Hamilton and Rosberg probably would have slowed down too before the white line if there hadn't been any cars in front of them. But they saw that light too late and hadn't time to react.

With a lot of drivers coming into the pits at the same time, - like it or not - we will see more crashes in the pits in the future as the drivers at the back don't react and drive into the drivers ahead of them. Safer? Cutting costs? No way. By the way, I even don't think we will see crashes just because of the red light, but simply because the pits are so overcrowded with cars moving everywhere and the possibility of a crash is high anyway. Safer?

With the keyword "safety" FIA has implemented a lot of rules. One of the reason for grooved tyres was safety (reducing speeds), one of the reasons for V8's was safety (again reducing speeds). I don't think folks quite like those rules. I am seriously suspicious that the real reason behind the current SC rule is simply making F1 less dull by creating some mess with dropping frontrunners to the back of the field. And they are succeeding in it perfectly. The word "safety" is just a cover. Nothing is safer now.
The saftey car has been in F1 for more than 30 years and whenever its deployed we always see cars diving into the pits en mass, have done for decades, and the same goes whenever there is a change in conditions, the pit lane ws rather crowded last year at the Nurburgring when it started raining on the first lap. Maybe larger red lights are needed at the end of the pitlane, but drivers jumping the red light is nothing new, I remember Jarno Trulli getting DSQ'd a tthe A1 Ring in 01 for it. If theirs a problem with the visibility of the light, the drivers should flag it up on the friday in practice so something can be done about it, and pay more attention in the race.

[BDunnell]

I just wonder if it had been Sato who hit Lewis Hamilton and put him out of the race, I just wonder whether some would have demanded Sato be banned for a number of races.

Jest a thought!!

No-one reasonable or sensible would have done.

[Daniel]

No-one reasonable or sensible would have done.
So a fair few forumers would be calling for Sato to get race bans then? :p

[BDunnell]

So a fair few forumers would be calling for Sato to get race bans then? :p

And, no doubt, for him to be burnt at the stake for BEING SUCH A LIAR AND COWARD, or something similar. But I digress.

[PSfan]

I just wonder if it had been Sato who hit Lewis Hamilton and put him out of the race, I just wonder whether some would have demanded Sato be banned for a number of races.

It my opinion that had Rosberg not ran into the back of Hamilton, that a stronger penalty might have been in Hamilton's future. They could have punished the suspicious way he decided to hit Kimi instead of Kubica and "masked" it as pitlane safety, but it would have been hard to give the LH and NR different penalties for essentially the same crime...

Though perhaps 10 grid spots is the worst penalty the race stewerts can hand out based on the Sporting regs...



Jest a thought!!

Surely you jest :p :

[aryan]

The safety car rule is making the pits more dangerous - fact. If almost every time someone misses the red light, then I'm becomic sceptical about always saying, how stupid and idiotic the drivers are. Well, are really so many of them brainless then? Yeah, we all on the Internet are a lot smarter than those drivers and know exactly, what to do, sure. :rolleyes: I think the red light is not seen well. Look, Kimi and Kubica breaked quite late. Hamilton and Rosberg probably would have slowed down too before the white line if there hadn't been any cars in front of them. But they saw that light too late and hadn't time to react.

With a lot of drivers coming into the pits at the same time, - like it or not - we will see more crashes in the pits in the future as the drivers at the back don't react and drive into the drivers ahead of them. Safer? Cutting costs? No way. By the way, I even don't think we will see crashes just because of the red light, but simply because the pits are so overcrowded with cars moving everywhere and the possibility of a crash is high anyway. Safer?


The gist of your argument seems to be that because of current SC rules, the pits are overcrowded when SC comes out.

I fail to see how this is different to what we had before. If I remember correctly, prior to the new SC rules and the closing of the pits during SC, nearly everyone also pitted when the pace car came out. Because in effect it gave you a free pit stop.

Now, people are not pitting when the car comes out, but a couple of laps later when the pit opens. The overcrowding of the pit lane during SC is still the same, and if memory serves me right, it has actually slightly improved because of the new rules.

I understand your argument that if so many people are doing it, then there should be a problem. Fair enough. I still think that because a red light at pit stop happens very rarely, many drivers simply forget to pay attention to it, and that is the root of the issue. However, I wouldn't mind seeing new and improved pit lane lights, maybe make them bigger, or move them overhead. Maybe a marshal can also show a flag at the end of the lane when the light is red, to attract attention. Drivers seem to be paying more attention to racing flags than lights.

[aryan]

Hamilton had at least a 6-second lead before pitstops.

I don't think his pitstop lasted for more than 6 seconds longer than the pitstops of his chief rivals. So the connection to the rule change is simple. Even with a longer pitstop he would have remained in the race lead as he wouldn't have lost all his 6-second advantage just due to a pitstop.

Jens, I am trying my best to follow your argument here but I can't.

With the previous SC rules, Hamilton, Kubica and Kimi would have spent half a lap behind SC before hitting the pits, right? But Hamilton's lead would have evaporated anyway when SC came out and they would have hit the pit stops in pretty much the same way they did with the new rules.

Am I missing something?

[jens]

The gist of your argument seems to be that because of current SC rules, the pits are overcrowded when SC comes out.

I fail to see how this is different to what we had before. If I remember correctly, prior to the new SC rules and the closing of the pits during SC, nearly everyone also pitted when the pace car came out. Because in effect it gave you a free pit stop.

Now, people are not pitting when the car comes out, but a couple of laps later when the pit opens. The overcrowding of the pit lane during SC is still the same, and if memory serves me right, it has actually slightly improved because of the new rules.


In the past, when the SC came out, the field was more spread out and there was less chaos in the pits as often the leaders already exited the pits, when the backmarkers were still to come into the pits. Currently, however, everyone enters the pits together.

Talking about gist - actually the biggest issue, what annoyes me with the current SC rules, is that the front runners are undeservedly dropped to the back of the field. But "overpopulation" is an issue too.

If the Canadian Grand Prix had been run with the previous SC rules, then simple calculations say that Hamilton would have lead the race after the pitstop too if we look at the list of those, who came into the pits. The best positioned guy, who decided to stay out, was Heidfeld, but before SC he was already almost 30 seconds behind LH.


The saftey car has been in F1 for more than 30 years and whenever its deployed we always see cars diving into the pits en mass, have done for decades, and the same goes whenever there is a change in conditions, the pit lane ws rather crowded last year at the Nurburgring when it started raining on the first lap. Maybe larger red lights are needed at the end of the pitlane, but drivers jumping the red light is nothing new, I remember Jarno Trulli getting DSQ'd a tthe A1 Ring in 01 for it. If theirs a problem with the visibility of the light, the drivers should flag it up on the friday in practice so something can be done about it, and pay more attention in the race.

More than 30 years? Weren't safety car rules implemented in F1 in early 90's? I think in North American series they have been used for a lot longer.
Indeed drivers have done such mistakes for ages. I remember back in 1989 Mansell and Nannini started from the pitlane in Canada and both exited the pits before the race had been started, hence both got a disqualification. :p :
What is more amazing that despite those almost ever-lasting problems nothing has been done with the lights.
---

But at least we have gone to an agreement that something should be done with the lights. :)

[jens]

Jens, I am trying my best to follow your argument here but I can't.

With the previous SC rules, Hamilton, Kubica and Kimi would have spent half a lap behind SC before hitting the pits, right? But Hamilton's lead would have evaporated anyway when SC came out and they would have hit the pit stops in pretty much the same way they did with the new rules.

Am I missing something?

With the previous SC rule everyone, who wanted, would have pitted before catching safety car. So no half of the lap. Safety car exited the pits, while drivers, before joining the SC lead pack, entered the pits to have their stops. What was of course important, was a quick reaction by the pitcrew to be ready to take a driver in immediately, but normally there weren't problems with this. Montoya missing the pits in Canada in 05 is actually the only "miss" I can remember.

[BDunnell]

In the past, when the SC came out, the field was more spread out and there was less chaos in the pits as often the leaders already exited the pits, when the backmarkers were still to come into the pits. Currently, however, everyone enters the pits together.

And this, surely, is at the root of why the new rules affect the situation in the pits. It's also, of course, unduly unfair on those teams that have two drivers on the same strategy, especially under short SC periods. This simply shouldn't be allowed to continue. It doesn't add any more unpredictability to races than we've always had in the past when teams have made their own strategic mistakes regarding pitting people under the SC.



Talking about gist - actually the biggest issue, what annoyes me with the current SC rules, is that the front runners are undeservedly dropped to the back of the field.

This is where I disagree slightly, because I would have thought that changing strategies and giving yourself enough flexibility on fuel and tyres to get around sudden SC periods could help to get around this. The finishing positions of the two Red Bulls on Sunday is a classic example of this.



More than 30 years? Weren't safety car rules implemented in F1 in early 90's? I think in North American series they have been used for a lot longer.
Indeed drivers have done such mistakes for ages. I remember back in 1989 Mansell and Nannini started from the pitlane in Canada and both exited the pits before the race had been started, hence both got a disqualification. :p :
What is more amazing that despite those almost ever-lasting problems nothing has been done with the lights.

Strictly speaking, the first use of a safety car in F1 was at the Canadian GP in 1973, and without good electronic timing equipment or decent lap-charting it proved chaotic. The weather was incredibly mixed, and still no-one really knows who won (the victory was given, possibly rightly, to Peter Revson) because the order got so jumbled up that nobody could keep track. The safety car, incidentally, on that occasion was a Porsche 914/6 driven by Canadian racer Eppie Wietzes — there's more about it here: http://www.f1rejects.com/drivers/wietzes/biography.html

If I remember correctly, though, it was reintroduced as a permanent fixture in 1994.

[jens]

This is where I disagree slightly, because I would have thought that changing strategies and giving yourself enough flexibility on fuel and tyres to get around sudden SC periods could help to get around this. The finishing positions of the two Red Bulls on Sunday is a classic example of this.


The problem is that safety car periods can't be predicted and any strategy can be ruined if the SC comes out at a wrong moment. SC came out on Lap 17 (?) and the 2-stoppers suffered. If it had come out on Lap 27, then the one-stoppers would have been the losers.

[jens]

If I remember correctly, though, it was reintroduced as a permanent fixture in 1994.

IIRC safety car was deployed at the 1993 Brazilian and British Grand Prix's too.

[pits4me]

I think thats the point.

10 place may be harsh but Kimi was running anywhere from 1st to third and in a non racing incident and following the rules he was taken out by Hamilton. Id expect the same in any situation, only wish Schumacher had been dealt with similarly during his 'reign'.

Kimi gets of clean with his brain fade in Monaco. Sutil was looking at a great finish.

[pits4me]

The saftey car has been in F1 for more than 30 years and whenever its deployed we always see cars diving into the pits en mass, have done for decades, and the same goes whenever there is a change in conditions, the pit lane ws rather crowded last year at the Nurburgring when it started raining on the first lap. Maybe larger red lights are needed at the end of the pitlane, but drivers jumping the red light is nothing new, I remember Jarno Trulli getting DSQ'd a tthe A1 Ring in 01 for it. If theirs a problem with the visibility of the light, the drivers should flag it up on the friday in practice so something can be done about it, and pay more attention in the race.

Maybe lights should be deployed along the wall in several locations.
Why was Mosley's Mob holding up the cars anyway? The fact Lewis lost two grid spots when pitting means McLarens pit location must be very very bad.

[stevie_gerrard]

Was always going to happen, if anything, i think it will make the action in the middle pack even more exciting than it already has been.

[Bagwan]

What does Ron say about it ?
"It’s difficult for a driver to decide whether to focus on the lights or on the cars ahead in situations like that."

Either would have worked .

Whitmarsh says he was warned by the team as well .

[Ari]

Fair penalty. I said to myself it would be 10 spots at the next race and it was.

[Tazio]

Why was Mosley's Mob holding up the cars anyway? . They were distracted by the Anglo-Mafia :p


The fact Lewis lost two grid spots when pitting means McLarens pit location must be very very bad. I'm not sure, but I think they were in the second to last pit. Which isn't as bad, or the pit, that they earned by finishing last in the WCC last season!

[Valve Bounce]

F1 is all about Vested Interests, and the more powerful the team, the more vested is the interest and the louder the protest.

As I had put to this forum, had Sato run into the back of Hamilton and put him out of the race, Whitmarsh would have screamed blue murder to have Sato d/q'd and banned.

Secondly, and not related to the above, McLaren did explain why Hamilton came out behind Kimi, although the reason seemed very sus to me - basically their excuse didn't add up to the extra fuel and it sounded more like a minor stuff up. Nevertheless, they did admit that it could have been what caused Lewis to be flustered, and they also admitted they told Hamilton about the red light. (I can't find the link as Autosport has moved on with many articles).

[Hawkmoon]

McLaren had the 5th garage. If they'd been given the garage they were supposed to get, ie. 11th, then we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

McLaren's garage spot had nothing to do with the incident. A poor pitstop that caused Hamilton to fall behind Raikkonen and Kubica combined with Hamilton's inattention caused the incident.

[jso1985]

Doesn't it sound like if the drivers don't crash out at any part of the circuit, then we won't have any safety cars at all and it would be all right. Surely it's easier to avoid mistakes on the pitlane than on the circuit, but mistake is a mistake. Looking at the amount of mistakes made with the red light (Montoya, Barrichello, Massa, Fisichella, Hamilton, Rosberg - like what, 6 drivers?!?! And there are surely more of them, who I have forgotten) then it shows that the problem persists.

The safety car rule is making the pits more dangerous - fact. If almost every time someone misses the red light, then I'm becomic sceptical about always saying, how stupid and idiotic the drivers are. Well, are really so many of them brainless then? Yeah, we all on the Internet are a lot smarter than those drivers and know exactly, what to do, sure. :rolleyes: I think the red light is not seen well. Look, Kimi and Kubica breaked quite late. Hamilton and Rosberg probably would have slowed down too before the white line if there hadn't been any cars in front of them. But they saw that light too late and hadn't time to react.

With a lot of drivers coming into the pits at the same time, - like it or not - we will see more crashes in the pits in the future as the drivers at the back don't react and drive into the drivers ahead of them. Safer? Cutting costs? No way. By the way, I even don't think we will see crashes just because of the red light, but simply because the pits are so overcrowded with cars moving everywhere and the possibility of a crash is high anyway. Safer?

With the keyword "safety" FIA has implemented a lot of rules. One of the reason for grooved tyres was safety (reducing speeds), one of the reasons for V8's was safety (again reducing speeds). I don't think folks quite like those rules. I am seriously suspicious that the real reason behind the current SC rule is simply making F1 less dull by creating some mess with dropping frontrunners to the back of the field. And they are succeeding in it perfectly. The word "safety" is just a cover. Nothing is safer now.

just take count that Montoya's incident in Montreal 05 was the most dangerous one of all the pit-lane and red light incidents I have seen in F1(cuz in motorsport in general Andretti crashing into Tracy's back in an IndyCar series race in 1993(?)(could had been the other way round, please correct me) was way above "dumb") as he almost crashed agaisnt the SC, and that was with old SC rules.
fact is that going through the accident area without the guidance of a SC first increases the danger at least a bit. while having more cars on the pit-lane isn't an excuse for more accidents otherwise I have a really good one if I ever crash agaisnt another car during heavy street traffic!
I don't like much the new SC rules, but Hamilton dumbness had nothing to do with it

[GP-M3]

Personally I think Lewis' penatly is not enough. If those two were not there, he would have run the red light, thus be out of this race. Plus with the addition of taking out Kimi (how convenient) he should have started the next race from Pit Lane, right where he left off here. I believe that is why Big Mac is being so gracious about this penalty, they got off easy.

[leopard]

It looks like the pit exit cutting off the track vertically was designed to trap drivers aren't getting used to look at traffic light carefully. Last year Massa and who was another one, were black-flagged here for ignoring red light.

It's recommended to modify either one of the track or pit exit to have intersection with the more proper declivity, if Montreal still deserves of the next race in future comes. The track condition is also something could make drivers and cars are pissed off.

[wmcot]

Also if the penalty was for not stopping for a red light it could well be argued that had Raikonnen and Kubica not been blocking the end of the pitlane that Hamilton would have stopped before the line!

Or, perhaps he would have passed the light and been DQ'd???

[ArrowsFA1]

Can anyone make sense of Stefano Domenicali's latest comments (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/68175http://) about the incident:

"For Kimi it's pretty obvious what happened. It's clear, nothing to add apart from the fact that you can imagine that at that speed, 80 km/h, in the pitlane, without respect for that, black flag for that, it was an avoidable collision... well, lot of things that I think that… it's important to see what will be the Federation's reaction to that."
Later in the interview he says of the 10 place grid penalty imposed on Hamilton & Rosberg:

"I think it's a fair decision. It's something that.. on the code. I didn't know. Honestly, I would have expected something. You cannot exclude him from points in the race because he didn't finish, so to be realistic, pragmatic, knowing the rules, yes, that's what I was expecting, so that will be part of the show in the next race."
To be clear, I'm not criticising Domenicali for what he's saying. I'm just wondering what he means when he says "it's important to see what will be the Federation's reaction to that". Is he suggesting there should be some sort of additional penalty?

[BDunnell]

Personally I think Lewis' penatly is not enough. If those two were not there, he would have run the red light, thus be out of this race. Plus with the addition of taking out Kimi (how convenient) he should have started the next race from Pit Lane, right where he left off here. I believe that is why Big Mac is being so gracious about this penalty, they got off easy.

Good point, but I don't think you can impose an extra penalty based on something that didn't actually happen.

[Bezza]

Hamilton now reckons the penalty was harsh, and that the red light being on was a "silly" rule.

So, not his fault clearly then...

He really needs to take a look at himself. What grates me most with any mistake is when the person does not have the decency to admit it, shrugging it off, barely apologizing to Raikkonen, and then deciding the rules are wrong.

Pathetic.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7445657.stm

[F1boat]

And he says that he is unstoppable, so why worry about the penalty?

[ArrowsFA1]

Hamilton now reckons the penalty was harsh, and that the red light being on was a "silly" rule.
Regarding the "silly" comment, Hamilton is saying much the same as Massa said (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59664) last year and I don't recall Felipe being criticised for his comments.

[Robinho]

he also says the rule is silly, but it is a rule and he respects that

[F1boat]

He should listen to his radio and talk less.

[ArrowsFA1]

He should listen to his radio and talk less.
So what's your view of these comments:

"I didn't do anything wrong and I find my disqualification absurd and utterly mistaken. What was I supposed to do? I never saw the red light. What sense does it make? Was I supposed to stay stopped while the race went on?"

[Knock-on]

So what's your view of these comments:

Whoever said that should be hung, drawen and quartered.

Ban them, ban the team, burn them at the stake :laugh:

[Daika]

Hamilton could be more humble. No point in being arrogant. That he would won easy etc..

[ArrowsFA1]

Whoever said that should be hung, drawen and quartered.

Ban them, ban the team, burn them at the stake :laugh:
:laugh: :laugh:

Your view F1boat?

[Valve Bounce]

Whoever said that should be hung, drawen and quartered.

Ban them, ban the team, burn them at the stake :laugh:

Jest a thought, that's all, jest a thought.

[Storm]

This guy is unbelievable...while his fans want to call it "end of story" he is still going on about it...calling the rule silly (well yes it maybe indeed) and calling his penalty as harsh....just accept it and get on with it.
Whitmarsh says we did tell him to expect the red light at the end of the pit lane...and still he crashed into Kimi? And still its too harsh?

That is one damning comment from his team boss if ever there is likely to be.

[Knock-on]

This guy is unbelievable...while his fans want to call it "end of story" he is still going on about it...calling the rule silly (well yes it maybe indeed) and calling his penalty as harsh....just accept it and get on with it.
Whitmarsh says we did tell him to expect the red light at the end of the pit lane...and still he crashed into Kimi? And still its too harsh?

That is one damning comment from his team boss if ever there is likely to be.

Is he doing anything different to Massa last year?

Don't remember everyone getting up in arms and it's strange nodody that is slagging Hamilton wants to comment :laugh:

I thought the Monkeys were at the back, but there seems to be 3 here :D

[Daniel]

Is he doing anything different to Massa last year?

Don't remember everyone getting up in arms and it's strange nodody that is slagging Hamilton wants to comment :laugh:

I thought the Monkeys were at the back, but there seems to be 3 here :D
Massa missed a light. Hamilton missed a light and 2 STATIONARY cars in front of him. Big difference. If you told me you'd missed a light once or twice before I wouldn't think anything less of you.... but if you said you missed the light and stationary cars and plowed into the back of one of them I'd never drive in front of you......

[ArrowsFA1]

Massa missed a light. Hamilton missed a light and 2 STATIONARY cars in front of him. Big difference.
We've apprently moved on from slaming Hamilton for what he did, and it's now what he says is the the problem.

Hamilton says "silly" this year; Massa says "absurd and utterly mistaken" last year.

Big difference?

On another note...what is it with Kubica? It was he who was stopped at the red light last year :D

[Daniel]

We've apprently moved on from slaming Hamilton for what he did, and it's now what he says is the the problem.

Hamilton says "silly" this year; Massa says "absurd and utterly mistaken" last year.

Big difference?
I think given the difference in the incidents I don't see how you can really compare them. There is a rule against ramming your title rival up the arse. That rule isn't silly in the slightest.

Is he doing anything different to Massa last year?

Don't remember everyone getting up in arms and it's strange nodody that is slagging Hamilton wants to comment :laugh:

I thought the Monkeys were at the back, but there seems to be 3 here :D

I called Massa a stupid twat in 2007 for driving through the red light.

I therefore reserve the right to call Hamilton a stupid twat for crashing into the back of a driver who was sat at the red light in 2008.

[Storm]

Is he doing anything different to Massa last year?

Don't remember everyone getting up in arms and it's strange nodody that is slagging Hamilton wants to comment :laugh:

I thought the Monkeys were at the back, but there seems to be 3 here :D

I have no problems about his commenting on the rule or calling it silly...which it maybe as I said earlier..problem is the rule is here to stay and I never heard him calling it silly before today..also the fact that he was told by his team abt the possible red light and he still managed to rear-end Kimi is amazing.

Why would anyone get up in arms if someone missed a red light earlier? As long as they ruined ONLY their own bloody race by doing it.
Hamilton screwed the world champ and his main rival in this case.

[ArrowsFA1]

I think given the difference in the incidents I don't see how you can really compare them.
So it's acceptable for Massa to be critical of a rule/decision, but not Hamilton? It's arrogant of Hamilton to call the rule "silly", but when Massa says the decison was "absurd and utterly mistaken" that's perfectly ok?

[Storm]

Its acceptable to be called monkeys then :)

Who the hell is saying its acceptable for Massa or anything...where did Massa enter the picture really ? Massa did not hit a stopped car from behind and then call the rule silly (when in reality he was dumb enough not to see TWO cars and a red light inspite of being told on the radio about the light?)

[ArrowsFA1]

...where did Massa enter the picture really?
See below for the context.

Hamilton now reckons the penalty was harsh, and that the red light being on was a "silly" rule.

So, not his fault clearly then...

He really needs to take a look at himself. What grates me most with any mistake is when the person does not have the decency to admit it, shrugging it off, barely apologizing to Raikkonen, and then deciding the rules are wrong.

Pathetic.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7445657.stm

Regarding the "silly" comment, Hamilton is saying much the same as Massa said (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59664) last year and I don't recall Felipe being criticised for his comments.

Of course no one incident is exactly the same as the other, but there are similarities between Canada 2007 & Canada 2008 - safety car, pit lane open/closed regulation, pit lane red light - and we have two different drivers making comments. It seems there are different standards where judging those comments are concerned :dozey:

C'est la forum vie :s mokin:

[Daniel]

So it's acceptable for Massa to be critical of a rule/decision, but not Hamilton? It's arrogant of Hamilton to call the rule "silly", but when Massa says the decison was "absurd and utterly mistaken" that's perfectly ok?

I said they were different incidents. I didn't call Hamilton arrogant because of that comment. Do get your facts straight.

[ioan]

Its acceptable to be called monkeys then :)

Who the hell is saying its acceptable for Massa or anything...where did Massa enter the picture really ? Massa did not hit a stopped car from behind and then call the rule silly (when in reality he was dumb enough not to see TWO cars and a red light inspite of being told on the radio about the light?)

Don't lose your time Storm, they will next say it's Ferrari's fault and MS's Fault and than that the FIA is punishing Lewy just becaue he rammed a Ferrari and so on and so forth.

Like driver like fans!

[Daniel]

See below for the context.



Of course no one incident is exactly the same as the other, but there are similarities between Canada 2007 & Canada 2008 - safety car, pit lane open/closed regulation, pit lane red light - and we have two different drivers making comments. It seems there are different standards where judging those comments are concerned :dozey:

C'est la forum vie :s mokin:

The difference is Lewis ploughed into stationary cars. There was Massa sitting there at the line while he could have been racing and he went. I think he is wrong but has a leg to stand on. Lewis went into a stationary car and then blames the rule rather than himself for what happened. There were two other guys there who knew the rule just fine didn't cause an accident........

Why am I not talking about Nico? Because Nico's kept his trap shut like you should if you screw up like this.....

[ArrowsFA1]

I said they were different incidents. I didn't call Hamilton arrogant because of that comment. Do get your facts straight.
My facts are fine thanks because I didn't say you did.

As you'll see I introduced the Massa comment in response to criticisms of Hamilton's "silly" comment for comparison purposes. I said to you, and my view is, "it's now what he says is the the problem" and that is what I was trying to discuss. You want to continue discussing the incident itself. Apologies for being at crossed purposes.

[Daniel]

My facts are fine thanks because I didn't say you did.

You were replying to me when you said it :)

[ioan]

My facts are fine thanks because I didn't say you did.

As you'll see I introduced the Massa comment in response to criticisms of Hamilton's "silly" comment for comparison purposes. I said to you, and my view is, "it's now what he says is the the problem" and that is what I was trying to discuss. You want to continue discussing the incident itself. Apologies for being at crossed purposes.

here's the part that makes the difference between Felipe's comments and Lewy's:


"This will make no difference," he said, speaking to British newspapers.

"It hasn't knocked me confidence-wise. I'm not gutted or disappointed.

"We are baffled how it came to that in the space of 30 seconds.

"I had two guys in front of me and suddenly they have stopped as I have looked at the red light. But you can't win them all. This makes me stronger.

"Going forward, the mood is strong. The fact is, we destroyed everyone [on pace].

"With the car we have right now, there is no stopping us. It is not going to take me a day to recover or anything. I am really looking forward to Magny-Cours."

It's the stupidity and arrogance of the "best thing since sliced bread" that makes me, and I suppose others, to have a go at him.
The fact that you don't see it like that doesn't mean that you have to start rubbing it in others face ( I'm talking about your previous comments directed to F1boat).

[ArrowsFA1]

Don't lose your time Storm, they will next say it's Ferrari's fault and MS's Fault and than that the FIA is punishing Lewy just becaue he rammed a Ferrari and so on and so forth.

Like driver like fans!
You never fail to disappoint ioan :s mokin: IIRC a year ago you criticised the SC rules that ended up penalising Massa last year, and even used Ron Dennis's comments to support your view.

You were replying to me when you said it :)
When I said "So it's acceptable for Massa to be critical of a rule/decision, but not Hamilton? It's arrogant of Hamilton to call the rule "silly", but when Massa says the decison was "absurd and utterly mistaken" that's perfectly ok?" I was not saying you called Hamilton arrogant. I was posing a question for the purposes of discussion.

[Daniel]

When I said "So it's acceptable for Massa to be critical of a rule/decision, but not Hamilton? It's arrogant of Hamilton to call the rule "silly", but when Massa says the decison was "absurd and utterly mistaken" that's perfectly ok?" I was not saying you called Hamilton arrogant.

It was implied :)

[ArrowsFA1]

The fact that you don't see it like that doesn't mean that you have to start rubbing it in others face ( I'm talking about your previous comments directed to F1boat).
I'm not rubbing anything in anyone's face :rolleyes: I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion, and part of that was to get F1boat's views on Massa's comments given that F1boat had said Hamilton should "talk less".

[ioan]

You never fail to disappoint ioan :s mokin: IIRC a year ago you criticised the SC rules that ended up penalising Massa last year, and even used Ron Dennis's comments to support your view.

I don't remember Massa running into anyone last year, do you?!
I don't think the SC car rules are good.
But I don't think that someone should run into the back of other cars in the pit lane, no matter the reason for that.

You can go on and twist the facts as much as you wish, what I said last year still stands and doesn't absolve Lewy from his idiocy.

But we all know that you are a die hard McLiars fan, there's enough proof for that in the spying affair thread, so i'm not surprized by you trying to protect them and Lewy for this blunder.

:s mokin:

[ioan]

I'm not rubbing anything in anyone's face :rolleyes: I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion, and part of that was to get F1boat's views on Massa's comments given that F1boat had said Hamilton should "talk less".

And if chose not to reply to your baiting than why do you have to hares him?

[Tazio]

Don't lose your time Storm,
I second the motion!
This thread has become pathetic!
Once again a thread has been hijacked by the Anglo-Mafia!
The same list of suspects come to the aide of their misunderstood hero,
that defended him for flipping the bird to a driver that had the nerve to race him for position!
What do these two events have in common?
In the blatant disregard for the rule, and unrepentant attitude of the latest, Hamilton's ego, or lack of class won't let him take full responsibility for this egregious error!
In the earlier event Hamilton shows an utter lack of respect, and propriety, by losing the plot of a race. and his knee-jerk reaction is to be obscene, then down play his lack of class/experience.
Personally I think he is one of, if the not the most gifted drivers in the current field!
He does have the prepensely to act like a horses @ss, instead of owning up to mistakes however.

[jens]

In some way Massa's and Hamilton's mistakes are similar. Hamilton was driving close behind KR and RK and expected them not to stop. And seeing them stopping came to him as a surprise and he didn't have time to react to avoid hitting a car ahead.

The fact that one of them (Massa) had a free way in front and the other (Hamilton) had two cars ahead, doesn't mean in this case much to be honest. Both made the same mistake, it's just a coincidence that one of them didn't have anyone in front of him to hit and the other one had. If in 2007 someone had been right ahead of Massa and braked, you think Massa wouldn't have hit him? If Hamilton had been the first to exit the pits, then wouldn't you have a different attitude?

[F1boat]

So what's your view of these comments:

I will say that Felipe disresp[ected the rules, although his comment is less entertaining as he never said that he is "unstoppable", "will destroy the competition" (in the case of Lewis, quite literally, it seems) and did not crash into another car.
;)

[ArrowsFA1]

You can go on and twist the facts as much as you wish
Exactly what facts I am twisting ioan?

[BDunnell]

In some way Massa's and Hamilton's mistakes are similar. Hamilton was driving close behind KR and RK and expected them not to stop. And seeing them stopping came to him as a surprise and he didn't have time to react to avoid hitting a car ahead.

The fact that one of them (Massa) had a free way in front and the other (Hamilton) had two cars ahead, doesn't mean in this case much to be honest. Both made the same mistake, it's just a coincidence that one of them didn't have anyone in front of him to hit and the other one had. If in 2007 someone had been right ahead of Massa and braked, you think Massa wouldn't have hit him? If Hamilton had been the first to exit the pits, then wouldn't you have a different attitude?

:up:

While some may consider this an inadequate explanation merely because it doesn't bash any of the drivers concerned, especially one, I think it is utterly fair and a welcome antidote to some of the feigned outrage being expressed elsewhere.

[Knock-on]

:up:

While some may consider this an inadequate explanation merely because it doesn't bash any of the drivers concerned, especially one, I think it is utterly fair and a welcome antidote to some of the feigned outrage being expressed elsewhere.

Totally agree.

All we get from certain members is blatent twisting of facts or blatent lying.

I have not seen anyone here defending Lewis. He was totally in the wrong and I, along with just about every post I have read, agrees with this.

I have pointed out that if Kimi was behind Robert, where I believe he should of been, then Lewis may have avoided him. That is in no way, shape or form defending Lewis is it?

Yet all we get is childish name calling, accusations of defending the indefensible, claims that there is some sort of "anglo-mafia" conspiracy (still cannot fathom that one) and general silliness that does this forum no credit.

Sorry chaps but it is really getting quite droll and I would ask people to try and back up their posts with facts, especially when they are levelling accusations at members.

I ask anyone to please point out where I have defended Lewis over this accident. Just one comment?

[F1boat]

Totally agree.

I have pointed out that if Kimi was behind Robert, where I believe he should of been, then Lewis may have avoided him. That is in no way, shape or form defending Lewis is it?


That's up for the FIA to say.

[janneppi]

Actually, I'm fed up with this thread. Everything worthwhile has been said already, all that remains is the normal run up to personal insults.

In otherwords, In before teh lock!. ;)