Questionable penalties

[Knock-on]

So, which questionable penalties have been awarded, which should have been awarded but weren't and who has been the people that gained.

Then I'll compile a Fantasy FIA Feck-up League on what the true standing of the championship should been.

[Shifter]

Remove Bourdais' penalty. Also remove Hamilton's spa incident as it was debatable and ultimately damaging to the sport.

[Shifter]

Well there are also a number of penalties for blocking during quali... I'd have to review video of each to see if any are like the one that Alonso got for 'blocking' Massa in Monza a couple years ago.

[F1boat]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

[Knock-on]

http://www.ogreview.org/fia/

Looking at it, McLaren have been "penalised" almost as much as the rest of the field put together.

[Knock-on]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

Isn't being compared to a FIA Steward a personal attcak ;)

[seppefan]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

Not difficult which is why it is not funny.

[F1boat]

I agree to disagree - I trust FIA professionals more than you. It's funny that I disliked Massa's penalties in Singapore and Japan, but I am OK with FIA. It's only the McLaren fans who disrespect the organization - because it is not ruling in their favour.
Cute.

[jens]

I think it should not be a surprise that those "FIA professionals" are interested in as close title fight as possible. In spicing things up they are indeed professional. It's possible to find examples from almost every season.

Yes, I know there are arguments that they are smarter and more competent than average F1 fans. Well, true. But what we must not forget is that like us they are also human beings with their own interests. We have had scandals of unfair referee decisions in all kinds of sports, be it a ballgame, boxing, sports which demand ratings (gymnastics, etc). What makes you think F1 stewards may not have their own sympathies and interests, which influence decisions?

[hmmm - donuts]

Don't know how far you're going back, but to my mind the most questionable instance of not getting a penalty (sort of) was when Michael Schumacher served a stop-go after crossing the finishing line at Silverstone - not sure of the year. Surely serving a penalty AFTER crossing the race is no penalty at all but somehow he got away with it. Red car perhaps?

Regards

[christophulus]

I think the penalties were justified in almost all cases, it's the punishment that the driver receives that has been completely wrong.

Why should a driver who avoids a collision and cuts a corner (Hamilton, Spa) receive the same penalty as someone who overtakes under the yellow flag? (Glock? at Spa). One is dangerous, one blatantly isn't. Just as a disclaimer, I don't want to argue about Hamilton being right or wrong, this isn't the place for that, but what he did wasn't dangerous - and I think that's a very important distinction to make.

Unsafe release in the pitstop is enormously dangerous (Massa and Sutil, twice), yet receives the same standard drive through (or a paltry fine).

The stewards need more options, and I for one believe that the penalties should be applied after the race as place demotions, rather than time penalties which can be worked around by driving more aggressively. For example, Hamilton could have been demoted one place, Glock and Massa three or so?

I know people disagree with sorting it after the race but it's the only fair way. A drive through cannot be undone.

I know it's not a well thought-through idea, but it's a start!

[gravity]

I think Knockie is referring to incidents relating to this years championship (hence re-calculating the points). These instances have been debated so far stick to memory:

- Rosberg entering pits during safety car: Penalised, but only 10 laps later.
- Kimi driving around with his exhaust pipe flailing, then falling off at racing speed: no penalty
- Kimi running into the back of Sutil at Monaco: No penalty
- Lewis driving into Kimi in pit lane: 10 place penalty on grid next race
- Lewis cutting chicane at Spa: 25s penalty
- Lewis driving into Alonso (losing wing): No penalty
- Trulli driving the wrong way around the track to enter pits: Financial Penalty
- Lewis cutting chicane at France: drive through penalty
- Massa cutting chicane at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Webber wide at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Glock wide at Monza: no penalty
- Massa released in front of Sutil (1st time no penalty, 2nd got a penalty)
No wonder Sutil tried to avoid hitting the Ferrari as it came out of pits... if he didn't, he'd have been penalised for causing an avoidable incident!

How many incidents has DC been involved in this year? How many penalties has he received? Actually, all drivers involved in accidents throughout the season deserve penalties if we are to go by the FIA standards.

[PSfan]

http://www.ogreview.org/fia/

Looking at it, McLaren have been "penalised" almost as much as the rest of the field put together.

Give it a rest... how many times must people say that given spygate last year, MacLeran has lost the benefit of the doubt in every case this year, and probably for the next couple years... the alternative would be exclusion from the championship for 2 to 3 years... but obviously the FIA just didn't want to rid of Ron that badly.

The biggest, I'll call it non-call would be Hamilton's 10 grid Montreal penalty, Based on the idiots rambling to the pit reporter "This isn't as bad as if I crashed out on the track..." Stupid idiot was proud of taking out his title rival at the time when he f'ed up... That should have been a 3 race sit down at least. Now he has the nerve to accuse his buddy Massa of trying to take him out intentionally...

I think Bourdais has received alot of unjust penalties this year, but that may be do to his original defence from the Heidfeld incident. instead of a comment like "I'll have to look at a tape before commenting" Bourdais did the "Well we where all trying to make a gap" which would be like someone telling a cop I was speeding cause I was late for work/gotta go pee. Now Bourdais has a FIA criminal record and that gave Massa the benefit of the doubt in Japan.

[ArrowsFA1]

Give it a rest... how many times must people say that given spygate last year, MacLeran has lost the benefit of the doubt in every case this year, and probably for the next couple years... the alternative would be exclusion from the championship for 2 to 3 years... but obviously the FIA just didn't want to rid of Ron that badly.
If that's the case then that's a disgraceful situation in so many ways.

Whatever you think of Spygate McLaren were penalised. They were found guilty and, in many eyes, an excessive $100m a penalty applied. Effectively what you're saying is it's ok for a vindictive FIA President, because he couldn't get the penalty he wanted, to penalise the team again and again and again, not because they've particularly done much wrong, but because he can abuse his powers, appoint his assistant to oversee the stewards, and 'fix' decisions.

I've said before that I'd guess the last thing Max wants is for McLaren to win either of the championships this year. Equally the last thing the sport needs is for an FIA President to be 'fixing' things to ensure they don't.

[PolePosition_1]

If that's the case then that's a disgraceful situation in so many ways.

Whatever you think of Spygate McLaren were penalised. They were found guilty and, in many eyes, an excessive $100m a penalty applied. Effectively what you're saying is it's ok for a vindictive FIA President, because he couldn't get the penalty he wanted, to penalise the team again and again and again, not because they've particularly done much wrong, but because he can abuse his powers, appoint his assistant to oversee the stewards, and 'fix' decisions.

I've said before that I'd guess the last thing Max wants is for McLaren to win either of the championships this year. Equally the last thing the sport needs is for an FIA President to be 'fixing' things to ensure they don't.

I agree, for my, Spygate is just further evidence that McLaren seem to be treated worse than any other teams.

If you look at precedent, and how spying is so common within F1, and their justification of the penalty, the $100m fine was a disgrace.

And to be honest PSOne, I think people will give it a rest once the Stewards stop dishing out random penalties helping Ferrari and continously disadvantaging McLaren.

I garantuee you now, if the Stewards didn't punish Hamilton for going wide at turn 1, which happens at most races, or Bourdais for defending his position, ultimately helping Massa.

We would not have continous stream of threads relating to the FIA and Stewards being biased.

Originally, I'd have to agree with F1Boat that the stewards are better placed than us. However, when they make what appears to be decisions based on helping Ferrari, and with no justification for it, I can't respect it.

[ShiftingGears]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

Given the amount of dubious and overzealous penalties this year, what makes you think its funny?

I thought Alonso's penalty in qualifying in Monza 2006 would've been the worst decision I have seen. But this year, I was proven wrong. Many times.
And I'm not a McLaren fan. I am a racing fan. The stewards decisions have been detrimental to racing.

[Knock-on]

I think Knockie is referring to incidents relating to this years championship (hence re-calculating the points). These instances have been debated so far stick to memory:

- Rosberg entering pits during safety car: Penalised, but only 10 laps later.
- Kimi driving around with his exhaust pipe flailing, then falling off at racing speed: no penalty
- Kimi running into the back of Sutil at Monaco: No penalty
- Lewis driving into Kimi in pit lane: 10 place penalty on grid next race
- Lewis cutting chicane at Spa: 25s penalty
- Lewis driving into Alonso (losing wing): No penalty
- Trulli driving the wrong way around the track to enter pits: Financial Penalty
- Lewis cutting chicane at France: drive through penalty
- Massa cutting chicane at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Webber wide at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Glock wide at Monza: no penalty
- Massa released in front of Sutil (1st time no penalty, 2nd got a penalty)
No wonder Sutil tried to avoid hitting the Ferrari as it came out of pits... if he didn't, he'd have been penalised for causing an avoidable incident!

How many incidents has DC been involved in this year? How many penalties has he received? Actually, all drivers involved in accidents throughout the season deserve penalties if we are to go by the FIA standards.

Thanks. That's a great start and exactly what I was thinking.

I didn't start this thread to debate whether the FIA are favoring a particular team over another but to have a look at what penalties have been applied (or not) and using FIA standards (as in recognised practice and not single instancing as they seem to have been recently) work out what the true situation is.

So, for people that think we are not qualified to be Stewards, I don't disagree as we are not vying to become Stewards. However, we are looking to see what the Stewards have done and what the situation would be if we were Stewards.

[ioan]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

Well said! :up:

Even funnier is that people who were calling for penalties on MS for no matter what are now saying that what Lewy is doing is OK! :laugh:
Hypocrites!

[ioan]

I think Knockie is referring to incidents relating to this years championship (hence re-calculating the points). These instances have been debated so far stick to memory:

- Rosberg entering pits during safety car: Penalised, but only 10 laps later.
- Kimi driving around with his exhaust pipe flailing, then falling off at racing speed: no penalty
- Kimi running into the back of Sutil at Monaco: No penalty
- Lewis driving into Kimi in pit lane: 10 place penalty on grid next race
- Lewis cutting chicane at Spa: 25s penalty
- Lewis driving into Alonso (losing wing): No penalty
- Trulli driving the wrong way around the track to enter pits: Financial Penalty
- Lewis cutting chicane at France: drive through penalty
- Massa cutting chicane at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Webber wide at Monza: no penalty
- Lewis pushing Glock wide at Monza: no penalty
- Massa released in front of Sutil (1st time no penalty, 2nd got a penalty)
No wonder Sutil tried to avoid hitting the Ferrari as it came out of pits... if he didn't, he'd have been penalised for causing an avoidable incident!

How many incidents has DC been involved in this year? How many penalties has he received? Actually, all drivers involved in accidents throughout the season deserve penalties if we are to go by the FIA standards.

People should learn the rule book before making such "laughable lists.

[ArrowsFA1]

People should learn the rule book before making such "laughable lists.
Why is gravity's list "laughable" :confused: Did those incidents happen as described or not?

[ioan]

Why is gravity's list "laughable" :confused: Did those incidents happen as described or not?

because there are plenty of penalties that were right and also occasions where penalties were given or were not needed in his rather wicked list. Still you will need to read the rule book and use a bit of objectivity to understand it.

[gravity]

I wasn't listing penalties as "incorrect" or "correct". I was providing Knock-On with a list of penalties that I could recall from this year. If you feel that everything on that list is wrong, then that's your freedom of choice. If you feel that I have missed a penalty or two then you are welcome to add to the list. I doubt you would want to add anything to the list as it just highlights how often Ferrari have benefitted from the stewards decisions.
By pointing and laughing (prob trying to discourage others from listing penalties too) you hope that the whole thread is swept under the carpet?

[ioan]

I wasn't listing penalties as "incorrect" or "correct". I was providing Knock-On with a list of penalties that I could recall from this year.

My bad than. Sorry for offending you.

[gravity]

My bad than. Sorry for offending you.

Thanks for your response. Appreciated.

If that's the case then that's a disgraceful situation in so many ways.

Whatever you think of Spygate McLaren were penalised. They were found guilty and, in many eyes, an excessive $100m a penalty applied. Effectively what you're saying is it's ok for a vindictive FIA President, because he couldn't get the penalty he wanted, to penalise the team again and again and again, not because they've particularly done much wrong, but because he can abuse his powers, appoint his assistant to oversee the stewards, and 'fix' decisions.

I've said before that I'd guess the last thing Max wants is for McLaren to win either of the championships this year. Equally the last thing the sport needs is for an FIA President to be 'fixing' things to ensure they don't.

When has there been any evidence provided that Max didn't get the penalty he wanted for Mclaren in the Spygate saga?

Nowhere.

http://www.ogreview.org/fia/

Looking at it, McLaren have been "penalised" almost as much as the rest of the field put together.

The reason they get penalties is simple. They deserve them.

[Knock-on]

because there are plenty of penalties that were right and also occasions where penalties were given or were not needed in his rather wicked list. Still you will need to read the rule book and use a bit of objectivity to understand it.

Being serious for once, can you provide a list of them?

I want to get an idea of penalties that were given and penalties that may not have been where on other occassions they were.

Thanks.

[Dave B]

The Mystic Meg in me predicts you'll get a response like "Google it" or "see previous threads". ;)

[ioan]

^^ Yeah, what Dave said! :D

[Dave B]

Damn I'm good. I'm off to buy a lottery ticket. :D

[Garry Walker]

The penalties that have been given this year have largely been of very idiotic nature. Complete embarrassment to F1.
Way to improve racing.

[ioan]

Damn I'm good. I'm off to buy a lottery ticket. :D

Don't be so selfish, share the numbers with the fellow forum members! ;)

[Roamy]

I just watched the webber massa deal and I would ban webber for 3 races straight away!! There is no place in racing for this "chickensh!t" driving

[tinchote]

http://www.ogreview.org/fia/

Looking at it, McLaren have been "penalised" almost as much as the rest of the field put together.

In the list you linked from, McLaren appears 11 times and Ferrari appears 11 times. Maybe your observation shows some bias on your part? ;) :D

[tintop]

http://www.ogreview.org/fia/

Looking at it, McLaren have been "penalised" almost as much as the rest of the field put together.

To be fair, I think that there are a lot of historical penalties missing. It would be great to have a comprehensive database.

[wmcot]

Don't know how far you're going back, but to my mind the most questionable instance of not getting a penalty (sort of) was when Michael Schumacher served a stop-go after crossing the finishing line at Silverstone - not sure of the year. Surely serving a penalty AFTER crossing the race is no penalty at all but somehow he got away with it. Red car perhaps?

Regards

Nope - the all-time-most-questionable-non-penalty was Senna punting Prost off at turn 1 of Suzuka in 1990 after announcing beforehand that he would do it (and then being awarded the WDC, to boot)

p.s. Not a Red car, but an orange and white McLaren. Were the FIA anti-Ferrari in 1990?

[wmcot]

I agree to disagree - I trust FIA professionals more than you. It's funny that I disliked Massa's penalties in Singapore and Japan, but I am OK with FIA. It's only the McLaren fans who disrespect the organization - because it is not ruling in their favour.
Cute.

Excellent comments. Funny how the stewards are doing a fine job until they penalize somebody's favorite team...

[ioan]

Hey, it's funny how Ferrari fans don't call the stewards idiots even when they don't really agree with them. A very telling difference to the McFans!

[ArrowsFA1]

Excellent comments. Funny how the stewards are doing a fine job until they penalize somebody's favorite team...


Hey, it's funny how Ferrari fans don't call the stewards idiots even when they don't really agree with them. A very telling difference to the McFans!
Is Nick Heidfeld a McLaren fan, or "anti"-Ferrari :confused:


When asked in Shanghai about whether he was worried that from now on any mistakes on track put him at a risk of facing sanction, Heidfeld said: "Until the last race I wasn't, but in the last race I think penalties were not justified."

"...the one on the start with (Lewis) Hamilton was for me not worth a penalty at all. It is just racing. What did he do (wrong)?"

"The other one with (Sebastien) Bourdais was also not understandable."

"The one that is acceptable, maybe arguable, but you can at least follow what they may be thinking, is the one that (Felipe) Massa got for turning around Hamilton. In my view it does not need to be given, but okay it could be."

"I don't understand what happened there (in Fuji) and I don't even think you (the media) do."
And he has a solution:

"As I have said before and, as we had last year, I would like to see it come back where we have one guy, like Tony Scott-Andrews...it was a lot more consistent and for me a lot better than what we have had this season...The consistency was a lot better last year, and it is easier than if there are just some guys who are coming to a few races. They don't have the insight compared to a guy who is always there."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71423

[Big Ben]

i can't say that I agree with all the penalties handed or not handed this year but I can't get over the fact that most of the time we have the same man in the center of so many scandals. You all know who he is. Let's take the Spa incident. Was it the first time a driver got ahead of another by cutting the chicane. no, it wasn't! However I don't recall another driver "giving up" the "illegal" advantage gained for a few meters and then overtake again. I recall Alonso giving up a position in Japan a few years ago just because he had his doubts about it. It turned out he didn't have to but I think he got the idea right. It's not about how many corners, meters, or centimeters you have to stay behind the other driver, YOU JUST HAVE TO GIVE UP THE ADVANTAGED GAINED!

How come every other race they need to clarify rules because of this guy. Since he came we needed to be told that it's not safe to take the car with a crane and put it back on track or that you really have to give up an "illegal" advantage and not just pretend you do.

If McLaren needs someone to explain them what's with all the rules I'd be happy to. They seem to be very confused. they need clarifications weekly.

[ArrowsFA1]

i can't say that I agree with all the penalties handed or not handed this year but I can't get over the fact that most of the time we have the same man in the center of so many scandals.
Odd isn't it :p Instead of Pickems, perhaps we should have a game called PickThePenalty where we predict which penalty Hamilton will be hit with at each GP :D

More seriously...


Leading Formula One drivers have joined calls for a change to the stewards system following the controversial penalties handed out at the Japanese Grand Prix.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71436

[Mickey T]

Funny that guys here think to be more competent than FIA stewards. :)

most of them would be...

[MrJan]

I agree to disagree - I trust FIA professionals more than you. It's funny that I disliked Massa's penalties in Singapore and Japan, but I am OK with FIA. It's only the McLaren fans who disrespect the organization - because it is not ruling in their favour.
Cute.

How do you dislike the Massa penalty in Singapore (unless it was for being too lenient). That was a stupidly dangerous release regardless of having the hose connected or not. Ferrari's magic system seems to be causing a few problems and even the relative low speed in the pitlane could still result in a serious injury or death.

For me the FIA stewards make some strange decisions but you can always argue that a driver shouldn't be in the position to have a dodgy decision thrust upon them. Stay off the grey area of the rule book and you'll be fine. The problem then being that people aren't sure what still constitutes a grey area which is why we had that fuss at Spa.

Odd isn't it :p Instead of Pickems, perhaps we should have a game called PickThePenalty where we predict which penalty Hamilton will be hit with at each GP :D

Name a sport that doesn't have strange decisions by the stewards?

[Shifter]

Odd isn't it :p Instead of Pickems, perhaps we should have a game called PickThePenalty where we predict which penalty Hamilton will be hit with at each GP :D

I bet he behaves himself on-track, so it'll be a technical penalty of some sort on the car itself.

[ArrowsFA1]

Name a sport that doesn't have strange decisions by the stewards?
I suspect there are very few, if any.

[Knock-on]

I bet he behaves himself on-track, so it'll be a technical penalty of some sort on the car itself.


Nope, I think the glare of the Sun off his McLaren get's in Massa's eyes and causes him to go off track :D

[ArrowsFA1]

FIA representative Alan Donnelly has rubbished suggestions that the governing body is favouring Ferrari in this year's championship.

"I read so much rubbish on the decisions taken by the stewards this year. They write that the FIA and the stewards are always favouring Ferrari, and that we don't want Hamilton to become world champion. You just need one example to debunk that theory: at Monaco the stewards noticed that on Raikkonen's F2008 the wheels had not been fitted before the three-minute mark as allowed in the regulations. So the stewards penalised Kimi with a drive-through in a track where you can't overtake."
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71532

Funny that Max used exactly the same example in his interview (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7657298.stm) with the BBC, and a very poor example it is too. Why? Because Raikkonen's penalty was as clear cut as it gets. There simply could be no dispute over it, unlike many of the other penalties.

That's not to say the FIA are pro-Ferrari, just that the example used debunks nothing IMHO.

[ShiftingGears]

Donnelly also doesn't think the ex-racing driver stewards idea would be a good one because "racing has changed a lot in 10 years".

What doesn't change in 10 years is the instinct of a racing driver. They actually know what it means to be a racing driver, as they have been in places where drivers argue over the same bit of road. The stewards have not.

Awful.

[F1boat]

I agree a 100% with Donnelly. But sure it is more interesting to add conspiracy theories in the sport.

[PSfan]

If that's the case then that's a disgraceful situation in so many ways.

What would make it disgraceful? Its a reality of life, Just as a convicted child molester or drug dealer will likely get charged with every offence they get caught at, even jay walking, Macleran can expect the same within the sport of F1.


Whatever you think of Spygate McLaren were penalised. They were found guilty and, in many eyes, an excessive $100m a penalty applied. Effectively what you're saying is it's ok for a vindictive FIA President, because he couldn't get the penalty he wanted, to penalise the team again and again and again, not because they've particularly done much wrong, but because he can abuse his powers, appoint his assistant to oversee the stewards, and 'fix' decisions.

With all due respect, in hindsight, 100m was no where near a strong enough penalty, based on where the silver team are doing in this years championship. While I figure Ferrari are equally to blame for that, but at the same time, with the reduced buget the macs should have had due to there fine, BMW and Toyota should have passed them in the standing for this year. Max had mentioned that he should have excluded them, and I stated last year that the drivers gained from spygate last year and should have been excluded last year as well, but I don't see it as Max being the ones who's out to get MacLeran, they must first do something punishable, and since they can't seem to stay out of trouble, how Max can be blamed is beyond me...


http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71532

Funny that Max used exactly the same example in his interview with the BBC, and a very poor example it is too. Why? Because Raikkonen's penalty was as clear cut as it gets. There simply could be no dispute over it, unlike many of the other penalties.

That's not to say the FIA are pro-Ferrari, just that the example used debunks nothing IMHO.

Who's to say that it is such a bad example? How close was Ferrari with the 3 min tire? and who holds the stop watch? If the FIA are really out to help Ferrari win the championship, then they could have waited for a protest instead of going out an penalizing Kimi as soon as they could. Another example would be the last race, They could have easily not penalized Hamilton and Massa, and Massa would have been alot better off...

[Knock-on]

Who's to say that it is such a bad example? How close was Ferrari with the 3 min tire? and who holds the stop watch? If the FIA are really out to help Ferrari win the championship, then they could have waited for a protest instead of going out an penalizing Kimi as soon as they could. Another example would be the last race, They could have easily not penalized Hamilton and Massa, and Massa would have been alot better off...

Come on, when everyones cleared the tyres and Ferrari are still messing about, it's pretty bloody obvious.

As for not penalising Massa, that happened later in the race ;)

[ArrowsFA1]

What would make it disgraceful? Its a reality of life, Just as a convicted child molester or drug dealer will likely get charged with every offence they get caught at, even jay walking, Macleran can expect the same within the sport of F1.
Hardly comparable, but I take your point event though I disagree with it. McLaren were penalised. Full stop (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69043).

Max had mentioned that he should have excluded them...but I don't see it as Max being the ones who's out to get MacLeran, they must first do something punishable, and since they can't seem to stay out of trouble, how Max can be blamed is beyond me...
I've said before that I suspect the last thing Max would want, having had to settle for $100m as opposed to a ban, would be for McLaren to win one or both of the FIA championships this year. The end of season awards ceremony could be an interesting one :)

If the FIA are really out to help Ferrari win the championship, then they could have waited for a protest instead of going out an penalizing Kimi as soon as they could...
I doubt whether Ferrari would want that kind of help. They could have no complaint over that penalty, and the FIA could not have ignored it simply because it was so obvious, despite Max saying no-one noticed!

Whatever, I just hope that through all the controversies of this season, the championship is not decided by the stewards decisions.