Should Vettel be banned?

[Nitrodaze]

In the last two seasons have had occasion to some of worst behaviour if F1 displayed by the Four time F1 champion Sebastian Vettel. There was the infamous Mexico incident when on open radio, Vettel unleashed a tirade of abuses at the Racing Director Charlie Whiting much to the shock of every televised audience across the globe.

To everyone's surprise he was let off on the basis that he apologized for his actions. One thing was certain, if that was anyone else, they would slapped with the stiffest penalty available.

This season, we get a repeat of his red mist eruption as we all watch with disbelief as Vettel crashed into the rear of Hamilton's car and then, in what looked clearly like a red mist moment, pulled up alongside Hamilton and rammed his front tyre into Hamilton's front tyre.

Vettel was adamant during and after the race, that Hamilton deliberately brake checked him. However he stewards saw things differently and handed Vettel a 10 sec penalty. Most of us were quite flabbergasted at the meager punishment levele at Vettel.

Some argued that the punishment was too lenient. So what is the right punishment for a repeat infringement of the rules?

[gm99]

Well, he does get penalty points (three for yesterday's incident) on his super-license and is only three points away from a race ban. I think that's a reasonable system that if introduced earlier would probably have meant an earlier Ferrari debut for Luca Badoer or a sighting of Pirro in a McLaren-Honda ;)

[Tazio]

I just think Seb. has basically made a fool of himself. Specifically when he was all like saying he would call LH and clear the air,and the Boss ejaculated "Shi' mo', homie don't even have my number, and he best not even axe me for it. Be doin' my talking on the track. :dork:

[Rollo]

Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)

Section 118 - Menacing driving
(1) Offence-intent to menace A person must not drive a motor vehicle on a road in a manner that menaces another person with the intention of menacing that other person.

Maximum penalty: 30 penalty units or imprisonment for 18 months or both (in the case of a first offence) or 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years or both (in the case of a second or subsequent offence).


I wouldn't put him in prison but revoking his licence for 2 calendar years from 26th Jun 2017 to 25th Jun 2019 seems appropriate to me.

This isn't forever sort of intent as Senna or Schumacher but it's still deliberate.

[truefan72]

I just think Seb. has basically made a fool of himself. Specifically when he was all like saying he would call LH and clear the air,and the Boss ejaculated "Shi' mo', homie don't even have my number, and he best not even axe me for it. Be doin' my talking on the track. :dork:

we could do without your poor take on ebonics.
Have you heard Hamilton talk that way?
why do you have to go there Tazio? SMH

[Mia 01]

Abowe, we don´t need to walk down that line.

[The Black Knight]

Yeah, 100% he should be banned. I have heard that the FIA are considering taking further action against him for Sunday as well. He needs to be taught a good hard lesson.

I see that the cowardly useless commentator that is Martin Brundle has come out and said that he feels the 10 second stop go penalty was enough. I hope that Sky get rid if this tool. He has been useless for a while now. He is too concerned nowadays with protecting his next Ferrari F1 day outing than he is with expressing his opinion. The commentators on Sky have it too cushy. Sometimes you just got to come out and say it as it is and none of them have the balls to do this. Too gutless the lot of them.

Should we use a red mist moment as an excuse we can excuse all sort of things that happened in the past such as Jerez 97, Monaco 2006 etc None of them can really be excused and whether they be mistakes or not the punishments handed out for them were all appropriate imo

Furthermore, it is understood now that the Stewards bottled it on Sunday. They were reluctant to give a black flag to Sebastien because they didn't want to interfere too much with the championship battle. To me this means two things:

1) None of them should ever be allowed steward an F1 race ever again. They bottled it and that isn't their job. Their job is to apply the law appropriately, not go easy on someone because they are in a championship battle.

2) Hamilton was very hard done by and instead of increasing his championship lead, Vettel got to increase his. Vettel needs to appear before the WMSC, be sanctioned and banned from the rest of this years championship.

[N4D13]

I don't think he should be banned. Yes, it was a regrettable and deeply stupid maneuver, but I don't think for a second it was a really dangerous move. Seb is a 4-times world champion and knows perfectly how to bang wheels at low speeds without causing damage to the cars. This is a matter of ethics and of whether someone with so many titles to their name should be driving like a hot-headed teenager, but I don't think there are safety grounds that warrant a race ban for him.

As a reminder, Pastor Maldonado did something much worse during qualifying at a Belgian GP and didn't get a race ban either.

[gm99]

Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)

Section 118 - Menacing driving
(1) Offence-intent to menace A person must not drive a motor vehicle on a road in a manner that menaces another person with the intention of menacing that other person.

Maximum penalty: 30 penalty units or imprisonment for 18 months or both (in the case of a first offence) or 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years or both (in the case of a second or subsequent offence).


I wouldn't put him in prison but revoking his licence for 2 calendar years from 26th Jun 2017 to 25th Jun 2019 seems appropriate to me.

This isn't forever sort of intent as Senna or Schumacher but it's still deliberate.

You can't apply the rules of the road to racing. Otherwise, you'd have to send all participants of Sunday's race to the den for taking part in a "race between vehicles" (Section 115 of the Road Transport Act 2013 [NSW]) ;)

[Starter]

It's hard to say what exactly the punishment should be. The 10 second penalty was much too light. On the low side I would sit him for one race and remove any points earned in this last race. Those advocating a several year ban are a little too harsh IMO. So for the high side I'd sit him for the rest of this year. Whether anything more comes of it remains to be seen.

[Big Ben]

we could do without your poor take on ebonics.
Have you heard Hamilton talk that way?
why do you have to go there Tazio? SMH

How about you give us a break with your political correctness crap. We really need this lazy heroics here :rolleyes:

[truefan72]

It's hard to say what exactly the punishment should be. The 10 second penalty was much too light. On the low side I would sit him for one race and remove any points earned in this last race.

that would be (should have been) the appropriate punishment.

[Bagwan]

we could do without your poor take on ebonics.
Have you heard Hamilton talk that way?
why do you have to go there Tazio? SMH

Chill , man .
No need to be upset about using some rap-talk when speaking about a guy who hangs with those cats .

Dig that Taz is a fan of da Boss , son .

And , don't go there .

[Bagwan]

Here's a stir for you .
I'm with JV when he says that he'd rather see Vettel and his anger at low speed , than hear Lewis ask if there's anything that Bottas can do to slow Seb down .

[truefan72]

How about you give us a break with your political correctness crap. We really need this lazy heroics here :rolleyes:

It's not political correctness, it's common decency and respect.
And I've pointed it it out once...right now!
you just don't see it, but to me its rather offensive.
So i will point it out. I really do like Tazio and find him funny most of the time. but in this case it was a bit out of bounds.
There is no need to make a stereotyped "black american" caricature of Hamilton.
It's a shame you can't see it or understand.
Then again based on your comments, perhaps that is to be expected from you.

[Tazio]

we could do without your poor take on ebonics.
Have you heard Hamilton talk that way?
why do you have to go there Tazio? SMH
Just having a little fun bro. No disrespect intended!

[truefan72]

Just having a little fun bro. No disrespect intended!

it's all good Tazio.
let's move on

[Nitrodaze]

I don't think he should be banned. Yes, it was a regrettable and deeply stupid maneuver, but I don't think for a second it was a really dangerous move. Seb is a 4-times world champion and knows perfectly how to bang wheels at low speeds without causing damage to the cars. This is a matter of ethics and of whether someone with so many titles to their name should be driving like a hot-headed teenager, but I don't think there are safety grounds that warrant a race ban for him.

As a reminder, Pastor Maldonado did something much worse during qualifying at a Belgian GP and didn't get a race ban either.

The point is, he shouldn't be banging wheels intentionally in the first place. The FIA have an opportunity to make it clear that this sort of conduct is not acceptable for the sport. But more importantly, they need to ensure that the decisions of the stewards are applied equally to all drivers regardless of whether they are world champions or not.

I cannot reconcile Kyvat's punishment which was much less compared to Vettels, to the wheel banging penalty given. There is clear favoritism displayed here and it is ugly.

[Nitrodaze]

Punishment aside, Vettel has displayed that he is brittle. He has shown that he may not be as tough as most people think. I am really wondering if he can take the heat of dueling with Hamilton for the title. Lets face it, he has not really come up against a credible opponent with a competitive car. He dueled most with Webber and with Alonso in an inferior Ferrari at the time. Now he is taking on Hamilton in almost as competitive machinery as he has and he is feeling the pinch of it.

I may be wrong, but this is what l can make out from this incident.

[Zico]

Some of you are over reacting.. just slightly!
Yes, it was poor behaviour but c'mon guys, a season ban?... seriously?
Ask yourself if you would be saying the same if Lewis had done it... ;)

Nah, black flagged and six penalty points would be my recommendation.

[emporer_k]

I think that disqualification from the Grand Prix and a suspended race ban to be activated if he gets up to anything like that again would have been appropriate.

[Nitrodaze]

Some of you are over reacting.. just slightly!
Yes, it was poor behaviour but c'mon guys, a season ban?... seriously?
Ask yourself if you would be saying the same if Lewis had done it... ;)

Nah, black flagged and six penalty points would be my recommendation.

I think Hamilton would had a ton of bricks drop on his head if he had done the Vetbang. Ok a season ban would have been too much, but something more than a ten second stop and go was called for. And l think Martin Brundle was well wrong on this one and surprisingly so.

[The Black Knight]

Here's a stir for you .
I'm with JV when he says that he'd rather see Vettel and his anger at low speed , than hear Lewis ask if there's anything that Bottas can do to slow Seb down .

There's a shock, the supposedly unbiased Bagwan sides against Hamilton in the only way he possibly could 😂

[The Black Knight]

I think Hamilton would had a ton of bricks drop on his head if he had done the Vetbang. Ok a season ban would have been too much, but something more than a ten second stop and go was called for. And l think Martin Brundle was well wrong on this one and surprisingly so.
Yeah I notice the usual Vettel tifosi are quiet. Interesting how some people see it as okay because it was at such slow speed. The speed is irrelevant. It's the action that matters.

I would be very disappointed had Hamilton done something like that. I don't think we ever have to worry about that happening though.

One of my biggest issues here is that there is and had been a very clear cut bias towards Vettel in the Stewards room for many years now. Every time it is possible for him to get a lenient call he usually gets and benefits from it. I find it all very convenient that news came through about Vettel's penalty just as it was clear Hamilton had to pit despite over 30 mins at least passing between the incident and the Stewards decision. At that time it was obvious that the differential for a penalty would be minimal and suddenly the penalty appears.

What opened on Sunday is the result of years of soft punishment and not being made to answer for things he had done. He'a petulant, spoiled and needs to be brought back down to earth with a bang.

[truefan72]

Some of you are over reacting.. just slightly!
Yes, it was poor behaviour but c'mon guys, a season ban?... seriously?
Ask yourself if you would be saying the same if Lewis had done it... ;)

Nah, black flagged and six penalty points would be my recommendation.

I think everyone bar one has felt a black flag for the race would have been the correct punishment.
Incidentally, adding 6 points to his license would have meant a race ban for Austria too. as he would have reached the 12 point threshold.

[truefan72]

Yeah I notice the usual Vettel tifosi are quiet. Interesting how some people see it as okay because it was at such slow speed. The speed is irrelevant. It's the action that matters.

I would be very disappointed had Hamilton done something like that. I don't think we ever have to worry about that happening though.

One of my biggest issues here is that there is and had been a very clear cut bias towards Vettel in the Stewards room for many years now. Every time it is possible for him to get a lenient call he usually gets and benefits from it. I find it all very convenient that news came through about Vettel's penalty just as it was clear Hamilton had to pit despite over 30 mins at least passing between the incident and the Stewards decision. At that time it was obvious that the differential for a penalty would be minimal and suddenly the penalty appears.

What opened on Sunday is the result of years of soft punishment and not being made to answer for things he had done. He'a petulant, spoiled and needs to be brought back down to earth with a bang.

and it should not have taken that long to issue the penalty. Everyone, the media, commentators and the audience instantly knew what happened. and without the added benefit of additional replays and telemetry, and yet it took forever for the stewards to render a useless decision, which only served to benefit vettel.

[yodasarmpit]

I would say that a black flag for the Baku race, nothing beyond that, would have been proportionate.

[yodasarmpit]

Here's a stir for you .
I'm with JV when he says that he'd rather see Vettel and his anger at low speed , than hear Lewis ask if there's anything that Bottas can do to slow Seb down .
It is worth noting that earlier in the race he asked, on the radio, if he should slow down to allow Bottas to catch up to the rear.
Seems like a team player, also in the request for Bottas to hold up Seb he did say "if he's not catching the guys in front"

[truefan72]

FIA to investigate Vettel's actions in Baku
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/fia-untersucht-vettel-foul-gp-aserbaidschan-2017-3426455.html

[Tazio]

I'm thinking a 15 spot grid drop for Austria would satisfy my blood-lust for 'the evil one'. That, or just forfeit his points from Baku. Actually I think both are in order (it is a lesson he needs, to understand the impropriety of his action). He deserves at least one of the a fore mentioned punitive actions. Not even Mike or anyone else got away with that kind of behavior.

[Duncan]

FIA to investigate Vettel's actions in Baku
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/fia-untersucht-vettel-foul-gp-aserbaidschan-2017-3426455.html

Key quote from the article:

"Der Shitstorm in den internationalen Medien und auf den sozialen Netzwerken über die relativ milde Bestrafung beim GP Aserbaidschan ist auch in Paris angekommen."

Couldn't have put it better myself.

[Hawkmoon]

I don't think Vettel actually meant to hit Hamilton's car. It was still a stupid thing to do and a DQ from Baku would have been appropriate. More than that would have been too much.

I think Vettel has made it worse by refusing to acknowledge he made a mistake. It was plain to see that he thought he got brake tested, lost his cool and tried to make a visible statement of his anger by pulling alongside Hamilton and swerving to the right. That was a stupid thing to do and he compounded it by swerving too much and hitting the Mercedes. Basically, he f__ked up.

He would have done himself a world of good by saying 'sorry, I thought I got brake tested and wanted to make Hamilton aware I was pissed off but I didn't mean to hit him, my bad'. Of course, he's too arrogant or stupid to do that so makes matters worse by ignoring his actions and complaining that Hamilton wasn't penalised.

I don't like Vettel that much. He's a fine driver and I hope he wins Ferrari another title (or two or three) but he's no Giles or Alesi.

[The Black Knight]

Another point to note that hasn't been mentioned is that Vettel was way too close to Hamilton in the preceding corner. If you replay the race in real time there is a camera angle of the cars going into that corner before Vettel hit him. That camera angle shows that Vettel was much closer to Hamilton than any of the following cars were to him or each other, which is further proof that Vettel messed up. All the other drivers had the smarts to stay further clear of their opponents.

I'm glad the FIA are going to investigate Vettel, I had heard it from a friend of mine that works in the F1 fraternity on Monday but had no confirmation. Ban him for the championship and teach the little runt a good hard lesson he so badly needs.

[pino]

Nice writing Hawk ! As I posted on Baku thread, I still believe, the black flag for the race, would have been, the most fair punishment! I agree, Vettel isn't the most sympathetic person, but asking for a season ban, or revoke his license, it's just crazy!

[pino]

Another point to note that hasn't been mentioned is that Vettel was way too close to Hamilton in the preceding corner. If you replay the race in real time there is a camera angle of the cars going into that corner before Vettel hit him. That camera angle shows that Vettel was much closer to Hamilton than any of the following cars were to him or each other, which is further proof that Vettel messed up. All the other drivers had the smarts to stay further clear of their opponents.

I'm glad the FIA are going to investigate Vettel, I had heard it from a friend of mine that works in the F1 fraternity on Monday but had no confirmation. Ban him for the championship and teach the little runt a good hard lesson he so badly needs.

Jesus...you really hate him, don't you ?! :eek:

[The Black Knight]

Jesus...you really hate him, don't you ?! :eek:

I have met him on a number of occasions, didn't like him when I met him, don't like him now. That witty happy personality he tries to put on is an act and that is gradually beginning to show over the last year and a half. I wrote this quite some time ago on the forum. I am not surprised this is happening.

[pino]

I have met him on a number of occasions, didn't like him when I met him, don't like him now. That witty happy personality he tries to put on is an act and that is gradually beginning to show over the last year and a half. I wrote this quite some time ago on the forum. I am not surprised this is happening.

There's nothing wrong, in disliking a person but I think you should be more objective when judging his behavior, especially when this person is a professional driver, that can make mistakes due to huge adrenaline !

[AndyL]

It's not the first lenient penalty we've seen this year. A couple of times we've seen 5-second penalties for offenses that gained the driver more than 5 seconds.

A DQ/black flag would seem like a reasonable response, but it shares the same risk as any other penalty imposed during the race, namely that the driver might retire from the race anyway, and the penalty becomes meaningless.

I think this was a case that should have been left until after the race. Immediate penalties are fine for the common cases of incidents caused by error or overstepping the bounds of fair racing, or technical infringements. But if you're looking at someone for a deliberate act of aggression, that needs more consideration. You need to evaluate the degree of intent, which is a more subtle question than the simple mechanics of who was to blame for a collision.

I'm sure if the stewards had considered this incident in a less hasty manner after the race, a heavier penalty would have been given.

[Bagwan]

There's a shock, the supposedly unbiased Bagwan sides against Hamilton in the only way he possibly could 😂

You did notice me saying he should have been black flagged , didn't you ?

Are you biased at all in any way ?

[Rollo]

You can't apply the rules of the road to racing. Otherwise, you'd have to send all participants of Sunday's race to the den for taking part in a "race between vehicles" (Section 115 of the Road Transport Act 2013 [NSW]) ;)

Or pass a similar piece of legislation to the Motor Sports (World Rally Championship) Act 2009, which would section off public roads.

[Rollo]

but asking for a season ban, or revoke his license, it's just crazy!

The question is one of intent. Causing a collision is a provision in the rules but deliberately causing a collision?

[Bagwan]

The question is one of intent. Causing a collision is a provision in the rules but deliberately causing a collision?

An admission that it was "deliberate , but instinctual" once resulted in a dropping of points from a whole season .

I find it interesting that even though we've had a number of people wondering if it was actually intentional or whether it was just a bounce of the elbow on the wheel as he began his gesticulating at Hamilton , we've not heard anything about the second contact at all from Vettel .
It seems to make sense that he simply screwed up , and seems an easy way out of this sticky mess , even if it isn't really true .

Coming along side him and waving a WTF at him looked more like what he was up to , and would have been justified , even if only in Seb's head .
A lot of other drivers would have done the same .
But , all seem agreed that the hit wasn't on .


So , why not just say he screwed up while in a tizzy , which is what it looked like , rather than have the question of intent floating out there ?

It makes him seem guilty as charged .

[N. Jones]

Should he get a one race ban? He did bang wheels with Lewis and that's unnecessary.

Anything harsher than that is drunkin' talk.

[Nitrodaze]

I don't think Vettel actually meant to hit Hamilton's car.

Wow, l wonder what race you were watching. Jonny Herbert tried to make this point but when viewed from the rear to the front, it was very clearly a deliberate action. You could see that he took great care to align to the tyres of Hamilton's car and violently turned into it.

What he did not do is unwittingly drift into Hamilton's car, which would have been a gentle drift and impact into Hamilton's tyres. We can undoubtedly rule out mistake due to loss of concentration. We can also undoubtedly state that it was a red mist reaction which was calculated to ensure the action only catches Hamilton's attention without doing damage this his or Hamilton's car.

I have to say, most in the sky F1 were surprisingly too obvious in trying to dumb this down the severity of the incident. If this was a headbutt, which is the equivalent of the action, l suppose they would be saying it was only a light knock. It kind of diminishes the credibility of that team.

[Nitrodaze]

It's not the first lenient penalty we've seen this year. A couple of times we've seen 5-second penalties for offenses that gained the driver more than 5 seconds.

A DQ/black flag would seem like a reasonable response, but it shares the same risk as any other penalty imposed during the race, namely that the driver might retire from the race anyway, and the penalty becomes meaningless.

I think this was a case that should have been left until after the race. Immediate penalties are fine for the common cases of incidents caused by error or overstepping the bounds of fair racing, or technical infringements. But if you're looking at someone for a deliberate act of aggression, that needs more consideration. You need to evaluate the degree of intent, which is a more subtle question than the simple mechanics of who was to blame for a collision.

I'm sure if the stewards had considered this incident in a less hasty manner after the race, a heavier penalty would have been given.


I think you are quite correct in some respects. I am not sure degree of intent would have much bearing here. Intent was demonstrated by driving up alongside Hamilton. In this circumstances, even an accidental bump due to loss of focus would have been punishable. The real problem here was a clear demonstration of aggression which involved him using his vehicle as a weapon to intimidate another driver. This is what was very serious and the very point that made the stewards decision on the matter very questionable.

I think it could be very damaging for the sport if the FIA appear lenient as it would show nonchalance on the matter.

[Nem14]

the point is, . . . They need to ensure that the decisions of the stewards are applied equally to all drivers regardless of whether they are world champions or not. . .
. . . There is clear favoritism displayed here and it is ugly.qft.

[Triumph]

I haven't read all of the replies, but regarding the thread title, I think it depends on if you are a Vettel supporter or not.

I like him (and I like Hamilton too, incidentally), so I think not. Although Vettel's actions were at least a bit close to the mark, all I see here are parallels with that of Michael. All things considered, that doesn't amount to a bad thing, in my opinion.

[Triumph]

Sorry, just to add: I think the concern here is more to do with Vettel's attitude than the actual consequences of his action. If he had knocked Hamilton out of the race then it would have been a different matter.

[Duncan]

I think a one race suspension would be reasonable and proportionate. I don't think anything more than that would be justified (and something like dropping all points or a season ban would be a disaster for the sport; I really don't think that will happen).

I don't think that the rationale of Jerez '97 really applies here. In that case, we had a championship being decided in the last race of the season, and there needed to be a very strong message that the leader taking out themselves and their only realistic rival in that situation isn't to be tolerated... and I really don't imagine that anybody thinks Vettel was trying to actually crash Hamilton out of the race.

Vettel's intent is probably going to get talked about a lot. If he did deliberately crash into Hamilton, obviously that would be very bad, but I'm not convinced the alternative of "I lost control of the car because I was angry and took my hands off the steering wheel" is so much better.

For the record, I don't think it was intentional for him to actually make contact. But he clearly lost control of his car by being stupid and losing his temper. F1 drivers should be better than that, although I understand there's a lot of adrenalin in the cockpit.

[Koz]

Vettel should have been black flagged. Not 100% sure how intentional it was, the replays I have seen don't show if he deliberately steered into him, nor is it like he tried to take him out. 10 stop and go wasn't enough.

[The Black Knight]

I think a one race suspension would be reasonable and proportionate. I don't think anything more than that would be justified (and something like dropping all points or a season ban would be a disaster for the sport; I really don't think that will happen).

I don't think that the rationale of Jerez '97 really applies here. In that case, we had a championship being decided in the last race of the season, and there needed to be a very strong message that the leader taking out themselves and their only realistic rival in that situation isn't to be tolerated... and I really don't imagine that anybody thinks Vettel was trying to actually crash Hamilton out of the race.

Vettel's intent is probably going to get talked about a lot. If he did deliberately crash into Hamilton, obviously that would be very bad, but I'm not convinced the alternative of "I lost control of the car because I was angry and took my hands off the steering wheel" is so much better.

For the record, I don't think it was intentional for him to actually make contact. But he clearly lost control of his car by being stupid and losing his temper. F1 drivers should be better than that, although I understand there's a lot of adrenalin in the cockpit.

Of course Jerez 97 applies! The reasons, circumstances and intent around what happened are totally irrelevant! He used his car to hit a competitors. Every race in the season is worth the same number of points regardless of whether it is the season finale or the first race. If a driver does what schumacher did or what vettel did the punishment should be the same. Just because it's the season finale isn't written in the rules and never will be! The action and intent is the same.

If I punch a competitor in the World Cup final versus the first game in the group stages should I be treated any different? Absolutely not! I get sent off and probably receive further sanctions after.

[The Black Knight]

You did notice me saying he should have been black flagged , didn't you ?

Are you biased at all in any way ?

Only because of years of witnessing clear bias in the Stewards room towards Vettel

[The Black Knight]

There's nothing wrong, in disliking a person but I think you should be more objective when judging his behavior, especially when this person is a professional driver, that can make mistakes due to huge adrenaline !

His adrenaline is irrelevant - all other drivers on the grid don't behave like that, he shouldn't get after pass just because he is prone to "red mist" moments.

FIA to investigate on Monday. Let us hope they too don't bottle it like the Stewards:

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/10930391/sebastian-vettel-clash-with-lewis-hamilton-to-face-further-fia-probe

[Duncan]

Of course Jerez 97 applies! The reasons, circumstances and intent around what happened are totally irrelevant! He used his car to hit a competitors.

I respectfully disagree; I think it matters whether the contact was intended to just bang wheels or to actually take out the other driver.



Every race in the season is worth the same number of points regardless of whether it is the season finale or the first race. If a driver does what schumacher did or what vettel did the punishment should be the same. Just because it's the season finale isn't written in the rules and never will be! The action and intent is the same. If I punch a competitor in the World Cup final versus the first game in the group stages should I be treated any different? Absolutely not! I get sent off and probably receive further sanctions after.

I agree with that to a large extent, except for this: The fact that it was the last race of the season, and the championship was on the line, helped establish the that the intent was to take Villeneuve out of the race.

[Firstgear]

Of course Jerez 97 applies! The reasons, circumstances and intent around what happened are totally irrelevant! He used his car to hit a competitors. Every race in the season is worth the same number of points regardless of whether it is the season finale or the first race. If a driver does what schumacher did or what vettel did the punishment should be the same. Just because it's the season finale isn't written in the rules and never will be! The action and intent is the same.

If I punch a competitor in the World Cup final versus the first game in the group stages should I be treated any different? Absolutely not! I get sent off and probably receive further sanctions after.

Jerez doesn't apply because the penalty meant nothing towards the championship. They took away points from a championship he had already lost. Before the penalty, his chances of winning were 0.0% That didn't reduce after the penalty. The purpose of the penalty was to humiliate. If they really wanted to hand him a harsh penalty they would have banned him for X races in the following season.

I say ban him from the next race or take away his points from Baku. And coincidentally, this would be the perfect punishment for the championship race (FIA $$$) as well as it makes things closer in a season that finally has a close rivalry between top teams. Banning Vettel for more than a race would kill the season, so even if it were the right thing to do, it wouldn't happen because there's too much money at stake.

[Nitrodaze]

I respectfully disagree; I think it matters whether the contact was intended to just bang wheels or to actually take out the other driver.

I think we are coming back to the question of degree of intent.The fact of the matter was he displayed a red mist reaction. Whether by doing so he lost control and caused the wheels to bang into each other or he intentionally did it is the same punishable offence. The reason was that it could have caused a bad accident involving himself, Hamilton and the train of cars behind that would not see the crashed cars until they were upon them. A spectacular pile up could have happened.

There are other consideration as well.One is that Vettel is a repeat offender of unbecoming driverly conduct. His insulting tirade to Charlie Whiting does not go unremembered. There has been other minor flashes of flared anger witnessed in the past.
Secondly, the use of an F1 car as a weapon to intimidate a fellow driver should be seriously frown upon. As this could easily set a very dangerous precedent.

I fail to see how Vettel should walk away from this without some very clear indication that this sort of conduct is not tolerated in F1.

[Bagwan]

Jerez doesn't apply because the penalty meant nothing towards the championship. They took away points from a championship he had already lost. Before the penalty, his chances of winning were 0.0% That didn't reduce after the penalty. The purpose of the penalty was to humiliate. If they really wanted to hand him a harsh penalty they would have banned him for X races in the following season.

I say ban him from the next race or take away his points from Baku. And coincidentally, this would be the perfect punishment for the championship race (FIA $$$) as well as it makes things closer in a season that finally has a close rivalry between top teams. Banning Vettel for more than a race would kill the season, so even if it were the right thing to do, it wouldn't happen because there's too much money at stake.

The idea of taking away the points for Baku does make sense , being that he came in ahead of Hamilton , and a move like that , whether deliberate or not should merit more than what he got during the race .

[gm99]

Jerez doesn't apply because the penalty meant nothing towards the championship. They took away points from a championship he had already lost. Before the penalty, his chances of winning were 0.0% That didn't reduce after the penalty. The purpose of the penalty was to humiliate. If they really wanted to hand him a harsh penalty they would have banned him for X races in the following season.


I agree - the main "penalty" for Jerez was that Schuey couldn't go the FIA banquet and pick up his trophy for 2nd (aka first of the losers) in the driver's championship. Big deal. He still got to keep all his wins from the 1997 season.

[truefan72]

I am also getting a little fed up how a bunch of major news outlets are describing the incident.
Autosport and a few others are going full speed with "war of the world Champs" or "WDC leaders in latest Feud"
the same outlets and many more others describing it as a Clash of drivers and "who is to blame for the drivers banging wheels"

To me all that is rubbish. It isn't some kind of he said - he said situation or a scenario where they were clashing with each other or in some kind of feud.
That would indicate both parties involved in something subjective worthy of trying to apportion blame.

The simple fact is only one driver clumsily barged into the back of another, and then went on to deliberately drive his car into the other in a fit of rage.
Hamilton for his part, remained calm and never sought to retaliate or even show any kind of demonstrable aggravation (which I would have done)

But many media outlets are still playing this up like it is worthy of a debate.
oh well

[Nitrodaze]

I think the 2017 season just started in earnest in Baku. We have a rivalry akin to the Rosberg-Hamilton showdown of 2016. To make it interesting, it is a German vs British in the vein of Hill Vs Schumacher, Hamilton vs Rosberg etc.

The controversy is sweet and we enthuse over all aspect of it with emotion and passion as two Colossus of modern day F1 do battle for the honour of winning the 2017 driver's title. If anything, it is clearly crunch time and Vettel lets out a yell as he does the Vetbang on Hamilton. The rest of the season is faced with a challenge to emulate this spectacular and highly bizzare Baku race. The price of error remains high as is the cost of dwelling on an emerging problem to Force India's disappointment.

At Baku, F1 finally got our full attention and we eagerly await the Spielberg showdown.

[Duncan]

At Baku, F1 finally got our full attention and we eagerly await the Spielberg showdown.

Indeed. Either way, the rest of the season should be one for the ages. Spielberg should be interesting, but I have a strong suspicion that one of the Ferraris will be driven by Antonio Giovinazzi.

[Starter]

I think the 2017 season just started in earnest in Baku. We have a rivalry akin to the Rosberg-Hamilton showdown of 2016. To make it interesting, it is a German vs British in the vein of Hill Vs Schumacher, Hamilton vs Rosberg etc.

The controversy is sweet and we enthuse over all aspect of it with emotion and passion as two Colossus of modern day F1 do battle for the honour of winning the 2017 driver's title. If anything, it is clearly crunch time and Vettel lets out a yell as he does the Vetbang on Hamilton. The rest of the season is faced with a challenge to emulate this spectacular and highly bizzare Baku race. The price of error remains high as is the cost of dwelling on an emerging problem to Force India's disappointment.

At Baku, F1 finally got our full attention and we eagerly await the Spielberg showdown.
This is very true. There has been more debate and passion in this microcosm of a forum then there has been in a long time. Everyone's juices are flowing and I imagine there will be a bigger audience for the next race than there would have been otherwise. Bad for the sporting image, but good for the sport, which has been seeing declining interest for a while. It's the WWF of auto racing. Can everybody say NASCAR ya'll? :D;)

[Tazio]

Personally this season had my full attention before this clusterf#$k. If Vettel didn't go "mental" he would have won the race (assuming his initial contact with LH didn't dislodge his neck support)and increased his lead in the WDC. So now we have this polarizing event. I was pulling for "The Boss", now I'm still pulling for him, maybe a little harder. The key for me is that the future races resemble Baku, not the processions that have become all too common.
Roll on Austria!

[Rollo]

The purpose of the penalty was to humiliate. If they really wanted to hand him a harsh penalty they would have banned him for X races in the following season.

The purpose of the penalty should have been to say what is and isn't acceptable. Deliberately taking out your rivals should not be acceptable, period. I would have banned Senna after Suzuka, I would have banned Schumacher after Jerez and I would have banned Vettel after Baku. I don't care if the incident happened at 200mph or 2mph - the principle is identical.

[The Black Knight]

I respectfully disagree; I think it matters whether the contact was intended to just bang wheels or to actually take out the other driver.




I agree with that to a large extent, except for this: The fact that it was the last race of the season, and the championship was on the line, helped establish the that the intent was to take Villeneuve out of the race.

You can never fully judge intent. No one actually knows if Schumachers intent was to take JV out 100% except Schumacher. Maybe he just wanted to make him hobble and finish second. You can only base it upon what you see the action was. Once you start bringing in interpretation to the rules which have been set out, which is the main reason why we have such inconsistency in F1 to begin with, then you will never have consistency. For consistency he should he excluded from the championship.

[The Black Knight]

Jerez doesn't apply because the penalty meant nothing towards the championship. They took away points from a championship he had already lost. Before the penalty, his chances of winning were 0.0% That didn't reduce after the penalty. The purpose of the penalty was to humiliate. If they really wanted to hand him a harsh penalty they would have banned him for X races in the following season.

I say ban him from the next race or take away his points from Baku. And coincidentally, this would be the perfect punishment for the championship race (FIA $$$) as well as it makes things closer in a season that finally has a close rivalry between top teams. Banning Vettel for more than a race would kill the season, so even if it were the right thing to do, it wouldn't happen because there's too much money at stake.

And why did he lose the championship, because he hit JV. JV was likely to end up on the gravel otherwise. Schumacher ruined his chance of the championship by what he did and had 0% chance of winning so, for consistency, so should Vettel. A 2-3 race ban would be enough to guarantee he doesn't win this years championship anyway, but probably be enough to keep people interested. And since the purpose of removing him from the championship was humiliation, then there is no better way of doing it to Vettel than a season ban.

My gut is that he will get an extra 3 points on his license and be banned for racing in Austria. My only hope would be that he isn't allowed race under appeal in that circumstance. My real hope is that he will be remove from the season. Whether there is close rivalry this season should not factor into the decision of the punishment he receives.

[The Black Knight]

The purpose of the penalty should have been to say what is and isn't acceptable. Deliberately taking out your rivals should not be acceptable, period. I would have banned Senna after Suzuka, I would have banned Schumacher after Jerez and I would have banned Vettel after Baku. I don't care if the incident happened at 200mph or 2mph - the principle is identical.

Nail on the head.

[The Black Knight]

I am also getting a little fed up how a bunch of major news outlets are describing the incident.
Autosport and a few others are going full speed with "war of the world Champs" or "WDC leaders in latest Feud"
the same outlets and many more others describing it as a Clash of drivers and "who is to blame for the drivers banging wheels"

To me all that is rubbish. It isn't some kind of he said - he said situation or a scenario where they were clashing with each other or in some kind of feud.
That would indicate both parties involved in something subjective worthy of trying to apportion blame.

The simple fact is only one driver clumsily barged into the back of another, and then went on to deliberately drive his car into the other in a fit of rage.
Hamilton for his part, remained calm and never sought to retaliate or even show any kind of demonstrable aggravation (which I would have done)

But many media outlets are still playing this up like it is worthy of a debate.
oh well

That's hardly a surprise. Despite what people think, the purpose of the media isn't to tell the news, it is to sell a story to keep people interested and coming back for more. CNN has made millions from the fictitious Der narrative over Trump and Russia. There are videos out there which have just been released which clearly show CNN officials saying the Russia new story is a "Nothing-burger" and another stating that it probably is untrue but they have been given a directive by their CEO to harp on about Russia. The reason for it is ratings. The story has made CNN millions, they don't care about the truth, they care about profit. It's no different with any other news network or F1 journalist.

[pino]

My gut is that he will get an extra 3 points on his license and be banned for racing in Austria. My only hope would be that he isn't allowed race under appeal in that circumstance. My real hope is that he will be remove from the season. Whether there is close rivalry this season should not factor into the decision of the punishment he receives.

I really would like to know, what Vettel did to you, when you met him. Must have been something terrible to justify all this hatred towards him. Tell you what, I ve also had many bad experiences, meeting some of mine idols. Well, I didn't start to hate them, or stopped to support them or stopped to buy their music. People are different and not everyone has a nice attitude when you meet them. So If I were Vettel, right now, I would be more afraid of you, than the FIA...:eek:

[Rollo]

You can never fully judge intent. No one actually knows if Schumachers intent was to take JV out 100% except Schumacher.

Sure you can judge intent - The Man On The Clapham Omnibus test.

1. Would a reasonable person have forseen the natural and probable consequence of those actions?
2. Could a reasonable person have foreseen that result, with reference to all the evidence?

Sure, no one actually knows if Schumacher's intent was to take JV out 100% except Schumacher but you can ask if a reasonable person based on the evidence could have forseen it.

Aside: Everyone knows what Senna's intent was at Suzuka in 1990. He said as much before the race. He should have been banned forever.

[Mia 01]

You can never fully judge intent. No one actually knows if Schumachers intent was to take JV out 100% except Schumacher. Maybe he just wanted to make him hobble and finish second. You can only base it upon what you see the action was. Once you start bringing in interpretation to the rules which have been set out, which is the main reason why we have such inconsistency in F1 to begin with, then you will never have consistency. For consistency he should he excluded from the championship.

Jenson Button and Fernando Alonso don´t agree with you.

And, FIA will investigate the whole incident, which means both Lewis and Vettels doings.

[Big Ben]

If a football players slaps another, he would get a red card and at least a match ban, in normal conditions. It's not conditioned by an injury or physical damages, it's for unsportsmanlike conduct. I think the same logic should apply in F1. I think they should get the message across that such behavior is unacceptable and that there will be consequences for anyone who can't get a hold of himself.

I don't get the 'red mist' argument. What are we talking about here? Are we saying we should look away because he can't help himself. Is that really an excuse?

[Bagwan]

Sure you can judge intent - The Man On The Clapham Omnibus test.

1. Would a reasonable person have forseen the natural and probable consequence of those actions?
2. Could a reasonable person have foreseen that result, with reference to all the evidence?

Sure, no one actually knows if Schumacher's intent was to take JV out 100% except Schumacher but you can ask if a reasonable person based on the evidence could have forseen it.

Aside: Everyone knows what Senna's intent was at Suzuka in 1990. He said as much before the race. He should have been banned forever.

Well , Michael did say it was "deliberate , but instinctual" , so we can actually determine that his intent was to hit Jacques .
He admitted to a deliberate action .
As a devout JV fan , I wanted his head at first , but when I heard that quote , I heard him saying it was entirely his fault , and a moment when he wasn't able to control himself because of his extreme desire to win .
He took a lot of abuse for his actions , stood up to it and took the embarrassment of it , but came back fighting .

He earned my forgiveness , and a lot of respect for the way that he dealt with his horrible brain fade .

We have no such admission from Sebastian .
Only growls about a brake check .

He's got two brain fades he needs to concede .
One is that he was caught out by trying to stay closer for the restart , and the other that he banged wheels .

Both could be entirely simple errors , as even the second is not so uncommon , seeing a driver alongside , gesticulating at the other , without contact , of course .


But , to say nothing ?
Public outcry may still prompt that meeting , and a big red stonewall may not help their cause much .

[Zico]

Why the comparisons to football, headbutts, punches and slaps? :D
F1, football and their punishments are nothing alike, no should they be.

Vet swerved towards Lewis and they bumped wheels... Yes it was very silly, yes the punishment was too lenient but it was not a physical assault and being at low speed, it did not endanger Lewis.

Would the executioners on here be saying the same if it was their favourite driver who did it? I think not...

[truefan72]

Well , Michael did say it was "deliberate , but instinctual" , so we can actually determine that his intent was to hit Jacques .
He admitted to a deliberate action .
As a devout JV fan , I wanted his head at first , but when I heard that quote , I heard him saying it was entirely his fault , and a moment when he wasn't able to control himself because of his extreme desire to win .
He took a lot of abuse for his actions , stood up to it and took the embarrassment of it , but came back fighting .

He earned my forgiveness , and a lot of respect for the way that he dealt with his horrible brain fade .


While MSC did acknowledge his culpability in that case ,he was of course a serial violator of what can be considered ethical behavior prior and post that incident.
We remember his fight with Damon Hill and what exactly he did to earn that championship in 1994 in Australia,
He then tried the same thing in 197 with JV and rightly got sanctioned for it.
His most similar incident was in Belgium 98 when he ploughed into the back of DC due to spray and in his own red mist tried to start a fistacuffs in the pit lane instead of simply doing a mea culpa
Then Monaco 2006 ( one that Rosberg emulated, and laughably actually got a way with)
Also trying to take out Rubens in Hungary 2013 (I think)
Not to mention all the other little things he got away with because he was driving the Ferrari. So He never earned my forgiveness for his behavior. But has my respect as arguably the all time best F1 driver. No matter his flaws, he was supremely talented. Much the same with Senna, who I actually loathed as a driver.



We have no such admission from Sebastian .
Only growls about a brake check .

He's got two brain fades he needs to concede .
One is that he was caught out by trying to stay closer for the restart , and the other that he banged wheels .

Both could be entirely simple errors , as even the second is not so uncommon , seeing a driver alongside , gesticulating at the other , without contact , of course .


But , to say nothing ?
Public outcry may still prompt that meeting , and a big red stonewall may not help their cause much .

Yeah, i hear you on that front. Let's hope he learns from this finally, because i for one would like to see a thrilling competition without the need for all this extra stuff.
I also thought the battle was nicely balanced already and did not need any of this extra stuff to spice it up. It was 2 competitors both at the top f their game in two different cars, going back and forth in wins and exciting races. There was enough drama, tension and interest for the championship before this incident. I'm not sure about those who think they need it to be nasty to keep their interest. Journalists i see, who think it is fodder for their paper and headlines. But for the F1 fan, this was already shaping up to be an epic year with 4-6 guys capable of winning races and Force India lurking right behind, along with Williams.

[Rollo]

Would the executioners on here be saying the same if it was their favourite driver who did it? I think not...

Absolutely.


Why the comparisons to football, headbutts, punches and slaps?
F1, football and their punishments are nothing alike, no should they be.

Why not? As a referee I have the power to send people off. If there were headbutts, punches and slaps, I'd not only send them off but report them to the association and have them suspended.

[Firstgear]

Senna's intent was to take out a competitor.
Schumacher's intent was to take out a competitor.
Vettel's intent, I think, was less sinister - to get Hamilton's attention and to display his anger at (what he thought) being brake tested. If he wanted to take Hamilton out, he would have.

Wrong? Yes. Wrong to the degree of the other two? Not even close.
Anything more than a 1 race ban & points on his licence is too much.

But it does spice up the season. Every good movie needs a villain. That's part of what made the Senna & MSC years interesting.

[TMorel]

What I'd love would be for the FIA to come out and state unequivocally:

a) did Lewis do anything wrong
Brake/steering/throttle vs the actual rule book on restarts. None of this "he was naughty".

b) did Seb deliberately swerve
Steering input/throttle etc. Did the car just get away from him or did he steer.

I couldn't give a stuff about penalties any more. I'm more annoyed at the vagueness of the official statements.
I just want the FIA to give actual clear and transparent answers.

And I want Ron Dennis to give the answers. That way there's no doubt as to what's what.

[The Black Knight]

What I'd love would be for the FIA to come out and state unequivocally:

a) did Lewis do anything wrong
Brake/steering/throttle vs the actual rule book on restarts. None of this "he was naughty".

b) did Seb deliberately swerve
Steering input/throttle etc. Did the car just get away from him or did he steer.

I couldn't give a stuff about penalties any more. I'm more annoyed at the vagueness of the official statements.
I just want the FIA to give actual clear and transparent answers.

And I want Ron Dennis to give the answers. That way there's no doubt as to what's what.

Well, the data has shown that Hamilton didn't do anything different to the other restarts so I can't see how he could be at fault. I guess we'll find out today. I suspect Seb will be disqualified from Baku GP and perhaps the Austrian GP as well. Although the title challenge shouldn't factor into any decision the FIA make, it is unlikely they will ban him for the rest of the season as much as he may deserve it.

Personally, if were they to ban him for the remainder of the season I would be very proud of the FIA. It would be consistent with Jerez 97 which is the last time I can remember a driver turned in on another in such a manner.

[Bagwan]

Has anyone heard if Hamilton has said that he was aware that Vettel was following much closer on that second restart ?

[The Black Knight]

Has anyone heard if Hamilton has said that he was aware that Vettel was following much closer on that second restart ?

I am unaware of him making such a statement. It's up to Vettel to stay far enough back anyway.

On another note, it is unlikely Vettel will receive any punishment today. It may well take quite a number of weeks, even into the start of the second half of the season if not later before this is fully resolved should the issue be referred to a tribunal.

[The Black Knight]

So Vettel gets away with it. Gutless Jean Todt accepted an apology in which he took full responsibility for his actions and he'll do community service.

What a load of c*ck! If this was Lewis then and apology wouldn't have been enough. The very minimum should have been losing all Baku points.

[BigWorm]

Quite scandalous. Should have been a suspended race ban but he gets away with it.

[truefan72]

simply pathetic and gutless by the FIA

[The Black Knight]

It's typical of the bias shown towards Ferrari and Vettel throughout the years. May as well all ram into each other now except I am pretty sure other drivers/teams wouldn't get away with it.

[Triumph]

No further action then. Good.

[Triumph]

I think it matters whether the contact was intended to just bang wheels or to actually take out the other driver.


Spot on.

[airshifter]

This makes the FIA look very weak IMO. After all the denial of what was obviously enough intentional contact and then denial, they got Seb to admit it was stupid, and make apologies.

I think setting a precedent of allowing his race points is a poor showing. I'm sure he and Lewis both knew he wasn't trying to kill or hurt Lewis, but the potential for car damage and the example itself deserved something of a penalty.

[Tazio]

Vettel's behavior deserved further sanctions. A bunch of gutless pukes the FIA are!

[TMorel]

I'm glad there was no extra penalties but I'm not happy with the wording, "I don't believe he had any bad intentions" to me still reads as if Lewis was still a bit "naughty"
I was hoping for a more clear cut response from The FIA and Seb himself.

As long as Lewis wins every remaining race then I can probably move on.
Maybe if Seb loses out to Max on a few controversial manoeuvres that would help too.

[The Black Knight]

I'm glad there was no extra penalties but I'm not happy with the wording, "I don't believe he had any bad intentions" to me still reads as if Lewis was still a bit "naughty"
I was hoping for a more clear cut response from The FIA and Seb himself.

As long as Lewis wins every remaining race then I can probably move on.
Maybe if Seb loses out to Max on a few controversial manoeuvres that would help too.

Yeah, his apology wasn't really an apology at all. He was implying that Lewis did something wrong but didn't mean to, which he didn't. Lewis did nothing wrong. Actually for that alone he should be brought before the International Tribunal as straight way he has broken his agreement with the FIA to take full public responsibility. It shows that he doesn't take the FIA seriously and, of course, why should he after them bottling it like they did.

I don't understand how any true F1 fan could be happy with this result or glad that he wasn't punished more. Lewis isn't going to win all the remaining races and now Vettel pretty much has been given a clean slate to do what he wants. It has never been more clearer than in this instance that the FIA bottled it under political pressure here.

[jens]

I am leaning to the view that Vettel probably should have been disqualified from the Baku GP. I personally could care less, what they shout on the team radio, but if you act like that on the track it is a completely different matter. Combined with complete denial after the race, it is a bad enough offence for me to re-consider, who to actually support in F1. This season won't be the same any more for me.

[TMorel]

Yes I was being flippant.

I wasn't happy with just the stop-n-go at the time and I'm not glad with yesterday's result, not because I wanted an eye for an eye but because I wanted facts. I wanted a proper line in the sand to be drawn.
They were never going to give an appropriate punishment. I'm so tired and weary of them, really really effing tired and weary of the FIA's judiciary process.

I was more worried they were somehow going to make this into a bizarre blame of Lewis or worse, give a totally over the top punishment to Seb that actually wasn't appropriate.

But yes, I'm also glad he wasn't punished more because now it's done. That's the end.
And for that I'm glad because otherwise this would drag on all year (still will, but I can deal with this way, couldn't cope with any more making Seb the victim - I can't look at the Autosport forums as it is, makes me sick to think of the response any other result would have meant)

But if I am complete honest, I still think some of Max's racing manoeuvres were worse.

[The Black Knight]

This is a really good article which pretty much sums up my feelings on the issue:

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/19807241/sebastian-vettel-strikes-lucky-again-baku-reprieve

[Bagwan]

Those disappointed by this decision should remember a few things here .

Firstly , it is no small thing for Sebastian and his team to go through all this embarrassment .
He made a fool of himself in front of the world .

Then , he and his team handled it all really poorly .
Again , fools .

It was also , in a tight race season , a stupid distraction they didn't need , so that will hurt them as well .

And , one other thing for Vettel to think about is how hard to go into the fight now , with any more points loss meaning exclusion .
Will others take advantage of this ? I think it's pretty likely .

So , while there was no further sanction , he(they) didn't get away totally unscathed .

[zako85]

Yeah, his apology wasn't really an apology at all. He was implying that Lewis did something wrong but didn't mean to, which he didn't. Lewis did nothing wrong. Actually for that alone he should be brought before the International Tribunal as straight way he has broken his agreement with the FIA to take full public responsibility. It shows that he doesn't take the FIA seriously and, of course, why should he after them bottling it like they did.

I don't understand how any true F1 fan could be happy with this result or glad that he wasn't punished more. Lewis isn't going to win all the remaining races and now Vettel pretty much has been given a clean slate to do what he wants. It has never been more clearer than in this instance that the FIA bottled it under political pressure here.

After reviewing the incident, I think Vettel deserved some kind of punishment, up to and including being fully disqualified from that race. But perhaps the race stewards went easy on him because this happened under yellow.

[zako85]

So , while there was no further sanction , he(they) didn't get away totally unscathed .

Indeed. Hamilton is now riding on a white horse, while Vettel revealed himself as a Maldonado wanna-be. Does anyone remember how Maldonado tried to ram his car into Hamilton's some time at the end of a qualifying session in 2011, or was it in 2012?

[Big Ben]

I'm not sure if they reached this verdict because the FIA is partial when it comes to Ferrari or because they are lazy and they can't be bothered with all the fuss that was about to come, neither is an acceptable reason anyway. Very disappointing

[Tazio]

This is a really good article which pretty much sums up my feelings on the issue:

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...-baku-reprieve (http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/19807241/sebastian-vettel-strikes-lucky-again-baku-reprieve). A pretty good read. I've decided after thoughtful consideration that Vettel's punishment should be disqualified from the race. Their is no other proper sanction IMO period

Those disappointed by this decision should remember a few things here .

Firstly , it is no small thing for Sebastian and his team to go through all this embarrassment .
He made a fool of himself in front of the world .

Then , he and his team handled it all really poorly .
Again , fools .

It was also , in a tight race season , a stupid distraction they didn't need , so that will hurt them as well .

And , one other thing for Vettel to think about is how hard to go into the fight now , with any more points loss meaning exclusion .
Will others take advantage of this ? I think it's pretty likely .

So , while there was no further sanction , he(they) didn't get away totally unscathed .
Baggy you've proposed Freudian psychological affect on Fettel and his team. I don't think those really affect sociopaths, which is the behavior he has exhibited. He needs, and deserves real sanction.

[Mia 01]

Both drivers are guilty in this "incident", but someone had to start it.

[Bagwan]

.

Baggy you've proposed Freudian psychological affect on Fettel and his team. I don't think those really affect sociopaths, which is the behavior he has exhibited. He needs, and deserves real sanction.



I was just pointing out that he was made to look stupid , Taz .

Nobody likes that , even sociopaths .

I never heard a single comment during all of this mess that said that he deserved no sanction at all . It was all about what degree of sanction he deserved .

And , just for the record , I think a black flag would have been appropriate at the time , or a race exclusion retrospectively .

You should not be allowed to do what he did .


The issue now is that they may now appear to have done this either for the sake of an exciting championship , or specifically for the sake of one specific team or competitor , rather than for the sake of fairness .
Fairness is what I wish to see , and perhaps we don't know some of the details , though i can't imagine what they'd be to make this a fair decision in the end .


I get his anger , if he felt he'd been brake-checked , and his actions , but only up until that sideswipe occurred .
Whether he meant to do it or a mistake , it's worth a harder slap than he got .

I expect to hear a lot of jeering if he gets on the podium at the next one , and he'll have to field a hell of a lot of questions about all this at the next race , so the nightmare isn't over for Seb by any means .


For me , with them still close , and the added tension this will make , the season looks still set to be one to remember for a long time .

[Bagwan]

Both drivers are guilty in this "incident", but someone had to start it.

Lewis did play his role , Mia , but Seb was right to say it was his own fault .
Lewis didn't react to Seb being closer on the second restart , but it was not his role to do so .

I'd guess Vettel expected him to do so , and thus , was caught out .
A silly error , and an improper assumption led to a dumb move .

[Tazio]

I was just pointing out that he was made to look stupid , Taz .

Nobody likes that , even sociopaths .

I never heard a single comment during all of this mess that said that he deserved no sanction at all . It was all about what degree of sanction he deserved .

And , just for the record , I think a black flag would have been appropriate at the time , or a race exclusion retrospectively .

You should not be allowed to do what he did .


The issue now is that they may now appear to have done this either for the sake of an exciting championship , or specifically for the sake of one specific team or competitor , rather than for the sake of fairness .
Fairness is what I wish to see , and perhaps we don't know some of the details , though i can't imagine what they'd be to make this a fair decision in the end .


I get his anger , if he felt he'd been brake-checked , and his actions , but only up until that sideswipe occurred .
Whether he meant to do it or a mistake , it's worth a harder slap than he got .

I expect to hear a lot of jeering if he gets on the podium at the next one , and he'll have to field a hell of a lot of questions about all this at the next race , so the nightmare isn't over for Seb by any means .


For me , with them still close , and the added tension this will make , the season looks still set to be one to remember for a long time .
Got it! Yet, anyone that was in as much denial as he was during the race, perplexed about why he was being given his 10 sec. stop and go. Would he even know, or for that matter care he was made to look foolish, or just feel relieved that he got away with his behavior. Only time will tell if he can control his rage. My money says he can't

[The Black Knight]

Lewis did play his role , Mia , but Seb was right to say it was his own fault .
Lewis didn't react to Seb being closer on the second restart , but it was not his role to do so .

I'd guess Vettel expected him to do so , and thus , was caught out .
A silly error , and an improper assumption led to a dumb move .

Exactly what role did Lewis play apart from being in the lead of the race and doing exactly as any other driver, including Vettel, might have done?

[truefan72]

the Tour de France folks showed more guts and integrity than the Baku Stewards or the FIA
That is how you handle the situation and oddly enough it was comparatively similar to what went down in Baku...in terms of behavior intent etc.
Vettel should at the very least have been DQ's from Baku, stripped of his points and added 1 extra penalty point (for a total of 4)
Sagan got DQ'd from the entire Tour after initially being docked 30 seconds.
This was after a swift and decisive inquiry, when the team had the audacity to protest the initial fine.
FIA could learn a thing or too about integrity and applying punishment, regardless of who you are.
p.s. I believe Cavendish is done for the tour with a fractured collarbone :(

[The Black Knight]

I was just pointing out that he was made to look stupid , Taz .

Nobody likes that , even sociopaths .

I never heard a single comment during all of this mess that said that he deserved no sanction at all . It was all about what degree of sanction he deserved .

And , just for the record , I think a black flag would have been appropriate at the time , or a race exclusion retrospectively .

You should not be allowed to do what he did .


The issue now is that they may now appear to have done this either for the sake of an exciting championship , or specifically for the sake of one specific team or competitor , rather than for the sake of fairness .
Fairness is what I wish to see , and perhaps we don't know some of the details , though i can't imagine what they'd be to make this a fair decision in the end .


I get his anger , if he felt he'd been brake-checked , and his actions , but only up until that sideswipe occurred .
Whether he meant to do it or a mistake , it's worth a harder slap than he got .

I expect to hear a lot of jeering if he gets on the podium at the next one , and he'll have to field a hell of a lot of questions about all this at the next race , so the nightmare isn't over for Seb by any means .


For me , with them still close , and the added tension this will make , the season looks still set to be one to remember for a long time .

He was made look stupider for taking 8 days to apologise and then even stupider for issuing an apology where he still deflected some blame and insinuated Lewis had done something wrong. I doubt very much he cares how he looks and the questions at the Austrian GP ain't going to be bothering him a lot either.

[The Black Knight]

the Tour de France folks showed more guts and integrity than the Baku Stewards or the FIA
That is how you handle the situation and oddly enough it was comparatively similar to what went down in Baku...in terms of behavior intent etc.
Vettel should at the very least have been DQ's from Baku, stripped of his points and added 1 extra penalty point (for a total of 4)
Sagan got DQ'd from the entire Tor after initially being docked 30 seconds.
this was after a swift and decisive inquiry, when the team had the audacity to protest the initial fine.
FIA could learn a thing or too about integrity and applying punishment, regardless of who you are.
p.s. I believe Cavendish is done for the tour with a fractured collarbone :(

Stripping Vettel of all championship points earned to date would have been a reasonable punishment as well I feel. That way he can't win the championship but we all still get to enjoy a season long battle between Mercedes and Ferrari.

[Big Ben]

Both drivers are guilty in this "incident", but someone had to start it.

Actually no. Just one was at fault here. The fake jolly good fellow was sleeping at the wheel, bumped the mercedes in the back and then decided to take a swipe at Hamilton. He was wrong from start to finish which makes him look quite stupid. And in the end he decided to admit his mistake only to avoid further penalties without showing any real remorse at any point. The guy's a class act. He's the spoilt brat of Formula 1 but it's enough to look at this last episode to understand how we got here. The spoilt brat surely has learnt his lesson now. This decision is 100% wrong.

[Mia 01]

Lewis surley knows which buttons he triggered whith his actions. His mind game succeded and Vettel got in his trap. Red mist, and the rest is history.

[Bagwan]

Exactly what role did Lewis play apart from being in the lead of the race and doing exactly as any other driver, including Vettel, might have done?

It was Lewis dropping his speed about 30 kph at the end of the corner that caught Sebastian out .
He wasn't obligated to do it any differently the second time , but Vettel , I think obviously , expected him to have some reaction to him being so much larger in his mirrors .

I think to look at it from Vettel's point of view before the accident , you see Hamilton slowing significantly , even though he knew Seb was really tight behind .
And , I think that's where you get Sir Jackie's view that Lewis might have tried to unsettle him before the restart .

From Lewis's explanation and the radio chat about the safety car close-call , I think we can surmise that Lewis had the restart plan well rehearsed , and , had Seb been able to keep out of the back of him (and note that nobody else in line rear-ended anyone else) , on the brakes slightly faster , it probably would have been a spectacular lead generated by slowing down when he did so .

It's just not the normal place to be slowing down on a track .
It was the way he'd done it the first time .
And , he is allowed to dictate the speed at that point .
But , his role was pretty clear .

[truefan72]

It was Lewis dropping his speed about 30 kph at the end of the corner that caught Sebastian out .
He wasn't obligated to do it any differently the second time , but Vettel , I think obviously , expected him to have some reaction to him being so much larger in his mirrors .

I think to look at it from Vettel's point of view before the accident , you see Hamilton slowing significantly , even though he knew Seb was really tight behind .
And , I think that's where you get Sir Jackie's view that Lewis might have tried to unsettle him before the restart .

From Lewis's explanation and the radio chat about the safety car close-call , I think we can surmise that Lewis had the restart plan well rehearsed , and , had Seb been able to keep out of the back of him (and note that nobody else in line rear-ended anyone else) , on the brakes slightly faster , it probably would have been a spectacular lead generated by slowing down when he did so .

It's just not the normal place to be slowing down on a track .
It was the way he'd done it the first time .
And , he is allowed to dictate the speed at that point .
But , his role was pretty clear .

I am surprised you are still litigating the facts of the incident. All in a futile effort to deflect any kind of culpability to Vettel's action.
Why are you trying so hard to convince yourself hamilton did something wrong.
Can it not be for this one time, be accepted and understood that he did nothing wrong and vettel simply made a mistake and then matters even worse?
I'm really trying hard to understand what you have to gain by finding some way, any kind of way, to apportion blame to Hamilton.
...Big Ben said it best, as i'm a bit tired of having to explain the incident over again.


Actually no. Just one was at fault here. The fake jolly good fellow was sleeping at the wheel, bumped the mercedes in the back and then decided to take a swipe at Hamilton. He was wrong from start to finish which makes him look quite stupid. And in the end he decided to admit his mistake only to avoid further penalties without showing any real remorse at any point.

there, that simple

[Tazio]

And , he is allowed to dictate the speed at that point .
But , his role was pretty clear


As the leading car he dictates the pace. So yes his roll was pretty clear, Vettel is at a decided disadvantage for not being in the lead. The Boss did not brake check him. Vettel should not assume what speed the leader is going to maintain right before the start. He hit Hamilton because he was too close to him. A minor infraction worth a drive through penalty. They ensuing road rage deserved a black flag!

[The Black Knight]

It was Lewis dropping his speed about 30 kph at the end of the corner that caught Sebastian out .
He wasn't obligated to do it any differently the second time , but Vettel , I think obviously , expected him to have some reaction to him being so much larger in his mirrors .

I think to look at it from Vettel's point of view before the accident , you see Hamilton slowing significantly , even though he knew Seb was really tight behind .
And , I think that's where you get Sir Jackie's view that Lewis might have tried to unsettle him before the restart .

From Lewis's explanation and the radio chat about the safety car close-call , I think we can surmise that Lewis had the restart plan well rehearsed , and , had Seb been able to keep out of the back of him (and note that nobody else in line rear-ended anyone else) , on the brakes slightly faster , it probably would have been a spectacular lead generated by slowing down when he did so .

It's just not the normal place to be slowing down on a track .
It was the way he'd done it the first time .
And , he is allowed to dictate the speed at that point .
But , his role was pretty clear .

Not every situation always has two people to blame, Bagwan. This is clear cut and dry as scenarios come. There was zero fault on behalf of Hamilton. Your post is bordering on being ridiculous and desperate.

There is firstly no evidence to suggest Hamilton knew Vettel was closer. And even if he did, there is still no reason as to why he should have approached that safety car restart any different than the previous. You can't let another driver dictate your actions and preparation for a restart just because they are closer than the previous time, especially when you have the right of way to begin with. It is and always has been, in that situation, the responsibility of the following driver to look after themselves, not the car in front. To lay any blame on Hamilton for this is not alone ridiculously stupid but very much delusional.

[N4D13]

My honest impression about this whole debate now:

http://crooksandliars.com/files/primary_image/16/07/dead_horse.jpg

[AndyL]

the Tour de France folks showed more guts and integrity than the Baku Stewards or the FIA
That is how you handle the situation and oddly enough it was comparatively similar to what went down in Baku...in terms of behavior intent etc.

That's highly debateable too. The BBC's Rob Hayles saw no malicious intent on the part of Sagan and reckons the commissaires over-reacted. In the head-on slo-mo it does look like Cavendish has hit the hip or thigh of Sagan and is already on the way to the scene of the accident before the elbow comes out. It was Sagan's move that caused it but he was trying to find room for himself, not to take Cavendish out. The guy in front of Sagan switches from right to left so Sagan switches from left to right, squeezing Cavendish who's already coming up on Sagan's right into the barrier.

It's more like the Kimi/Bottas collision or various other racing collisions we've seen, than it is like Vettel's shenanigans under safety car conditions. For both Vettel and Sagan I think the officials have issued unjust penalties: one too lenient, one too harsh. In both cases they're vilified for it. Who'd want that job?

[Bagwan]

I am surprised you are still litigating the facts of the incident. All in a futile effort to deflect any kind of culpability to Vettel's action.
Why are you trying so hard to convince yourself hamilton did something wrong.
Can it not be for this one time, be accepted and understood that he did nothing wrong and vettel simply made a mistake and then matters even worse?
I'm really trying hard to understand what you have to gain by finding some way, any kind of way, to apportion blame to Hamilton.
...Big Ben said it best, as i'm a bit tired of having to explain the incident over again.



there, that simple

Do you even read my posts ?

[Bagwan]

Not every situation always has two people to blame, Bagwan. This is clear cut and dry as scenarios come. There was zero fault on behalf of Hamilton. Your post is bordering on being ridiculous and desperate.

There is firstly no evidence to suggest Hamilton knew Vettel was closer. And even if he did, there is still no reason as to why he should have approached that safety car restart any different than the previous. You can't let another driver dictate your actions and preparation for a restart just because they are closer than the previous time, especially when you have the right of way to begin with. It is and always has been, in that situation, the responsibility of the following driver to look after themselves, not the car in front. To lay any blame on Hamilton for this is not alone ridiculously stupid but very much delusional.

I've told you cats that I think Seb should have been black flagged .

I've told you that Lewis was not obligated to do it any differently .


But , he did drop that speed at the exit of that corner , catching out his opponent badly , so all and sundry should not be saying he wasn't involved at all .
I'd like to point out that this line of conversation began with my response to Mia , who insinuated Lewis was partly responsible .

I'd also point out that I didn't use the words "delusional , ridiculous , desperate , or stupid" in my response .

I did concede , though , that Lewis slowing significantly started the sequence .

[The Black Knight]

I've told you cats that I think Seb should have been black flagged .

I've told you that Lewis was not obligated to do it any differently .


But , he did drop that speed at the exit of that corner , catching out his opponent badly , so all and sundry should not be saying he wasn't involved at all .
I'd like to point out that this line of conversation began with my response to Mia , who insinuated Lewis was partly responsible .

I'd also point out that I didn't use the words "delusional , ridiculous , desperate , or stupid" in my response .

I did concede , though , that Lewis slowing significantly started the sequence .

Mia tends to come in a drop a bombshell very now and then just for the fun of it. Just because she did doesn't mean you have to agree with her.

First you said "It's just not the normal place to be slowing down on a track " and actually it is before the restart of a safety car.
Second you said "But , his role was pretty clear ." This tends to lead one to the conclusion that you actually lay some blame upon Hamilton, even after he has been absorbed of all blame and was as blameless as anyone possibly can be in any incident.

[Bagwan]

Mia tends to come in a drop a bombshell very now and then just for the fun of it. Just because she did doesn't mean you have to agree with her.

First you said "It's just not the normal place to be slowing down on a track " and actually it is before the restart of a safety car.
Second you said "But , his role was pretty clear ." This tends to lead one to the conclusion that you actually lay some blame upon Hamilton, even after he has been absorbed of all blame and was as blameless as anyone possibly can be in any incident.

First , I'm sure you meant "absolved" , rather than "absorbed" .

Now , dropping 30kph in short order when exiting the corner prompted Vettel into thinking it was a brake check , so , though the brakes weren't touched , and the traces said he acted the same way he had the first time , that , in itself is significant .
Now , as you mentioned , have no way of telling whether Hamilton knew if he was as close as he was .

But , here's where Lewis had the choice of whether to slow right there or not .
It was clearly a good tactic to time his arrival at the safety car line as the car went off track , so no complaint there .
And , it's a good tactic , slowing down the pack behind , so that you may dictate when you go , so , no complaint there either .

But , if he was aware the Sebastian was there , he ought to see dropping 30 kph was putting his own ride in danger .
And that's the only blame I think you can attach to Hamilton here .

[Mia 01]

I admit Seb was in the wrong steering in to Lewis, the red mist was blinding him. But it was Lewis who started the incident. Just because you can´t throw the rulebook on him dosen´t mean he was not in the wrong. Lewis did this one wery nice.

[Starter]

I admit Seb was in the wrong steering in to Lewis, the red mist was blinding him. But it was Lewis who started the incident. Just because you can´t throw the rulebook on him dosen´t mean he was not in the wrong. Lewis did this one wery nice.
It is true throughout car racing that, absent the lead car altering their line to block, it is ALWAYS the overtaking car's responsibility to avoid contact. That includes restart laps.

[Zico]

I admit Seb was in the wrong steering in to Lewis, the red mist was blinding him. But it was Lewis who started the incident. Just because you can´t throw the rulebook on him dosen´t mean he was not in the wrong. Lewis did this one wery nice.


So Lewis provoked him because he slowed down and should not have done so.... so that Seb could stay much closer to him and increase his chances of jumping him on the restart?

You are joking right?

[Mia 01]

Yup, Lewis started it.

[Jag_Warrior]

Mia, if Vettel felt the same as you, then he most certainly should not have apologized and taken full responsibility for the incident. He should have continued to argue that (illogical) point and stood his ground. Let the cards fall where they may.

In other news, Jean Todt will not be at the Austrian Grand Prix this weekend. He'll be singing in a classical boys' choir as a castrati.

[truefan72]

Yup, Lewis started it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxIzGC0zJe0

i hope you can now amend your statements after this press conference.
It is weird when the driver himself admits all the wrongdoing but your dislike of Hamilton still sees you blame Lewis.
laughable if not so sad

[Warriwa]

It's not just in racing where Sebastian receives special treatment. This forum used to have a thread titled "Vettel showing his true personality" which held some great discussions negative and positive, however one of the moderators "decided" to close it because they didn't like what the contributors had to say. Essentially a gag order.

[AndyL]

Mia, if Vettel felt the same as you, then he most certainly should not have apologized and taken full responsibility for the incident

I think Vettel does feel the same as Mia, and that's why he gave a rather mealy-mouthed apology when ordered to by the FIA.
That doesn't mean they are right of course!

[Zico]

I think Vettel does feel the same as Mia, and that's why he gave a rather mealy-mouthed apology when ordered to by the FIA.
That doesn't mean they are right of course!


Yes, I think so too.

As a 'star' it must be very difficult to remain grounded and not end up a bit up yourself, when effectively living in an echo chamber with everyone surrounding you constantly agreeing with you and telling you what they think you want to hear.
I think very few would remain immune to that.

[Bagwan]

He needs to take a course in "method" acting .
It would perhaps help him stay in character for the whole weekend .

Mr. Vettel is making no fans right now .

[Nitrodaze]

So the FIA did not think Vettel should be punished. So l hope they do not punish any other driver that does the same.

[Rollo]

I admit Seb was in the wrong steering in to Lewis, the red mist was blinding him. But it was Lewis who started the incident. Just because you can´t throw the rulebook on him dosen´t mean he was not in the wrong. Lewis did this one wery nice.

Unless the car trailing has passed the B-pillar, it is always 100% the fault of the car behind for running into the back of the car behind.

Lewis could have come to a complete stop and still would not be in the wrong. The car behind was travelling too close and failed to avoid an accident.

[AndyL]

Lewis could have come to a complete stop and still would not be in the wrong. The car behind was travelling too close and failed to avoid an accident.

Are you trying to apply the rules of the public highway to racing?

If Lewis had brake-checked Vettel, then Lewis would certainly have been in the wrong.

[Zico]

From BBC..

Todt said: "People say he had already a warning after Mexico. This is true, but it was a completely different matter. He lost control and was insulting one of the stewards. It was a different category.

"So on the first category he has no more joker, on the second category he has no more joker."



What gives... I'm guessing they don't want to upset Ferrari?

What if he loses control in a third 'category'... such as choking Valteri out on the podium, Jean?

[Rollo]

If Lewis had brake-checked Vettel, then Lewis would certainly have been in the wrong.

Why? Because Vettel was following too closely? You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does.

[AndyL]

Why? Because Vettel was following too closely? You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does.

On the road, yes. Not in a race.

[N4D13]

Something that should also be said is that Vettel has a history of occasional lapses in his concentration at times you wouldn't expect a professional racing driver to crash. He did crash into Webber under safety car conditions in Japan 2007 (incidentally, caused by Hamilton's swerving), and also hit a car he was lapping at a Malaysian Grand Prix a few years ago. Of course it's not something that happens every race, but it's not the first time that he makes odd mistakes.

[Big Ben]

He also got a penalty for not keeping the appropriate distance to the safety car in Hungary a few years ago. He was as graceful about it as ever. It seems safety cars are challenging for him.

[TMorel]

Maybe he's slightly colourblind when it comes to anything silver.
His eyes seem to play tricks on him as the silver cars seem to slow too quickly or start too fast.

[Mia 01]

Banned. How much use is it to post if you not agree. Another extension of Sebs lead this wekleend. I like it bu i´m not sure if i would like to chair my like, theirs to much hate.

[Tazio]

Banned. How much use is it to post if you not agree. Another extension of Sebs lead this wekleend. I like it bu i´m not sure if i would like to chair my like, theirs to much hate.Well Mia you chaired your like, and you did it on this thread. Most contributors on this thread think that Seb got off too easy. I happen to be one of them. Mine is simply an opinion. Having said that I believe he deserved a more substantial penalty. Excluding him from that race seems appropriate

[Bagwan]

Banned. How much use is it to post if you not agree. Another extension of Sebs lead this wekleend. I like it bu i´m not sure if i would like to chair my like, theirs to much hate.

I'll always defend your right to an opinion , Mia .

I may not agree , but it's important to hear both sides .

[Rollo]

On the road, yes. Not in a race.

Is there a good reason why the FIA standards for Formula One should be worse? That is the standard for club racing and as far as I am aware, V8Supercars.

[AndyL]

Is there a good reason why the FIA standards for Formula One should be worse? That is the standard for club racing and as far as I am aware, V8Supercars.

I don't know where you're getting that from. It's never been the standard in any form of racing from club to international.


You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does.

You're talking about applying the 2-second rule to racing, which would make DRS kind of useless for starters, and slipstreaming would be impossible.

[Starter]

I don't know where you're getting that from. It's never been the standard in any form of racing from club to international.Actually, you are mistaken about that. It is always the responsibility of the car behind to avoid contact. I'll refer you to the Sports Car Club of America's General Competition Rules (GCR) to confirm. SCCA is the largest sanctioning body for club racing in the world, so it's not just some off the wall local group.

In the case of brake checking, that would be covered under unsportsmanlike conduct.

[AndyL]

So if you're slipstreaming someone, and the car in front makes a mistake, let's say misses a gear, resulting in you colliding with the back of him, you would expect to be penalised by the stewards? That's a new one on me.
I've watched a lot of racing at a lot of different levels and I've never seen a form where drivers always leave a gap to the car in front, just in case the guy ahead hits the brakes or has a problem.

[AndyL]

Actually, you are mistaken about that. It is always the responsibility of the car behind to avoid contact. I'll refer you to the Sports Car Club of America's General Competition Rules (GCR) to confirm.

Is this what you're referring to, 6.11.1 D:



The overtaking driver is responsible for the decision to pass another car and to accomplish it safely. The overtaken driver is responsible to be aware that he is being passed and not to impede or block the overtaking car. A driver who does not use his rear view mirror or who appears to be blocking another car attempting to pass may be black flagged and/or penalized, as specified in Section 7.


That's clearly a rule about overtaking, not about how closely you should follow.

[Starter]

That's clearly a rule about overtaking, not about how closely you should follow.
I never said anything about following closely, just that it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to avoid contact. There are always extenuating circumstances and you can parse the hell out of most anything if you try.

[AndyL]

I never said anything about following closely, just that it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to avoid contact.

I think you misread the conversation you jumped into then. Rollo said that "You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does," I disagreed that this was a standard in any form of racing, and you said I was wrong.

Vettel wasn't trying to overtake Hamilton when he ran into the back of the Mercedes, so rules on overtaking aren't really relevant.

[zako85]

I vote Vettel must be banned from racing for life. His driver license, Netflix, and Amazon Prime membership must be revoked for at least five years.

[Bagwan]

I think you misread the conversation you jumped into then. Rollo said that "You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does," I disagreed that this was a standard in any form of racing, and you said I was wrong.

Vettel wasn't trying to overtake Hamilton when he ran into the back of the Mercedes, so rules on overtaking aren't really relevant.

Can I drop in that it wasn't insignificant that Hamilton got off the hook in this because he acted the same way he had acted on the first restart ?
The data said he acted within his rights as a driver .
We should be able to extend that logic to say that , had he slowed more , he might have moved into the realm of being penalized , himself .

Thus , we should be able to say that there is , indeed , some responsibility for the driver leading the pack into a restart to act in a safe manner .

[Starter]

I think you misread the conversation you jumped into then. Rollo said that "You should be at a distance that you're able to pull up in time no matter what the car in front does," I disagreed that this was a standard in any form of racing, and you said I was wrong.

Vettel wasn't trying to overtake Hamilton when he ran into the back of the Mercedes, so rules on overtaking aren't really relevant.
Um, I think that when you run into somebody from the rear, you have overtaken them. :p

[Tazio]

Remember this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E4vgb4zBEg

[Jag_Warrior]

What if he loses control in a third 'category'... such as choking Valteri out on the podium, Jean?

Well, if Seb mistakenly believes that Valtteri picked up a towel meant for him after the race, yes, he might feel the need to lay hands on Bottas' neck. But as long as he gives a half-hearted apology afterward, I don't think the FIA should impose any sort of heavy penalty. I mean, afterall, Valtteri picking up that towel could be considered provocation. Sometimes ya just gotta choke a guy out when the need arises.

[sportsfan]

I think not but there should be some punishments for this.

[Rollo]

Vettel wasn't trying to overtake Hamilton when he ran into the back of the Mercedes, so rules on overtaking aren't really relevant.

Good. Let's take this to it's logical conclusion:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DEx0ts5UQAA9PeN.jpg

Car in front here deliberately came to a stop.

Hamilton in the McLaren here is not in the wrong?

[AndyL]

Car in front here deliberately came to a stop.

Hamilton in the McLaren here is not in the wrong?

I can't really say. I don't remember that incident, I don't know what happened.

However, if you were to tell me that the two cars were racing each other nose-to-tail at the time, and the Ferrari stopped in a situation where it would not normally be expected to stop, then I'd say the McLaren driver is blameless. I suspect the circumstances of that picture were nothing like that though.

[Mia 01]

I remeber, Lewis driving straight in to the back of Kimis car at Canadas grandprix 2008 i Think. Then justice, Lewis got a penalty. Kimis car was standing still.

[Duncan]

it also involved Rosberg, who ran into the back of Hamilton right after that picture was taken:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbSL8edgC3Y

both Hamilton and Rosberg were apparently caught out by the pit lane exit being closed. You can just see the light change from red to green right after the second collision happened.

[Nitrodaze]

My honest impression about this whole debate now:

http://crooksandliars.com/files/primary_image/16/07/dead_horse.jpg
Only the dead horse in this instance is the credibility of Jean Todt's FIA. He should resign but l seriously doubt he would.