2008 Belgian Grand Prix

  • Thread starter Thread starter PeterJB
  • 493 comments
  • 23,719 views
Muzaffar: indeed, so ask yourself this: why weren't there huge threads and national press articles condemning those decisions? Answer: because by and large, even Hamilton fans (not fanboys, but hey, can't do anything about fanboys) acknowledge that those were fair and appropriate punishments. If anything, that just makes it more obvious that things are different here.
 
👍 I'm kinda picking up on this and...... well, let me make a quick recap of things.

Malaysian GP: Both McLaren drivers were each put back five places on the grid for impeding Nick Heidfeld and Fernando Alonso, respectively, during Q3.
Canadian GP: He was given a 10 position grid penalty for the next race after he crashed into the back of Räikkönen's car in the pits.
French GP: He was given a drive-through penalty after overtaking Vettel before running off the track in the second half of the Nurburgring Chicane.

and this.

How unfair is it for Hamilton not to get a penalty in a season? This is all the FIA's fault I tell ya.....

1. Hamilton had in fact impeded these drivers as he and Kovalinen were crawling around the track to save fuel. Penalty deserved.

2. He ran into the back of KR in the pit lane when the light was red. Came down to the heat of the moment leading to carelessness by LH. Even if it was a mistake, he ran into the back of someone and caused an avoidable accident, as well as taking out a fellow WDC contender. Penalty deserved.

3. He overtook Vettel by cutting the chicane (and if i remember correctly, failed to give the place back). Penalty deserved.

I support both Hamilton and Kimi, but even I admit that he deserved those penalties. If someone has done something wrong, they should be accountable for their actions. However, this most recent one is a load of BULL****
 
Muzaffar: indeed, so ask yourself this: why weren't there huge threads and national press articles condemning those decisions? Answer: because by and large, even Hamilton fans (not fanboys, but hey, can't do anything about fanboys) acknowledge that those were fair and appropriate punishments. If anything, that just makes it more obvious that things are different here.
I support both Hamilton and Kimi, but even I admit that he deserved those penalties. If someone has done something wrong, they should be accountable for their actions. However, this most recent one is a load of BULL****
Well yeah, that was kinda pointless ain't it. :indiff: But to be honest, I could clearly see that most of the penalty are given because of the way Hamilton drives. (except the one in Malaysia) You know, he just seems to overdrive it at times and had paid the price. Well compared to Kimi, Massa and Heikki, I think none of them drive as aggressive as the way Hamilton does. I mean he always lock up his brakes when he drives and always tries to push himself even when he could have backed off a bit, but I was kinda wondering if his driving style is the cause of the penalties........
 
You two are missing what im saying. I was giving a reference to how it would have been if Hamilton had not tried to overtake at Bus stop and instead planned to overtake at La Source. He would have been in a much worse position.
I'm not missing what you are saying at all, I simply saying its not relivent to the situation. He did try to overtake and as such the position he may have been in, if he hadn't has no bearing on this at all. I've also asked now repeatedly for someone to cite the exact FIA sporting regulation that states he must return to a certain distance behind the other car on returning to P2. I already know why I have't got an answer, simply because it does not exist. Nothing at all in the regulations lays this out in specific terms.


On the ideal overtaking senario for La Source, he would have been farther behind and slower. This is important because it means he was in a position to overtake at La Source because he cut the chicane, had he not, he would have been further back (not much overtaking ever happens at La Source even with fast cars passing slower ones).
Simple question.

After Bus Stop and before La Source who was the car in front and who was going faster?


If he had not bailed for cutting the chicane but slammed on the brakes to take the corner, he may have hit Kimi or if not, lost multiple seconds and would not have had an opportunity to overtake at all for several corners. So that becomes irrelevant, unless you want to tell me that bailing on his move and cutting a chicane should give him the right to attack from an improved position at the next corner?
Its your suposition that it gave him an improved position, I would argue that LH ended up back in P2 and moving at a slower speed. People have argued that 6 kph is not a great deal slower, and I disagree, even on a short straight it makes a big difference to who can potentially get to the next corner first.

In my opinion KR did not expect LH to fight back for the next corner and as such left it too late to defend his position.


He cut a chicane, cheated the course. Not his fault, but he shouldnt take advantage of that. His shortcut put him into a better position to overtake. Thats his infraction.
Again not a single damn thing in the rules states exactly what you must do in a situation like this, nor do I agree that it put him into a better position than he was before the corner. As the entered Bus Stop LH was level with KR's rear tyres at the very least, when they left it he was behind and going slower.


Had he dropped back further and attacked later, there would be no question or opportunity to punish him.
How much further back? How was he to measure it?




It may seem harsh (and I wouldnt have taken away his win, a grid penalty for the next race would have been sufficient), but as Fasj made a point of, if you let him get away with it, other drivers will try the same, so something had to be done.
Utter and complete nonsense of the highest order. Have we seen a spate of cars being released in front of others in the pit lane? Massa was released into the path of a car that had priority and the penatly was a fine of a few thousand Euros. That has not set a precident and you have zero proof that this would .

Secondly the penatly handed to LH was not the only option to the stewards, yet they gave the same penalty that would 'normally' have been given had a corner or chicane been cut, position gained and not returned at all. If anything the precendent being set here is that even attempting to follow the sporting regulations is pointless as the penalty you get will be exactly the same as ignoring it.

A repremand or fine would have been at most a more appropriate penalty, if any was warranted at all (and I don't agree it was).

Regards

Scaff
 
Massa was released into the path of a car that had priority and the penatly was a fine of a few thousand Euros. That has not set a precident and you have zero proof that this would .

I take it everyone has heard that Bruno Senna did exactly the same thing in the GP2 race at the weekend and was given a drive-through penalty which cost him the race win.

FIA, consistent as always. :rolleyes:
 
I don’t care if the car in front is red, silver or blue, nor if the driver is Finn, Brazilian,... I enjoy Racing.

Ok, rules are there to regulate behaviors but in no way they should be “miss” used or spoil a deserved result. Obviously, they should be evenly applied for assuring their credibility.

For some the pill is hard to slick, but let’s face it, at this time, the Ferraris are on the weak side when it comes to humid-rainy conditions (Silverstone being one of the most obvious demonstration of this claim)

Did Hamilton “keep” an “advantage” by “cutting” the chicane “on purpose” while giving position back to Raikkonen? Too many mysteries and unknowns is this equation for my brain anyway.

I guess one basic rule should remain innocence presumption, especially if you can not deal with the emotional aspect of things.
 
It seemed as though Hamilton put himself in the wrong position though going into the bus stop chicane - there was no pass on originally yet he was determined to pressure Kimi through there.
Then, after he let Kimi past it seemed to me from watching that he still maintained his advantage as it looked as if he was a lot closer to Kimi than he was prior to the bus stop, allowing him to pull that move on the very first corner. Camera angles can be deceiving though so I'm really not too sure.
 
He wasn't in the wrong position. He was chasing and Kimi went defensive (inside line). Kimi then braked way too early catching Hamilton by suprise. Hamilton swerved to the outside (in a fantastic display of reflexes) as that was the only way he could go. He then found himself almost going past on the outside. Kimi closed the door so Hamilton had to cut the chicane to avoid hitting him for a second time.
 
It seemed as though Hamilton put himself in the wrong position though going into the bus stop chicane - there was no pass on originally yet he was determined to pressure Kimi through there.
Then, after he let Kimi past it seemed to me from watching that he still maintained his advantage as it looked as if he was a lot closer to Kimi than he was prior to the bus stop, allowing him to pull that move on the very first corner. Camera angles can be deceiving though so I'm really not too sure.

Have a look from Lewis' point of view:

Oh, and first Niki Lauda, then Ralf Schumacher...now Eddie Irvine:
http://www.virginmedia.com/sport/motorsport/eddie-irvine-belgium.php?ssid=1
 
Last edited:
Ardius:tup:well done man on the video..it shows what lewis had to contend with..i think if anything kimi should be the one getting punished for his part in the whole affair.. we all giveout about lads that brakecheck us when online racing.. and its very clear to me thats what kimi done..then puts his car in a position that forces lewis to take the up and over move..:grumpy: plus there was 2or so laps left when it happend.but nothing was done about what went on:indiff:why let the lad go and collect the first place trophy only to take it away from him and the team...as scaff has said show me the rule that says you must allow the other car x-amount in front before you can challenge him again.. as far as i could see lewis gave the lead back before the start-finish line and then got it back just before the first corner..which i might add was great driving by both drivers.. 👍
 
I don’t care if the car in front is red, silver or blue, nor if the driver is Finn, Brazilian,... I enjoy Racing.

Ok, rules are there to regulate behaviors but in no way they should be “miss” used or spoil a deserved result. Obviously, they should be evenly applied for assuring their credibility.

For some the pill is hard to slick, but let’s face it, at this time, the Ferraris are on the weak side when it comes to humid-rainy conditions (Silverstone being one of the most obvious demonstration of this claim)

Did Hamilton “keep” an “advantage” by “cutting” the chicane “on purpose” while giving position back to Raikkonen? Too many mysteries and unknowns is this equation for my brain anyway.

I guess one basic rule should remain innocence presumption, especially if you can not deal with the emotional aspect of things.


couldn't say it better myself 👍
 
If anything the precendent being set here is that even attempting to follow the sporting regulations is pointless as the penalty you get will be exactly the same as ignoring it.

I totally agree with this. If the FIA is going to make such a big deal by playing the 'precedence' card then here's what they've just announced - If you gain a position by cutting a corner and leaving the racetrack, the only option you have available is to drive as quickly as you can for the rest of the race to try and make up for the penalty. Giving the place back to the opponent will only serve to lose you more time.
 
Ardius:tup:well done man on the video..it shows what lewis had to contend with..i think if anything kimi should be the one getting punished for his part in the whole affair.. we all giveout about lads that brakecheck us when online racing.. and its very clear to me thats what kimi done..then puts his car in a position that forces lewis to take the up and over move..:grumpy: plus there was 2or so laps left when it happend.but nothing was done about what went on:indiff:why let the lad go and collect the first place trophy only to take it away from him and the team...as scaff has said show me the rule that says you must allow the other car x-amount in front before you can challenge him again.. as far as i could see lewis gave the lead back before the start-finish line and then got it back just before the first corner..which i might add was great driving by both drivers.. 👍

I'm surprised by these accusations of brake-testing - Lewis was gaining on Raikkonen hand over fist in the preceding laps partly because Raikkonen had to be more cautious on the brakes. Hamilton would surely have known this so I'm not sure why he sat directly on his rear approaching the braking zone... Raikkonen had already commited to the inside line and Hamilton should have been ready on the outside to have a better slingshot into the chicane.
Rather than being a quasi-superhuman response to a dirty move, it was an error on Hamilton's part to be in that position in the first place. That's why he ended up in the wrong place in the chicane...
It's all irrelevant to what happened afterwards in any case.
 
Raikkonen did nothing wrong, at any point.

Squeezing Hamilton wide in the first corner of the Bus Stop was no worse than Hamilton squeezing Piquet and Massa (twice) off the road at Hockenheim. He braked early, but if he didn't have the confidence in the conditions that Hamilton did, then that's still not his fault. Raikkonen, just like the rest of the field, can brake wherever he likes. When racing for position, it's up to the guy behind to make the pass safely.

If I'm reading this right, Hamilton got the penalty for not dropping back far enough on exiting the Bus Stop. The obvious question - to me - that springs from this is 'how far back is far enough?' Is it the same as the gap before the corner, when they were nose to tail? Is it earlier than that? If so, how much earlier? I can't see how the arguement of 'how far back he would've been had he stayed on track' holds water, because had he stayed on track, there would have been a collision.
 
Well what a race, real excitment there after a very poor European GP, luckily I missed that but not this week. I will start by saying that I have signed the partition and urge everyone else to do the same, numbering something like 22,000 already. Ok the FIA might not listen but at least we have voiced our opinons and tried to force a change.

I am a Lewis fan, although not a fanboy, he can and does make mistakes. I admire him for his brillant driving but he is not full of it unlike some recent drivers but that is another matter. I also admire Kimi although I have lost some respect for him since his move to the 'Red Team' and I don't think it is doing his driving any good. Until this race he didn't seem to be in the season at all, where as before he was always pushing to be at the front and quite often was robbed by bad luck and poor team decisions.

So Lewis is catching Kimi up fast, the Finn or the car doesn't seem to like the wet, can't blame the tires they are the same as everybody else's. Whether Kimi knew Lewis was close behind him or whether he was just playing safe for the chicane is hard to tell but watching the on board I can't belive how early he braked for the corner. This then forced Lewis on the outside and past Kimi's car, did he really want to overtake at the chicane?

Entering the corner Kimi's car nose is alongside the front wheels of Lewis but he, Lewis, allows room for this although Kimi seems to push Lewis towards the whiteline. In the middle of the chicane, where the wheels are pointing straight, it appears to me that Kimi's rear tires and Lewis' front tires touch. Either that or Lewis belives they are going to touch and so he turns left and cuts the rest of the chicane.

He then joins the race track ahead of Kimi, however before the start finish line he allows Kimi to re-take P1, not by a lot but Kimi's car is ahead. This surely means that he wasn't accelerating as fast as Kimi because Kimi had distance to make up before beginning to pass the car. Lewis then probably accelerated to 100% in order to keep up with Kimi and outbraked him into the La Source corner, whereby Kimi drove into the back of Lewis' car damaging his front wing.

In the replay, although I thought so at the time, you can see that his front wing is no longer straight but pointing slightly to his right. This I believe could have led to his early exit from the race but it seems clear that he was desperate to win at any cost by the examples of his driving, I am talking of the driving on the run offs at what seems to be a dangerous speed. It is very lucky that he didn't collect Lewis or Rosberg or both and Lewis and Fellipe stated in the post race interview that their cars were touched by Kimi's whilst on the race track which further supports this evidence.

So as regards the penalty, I think it was a racing incident and should be treated as such, Lewis was forced to cut the chicane but immediatly gave the position back to Kimi. He then passed Kimi at the La Source corner but was later passed and so it went on, some of the most thrilling racing for a long time. I would like to look at Kimi's telemetry, to see if he did speed up into the chicane after realising that Lewis had just got passed.

As a last line, before the race Fellipe's engine had spark plugs and wiring changed, but he didn't get a 10 place drop. What constitues an engine change and is this another grey area?
 
Last edited:
Ardius:tup:well done man on the video..it shows what lewis had to contend with..i think if anything kimi should be the one getting punished for his part in the whole affair.. we all giveout about lads that brakecheck us when online racing.. and its very clear to me thats what kimi done..then puts his car in a position that forces lewis to take the up and over move..:grumpy: plus there was 2or so laps left when it happend.but nothing was done about what went on:indiff:why let the lad go and collect the first place trophy only to take it away from him and the team...as scaff has said show me the rule that says you must allow the other car x-amount in front before you can challenge him again.. as far as i could see lewis gave the lead back before the start-finish line and then got it back just before the first corner..which i might add was great driving by both drivers.. 👍

Erm..that wasn't brake testing. Yes, Kimi did brake slightly early (probably because the Ferrari handles like crap in that weather and his tyres were unsuitable, as we saw later on in the laps) and did surprise Lewis. But what you are seeing there is the crazy speeds this stuff happens at and how fast the drivers have to react.
Kimi didn't do anything particularly wrong here, its just Lewis was way faster because the McLaren was clearly superior.

Anyway, point is Lewis had to react extremely fast to all that and I don't think anyone can say he planned to go on the outside and cut the chicane. I suppose the place where this is really debatable is after the chicane in whether he should have cut the power back more when letting Kimi past again. But like has been said numerous times, he can't really be penalised for that, at least not this harshly and especially because it affects the race result so much that it doesn't represent what actually happened.

Oh, and I didn't post the video first in this thread, AdamW did.
 
👍 I'm kinda picking up on this and...... well, let me make a quick recap of things.

Malaysian GP: Both McLaren drivers were each put back five places on the grid for impeding Nick Heidfeld and Fernando Alonso, respectively, during Q3.
Canadian GP: He was given a 10 position grid penalty for the next race after he crashed into the back of Räikkönen's car in the pits.
French GP: He was given a drive-through penalty after overtaking Vettel before running off the track in the second half of the Nurburgring Chicane.

and this.

How unfair is it for Hamilton not to get a penalty in a season? This is all the FIA's fault I tell ya.....

So because he has previous he is guilty this time, on previous alone?


Ignore me if I am mis-reading that post.
 
About the advantage gained (what many still don't believe) and using the situation as a precedence.

Imagine we have a straight, a slow chicane, another straight and a hairpin. The old Donington layout with its back straight is a perfect example, with the exception that the chicane has to be cuttable. Car X is half a second behind car Y when coming onto the first straight and can't get any closer. Car X then misses the braking into the chicane and cuts it while car Y drives through normally. In the process car X has no chance but get ahead of car Y. Both accelerate out of the corner, car X lets car Y slip past and hangs a couple of metres behind. Car X then outbrakes car Y into the hairpin, there being virtually no gap. The half a second has disappeared even though no "advantage" was gained.

If Hamilton in the end isn't punished I'll fully expect someone to take advantage of the hole in the rules, use this case as a precedence and get away with no penalty.
 
If Hamilton in the end isn't punished I'll fully expect someone to take advantage of the hole in the rules, use this case as a precedence and get away with no penalty.

But how can you rule for that in racing? I understand that it can be said he gained an advantage but how are the drivers going to know that they have allowed a sufficant gap? Maybe they aren't allowed to overtake the car they have just given the position back to until after the next corner, or the next lap.

But what if it is a Force India car that is clearly holding up a much faster car, but the faster car overcooked it at the chicane and now has to sit behind the slower car for the next lap.

I think what has upset a lot of people is the seeming unfairness of the FIA towards Lewis and McLaren in general.
 
About the advantage gained (what many still don't believe) and using the situation as a precedence.

Imagine we have a straight, a slow chicane, another straight and a hairpin. The old Donington layout with its back straight is a perfect example, with the exception that the chicane has to be cuttable. Car X is half a second behind car Y when coming onto the first straight and can't get any closer. Car X then misses the braking into the chicane and cuts it while car Y drives through normally. In the process car X has no chance but get ahead of car Y. Both accelerate out of the corner, car X lets car Y slip past and hangs a couple of metres behind. Car X then outbrakes car Y into the hairpin, there being virtually no gap. The half a second has disappeared even though no "advantage" was gained.

If Hamilton in the end isn't punished I'll fully expect someone to take advantage of the hole in the rules, use this case as a precedence and get away with no penalty.

Watch the video of Hamilton's onboard camera, he doesn't miss the braking, Kimi brakes earlier than Hamilton was expecting and also defensively held the inside, forcing Hamilton to the outside and having the superior car could brake in time to take advantage at the chicane, which Kimi denies with a block.
Also, Hamilton wasn't half a second behind..he was right behind him.
 
Roo: I should note given my earlier posts that I wouldn't say Raikkonen's driving was 'wrong' in the sense of committing an actual offence that he should be punished for. All I mean when I talked about Raikkonen pushing Hamilton wide, etc, is that they were racing each other - neither had a clear lead - going into the corner, so Hamilton is not obliged to take up position line astern, and it's legitimate for Hamilton to take evasive action, rather than try at all costs to get back behind Raikkonen, when Raikkonen runs very close to the inside of the LH section of the chicane. I don't think Raikkonen did that with the intention of forcing Hamilton wide, exactly - I think he was just having a lot of trouble controlling his car in the conditions (as evidenced by him parking it in the wall a short while later :>) and was being very cautious. It's just unfortunate that this left Hamilton in the situation of having to choose to cut the chicane or try and make a dangerous move to get back behind him, and wrong to punish Hamilton for that.
 
TMM
But what if it is a Force India car that is clearly holding up a much faster car, but the faster car overcooked it at the chicane and now has to sit behind the slower car for the next lap.
Doesn't matter a bit when racing for positions. Bad for the driver of the fast car.

Watch the video of Hamilton's onboard camera, he doesn't miss the braking, Kimi brakes earlier than Hamilton was expecting and also defensively held the inside, forcing Hamilton to the outside and having the superior car could brake in time to take advantage at the chicane, which Kimi denies with a block.
Also, Hamilton wasn't half a second behind..he was right behind him.
Again, I watched the race, thank you. You very apparently can't tell a hypothesis from a real situation. Did I say Hamilton missed the braking? No. Did I say he was half a second behind? No.

The main point in my post, you (like many others) are very sure that no penalties should be given as the position was returned. But would you still feel the same if car X in my fictional example was a Ferrari, and car Y was driven by Hamilton? The position is legitimately returned so you should.
 
Right, sorted. (The following are .jpgs, don't try to click on them.)

On the way into the chicane, Hamilton was this far behind Raikkonen:

Spa20082.jpg


On the way out, he was this far behind:

Spa20083.jpg


That's why the penalty was given.

From the outside angle, it looks like there was no difference in the gap from before and after the incident, hence the confusion. It's not until the onboard footage was posted that any proper judgement could be made. The stewards would've seen the onboard footage on the day.
 
Last edited:
Still doesn't justify it. If so, why wasn't Nico Rosberg penalized for cutting a chicane at Monaco, in which he did gain an advantage so he could let the lapper by without exposing himself to the threat of an overtake?
 
Again, I watched the race, thank you. You very apparently can't tell a hypothesis from a real situation. Did I say Hamilton missed the braking? No. Did I say he was half a second behind? No.

The main point in my post, you (like many others) are very sure that no penalties should be given as the position was returned. But would you still feel the same if car X in my fictional example was a Ferrari, and car Y was driven by Hamilton? The position is legitimately returned so you should.

In that case, what was the point in the hypothesis at all?

It wouldn't have made a difference if the positions were switched, I would back Raikkonen just as much as I back Hamilton in this circumstance. Like I said before, I am more annoyed about this penalty because of what it represents not because of who it was placed on.
 
Still doesn't justify it. If so, why wasn't Nico Rosberg penalized for cutting a chicane at Monaco, in which he did gain an advantage so he could let the lapper by without exposing himself to the threat of an overtake?

The stewards and (of?) the FIA are not a democracy. They can do what they like.

From the Formula1.com latest news:

Martin Whitmarsh added: "From the pit wall, we then asked Race Control to confirm that they were comfortable that Lewis had allowed Kimi to repass, and they confirmed twice that they believed that the position had been given back in a manner that was 'okay'.

Link: http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2008/9/8344.html

By Charlie Whiting, the race director. He's not a steward, and his opinion, like ours, counts for nought in the stewards decision. He also wouldn't have seen the onboard footage when he confirmed the re-pass was OK.
 
Last edited:
And we can find it fair or unfair. The chasing car gained further while braking for the chicane, Roo..


To me, it doesn't matter who did this - as far as I care, it could be Kimi cutting it, Lewis, Nico, or Yuji Ide.
 
And we can find it fair or unfair. The chasing car gained further while braking for the chicane, Roo..

I agree with you. I posted that to demonstrate what the stewards based their decision on. I don't agree with that decision, but it happened and I'm sure it won't be changed, regardless of the appeal.
 
Roo
Right, sorted. (The following are .jpgs, don't try to click on them.)

On the way into the chicane, Hamilton was this far behind Raikkonen:

Spa20082.jpg


On the way out, he was this far behind:

Spa20083.jpg


That's why the penalty was given.

From the outside angle, it looks like there was no difference in the gap from before and after the incident, hence the confusion. It's not until the onboard footage was posted that any proper judgement could be made. The stewards would've seen the onboard footage on the day.

I think that is a bit deceptive, because Lewis went through half of the chicane. So it should be measure from the distance mid-chicane, should it not? I know many have said that Kimi braked early, so he did gain from that, which wasn't an unfair advantage.


bout the advantage gained (what many still don't believe)

No. I accept that an advantage was gained, as I think most others do. Our point is that he gave the advantage back.
 
Back