2008 Belgian Grand Prix

[Racer_LP]

Petition is now up to 24864 signatures and counting 👍

 

[Alex.]

It's not going to matter if you got 24 million.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Right, I already said it's a very close call, and that I don't think a penalty should be imposed.

I'd like to say just one more thing. Suppose the FIA asked you to set up a rule to end future situations like this. How would you write it?

The only objective ruling I can think of is (my english is very poor, so forgive me this should be written in any other way)


"Deliberately going off track is penalized, unless this manouver is made necessary to avoid:

a) a possible crash of the car in question;

b) a colision with another competitor's car.

If a) applies, the driver must resume the track at a lower speed than what would be possible at the same point if the corner was made using the track;

If b) applies, the driver who gained an advantage and overtook other(s) by going off track must give the position(s) gained back in a way that makes his car - all his car - to be behind the car(s) he must allow through."


Everything else is subjective. And Hamilton complied. If anyone can come up with a rule that is objective (measurable) about situations like this, and (in this Spa's case) results in a penalty to Hamilton, please suggest a way to write it.


PS - One thing is certain. If Kimi and Lewis were playing GT5P instead of the real thing, Lewis would get a 4 seconds engine-cut penalty . Probably that would be better for him, because there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that he was going to pass Kimi's car before the end of the race.

 

[Soundtrack]

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.

Actually, that onboard footage raises even more questions in my opinion.

At “Bus stop” breaking zone, since Kimi’s protecting inside and early breaking, Hamilton runs on the outside ( optimal racing line under normal circumstances ) then brakes with at least one wheel over Raikkonen before turn in. Should have there been room for these two cars (I believe the track is wide enough since it is the pit entry there) Hamilton would have been in a better position for next turn. I still don’t get what kind of an advantage he gained by cutting the corner and lifting off till Raikkonen was back complete in front of him.

We should keep in mind that these drivers aren’t taking decisions after 2 hours negotiations in front off slow-motion frame by frame replays, it more like 2 tenth of a second @ 200 km/h.

 

[Racer_LP]

Actually, that onboard footage raises even more questions in my opinion.

At “Bus stop” breaking zone, since Kimi’s protecting inside and early breaking, Hamilton runs on the outside ( optimal racing line under normal circumstances ) then brakes with at least one wheel over Raikkonen before turn in. Should have there been room for these two cars (I believe the track is wide enough since it is the pit entry there) Hamilton would have been in a better position for next turn. I still don’t get what kind of an advantage he gained by cutting the corner and lifting off till Raikkonen was back complete in front of him.

We should keep in mind that these drivers aren’t taking decisions after 2 hours negotiations in front off slow-motion frame by frame replays, it more like 2 tenth of a second @ 200 km/h.

+1.

If Kimi would have been able to give Lewis enough room to stay on the track, Lewis would have been in front because he would have been on the inside at the second part of the chicane.
Instead he ran wide, giving the Lewis the choise either to cut the second part of the chicane or try to stay on track and hit Kimi

You can accually see Lewis starting to turn to take the normal line through the chicane because the was in front of Kimi, but he couldn't because Kimi didn't have the grip to get it stopped and barely stayed on track himself

 

[Roo]

Cracking onboard video from Hamilton and Raikkonen from halfway around lap 42 until Kimi crashes:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6ovii_wwwformulamagcom-hamiltonkimi_sport

 

[the Interceptor]

The following is making its way around the internet. It has not been confirmed to be true yet, but if it turns out to be, it sure is an interesting read:

In a sensational turnaround, a flash from La Gazzetta dello Sport quotes defending World Champion Kimi Raikkonen as being prepared to testify on behalf of arch rival Lewis Hamilton at the FIA hearing that will result from Vodafone McLaren Mercedes' protest of the penalty imposed on Hamilton after the Belgian Grand Prix. "I don't care what the stewards said, as far as I was concerned, Hamilton let me by as we passed the pits", said Raikkonen in Geneva today. "I got ahead, I tried to defend the position and the race was on again. My car was for sure very difficult on the prime tyres in the rain and Lewis got by me into the hairpin. That was that."

Raikkonen went on, "For sure, I don't like to lose but I don't like to win through stupid decisions. People say I have lost the love (for F1) but yesterday I showed that second was not what I wanted. There are five races to go and I plan to win them all. I'm not the sort to give up that easily."

Asked if he was prepared to testify to that effect if the McLaren protest goes to the FIA, Raikkonen simply said, "Yes, why not."

Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali declined to comment on Raikkonen's statement but technical director Aldo Costa admitted the Scuderia was not pleased. "Our driver has a view but the team believes the stewards and the FIA have all the information they need. We will be talking to our driver during the week," Costa told Gazzetta dello Sport.

 

[Racer_LP]

Cracking onboard video from Hamilton and Raikkonen from halfway around lap 42 until Kimi crashes:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6ovii_wwwformulamagcom-hamiltonkimi_sport

Great video 👍. But i'd have liked to be on board with Kimi when he spun it the first time (when Lewis was on the grass).

About the post from the interceptor:

I surely hope it's true, but I doubt Kimi will get Ferrari's permission to go testify if I read Domenicali's reaction. He seems to forget Kimi was in the car and so he can judge it better.

 

[Soundtrack]

Cracking onboard video from Hamilton and Raikkonen from halfway around lap 42 until Kimi crashes:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6ovii_wwwformulamagcom-hamiltonkimi_sport

Impressive Thank's for the link:tup:

 

[Ardius]

The following is making its way around the internet. It has not been confirmed to be true yet, but if it turns out to be, it sure is an interesting read:

Wow, now Kimi? This is becoming quite a line-up on the defence of Hamilton if its true:
Charlie Whiting, Stefano Domenicali, Niki Lauda, Ralf Schumacher, Eddie Irvine, Kimi Raikkonen...who next? Fernando Alonso?

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

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:

On the way out, he was this far behind:

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.

at the point Hamilton left the track he was this far behind

so by your own argument Hamilton actually gave him too much back

 

[Racer_LP]

Wow, now Kimi? This is becoming quite a line-up on the defence of Hamilton if its true:
Charlie Whiting, Stefano Domenicali, Niki Lauda, Ralf Schumacher, Eddie Irvine, Kimi Raikkonen...who next? Fernando Alonso?

 

[darkfinal]

I think the whole reason of the penalty was for not giving Kimi enough time to defend his position again. Yes, he gave the place back, but already planning to get the inside.

I dunno if that's against the rules or not and, while I'm against such a harsh penalty, that wasn't a fair move either. If you gotta leave the track in a lost fight, damn, give the winner a chance to defend his position again: After all it's you who left the track, not him.

 

[Racer_LP]

I think the whole reason of the penalty was for not giving Kimi enough time to defend his position again. Yes, he gave the place back, but already planning to get the inside.

I dunno if that's against the rules or not and, while I'm against such a harsh penalty, that wasn't a fair move either. If you gotta leave the track in a lost fight, damn, give the winner a chance to defend his position again: After all it's you who left the track, not him.

Kimi repassed Lewis on the right side of the track, but when he got in front of Lewis he moved to the left side of the track, opening the door for Lewis to take the inside. If he really wanted to defend his position, he could have just stayed right to take the inside line.

 

[Only_in_f1]

If the rumour is true its great to see him saying that. Maybe he truly believes it or maybe he doesn't want Massa to win the title but either way it great to see him stick up for racing.

 

[PeterJB]

If the rumour is true its great to see him saying that. Maybe he truly believes it or maybe he doesn't want Massa to win the title but either way it great to see him stick up for racing.

Yeah. It's looking like removal of the penalty is imminent now.

 

[Only_in_f1]

I wouldnt say that. The FIA are tight and dont like to admit they are wrong.

 

[the Interceptor]

Even if Kimi really said that, I don't see the penalty removed yet.

 

[Sureboss]

The following is making its way around the internet. It has not been confirmed to be true yet, but if it turns out to be, it sure is an interesting read:

That's be a talk consisting of:

"If you testify on their behalf you no longer race for us"

 

[Soundtrack]

I wouldnt say that. The FIA are tight and dont like to admit they are wrong.

And Mosley is tighten. He should know when comes the time to loose the bridle.

 

[somebody]

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?

In rough terms, the engine block, heads, pistons and other internals count as 'engine', while wiring and external fittings (exhaust etc...) are not. Spark plugs are consumables and are expected to be changed regularly.

 

[Roo]

at the point Hamilton left the track he was this far behind

so by your own argument Hamilton actually gave him too much back

Firstly, I took and posted that screenshot in the first place. Secondly, I'm not arguing the point of whether the penalty was justified or not. I posted that because I think that's what the stewards thought, and why they gave Hamilton a penalty. It's not my point of view, it was what I believe was the stewards' point of view.

That's be a talk consisting of:

"If you testify on their behalf you no longer race for us"

Unless Kimi has already decided to leave F1 at the end of this season or next, and doesn't care.[/rumourmill] I'd take anything La Gazzetta dello Sport with a handful of salt (a pinch not being enough).

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It's not going to matter if you got 24 million.

Yeah, internet petitions do nothing. Excet maybe make the people signing them feel better about themselves.

 

[MagpieRacer]

Funny how no one mentioned the "off track advantage" Kimi got when they went wide at Pouhon, Hamilton got back on track but Kimi stayed on the run off and got a definate speed advantge into the following corner.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Funny how no one mentioned the "off track advantage" Kimi got when they went wide at Pouhon, Hamilton got back on track but Kimi stayed on the run off and got a definate speed advantge into the following corner.

A drive-through penalty would fix that.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Wow, now Kimi? This is becoming quite a line-up on the defence of Hamilton if its true:
Charlie Whiting, Stefano Domenicali, Niki Lauda, Ralf Schumacher, Eddie Irvine, Kimi Raikkonen...who next? Fernando Alonso?

- Juan Manuel Fangio
- Ayrton Senna
- The gopher from the Canadian GP
- Prostitute #2

 

[flubbachany]

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:

On the way out, he was this far behind:

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.

That doesn't give a fair representation. You forgot to account that at that moment in time (picture 1), they are right on the redline in 7th gear - top speed.
In the second picture, they would be nowhere near top speed as the straight is only a short one and Bus Stop is a relatively slow corner (also take into account it is wet).

Now, a 0.5s gap when two cars are travelling at 200km/h is very different (in fact, a lot smaller) to a 0.5s gap when two cars are travelling at 320km/h. In order to put these photos into perspective, you should not look at the distance between the cars, but rather the time split between them at the relative points in time.

 

[Muzaffar]

Even if Kimi really said that, I don't see the penalty removed yet.

Agreed, but there is one problem with that statement that I don't really believe....

Raikkonen went on, "For sure, I don't like to lose but I don't like to win through stupid decisions. People say I have lost the love (for F1) but yesterday I showed that second was not what I wanted. There are five races to go and I plan to win them all. I'm not the sort to give up that easily."

Isn't La Gazzetta dello Sport adding too much information?

But we all know that the race is over and the penalty is given, so there is no way to turn back time and have those penalties revoked. I'll start up the Monza thread now while you guys can discuss about the accident still in this thread. 👍

 

[P3nT4gR4m]

It's not my point of view, it was what I believe was the stewards' point of view.

Fair enough. Can someone forward my post to the f1 stewards please?

 

[Scaff]

But we all know that the race is over and the penalty is given, so there is no way to turn back time and have those penalties revoked.

While I agree we can't tuen back time, it is more than possiable for the penalty to be revoked, thats the exact point of the appeal.

It is unlikley to be revoked (FIA appeals rarely uphold appeals - particularly those against stewards), but its not impossiable.


Regards

Scaff