2008 Belgian Grand Prix

  • Thread starter Thread starter PeterJB
  • 493 comments
  • 23,704 views
I have to say, I agree with the FIA's decision to penalise Hamilton. Raikkonen was barely past him when he launched his counter-pass. He clearly had a faster car through that section, so what was the hurry? He could simply have followed Raikkonen through La Source and then pounced on the run down to Eau Rouge. His impatience got the better of him, and he paid the price. There have been bad decisions before, like Sato's supposed ignoring of blue flags at Indy that time (I think it was blue), but I don't think this is one of them.

I also think it has a lot to do with where it happened. Spa has the distinction of having the shortest Start/Finish straight on the calendar, so there's not a hell of a lot of room between the Bus Stop and La Source. If it had been anywhere else on the circuit, where there was some distance, it's likely Hamilton would not have been penalised.

Of course, all of this is fuelled by F1's race wars. You're either from Camp Ferrari or Camp McLaren; even if you support another team entirely, a part of you still has a preference for either of those teams. The pro-McLaren people say it was unfair because it was a McLaren involved, while the pro-Ferrari people claim it to be justified.
 
The FIA decided to issue a CLARIFICATION to the rules regarding the incident:

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/080913125933.shtml

That's right...the FIA felt compelled to CLARIFY a rule that supposedly is already written (but can't say where), for which Hamilton was penalized.

Translation: "Lest you think we don't know what the hell we're doing, we're just gonna claim the rule has always been there, punish Hamilton for it, then after a week of deliberating how to cover our asses, CLARIFY it..."
 
SUPER NUMBBER
The FIA decided to issue a CLARIFICATION to the rules regarding the incident:

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/080913125933.shtml

That's right...the FIA felt compelled to CLARIFY a rule that supposedly is already written (but can't say where), for which Hamilton was penalized.

Translation: "Lest you think we don't know what the hell we're doing, we're just gonna claim the rule has always been there, punish Hamilton for it, then after a week of deliberating how to cover our asses, CLARIFY it..."
Click to expand...

From FIA regulation:

16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by
any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and referred to
the race director for investigation) which :

- necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41 ;
- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code ;
- caused a false start by one or more cars ;
- caused a collision ;
- forced a driver off the track ;
- illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver ;
- illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.

Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving
more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.
Click to expand...

Since when did an unwritten rule carry more weight than a written one?
In the attached image you can see Kimi's front wheel above Lewis' helmet as he forced Lewis off the track. Had Lewis not cut the chicane, then he would have caused a collision.

The way I saw the incident (now from three different camera angles), Kimi braked early approaching the chicane, forcing Lewis wide to avoid a collision.

Entering the chicane, Lewis (ahead by half a wheel before turning in) allowed Kimi room at the first apex.

Exiting the chicane, Kimi left Lewis no room - quite possibly touching Lewis' front wheel with his rear. In another attempt to avoid a collision Lewis cut the chicane. Had Lewis attepted to remain on the track at the moment shown, he could either turn into Kimi causing a collision or continue straight, braking across the grass and spearing into Kimi as his left wheel slid across the wet grass. Lewis had no choice but to cut the chicane, or cause a collision as Kimi forced him off the track towards the grass.

After the chicane, Lewis allowed Kimi to pass before repassing into the hairpin.

So by the written rules, Kimi should have been penalised.
Instead, Lewis was penalised per an unwritten rule.

If anyone can show me where in the rules it was previously written that;
if a driver negotiates a corner illegally and gains a place, he should wait at least one more corner after giving back the position before launching another overtaking move.
Click to expand...

then both (or neither) drivers should have recieved a penalty. Otherwise Kimi alone should have. However, due to the combination of worn dry tyres and a wet track, I'd have let it slide(sic).

What would you have done in the next 100th second if it were you in the yellow helmet below?
 

Attachments

  • onboard.jpg
    onboard.jpg
    26.1 KB · Views: 23
Do you race?
Of course, all of this is fuelled by F1's race wars. You're either from Camp Ferrari or Camp McLaren; even if you support another team entirely, a part of you still has a preference for either of those teams. The pro-McLaren people say it was unfair because it was a McLaren involved, while the pro-Ferrari people claim it to be justified.
Click to expand...
It may come to you as a surprise, but if you browse this thread and other discussions on the internet, you will find that there is a respectable number of Ferrari and Kimi fans backing Hamilton in this matter. That alone speaks for itself.
 
Last edited:
Whiting told the gathering that, if a driver negotiates a corner illegally and gains a place, he should wait at least one more corner after giving back the position before launching another overtaking move.

It is understood that Whiting made clear his information was simply a clarification, rather than a new interpretation of the existing rule, or a new rule altogether.
Click to expand...


Have any of you tried to modify a rule within the middle of a game?
My advice: don’t! Unless you wanna look lousy and/or ridiculous.
 
How come nobody's mentioned that Hamilton may have been so much closer to Raikkonen on the straight because Raikkonen had loads of wheel spin coming out of the corner. I only noticed it on the video yesterday on ITV.
 
Soundtrack
Have any of you tried to modify a rule within the middle of a game?
My advice: don’t! Unless you wanna look lousy and/or ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Have you ever played any drinking game involving cards? Not only is it common, it's actually the point of the game.
 
Ross!
Hamilton put himself in a comprimising position - there was no way he would have got past so there was no need to try.
Click to expand...

How did he put himself in a comprimising position when he lead into turn 18 but was forced wide by Kimi coming accross the track?

Ross!
Raikkonen was always going to block him off on the exit of turn 18 and lead out of 19
so when he did try, he had the option of three things;
either turn into kimi and crash, go wide across the chicane and gain time on him, or brake, allow kimi through, miss the apex of 18 and lose two or three tenths (the latter being the correct sporting option)
Click to expand...

Considering that Kimi started this whole episode by braking so early that Lewis could only avoid a crash by going round him how can the only sporting option be to drop behind him into turn 19?

Ross!
Hamilton chose to cut the chicane which put him ahead of kimi. He knew he should also let Kimi past, but the reason for punishment was that he let him past and was behind him by less that a wheel's length,
Click to expand...

How can a driver measure the distance that he needs to drop back from a competitor in order to satisfy an unwritten rule when they are supposed to be racing for a championship?

Ross!
whereas if he had:
a) not tried to overtake in the first place, he would have been further back but possibly get a slipstream
Click to expand...

He didn't try, he did overtake.

Ross!
or b) done what he did but backed off instead of cutting the chicane, where he would be half a second behind by that point.
Click to expand...

He cut the chicane to avoid another potential accident, surely that should count in his favour with the FIA?
 
From what i saw, even when Kimi "forced" Lewis off the track (normal), he actually, WAS able to brake and turn normally without any accident whatsoever or cutting the track. And then, he chose to cut the track and gained speed and action by doing that. For me, that´s the reason of getting punished. I think FIA did it right.
 
benoni2
From what i saw, even when Kimi "forced" Lewis off the track (normal), he actually, WAS able to brake and turn normally without any accident whatsoever or cutting the track. And then, he chose to cut the track and gained speed and action by doing that. For me, that´s the reason of getting punished. I think FIA did it right.
Click to expand...

He was able to turn and brake BECAUSE he cut through the chicane after being pushed into it. Had he kept going forward, he wouldn't have the traction to brake and caused a collision.

And even when he did that, he gave back the position he gained.
 
Look at what I found:



Please notice how he had to hold back during the last sector, in order to respect the yellow flags, and 'risk' it all in the last corner, knowing the slightest mistake would cost him two full places.

Amazing or not, that's a hell of a tense situation. 👍
 
Nice on-board cam and lap. Looks like pertinent tyre selection plays a big role these days.:dopey:

Am I crazy or does that engine sound’s like if Renault has find a way to outcome Traction Control regulation for this year? Specifically Alonso getting out off the Pits: T 0:11 to 0:14 on the vid.
 
You're crazy. :p

That was the rev limiter; all engines are limited to 19,000rpm. On the slippery surface with the wheels spinning, you can't keep up with the upshifts.

Awesome video, I was hoping to see that 👍
 
We would probably need more than YouTube's Pixel Soup and biased sound to discuss this but the led display on the steering doesn’t show like Alonso is hitting the rev limiter (more of that @ 1:29 same vid) in my opinion.

Now, where the hell have I left that straitjacket?:dunce::)
 
Last edited:
I didn't see any reason for the yellow. Did any of you? I'm wondering if Glock has been done out of a point for eighth place for no good reason.
 
The yellows were there for Kimi's crash. His car was still parked at the side of the track.
 
Last edited:
Soundtrack
Am I crazy or does that engine sound’s like if Renault has find a way to outcome Traction Control regulation for this year? Specifically Alonso getting out off the Pits: T 0:11 to 0:14 on the vid.
Click to expand...

It might have something to do with the torque control which is used by McLaren and Renault.
 
Dear god, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change the courage to change the things I can and wisdom to know if the appeal is not upheld - the FIA can shampoo mine crotch!
prayingsmiley.gif
 
Gosh, I can hardly contain my excitement! What a thrilling finish to the race this is!
 
Back