Bloody hell, we really DO disagree on this one
One it wasn't EG's fault so not sure where you get to say it creates a penalty for both, stick to the situation at hand not a general sweeping one.
There was a penalty for EG, no doubt, but he wasn't at all at fault. I accept I could have been more clear about that. Remember that a penalty for a driver-at-fault (in this case Maldonardo) is set
without consideration of the circumstances with the ability to add discretionary penalties based on severity. That's exactly what happened here. The base penalty is correct in being relatively minor, the discretionary powers of the stewards to add further penalties for serious incidents is also correct.
So if an unsafe release potentially means that the car is still returning safely, the FIA isn't relying on the RBR system to tell them something went wrong. The issues here are the tire wasn't fully placed on the car, that issue one. Second issue is the team members were put at risk by having to fix their first wrong and pushing the car back to the box when some other car could have been coming down the lane. And then there are added issues that are hypothetical that FIA seems to be also tacking on. Not at all sure what you're getting at beyond the last portion which in itself makes not all that much sense.
I was being literal - a car that is in a completely safe condition in itself can be unsafely released. That would most obviously be into the path of another car.
Ricciardo was cleared to go so he went - the mechanic hadn't finished fitting the wheel. His hands were clearly in the wheel when the car left. There's your immediate unsafe release.
Which are the hypothetical issues that RBR are tacking on? I'm not saying they're not doing that, I just don't know what you mean
I highly doubt that, the FIA ban's on many questionable reasons like Romain's stupidity back in 2012 due to harming the "outcome of the F1 championship". That example among others is what is wrong with some FIA judgements that are based on the hypothetical knee jerk reaction of what could happen...
That's my opinion, of course, and not fact. The death of a spectator would be hugely expensive in financial terms for an organiser in terms of their insurance. A risk of spectator death would have been realistically demonstrated and so the cost to other organisers would go up. Sponsor-attractiveness would go down, parts of the press would spin against F1, the super-expensive ruling-class green-non-green sport.
A driver takes their own risks, insurance takes the rest. And it's damned expensive.