Belgium Grand Prix 2008 ***SPOILERS***

Whether there'll be an appeal or not we don't know yet. McLaren have confirmed they have submitted notice to appeal, but currently there are no grounds on which they can appeal as far as I'm aware.

That said, that steward apparently did say that they could have given a 10 grid penalty at the next race (would have been even more dodgy, given that it was this race the offence took place in, and Hamilton finished). How, I've no idea, as it's clearly written in the rules that it's a drive through or 25 second penalty.

Kimi's argument you naturally have to question. Though it would make little difference to him personally, just that of his team, he would say that, wouldn't he? It is the same argument that Trulli put forward though, and the one I've been repeating since before the penalty was even handed out.

Hamilton's defence of the move is rather weak in my opinion.

"After allowing Kimi to completely re-pass, I crossed from the left side of the track to the right side of the track, passing behind Kimi in the process. I then attacked Kimi on the inside of the first corner, and successfully out-braked him."

Clearly from the moment he came back onto the track he was working out how he could best gain from the situation.

If the penalty is for cutting the chicane and the initial advantage gained, it sets a worrying precedent for the future, where a driver can attempt to navigate a corner, perhaps with the minimum of effort then rejoin and launch an immediate attack. British media, Hamilton fanboys and some others are saying that F1 is a farce because of this penalty. For me, the bigger farce would be if you can launch such an overtaking move by simply cutting a corner.

If you can get around the corner, you should do. The general consensus is that Hamilton could have got around the corner, though perhaps with some risk to both cars. Even had he decided he could not, had he just ran off the circuit on the exit of the right-hander, then rejoined when Kimi's car was clear, he'd have had a minimum of an 6 point lead (assuming he won and Kimi still retired), possibly even a 10 point lead (had Kimi not retired and finished where he was).

Covfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rodrigo007 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> [www.mtv3.fi]
>
> > ot/f1/2008/09/707032
> >
> > Ferrari Kimi Räikkönen agrees with the
> stewards
> > that the McLaren-driver Lewis Hamilton
> benefited
> > from cutting the shikane in the F1 Belgian GP.
> >
> > - If he had come to the corner in way one ought
> to
> > do, he would not have been in the first corner
> in
> > such a postion that he would have been able
> even
> > to try to pass. Everyone has their own point of
> > view. Had there been a wall, he would never
> have
> > come through there, said Räikkönen of the
> > situation to MTV3.
>
>
> He's hardly going to say that Lewis was completely
> innocent will he?
>

Of course...but honestly I think he is right.

yes, hopefully the penalty isn't changed, because i dont recall in the past a grid penalty being given for the offence, and just because this could change the outcome of the race, it should be any different

---

X (@ed24f1)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2008 10:34AM by SchueyFan.

its funny reading over messages that marcl has posted, always edited, on one message on page 22 he edited 5 times lol

its interesting that mclaren say race control clarified the move twice. why did mclaren need clarification, they too must have known the move was dodgy, as they needed clarification within about a minute, twice!, as thats when kimi span off. if they were so confident his pass was so legal, why seek clarification???

and its also how can charlie whiting clarify it was ok, without seeing replays etc, there was only about 1 minute and a half between the move and kimi spinning off. thats why the stewards oppinion is more realistic then whitings who is concentrating at other things at the time.

If you read what the appeal is about its about race control telling them it was ok twice and thats why they never told lewis to let kimi pass again.

Had race control said we dont know they would have moved lewis over.

Thats what they are apealing for.

If they loose the apeal they could get a worse penalty and lewis could be excluded totally from the gp. I think they will loose anyway as I said before, but what might come out of it could be that race control are no longer allowed to pass judgement so it will stop this happening again.

Gav it does look like the penalty was for cutting the corner and not the 1st corner move. Thats what it seems like anyway from what that steward said, I agree with what you are saying. If this is the case they need to put gravel or speed bumps down to put people off cutting corners.

Teams seek clarification all the time about things not just mclaren. Its called covering your arse, only this time it did not work.

I edit my posts to add things rather than created 5 posts after one another.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2008 11:17AM by marcl.

marcl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gav it does look like the penalty was for cutting
> the corner and not the 1st corner move. Thats
> what it seems like anyway from what that steward
> said, I agree with what you are saying. If this
> is the case they need to put gravel or speed bumps
> down to put people off cutting corners.

It's hardly been elaborated on by the one steward to supposedly comment so far or the statement issued. It's been fairly basic. Regardless, Hamilton gained an advantage, so he deserved a penalty. I hope it's not changed, as as I said, to do so would be to make more of a farce than the fanboys are claiming it is now.

I dont think anything ever in F1 has caused as much talk all over the press, even last year did not cause all this.

Some press are even saying it was not going to be looked at until they got a phone call from guess who. But this is probably just crap.

I think the only change will be Lewis excluded from the race and another race ban. We have seen this before with MS and Eddie. They will throw the book at him things like cutting the corner, passing at the 1st corner weaving down the straight will all be looked at.

If they change the result it will not be due to the fact the penalty was wrong etc it will be changed to give the fans what they want and that is wrong.

At 1st I did think it was wrong as you know, but after reading what people said and seeing the replays I have to agree something should have been given. Had it been a 10 place grid drop I dont think people would have minded as much, had kimi finished 2nd I still think he would have been given the win with Lewis 2nd and again I dont think people would have minded as much. Just my views.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2008 12:00PM by marcl.

If they are found guilty in the council, is it certain that they will get a worse penalty? And why?

I honestly think Hamilton pass was not "100% legal" as Kimi was clearly in disadvantage in the first turn after the chicane, but it is a pity, because the final lap was simply sensational...

Anyway, why would they be punished even with a worse penalty?

watercolours Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If they are found guilty in the council, is it
> certain that they will get a worse penalty? And
> why?

No. It's never going to be a race ban or exclusion. The penalty will either be left as is or changed for a similar one (like the 10 grid drop if they can). Or it will be removed completely.

I was going by things that had happened in the past which is why I said it could be worse thats all.

If I remember right Eddie got a race ban after his crash in Brazil they questioned it and I think it bacame a 2 race ban.

Bennetton with MS after Silverstone got a 2 race ban after saying they should not have been excluded from Silverstone.

I think the above is right but that was ages ago.

Yeah, but this is just cutting a corner. They could throw the book at them if they wanted to I suppose, but a 25 second penalty is more than harsh enough. It's just fixed in the rules.

The appeal doesn't just take on the possibility of additional penalties just because a team appealed. The punishment is deemed to fit the crime, not the fact that you're arguing with it. Had McLaren brought the sport into disrepute by blurting out obscenities on the matter, or claimed the FIA was against them or something, then fair enough, but the only thing that's being looked at to our knowledge is the actual incident of cutting a chicane and getting an advantage out of it.

Irvine's crash was beyond belief. Brundle had a car landing on his helmet in that incident (which is painful no matter which way you look at it!). It's not causing an avoidable accident - it's being a blithering idiot and driving with no appreciation for the safety of his fellow drivers.

Schumacher rightly got a 2 race ban for simply choosing not to adhere to a black flag. He refused to be disqualified... If someone did that now there'd be uproar, far, far beyond what's going on now.

Ive not read it all but if a driver, Lewis perhaps or anyone failed to comply with blag flag then I would probably expect more than a 2 race ban.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

Have you seen this [www.petitiononline.com]

over 36,000 people have signed this to say the FIA were wrong lol its crazy.

Plus I think you should read this, its seems that race control did ask for the lewis move to be looked at. The race director is Charlie Whiting the same person that told Mclaren they were ok.

[www.eastandard.net]

Now I can see why mclaren would take this further.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2008 04:34PM by marcl.

I hope its changed at the least. I for one am taking issue with teh fact that what lewis has supposedly done is as bad as Glock overtaking under yellows.

Sim

---

All Hail The New York Giants - Winners of Superbowl XXI, XXV and XLII!

"I'd love to know what goes on in that crazy head of yours sometimes, Sim..." - Locke Cole

The news says that the stewart is a close ally of Max Mosley.

Which news and which steward?

Sim, I agree completely. Though to be fair to Glock, he was on wets and Webber was crawling around on dry tyres. Rules are rules, but you can understand why Glock is a bit frustrated.

The stewards arms will be tied with what penalties can be given though. Like I said, perhaps any appeal will allow more flexibility.

And according to some stories that have been on the radio it was not going to be looked at until Max called to ask it to be looked at. As I said this morning.

This is not confirmed on any web site yet and I hope its not true.

Sasjag I fully agree with you on that one. But both are drive through penalties in a race thats the problem. Glock gained a point through his pass Lewis gained nothing as kimi spun twice. But Glock also says he passed when it was ok to do so and the speed difference as he was on wets made it look like he did not slow for the yellow.

What happened with the other things though as people were saying alonso and nick also passed cars under yellow flags.

Also they should look at everything that happened in a race not just cherry pick. Thats just not fair.

"People need to understand how the decision was made, what the report from the Race Director said and why it was deemed necessary for the stewards to even consider the incident and not others that took place in the chaotic last couple of laps of the race,"



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 09/10/2008 05:06PM by marcl.