YouTube - Hamilton vs Raikkonen SPA 2008

Just found this footage of the actual event.

YouTube - Hamilton vs Raikkonen SPA 2008

Just found this footage of the actual event.

That is BRILLIANT - it shows how Lewis was catching Kimi hand over fist and how, for the 'bus stop', sooo very early Kimi was on the brakes; Lewis virtually had to swerve and overtake him to avoid an accident.

Again, coming into La Source, Lewis having conceded to Kimi, Kimi was sooo early on the brake Lewis had to jink right to avoid hitting him and was given the overtaking opportunity on a plate.

Can anyone e-mail this (YouTube clip)to the FIA?

Can anyone e-mail this (YouTube clip)to the FIA?

What's worrying is they'll have already viewed it! :eek:

Now any F1 fan, regardless of loyalties has to agree something smells here.

Now the bit that is hard to swallow is, that if they are going to punish Lewis with a 25sec penalty, then they should issue 25 second penalties to eash and every driver that left the circuit at any point during in the race

But it wasn't simply the fact that he left the circuit, it was that, in the eyes of the stewards, he left the track and gained an advantage. That is why they penalised Hamilton.

Lots of other drivers left the track but gained no advantage over another competitor at the time and so were not punished.

That’s Rose tinted glasses for you, compulsory at every FIA meet.

Interestingly Hamilton’s limiter is perfectly in tune with the song:thumbup:

I fail to see how the stewards can claim that Hamilton grained an advantage. He cut the corner to avoid a 'coming together', he let Kimi pass then dived inside at La source at the beginning of the lap. Three quaeters of the way around that lap the pair came across a Williams recovering onto the track (waved yellows) Hamilton went left and off the track to avoid hitting the Williams and Kimi was able to stay on track and miss the Williams, at this piont Kimi is back in the lead and Hamilton is off of the track, so any advantage Hamilton had gained has gone. Kimi would have been at least 5 seconds down the road by the time Hamilton returned to the track. Then Kimi all by himself spins off of the track and allows Hamilton to take the lead. Finally Kimi throws the Ferrari into the scenery while in second place.

The question is who did Hamilton gain advantage over? can't be Kimi, because he re took the lead, can't be Massa because he was way behind Hamilton.

All start praying for rain in the last three laps at Monza this weekend.

If the stewards were investigating the incident why were the trophies presented? would it not have been better to hold the presentations for half an hour and the stewards decide if they were going to dish out the penalty or not.

Is there a time limit for the appeal decision to be made?

The FIA have to decide if the appeal is admissible first. According to Mclaren they asked race control if were OK with Hamilton letting Kimi pass, Mclaren believe race control said it was OK, if they weren't satisfied, Mclaren would have instructed Hamilton to let Kimi pass again......

Perhaps the stewards refered to rule 1: If a Ferrari does not win, find a reason to demote the winner.

FIA if accepting the appeal, must hold a hearing/meeting of the council within 2 months from the date of application.

Which means, we might not learn the result untill after Ferrari are given their spoils.

This weeks Autocar is definitely not impressed with the Stewards.

Neither autosport, F1 mag, Planet F1, Crash.net, ITV......

Seriously, when is Bernie and the FIA actually going to say SOMETHING on the matter? They seem to be keen to hope it'll go away.

Symonds: Spa ruling bad for racing - F1 | ITV Sport

My prediction is they will dig their nice red shoes in and not reverse the decision.

Especially now every driver has backed them, I refer you to BBC sports F1 section.

On a happier note I'm glad Monza is on us already so we can put this to bed i bored of the harassment already.

The repercussions of this stupid decision will run until the title is decided. these are a few quotes from that article, and it's not all against Hamilton, at least in spirit if not with legal backing.

“And while most agree that the penalty for doing so - being stripped of victory - was over the top.......”

Well that’s conclusive.

“A convention has developed over the last few years that, as long as a driver committing this offence surrenders his advantage and gives the place back, he will not be punished. And drivers have to not only surrender the advantage - but be seen to surrender it.

This is not stipulated in the rulebook, but it is the way race officials have dealt with this sort of offence. “

I see the BBC agrees with you:D

“Leading engineers Pat Symonds of Renault and Mike Gascoyne of Force India both think Hamilton did nothing wrong - that, having let Raikkonen back past, he had fulfilled his obligation.”

It’s a game of two halves

I have read that article in full and similar ones on the F1 site and I can’t see many drivers getting on with Hamilton. He appears arrogant and doesn’t want to join in with the Drivers ‘Union’ which is a not good as one of the leading drivers.

The esteemed Allan Henry also dammed the decision as

“baffling”

“absolutely unjustified”

“the latest in a long line of wilfully perverse decisions which risk the public concluding that F1 is little more than a motorised version of pro wrestling”

“….this decision has been to devalue the title crown”

“Even by the FIA’s controversial standards, this could be an own goal of epic proportions”

Edited 12 September, 200817 yr by Lady Elanore

The majority opinion in Autosprout seemed to agree with the decision, but not the penalty. Of course, to support their view Autosprout published photos which showed the cars at apex 1 and Kimi at Apex 2 with Lewis ahead, but not the critical moment when Kimi turned in on Lewis.

Ah well, at least it's MotoGP from Indy this weekend, so we can look forward to some close but fair racing!

One factor I have learnt from this situation is that for 2008 the Race Stewards are individually appointed for each race (reverting to an old system) whereas for 2007, 2006 there was a permanent committee of Race Stewards appointed for the season, thus providing continuity.

The Mclaren appeal is set for 10.00am 22/09/08 in Paris. They are appealling against article 30.3(a) of the F1 sporting code & Appendix L, chapter 4 article 2 (g) of the International sporting code.

article 30.3: 'during practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe provisions of the code relating to driving behaviour on circuits'

article 2 (g):'the race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the race'

So any driver that went off of the circuit last sunday has fallen foul of the the second rule.

I have just read this article with a clarification to the rules that makes things clearer from now on, but sure as hell muddies the water for Lewis' case;

autosport.com - F1 News: FIA clarifies chicane-cutting position

It’s interesting that the Drivers who thought Hamilton had been fairly treated, were asking for clarification on the matter. I would have thought they wouldn’t require it, given their complete knowledge of the rule book.

I have just read this article with a clarification to the rules that makes things clearer from now on, but sure as hell muddies the water for Lewis' case;

autosport.com - F1 News: FIA clarifies chicane-cutting position

Funny how this has only just been introduced. So looking back over the season, a lot of drivers need penalising.

Interesting, and prob the reason there will be a hearing:

Mosley's FIA representative led stewards' investigation - Planet-F1 News - from planet-f1.com

The repercussions of this stupid decision will run until the title is decided. these are a few quotes from that article, and it's not all against Hamilton, at least in spirit if not with legal backing.

“And while most agree that the penalty for doing so - being stripped of victory - was over the top.......”

Well that’s conclusive.

“A convention has developed over the last few years that, as long as a driver committing this offence surrenders his advantage and gives the place back, he will not be punished. And drivers have to not only surrender the advantage - but be seen to surrender it.

This is not stipulated in the rulebook, but it is the way race officials have dealt with this sort of offence. “

I see the BBC agrees with you:D

“Leading engineers Pat Symonds of Renault and Mike Gascoyne of Force India both think Hamilton did nothing wrong - that, having let Raikkonen back past, he had fulfilled his obligation.”

It’s a game of two halves

I have read that article in full and similar ones on the F1 site and I can’t see many drivers getting on with Hamilton. He appears arrogant and doesn’t want to join in with the Drivers ‘Union’ which is a not good as one of the leading drivers.

The esteemed Allan Henry also dammed the decision as

“baffling”

“absolutely unjustified”

“the latest in a long line of wilfully perverse decisions which risk the public concluding that F1 is little more than a motorised version of pro wrestling”

“….this decision has been to devalue the title crown”

“Even by the FIA’s controversial standards, this could be an own goal of epic proportions”

I could go thro it and make a it look the other way Elanore, Im sure people will read the article for themselves rather then a biased pick out of a few lines

The post was made to show that there was two ways of interpreting the article………..yours and mine.

I dont think there is a conspiracy anymore since Max and Bernie took me to lunch at the Maranello strip club, and surprised me with a new Modena Spider.

If you check the Monza thread you'll see I've called for everyone including Berndt Maylander to be given a 25s penalty under this rule!