Hamilton Stripped of Win - Official

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Very interesting info.
From this video it seems like Lewis didn't let Kimi back,

---

But that's just speculation - the immediate advantage was that Hamilton gained a position, but then, whether he intended to or not, he conceded it to Raikkonen, negating that advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by call_me_andrew

If you can't see this as blatant pro-Ferrari bias by the FIA, then you must be so blind that Jesus couldn't cure you.

---

If you can't think before posting such comments, than ... I better not say what I'm thinking right now.

I got it. The rfules in question are: Article 30.3(a) of the sporting regulations and Appendix L chapter 4 Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

Not having watched the race, nor the incident (since I had to go shopping), I will wait until the final definitive assessment from ioan before accepting what the correct decision should have been.

---

You little bad boy, you go shopping on a Sunday evening, instead of watching THE F1 race?! Santa won't bring you presents this Christmas! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thunderbolt

? 25 seconds (equivalent to a drive through penalty)
i think they should decide this track by track

---

This is a prescribed penalty as defined by Article 13.6 of the 2008 Sporting Regulations -
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... 5-2008.pdf
The FIA have acted according to the law for what they thought was an offence, but which everyone ehere has been debating for the past 200 odd posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

As a Ferrari and Massa fan, I feel terrible at the decision. Hammy won fair and square. Hope the decision is overturned.

---

And as a Ferrari fan I agree with FIA about this : Lewis gained an huge advantage by cutting that shicane, anyone with driving experience would understand that :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mstillhere

It's interesting to see how everyone is blasting everything and everyone around here but yet we dont know what the regulations say in this regard, That should be our first step. Once we read it then we can start insulting each other. Without that knowledge though, everything else seems to be just an hysterical mayhem.

---

But that's totally normal around here. There are lots of them who only know about Hamilton being a F1 driver and that's enough for them to judge this event and insult the stewards. ;)

Truth is I think that the stewards should not change the results of a race, but they could still impose a 10 places penalty for next race, if they deemed it necessary in this occasion.

I'm off to search for the full FIA documentation about this incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shifter

Had Hamilton conceded defeat in the overtake, he would have had to closely follow Raikkonen through the left-hand exit of the chicane. Hamilton could not have been on the throttle as quickly as Raikkonen because he would have had to wait to hit the throttle on corner exit until Raikkonen's car began to accellerate. Most F1 overtakes are the clear result of a driver with a certain gap taking a corner at a higher rate of speed and carrying more onto the next straight. If the gap is zero (as it was with Lewis still alongside), the concertina effect occurs and there is no speed advantage relative to distance.

---

Without disagreeing with the general intent of your post, I was wondering about this paragraph.

My understanding of the 'concertina effect' is that it is the bunching of the field through slow corners, and the spreading out of the field on straights. It happens because when two cars travelling at a low speed are separated by, say, .3s, there is a much smaller distance between them than when they are both travelling at a high speed. Am I wrong? What were you talking about when you said:

"If the gap is zero (as it was with Lewis still alongside), the concertina effect occurs and there is no speed advantage relative to distance."

I would also like to know what you mean by "speed advantage relative to distance." It sounds like an intriguing concept that I haven't heard of before.

I think we can all disregard Ioans posts as pointless and un - informed.

As for the decision F1 is trying to kill it self. Best wheel to wheel racing in years, which the fans want, and then they have to ruin it. Great race, both Kimi and Lewis were sensational, their achievements have been ruined by this dyer decision.

Disgusting.

Last time Ferrari nearly run peolpe down in the pitts and nothing happens, Lewis gets forced wide by Kimi and prevents an accident and gives back the place, penalised........??????WTF>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theugsquirrel

But that's just speculation - the immediate advantage was that Hamilton gained a position, but then, whether he intended to or not, he conceded it to Raikkonen, negating that advantage.

---

This is forgetting the fact that Raikkonen was still pulling away from Hamilton throughout the straight, like he would've done if he hadn't boxed Hamilton in during the first part of the chicane. It was the braking ability that allowed Lewis in front.