Hamilton Stripped of Win - Official

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

The onus is on the team to show they've done nothing wrong in a case like this.

---

Is that not a little bit like saying "Guilty until proven innocent?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cosmicpanda

Is that not a little bit like saying "Guilty until proven innocent?"

---

Nope. Hamilton was clearly guilty of the infrigement. Up until the point where Kimi passed him it was clearly that he had gained a position non? So the onus was on him to make it obvious that he had lot out of the whole maneuver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

Maybe that is the problem: what exactly is "enough"? Where is it defined? F1 drivers are such a competitive breed that they'll only do the bare minimum to comply with the letter of the rules, you can't reasonaly expect them to say "after you".

Maybe Lewis was greedy, maybe not. But unless you define exactly where the boundries are you can't arbitrarily punish drivers for breaking them.

---

well, Lewis backed off by 6 km/h to allow Kimi to re-pass him and then glued himself to his gearbox so he could overtake him immediately. To me, this is not backing off enough. It all comes down to experience, in my opinion. I don't see a Prost, for example, making this kind of mistakes. I know they are all racers, but this episode shows me how immature Lewis still is. And Ron should have known better...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Like I said before. The regulations aren't exhaustive and simply can't cater for each situation.

---

Come on Danny. We all know what a driver should do when he overtakes by cutting a chicane.

He gives it back then tries to do it correctly.

Nobodies ever been penalised before for complying with this process and when they have even been told that it's OK by the Race Director, what more can they do?

When you get drivers like Schumacher maintaining his position several times by cutting corners and not being penalised, you have to ask questions.

You are right though. It is a cock-up and one they need to rectify.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Like I said before. The regulations aren't exhaustive and simply can't cater for each situation.

---

than how can a driver give back advantage if nobody can say what it exactly means ?...and where does it say in situations like this a driver should wait at least one corner to make another attempt to pass the other driver involved ? Like some say lewis should have donne ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

than how can a driver give back advantage if nobody can say what it exactly means ?...and where does it say in situations like this a driver should wait at least one corner to make another attempt to pass the other driver involved ? Like some say lewis should have donne ?

---

It does not but then again it doesn't say that a driver should give the place back.

The rules state exactly what the Stewards has indicated. That he cut the corner and was penalised 25 seconds. There is no other evidence mentioned by the Stewards to indicate that he gave the position back, was forced off track contrary to the regulations or that the Race Director said they were OK once they had given the place back and subsequently, when nothing could be done about it, started the investigation off.

Sounds like a 1970 police fit-up guv but the police managed to sort their house up by exhaustive anti-corruption investigations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

Nope. Hamilton was clearly guilty of the infrigement. Up until the point where Kimi passed him it was clearly that he had gained a position non? So the onus was on him to make it obvious that he had lot out of the whole maneuver.

---

OK, perhaps now, that the matter has gone to the Court of Appeal, the burden of proof is on McLaren, because they are challenging the decision.

I would think that before the original decision, though, it was up to the Stewards to explain why they thought Hamilton, despite backing off, merited a penalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HereIam

well, Lewis backed up by 6 km/h to allow Kimi to re-pass him and then glued himself to his gearbox so he could overtake him immediately. To me, this is not backing off enough. It all comes down to experience, in my opinion. I don't see a Prost, for example, making this kind of mistakes. I know they are all racers, but this episode shows me how immature Lewis still is. And Ron should have known better...

---

U should review the video...than you would see it was actualy Kimi moving over to Lewis line..so if there was already a drag it was caused by Kimi...why he not staid on the inside line defending his position like he did before the chicane ?Big mistake from kimi I think...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cosmicpanda

OK, perhaps now, that the matter has gone to the Court of Appeal, the burden of proof is on McLaren, because they are challenging the decision.

I would think that before the original decision, though, it was up to the Stewards to explain why they thought Hamilton, despite backing off, merited a penalty.

---

Sorry, perhaps I missed this.

Has the right to appeal been given by the FIA or are they still keeping stum?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HereIam

well, Lewis backed off by 6 km/h to allow Kimi to re-pass him and then glued himself to his gearbox so he could overtake him immediately. To me, this is not backing off enough. It all comes down to experience, in my opinion. I don't see a Prost, for example, making this kind of mistakes. I know they are all racers, but this episode shows me how immature Lewis still is. And Ron should have known better...

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXVT4CO6ALM

ok lets watch this video together..at 15 sec..no drag..at 20 sec no drag..but by than Kimi moves over to Lewis line..on 21 secs lewis dives to the inside..in a split of a sec...where exactly did he "glued" himself to kimi's gearbox ?