Hamilton Stripped of Win - Official

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

wait wait wait..are you saying now a car in the lead is allowed to overshoot a chicane while the car trying to pass is not ?

In Ms case..true...he was maybe in front..the nose of his car maybe...but by cutting the chicane he was a wayyy more ahead than before the chicane..so no advantage ?

---

That's how it has always been non-enforced in the past, if I recall correctly.

I don't recall anybody being told to forfeit a place he had never lost, but I do know of plenty of occasions when a driver has had to give a place back he had gained.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

Yes, and "before" the corner Michael was in front at the Hungaroring.

But, like I said, the difference is that Michael had been in front for several laps and was therefore leading.

Michael was still leading when he cut the chicane.

He therefore held the advantage before and during the Hungaroring chicane.

So, I ask again, any chance of anyone explaining how you can gain what you already have?

---

so the way you explain it...gaining advantage only is based on the position you are in ? as one can clearly see MS leads was bigger after he cut the chicane than it was goin in the chicane..But that doesn't count as advantage ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonieke

so the way you explain it...gaining advantage only is based on the position you are in ?

---

By George, he's got it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

By George, he's got it!

---

than why the heck are we discussing Lewis penalty ?..as Kimi was in the lead before the chicane and still was after the chicane..if distance gained doesn't count for you...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/7611152.stm

a very good summary of the situation here - i think i'm leaning towards the side that i can see an arguement for Lewis being found to have gained (a very slight) advantage, but that the punishment in no way befits the crime in this case.

the incident is so marginal we can all argue all day whether the advantage gained was given back, given back enough, or not goven back for long enough, but the strength of the punishment, for me, is the bigger issue - despite a potential advantage being retained or gained or whatever, there seems to be little disagreement that Hamilton would and should have won the race given the conditions at the end of the race (no sleight on Kimi or Massa, purely a product of McLarens keeping heat in Tyres better), regardless of the incident and therefore the penalty is particularly harsh, but by the letter of the FIA's (rather silly) laws, the 25 second penalty was the least harsh available to the stewards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tamburello

By George, he's got it!

---

Tamburello. You're better off ignoring him :) I've ignored him and I'm feeling better already! No need for those silly blood tests :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/7611152.stm

a very good summary of the situation here - i think i'm leaning towards the side that i can see an arguement for Lewis being found to have gained (a very slight) advantage, but that the punishment in no way befits the crime in this case.

the incident is so marginal we can all argue all day whether the advantage gained was given back, given back enough, or not goven back for long enough, but the strength of the punishment, for me, is the bigger issue - despite a potential advantage being retained or gained or whatever, there seems to be little disagreement that Hamilton would and should have won the race given the conditions at the end of the race (no sleight on Kimi or Massa, purely a product of McLarens keeping heat in Tyres better), regardless of the incident and therefore the penalty is particularly harsh, but by the letter of the FIA's (rather silly) laws, the 25 second penalty was the least harsh available to the stewards

---

What an excellent piece :up:

The thing is the punishment MUST always outweigh the possible gain. If it doesn't then people will just offend and if they get let off they've gained and if they get penalised they're back where they started. Yes Lewis would have got past had things gone as we expect but there should be a penalty for this sort of thing and if you can gain a place from it then you should lose at least 2 places for doing it so a message is sent that it won't be tolerated.

As my friend Sebastien Bourdais and myself have mentioned, Lewis has previous for this so surely given his history then I think a fairly harsh penalty is right.

People are only kicking up a fuss about this because it has offended their sense of natural justice as the article says. If this were happening to someone further down the field no one would care. In fact if it was that Alonso whose fans are such horrible horrible people then all these people who have such a strong sense of justice would be poo-pooing Fernando for unsportsmanlike behaviour and cheating and so on and taking delight in that dirty cheating Spaniard getting what was coming to him.

Lewis may just be the most skilled driver out there and the fastest driver but if he doesn't pull his head out of his own arse and realise that he's special only in the eyes of himself, his dad and his legions of adoring fans then he's going to continue to get penalties like this which he doesn't need to be getting. Think about it...... if he'd not crashed into Kimi he'd have had lets say 6 points minimum? Magny Cours when he passed Vettel? Can't remember what position he was in but lets take 25 seconds off his time for the stop and go and he would have another 4 points and Spa he would have another 4 points as well. So that's 14 points that Lewis has lost out on for being a little bit loose in the brain department.

Tell you what if Massa or Kimi win the title over Lewis by anything less than 15 points they should offer the trophy to Lewis on one condition .... he go on the BBC 2 at about 8:55 on a Sunday night and say "I'm a clot and I ruined my championship and I've WON!"

Hey that could be a TV show *strokes chin* :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel

What an excellent piece :up:

The thing is the punishment MUST always outweigh the possible gain. If it doesn't then people will just offend and if they get let off they've gained and if they get penalised they're back where they started. Yes Lewis would have got past had things gone as we expect but there should be a penalty for this sort of thing and if you can gain a place from it then you should lose at least 2 places for doing it so a message is sent that it won't be tolerated.

As my friend Sebastien Bourdais and myself have mentioned, Lewis has previous for this so surely given his history then I think a fairly harsh penalty is right.

People are only kicking up a fuss about this because it has offended their sense of natural justice as the article says. If this were happening to someone further down the field no one would care. In fact if it was that Alonso whose fans are such horrible horrible people then all these people who have such a strong sense of justice would be poo-pooing Fernando for unsportsmanlike behaviour and cheating and so on and taking delight in that dirty cheating Spaniard getting what was coming to him.

Lewis may just be the most skilled driver out there and the fastest driver but if he doesn't pull his head out of his own arse and realise that he's special only in the eyes of himself, his dad and his legions of adoring fans then he's going to continue to get penalties like this which he doesn't need to be getting. Think about it...... if he'd not crashed into Kimi he'd have had lets say 6 points minimum? Magny Cours when he passed Vettel? Can't remember what position he was in but lets take 25 seconds off his time for the stop and go and he would have another 4 points and Spa he would have another 4 points as well. So that's 14 points that Lewis has lost out on for being a little bit loose in the brain department.

Tell you what if Massa or Kimi win the title over Lewis by anything less than 15 points they should offer the trophy to Lewis on one condition .... he go on the BBC 2 at about 8:55 on a Sunday night and say "I'm a clot and I ruined my championship and I've WON!"

Hey that could be a TV show *strokes chin* :cool:

---

I am a fan of lewis but at least I have respect for all other drivers and don't insult them !

Are you lot still arguing about this? :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/7611152.stm

a very good summary of the situation here - i think i'm leaning towards the side that i can see an arguement for Lewis being found to have gained (a very slight) advantage, but that the punishment in no way befits the crime in this case.

the incident is so marginal we can all argue all day whether the advantage gained was given back, given back enough, or not goven back for long enough, but the strength of the punishment, for me, is the bigger issue - despite a potential advantage being retained or gained or whatever, there seems to be little disagreement that Hamilton would and should have won the race given the conditions at the end of the race (no sleight on Kimi or Massa, purely a product of McLarens keeping heat in Tyres better), regardless of the incident and therefore the penalty is particularly harsh, but by the letter of the FIA's (rather silly) laws, the 25 second penalty was the least harsh available to the stewards

---

Reading the quotes from today's press conference did make me change my mind for a moment but re-watching the replays I still think Lewis was pushed wide and no option but to cut the second part of the chicane else there would've been contact.

What Lewis is guilty of is 'improperly' conceding his position. Maybe the stewards/Charly Whiting are partly to blame because they should've addressed this issue properly in the driver briefings or its going out of the other ear when you're in the heat of the battle.