FIA Spa Verdict: The FIA has no spine

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

The rule book clearly states that a drive through penalty can/ should be imposed. If the offense is at the end of the race and a drive through can not be imposed, a 25 second penalty will be substituted. No random number. As I said before " timing is everything"

If the stewards had suggested a lethal injection it would be ok with me

If Hamilton gave up the advantage he gained by going off-course and let Kimi pass him, then why should there be a penalty?

[MFAFF]

Originally Posted by Rearden

If Hamilton gave up the advantage he gained by going off-course and let Kimi pass him, then why should there be a penalty?

The penalty was not for gaining an advantage...the articles quoted are to do with only using the track itself during the race.

The issue is that the Stewards, who change with every race, do not apply the rules in a very consistent way..hence inconsistent penalties and perceptions of favouritism.

[911pcars]

Anyone here who has an opinion on rules infractions based on a driver's personality or past transgressions (perceived or real) isn't credible. Just judge the incident on its own terms please. Reverse the driver roles and see if you come up with the same conclusions.

Driver A cut a corner and gained a position advantage over driver B. Driver A gave up the position shortly thereafter, then passed B again cleanly.

Do the rules say A must wait until the next corner to pass driver B? I think not.
Do the rules say B must be at race pace before being passed? I think not.

The steward's decision was either poor or arbitrary and perhaps politically motivated. Maybe all three. Same result. Bad ruling. It's a tainted race result for Massa.

More examples of this type of "officiating" will result in a further loss of credibility for F1, perhaps resembling NASCAR and their philosophy for "even" racing.

Sherwood

[MFAFF]

You need to watch this race to understand the FIA's actions....

[legion]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

Anyone here who has an opinion on rules infractions based on a driver's personality or past transgressions (perceived or real) isn't credible. Just judge the incident on its own terms please. Reverse the driver roles and see if you come up with the same conclusions.

Driver A cut a corner and gained a position advantage over driver B. Driver A gave up the position shortly thereafter, then passed B again cleanly.

Do the rules say A must wait until the next corner to pass driver B? I think not.
Do the rules say B must be at race pace before being passed? I think not.

The steward's decision was either poor or arbitrary and perhaps politically motivated. Maybe all three. Same result. Bad ruling. It's a tainted race result for Massa.

More examples of this type of "officiating" will result in a further loss of credibility for F1, perhaps resembling NASCAR and their philosophy for "even" racing.

Sherwood

You forgot it begins with: "Driver B forced Driver A off the track while aggressively (illegally?) defending his position.

[Neilk]

SPOILER ALERT in case you haven't seen today's race



I think the racing gods were looking down on this race and put everything back in balance by screwing up Massa's refueling... or the conspiracy theorist will argue that McLaren jammed the signal to the electronic lollipop and made it turn Green prematurely.

[Henry Schmidt]

Originally Posted by legion

You forgot it begins with: "Driver B forced Driver A off the track while aggressively (illegally?) defending his position.

Driver B (Kimi) was clearly ahead (undisputed by all rational observers) and the rules categorically state "the overtaking driver must take responsibility for a safe passing maneuver". This rule is common to F1 and every sanctioning body I have ever raced with. It is even the rule of the road.

[Noah930]

Originally Posted by Henry Schmidt

The rules say "drive through penalties are not subject to appeal ". Because Ham Bone was assessed a drive through penalty translated as 25 second because of timing there is no appeal available.

Thanks for the clarification. Then, another question: why was the original drive-through penalty not enforced during the actual running of the race? Before the drivers crossed the finish line? Is there some sort of regulation that states when (in what sort of timeframe) a penalty must be assessed? I mean, heck, could the FIA hand down a new ruling on a race from last season such that McLaren would win the championship, instead of Ferrari?

I understand the points you are making. At the same time, were I LH, I would argue that had I known I was going to be docked 25 seconds, I would have pushed a bit harder and finished more than just 20 seconds ahead of P2. I don't know if McLaren's deliberately trying to skate around the rules by asking "race control" instead of the stewards about this during the race. I can see how the distinction would get a bit fuzzy in the heat of the closing laps of a race. I can see why McLaren thinks there's certainly a bit of Mickey Mouse officiating going on.

[Aerkuld]

This whole thing will soon be a non-issue if Kimi keeps on driving like a knob and Ferrari keep screwing things up for Massa...

...until next season at least.