Comments on 'More Controversy Over Penalties' on F1 Insight

Comment by John Beamer

23/06/2008 17:44:43

Clive couldn't agree with you more. Had that exhaust been on Lewis' car he would have been called in for sure. Stephen makes a similar and correct point over at F1-Pitlane http://www.f1-pitlane.com/content/le-grand-prix-du-france#comment-433

Comment by luke

23/06/2008 17:45:21

i would agree that Kimi should have been forced in. without a doubt, this was a safety issue, and the stewards should be made to answer for their lack of action. in terms of Lewis, i think it could have gone either way. yes he had already passed Vettel, but his speed to do so is what forced him off course. again, an arguement could be made either way. Heikki's penalty war ridiculous, and trulli/heikki was just racing, IMO. i dont think its a conspiracy, yet.

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 19:07:47

John: Agreed that Steven has written an excellent article for F1-Pitlane, John. In fact, the exhaust issue would not be so glaringly obvious had not the stewards chosen to penalize McLaren at every opportunity but not Ferrari. All we are asking is that some impartiality be demonstrated.

Comment by aracerdude

23/06/2008 19:10:20

What dangling exhaust? What I saw was a car fast enough to win while wounded. And Lewis Hamilton continuing to prove he is highly over-rated.

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 19:10:59

The trouble is, Luke, that it's not just a few examples from one race that need to be considered when looking at fairness in the administration of penalties; the FIA has a long record of apparently favoring Ferrari over other teams and do not assist their cause by always judging McLaren to have been in the wrong. When was the last time a decision went McLaren's way?

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 19:16:10

The exhaust that was hanging on only by virtue of the sensor cable, Aracer. It was flapping about all over the place and could at any time have flown off to hit the driver of a following car, apart from the damage it was causing to the bodywork of the Ferrari. And, to say a word for Hamilton, let us not forget that he was handicapped in this race by two penalties and so was buried in the midfield. Yet he still managed to be the fastest car on the circuit for long periods. It would be a dangerous thing to under-rate him.

Comment by aracerdude

23/06/2008 19:57:16

I actually thought the exhaust situation should have a LEAST been attended to during their next pit stop. And the penalty on Lewis seemed suspect.

Comment by AJP

23/06/2008 20:11:55

The exhaust pipe breaking and flapping about was a definite safety issue. Although it did not fly off the car and cause an accident or injury, the possibility existed that it could which makes it seem inexplicable that the car was not called in if for no other reason than to remove that possibility. It looked to me like there was contact between Trulli and Kovalainen. Trulli says there wasn't. What I find interesting and suspicious is that Kovalainen hasn't said anything about it and no one seems to be asking.

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 20:24:33

To be fair to Ferrari, I think the exhaust had fallen off by the time Raikkonen made his pit stop - they had a quick look and could see nothing that could be done quickly. But he really should have been called in before the exhaust fell off. As regards Hamilton's cut across the chicane, we have seen many cars do that sort of thing when running ahead of another car and no penalty is awarded. So it is not the fact of arriving a little too fast at the first corner that is the point of the rule, it's the matter of gaining advantage from cutting the chicane. Hamilton was ahead by the time he reached the chicane and it becomes irrelevant, therefore, whether he was going too fast to take the first section. The chicane took no part in the actual overtaking manoeuver. Of course we can now say that this makes it okay to overtake, knowing that you are going to have to cut the chicane as a result. But that is a separate issue that needs to be addressed by the rules - the present rule does not cover that particular situation; it merely states that a driver shall not gain a place by cutting the chicane. Hamilton arrived at the chicane in a certain position and he exited it still in that position. No penalty should have been awarded.

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 20:27:10

It does seem suspicious, doesn't it, AJP? I was certain that McLaren would protest Trulli at the end of the race but... nothing. Maybe we were watching a different race. ;)

Comment by donwatters

23/06/2008 20:30:51

As usual, Clive, you've got the right take on this. I understand there is some discussion about whether or not McLaren should have contacted Charlie Whiting about wether or not to let Vettel regain his position...but really, I thought it was quite clear that Lewis made a clean pass. And if the stewards thought otherwise, why didn't they just tell McLaren to let Vettel by rather than wait around and assess a drive-through? But the most obvious example of bias was in letting Kimi stay on track with the dangerously dangling exhaust. I think it's now very clear to everyone that extreme bias for Ferrari exists within the FIA. Why the other teams aren't up in arms about it continues to baffle me. Yeah, I know, they're afraid of retributions by Max...but is that any way to run a sport...or business?

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 20:37:41

That is why I'd like to see BMW become Ferrari's strongest competition, Don. They are not a company formed primarily for the purpose of motor racing and they have the muscle to make serious waves if they ever feel unfairly treated by the FIA. Somehow I don't think Dr Theissen will take kindly to having a championship put beyond his grasp by victimization. I suspect it will happen, if not this year, then the next.

Comment by francois

23/06/2008 20:44:54

F1 seems to be fast becoming a game of snakes and ladders , with the McLaren board having seemingly more snakes than the others. I always thought the marshals had discretionary powers when dealing with the offences and by that they could just haul him up and give him a strong warning after the race instead of a silly stop and go.Based on the FOM onboard camera it looked very much as if Lewis completed the move before sliding wide but I can't see how Vettel would have retaken the place if Lewis kept on the track. Yes , I find it a bit mysterious why on earth having a very hot exhaust pipe hanging by a lambda sensor cable isn't considered dangerous enough for a black-and-yellow flag.Wouldn't like to see what could have happened if that pipe had flew off and hit a following.

Comment by Architrion

23/06/2008 21:23:21

Clive, I have to say that I can't connect this writing with your usual common sense and well earned reputation. In fact, I can remember other pieces of a McLaren flapping all the way, ending in a safety issue (with no consecuences at all, but very dangerous), with no call from the stewards. Don't you remember some mirrors so fragile that didn´t last half a stint when Montoya and Raikkonen were in McLaren camp? They were broking race after race. If the stewards had to make a call each time there is a junk that that could break and fall free, then we would have a pit procession instead of a race. About the penalties, I understand that you believe that each one has a bit of truth, but you say that if you take a wide shot, then some type of bias appears on the horizon. This is a poor argument IMHO. Only if the penalties were given by some kind of non sense stewards, then you would have your point. But at the moment, I can't see nothing strange (except the usual opened hand when Ferrari comes to place). It isn't different at all from football, with Manchester, Liverpool, Arsenal or Chelsea having a preferential treatment from the referees. McLaren is not suffering any kind of persecution. Just my view.

Comment by donwatters

23/06/2008 21:42:45

Shouldn't this kind of obvious bias give the teams second thoughts about cutting a deal with the FIA?

Comment by Steven Roy

23/06/2008 22:22:58

Clive, Ferrari made a stop while the exhaust was still dangling and they didn't remove it when they had the chance. I am certain of this because I was going ever so slightly mental at the TV at the shear audacity of the FIA for not telling them to take it off even at a scheduled stop. I had assumed (I know I should know better by now) that the FIA had said they wouldn't flag them if they dealt with it at a scheduled stop. Mirrors are hardly the same as exhaust pipes. If a driver is hit in the face with a mirror his visor will stop it. If he is hit by an exhaust it may be different. I was commenting on the race at sidepodcast and one of the guys there had been black flagged in a kart race for a loose exhast. There is no excuse for no penalising this. I have seen people at club race meetings black flagged for a piece of dangling glass fibre never mind an exhaust. I think the Trulli thing was a racing incident but Kovalainen was level and Trulli pushed him on to the grass. Trulli could not have gone into the chicane at the speed he did without contact. How can Lewis missing a chicane be worthy of a penalty when Jarno nudging Heikki is not. Doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. I also don't think BMW being a manufacturer will help them. It didn't help Renault with the mass damper which had been legal fro 18 months and then it wasn't. It didn't help them with the amazingly expanding tyres which became too wide as soon as Ferrari were threatened. Until then the same tyres were legal.

Comment by Craig

23/06/2008 22:25:44

Didn't Kimi's drive-through penalty in Monaco help McLaren at all? I certainly don't see how it helped Ferrari! The red team are far from angels, but McLaren and their drivers can't be punished unless they give the stewards and the FIA the chance to do so.

Comment by Clive

23/06/2008 23:37:11

Let's get this clear - I am not accusing Ferrari of anything underhand or anything like it. All I want is some consistency in the application of the rules, even when they are very poorly written. Yes, Kimi had a drive through penalty at Monaco and that was in accordance with the rules. Yes, teams have been allowed to get away with bits and pieces hanging off the cars in the past. But that doesn't make it right. When the rules are applied rigorously to one team but not to others, I think there is cause for concern. We can say that McLaren put themselves in situations where they can be penalized too often but that ignores the fact Kovalainen was being held up by Nakajima at the time of his alleged offence, it ignores Massa's continuous use of run off areas to gain advantage in Japan last year. The plain fact is that, if the rules were applied as strictly to other teams as they have been to McLaren over the last year or so, there would be quite a few team owners feeling aggrieved. I have seen criticism of McLaren's handling of issues when they crop up - they should have queried this, that or the other straight away, they should have radioed the driver, or whatever. Easy to say after the event, easy to say to a team who seem to be penalized whatever course of action they take. If they are confused and demoralized (and I don't think they are), it would not be surprising. Whether the FIA like it or not, they have a long-standing reputation for bias in favour of Ferrari and this has been confirmed on occasion by both Mosley and Ecclestone. This is now being added to by an apparent bias against McLaren. If the rumours are not true, let the FIA prove it by being as hard on other teams as they are on McLaren - and that means calling Kimi in when an exhaust is flapping around at the rear of the car and disqualifying Trulli for dangerous driving. That would be tough but fair, just as was universally agreed about Hamilton's ten grid place penalty for his mistake in the Canadian GP.

Comment by Pink Peril

24/06/2008 00:19:25

I have been noticing a pattern for the last few years. Whichever team happens to be currently challenging Ferrari seems to bear the brunt of the FIA's fury. BAR-Honda and the fuel as ballast issue (which apparently three other teams were doing, but on that year it was Honda taking the challenge to Ferrari), Renault and the mass dampers and of course the *#@% penalty against Alonso at Monza, Williams and that penalty against Montoya - was it at Malaysia? Can't remember now. And since McLaren have been the main challengers last year and this - and god forbid it looked like they were actually going to win last year - not to mention S&Max's obvious personal issues with Ron Dennis, and it means McLaren come under fire constantly of late. Makes me sick to my stomach. I hope Ferrari enjoy their phyrric victories, and that talks of a breakway & fair series yeild something.

Comment by Number 38

24/06/2008 05:34:24

Hamilton straight-lined the curve, all four wheels were on the green runoff, Vettel played no part in the penalty. The Trulli/Kova incident........a "hail Mary" desperation move on Kova's part; neither of them are complaining, why are we?

Comment by Journeyer

24/06/2008 06:08:06

Gotta side with Number 38 on this one. Lewis missed the chicane by a LOT, not just a few inches here or there. And that casts doubt as to whether he had to brake late just to clear Vettel. Trulli/Kovy... when I saw the replay, it looked clean to me. No word from Kovy on it when they could've at least brought it up.

Comment by chunter

24/06/2008 07:03:37

I'm not really big on the conspiracy theories just yet, but without a trace of doubt in my mind, Raikkonen was driving a dangerous car and is lucky that pipe didn't break his rear wing off, hit a car behind him, or land a 1000 degree pipe in a steward or spectator's lap.

Comment by George

24/06/2008 08:19:24

Clive and Steven, I think you have hit the nail on the head. Only comment I have is that even a mirror falling off a car at over 100 miles an hour will do a fair bit of damage and more than likely cause an accident/injury if it should hit a driver! In other words, Kimi should definitely have been shown the black and orange flag and Ferrari should have had to remove the flailing wreckage of the exhaust to make the car safe. Does anyone else recall the spectacular accident at Monza in 1995 when, with the two Ferraris running nose to tail, Alesi's onboard camera came loose, fell off and smashed Berger's front suspension to smithereens at high speed on the way down to the Ascari chicane? I really wouldn't have liked to have seen a similar incident on Sunday.

Comment by Steven Roy

24/06/2008 12:28:31

Thanks George. I have spent hours trying to think who was involved in that incident. I remember the whole incident I just couldn't remember who was involved. A mirror is so light it is unlikely to do any damage but I certainly would not complain if a driver was flagged for it. In Kimi's situation apart from the dangling exhaust, the bodywork was being burned away. The car should have been inspected to make sure nothing vital was burning.

Comment by Alianora La Canta

24/06/2008 12:44:45

I do not agree with Clive on Trulli or Hamilton. In both cases, I think the correct judgement was made. Had Hamilton negotiated the chicane in a way that allowed him to get through it, he would have lost a place. Cutting the chicane allowed him to keep the place. Therefore he gained an advantage - and that is all the rules say you need to have to be penalised. Trulli appeared to misjudge his braking for the corner a bit and Kovalainen reacted accordingly. It wasn't a massive mistake, but enough that a collision was close to occurring. However, I agree with Clive on Raikkonen's exhaust warranting a penalty. If Ferrari had been told to remove it with heat-resistant long-handled pliers at the pit stop, or called in with a black-and-orange flag to remove it, it would have solved the safety problem. In the former case, Kimi wouldn't even have lost 2nd position. So the decision to let the exhaust come off in its own time wasn't even to Ferrari's benefit. It was just incompetence on the part of the stewards. But it does support the impression that Ferrari get away with stuff other teams don't. Which is one of several reasons why it is essential that the stewards become fairer as soon as possible.

Comment by rob ijbema

24/06/2008 12:46:55

welcome to the FIA Ferrari show!

Comment by Andrew

24/06/2008 14:13:11

The exhaust fell off after Kimis final stop. I remember because The American commentators were marveling over how he A) wasnt brought in on grounds of safety not only for drivers but spectators also B) The fact they did nothing about it during the pit stop Quite incredible

Comment by Nick Goodspeed

24/06/2008 14:18:11

How ridiculous would the Fia look if McLaren were to win, or even come close to the title this year after the huge fine imposed last year. How could they justify the huge cost of things when a team can carry on with hardly a hic-up with a $100,000,000 or so less in their coffers? Nick

Comment by Alianora La Canta

24/06/2008 14:26:13

Max would probably twist it and say that every team is overspending by at least $100m and that drastic measures are needed over and above the currently-proposed ones to give more money to the FIA and less to making the cars better...

Comment by Clive

24/06/2008 14:28:33

Number 38: If Vettel played no part in Hamilton's penalty (and I agree he didn't), then Hamilton was not guilty of contravening any rules. Drivers straightline chicanes often and for various reasons and they are only penalized when they have gained a place by doing so. Kovalainen's move on Trulli was a legitimate attempt to overtake and there was plenty of space for both cars. Trulli moved over to the point where Kovalainen had no option but to go off track. It matters not whether they touched or whether Kovi had anything to say about the incident afterwards - it was dangerous driving on Trulli's part. Or are we saying it's legal to force other drivers off the track?

Comment by Clive

24/06/2008 14:34:35

What is clear from all the comments is that we see incidents differently, probably depending on where our sympathies lie. I know that all of the incidents mentioned are debatable in terms of the rules and would ask just two questions: 1. Why does it seem that decisions always go against McLaren of late? 2. Why do we have rules that are so poorly worded that they are open to debate?

Comment by Alianora La Canta

24/06/2008 23:16:55

1. Because McLaren get themselves into more incidents in the first place. More incidents = more irritation factor = less sympathetic hearing. 2. Because the FIA are not competent in their rule-making role.

Comment by Number 38

25/06/2008 02:25:30

Ditto Alianora above. Posted previously, "Hamilton straight-lined the curve, all four wheels were on the green runoff,....." Drivers were warned by Charlie Whiting of four wheels off after P1 on Friday when several had run off at the last turn. Hamilton failed to follow orders. Hammy deserved the drive thru ....... Kova's penalty for balking Webber is more questionable. I think Kova himself was balked by another, both were off line and neither really impeded Webber's time. Alianora's come closest to the problem......poor rules, poorly applied or enforced, and I'll add TOO MANY rules!

Comment by castlesuzie

17/08/2011 04:56:30

cheap car insurance %DDD cheap auto insurance znf