2019 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal June 7-9

[FrukostScones]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
and when you thought Ferrari was healed from Todt, Brawn and Montezemolo, they embarrass themselves again.
yuck, brings back memories of Spielberg and other Ferrari finest moments in F1.
says a Ferrari Fanboi.

[bonjon1979]

I’m sorry...the new ‘overwhelming evidence’ they brought to the review was kharun on the skypad? And people are still arguing about this? Has the world gone completely barmy? Ferrari are using an opinion piece by a sky sports pundit as ‘evidence’. I’m amazed they didn’t quote an autosports forum poll...GROW UP. Your driver made another mistake, by the letter of the ill conceived rules he is guilty and got the minimum penalty possible. Grow a pair and jog on...

[TAG]

dans79, NO, TAG: there is validity to both sides, and both sides are at times making flawed arguments. It isn't difficult to consider. Jolyon and Chandok both raised good points. This partly explains the level of controversy.

There are good people on both sides... you know what that sound like? There is no "controversy" there is only dissent and bitterness about the penalty handed because it impacted Ferrari and Vettel. The was no question as per the rules. Don't flatter yourself by calling it anything other than that.

[NathanOlder]

We should consider that diving into a closing gap between a car, oscillating in yaw across 2/3 of the track after grass, and a wall, was perhaps not the only nor best decision Lew could have made.

Hamilton was committed to the corner when Vettel was off track. If, at any point, Hamilton was required to act to avoid a collision during Vettel's rejoin, it's a penalty to Vettel. That's the rule. Argue the rule, not the penalty.

In Monaco, the incident was caused by Max's dive bomb attempt. I have no problem with his attempt, although if he had caused a problem for Hamilton (spin, puncture etc) he would have reserved a penalty. Hamilton was ahead, under control and he has the right to take his line. Vettel left the track and deliberately crowded Hamilton. That's an offence.

Now, one might argue the rule is wrong, but the penalty is in line with the rule and thus entirely justified.

This 100%.

People saying Hamilton should have gone to the left have obviously never even been on a race track, and have never looked at it in a way of a racer.

Here Hamilton has to start deciding which way he is going to go.



The 2nd picture shows how much closer Lewis is in such a short distance, showing how much faster Lewis is travelling compared to Vettel. The line I have drawn is the racing line, the fastest line, and at this time the only line available. Lewis has 2 options, pass on the right or brake hard and wait behind. No racer on the planet will go for the 2nd option. Some people here are saying he should have tried to pass on the left is a complete joke.



Next is where lewis has a large portion of his car alongside Seb, his front wheels are level with sebs rears. As you can see there is still plenty of room for Lewis and Seb should now be turning more left to not crowd Lewis off the track (white line). If seb was unable to stop his car drifting to the right then it means he was out of control still and had rejoined the track in an unsafe manner.





Please if any of you disagree with the penalty look at this and explain how Sebastian is not guilty of breaking a rule.

Or most likely ignore my post as you can't explain a way out if the inevitable penalty that was rightly issued 2 weeks ago.

[Restomaniac]

I’m sorry...the new ‘overwhelming evidence’ they brought to the review was kharun on the skypad? And people are still arguing about this? Has the world gone completely barmy? Ferrari are using an opinion piece by a sky sports pundit as ‘evidence’. I’m amazed they didn’t quote an autosports forum poll...GROW UP. Your driver made another mistake, by the letter of the ill conceived rules he is guilty and got the minimum penalty possible. Grow a pair and jog on...

When I saw that I wouldn’t of blamed the FIA if after wetting themselves laughing they had just doubled Vettel’s time penalty for Ferrari utterly wasting their time. I know they couldn’t BTW but that is just a urine take by Ferrari.

[bonjon1979]

I’m sorry...the new ‘overwhelming evidence’ they brought to the review was kharun on the skypad? And people are still arguing about this? Has the world gone completely barmy? Ferrari are using an opinion piece by a sky sports pundit as ‘evidence’. I’m amazed they didn’t quote an autosports forum poll...GROW UP. Your driver made another mistake, by the letter of the ill conceived rules he is guilty and got the minimum penalty possible. Grow a pair and jog on...

When I saw that I wouldn’t of blamed the FIA if after wetting themselves laughing they had just doubled Vettel’s time penalty for Ferrari utterly wasting their time. I know they couldn’t BTW but that is just a urine take by Ferrari.

Totally. Lock the forum. No more good can possibly be gained by discussing this. I prostrate myself on the moderators altar and beg for mercy.

[Xwang]

We should consider that diving into a closing gap between a car, oscillating in yaw across 2/3 of the track after grass, and a wall, was perhaps not the only nor best decision Lew could have made.

Hamilton was committed to the corner when Vettel was off track. If, at any point, Hamilton was required to act to avoid a collision during Vettel's rejoin, it's a penalty to Vettel. That's the rule. Argue the rule, not the penalty.

In Monaco, the incident was caused by Max's dive bomb attempt. I have no problem with his attempt, although if he had caused a problem for Hamilton (spin, puncture etc) he would have reserved a penalty. Hamilton was ahead, under control and he has the right to take his line. Vettel left the track and deliberately crowded Hamilton. That's an offence.

Now, one might argue the rule is wrong, but the penalty is in line with the rule and thus entirely justified.

This 100%.

People saying Hamilton should have gone to the left have obviously never even been on a race track, and have never looked at it in a way of a racer.

Here Hamilton has to start deciding which way he is going to go.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=a48 ... 3761b6d877

The 2nd picture shows how much closer Lewis is in such a short distance, showing how much faster Lewis is travelling compared to Vettel. The line I have drawn is the racing line, the fastest line, and at this time the only line available. Lewis has 2 options, pass on the right or brake hard and wait behind. No racer on the planet will go for the 2nd option. Some people here are saying he should have tried to pass on the left is a complete joke.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=366 ... aacf2d0b59

Next is where lewis has a large portion of his car alongside Seb, his front wheels are level with sebs rears. As you can see there is still plenty of room for Lewis and Seb should now be turning more left to not crowd Lewis off the track (white line). If seb was unable to stop his car drifting to the right then it means he was out of control still and had rejoined the track in an unsafe manner.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=99c ... ebfe1327cd

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=45f ... 55a1c684ac

Please if any of you disagree with the penalty look at this and explain how Sebastian is not guilty of breaking a rule.

Or most likely ignore my post as you can't explain a way out if the inevitable penalty that was rightly issued 2 weeks ago.

According to me the rejoin was safe (see my previous post), then when the dirty wheels were on track there was an overspin (which is not forbidden) and so Vettel had to counter steer sliding to the left.
So according to me it was a racing incident.

[NathanOlder]

But surely that would mean Vettel was in control of his car, hence the safe re-entry. At which point he pushed Lewis off the track, which is a penalty. You cant use the oversteer as an excuse. Thats like saying its ok to push someone off heading in to a corner if your locked up. Locking up is not forbidden and you would have to ease off the brake to regain full control.

[Xwang]

It's evident that we see this thing in a different way and so there is no use to continue.

[Jolle]

Hamilton was committed to the corner when Vettel was off track. If, at any point, Hamilton was required to act to avoid a collision during Vettel's rejoin, it's a penalty to Vettel. That's the rule. Argue the rule, not the penalty.

In Monaco, the incident was caused by Max's dive bomb attempt. I have no problem with his attempt, although if he had caused a problem for Hamilton (spin, puncture etc) he would have reserved a penalty. Hamilton was ahead, under control and he has the right to take his line. Vettel left the track and deliberately crowded Hamilton. That's an offence.

Now, one might argue the rule is wrong, but the penalty is in line with the rule and thus entirely justified.

This 100%.

People saying Hamilton should have gone to the left have obviously never even been on a race track, and have never looked at it in a way of a racer.

Here Hamilton has to start deciding which way he is going to go.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=a48 ... 3761b6d877

The 2nd picture shows how much closer Lewis is in such a short distance, showing how much faster Lewis is travelling compared to Vettel. The line I have drawn is the racing line, the fastest line, and at this time the only line available. Lewis has 2 options, pass on the right or brake hard and wait behind. No racer on the planet will go for the 2nd option. Some people here are saying he should have tried to pass on the left is a complete joke.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=366 ... aacf2d0b59

Next is where lewis has a large portion of his car alongside Seb, his front wheels are level with sebs rears. As you can see there is still plenty of room for Lewis and Seb should now be turning more left to not crowd Lewis off the track (white line). If seb was unable to stop his car drifting to the right then it means he was out of control still and had rejoined the track in an unsafe manner.

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=99c ... ebfe1327cd

http://pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=45f ... 55a1c684ac

Please if any of you disagree with the penalty look at this and explain how Sebastian is not guilty of breaking a rule.

Or most likely ignore my post as you can't explain a way out if the inevitable penalty that was rightly issued 2 weeks ago.

According to me the rejoin was safe (see my previous post), then when the dirty wheels were on track there was an overspin (which is not forbidden) and so Vettel had to counter steer sliding to the left.
So according to me it was a racing incident.

Incompetence is not a good defense.

[NathanOlder]

It is if you drive for team Xwang.

And him/her saying they see things differently means they dont agree with the rules? Or they actually see the images on television differently?

Who knows.

[hollus]

Personal attacks end here, explicit or veiled, large or small. You all know the rules and patience has a limit.

[Saxmansaxman]

I cannot hold my tongue forever ... although i have tried... i have read the entire thread, marveling at the lengths some folks will go to ... fascinating stuff! A few of you seem to see through the red mist / driver-team bias / emotion at least. So thanks for that at least.
By the way, I am a high level official in another sport.

Officiating 101, if I may ...

Citing the opinions of current/former drivers is bollocks.
This is an officiating question, well outside of the racing drivers' Purview.
A hockey or football official would be a much more credible source.

Comparing to other incident is irrelevant.
The stewards do not do this if they are any good. This is why there is a rulebook.
I found the stewards' initial ruling pretty wordy and full of extra stuff.
Better to just cite the rule(s) and the decision.

Considering the drivers' "intentions" is madness.
The rules have bee cited in this very thread. Intent is notably absent.
Rules virtually never rely on determining a competitor's intent. Impossible!
Actions are weighed against the rules. Facts, not opinions.

Fact: Vettel clearly forced Ham off the track after Ham was legally alongside, per the rulebook definition. Ham was for ed to take emergency measures to avoid Vettel. There is the penalty. Everything else is window dressing.
Accidental or intentional? Who can say?

Opinion: LeClerc was ripped off. By his own team. That seems to be the real story here.

Saxman

[Shrieker]

Please if any of you disagree with the penalty look at this and explain how Sebastian is not guilty of breaking a rule.

What ? Voice of reason and sanity ?!? Blasphemy !!!

[roon]

We should consider that diving into a closing gap between a car, oscillating in yaw across 2/3 of the track after grass, and a wall, was perhaps not the only nor best decision Lew could have made.

Hamilton was committed to the corner when Vettel was off track. If, at any point, Hamilton was required to act to avoid a collision during Vettel's rejoin, it's a penalty to Vettel. That's the rule. Argue the rule, not the penalty.

...

Now, one might argue the rule is wrong, but the penalty is in line with the rule and thus entirely justified.

I agree. Earlier I referenced how Button had a similar view regarding the writing of the rules being the real issue here, if any. The real culprit might be fate. The situation, its timing, its location, its context, who it involved, created a perfect storm. Seems like the most contentious/dramatic event in recent seasons.