Lewis third, Jarno given 25s penalty > Trulli 3rd, Lewis DSQ

[ringo]

You know, while all this is going on, truli is getting away with murder.
Even if lewis let him by, the only way for truli to be in 3rd legally is if lewis went off the track then he passed. Think about it, truli obviously believed that he was supposed to be in 3rd, so he passed fearing he would lose his well earned position, which he rightfully lost.
I dont think a driver can choose to shuffle spots behind the SC, so lewis was wrong for giving truli third and truli was wrong for accepting the pass. He should have known better.
One hand washed the other.
Correct me if i am very wrong. I dont know all the rules, i am just applying the same rule in the reverse situation.

[Ray]

You know, while all this is going on, truli is getting away with murder.
Even if lewis let him by, the only way for truli to be in 3rd legally is if lewis went off the track then he passed. Think about it, truli obviously believed that he was supposed to be in 3rd, so he passed fearing he would lose his well earned position, which he rightfully lost.
I dont think a driver can choose to shuffle spots behind the SC, so lewis was wrong for giving truli third and truli was wrong for accepting the pass. He should have known better.
One hand washed the other.
Correct me if i am very wrong. I dont know all the rules, i am just applying the same rule in the reverse situation.

I asked this before with the spin Montoya had in Australia a few years back. In that situation on the formation lap, he spun, but if he got going again he could retake his spot on the grid. Does this apply to going off and back on under the safety car like Ringo and I asked? Anybody know?

[mikhak]

the rules state:

40.7
Overtaking will be permitted under the following circumstances :
- if a car is signalled to do so from the safety car ;
- under 40.15 below ;
- any car entering the pits may pass another car or the safety car remaining on the track after it has
crossed the first safety car line ;
- any car leaving the pits may be overtaken by another car on the track before it crosses the second
safety car line ;
- when the safety car is returning to the pits it may be overtaken by cars on the track once it has
crossed the first safety car line ;
- any car stopping in its designated garage area whilst the safety car is using the pit lane (see 40.10
below) may be overtaken ;
- if any car slows with an obvious problem.

It seems there is no explicit provision for someone going off the track! but maybe the part in bold covers it...you could say a car going off the track has an obvious problem, therefore ok to overtake..covers trullis pass on hamilton though as he thought hamilton slowed due to a mechanical problem.

[mikhak]

Just for clarity, 40.15 refers to starting behind the safety car scenario.

[Ray]

the rules state:
- if any car slows with an obvious problem.

Didn't Vettel say something about he thought Lewis had a problem and was slowing down in Fuji last year? I could have sworn he said he hit Webber because he thought Lewis was swerving hard right and slowing rapidly and he was paying attention to him and nailed Webber.

[mikhak]

you're thinking of fuji 2007 and yeah thats more or less what vettel said....

Vettel - "I looked to the right and saw Lewis going really slowly, I don't know why, but I thought he had a problem. Probably he was heating his brakes. Then, by the time I looked forward again, I was already in the back of Mark's car and I think he had also reacted to Lewis."

[WhiteBlue]

Basically I am with Ciro on this although I believe that Hamiton's part in the affair is done and dusted.

The FIA action seems to target McLaren as a team and most probably Martin Whitmarsh as team principal. He thought he could get away from this by sacking the sporting director Dave Ryan. He forgot that it is his responsibility to run the team and interfere when his directors mislead the public and the officials. He was 100% in the loop from the moment of the incident because he was on the pit radio and knew exactly what was being played.

This is just the kind of situation McLaren has been in before and Dennis managed to make Caughlan the scape goat. Now Dave Ryan is the attempted scape goat but this isn't working. Everybody knows that at least Whitmarsh was 100% involved. So my understanding of this is that Whitmash will be shot down.

Regarding the involvement of other teams I think it is nonsense to make any accusations. It is public knowledge that the story was broken by Michael Schmidt, an F1 reporter with Auto Motor & Sport. We know that Schmidt has excellent contacts with the FIA but that is also true for BMW, Mercedes and Toyota as there is a strong German intrest in those teams. The most probable root cause of the story is Schmidt got together with a German guy from Toyota like Dieter Gass and stumbled over the inaccuracy. Being a reporter he publishes the story. End of conspiracy.

So what is likely to happen? As I said the FIA will take a head from McLaren, probably Whitmarsh. And they will impose another penalty on McLaren. Regardng that penalty I would think that it will be about constructor points like Hamiltons loss of driver points but it will be harsher this time because they got caught red handed the second time and they lied several times. No constructor points this season could be possible or at least loss of points for multiple races.

The more interesting ramifications are what will happen at Daimler shareholders meeting. If it goes the worst way Merc will sell their holdings in the team and go aquiring a majority in Brawn. The engine company MHPE Ltd. is 100% owned by Mercedes. So they do not even have to ask Ron Dennis. They have been snubbed by Dennis several times (super sports cars) and I can imagine that there are board members who will take a tough attitude in this case. They may even ask for Dennis to step down if they stay with McLaren.

[The FOZ]

No team has ever lied in the history of F1 before!

To my knowledge, in such way, none.

Don't you mean "No team has ever been caught lying in such a way"??

[ringo]

the rules state:

40.7
Overtaking will be permitted under the following circumstances :
- if a car is signalled to do so from the safety car ;
- under 40.15 below ;
- any car entering the pits may pass another car or the safety car remaining on the track after it has
crossed the first safety car line ;
- any car leaving the pits may be overtaken by another car on the track before it crosses the second
safety car line ;
- when the safety car is returning to the pits it may be overtaken by cars on the track once it has
crossed the first safety car line ;
- any car stopping in its designated garage area whilst the safety car is using the pit lane (see 40.10
below) may be overtaken ;
- if any car slows with an obvious problem.

It seems there is no explicit provision for someone going off the track! but maybe the part in bold covers it...you could say a car going off the track has an obvious problem, therefore ok to overtake..covers trullis pass on hamilton though as he thought hamilton slowed due to a mechanical problem.

This is very subjective (what you have in bold); also saying "he thought" may not help his situation. I still feel truli shouldn't be off the hook. A mechanical problem is not obvious until a car comes to a stop or shows signs of damage. The mclaren had no signs and it didn't leave the circuit.Ironically, Vettel obviously had mechanical problems, he was not passed for a while.So all teams are a bit cloudy of the rules.
By these regulations i don't see where LH "consciously" letting truli pass makes truli legitimate.There is no provision for driver courtesy behind the SC from what you have above.
So therefore I believe truli should also be penalized for an illegal pass.

I am not a lawyer but this is what i gather.

[Kester]

So your saying you have to wait for a car to stop before you can pass them under the safety car?

If a f1 car is going slower than 50mph it usually means there is a problem, you shouldn't have to wait for it to stop.

[db__]

So your saying you have to wait for a car to stop before you can pass them under the safety car?

If a f1 car is going slower than 50mph it usually means there is a problem, you shouldn't have to wait for it to stop.

Actually the way I read it even if the car in front stops - as long as it's not in the pits you can't overtake. So you could (theoretically) have the situation where a car stops on the track 'with no obvious problem' and backs the rest of the field up. I appreciate this is a very literal view but it is what it says in the regs unless i've missed something.

Quite why a car would stop on the track with no problem is of course another matter entirely

[vall]

the rules state:

40.7
Overtaking will be permitted under the following
- any car stopping in its designated garage area whilst the safety car is using the pit lane (see 40.10
below) may be overtaken ;
- if any car slows with an obvious problem.

I would think that this covers technical problems only, or at least it is not clear. I think FIA should clarify this point. I saw the youtube video and is it obvious that Trulli was coming back to the track. LH was well behind and he could have well slowed down and allow Trulli to take his position. A few seconds after that, another car when off track. 3-4 other cars were following it very closely, but none overtook it. LH could have done the same, knowing he was after SC.

[mikhak]

Actually the way I read it even if the car in front stops - as long as it's not in the pits you can't overtake. So you could (theoretically) have the situation where a car stops on the track 'with no obvious problem' and backs the rest of the field up. I appreciate this is a very literal view but it is what it says in the regs unless i've missed something

Earlier in the rules they have a provision for punishing drivers who drive "unnecessarily slowly, erratically or which is deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers at any time".

This is very subjective (what you have in bold); also saying "he thought" may not help his situation. I still feel truli shouldn't be off the hook. A mechanical problem is not obvious until a car comes to a stop or shows signs of damage. The mclaren had no signs and it didn't leave the circuit.Ironically, Vettel obviously had mechanical problems, he was not passed for a while.So all teams are a bit cloudy of the rules.
By these regulations i don't see where LH "consciously" letting truli pass makes truli legitimate.There is no provision for driver courtesy behind the SC from what you have above.
So therefore I believe truli should also be penalized for an illegal pass.

This part of the rules is inherently subjective. You cant expect the driver on the track to know the facts about the state of the other car, many mechanical problems have no sign other than a slowing down off the racing line. A driver must make a subjective decision as to whether the car in front has trouble or not. And you cannot expect the following driver to wait and see if the car fully stops and decide its okay to pass. By this logic hamilton should have waited to see if trulli came back onto the road before going past him.
The rules applied to this situation are not completely black and white which is why mclaren and toyota and the stewards all showed some confusion.

I would think that this covers technical problems only, or at least it is not clear. I think FIA should clarify this point. I saw the youtube video and is it obvious that Trulli was coming back to the track. LH was well behind and he could have well slowed down and allow Trulli to take his position. A few seconds after that, another car when off track. 3-4 other cars were following it very closely, but none overtook it. LH could have done the same, knowing he was after SC.

Yes the other toyota of glock went off the track at the same corner just seconds afterwards. However glock was only slightly off the track and already had at least some wheels back on the race track when the other cars came around the corner. Trulli was alot further off the track than Glock.

[axle]

I honestly can't see any further action being in the interests of the sport.

They have had their points stripped for lying. It appears that it was a stupid attempt to protect themselves from being demoted because of some incorrect understanding of the rules.

They've been silly and inept. But that's it.

I can't see the value of going after blood. It seems to me like such a fuss about nothing. Too much effort and hot air being spouted about it IMO. Not to mention the waste of money...

[nudger]

What boggles me the most is the fact that it's becoming a habit at Mclaren to shoot themselves. They should have known better, kept quiet, and get the 5pts from Autralia, end of story. No blame game. No witch hunt. It's just such a shame for a team like Mclaren to involved in so much controversy. I just hope they could pull things together and get on with it.

well, it must be said that mclaren did not appeal the result...it was the stewards that decided to investigate, and hamilton and ryan were called in as part of that.
i think it would be a very good thing for mclaren if they had a new face at the top, maybe a mercedes man.
to be honest, if that dosnt happen, i can see mclaren ceasing to be involved in formula one ever again.