Seven reasons why so many F1 fans are furious about Hamilton’s penalty
After the stewards took Lewis Hamilton’s win in the Belgian Grand Prix and handed it to Felipe Massa comments flew into F1 Fanatic faster than I had time to read them.
Inevitably many have reacted to the decision based on whether they’re fans of Hamilton or Ferrari, which is understandable. But reading the hundreds of comments here and elsewhere I get the impression most ‘neutral’ fans and even some avowed Ferrari supporters find the stewards’ latest controversial decision too much to take.
This is about more than just Ferrari versus McLaren – this is about the poor state of racing in F1, and the sport’s reputation being brought into disrepute by its own governing body.
What was Hamilton supposed to do?
Much of the discussion yesterday hinged on what Hamilton should have done to avoid a penalty.
Some criticised him for cutting the chicane. But what was his other option? Given how close he and Raikkonen were, and how sharply Raikkonen turned in on him, I don’t think he would have been able to avoid hitting Raikkonen just by braking. In which case, as Dan M pointed out:
If he stayed on track and caused an accident with Raikkonen he would have gotten [Kovalainen's] penalty, instead he went off, spared both cars and gets penalised for having a competitive advantage.
Hamilton himself said: “Kimi ran me wide. To avoid an incident, I had to go up that part of the track.”
If Hamilton had no choice but to cut the corner, what did he need to do to avoid a penalty? He let Raikkonen go entirely past him. Presumably the stewards wanted him to let Raikkonen go further ahead. But how far away did he need to let Raikkonen to be sure he wouldn’t get a penalty? There’s no way of telling by looking at the rules.
Inconsistency
It almost goes without saying that the stewards’ decision makes no sense in the context of recent decisions. As Thomas O pointed out Felipe Massa went off the track and gained an advantage at least once while racing Robert Kubica in last year’s Japanese Grand Prix:
Was Massa punished? No.
Adding to the inconsistency, race director Charlie Whiting told McLaren he thought what Hamilton did was legitimate.
A great race ruined
After the race many people on the live blog remarked on how exciting it had been, especially after the dreariness of the European Grand Prix.
If there’s one thing all F1 fans like it’s a proper, wheel-to-wheel battle for the lead. The stewards interfering with that not only spoiled the race, it gives the impression they don’t want drivers overtaking in Formula 1. As The Limit said:
Today we witnessed one of the most thrilling battles in years, by two of the most gifted open wheel drivers. They gave no quarter in their quest for glory, and none was given, even to team mates. All the frustrations, the pressure, was released, the gloves had finally come off. How I would have loved, to have talked to you all about the quality of Kimi Raikkonen and Lewis Hamilton today, about the ferocity of their battle, the skill that was involved.
Sadly, all we can talk about is what followed, not on the track where it belongs, but in a boardroom.
Punishment out of proportion
Assuming Hamilton did gain a slight advantage by not letting Raikkonen past by enough, the punishment seems grossly disproportionate to the crime.
The stewards could easily have instructed him to let Raikkonen past again – indeed, they’ve done it in the past in F1 and it’s common practice in other motor sports.
Instead, they relegated Hamilton behind two drivers who weren’t even involved in the battle for the lead. Where’s the justice in that?
Ferrari
The innuendo about the FIA favouring Ferrari has hung around F1 for years. The barge board and Michelin tyre scandals in 1999 and 2003, Fernando Alonso’s dubious penalty at Monza in 2006, and McLaren’s staggering punishment in spy-gate last year are just a few examples of occasions when the FIA has been accused of protecting F1′s most famous team.
Hamilton’s punishment is just one more reason why so many F1 fans think the FIA is biased in favour of Ferrari. And if the game is rigged, no-one will want to watch.
Another court room battle
The 2007 season was ruined by a seemingly unending string of controversies that ended up before the FIA Court of Appeal. And here we go again.
Many F1 fans are sick of the politics. They want to see races decided by the racers.
F1 brought into disrepute
We may grumble and groan about its idiosyncrasies, but F1 fans at heart are passionate about motor racing and see Formula 1 as one of the top forms of motor sport.
Decisions like this which seem unjust, out of all proportion, and designed to favour one team over the others, are hugely damaging to F1′s public image.
No-one wants to admit to liking a sport if the rest of the public see it as being corrupt. The FIA stewards brought Formula 1 into disrepute yesterday.
See the original discussion in full which already has over 300 comments: Lewis Hamilton stripped of Belgian GP win – another asinine FIA penalty
The comments below have been split across multiple pages. If you are having trouble viewing all the comments click here to see them all.
mail123456 said on 10th September 2008, 16:11
nice shot … but let’s no remember that rain is falling at this time … did we need another Canada repeat ?
already posted but look where are other cars at the same place, and where is Kimi:
http://f1.f-e-n.net/2008/Belgium%2005.09%20-%2007.09.2008/Last%20Corner/
I’m with Keith on this
“Raikkonen forced Hamilton off the track by swerving across the front of the McLaren”
it’s racing nothing more, nothing less …
ajokay said on 10th September 2008, 18:38
Interesting article from Mark Hughes on the ITV-F1 website.
http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=Mark_Hughes&id=43892
Sri said on 10th September 2008, 21:34
@mail123456
Sorry mate, i beg to differ. Ham could have easily averted a repeat of Canada by using his brakes.
Surely this is not the first time that he cut a chicane, did he? Why defend his tactics(sure it feels like that) so ardently? Infact, i for one thought, “damn, that’s a penalty alright”, as soon as he pulled the move. The only thing which i did not understand was, what took stewards so long to penalize him?
Also, see the link(http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70435) from autosport, where Trulli pretty much puts to rest any doubts about whether there was an advantage to be gained.
Sri said on 10th September 2008, 21:38
@mail123456
Let me clarify that when i said, “sure it feels like that”, i meant that Ham uses this as a race strategy and sees no wrong with it. As per statements issued by him after both France and Spa.
No insult was insinuated at ya(read it again and it seemed open to interpretation, “sure it feels like that” bit..)
sorry if i hurt ya with that…
mail123456 said on 11th September 2008, 4:54
@Sri – nothing to hurt :) we are state our arguments, did’t we ?
I read Trulli statement when it was published and I completely agree with him. He is right about
“In my opinion Hamilton got an advantage by cutting the chicane, Had he stayed on the road, he wouldn’t have had the speed to overtake the Ferrari.”, but only if track was dry. Ferrari’s were so bad in wet.
I still think that
“Raikkonen forced Hamilton off the track by swerving across the front of the McLaren. Hamilton had been entirely alongside the Ferrari going into the corner.” – Keith
And also think that if Hamilton push his brakes hard in chicane he will be finish somewhere in Kimi’s car. It was wet and slippery. But that’s just my thoughts.
“To me the facts are quite clear in retrospect. I have had a look at the videos, I’ve had a look at the published data which shows that Lewis was nearly 7 km/h slower than Raikkonen across the line, you can quite clearly see on the in-car camera that he lets him get completely in front, and in my view Raikkonen just braked very early.
“Lewis went inside him, and if you look at the in-car camera stuff, Lewis drove around the hairpin very easily. He didn’t have a big slide, he didn’t have to correct it, he hadn’t gone in too deep and come out wide, it was a perfectly legitimate manouevre, and it wasn’t that much later that Raikkonen went past him.
“This is racing, this is what we want.”
These are from Renault director of engineering Pat Symonds.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70457
mail123456 said on 11th September 2008, 5:36
@Sri – just another thing about breaking
http://f1.f-e-n.net/2008/Belgium%2005.09%20-%2007.09.2008/Last%20Corner/kimi.html
why Kimi left track ? Why just not break there and stay behind, but he opted to leave track ? Did Kimi know how to use his breaks ?:)
Don’t get me wrong, I’m just trying to say that on given time track was wet and when we judge we have to take that fact …
PJA said on 12th September 2008, 14:14
Well it seems the other drivers think Hamilton broke the rules even if the penalty may have been harsh
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7611152.stm
The article also states that
‘The problem is that the stewards in Spa had no choice but to punish Hamilton in the way they did once they had concluded he had committed an offence.
If a driver is found guilty of this offence, they can choose one of two penalties – to drive through the pits, where there is a speed limit, without stopping, or a 10-second stop-go penalty in the pits.
And if one of those penalties is deemed appropriate, and the offence is committed in the last five laps of the race, the rules give only one option – 25 seconds must be added to the drivers’ race time. ‘
Funny how the stewards managed to think up a new, (and meaningless), penalty for Massa and Ferrari at Valencia.
Then I read on Autosport that Coulthard didn’t think it would damage Formula One
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70480
I think it is damaging Formula One. You only have to look at the number of posts on dedicated F1 sites such as this but also a comment on a non-F1 board on Monday when the subject came up was
’ Massa starts in second, slips to third, overtakes no one, finishes (a good way) behind Hamilton, and wins.
Not a huge fan of F1, but that’s some interesting rules.’
And then a work colleague of mine who doesn’t follow F1 said that she wondered if Hamilton was being penalised because he was black. I told her if there was some plot to stop him winning it was more likely do to with Ferrari International Assistance theories.
While incidents like these may not stop dedicated fans from following the sport, (the sort of people who read F1 sites to catchup on the latest goings on rather than just from the mainstream media), it could put potential fans off and even sponsors if they think F1 is unfair, fixed or in some way bad for their corporate image. An extreme case is cycling where quite a few sponsors have left because of the drug scandals.
Some posters on here have said that they think Hamilton showed his immaturity by not waiting to pass Kimi or not settling for second, and that he was racing Massa not Kimi I would rather drivers had a go at overtaking when they saw the chance, especially if it was for the lead, then just settling for second, the rules may reward consistency and reliability but I think drivers should go for the win if they can. Also, considering how far behind Kimi was in last years Championship before he won it by such a small margin in the end, shows that Lewis was right in trying to overtake, at that point in the race in wet conditions he was a lot later on the brakes than Kimi, but for all he knew Kimi could have got used to the conditions later in the lap if he had waited,
As McLaren checked with race officials in the overtake was legit and they twice said it was, and the fact that the punishment didn’t fit the crime (if you accept he did break the rules) I would hope that the penalty gets overturned on appeal, but then I was shocked at the stewards original decision so I am not holding my breath.
Love the site Keith, just wish I had the time to read it all. I seem to have a problem when I click on the link to read the 2nd, 3rd,… page of comments of an article with multiple posts, although the web address changes it either stays on page 1 or goes to the site home page. Is there some settings I need to change on Internet Explorer.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2008, 14:22
PJA – a few people are having that problem intermittently and it’s been written about in the forum here:
Technical problems
mail123456 said on 12th September 2008, 14:39
Kieth above link is broken
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2008, 14:49
Working now.
usF1fan said on 12th September 2008, 15:31
I’ve been talking about the FIA’s pandering to Ferrari for years now, ever since I started following Formula 1 just five years ago. Up until last year I had no real feelings either way against Ferrari. That was all changed after their (Ferrari’s) comments following the Brazilian Grand Prix.
“Championships should not be decided in court.” This was Ferrari’s statement when McLaren petitioned for a penalty to be given to a couple of teams that were using fueling rigs with higher than allowed pressures and temperatures lower than the regulations stated. Regardless of whether there was any wrongdoing on any teams part, the statement from Ferrari was blatantly hypocritical.
Getting back to this year and the biased decisions of the stewards and FIA. Kimi’s Ferrari had an exhaust pipe dangling by a cable. This was clearly a hazard to other racers, fans, and track side personnel. Fortunately the exhaust pipe didn’t hit anyone when it finally broke loose, but what if it had? They (Ferrari) had a pit stop where they could have removed the pipe, and race control had many laps to call them back into the pits to have it removed. Had this been any other team, I believe that the stewards would have called them into the pits. In this case it wasn’t about points or money, this could have been about a life. What if someone had been hit and killed by that exhaust pipe? What would the FIA say then?
usF1fan said on 13th September 2008, 1:21
“254 The Old Codger 10 September 2008 at 3:00 pm
“The only solution I can see is to keep all the existing drivers, Ferrari then build 20 F1 cars, and the stewards scrap every McLaren, BMW, Renault, Red Bull, Williams, Torro Rosso, Honda, Toyota & Force India.
It’s potentially a good idea because we real fans can enjoy close racing that allows driver talent to be paramount, the drivers would like it because their skills are easily seen, and the stewards would like it because Ferrari would win every race without them having to fix the result.”
I just read this and laughed my ass off. I think the Old Codger should take old Max’s place.
Toby Thwaites 93 said on 24th March 2009, 19:33
I loved seeing Kubica battle it out with the ferrari’s in 2007 and 2008 Japanese GPs, it was amazing to watch! Nothing wrong with them battling it out, however Hamiltons situation was very much different and was over one corner a pure advantage of which he did not give back to Kimi before passing him again :)