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.
Matt said on 8th September 2008, 12:57
Keith, last year you wrote…
“Behind the Finn was a gripping battle for seventh led by the Honda of Jenson Button, who was revelling in driving a circuit that minimised the flaws of the dreadful RA107. Nico Rosberg made several attempts at the first chicane before finally nailing the move at Roggia on lap 20.”
This was from your 2007 Italian Grandprix review. I seem to remember Button and Rosberg being involved in a very similar situation to Hamilton and Raikkonen and no penalty was addressed. My memory isn’t 100%, perhaps you could try and dig up a video of Button and Rosberg’s battle as it seems far more relevant than that of Massa and Kubica’s.
matthew said on 8th September 2008, 13:03
@audiq7 youre basing youre views on the sound on a video on a website?!! DO you not think Mclaren’s data is a better basis for views.
This is getting just as ludicrous as the decision now.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 8th September 2008, 13:03
S Hughes – yep, quite a few times. I’ll do an article along those lines later today.
Journeyer said on 8th September 2008, 13:04
‘Are you saying that Hamilton orchestrated the whole incident on purpose? Solely to get a tow on the straight into La Source?’
Graham, didn’t AJ say that Lewis didn’t do it on purpose? But the decision here could’ve left an opportunity for other drivers to do it intentionally.
As it is, Lewis was thinking on his feet. He thought he had done enough to avoid the penalty, when it turns out he shouldn’t have taken advantage right away.
phoros said on 8th September 2008, 13:07
“People can explain everything”. Especially fallen in love…
mail123456 said on 8th September 2008, 13:08
at this time there is 10363 people who think that penalty is wrong …
http://www.petitiononline.com/belgp08/petition.html
one question: how many spectators were on Spa ?
the simple reason for question is if we have spectators on track even near to people sign that petition, then FIA must really re-think what they doing …
Journeyer said on 8th September 2008, 13:11
S Hughes, the most obvious example was Japan 1989, where Senna’s win was taken away and given to Nannini after Senna and Prost took each other out at the final chicane (final chicane? sounds familiar, no?), therefore sealing the title for Prost that year. In some ways, that was even MORE controversial than yesterday.
Spa 1994 also saw Schumi lose his win. But that was because his car’s underbody/plank was too thin, which is pretty much an open-and-shut/black-and-white case.
Alain Prost also lost a win of his… was that in 1985? I believe that was because his car was underweight. Not so sure, though. :)
Journeyer said on 8th September 2008, 13:12
more than a hundred thousand was at Spa, mail. long way to go…
audiq7 said on 8th September 2008, 13:19
@Matthew,
Unfortunately, this is the only source that I have. I would be very happy to have/consult McLaren data so if you can redirect me to the url where I can consult them, it would be nice.
mail123456 said on 8th September 2008, 13:19
btw great article by Earl Alexander on f1-live
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail
/080908114903.shtml
audiq7 said on 8th September 2008, 13:24
I’ve read on other website that McLaren said that LH is 6km/h slower than KR on the line but I don’t that is the proof that LH has slowdown to let KR pass. McLaren needs to give more detailed data otherwise they would loose the appeal. I hope that FIA will let these info public so everyone can check.
audiq7 said on 8th September 2008, 13:41
@Keith
“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.”
F1 stewards make me think about Football referees and about how many mistakes they’ve done during WorldCup, Euro, or Champion’s League. I don’t think it will disrepute anything, it’s only a way for people to talk about F1 as a controversy sport as usually, there is nothing happening on the tracks as after the start, cars will follow each other till chequered flag.
And when we had a fantastic battle on track, they’ve found something controversy to add.
DG said on 8th September 2008, 13:48
According to ITV-F1 McLaren had submitted their telementary data to the FIA Stewards, which showed how much Lewis was braking/slowing down during the chicane. They are launching the appeal because they feel this information has been ignored in making the decision to penalise Lewis.
What makes it worse (to me anyway) is that this started with McLaren asking for confirmation from Charlie Whiting that they had done the right thing, and although his word isn’t gospel, its usually good. The Stewards appear to have picked up on this conversation/email/whatever and made their judgement.
I don’t think the Ferrari team (ie those in the garage) had anything to do with the initial judgement, as they normally are jumping with anticipation if they call for an enquiry against McLaren. This time they seemed as surprised as everyone else. Although its equally possible for Jean Todt or Old Schuey to have mentioned it to someone…..
Eric said on 8th September 2008, 13:51
TOTAL CRAP!!!!!!! Just one more way for Massa to win the title. He can’t do it on his own so the FIA will win it for him. DISGRACE %#&^ Ferrari and the FIA.
audiq7 said on 8th September 2008, 13:56
The previous FIA president is Jean-Marie Balestre who was famously said pro-Prost vs Senna when Senna was disqualified at Japan GP in 1989 after winning the GP. Now since Mosley is president, people are thinking that FIA is pro-Ferrari. I remembered when during the domination of Schumacher, they have changed for 2003 after 3-in-a-row championship won by Schumacher the point repartition from 10-6-4 to 10-8-6 for the 3 first so a victory is less important from a championship point of view. Everyone has said at this time it was for penalising Schumi-Ferrari because they’re winning too much.