Hamilton gets reprimand but keeps pole

Lewis Hamilton's Montreal pole position will stand

Lewis Hamilton's Montreal pole position will stand

Lewis Hamilton will keep his pole position for the Canadian Grand Prix despite stopping his car on his way back to the pits to avoid running too low on fuel.

The FIA have issued a $10,000 fine for exceeding the maximum time allowed to return to the pits and given Hamilton an official reprimand.

The stewards’ statement read:

The team instructed the driver to stop on the circuit causing him to exceed the maximum time as defined in Document 15 – Race Directors’ Not to Teams of 11 June 2010, 19:06

Offence: Breach of article 15.1 of the 2010 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations
Penalty: Reprimand and a fine of $10,000

Article 15.1 of the Sporting Regulations simply says:

The stewards or race director may give instructions to competitors by means of special circulars in accordance with the Code. These circulars will be distributed to all competitors who must acknowledge receipt.

The radio message McLaren gave Hamilton told him to stop in order to avoid having too little fuel in order to give a sample after qualifying. This is required under article 6.6.2 of the Technical Regulations:

Competitors must ensure that a one litre sample of fuel may be taken from the car at any time during the Event.

2010 Canadian Grand Prix

Browse all 2010 Canadian Grand Prix articles

Advert | Go Ad-free


182 comments on Hamilton gets reprimand but keeps pole

  1. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 13th June 2010, 1:09

    It seems that some aren’t happy even when Hamilton is punished!

    If any other driver had done it, the result would have been the same. And Hamilton would have had pole anyway. Case closed.

  2. James said on 13th June 2010, 1:14

    Hamilton’s lap was outstandning, but the rules seems to be changing with year, if not race. I’m not a Mclaren or a Hamilton fan but at the same time I thought Hamilton’s lap was outstanding. It’ll be interesting to see how much he has left in those tyres.

    But on the other hand, my mind goes back to last year where Massa had to stop on track at one race (albeit after the chequered flag) fearing he would not have enough fuel left in the tank for a sample. He didnt get punished himself, and I cant remember him getting a fine? It was some while ago though, and perhaps he did get one.

    Furthermore, this will be Hamiltion’s second reprimand of the season, albeit for a different offence. How many reprimands must a driver collect before having his knuckles stung with the cane? I think this point was raised both this website as well as the BBC.

    A brilliant qualifying session none-the-less. I look forward to watching the race on iplayer – I’ll miss the race as I’ll be working… unfortuantely!

    • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 13th June 2010, 2:32

      I think you’re referring to the 2009 Spanish Grand Prix.

      In the end the problem turned out to be incorrect data coming from the Ferrari, and Massa actually had enough fuel to finish!

      Whilst the FIA haven’t said anything, it does seem pretty clear that multiple reprimands will only be punished for the same offence committed multiple times, as well it should be; there are so many rules in F1!

  3. Of course Lewis gets a fine for his pole position! The guy can never win, he gets punished for everything!!!!!!!!

  4. Tommy said on 13th June 2010, 2:20

    As well he should…

  5. DaveW said on 13th June 2010, 2:32

    The team is fined for flouting the “memo.” It’s not a rule. Whitmarsh made the call to ensure that the car had enough for a sample.

    So what did Hamilton do wrong? Nothing. What was the effect on the outcome of qualifying of the team not putting in an extra liter? Nothing. Break out your calculators, it’s nothing. So let’s wrap up this particular Hamilton hate-session.

  6. Mutton said on 13th June 2010, 2:37

    never without controversy. maybe you need that to be considered ‘great’?

  7. Drew said on 13th June 2010, 3:02

    So Sebastian Loeb lost a rally because his co-driver was not belted into the car for all of 5 meters during a stage after changing a tyre. this is total bs. One rule for one, one rule for another.

    • David A said on 13th June 2010, 3:49

      Yes, there is one rule for one situation, and one rule for a completely different situation.

  8. M0tion said on 13th June 2010, 3:17

    Can someone tell Whitmarsh that 3 yellows on only 1 side of his garage is “systemic”. So the system is that you exploit every rule in F1 with even the slightest bit of marginality in it. That is what Hamilton’s side has been gaming. Yet Whitmarsh thinks he can tell other teams that once Lewis has done it he can bank it but noone else can follow.

    Anyone see the look on Button’s face as he saw Lewis pulled up?

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 13th June 2010, 15:40

      The system there being, now this case was on the table once, the next time anybody in the same situation will have to do a lot more explaining. And if they are found to give this scenario a serious thought, they will be punished.

      And Button said himself, he was pretty satisfied he got all there was from the car and was amazed at the fantastic lap Lewis did, not sad for being made to go slower.

  9. Oh how I wish this will happen to either Massa or Alonso later this season. Will it be handled differently? I think so!

  10. sumedh said on 13th June 2010, 3:52

    This thread is still going on!! Seriously!! Everybody is a conspiracy theorist, it seems.

  11. dragon said on 13th June 2010, 4:39

    Are you saying he DIDN’T deserve to be punished? I’m still scratching my head at the leniency. Adding in the fuel weight, he still would have been faster than Webber, but that’s not the point – the point is, he should not have gone for that final run anyway. It’s a shame, because the lap was stunning – I thought I’d throw that in before i’m jumped on and branded as another Hamilton hater. You may all call it a fair decision, but it sets a dangerous precedent. When you search for every hundreth, every thousandth, ten grand is a cheap price to pay for pole…

    • Sri said on 13th June 2010, 5:22

      Senna did set precedents too… we all loved him to bits when he drove Prost off and cheered for him. I revered Senna as a kid… When i grew up, well, didn’t like the idea of him all that much as a competitor. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a humanitarian and did a lot of work for people back home in Brazil and i respect that. I respect him as a person, but not much as a sportsman. Certainly not as much as i do respect Prost.

      Now Hamilton did this, some are here cheering for him :P I’ll bet a million, which i do not have :P , that a lot of people would protest if say some other driver did it. Say Schumacher, Vettel, Webber or any other for that matter :D Funnily enough i’ll be waging that people would readily run down the other car from McLaren itself if it did it. :D

  12. Sri said on 13th June 2010, 5:14

    Hmm, wonder what Hamilton fans have to say about FIA and its stewards now. No more racist this racist that?

    If a car runs below minimum weight requirement… well, they’re not legal. However, in retrospect i can’t remember any rule which bars stopping a healthy car to preserve fuel levels and thereby weight and keeping to the rule of minimum weight, to clear any routine FIA checks. Please do correct me if i’m wrong…

    So there, all you Hamilton fans, i think it was ok, though not in the spirit of the game/ sportsmanship, but within the regulations.

    • martin bell said on 13th June 2010, 8:59

      There is no suggestion of the car having been under the minimum weight requirement. It seems, once again, that the stewards have issued the only penalty they had available, handed out for the ‘offence’ of being late back to parc ferme. Some of us are old enough to remember the sight of F1 cars regularly running out of fuel in the fuel restricted days. I, like many here, see this incident only as a slightly worrying precedent, yet another issue that needs clarification. Part of me feels sorry for Lewis, he always seems to be involved in some ‘marginal’ decisions and, on this occasion, it’s hardly his fault. A couple of weeks ago he was saying that he didn’t want to be remembered as Schumacher is, as a serial envelope pusher. Great pole lap, well deserved pole, but I don’t see the controversies coming to an end any time soon, and it may already be too late for Lewis to avoid this legacy.

      • Sri said on 13th June 2010, 10:38

        Hi Martin,

        Well, i’m not saying that it was underweight… but only that it was perilously close to it. So close, that the team had to radio him, radio being heard by stewards and all the world plus dog for that matter, and inform him to stop on track to save fuel. Car’s minimum weight requirement is not just for a dry car, it includes driver’s weight, fuel and oil(s) on board. In this instance, they asked him to stop, as it would have taken some fuel, and it would have possibly brought into question the overall weight of the car, which would have left McLaren in a dodgy situation. A situation mind you, that they got themselves into. So all ye Macca fans, please don’t hate the FIA. McLaren are just plain suicidal :P

        • martin bell said on 13th June 2010, 11:37

          I don’t think we have any way of knowing how close he was to the minimum weight limit, but I take your point entirely. The extension of my point is wondering if we are now going to see teams running so marginal on qualy fuel that they run out just over the line on their last lap, now that it seems that it’s ok to push your car back to the pits having run out of fuel. (or in Lewis’s case getting someone else to push it for you!!!)A ridiculous scenario of course, but stranger things have happened in F1!!

          • Sri said on 13th June 2010, 16:15

            You were not the only one Martin, as did Gary Anderson, who is a former tech director, now commentating on Start Sports.

            I’m impressed mate, about how we discussed stuff without getting personal. Thanks for the same…

            Reminded me of forums here about a couple of years ago or so. Yes, those of you with Flame-master 2000 scouting me out, pun is indeed intended :P

          • martin bell said on 13th June 2010, 22:32

            You know, I watched this race, for what I think is the first time ever, with another F1 fan who I don’t know very well, but was a fan of different drivers to me. We managed to discuss things during the race without getting personal and it really enhanced my enjoyment of it. So I figure that there really is no need to post in the way some do here, we’re all F1 fans after all, and in truth, you lot here are the only people that I get to talk to about the sport I have loved since 1976.

  13. The Nude Wizard said on 13th June 2010, 5:29

    Everyone else carried enough fuel as per the regs, Hamilton didn’t I’m not gonna convince any one eyed DISTINGUISHED ENGLISH GENTLEMEN (better Keith? haha) haha but if Ferrari had pulled that stunt you’d be screaming for blood and calling it favouritism. I’m not debating the guys talent, but they cheated.

  14. dragon said on 13th June 2010, 6:29

    And I don’t need someone coming along and saying “Hamilton’s good, get over it”. I know he’s bloody brilliant. I love watching him drive. But perhaps a more complex offering explaining why his actions, in this case, are acceptable would be better. I don’t care how harsh or lenient you think they’ve been on him in the past, this penalty is just not right.

  15. Prateek727 said on 13th June 2010, 6:47

    The cars typically burn about 0.5 – 0.75 kilo down the back straight (in my experience with rfactor :P ) so I think there’s every chance Lewis could have made it back to pits AND had enough fuel left for the sample.

    Mclaren just wanted to play it safe

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.