Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Sepang, 2011

Hamilton and Alonso handed penalties

2011 Malaysian Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Sepang, 2011
Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Sepang, 2011

Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso have both received 20-second penalties following their collision during the Malaysian Grand Prix.

Hamilton was penalised for making more than one move to defend his position. Alonso’s penalty was for making contact with the McLaren driver.

Alonso’s finishing position is unaffected by the penalty, but Hamilton drops from seventh to eighth.

Kamui Kobayashi inherits seventh position.

As these are time penalties imposed by the stewards, McLaren and Ferrari are unlikely to be allowed to appeal the decisions.

The text of the stewards’ decisions are as follows:

Facts: The Driver of car 3 made more than one change of direction to defend a position
Offence: Breach of Article 20.2 of the 2011 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations
Penalty: Drive through penalty, imposed after the race in accordance with Article 16.3 (20 seconds added to elapsed time).
Stewards’ decision 51 (Lewis Hamilton)

Fact: Caused a collision with car 3.
Offence: Involved in an incident as defined by Article 16.1 of the 2011 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations
Penalty: Drive through penalty, imposed after the race in accordance with Article 16.3 (20 seconds added to elapsed time).
Stewards’ decision 52 (Fernando Alonso)

Did Hamilton and Alonso deserve their Malaysian Grand Prix penalties?

  • Hamilton deserved a penalty (17%)
  • Alonso deserved a penalty (12%)
  • Both Hamilton and Alonso deserved a penalty (7%)
  • Neither deserved a penalty (63%)

Total Voters: 465

Loading ... Loading ...

You need an F1 Fanatic account to vote. Register an account here or read more about registering here.

Updated race results and points:

2011 Malaysian Grand Prix

Browse all 2011 Malaysian Grand Prix articles

427 comments on “Hamilton and Alonso handed penalties”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 9
  1. Cue Ferrari and Hamilton fans going on about how unfair it is in three… two… one…

    1. it is pretty unfair though, surely if they’re equally to blame then it should be put down as a racing incident?

      1. Probably – I’ve just spent all morning getting irritated at the sheer fanboyism on Twitter.

        And I wanted to see if I could time that comment perfectly.

        1. This penalty is the final straw. The most ridiculous penalty! Sure, Hamilton was weaving but not badly! A warning should suffice this time. Alonso racing! This is just so insane I don’t understand it one bit! Ever since they brought in these ex-drivers steward advisors there have been more and more really dorky penalties. I’m just sick of this.
          THIS is what prevents good racing! No one can take a risk and attack because the risk stupid penalties for racing incidents!

          If this keeps up, I’m leaving F1. Not even kidding. I’m a pretty hardcore F1 fan. But this is starting to get ridiculous!

          1. Have to agree. We have to have fake overtaking for drivers who can’t manage otherwise, then two who do actually battle on track get penalized.

          2. Hamilton got his warning after he waved in front of Petrov last season. now it’s time for a penalty.
            We’ll miss you.

          3. Totally agree with you. That was pure racing. What are these stewards thinking!? So irritating and ridiculous.

          4. Have to agree with all these critical comments. In their single minded determination ( some would say paranoia ) to find woodland at any cost, the stewards have walked straight past thousands of trees !

            The Alonsa/Hamilton incident was a professional racing incident. It’s what happens when the best drivers on the planet push the error margins down to millionths of seconds and thousandths of a millimetre. There will be minor events like these. And that is all they are. Minor racing incidents.

            Very badly done Malaysian GP stewards.
            Very poorly done indeed !

          5. Hamilton has this coming from a very long time. He does this occasionally and had escaped the penalty for a long time. It is high time he got this. If there is a rule follow it. He is nothing special as he thinks. Hope atleast from now on he does not do this. Last year and the earlier years we can count so many instances where he has done this. good job stewards.

            For Alonso he damaged his wing, Got a penalty for that and that happened while racing with Hamilton. How bad your day can be ? he he he. The only consolation he can take home is that he did not drop down in the finishing position.

          6. Personally I feel there should have not been a penalty for either move.
            Alonso misjudging how close he was, how was that not a racing incident? We might as well have given Webber a penalty for flying over Kovalainen last year.

            As for Hamiltons moves. Personally I think this should be part of racing, it was certainly not exsessive weaving.
            But he was warned about it last year already, and it is against the rules, so I guess it should be penalized. Not too happy about it though.

          7. TMAX, instead of making crass comments about Hamilton deserving the penalty, compare his alleged weaving with Vettel’s changes of direction off the start line to block Hamilton. You’ll see Vettel did more. Any penalty? Of course not. Any penalty for Massa weaving FAR more to block Button last race? Of course. Nor should they have been penalized. The weaving rule should only really be there to prevent dangerous maneouvering, not aggressive (or just normal) defending.

            FIA are castrating racing in F1 while turning overtaking into a computer game gimmick (push the DRS button to overtake). Last season was vastly superior without DRS and KERS.

          8. This is F1, what do you expect? I watch a race but wait a couple of hours/days to find out the real result. It’s like Wrestling on wheels. I’m really enjoying ‘the show.’ It is pointless to watch a race live, may as well catch the highlights with the corrections included. Bring on the artificial rain and oil slicks.

          9. Not the mention the very harsh penalty Buemi got for speeding! Unless he was doing a lot more than allowed, a 10 second stop n go is very very harsh. F up stewards.

          10. Totally agree!!!

          11. I just watched Hamilton’s weaving and it is painfully obivious that Hamilton’s weaving prevented Alonso from passing on the straight, leading to the later collison. If anything I think Alonso was really the biggest loser from the whole scenario, blocked, then accidentially hits Hamilton, damaging his own car, then pits, then gets a 20 second penality.

            Having said that Hamilton’s weaving was not as bad as Massa’s blocking on Button in Australia, and Webber in Malaysia.

            The main problem is the lack of consitency in the application of the rules, which has led the whole bunch of current F1 drivers to play dirty, because there is always the chance they’ll get away with it. With some clean racing, you might even see some more overtaking happening.

      2. Yeah, it is pretty unfair, I hadn’t noticed Hamilton’s infraction and Alonso’s crash was purely a racing accident.

        1. Alonso’s crash is lack of skills… This kind of mistakes cost him the championship in 2010.
          Hamilton always does that, but I think this time it was no big deal…

          1. or lack of downforce on the front wing.

          2. I presume you are a F! driver to asses any of these guys skills? aren’t you?

    2. …and racing fans. It could be any two drivers on the grid and I’d still think it’s unfair. Hamilton defended his position forcefully and Alonso was over-zealous, a racing incident.

      1. Lol and I thought Nico had a bad day in the office.

        1. Racing Incident. Neither driver gained anything and neither incident was dangerous.

          The stewards probably wanted to Penalise Alonso (because thats what Alonso is there for), and were then put on the spot when Ferrari countered with “hit hit him because blah blah” so the FIA HAD to punish their homeboy as well.

          Stupid stupid stupid

          1. Agreed, ludicrous stewarding, they really need to avoid changing the finishing order retrospectivly. I’m at work today so although I watched the race I haven’t seen the bbc F1 Forum or any after race interviews. It would be intresting to see if the inquiry was instigated by comments by either Ferrari or McLaren. I really can’t see the point or reason for penalising either of them.

          2. @Infy Firstly a rule was broken by Hamilton. Your argument is like Break the rules as long as you don’t gain anything. Then everybody can break the rules and penalties can be handed out if they gain something.

            Lets take the case of Hamilton, if he had not waved in front of Alonso , Alonso would have overtaken him that means by Alonso not overtaking him then technically Hamilton had a race gain. Statistics also proves that Alsonso was faster than Hamilton at that point in race. Now if Alonso had overtaken him then, he would not have gone ahead with the wing clipping incident, the subsequent pitting and the penalty. Now that is a bigger loss for Alonso.

            So how can we say that Lewis did not gain anything and secondly even if he has not gained anything why should he be allowed to break rules which he had been doing for a long time.

          3. @infy.
            I see it the other way round. They wanted to penalise Hamilton and penalising Alonso gets round the ‘Hamilton is victim of the tyrant that is the FIA’. Alonso got a non-penalty and it was a ridiculous penalty that sets a dangerous precedent for the rest season. When the blame for a collision can be solely attributed to a driver then they get a penalty, regardless of how small.

            On collisions did Rubens get penalised for driving into Nico in Aus?

            You make it seem so clear cut when it isn’t. It’s a marginal decision made because of questionable wording in the rule book. Hamilton never moves off the racing line and it’s a long straight, I’d be surprised if you can find a driver that didn’t change direction twice on it. At no point did he block Alonso or did he drive dangerously.

          4. Don’t be so ridiculous. Conspiracy theory much?

            We know why they got the penalties, Hamilton was weaving and Alonso hit someone’s car. I don’t really agree with Lewis’ penalty and giving Alonso a penalty was well past what he deserved. But conspiracy theory? I think not…

      2. I agree entirely… its a ridiculous judgement over two drivers who where racing hard but fair…

        and thats before I consider the fact that one driver was actually penalised by the punishment and the other wasn’t….

        BLOODY FARCE! have seen the incident a few times and neither driver is to ‘blame’ it was a racing incident!!!

        1. 100% agree. The stewards are useless. They need to understand the difference between ‘dangerous driving’=penalty and a pure ‘racing incident=no penalty. This is pathetic, no penalty was necessary it would have not been a penalty 10 years ago so why is it now!!??

        2. All this comment is excellent ! OK.. Now look at Vettel off the line. I don’t think his moving from side to side down to turn one is at all out of order, but if what Hamilton did was penalised then Vettel’s weaving is way, way out of order. Ten times worse.

          Fact is though that crass decisions like these
          do very serious damage to this fabulous sport.

          1. totally agree…. just see the replay of the race and Vettel weaving was clear braking the rules….also if any one notes Maldonado hit Perez on lap three or four from behind and not get penalty…..very strange decision from FIA

        3. It was actually two separate incidents. 1st Hamilton blocking on the main straight. 2nd was Alonso crashing into the rear of Hamilton.

          Regarding the 1st incident, I believe Hamilton should have been penalised.

          Regarding the 2nd incident, it would have never happened without the first one, and Alonso did no damage to Hamilton’s car, nor did he impede Hamilton’s race, so in my eyes no penalty should have been applied.

      3. Correct, there was also a lot of wheel banging today, and thats what racing is all about.
        It was a replay of the incident in Brazil 2009 when Hamilton clipped the rear of Massa and gave him a puncture, NO inquest.
        We, the viewers, want to see close racing, and when we do, the stewards get all uppety and start chucking out penalties.
        Drivers shouldn’t have to consider the consequences of a maneuver as interpreted by the stewards on top of all the other aspects of racing.

        1. 100% agree!!!

        2. It was a replay of the incident in Brazil 2009 when Hamilton clipped the rear of Massa and gave him a puncture.

          Massa wasn’t there. I can only think of Webber closing in on Kimi and braking his wing, but that was Webber’s fault.

        3. BAR not MAS.

        4. opposite lock
          11th April 2011, 12:52

          You’re thinking of Barrichello, not Massa – but his puncture was caused by him forcing Hamilton against the pit wall, for which Barrichello later apologised.

    3. d1sciple (@)
      10th April 2011, 14:04

      A penalty each which penalises Hamilton but not Alonso. Conspiracy theorists begin …

      1. A penalty each which penalises Hamilton but not Alonso. Conspiracy theorists begin …

        Well that’s not true because when it happened Alonso had to pit and Hamilton didn’t.

        1. d1sciple (@)
          10th April 2011, 14:22

          What? The final race result has changed adding 20 seconds to each driver. This pushes Hamilton down one place but leaves Alonso where he originally was. Therefore Hamilton is penalised and Alonso isn’t!

          Nothing to do with the actual incident, that was during the race and is irrelevant to this.

          1. Weren’t the two incidents separate? Hamilton weaved on the S/F straight and Alonso crashed into Hamilton a few corners later. No racing incident.

          2. Wait a second, point is, if someone is guilty for something, you give him deserved penalty after the race. In this case, penalty for both offenses is drive-tru, which can be awarded by stewards even after the race. Its equivalent of 20sec, because that is how much time driver loses in race when going trough pits at pit limit, and that is fair thing.

            Reasoning that same time added didn’t cause same finishing relegation for both is wrong, because you cant penalize by dropping positions, only by adding time, and that is that 20secs.

            Remember what happened in Valencia last year, Alonso obeyed rules, didn’t pass Safety car and suffered, Lewis did and even if he was penalized, he make it stick, because gain for offense was bigger than penalty, that in my view was unfair.

            This here should be seen as two different incidents. First, Lewis weaved on pit strait, and that is by rules not permitted, therefore, his penalty is deserved. He said he knew that and even if he let Fernando pass in next corner i think stewards would penalize him anyway.

            Second one was the touch, which i as a Ferrari fan can put this way: Lewis had bad traction out of corner two, and lost a little bit of traction uphill to turn 4. That loss of acceleration caught Fernando, who was very fast out of turn 2 and pushing KERS uphill, by a surprise and Alonso just couldn’t turn right quick enough to miss Lewis. No damage was to Lewis’ car, Fernando let him pass (so no advantage is gained by collision) and that is it. This is all true, but rules say you cant hit anyone from behind, and penalty stands. Arguing that he was already penalized by having had to pit doesn’t stand, because rules are rules. Not strictly enforcing them, will one time help you or your team, but be sure next time you will be on the other side, and then we will have 2 sides thinking they were damaged by stewards, and they will be right, because if the rules were enforced by the book, there is no argument about that.

      2. why bother… this is f1 this kind of thing has always happened :-( I thought the idea of having an ex-driver on the panel was to stop this kind of crap…. but at the end of the day the wrong decision has been made and we need to sort that out not go on about conspiracy theories.

    4. Hamilton’s penalty is ok i guess, it was unsporting. BUT Alonso’s penaly is just ridiculous. it’s a racing incident!

      1. sorry but you if you are going to give imaginary to one driver you might as well give them to both… but to stick to some arbitrary punishment that punishes one driver but not the other just puts sublime with the ridiculous…

        but at the end of the day it appears its just business as usual… Sauber lost valuable points, Perez and Kobi were robbed of valuable points because of technical infringements that didn’t aid them… and there will be more incidents as the season goes on… its just a part of the sport I thought ex-drivers on the stewards panel was supposed to stop… this was just a racing incident… if they thought the drivers needed a slap on the wrist then they should have just given them a stern telling off and a fine, with instruction to play nice the next time (which would be ignored).

        1. So you can break the rules all you want as long as it doesn’t directly benefit you? That’s like writing notes on your hand before you enter a test and saying its okay because you had studied and remembered them anyway. Don’t think the examiners would be okay with that.
          I think Alonso’s incident was a racing incident, but the stewards had reason to give Hamilton a penalty for weaving, remember last year when he only got warnings for it, he knew exactly what he was doing.

          1. Sorry I think misrepresented my views… At the end of the day penalties are part of the sport… they happen sometimes they are unfair… doesn’t matter the rules are the rules and the sport goes on regardless…

            I am annoyed about the penalties from Malaysia, because the footage I saw didn’t give me any reason to think they are justified… but the same can be said about any one of hundreds maybe even thousands of different incidents over the years..

      2. I agree, Hamilton broke the rules with the weaving but Alonso hitting him was just down to bad luck. It was a racing incident and shouldn’t have caused a penalty

        1. Finally the FIA get their wish for some overtaking and exciting side by side racing. Oh no wait…far too exciting! Dish out the penalties! How draconian towards both Ferrari and McLaren.

          1. i dont get it. First bring in DRS and KERS to allow more overtaking, and then when there is a racing incident while overtaking, penalise the guys? so what exactly do they want? the leader just parks his car and let everyone else pass?

  2. What a complete joke.

    1. Fumin’!! Absolute Bulls***!!

      “Sorry guys, your not allowed to do anything while racing.”

      I was already angry today with Lewis being so slow, but this is ‘just the icing on the cake’ now! Completely stupid

    2. Agreed, this is ridiculous.

      Just in case any of the stewards reads this… If you are too slow to judge the situation during the race, please, for the love of all that’s F1, don’t change the result we saw!

      This kind of penalty should be reserved only for the most extreme cases. In my opinion even the penalty handed to Sauber two weeks ago was unjustified. You have other tools at your disposal.

      I won’t even go into the fact, that any penalty in this case is completely unjustified. These things happen. They were racing!

      However if you really want to penalize them, pick another way. Changing the result feels like cheating, like you are robbing us of something.

      1. One more thing: I don’t think any of them deserved a penalty, but if you want to penalize someone THINK. You are taking points away from one championship contender, but not from the other! Where is the logic here?

        1. Hamilton was the only one who deserved a penalty!!! =P

          But seriously none of that was Hamilton’s fault.

          1. haha Riise laa, love your sarcasm!! (at least i hope it is)

            I don’t think Hamilton and Alonso are allowed to race each other anymore. They will have to do time-trials on their own now LOL

          2. This incident reminded me of Bahrain 2008, did anyone get a penalty then? Nope

    3. This is madness. The stewards should get a special Darwin reward for that…

      1. But these awards are only given post-mortem… ahh, I see what you mean now, you devil! Well, it’s hard to disagree.

        1. As a less drastic alternative I would make them drive a HRT through a full race! Or would it be more drastic?

          1. I mean the stewards ;)

      2. To get a Darwin, don’t the have to remove themselves from the gene pool? So.. bit more drastic

  3. KERS and DRS are introduced to help improve the racing, yet the drivers are getting penalised for actually racing. This is an embarrassment for the FIA.

    1. Exactly it’s a racing incident. I thought we wanted to see racing?

      1. well thats clearly not the case. If the FiA have handed out penalties its because they know some reason why a penalty should be given.

        Either because Hamilton moved with Alonso when he tried to overtake, or because Hamilton lifted.

        Alonso meanwhile caused the accident.

        Those are hypothesis, but the stewards won’t have come to that decision lightly – changing the results post race is not something that the sport needs

        1. there is also the suggestion on the autosport forum that it is because of hamiltons weaving the lap before – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L61_AevsjMs

          1. Just watched that video, it makes me laugh out loud. He hardly moves a couple of times and Alonso is in no attempt of making a move as he is so far back.

          2. Even with the video, i fail to see how that is weaving. Last year with Petrov yes. But this, i really don’t see.

          3. check this out

            what do you think

          4. Its racing, what a disappointment!

          5. vettel clearly weaving on the start :

          6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDfkz0J74Qg

            It reminds me last year. that was between Hamilton and Petrov. Many claimed Hamilton should get penaly but not. maybe stewards want to correct his habit…

          7. Eggry, that is ridicilous. Petrov followed hamilton there….

          8. @alonsodz – how did you post the video?? Which formatting code??

          9. @dam00r that is why you don’t have to weave. you can crash with opposite if he’s already there.

        2. Isn’t Hamilton allowed to lift?

          When the camera was on LH’s car, it did sound full throttle.

          1. This is nonsense. Now drivers cannot fight for position!!!

            Is that lap weavering around???? If yes what do oyu want a driver in front do? From now on show him the blue flag so that he will let the guy behind to pass freely.

            Hamilton takes very critics always on these issue but what do we want to see a procession or a good fight.

            Why penalise these 2 Champions while doing their duties. It was just a racing incident and nothing else.

          2. I think the stewards would take a dim view of Hamilton lifting on the straight to fend off another car. But it didn’t appear as if that’s what he did.

  4. I’m very curious to see the reasons why for both drivers – why did the stewards think they needed punishing?

    1. Lewis for moving more than once when defending. I didn’t see it at the time and thought it was just a racing incident which the stewards should leave alone. However, if they found Lewis moved more than once then a punishment is fair I think.

      Alonso for hitting him.

      1. Lewis moved over to defend after they exited turn 3, just before Alonso hit him, which would have been his one move – that feels like there should be no penalty there.

        Alonso hit Hamilton in a racing incident, he came out worse off, so why would he need a penalty to mis-judging the gap to another car?

        It’s all conjecture until the reasoning is given by the stewards.

        1. The reason for Lewis was that he moved too much when defending according to Adam Cooper…

        2. According to Adam Cooper it was because Lewis moved more than allowed when defending.

        3. I don’t understand penalising Lewis even as a Ferrari fan. I would have done it only if he would have had really break-tested Alonso.

          He did make only one move.

          At least in that particular situation.

      2. I think it is rather unfair though, the two infractions (I also didn’t see Lewis doing that, but the stewards have the data) aren’t of the same magnitude; one possibly held up Alonso for a bit, the other kept Hamilton extra slow for the rest of the race. And then it looses him an extra position too? No, definitely unfair, they should have gotten different penalties.

        I also have to say, that maybe those are the rules, but it is a bit pointless that most penalties tend to go for those behind the leaders in the race – kicking a horse when it is down, and keeping it there, thus spoiling it even worse.

        1. Hamilton has been warned about weaving before at this track though and it possibly resulted in the crash.

          Simon Adam Cooper said that the reason for Ham’s penalty was moving too much when defending.

        2. Maybe they both got penalties for whining too much. The stewards reasoning that they would only pipe down if punished

          1. I do think so, yes. And that is a ridiculous: just let the stewards tell them to shut up and deal with it instead!

        3. hamilton said it himself in the bbc interview – the incident with Alonso didn’t slow him down. Also, Hamilton weaved in the top video at least 3 times, both incidents were worthy of drive – thru’s so 20 sec. penalty was completely fair.
          As for those complaining that Hamilton lost a position – Valencia 2010. Drive – thru’, not position lost.

          1. Please don’t confuse ‘weaving’ with a move to get back on the correct racing line for a corner.

            This is a stupid decision for both drivers and a blot on F1.

      3. Massa weaved much more to defend against Button during the last race in Melbourne, but penalizing either Hamilton or Alonso is a bad decision.

  5. what the hell for?

    1. Exactly, the stewards have no brains.

  6. Maybe I’m letting my emotions get the better of me but I find Alonso’s punishment ridiculous. First off on the face of it the whole thing looked like a racing incident and a penalty for it isn’t even consistent with past ruling (Ham Brazil 09 and Aus 2010 and Bourdais/Heikki Silv 09).

    If the steards found Hamilton moved more than once a penalty is fair (esp as he was warned last year) but if he was found to be driving dangerously how can they possibly punish the other guy for crashing into him? It’s just crazy logic.

    1. That is ridiculous Steph. Alonso may claim he hit HAM because he was weaving (don’t know if he did), but that is rubbish nonsense, he just made a mistake himself, driving into HAM. Weaving isn’t dangerous driving, it is making the car wider than allowed. Sure, unsporty, and therefore not allowed, but not dangerous.

      I agree both should not have gotten a punishment, it really seemed to be a racing incident.

      To be honest, I read this as if McLaren decided to complain about Alonso, because they were miffed, then Ferrari said “yeah, but, if you start like that, then HAM did” … and the stewards were stupid and listened.

      I have seen before (Ferrari I am sure got a bit of it after Valencia, and in Singapore) that this results in them wanting to punish the one to complain extra if both parties are at fault – hence giving HAM an the same penalty for a lighter offence while he didn’t have the same margin behind him. They knew full well Alonso would then keep his position.

      I would rather they just say: racing inicident, stop moaning to the complainer instead of this.

    2. Sorry if I came of a bit strong, I do think maybe your emotions as a Ferrari fan are getting the better of you. I guess my emotion too a bit :-p

      What I wanted to say is: I agree Alonso shouldn’t have gotten a penalty; the fact they both got one shows, in my opinion, that it is as I describe above: the stewards felt forced to investigate; instead of just saying: racing incident, they decided to give both a penalty, and I do believe that likely McLaren asked first, and thus got the bigger negative effect.

      So, don’t blame HAM, if anyone, blame the stewards for not having strong enough backs, and McLaren for not letting it rest (we can forgive Ferrari for countering I think :)

      1. I also believe that this was a clear racing incident. None of them deserved it. Alonso did a mistake he didn’t earn anything from it. And I’m sure Hamilton didn’t got this place because of the hit.

        Also his move cannot be described as weaving! That’s ridiculous! He was clearly trying to defend his place. It’s called racing. Hamilton’s move on Petrov last year was weaving. That’s certainly not! Hamilton moved a bit of the limit in the straight. As soon as he entered the corner he simply followed the racing line got the apex and got out of it.

        And since thy want to encourage overtaking why on earth did they penalise them? It’s a a laugh for sure!

      2. I didn’t say it caused the crash. I said moving more than once is against the rules so should be punished. My gripe is that Alonso got punished.

        1. Actually reading back I should have been clearer so sorry for the confusion Bosyber! I still think it was a racing incident but if the stewards saw more movement then allowe then I can’t argue against a penalty for Hamilton and it was fair.

          1. True, and I suppose according to the rules he should be punished then, esp. since he got a reprimand last year for it.

            I just didn’t feel that he was really weaving, as many said, he moved off the racing line and back; and positioned himself for the corner, a bit later – it is a bit silly that one isn’t at all allowed to defend, apparently, I would like them to just be allowed to race rather than call those slight moves weaving. Originally the “no weaving” rule was introduced for much more clear and aggressive moves where drivers were almost pushed off the track, unless I’m mistaken.

            We definitely agree that Alonso should not have been punished for making a mistake during racing.

            Fundamentally, I also really dislike punishments altering the race after has run, especially for this sort of stuff it is just silly and stupid, and makes me feel watching the race live is somewhat pointless (still didn’t watch that recording I also have either, why bother).

  7. Crookeymonster
    10th April 2011, 13:20

    Why? It was a racing incident, don’t think they did anything else wrong

  8. What a stupid decision. It was just a racing incident, Hamilton didn’t do anything wrong. If Hamilton momentarily lifted, then he should be disqualified. I can’t see why Alonso got penalised either, even if it has no affect on his result.

    1. It was because they decided Hamilton moved more than once when defending apparently rather than any conspiracy about how slowly he was going.

    2. It’s noty about Ham lifting or any other reason why he was slow but about his movements across the track.

  9. absolutely unnecessary

  10. That’s absurd. I don’t believe Alonso should be being penalised but Hamilton appeared to be a passenger to the incident.

    The FiA need to stop trying to legislate away aggression in Formula One drivers.

  11. Riduculous, it was a racing incident that required no intervention.

  12. I read somewhere else that Hamilton’s was for moving twice when defending on the straight. If this is the csse half the field should get a penalty. No idea why Alonso should get a penalty. It’s racing – these things happen when you RACE.

    1. took the words out my mouth. why was Masa not penalized in Melbourne and while was vettel not penalized for weaving today? in fact while we are at it, why was vettel not penalized for the illegal pass on Button in Melbourne?

    2. Totally agree.

      It highlights an issue about the stewards understanding of the rules or why they exist and it impacts their decision making. Hamilton was punished by the wording of a rule which is essentially there to prevent blocking and dangerous driving and I don’t think he was guilty of either. Ditto for Alonso and his penatly.

  13. Sometimes i just can’t stand that so-called sport.

    1. Its taken you this long?

      1. absolutely ludicrous

  14. I think the ruling is a bit incoherent, how can Alonso be to blame for an incident where the driver he was trying to pass was dangerously weaving?

    1. How was Hamilton weaving? they were going around a corner…

      1. I didn’t conclude that he was doing anything wrong the stewards did, in which case I don’t understand why they also punished Alonso. But I’ll wait to hear what their reasoning was.

        1. So going around a corner is considered dangerously weaving now?

          1. I’m not saying he moved dangerously the stewards are. And if they concluded he did they surely can’t at the same time punish Alonso for causing the incident.

            Although I may have jumped the gun and Ham may have been penalised for weaving before that, as KazeXT says below. In which case my point looks a bit daft. But as it is I don’t really think it makes sense to punish Alonso.

      2. After having watched the incident again, I can’t believe that the weaving penalty is related to moment when Alonso touched Hamilton. It must have been earlier on than that.

    2. * I’ll add I don’t think they should have been punished, but if they conclude Ham was blocking too aggressively they can’t simultaneously punish Alonso for the accident that then happened

      1. They can – Hamilton was punished for an earlier instance on the straight. The bash was a lot later.

        Still, neither deserve a penalty – Hamilton’s ‘weave’ was marginal at best, and Alonso’s accident was a racing incident.

        1. It was evident that Hamilton had problems in accelerating from every corner with that set of tyre. Alonso has misjugded that in that corner and it was a pure racing accident. FIA you need to let Champions race and let us have some fun watching them.

          1. Totally agree. It looks like he got a touch more wheel spin off the corner before Alonso nudged him. The only victim in the incident was Alonso, so the penalty is poor form and will only discourage racing.

            This is the FIA’s new position: just use DRS to get past in one move and forget about racing elsewhere.

            They need a common sense rule!

        2. Yer as I said above, if Ham’s penalty was for an earlier one then my point is redundant.

        3. I agree that neither should get a penalty. They both suffered after all.

          I think everyone is looking at this wrong to use the word “weaving”. It’s probably better to think of it more as a penalty for changing his line too many times on the straight. I have had a look at the video and noticed it at the time he did it. It wasn’t a wild weave or anything and it wasn’t dangerous but the rules have become a bit strict in this area.

          1. Perhaps a victim of the increased marbling from the Pirelli tyres? There’s now a bigger disadvantage being offline, and perhaps it catches drivers off-guard.

            Still, definitely not a fan of post-race penalties. It makes no sense with engine conservation rules – I know that the intention is to penalise drivers, but how it unfairly penalises drivers that have made space enough to ‘ease off’, some of whom may be totally unaware they’re even under investigation.

  15. What?! Why?

    1. How about you read the article instead of just reacting to a headline? Hamilton was given a penalty for excessive blocking of Alonso, who was given a penalty of his own for causing an avoidable accident.

      1. I think he understands the article. He is just using a Very commonly used phrase (‘What?! Why?’) to express disbelief at what he may consider to be a very poor stewarding decision.

      2. Because when the article first came up it didn’t have anything in it except the fact that Hamilton and Alonso were penalised. Keith edited it afterwards.

        1. Sorry for having an initial reaction…

          In fact this article has expanded a lot since then, to include videos and a poll.

      3. What he said.

  16. So it is forbidden now to fight for position and have contact? Seriously, this is a huge fail by the FIA.

  17. Just when we thought the FIA had turned a new leaf and were making better judgement calls, this happens. Surely they 4th steward should have made a strong case for this being a racing incident?

  18. I think it’s probably a good move from the FIA.

    With bigger closing speeds due to the rules this year, I think that it was necessary to crack down on drivers darting out at the very last minute. We’ve seen a few very near misses in recent years, such as Hamilton nipping Barrichello at Brazil 2009 and just missing Massa at Melbourne 2011.

    As for defending, the same thing – with big closing speeds, I think it was necessary for the FIA to make a stand, with minimal penalty to the drivers (only a few points for Hamilton).

    These drivers probably are scapegoats for a greater initiative (Petrov weaved a bit as well), but I don’t think they can complain too much, particularly Hamilton, as he has been let off many times in the past.

  19. FIA has an astonishing talent to just ruin what you wouldn’t think can possibly be ruined.

    1. kinda feels like Spa ’08, huh?

      near perfect race and then some numb-skull sticks his brains in a grinder and then mucks it up for the rest of us, leaving the bitter aftertaste.


  20. Lucas "Mr. Veloce"
    10th April 2011, 13:30

    Repeat of 2008, they want Hamilton to lose out. None of that incident was Hamilton’s fault yet they must have dilerberatly given both of them 20 second penalty, knowing Fernando wouldn’t have lost out when it was all his fault. I am disgusted by this, if I was McLaren, I’d take this to court. The stewards are Ferrari biased and want to look like they are punishing both drivers, I’m sorry but you aren’t.

    1. You are biased if you don’t think Hamilton got an advantage at Spa 2008. That was a fair penalty.

      1. At the time the rule was that you had to give the place back.

        Also, Hamilton drove up to raikkonen and past between the two bus stop chicanes. He just had so much more traction.

        So no, he didn’t get any unfair advantage either. He was simply that much faster.

    2. Don’t be daft, the stewards looked at these incidents independently. And the judgement on either penalty isn’t connected to the fate of the other driver.

    3. You do realise Hamilton got a penalty for weaving, not the contact with Alonso…

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 9

Leave a Reply

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

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.