Hamilton and Alonso handed penalties

2011 Malaysian Grand Prix

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 (64%)

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

Advert | Go Ad-free

427 comments on Hamilton and Alonso handed penalties

  1. Wallbreaker said on 10th April 2011, 13:25

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

  2. James (@jamesf1) said on 10th April 2011, 13:26

    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?

  3. ed24f1 (@ed24f1) said on 10th April 2011, 13:28

    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.

  4. Stefanauss (@stefanauss) said on 10th April 2011, 13:29

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

    • Stubie (@stubie) said on 10th April 2011, 13:33

      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.

      argh!

  5. Lucas "Mr. Veloce" said on 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.

    • ed24f1 (@ed24f1) said on 10th April 2011, 14:09

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

      • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 10th April 2011, 16:24

        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.

    • Mike said on 11th April 2011, 2:20

      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.

    • RIISE (@riise) said on 11th April 2011, 10:18

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

  6. Ragerod said on 10th April 2011, 13:32

    My concern is that now if two drivers collide later in the season in a similar fashion they either have to punished equally or an acknowledgement is needed that this was a poor decision.

  7. driftin said on 10th April 2011, 13:33

    I’d like to see the video evidence of Hamilton making more than one move to defend.

  8. Eggry (@eggry) said on 10th April 2011, 13:35

    What? It must be FIA want them to have more hate to each other!

  9. TomD11 (@tomd11) said on 10th April 2011, 13:35

    Silly stewards, April Fools’ Day is the first of April, not the tenth.

    I mean, seriously, are they kidding?

    What next? 20s penalty for looking at another driver agressively?

  10. David5 said on 10th April 2011, 13:35

    Why Massa didn’t get a penalty in Melbourne then? So stupid.

    • David5 said on 10th April 2011, 13:38

      I know i’ll change my mind next race but right now i’m really tired with formula 1 stupid rules. I might stick to tennis. Make more sense to me as a sport.

  11. Really FIA created new controversy out of nothing. The incident generally accepted as racing incident and moreover none of either driver complained about other (alonso abt weaving or ham abt collision). So not sure what on earth stewards were doing to handout penalty.
    We were all discussing FIA have done better jobs with stewarding in last year..but now back to old days.

  12. Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th April 2011, 13:40

    I’ve added a poll. There was a slight glitch when the poll went live so I had to correct and re-set it, meaning the first seven people who voted will have to cast their votes again. Apologies for the error.

  13. Stubie (@stubie) said on 10th April 2011, 13:40

    the lack of consistency is more of a concern.

    Case in point VET with all 4 wheels off track passing BUT in Melbourne, no penalty. Yet, WEB penalized going around (ALO??) in Singapore in ’10.

    The addition of the stewards has been an improvement to the sport’s fairness, for the most part, but right now, I just want some ruddy consistency, fer cryin’ out loud

    • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 10th April 2011, 16:26

      And Vettel clearly blocking Hamilton after the start doesn’t get punished when Hamilton not driving perfectly straight for 800meters is seen as blocking.

      There is one thing in common with both situations though …

    • Mike said on 11th April 2011, 2:30

      I just want some ruddy consistency

      You are getting consistency! In the years gone by they have often made their mind up on a whim, and in that tradition they are still doing it today! :D

  14. ashes1991 said on 10th April 2011, 13:42

    Ridiculous.. Why the need for penalties? It was a racing incident.

    • ashes1991 said on 10th April 2011, 13:44

      There trying to make F1 fun and more overtaking, that was a good battle to watch! All I can think is that there going to loose fans by making stupid decisions like that.

      Was good to watch and yh didn’t end well, but surely that’s just racing?

  15. f1matty (@f1matty) said on 10th April 2011, 13:42

    If hamilton was penilised for defending, then the crash is his fault right? But still alonso gets a pently for causing an accident… it makes sence that hamiltons waeving was the thing that caused the accident! If both needed a pently it must just be a racing accident

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.