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 (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

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

Advert | Go Ad-free

427 comments on Hamilton and Alonso handed penalties

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

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

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

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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

  9. 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?

  10. 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

  11. I can only assume Lewis’s penalty was for earlier on, down the pit straight?

    I think both incidents should have been classed as a racing incident.

    I’m unsure on the “2 move” rule. Isn’t it against the very nature of racing? I know its for “safety”, but is moving more than once really that unsafe? These are supposed to be the best drivers in the world, after all.

    • Wallbreaker said on 10th April 2011, 13:50

      If I remember well, it´s because of that Barrichello-R.Schumacher crash 2002 in Australia where Ralf´s gone airbourne because Barrichello moved twice.

      Ridiculous rule for me.

    • Hamilton fan in peace. Agree mate, Hamiltons penalty will be for his defending on the Start/Finish straight. Technically he did move more than once, but I agree that the rule is silly. The penalties should only be given out if incidents occur, the drivers should be entitled to defend their position. Massa’s defending in Melbourne could be considered in the same light and he was not penalised (rightly IMO). As for Alonso’s penalty, that is outrageous. He’s made a mistake which has cost him a podium, then he is penalised for it? Even more ridiculous is the fact the punishment doesn’t affect his points total. I’m sure he’s devastated at his total race time being 20 seconds longer (not!).

    • End of lap 44/beginning of lap 45 was Hamiltons supposed ‘weave’. ridiculous rule IMO.

  12. danny said on 10th April 2011, 13:42

    I dont understand how Hamiltons defense of his position is worse than Massa defending from Button in Melbourne

    • I still cant find what “move” the FIA are referring too (er, FIA transparency…?) but I agree. Massa was aggressive in Melbourne.

    • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 10th April 2011, 16:38

      Or Vettel’s move on Hamilton just after the start. Or just about any defense of any driver against another.

  13. F1iLike said on 10th April 2011, 13:42

    aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah maaan these stewards are pathetic!!!! Seriously! They are the reason no one is racing! Screw DRS, fire these pathetic stewards instead! Neither of them should have a penalty! This is just appauling!

  14. TheVillainF1 (@thevillainf1) said on 10th April 2011, 13:45

    so if the stewards decide (ridiculously) to be so harsh when it comes to making two moves (which I didn’t see Lewis do, he exited the previous corner, then went left to defend the inside = 1 move), what about Vettel at the start then vs Hamilton. Vettel moves to the inside, Hamilton follows looks to inside buyt pops back out to try the outside, then Vettel moves back outside….
    IF they’re gonna be so silly at least be consisten in your judgments!

  15. Oliver said on 10th April 2011, 13:45

    Hamilton did the supposed muliple move on the straights but was that due to marbles on track? Because immediately the got to the start finish straight he moved left then he seemed to be dodging marbles afterwards. Yet still plenty of time to make him do a drive through. Because Alonso’s incident was not connected with Hamilton’s pit straights antic. When Alonso hit Hamilton, both on board cameras showed Hamilton holding his line perfectly without deviating.

  16. Orishas77 (@) said on 10th April 2011, 13:46

    About Lewis’ penalty, we need to watch the video again, but if he actually drove dangerously changing line twice on the straight, which is forbidden, a penalty would seem fair.

    About Alonso, I really don’t understand why he got a penalty since :
    a) he had no

  17. xtophe (@xtophe) said on 10th April 2011, 13:46

    Unless we’re talking about penalties for different events here, I don’t see how they can both be at fault here. Confusing stuff again.

  18. juan fanger (@juan-fanger) said on 10th April 2011, 13:46

    I’m thinking Hamilton’s penalty was for the lap before the touch, when he moved all over the main straight trying to break Alonso’s tow – just like last year with Petrov.

    And as many others have commented, Alonso didn’t deserve any more penalty then losing his front wing for a racing incident (unless his radio chatter was something like “I’m going to crash into Hamilton!”)

    • Haha maybe he was vocal about it beforehand! In all seriousness, a penalty for Alonso for what is clearly a racing incident is pathetic. Things like this really do leave a sour aftertaste.

  19. ginelloo said on 10th April 2011, 13:49

    watch the start, how many times did Vettel change direction…

    • fordsrule (@fordsrule) said on 10th April 2011, 13:58

      Exactly but they dont care, it was Vettel…

    • Exactly. I just don’t get this rule, or when they choose to apply it.

    • no difference with Hamiltons whatsoever. Clear bias from the FIA I’m afraid :(

      • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 10th April 2011, 16:42

        There actually was a huge difference. Vettel made his double move in the braking zone while Hamilton’s “move” was on the ling drive along the straight.

        • The Last Pope said on 11th April 2011, 2:37

          Its even worse than that. (1)Vettel was moving to block other drivers. (2)Hamilton was moving sideways away from alonso to break the slipsteam.

          Situation 1, the danger is caused by the car infront. He is putting the other driver at risk of collision. This is far worse than…

          Situation 2, the danger is caused by the car behind wanting more slipstream. He is putting himself at risk.

          There sould be a rule saying how many moves a car can make to remain in a slipstream. If Alonso hadn’t followed Hamilton in the weave the weave wouldn’t have happend.

  20. Orishas77 (@) said on 10th April 2011, 13:49

    About Lewis’ penalty, we need to watch the video again, but if he actually drove dangerously changing line twice on the straight, which is forbidden, a penalty would seem fair.

    About Alonso, I really don’t understand why he got a penalty since :
    a) he had no interest in crashing into Hamilton
    b) he did not damage Lewis’ car (apparently)
    c) he actually damaged HIS OWN car and punished himself with a broken wing and one more pitstop

    They are both world champions and experienced drivers, so I don’t think penalties where necessary to “teach” Alonso. Hamilton might need to be less aggressive when defending his position, though.

    • I think he took a chunk of Lewis’s diffuser. I was very surprised he didnt get a puncture.

      Either way, I guess that isnt the point.

    • he damaged Lewis’ diffuser, but that shouldn’t warrant Alonso getting a penalty. He cost himself a podium, that is punishment enough. But Alonso’s ‘penalty’ only affects the statistics, not his points total, so will he really give a fig? Pretty pathetic from the FIA.

      • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 10th April 2011, 14:54

        And if it does, why didn’t he get one for damaging Button’s last year?

        Stewarding remains a farce despite the former driver addition.

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.

Skip to toolbar