FIA steward Daly says Schumacher should have had penalty

2011 Italian Grand Prix

Michael Schumacher, Mercedes, Monza, 2011

Michael Schumacher, Mercedes, Monza, 2011

Derek Daly says Michael Schumacher should have been given a penalty for his driving at Monza.

The former F1 racer was the drivers’ advisor to the stewards during the Italian Grand Prix.

Schumacher was criticised for his moves while racing with Lewis Hamilton.

In a statement Daly said: “On lap 20, race director Charlie Whiting asked the stewards to look at an incident between [Felipe] Massa and [Jarno] Trulli at the second chicane.

“While looking at the slow motion video of this incident, I missed the Schumacher/Hamilton incident that happened at that moment.

“When I looked at it again at home, I believe that Schumacher should have been given a drive-though penalty. He was warned repeatedly and this style of driving is not what you want the future generation of drivers to perfect.

“We as stewards probably let Charlie down with this one.”

Hamilton overtook Schumacher on lap 27, and finished fourth with the Mercedes driver fifth.

2011 Italian Grand Prix

Browse all 2011 Italian Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Daimler

Advert | Go Ad-free

203 comments on FIA steward Daly says Schumacher should have had penalty

  1. Maksutov said on 15th September 2011, 3:48

    “When I looked at it again at home, I believe that Schumacher should have been given a drive-though penalty…

    Ok so there are several conclusions I make from this comment:

    1) From my understanding, the decision to panalise someone is not governed by 1 person alone. There must have been other stewards who were (and had to have been) looking at the replays/incident. The fact that he refers to the possibility of a “penalty” based on his own individual ability to see or act upon, suggests that he is talking rubish because its not only his dicision to make.

    2) By him admitting that “I had to go home to have another look”, suggests that he did not do his job properly in the first place, im sure there is “plenty” of time to look at the replay during the race.

    3) If it is true that stewards did not see the very incident that was spoken about the most, then this is quite scary, because it supports the very concern that stewarding is a very inefficient system. Which i dont believe to be the case. It is more likely that Daly couldn’t do anything about it because the incident could not be proven with 100% certainty to be blocking. And these are the facts.

    From my understanding, there is a group of stewards looking at various incidences and not just one. And they make dicisions together. So Daly is making matters worse for himself by reflecting on decisions outside of his work.

    • 1) Daly did say on posts I have seen and on Peter Windors broadcast that he didn’t know what the other (2) stewards were doing when he was watching a slow motion vid of an incident that Charlie Whiting had asked them to look at.
      2) A I said Daly was busy at the time of the Schumacher/ Hamilton incident on lap 20, and the stewards were not asked to go back and look at it.
      3) If the stewards were busy and did not see the incident and it wasn’t refered to them. What are they supposed to do about it?

      I would think that this is a Charlie Whiting or a system failure, not the three stewards on duty. One of which was a trainee. After two warnings to Ross Brawn, passed on to Schumacher, by Charlie Whiting before this incident I am sure that this incident should have been passed to the stewards But then again Charlie Whiting might not have seen the lap 20 event because he was busy with something else.

      We will probably never know.

      Maybe there should be more teams of stewards and/or more people with the power to refer incidents to the stewards.

  2. So let me get this right, what some people are saying here is it’s ok to move once to block an overtake and then when your opponent moves the other side to overtake you can move back in front of him because that’s the racing line ? What a load of TOSH ! One move means one move, not one off the racing line and then one back on it again.
    I find Daly’s admission after the race more disturbing than what happened during the race. Once again the FIA and consistency simply don’t go hand in hand.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 15th September 2011, 10:14

      One move means one move, not one off the racing line and then one back on it again.

      I understand why you think so, but that isn’t how the rule is enforced.

      For years, decades even, drivers have been allowed to move once off the racing line and then move back towards the racing line.

      I’m not saying I like it, but that’s how it is. Here’s an example from three years ago describing the same thing:

      Four of F1′s ‘unwritten rules’

  3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpdAH5ohpAo&feature=fvsr

    I like to see these older races. Probably Senna nowadays would have gotten a penalty, which we would be discussing time and time again.
    I enjoyed watching Hamilton versus Schumacher. With DRS and Kers it seems its just a matter of setting the car right push the button and you’re set.

    • Good point, though I’m not sure I see anything there resembling a double move (or even a single “block”) from Senna – maybe the approach to bridge corner that one time, but it seems to me that Senna just keeps outbraking Prost and going around his outside.

      Actually, what’s notable here (again, per my earlier reference to Spain 1991) is actually that Senna is NOT blocking. First shot – into Stowe, he leaves the inside completely open for Prost and just goes around the outside. Same again into Abbey, he comes up the centre of the track but leaves room for Prost to go inside, which he does, then has a twitch on turn-in and backs out of it. Same story again into Copse, then Senna just takes the normal racing line into Becketts.

      If anything, this seems to support Rob Walker’s point that Senna on a typical day was cleaner and fairer than he gets credit for now, and that standards have degraded w.r.t. blocking in general. Go back to that first shot – how many drivers today would move to the inside to block going down to Stowe? Seems to me that’s exactly what was happening multiple times in the very last race. I think the leading driver can take his chosen line in a case like that (though Senna here shows it’s not always necessary and there’s more than one way to skin a cat), but I’m still uncomfortable with the idea that he can move once to block and then move back again “to take the racing line”. To me that’s two moves and if you move once, you commit to that line, including a shallower corner entry.

      I think your wider point is very well taken, though. This was excellent, hard racing and if stewards intervention takes us to a point where this sort of racing gets penalties, then it will be a horrible development. And it’s certainly possible that we could end up there.

      • This was excellent, hard racing and if stewards intervention takes us to a point where this sort of racing gets penalties, then it will be a horrible development. And it’s certainly possible that we could end up there.

        Exactly. Jenson overtook at Ascari, we should be looking at that,it was a brave racing move and it should deserve more consideration.Looking at another sport – cycling – http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-begins-implementation-of-radio-ban-for-elite-riders – i’m bringing this as they point one of the reasons being forcing the riders to “think by themselves”. On Spa we had that huge moment between Alonso and Webber,on Monza, that move by Jenson at Ascari. Limiting defending to one move and then having drs and kers it’s like making of more like Fast and Furious and less like 1969′s Grand Prix.

  4. clairvoyant said on 15th September 2011, 11:15

    Hello to all formula 1 fans i found this conversation between michael his race engineer and ros brawn.I don’t know if it’s real but the journalist is reliable the dialogues are so funny.Here it is:
    Race engineer:Michael you may take a penaltyfor blocking
    Michael:Why?
    RE:Because the stewards warned us
    M:Blocking?Isn’t my teammate?
    RE:No it’s Hmamilton.That;s yellow helmet is Hamilton’s not Nico’s
    M:A..I can’t see nothing from the mirrors.
    RE:Have your mirrorsbeen broken?
    M: Not somebody stuck a photo of Kobayashi on the left and one to Petrov on the right.
    RE:Can you repeat?
    M: Just kidding. Now go to Ascari. Yes! Again failed to pass the Schumy.
    RE:micael you must stop blocking.
    M:We have a nice battle.
    RE:Charlie don’t think it looks like that.
    M: You know I wonder if I can lead him on the grass in this lap.
    RE:If you do not stop the closing(blocking), I will call Ross.
    M:I don;t hear.
    Ross Brawn: Michael Ross here. You must leave space.
    M: There is enough space.
    RB: You must let the width of the car, not just the space between the car and the barrier.
    M:It really is fun
    RB:Michael must let go of Lewis, if you crash …
    M:He;ll take responsibility.Always blame him for everything, there will be no problem
    RB: We had several problems with Rubens last year.
    M:Schumi schumi schumischumi schumiiiiiiiiiii!!!!!
    RB:If you don;t make space ,i;ll tell people what happened in 1994
    M:Well i think my tyres are finished

    That is a conversation i found it;s really funny.I’m not sure if it’s real or not.Ifound it on a greek site and i translate it.Can anyone confirm that?

  5. clairvoyant said on 15th September 2011, 12:32

    Sorry Keith my mistake i was misleaded because of the reliability of the journalist.I thought also it was very good to be true.

  6. AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner) said on 15th September 2011, 13:45

    I really need to sit down and watch this race on TV. A couple of things are niggling me, this being one of them.

  7. my only take on this “incident” with Hamilton and Michael is: what the devil has f1 racing become. Given all the add-ons and DRS’s, Kers and the likes, now one must simply move over to let a car thru that is on the same lap as you are. Those moves are only for when you are about to be lapped.
    Being in front of any car gives you the right to the racing line and if in doing so you move wide to cut a turn, it’s your right. Hamilton at no stage was in a position to enforce an overtake and was merely getting frustrated at his own incapability of doing so. He should ask his team-mate to give him some pointers how to pass Michael with ease, on their off week-ends.

  8. There was no penalty ‘coz he is black’ innit?

    ;oP

  9. The problem with the Daly comment is that he’s basing it on insufficient evidence from a steward’s point of view. As Martin Brundle said in his column on the race “When the stewards look at an incident, they have GPS trace overlays, car data, and many camera angles to carefully analyse a driver’s consistency of line and actions.”

    Perhaps the incident should have been looked at and Daly could rightfully say that it should have been referred to the stewards, or if he could say that had he seen it during the race, he would have recommended it be referred, but beyond that, without the totality of the process that stewards go through to determine if an incident deserves a penalty, then he’s just showing his own bias and suggests he has other motives for his comments. On the surface, his comments seem unprofessional (whether or not they appeal to a segment of fans).

  10. kowalsky said on 15th September 2011, 16:23

    hamilton was complaining during the race but when asked after it, he said it was normal racing. So i think that’s the end of it.
    But a nobody like daly wants to be heard, because nobody cares about his opinions anymore.
    It was a long time when people cared what you had to say derek. Sure most of the f1f fans don’t.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 15th September 2011, 16:24

      Says who? If he’s one of the ones responsible for handing out penalties I definitely want to know what he thinks.

      • the problem with that, is that while we want his opinion as someone responsible for handing out penalties, we assume that it would be based on him having access to much more information (data, LH’s in-car camera, the distances between the cars, etc.). But he’s basically giving an opinion on the same footage we’ve all seen on the world feed which doesn’t give the best angles, foreshortens perspective, etc.

        A doctor’s opinion carries much more weight when it’s based on having access to all of a patient’s data, not trying to diagnose from a distance.

        As I said above, it’s one thing to say an incident deserves to be investigated, quite another to say because it deserves investigation it deserves a penalty. An accusation isn’t proof.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 15th September 2011, 18:30

          I don’t think that was Kowalsky’s point, which is what I was replying to.

          And I don’t agree with your view that a steward necessarily needs to see more footage than we do in order decide whether a move was legal or not. There may well be cases when extra footage isn’t available.

          What matters is that the rules are interpreted and enforced consistently and that the process is transparent and fans can comprehend it. I think Daly deserves credit for giving us insight into what actually goes on in the stewards’ room.

          • I’m new to posting here, so I won’t belabor my point (great site btw). I agree it’s nice to get insight into the stewards’ room and I agree on consistent interpretations and enforcements of the rules.

            I don’t think we’ll ever get to transparency in the process, but we can keep it on our Christmas wish list :-)

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 15th September 2011, 21:04

            great site btw

            Thanks!

      • kowalsky said on 16th September 2011, 17:44

        i said most.

    • I have a feeling that Hamilton didn’t want to say anything in public that might upset the officials.

      What would be more interesting is what he has said at the de-briefing. And that we will probably never know.

  11. Why do we even need the one move rule? Why can’t they just penalize dangerous driving, or questionable driving at certain dangerous spots and then forget about whether it was one move, or two or one and then a second back to the racing line?
    And if there has not yet been caused an accident I think they should just bring out the “you are driving like a ****! Cool down!” flag (I don’t remember what it is called or how it looks, but I think it exists.) out more often to warn the drivers if they are getting too close. I would have hated to see the Schumi vs Ham duel stop because Schumacher was given a drive through. I think an official warning from the stewards during the race if the drivers are getting on the edge would get the to keep themselves within what is safe to do, and then the duel might fade away because of that, but I will much rather see it that way then with a drive through. Of cause if they just ignore the warning and keeps going a penalty has to come.
    But I want to see the stewards manipulating the race result as little as they can. They need to be there to keep things under control, but the more invisible they are the better.
    And while we are at it, lets stop the causing a collision, drive through unless it is an obvious brain fade kind of accident.
    Let the laws of physics sort out who comes out better in a crash. Not the stewards.
    Unless as I say that it is a total kamikaze overtake kind of crash, or just stupidity behind the wheel.
    The one move and one back to the racing line is a fine guideline, but I don’t want to see penalties handed out mainly because of that rule.

  12. Here’s what I’d like to say about the subject: As a fan, I love racing, I’m biased not to penalize Schumi because I’m a fan, as a steward, I’d have to at least warn him, directly about it. Stewarding is been has been and will always be inconsistent because its up to each individual steward to decide what a violation is. Yes, there’s rules but there’s loads of ambiguity in them and there always will be.

  13. i am not a Michael Schumacher fan BUT that was racing. fed up with all the rules. let drivers drive and fight and get rid of blue flags and rolling starts and bring back refueling so we dont have to have fuel saving periods. and the rule saying you have to use both compounds of tyres is stupid too. i as a fan want to see drivers racing from start light to checkered flag. in the past races could be won or lost due to fuel rig problems or getting stuck in traffic etc etc. tear up the rule book and start again and let teams and drivers decide whats best and safe.

  14. I’m new here and discussions like this make me wish I started really watching F1 more than just last year and that I found this awesome site during 2010. I don’t know the rules like probably all of you here but after reading “4 Unwritten Rules” Schumacher might have made a move and a half at the lap 20 incident but the actual racing line was hard for me to determine from the TV coverage, the rest fit into what I understand those rule mean from reading the article. As for Lewis going off in the grass I don’t think he was run off by Michael as much as he made a judgment error on the space he needed. Also, Stewards are just like officials in any other sport, human. They do their best but make mistakes like anyone else. Was nice to get a glimpse of what goes on in their world though.

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.