Sebastian Vettel, Red Bull, Hockenheim, 2012

Vettel demoted to fifth with 20-second penalty

2012 German Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Sebastian Vettel, Red Bull, Hockenheim, 2012Sebastian Vettel has been given a 20-second penalty for passing Jenson Button off the track during the German Grand Prix.

The penalty, for breach of article 20.2 of the sporting regulations, drops Vettel to fifth in the race.

The stewards determined Vettel had “left the track and gained an advantage when he rejoined”. He was given a drive-through penalty which, because it was awarded after the race, became a 20-second penalty.

Button moves up to second with Kimi Raikkonen promoted to third ahead of Kamui Kobayashi.

2012 German Grand Prix

Browse all 2012 German Grand Prix articles

269 comments on “Vettel demoted to fifth with 20-second penalty”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 4
  1. No surprices here

    1. It is, actually :P

      1. Indeed. If memory serves me right Hamilton passed Rosberg completely off the track in Bahrain and no action was taken. How odd.

        1. I think he didn’t complete the pass.

          1. yes he did

    2. Nope…. Charlie was warning the drivers before the race about not using the ‘off track’ so its not a surprise at all…. I think the stewards have been waiting for such an obvious case so they can make an example… pour encourager les autres

      So not a surprise that he was punished…. perhaps a surprise about the size of the penalty.

      1. Hamilton from pole to last in qualification…that was a surprise!

        1. Except he wasn’t on pole.

          1. I think @sorin was referring to the Spanish Grand Prix

  2. Defininetly due in this case.

    1. I can’t believe I have an ounce of sympathy for Seb but I would have been satisfied had they merely reversed the positions, which of course is what Seb should have done himself so it’s not surprising the stewards decided to add a penalty.

      1. I agree, I thought they would probably just reverse the positions although this wouldn’t really act as much of a deterrent in future.

        1. they cant just reverse the positions. they have to do what is in the rule-book. reversing the positions is not one of the available penalties in F1.

  3. 5 fingers!!!

    1. LMAO.. nice one!

  4. Correct decision for once!

  5. Seems a bit harsh. I think he should have just lost a position to Button but I can understand it.

    1. Look Seb has gotten with a lot of judgements and this was long overdue and besides he broke the rule that a novice can clearly read.


    2. 20 seconds will always look harsh considering how tight it is these days.

    3. I agree, think it would have been enough to hand out a 5 second penalty to drop him behind Button.

      Seems the Stewards don’t want to let him get away without a penalty that costs him anything though, maybe next time a driver in a position like that will really give the place back now.

      1. He knew he went off the track and admitted it. He knows the rules, his team would have heard the radio from Jenson and they made the decision to risk it. For that I think they were penailzed.

      2. A 5 second penalty is impossible. A 20 second penalty is the smallest possible penalty that is available to the stewards. It was 20 seconds or nothing.

        1. Several drivers were given 5 second penatlies in Valencia 2010.

          Although it was never explained how that was possible.

          1. There’s always the possibility to give another sort of penalty. It has been made more clear 2? years ago, while in fact the possibility to give any punsishment always existed.

          2. As per FIA Article 16.3c, a time penalty of any duration, as applicable and deemed so by the race stewards, may be imposed on the erring driver/s.

            But then again, 16.4d also makes room for just a ‘reprimand’. Really, it’s just subjective, but surely subjective with political overtones!

          3. 16.3a) is the penalty for gaining an advantage from driving off the track… which becomes a 20sec penalty if in the last 5 laps.

          4. @marlarkey

            16.3a) is the penalty for gaining an advantage from driving off the track…

            Doesnt say so anywhere, except that IF the stewards choose the option 16.3a or 16.3b, but the incident happens in the last 5 laps, ONLY THEN would the 20sec penalty become an automatic penalty transition.

            However nothing can stop the stewards to instead choose 16.3c as their penalty option, in which case, the penalty may be of ANY time duration!

          5. Except that a drive-through penalty (ie 16.3a) is always the penalty given for gaining advantage from driving off the track….

            For the stewards to give any other penalty would be contrary to precedent, would be inconsistent and would open them up to accusations of favouritism.

      3. they want to give him ( S Vet ) a drive through penalty , but as the race ends soon so it converted into a 20 SEC Penalty … <<<

    4. Penalty means much more than give and take. It’s punishment.

      1. Exactly, he pulled an illegal move which he didn’t acknowledge, so being dropped down several places seems fair- maybe next time he and others will be more careful.

    5. I think a five second penalty would have been sufficient, after all given his situation in the last laps it was more than likely he would have taken the position anyway had he yeilded.

      1. Sorry, but a 5 sec penalty is impossible within the rules.

        1. HewisLamilton
          23rd July 2012, 15:44

          Which rules are you referring to that do not allow a 5 sec penalty???

      2. 16.3 The stewards may impose any one of the penalties below on any driver involved in an Incident :
        a) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and re-join the race without stopping.
        b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop at his pit for at least ten seconds and then re-join the race.
        If either of the two penalties above are imposed during the last five laps, or after the end of a race, Article 16.4b) below will not apply and 20 seconds will be added to the elapsed race time of the driver concerned in the case of a) above and 30 seconds in the case of b).
        c) A time penalty.
        d) A reprimand.
        If any of the four penalties above are imposed they shall not be subject to appeal.
        e) A drop of any number of grid positions at the driver’s next Event.
        f) Exclusion from the results.
        g) Suspension from the driver’s next Event.

        Effectively they ruled that this would have been punished by a drive-through penalty if it had been during the race but because it was in the last 5 laps that equates to a 20sec penalty.

        1. but they could just as well have given option c) a time penalty where the time could have been set to 5 seconds.

          1. No, they were treating it as if it had happened at any time in the race from the outset, as they should. There is no reason to give it a different treatment just because it happened at the end and thought he could get away with it. Based on that, the reasonable punishment is always a drive through for such a move. And as a drive through cannot be given, it is a 20 second penalty. Applying option c) would be treating it differently to if the same incident had occurred and been analysed in the middle of the race.

          2. @matt90 is exactly right. We’re always complaining about inconsistency in the stewarding, in this case they gave out what was the consistently applied penalty given the infringement which they identified. You might argue about whether he did anything wrong (my opinion is that he did and this seems to be agreed upon by most) – given that then a drivethrough (equivalently 20s) was the only penalty they could give for consistency. If this had happened at any other time (driver overtaking of track and not giving the place back) then it would have been a drive through penalty.

            I was actually surprised that Vettel wasn’t given an earlier warning as he was consistently running off track lap-in lap-out, I remember in the past Massa being given a warning about cutting a corner during a race, how come Charlie didn’t warn Vettel earlier as he seemed to prefer running off track to gain an advantage?

    6. spankythewondermonkey (@spankythewondermonkey)
      22nd July 2012, 17:03

      Not at all. He overtook off the track, didn’t had the place back so paid the penalty. Absolutely the right decision by the stewards.

    7. I think that also would have been unfair. Taking regulations by letter this penalty is right, but when Vettel exited the track out of the hairpin, he was alongside Button. I doubt the tarmac run-off offers more grip than the race track, however Vettel had a better acceleration than Button, who lost traction coming out of the corner and lost the position. Vettel gained no advantage unfairly, it was Button who lost a position because of a mistake on his own part. True, Vettel was not on track, but had Button left the space for him on the track the outcome wouldn’t have been different.

      1. Taking regulations by letter this penalty is right

        which maybe serves Vettel / Red Bull rigth for EXACTLY going within the letter of the rules on the throttle mapping :-)

      2. Yeah, that’s what VET said, but *he shouldn’t have been there anyway* more-or-less grip not with standing. The white line is the edge of the track. Treat it as a concrete wall.

      3. By going off track Vettel was able to take a wider line which aided his acceleration. Had he had to turn in more sharply- as Button did- he would not have had the same drive, and whether he would have taken the place is questionable.

      4. Also, the mere fact of having better traction/accelleration is not in itself enough to claim you’re faster. Button blocked Seb from overtaking on the outside, precisely because he knew he (Seb) had an advantage there and would have easily nailed him if he hadn’t covered. That’s the idea of defending – taking action against to prevent a (locally or overall) faster driver from using his speed advantage to overtake.

    8. @steph He should have let Button pass him back and then it would have only been one position. The fact he passed him off the track (accelerating knowing he was going off the circuit) and then didn’t think he had done anything wrong is worthy of harsher punishment, well in my opinion anyhow!

      1. And no-doubt the stewards had better things to do with their time than adjudicating on a 2xWDC blatantly cheating.

        1. Agreed. I think it’s a fair cop.

          Having said that, can you imagine the uproar on this site, should it have been Hamilton who did it? O.o

  6. It’s shame he didn’t wait for better chance. Now Alonso has even more ground.
    Contrat for Kimi’s 3rd and Kobayashi’s 4th(!).

    1. More ground on who? Mark still stays 2nd, yet Kimi gets closer :)

      1. It remains to be seen whether Webber can fight second part of the season or fall off slowly like 2010. He’s not famous of it.

        1. There were for drivers capable of winning the WDC in the final race of 2010, don’t discount anyone! Even button isn’t so far away anymore!

        2. I doubt there is an equal treatment of drivers at RBR like it is at Mclaren and I doubt they are investing in Webber WDC. I am expecting the slow starts and some bad qualifying some other glitches from Webber from now on.

      2. going into this race he was less than 20 points behind. now he is 34 behind. any driver finishing behind Fernando(who got maximum points) isnt getting any closer. how stupid r u?

        1. I think he meant that after the penalty Kimi is closer than he would have been without Vettel getting the penalty.

  7. Justice

  8. 20sec, the right decision. It is almost equal to the time lose due to a stop and go penalty.

  9. Good. Everyone knows you can’t pass all 4 wheels off the circuit- Button did it in Australia 2011 and was punished, now Vettel gets it too. This should shut Christian Horner up as well.

    1. *Everyone knows you can’t pass all 4 wheels off the circuit*

      Like Alonso did in the last corner in almost every lap near the end of the race? ;)

      1. Daniel Brown (@scuderiaferrarifanatic)
        22nd July 2012, 16:58

        Ahh but did he gain any advantage doing so? I doubt it.

        1. @scuderiaferrarifanatic, I’m sure he did gain an advantage, even if it was only to save the tyres, Alonso doesn’t make mistakes like that, but harder to prove an advantage when leading.

          1. Daniel Brown (@scuderiaferrarifanatic)
            23rd July 2012, 19:18

            As others have said, because at no point (as far as im aware) ALO didnt put 4 wheels off track it doesnt class as gaining advantage off track. Im sure Alonso, the wise hack he is, would have been fully aware of that and was – legally, it would seem – cutting two wheels off track to make up time. Im confident that with Whiting’s apparent crackdown and Vettels penalty, if the stewards had a problem, he would know about it.

      2. DS (@duncstick)
        22nd July 2012, 17:28

        Vettel was doing it the entire race at turns 1, 11, 12, and 17…

      3. Did Alonso overtake anyone? By ‘pass’ I was meaning ‘overtake’ You can’t overtake with all four wheels off the circuit. Track limits however is another matter, it’s up to the FIA to decide who is pinged. In the UK the MSA are really becoming serious about it

        1. But VET was already ahead of BUT comming out of the corner, BUT pushed him outside.
          He made the pass midway corner but BUT pushed him off track.

          1. I don’t agree Button did push him off that track. And even if he did, we’ve seen dozens of times in the past drivers are allowed to do that at the exit of corners.

          2. Vettel wasn’t ahead until after he’d committed to leaving the track.

          3. He only overtook BUT because he was accelerating off the track, knowing that there was a run-off area.

            A key question here is what would VET have done if the had not been a run-off area – what if it had been a gravel trap ? Would VET have put his foot down to overtake BUT by deliberately driving into the gravel ?

            The answer is no way… he would have backed out ie successful defence by BUT… or VET would have ended up beached in the gravel ie overtaking fail by VET.

      4. he didnt pass off the track, and wasnt taking a short cut.

    2. Vettel has overtaken Button off the track in melbourne and wasn’t penalised, Glock overtook someone around the outside at melbourne off the track in Melbolurne, and Buemi overtook someone off the track at turn 4 I think, all 4 wheels off track, and the guy he was racing was side-by-side into the next corner.
      In all instances, no penalty applied.

      1. Indeed, but in all instances a penalty should have been applied.

      2. I think the story in that case was that Vettel had already overtaken Button and ran wide after that.

        Still, Hamilton was given a penalty in Magny Cours for overtaking Vettel and consequently running wide. It’s a bit of a grey area. Not in this case of Vettel overtaking Button though.

        1. But Buemi was still alongside when he overtook a Fore India

  10. Definitely the right decision.


  11. James (@jamesjames123abc)
    22nd July 2012, 16:37

    20 second penalty sounds a bit harsh to be honest – much like Schumacher’s pass on Alonso at the end of the 2010 Monaco GP, why not just switch the positions? But at least it sets a precedent for anyone else who thinks about such a move.

    I just hope that the decision wasn’t based on not doing anything about the Red Bull car earlier in the day…

    1. because it’s punishment. if it just ends with switching position, everyone would try to same thing.
      there’s nothing lose much, Isn’t it?

    2. It was the smallest possible penalty the stewards are allowed to hand out. Seems reasonable to me.

      1. Except it wasn’t, was it. See above.

        1. A drive through penalty is the standard penalty for an illegal overtake. Which is automatically converted to a 20 second penalty when handed out after the race.

          So yeah, technically the stewards can hand out any penalty they like, but this is quite a specific and well known offense. So the 20 seconds penalty is pretty much fixed too.

  12. I don’t fully agree with this, but I understand the choice. It’s a shame for the championship, because Vettel is definitely the main title contender, but right now he is 44 points behind Alonso, I think.

    1. I would say Alonso is the main title contender….

      1. I would say, given the momentum he gained, Alonso is clear favorite.

        1. Ah okay, well in my book everybody is still a contender…. and given his performance Alonso is the MAIN title contender… lol..

      2. Alonso and Vettel were the main title contenders, so this may just prove crucial in the final standings.

        1. Ummm…have any of you actually looked at the championship table.

          Alonso and WEBBER are the main contenders.

          1. webber who finished 8th

          2. @dkpioe

            Your point being what? Webber is second in the WDC table. Ahead of Vettel.

  13. Kimi thinking: “3rd without having to do post race interview – perfect.”

      1. +1 almost a perfect result for him

    1. That is brilliant! Gave me a very good laugh!

    2. James (@jamesjames123abc)
      22nd July 2012, 16:47

      Eric Boullier did say Kimi would be on the podium, probably not the way he thought though…

    3. Too funny. He probably would have enjoyed the drink though.

      1. he would rather enjoy it drinking by himself rather than waste it spraying on the other

      1. Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
        23rd July 2012, 1:30


    4. Genuine laugh out loud from me!

    5. Haha, yes. Wonder if he’ll let Vettel keep the crappy Santander trophy?

      1. Unlikely since it’s Button that’s got his crappy Santander trophy

        1. I thought it was a trophy supplied by British Gas !

    6. Absolute CLASSIC! Dead right – Perfect result for Kimi!

      Nice one @baburm, belly laugh from me!

    7. +100.
      And did anyone see Grosjean?

    8. +1 ;-))))

    9. Haha, perfect indeed.

    10. perfect line :D

    11. Alex Yoong said that On-Air just after the race that Kimi tweeted “Love the sound of this. If Seb gets a 20/25sec penalty, not only do I get a podium, but I also avoid the podium interview!”
      Retweeted from
      Bloody made me split :P
      Are you theFakeKimi @BaburM ? :D

      1. @knightmare …and that’s exactly why we hava the Twitter Directory. No fakers here:

        If only Yoong had used it…

  14. Andy Redden (@andyredden-on-f1)
    22nd July 2012, 16:38

    Correct decision. If that had happened in middle of race they would have instructed him to move over. If not he would have had a drive through.

    1. 100% agree with this. It had to be 20 sec or nothing 5 sec wouldn’t have been a deterent for the future.

      1. It was nothing to do with being a deterent… it was the penalty dictated by the rules…

        Rule 16.3… a “drive-through penalty”…. last 5 laps = 20 sec penalty.

        1. @marlarkey check option c of your own comment: a time penalty.
          They could’ve done what they wanted. 2 seconds, 3 minutes etc

          1. And for the sake of clarity, fairness and for the avoidance of ‘favouritism’ this option (c) needs to be removed from the regulations!

            How such and open ended rule can exist in formula 1 beggars belief!

          2. Which would be totally inconsistent with the typical punishment for an illegal overtake- that is always a drive through during a race, which is what was given, and was converted to a 20 second penalty. There is no reason to use option c) for an offence which is always treated in the same way.

          3. and if they had given him 2 seconds or 5 seconds, what would happen the next time a driver does this? Same penalty? What happens if Hamilton does this the next race, and finished 5.1seconds ahead of Vettel? Would he then lose just 5 seconds, or more?

            The rule is very clear and has been applied in the past. It’s a 20 second penalty.

            Vettel was stupid and arrogant for not giving the place back. he would have got by on the next lap anyway.

          4. Sorry you’re not getting it….

            The penalty for gaining an advantage as a result of driving off the track is a drive through penalty… as per 16.3 a) that becomes a 20 second penalty if imposed during the last 5 laps or after the race.

            c) doesn’t come into it because c) isn’t the penalty for gaining an advantage from driving off the track, a) is.

  15. Kobayashi best result in F1!

    1. It was even before the penalty! Well done Kobayashi.

      1. Idd, congrats to Kamui. He has had some awful look this year. The qualifying wasn’t great but he had a good race and the 4th place is a nice reward. I still believe his car has the potential to win. He just needs a perfect weekend, which i can confidently say he’s never had to date. It’s coming tho… I can feel it.

  16. Serves him right….

  17. The only right decision.

  18. Hamilton should get a penalty for unlapping and impeding VET. Had it been an equally fast mid-field team, the driver would have been penalised. You can unlap urself, but shouldnt impede

    1. Read the rule books mate, yes y

    2. He was faster at that point and caught up to Alonso.

    3. @malleshmagdum Absolutely not. There is no rule against a driver unlapping themselves, nor should there be.

      Robert Kubica, for example, unlapped himself from Hamilton during the Brazilian Grand Prix in 2008. Vettel took advantage and passed Hamilton as a result. I don’t remember him calling Kubica “stupid” on that occasion.

      1. exactly what i think. Am nt a mc laren fan but lewis hamilton had every right to unlap himselfe

    4. @malleshmagdum, that is utter nonsense

    5. I agree with the top comment; because of Hamilton, Vettel lost a lot of ground on Alonso, and then also arguably Button, as he would have lost a fair amount of aero, and the time lost to Alonso would have covered him from Buttons attack; Hamilton unlapping himself effectively lost Vettel the race

      1. Hamilton unlapping himself effectively lost Vettel the race


      2. Hamilton unlapping himself effectively lost Vettel the race

        No, Vettel waving his arms and throwing a tantrum lost him the race. I mean, this is a guy who called someone “stupid” for unlapping himself (who didn’t impede anyone, especially his teammate Button), then said:

        “I’m not entirely happy, because I think we could have been a bit better if we were in clean air for most of the race.”

        In other words, he was complaining that he wasn’t in front for most of the race.


        1. He lost something like a second to Alonso in that lap due to hamilton unlapping himself.
          This is frankly ludicrous; hamilton was impeeding Vettel, made him lose a significant amount of time to Alonso, and that lost him the place to Button as well.

    6. Michael Brown (@)
      22nd July 2012, 22:03

      Shouldn’t Red Bull know that when two cars fight for position, they both end up going slower than a car in clean air?

    7. Section 20.5 states;

      As soon as a car is caught by another car which is about to lap it during the race the driver
      must allow the faster driver past at the first available opportunity. If the driver who has been
      caught does not allow the faster driver past, waved blue flags will be shown to indicate that he
      must allow the following driver to overtake.

      Was Hamilton;
      a) Caught by Vettel?
      b) Slower than Vettel?

      The answer to both of these questions is NO. So why exactly should Hamilton be penalised?

      And before you go off on one, I am NOT and Hamilton fan AT ALL! But in the end, Hamilton is racing Vettel in the Championship, not just the race, so if Hamilton can do something that prevents Vettel taking maximum points, and do it legally, then as far as I’m concerned, he’s done a good job as a racing driver.

    8. He didn’t impede Vettel… he overtook Vettel and drove away from him, catching up Alonso in quick time.

      Since when has overtaking been against the rules ?

    9. Was Hamilton faster than Vettel?
      – Yes

      Did Hamilton have the “right” to overtake Vettel?
      – Yes, because he was faster and it’s in the rules. We have seen it in Brazil (2008) as Keith pointed out and in Brazil (2011) when Adrian Sutil unlapped himself by overtaking Vettel near the end of the race.

      How did Hamilton impede Vettel?
      – Hamilton got past Vettel towards the end of the long straight. It was clear from the replays that HAM outbraked himself and got onto the racing line. In the process, VET couldn’t get a good exit out of the hairpin as HAM was infront of him. Had HAM not been infront of him, he would have been faster out of the hairpin and his delta to ALO would have remained the same.
      – As a result of HAM’s manoeuvre VET didnt get a good exit and lost time.

      How should have HAM overtaken VET?
      – He should have waited for the next straight and overtaken him much before the following corner.
      This way, on reaching the corner, he would have built up a good enough distance from Vettel and Vettel need not slow down to avoid hitting HAM at the exit of the corner.
      This is one example of how he should have done it watch the overtake at 00:46 . Assuming that Mansell was much faster than Senna(like HAM and VET), he would have had a good distance to him at the corner following the overtake
      @dutch-in-sweden @david-a @keithcollantine @nick101 @marlarkey @xjr15jaaag

  19. Wow. I was not expecting a penalty to be given out at all, moreso for the intangible factors surrounding the incident rather than the letter of the rules. Can’t say it’s not unwarranted as he did leave the circuit. This sends a message to every other driver as well. There’s a zero tolerance approach to this now.

    1. The message is: be afraid, don’t try to overtake. FIA is trying to make races more dull, there’s to much overtaking this year.

      Now, the punishment is to harsh. Don’t fit the crime at all.

      1. No the message is try to overtake LEGALLY!

        1. 2000’s F1 it’s kind of funny.

      2. Well I think it’s right they’re cracking down on it. The FIA had to do something to replace the penalty drivers used to receive when off the circuit was predominantly grass and gravel traps. The circuit ends at the white lines, drivers have to respect that or we end up with Mario Kart. I don’t think it’s the FIA trying to make the races duller!

        I agree that it is a bit harsh to the ‘crime’ committed, however he was given the only penalty provided for by the rules.

      3. spankythewondermonkey (@spankythewondermonkey)
        22nd July 2012, 17:16

        Punishment too harsh? Really? He overtook off the circuit. He knew he overtook off the circuit. He had the opportunity to give the place back. He didn’t. Hence why the stewards got involved. Stewards just swapping the places is not sufficient as the driver had the chance to do that and chose not too. A punishment must me meted out that sends the message to not do it again. Personally, I think he got away lightly as a stop-go or drive through would probably take longer.

      4. No, the message is “The runoff area is not there to help you pass”. Vettel deliberately chose a line that would take him off track to make the pass. He could have gone for the inside line, and simply out-accelerated Button from the hairpin, and given the state of Button’s tires, it wouldn’t have been difficult.

      5. Would VET have done what he did if there had been a gravel trap there instead of a tarmac run off area ? Clearly he wouldn’t have done.

        I think maybe something needs to be done with these run-off areas to discourage their use… maybe to give them a texture that slows the cars… difficult I know given that they can’t put sleeping policemen in them or ‘traps’ that might be a safety hazard in the event of a high-speed crash.

        1. Absolutely – and this isn’t even where the cars would end up in a high-speed crash. There should be more of a deterrent – perhaps more gravel, or a street-circuit-style soft barrier, after the apex of the corner where the cars re-join the track. Turn 1 and the hairpin at Hockenheim are particularly bad, and the chicanes at Valencia and Spa have the same problem – seems to be a Tilke design flaw.

      6. Mr. Marques, don’t make yourself look foolish.

        The decision was made by the stewards, not by the FIA. The rules are clear, the case was clear, there was little else to do but hand out the penalty.

        The rule that says you have to stay inside the track is not in place to make races dull, but because … well, do I really need to explain to you why the rule makes sense?

        Moreover, according to a stubborn core, the FIA has been trying to stop overtaking and make racing duller for the last few years. That same FIA has implemented rule changes and changes in regulations, in order to promote overtaking, but apparently they’re still trying to stop overtaking and make racing dull?

        Over the last 5 or so years, I’ve seen some of the best overtakes I’ve ever seen, (to cut you off rightaway, none of them involved DRS). Those drivers found a way around their opponent _on_ the track. If Vettel can’t find a way to do the same then it’s a pity for him, but on that day, on that track, in that car, and in that corner, he just was not good enough to nail the overtake, and that’s where the story ends, as far as I’m concerned. As F1 incidents go, this was one of the more straightforward ones, no matter who is behind the wheel.

  20. I´m not Vettel´s fan, but I don´t think this penalty was fair. Why wasn´t Hamilton penalized in Bahrain? Pretty much the same manouvre to me.
    It seems to me that the FIA knew that RB was illegal this morning but they couldn´t prove anything, so they got the first chance they had to hit on them.
    I don´t agree with political decisions.

    1. Sky showed a replay in the post-Race.

      Hamilton didn’t actually pass Rosberg until they were back on track.

      1. But he had the oppurtunity to do so, as going off the track gave Hamilton track position over Rosberg.

    2. I seriously think the Hamilton-Rosberg one was different, in that
      1) Hamilton was back on track when he overtook and
      2) he gained no advantage as he was on the grass down a straight.

      Vettel clearly gained an advantage as if he had stayed on track he wouldn’t have had the acceleration to overtake Button.

      IMO, if there had been grass, or artificial grass there, and vettel had got past on it then I would say the overtake was fair. The fact he used asphalt meant it was unfair. Easy solution – remove the asphalt, then drivers won’t use it.

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 4

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.