Raikkonen handed grid penalty for impeding Rosberg

2013 Malaysian Grand Prix

Kimi Raikkonen, Lotus, Sepang, 2013Kimi Raikkonen has been given a three-place penalty for the Malaysian Grand Prix.

The stewards found the Lotus driver impeded Nico Rosberg at the end of Q3.

Raikkonen’s penalty relegates him to tenth on the grid promoting Jenson Button, Adrian Sutil and Sergio Perez.

“It?s obviously disappointing to lose three places on the grid, but we?ll have to see what happens in the race,” said Raikkonen.

2013 Malaysian Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Malaysian Grand Prix articles

Advert | Go Ad-free

74 comments on Raikkonen handed grid penalty for impeding Rosberg

  1. Karthikeyan (@ridiculous) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:20

    Nooooo…. On a bright note Seb getting podium is still possible

    • Nomore (@nomore) said on 23rd March 2013, 12:06

      don’t forget the Mercedes

    • @ridiculous Only 3 places… I think the best penalty should have been to send him at the back of the grid like they did with Hammy in Barcelona 2012…

      • Red Andy (@red-andy) said on 23rd March 2013, 14:32

        Hamilton was sent to the back of the grid because his car failed scrutineering, as he couldn’t produce a valid fuel sample. That’s a violation of the technical regulations and is punished with exclusion.

        Raikkonen impeded another driver during qualifying, which is a breach of the sporting regulations and has almost always been punished with a grid penalty. Raikkonen’s punishment is entirely fair and proportionate, and has zero relevance to what happened to Hamilton in Spain.

        • @red-andy I get your point, but I was so happy to see hammy at the back of the grid from pole…
          On to the current topic, since there is no specific mention on how may grid places the penalty attracts (like 5 in case of a change of gearbox) I suggested the maximum in my post above..

          However the logical thing to do would have been not to impose a grid penalty as Kimi was already behind Rosberg in the grid positions… Hence he should only have been reprimanded as his penalty does no advantage to Rosberg

          • JCost (@jcost) said on 23rd March 2013, 14:57

            @jjjj apparently his action prevented Rosberg from getting a better position for himself. That’s punishable.

          • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 23rd March 2013, 15:42

            @jjjj So in one comment you suggest he should have been sent to the back of the grid, and now you’re saying no penalty should be applied. Right.
            Also a penalty is just that…a penalisation of a driver for an infringement. Restorative justice dosen’t come into it here so whether Rosberg benefits from the penalty or not is a moot point. The object is to punish Raikkonen for impeding Rosberg and to deter him and other drivers from doing such actions in the future.

      • @jjjj – Sending to the back of the grid wasn’t even a considered option, so why even make mention of that? Besides, as has been said before he violated the sporting regulations, not Lotus the technical regulations so 3 places is fair I assume for the offence.

        • So all of you, why did they give him 3 grid places penalty? What is the logic… Oh just to see him on that round figure of 10!

          • Colossal Squid (@colossal-squid) said on 23rd March 2013, 20:03

            @jjjj Keith’s comments a little further down the page explain why he was penalised, and why that penalty was likely 3 places instead of 5. There is no conspiracy here. Raikkonen held Rosberg up. Raikkonen got a penalty. The end.

    • @ridiculous Lol, I think I actually saw the transgression, a manipulative decision?

  2. Klaas (@klaas) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:21

    I think this is the first ‘disciplinary’ penalty that Raikkonen got during his entire F1 career.

  3. Rigi (@rigi) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:28

    i’ll believe it when i see how it happend

  4. nidzovski (@nidzovski) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:29

    Could something like this makes him angry?!?! :)

  5. Lotus has been down to earth this weekend. Yeah, hope they can scratching some big points tomorrow. (and yes, my prediction championship entry has been ruined hahaha)

  6. i don’t think kimi did it on purpose, he basically doesn’t care about other, so why should he try to disturb rosberg. perhaps he didn’t see rosberg, the rain is pretty heavy then. it’s the first time i heard kimi get a penalty for non machine issue

    • Red Andy (@red-andy) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:38

      Blocking penalties don’t take intent into account. If you impede another driver, you get a penalty regardless of whether it is deemed to be intentional or not.

      I don’t agree with this – in my opinion the onus should be on the driver behind to find enough space for a clear lap – but it is the way things have been for several years now.

      • TMF (@tmf42) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:42

        haven’t seen the footage yet but 3 positions seems a bit harsh considering that Vettel got away with a reprimand last year.

        • vuelve kowalsky said on 23rd March 2013, 11:58

          agree. typical f1 double standars.

          • panache (@panache) said on 24th March 2013, 5:24

            Speaking of double standards, why do other top drivers get lambasted for qualifying a couple of grid rows behind the capacity of their cars but when Raikkonen fails to deliver in qualifying it goes completely under the radar and nobody even mentions it?

            Raikkonen doesn’t care = nobody else does either?

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 23rd March 2013, 12:14

          @tmf42 Three place penalties are hardly out of the ordinary. Maldonado had one last year.

          It depends on the circumstances and having not seen it my inclination is to wait until the facts are in before calling it ‘harsh’ or ‘double standards’.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 23rd March 2013, 14:19

            Just seen Rosberg’s onboard of the incident. He was behind Raikkonen and Sutil, both of which had changed tyres in Q3. Given the timing of the incident (16:57) it must have been their out-laps. Sutil moved aside and let both drivers past in turn 13 but Raikkonen didn’t let Rosberg past, holding him up in turn 14.

            I think it’s clear Raikkonen held him up, but I suspect it wasn’t intentional and the distraction of Sutil is a mitigating factor. We often see five-place penalties for impeding but I think three places is fair for this.

          • vuelve kowalsky said on 23rd March 2013, 16:25

            why not a reprimand like vettel’s last year? As i said, there is no consistency on the penalties. Last year they wanted to keep the championship alive until the last race in an artifitial way, am sure they did.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 23rd March 2013, 20:48

            Because Vettel’s transgression was considered not sufficiently severe to merit a penalty. As I recall he did go off line and let Alonso through, but he could have done a better job of it.

          • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 23rd March 2013, 22:41

            @keithcollantine

            I suspect it wasn’t intentional and the distraction of Sutil is a mitigating factor.

            I can’t recall the last time a driver deliberately blocked another. And even if it was a widespread practice, Raikkonen had absolutely nothing to gain from blocking Rosberg, so there is no reason for him to have done it intentionally.

          • Candice said on 24th March 2013, 0:09

            Team said kimi suffer hydraulic issues and got stucked to same gear.

        • Jake (@jleigh) said on 23rd March 2013, 12:18

          It’s much easier to demote someone from 7th to 10th in the second race of the season than it is to move Mr E’s favourite off 1st just as he’s making his title push…

        • Shena (@shena) said on 23rd March 2013, 18:38

          Seb was trying to allow Alonso to pass but it wasn’t enough. Around the part of circuit there was nowhere to go, unless he could evaporate. Also in that case, yellow flags were involved to make things even more complicated.

      • Mads (@mads) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:46

        @red-andy

        in my opinion the onus should be on the driver behind to find enough space for a clear lap

        They have to do that as it is. If two drivers are on timed laps then none will be penalized for blocking.
        But it would be nearly impossible to get a clean lap in if drivers on in/out or cooldown laps were allowed to get in the way. First of all as that would mean many more cars to not catch by the end of the lap. Secondly because they are going a LOT slower then those on timed laps, and third because the team and driver will not know when another driver decides to leave the pits or even abort a timed lap due to a mistake.

      • Carl Craven said on 23rd March 2013, 11:48

        that’s impossible, a driver cannot see further down the track to see who might be in the way. Someone on a slow down lap should be aware of traffic coming from behind just like backmarkers getting blue flagged.

        • We also have to remember that getting in the way of a driver on a flying lap can be dangerous as much as anything else: Gilles Villeneuve died when he hit a slower driver in qualifying. So absolutely drivers should be penalised for getting in the way of drivers on a flying lap for many reasons; 3 places seems fair from reading Keith’s assessment.

    • Mark (@marlarkey) said on 23rd March 2013, 12:53

      What about the block by Perez ?

    • Kimi : “I know what I am doing…. Don’t have to remind me all the time…”

      • vuelve kowalsky said on 23rd March 2013, 16:28

        you can be sure that some of the guys are not happy with those comments and give him the penalty in a way to keep in line. But the fans are not happy.

  7. Traverse (@) said on 23rd March 2013, 11:55

    Quick! Somebody pass Kimi an Ice Lolly to cheer him up! Pronto!

  8. I think Lotus will try and squeeze in a 2 stopper now..

    Start on New Hards: Lap 17-18 pit Stop
    2nd Stint New Hards: Lap 38 Pit Stop
    3rd Stint New Medium: Run 18 Laps

  9. Shreyas Mohanty (@) said on 23rd March 2013, 12:03

    No, I had added him in my Fantasy League team after seeing that the Lotus car is really fast!Da*n !

  10. 2nd Consecutive Start for Kimi from P10 in Malyasia (also 2nd Consecutive Grid Penalty in Sepang- Gear Box Last Year)

    and He finished 5th with a comparitively Worse Car.. So, a Lot of Positive for them

  11. F1 Novice said on 23rd March 2013, 13:20

    Anyone else notice Vettel on the weighing scales with his drinks bottle ?

    • They do have drinks bottles in the car, so I think that is allowed but interesting observation.

    • Mark (@marlarkey) said on 23rd March 2013, 14:10

      Watched it back on slow-mo…. everything he was carrying at the weigh was in the car with him, he didn’t pick anything up if that’s what you were meaning.

      Re the drinks ‘bottle’… it looks as if they’re now using a sort of pouch that is built into the HANS device for water storage hence it is integral to the HANS/Helmet equipment and hence why he carried it to the weighing room.

    • @F1 Novice That is the illegal ballast that Red Bull uses..

      • vuelve kowalsky said on 23rd March 2013, 16:31

        agree. now i understand why the 3 straight titles. It took senna a lifetime,and this guy didn’t brake a sweat.

        • James_mc (@james_mc) said on 23rd March 2013, 17:25

          Well you say that, but Senna accrued his titles over 4 years as opposed to Vettel doing it over 3..

        • That could be as much of a sign of the modern drivers fitness levels as anything else! :P If I take the true meaning of your comment though, I’ll have you remember that although he had an incredibly strong teammate he did also have an incredibly dominant car in the McLaren. That doesn’t make him a bad driver though, which also applies to Vettel.

          • Joe Papp (@joepa) said on 23rd March 2013, 18:15

            I’m waiting for WADA to finally hold FIA accountable and start subjecting the F1 drivers to the same out-of-competition doping controls and in-competition controls that we’ve been subjected to for years and years w/o respite.

          • JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1) said on 23rd March 2013, 22:33

            @joepa

            WADA do test the drivers out of competition (see the tweets at http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/03/06/f1-fanatic-roundup-0603/ )

            And what is the relevance here, is it because there is a suggestion that a modern F1 driver might actually be good? I hate a lot of the cynicism, why can’t people assume that the winning team/driver just did a good job and maybe they aren’t actually cheating?

          • Joe Papp (@joepa) said on 23rd March 2013, 22:50

            @jerseyf1 drug testing in F1 is a joke compared to drug testing in pro cycling, both for frequency and relentlessness, and the implication is that there is doping in the sport that’s been facilitated by Fuentes, which has gone uninvestigated thanks to judicial corruption in Spain. Sheesh.

          • JerseyF1 (@jerseyf1) said on 24th March 2013, 21:12

            @joepap It seems that there is one “non-athlete” on Fuentes’ list and that the Spanish government/judicial system wants this covered up. I took it to be likely that the worry (or knowledge) is that the non-athlete in question is a certain Spanish tennis player rather than an F1 driver. I don’t know if a tennis player counts as a non-athlete?

            To be honest, I’d be absolutely blown away if the frequency and relentlessness of drug testing in pro cycling was not much greater than F1 given that it’s unlikely a major cycling tour has ever been won by a rider not on performance enhancing drugs. I don’t find it very hard to believe that plenty of F1 races are won without drugs. I think professional sports such as football, athletics and tennis (and obviously cycling) should be the focus of WADA attention, and that F1 should continue to pursue a reasonable anti-doping policy consistent with the risk level.

  12. Coronis (@coronis) said on 23rd March 2013, 13:25

    Something happens, he barely reacts, love this guy.

  13. Liam Stroud (@comabvbsixx) said on 23rd March 2013, 13:55

    Still think he can win. If he gets a good start he could easily be in the top 5 before turn 4.

    • William (@william) said on 23rd March 2013, 15:24

      Yeh but it depends on what time it rains but its increasing likely that we will have a SC period. Channel 10 boys are saying it will rain prior to the grand prix
      He is planning on moving back to WRC once his contract runs out with Lotus F1

  14. You know what’s Raikkonen thinking?

    Nothing

    • bimo said on 23rd March 2013, 20:48

      I didn’t hear Rosberg complains nor Kimi deliberately blocks someone else..it was just seconds. Alonso has an eye on Raikkonen, and the stewards decide penalty..simple.

      • Coniferocious said on 24th March 2013, 18:24

        And Alonso then ends his race miserably in the sand trap. If I didn’t know better, I’d say there is a God, after all.

        “You reap what you sow” — and in an eastern country, closely and fittingly enough, that seems to be: “bad karma” for ill-gotten gains?…

        Only the (FIA-) ‘gods’ know, I suppose.

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.