Kimi Raikkonen, Lotus, Yas Marina, 2013

Lotus blame broken part for Raikkonen’s exclusion

2013 Abu Dhabi Grand PrixPosted on Author Keith Collantine

Kimi Raikkonen, Lotus, Yas Marina, 2013Lotus say a broken part was to blame for Kimi Raikkonen’s car failing a post-qualifying inspection which caused him to be sent to the back of the grid.

The team said a part intended to prevent the floor from moving failed when he went off the track at turn three during qualifying.

Lotus team principal Eric Boullier accepted the ruling from the stewards, who excluded Raikkonen from qualifying.

??The team respects the stewards’ decision and will do everything in its power to ensure Kimi and the team gets the best result possible after starting from the back of the grid in the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix,” said Boullier.

“No advantage was sought or gained in the incident and the relevant part has been replaced,” he added.

One of Lotus’s car’s failed the same test after qualifying for the Hungarian Grand Prix in July. On that occasion the driver Romain Grosjean, was not given a penalty as the stewards accepted Lotus’s explanation the damage had been caused accidentally.

The setback comes on a tense weekend for the team after Raikkonen refused to turn up at the track for media engagements on Thursday. He later revealed he has not been paid by Lotus all year and has warned he may miss the final two races of the season if Lotus don’t meet their obligations to him.

Raikkonen will start Sunday’s race from the back of the field: “We?ve seen what Kimi can do to work through the field when he needs to and we are going all out for the strongest result possible,” Boullier said.

2013 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Lotus/LAT

21 comments on “Lotus blame broken part for Raikkonen’s exclusion”

  1. There should be some kind of exception/softer penalty when the rule is broken due to a mechanical failure.

    1. Stupid comment of my part, of course there is, if the stewards see it that way. I wonder why they didn’t see it today.

      1. @silence Apparently because Lotus used the same excuse when Grosjean’s car failed the same test in Hungary.

        Makes sense really. “Fool me once,” etc.

      2. I wonder why they didn’t see it today.

        B/c no doubt they’ve been incentivized to rule against the Iceman to send him a very clear but ambiguous and not-overly-transparent message from Genii that if he publicly embarresses his paymasters again, the next thing on his car to fail might be the brake lines!

        1. @joepa

          That made zero sense.

          Unless you’re joking.

        2. Should Kimi be affraid to drive today? Just wondering.

  2. Inconsistency in rulings from the stewards is frustrating, but the regulations are what they are. It could just as easily be said that Grosjean was lucky with the ruling in Hungary as that Kimi was unlucky with his. Though the stewards were within their rights in both cases, it just shows when the decision is in their hands you are at their mercy.

    Lotus will prep the car as best they can for this challenge and I know Kimi will do his very best to get to the front. Should be interesting.

    1. I assume the different decision is due to the first ruling being effectively a warning to fix the part which failed. For that same part to fail again suggests that lotus did not learn their lesson. Surely they should have modified the design.

      1. That makes sense and would go a long way to explain the different decisions.

    2. @bullmello probably the part failure on GRO’s car was obvious. While on Kimi’s it was completely the team’s faulty design

  3. On that occasion the driver Romain Grosjean, was not given a penalty as the stewards accepted Lotus’s explanation the damage had been caused accidentally.

    So it was deliberate this time was it Lotus, or is it poor ruling??

    Or was it different damage?

  4. I wonder whether they have a part that breaks deliberately!

  5. @keith collantine What would you think of the possibility of anticipating all this tests BEFORE the cars actually get to the track? It would make even more sense, since they’re intended for safety reasons: if the car doesn’t pass the test it isn’t allowed to the track until it does. I wonder why this has never been thought about or applied. Same thing would apply before the race of course.

    1. @alfa145 There is scrutineering that takes place before the event (usually on the Thursday, though it is Wednesday in Monaco due to the traditional Friday rest day). Cars are not allowed to take part in the event if they fail these initial checks. However, there is the obvious workaround that a team could modify their car between Thursday scrutineering and the race, so additional checks are performed throughout the weekend, and it is one of these that Raikkonen failed.

  6. Somewhere Alan Permane is smiling to himself.

    1. I’m not suggesting anything intentional, but he seems to have a personal problem with Kimi.

      1. @n0b0dy100 Yeah, a single angry comment on a single race totally shows a personal problem. I can’t just be a human mistake on the heat of the moment, it has to be a personal problem.

        Everything has to be that dramatical, right?

        1. @silence F1 is half a sport half a soap opera, you should know that by now ;)

          1. @mantresx It only became a soap opera once the fans were given a voice thanks to the spread of the internet.

            Damn fans ruining everything.

    2. @n0b0dy100 Yeah, because losing points therefore increasing the problems and risks of his team totally makes him happy.

      Seriously, people need to think about carefully about the current situation of Lotus and realize how much they need Raikkonen to perform as good as possible.

      1. I know they need him, but it’s not just his comments in India. If you read Permane’s comments to the media from earlier races they reveal a preference for Grosjean and there were rumors of a shouting match at Lotus after the Indian race.

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.