2008 Belgian GP - Race 13/18

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:23

yes because the fia will remove a super license and a team would let them lol
over reaction much?

as for alonso he got immunity for the cheating he did so i think its fair to say he has not been punished for his comments would you not think? can only think of the hungary incident when he blocked lewis in the pits which seemed fair to me cant recall any other penaltys can you?

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:24

CS||nuTs said:
So the FIA are Judge,jury and executioner? nice setup. Imagine any other business where this would be allowed.

sport you mean?
how about football where decisions made on the spot are often wrong, the fia stewards look at all the data

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:24

MTA99 said:
When did PDLR say it was illegal?

If you read what i said, i said even if PDLR thought it was dodgey, he should have been saying it was legal. I never once said PDLR said it was illegal.

CS||nuTs said:
So the FIA are Judge,jury and executioner? nice setup. Imagine any other business where this would be allowed.

Well who else should decide?? The FIA control the rules do they not? And the rules say you can't appeal a drive through penalty, so where is the problem??

Imagine it in races if you could appeal a drive through penalty?? It could kind of defeat the point of a drive through penalty wouldn't it??

Attu90 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:26

From watching the on-board video its obvious that Lewis is much better on the brakes than Kimmi into the chicane but ends up running out of road so cuts left but does let Kimmi back through BUT then Kimmi fakes right obviously hoping Lewis will go Left and then Kimmi moves Left to cover the move he has hoped Lewis has taken BUT Lewis didn't go left he kept right and Kimmi left the door open for him, we already know the Mclaren was better on brakes so it was then an easy job for Lewis to out brake him and hake the position in to the corner.

The more i see it the more sure i am that Lewis was in the right to do what he did, he didn't pass because of momentum or slip steaming, he passed because Kimmi left the door open by going so far over to the left and no being able to brake as well as Lewis into the corner.

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:28

Attu90 said:
From watching the on-board video its obvious that Lewis is much better on the brakes than Kimmi into the chicane but ends up running out of road so cuts left but does let Kimmi back through BUT then Kimmi fakes right obviously hoping Lewis will go Left and then Kimmi moves Left to cover the move he has hoped Lewis has taken BUT Lewis didn't go left he kept right and Kimmi left the door open for him, we already know the Mclaren was better on brakes so it was then an easy job for Lewis to out brake him and hake the position in to the corner.

The more i see it the more sure i am that Lewis was in the right to do what he did, he didn't pass because of momentum or slip steaming, he passed because Kimmi left the door open by going so far over to the left and no being able to brake as well as Lewis into the corner.

But the debate is, did he really need to cut the corner?
Current F1 drivers think no, old timers think yes.

Sparky · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:29

TheStig1 said:
sport you mean?
how about football where decisions made on the spot are often wrong, the fia stewards look at all the data

Which can then be appealed to the FA and if no joy there FIFA. Is that a good enough example?

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:32

CS||nuTs said:
Which can then be appealed to the FA and if no joy there FIFA. Is that a good enough example?

no offence but when has that ever happened?

Sparky · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:33

Like the Bosman ruling you mean?Ended up in the european court iirc

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:34

CS||nuTs said:
Like the Bosman ruling you mean?Ended up in the european court iirc

Well everyone knows the structure of the F1 rules. Who would you like McLaren to appeal too?

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:35

CS||nuTs said:
Like the Bosman ruling you mean?Ended up in the european court iirc

and thats the same as an offside decision being called wrong or a penalty not given right?
way off track now
even further off track than lewis lol

Sparky · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:35

A independant body maybe? The FIA is far from a Independant appeal court is it.

MTA99 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:36

JUMPURS said:
If you read what i said, i said even if PDLR thought it was dodgey, he should have been saying it was legal. I never once said PDLR said it was illegal.

I did read what you said which is why I questioned where PDLR had said it was illegal.

You want PDLR to say it was legal? Well he did just that!

Pedro said:
Lewis is on the limit of legality

Being on the limit of legality is legal. He's given his opinion ("it was dodgey [sic]) but also stated it was legal. What more do you want the man to say under the pressure of having to commentate on live TV?

Shadez · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:37

JUMPURS said:
Well everyone knows the structure of the F1 rules. Who would you like McLaren to appeal too?

how about Ferrari they run f1 dont they???

Sparky · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:37

TheStig1 said:
and thats the same as an offside decision being called wrong or a penalty not given right?
way off track now
even further off track than lewis lol

Its an example you asked for. Similar to how the ref can miss a blatant foul which can be dealt with after the match. I dont suppose you have ever see this happen either?

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:38

McLaren: FIA told us we were 'okay'

By Jonathan Noble Tuesday, September 9th 2008, 15:09 GMT

McLaren have revealed that they were told twice by FIA race officials during the Belgian Grand Prix that Lewis Hamilton had given back the race lead to Kimi Raikkonen in an 'okay' manner.

With the team confirming on Tuesday that they were pressing ahead with their appeal against Hamilton's 25-second penalty for gaining an unfair advantage, McLaren's F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh claims that the team enquired twice with Race Control whether or not their driver had acted in a legitimate manner.

Hamilton was given the penalty after cutting across the Bus Stop chicane while attempting to pass Kimi Raikkonen for the lead with three laps to go.

Whitmarsh said: "From the pit wall, we then asked Race Control to confirm that they were comfortable that Lewis had allowed Kimi to repass, and they confirmed twice that they believed that the position had been given back in a manner that was 'okay'.

"If Race Control had instead expressed any concern regarding Lewis's actions at that time, we would have instructed Lewis to allow Kimi to repass for a second time."

Hamilton has confirmed that he definitely backed off as he exited the chicane to allow Raikkonen to retake the lead, prior to choosing to make a move at La Source hairpin.

"In the closing stages of the race I was catching Kimi consistently, lap by lap, and with three laps remaining I got close enough to attempt to overtake him on the entry to the last chicane," he said.

"I managed to get slightly ahead of him in the braking area for the first apex of the chicane. He fought back approaching the second apex - but, in doing so, he left no room for me on the inside line. The only way for me to avoid a collision was therefore to cut inside the second apex.

"I came out of the second apex in front of Kimi and so I momentarily lifted-off on the straight, to ensure that Kimi got back in front. The team also came on the radio and instructed me to allow Kimi to repass, which I had already done. As a result, Kimi crossed the start/finish line ahead of me and 6.7 km/h quicker than me.

"After allowing Kimi to completely repass, I crossed from the left side of the track to the right side of the track, passing behind Kimi in the process. I then attacked Kimi on the inside of the first corner, and successfully outbraked him."

TheStig1 · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:39

CS||nuTs said:
Its an example you asked for. Similar to how the ref can miss a blatant foul which can be dealt with after the match. I dont suppose you have ever see this happen either?

ok then lol
and who decides this? oh yes the governing FA such as the FIA? lol

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:39

MTA99 said:
I did read what you said which is why I questioned where PDLR had said it was illegal.

You want PDLR to say it was legal? Well he did just that!

Being on the limit of legality is legal. He's given his opinion ("it was dodgey [sic]) but also stated it was legal. What more do you want the man to say under the pressure of having to commentate on live TV?

And i never said he claimed it was illegal. But PDLR should have been saying it was legal. No debate or that, yes it was legal. It is his team mate after all.

That is if we are following the 'don't bite the hand that feeds' rule.

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:40

CS||nuTs said:
Its an example you asked for. Similar to how the ref can miss a blatant foul which can be dealt with after the match. I dont suppose you have ever see this happen either?

I am confused as to the point you are trying to make?
How is the FIA not independent?

JUMPURS · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:41

Shadez said:
how about Ferrari they run f1 dont they???

That;'s why when Schumacher was winning everything in sight, the FIA done everything they could to change the rules to stop Ferrari running away with things. But people tend to forget about that.

Sparky · 9 Sep 2008 at 16:41

TheStig1 said:
ok then lol
and who decides this? oh yes the governing FA such as the FIA? lol

Finally you are beginning to grasp it. You can appeal to the FA and failing that FIFA.

NOT be told by the FIA that you are not even allowed to lodge an appeal after being told during the race that you have done everything that the rules state.