Italian Grand Prix 2010, Monza Circuit - Race 14/19

[Cavallino]

MSc overtook Alonso, fair and square, on the last lap, only for the Stewards/FIA to overule the overtake and give Alonso back the place and the extra point.

But again the car could have been Alonso or any other car. Fact is that this issue highlighted yet another grey area in the rules that the FIA set governing the safetycar on the last lap of a race and the meaning of the green flag on the last lap which has been under a safety car.

MSc has been in hot water this year with other drivers as well, so I think the fact that the result of the investigation helped Alonso, was a bonus.

 

[drunkenmaster]

"Sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind."

I cant remember all the events but the two or three that stick out.

Hamilton four weave manuever on a Renault (cant remember which one) - "being warned". You are either penalised or you are not.

Button - race restart schenaingans in China or Malaysia (cant remember which one). Backing the pack up and causing a collision between cars at the back.

Hamilton (again I think Malaysia) - doubling into the pits and effectively going in the opposite direct of the track.

Hamilton (again Malaysia I think!) - squeezing vettel in the pits.

Hamilton - (cant remember which race) - the safety car incident, backing up Alonso and then taking off... stewards taking 20 laps to decide whther to penalise, making any penalty moot.

Now whether you agree or not with any of these is another topic, but they are questionable incidents.

So easy to forget the incidents of the team you support. Which is why I asked about the Alonso incident above at Monaco

Rubbish, weaving is COMPLETELY ALLOWED, you can't make more than one manouvre to defend a car going past, the car behind was trying to slipstream him, not attempting to pass, he was just not letting the car behind get in his slipstream. Is it okay to weave if the car behind is 100metre's back, of course, as it is 10 metre's back, its ONLY when the car is attempting to pass you can't, and Petrov(IIRC) never was, it was basically the end of a passing manouvre by Hamilton, NOT a passing manouvre by Petrov.

Pits, he went in the pits, end of, Vettel? IIRC Vettel and Hamilton were released a the same time, absolutely nothing can be done about that, Vettel most certainly attempted to push Hamilton into the pit crew/stopping area, it was unlucky and bad timing but car alongside car will happen now and then, Vettel and Hamilton could have gone along fairly safely, Vettel didn't stay safe he essentially swerved at Hamilton and tried to push him to the right, which could have caused a major crash.

Hamilton didn't back up Alonso AT ALL, he was MILES ahead of Alonso and slowed down because he just wasn't sure if he was allowed to go, the ONLY thing Hamilton did wrong was not putting his foot down earlier, if he had of done he'd have been clear of the safety car completely legally, it was Hamilton being overly safe that cost him, it was him slowing down that allowed Alonso, going full speed, to catch up. He did not slow down, have Alonso behind him the whole straight and punch it right at the end, if Hamilton was 10 seconds further down the track Alonso would still have been caught behind the safety car.

Wasn't a restart thing backing people up, Vettel recently? I don't remember Button doing it, or could be two incidents, I have a bad memory in general I'm not coping out, if he did it, he did it.

 

[Cavallino]

Rubbish, weaving is COMPLETELY ALLOWED, you can't make more than one manouvre to defend a car going past, the car behind was trying to slipstream him, not attempting to pass, he was just not letting the car behind get in his slipstream. Is it okay to weave if the car behind is 100metre's back, of course, as it is 10 metre's back, its ONLY when the car is attempting to pass you can't, and Petrov(IIRC) never was, it was basically the end of a passing manouvre by Hamilton, NOT a passing manouvre by Petrov.

Pits, he went in the pits, end of, Vettel? IIRC Vettel and Hamilton were released a the same time, absolutely nothing can be done about that, Vettel most certainly attempted to push Hamilton into the pit crew/stopping area, it was unlucky and bad timing but car alongside car will happen now and then, Vettel and Hamilton could have gone along fairly safely, Vettel didn't stay safe he essentially swerved at Hamilton and tried to push him to the right, which could have caused a major crash.

Hamilton didn't back up Alonso AT ALL, he was MILES ahead of Alonso and slowed down because he just wasn't sure if he was allowed to go, the ONLY thing Hamilton did wrong was not putting his foot down earlier, if he had of done he'd have been clear of the safety car completely legally, it was Hamilton being overly safe that cost him, it was him slowing down that allowed Alonso, going full speed, to catch up. He did not slow down, have Alonso behind him the whole straight and punch it right at the end, if Hamilton was 10 seconds further down the track Alonso would still have been caught behind the safety car.

Wasn't a restart thing backing people up, Vettel recently? I don't remember Button doing it, or could be two incidents, I have a bad memory in general I'm not coping out, if he did it, he did it.

Dood. Im not going to argue whether they incindents were legal or illegal or whatever because frankly you and I will be wasting our time trying to convince each other that the other is wrong and they are right. However The fact that they were brought up by commentators and fans (as well as stewards) made them points of controversy. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. Lets agree on that.

The point I AM making however is that Ferrari are not the only ones who have had contrerversial decisions made against them (be it in their favour (team orders) or against them (Alonso/Kubica chicance cut for example)).

 

[Deleted member 651465]

I have to be honest I find Monza a pretty dull circuit. This year was no exception.

Once Hamilton was out then Ferrari effectively knew they could pass Button in the pits, so just kept Alonso on his tail while Massa was there as backup should a Red Bull find themselves further up the field.

Highlight of the day was the Webber / Hulkenburg shenanigans but otherwise it was 40 laps of Alonso pressuring Button without any real attempt at a pass

Not sure if it's been mentioned.. but what exactly did Button moan at? Sounded like he said "Why did we pit now?".. similar to Hamilton's outbursts?

 

[NathanE]

"Sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind."

Where was I being sarcastic?

Hamilton four weave manuever on a Renault (cant remember which one) - "being warned". You are either penalised or you are not.

He was just returning the favour after Petrov did the same to him.

Button - race restart schenaingans in China or Malaysia (cant remember which one). Backing the pack up and causing a collision between cars at the back.

No worse than what Vettel gets away with every time there is a SC and he's at the front. Hell in Silverstone he tried to back up the pack without even being in front - though for that he did get a penalty

Hamilton (again I think Malaysia) - doubling into the pits and effectively going in the opposite direct of the track.

If he went the wrong way that would have been insta-penalty. I don't remember any such incident though.

Hamilton (again Malaysia I think!) - squeezing vettel in the pits.

Other way around. Vettel squeezing Hamilton into tyres guns/mechanics. It was Vettel that was close to being penalised.

Hamilton - (cant remember which race) - the safety car incident, backing up Alonso and then taking off... stewards taking 20 laps to decide whther to penalise, making any penalty moot.

He got a penalty. The precise one it states should be handed out in the rules.

Now whether you agree or not with any of these is another topic, but they are questionable incidents.

The FIA has been remarkably well behaved this year, except for the whole team orders thing where they seem to be ignoring the validity of their own rule.

So easy to forget the incidents of the team you support. Which is why I asked about the Alonso incident above at Monaco

I've not forgotton them. The problem is that you're using them to form a lopsided opinion on something. Which is always a daft thing to do. All teams this year have had a fairly softly softly touch compared to recent years.

 

[Dutch Guy]

Not sure if it's been mentioned.. but what exactly did Button moan at? Sounded like he said "Why did we pit now?".. similar to Hamilton's outbursts?

The only chance Button had at a victory was if he would make a pitstop at the same time as Alonso, if he pitted first he knew Alonso would do a few laps he would be faster and would be 1st after his pitstop, which is just what happened.

So I guess Button wanted to wait longer, which was possible as Vettel ran to the end on the soft tyres.

 

[Duke]

Ferrari had a quicker pitstop by almost a second, which is why he lost the lead, so Mclaren need to work on that.

 

[Dup]

Button was never going to win but he did very well to stay where he was after the first chicaine. Ferrari and Alonso had the measure of him early on and it was just a matter of making McLaren pit first and give Alonso clear air. It's easy to blame the pit stops or the

I admire his thinking mans approach to racing taking an educated gamble with his setup, going against the grain of the field. No matter what he does championship wise this year, he's going to be seen as a valuable asset to other teams in the future. I do fear he'll end up like another Hill through and find himself back in a dog of a team.

Hamilton disappoints again... he joked about crashing out last year before this race then goes and does simething even sillier. It just feels like we're missing out on some great talent and exciting racing over silly incedents. That said, he has nothing on Vettel!

 

[Cavallino]

Where was I being sarcastic?

Your previous post seemed to suggest that. If not, then I retract my comment as I may have misunderstood you.

He was just returning the favour after Petrov did the same to him.

What, petrov weaving four times?
And anyway Im not arguing whether it was illegal or not, it was questionable though since the stewards brought him up on it with a warning (which incidentally does not exist in the rules of the FIA which you suggest the FIA is so diligently following below).

No worse than what Vettel gets away with every time there is a SC and he's at the front. Hell in Silverstone he tried to back up the pack without even being in front - though for that he did get a penalty

Again you're missing the point. Im not arguing whether it was right or wrong, or whatever! Im saying it was an incident which was brought up by people including the commentators such as Brundle who believed at that Button should have gotten a penalty for it. Whatever you believe or I believe is moot. Im saying that the incident brought about a situation where the FIA did not take any action towards a driver who contravened the rules. And if Vettel was penalised for it, then surely thats even moreso reason to enforce this rule? You are right to point out though that it was not always enforced but again this points to my direct argument about the lack of FIA consistency and stewarding.

If he went the wrong way that would have been insta-penalty. I don't remember any such incident though.

Watch the replays, he went left to go on the main straight but then in the last minute darted right towards the pits i.e. in the opposite direction of the main pit straight. Was picked up by Brundle...

Other way around. Vettel squeezing Hamilton into tyres guns/mechanics. It was Vettel that was close to being penalised.

Yes sorry the event I was refering to was when Hamilton overtook Vettel into the pits I think? (and yes Alonso should be penalised for this also when he did it to Massa). Had ALonso only commited this infringement during the race, the Mclaren camp would be crying blood murder. Again FIA fail.

He got a penalty. The precise one it states should be handed out in the rules.

Absolutely, but again, 20 laps later, where he built up a healthy lead (which incidentally, the FIA were aware of since the team gave Hamilton the hurry up for being under investigation). The penalty did not fit the crime, again poor stewarding. It took the best part of a minute to look at the replay and see that Hamilton crossed the second SC line. It took them the better part of 20 to make a decision.

The FIA has been remarkably well behaved this year, except for the whole team orders thing where they seem to be ignoring the validity of their own rule.

I would say this is a very "lopsided" argument. There have been plenty of team orders over the past 8 years, least of which was 2007 with Mclaren in Monaco where Ron Dennis admited to enforcing a team order to instruct his drivers to hold station, despite Hamilton wanting to race. And the team went away with not even a "warning".

Regardless of whether it was more obvious or whatever, the fact that both incidents were recognised by the press, teams and fans as a team order, but furthermore, the FIA ironically did their job correctly by not enforcing a penalty since all the previous incidents (which there are at least a dozen I can list if i go on a Google bender), went unpunished. So you may ask whats the point of the rule? Good question, one that should be asked to the FIA since they have not been enforcing the rules correctly since its inception. Again FIA fail.

And also if you watched the F1 forum, Brundle was quick to correct EJ (who is going on about the fans-being-fooled bandwagon) about this whole issue that Ferrari could easily list a lot of instances when the FIA did not punish other teams where team orders were used. And brundle even smartly suggested that he believes its worse that its worse if teams do team orders more covertly and sneakily.

I've not forgotton them. The problem is that you're using them to form a lopsided opinion on something. Which is always a daft thing to do. All teams this year have had a fairly softly softly touch compared to recent years.

Well most of these arguments are points that have been raised by the BBC F1 crew including Brundle. So if theyre lopsided, then they must be talking tosh as well

 

[JUMPURS]

I would assume he's referring to the demonstration of how two team mates can race together and salted-wound-rubbing they did to RBR in Hunguary. I.e. just a conspiracy that some quarters of the less-than devout McLaren fanclub have.

Like the Hamilton 'What the hell! why is Jenson attacking me' in Turkey? Is that what you mean?

 

[Cavallino]

Like the Hamilton 'What the hell! why is Jenson attacking me' in Turkey? Is that what you mean?

Ah yes I forgot about that one! Again wasnt Hamilton told that Button would not overtake him which the response was "no", which means that the team must have issued such an order to Button surely?

 

[Baboonanza]

I'm puzzled why McLaren pitted Button too. It seems to me there was nothing to gain and everything to lose. Alonso would have had slightly better tire wear from following but Jenson's extra downforce should have helped limit his wear, and I find it unlikely that the difference would have been big enough to allow an easy pass.

Surely they could have just left him out forever, as Vettel did. So if they knew Alonso would pass them why did they pit? It makes no sense.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

Question: Would Button have been allowed to pit in the last lap, and cross the start/finish in the pits?

 

[NathanE]

There have been plenty of team orders over the past 8 years, least of which was 2007 with Mclaren in Monaco where Ron Dennis admited to enforcing a team order to instruct his drivers to hold station, despite Hamilton wanting to race. And the team went away with not even a "warning".

It's getting blurred and everyone, not just you, is forgetting what the rule actually forbids. That is: "team orders that affect the race result".

Team orders are fine. Teams can tell a driver to not fight their team mate in front just fine today. It's when those team orders affect the race result like what happened in Austria '02 and Germany '10 (just the two most recent famous examples). Conspiracy theorists like to accuse McLaren of using fuel saving commands to manipulate their drivers into holding station. That may be totally true. But as we all saw in Hunguary - two drivers, in the same car, on the same fuel saving settings, are still going to be fighting because the only differences between their pace will be their driving and/or mistakes.

Coming back to Austria/Germany incidents... The only McLaren example that comes remotely close was from 2008 when Heikki yielded to let Hamilton pass after the team botched his pit stop strategy. Except that never bothered anyone because Heikki wasn't giving up a podium position for his team mate's benefit. It can also be argued that Heikki isn't a total idiot and knew that it would be a good idea to let his team mate through considering he was fighting for a WDC whereas he himself was not.

 

[Flibster]

Question: Would Button have been allowed to pit in the last lap, and cross the start/finish in the pits?

Why not. One driver has been able to take his stop and go penalty after the race had finished.

 

[Dutch Guy]

Question: Would Button have been allowed to pit in the last lap, and cross the start/finish in the pits?

Schumi did this once in a race, but I can't remember if that was allowed or not

 

[Cavallino]

It's getting blurred and everyone, not just you, is forgetting what the rule actually forbids. That is: "team orders that affect the race result". Team orders are fine. Teams can tell a driver to not fight their team mate in front just fine today.

Disagree. Whether a team asks a driver to overtake another, or asks both drivers to hold fort, is a team order and more importantly, manipulating the result of the race since the team has dictated terms which will affect the finishing order of the grand prix. It is articifical and ergo constitutes a team order.

I.e. By asking drivers to hold station, you are asking the driver behind to NOT overtake the guy infront and ultimately you are limiting competition by not allowing your drivers to race.

The FIA investigated the Mclaren incident as a team order by the way.

And also, had you been taken a punt on the driver whos been asked to hold fort behind his team mate, knowing he could potentially overtake him, would you be happy? Its just the same as say betting on a driver whos just been asked to drop back for his team mate.

And the Hamilton/Kovi incident is so grey, for that very reason it is probably better to do away with team orders altogether since that incident too could be interpreted as a team order albeit with much more difficulty. Especially in situations where in the past drivers have been asked to hold fort after the second pitstop, which was interpreted as fine, but why? You are asking drivers not to race and limiting competition. The rule itself is inherently flawed and needs radical revision.

Its like Massa/Kimi in 2007, Massa let Kimi through for the championship but no one said anything about it... that was a team order.

Hell even in 2008! Kimi let Massa through in China I think. Again for the championship!

If the FIA had punished Ferrari for the overtake, it would have set a different precedent to what it has been doing over the past 8 years. So ironically, the FIA actually made a correct decision not to penalise Ferrari since had it done so, then the various instances in the past should have also been liable to such penalties.

Let me be clear that I am not saying what Ferrari did is right or wrong. What Im saying is (as I said previously) is that the FIA has rules which are not being enforced correctly! And when they are being enforced, they are being done so in a fashion that is incorrect.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

Why not. One driver has been able to take his stop and go penalty after the race had finished.

Then surely McLaren should have done this if they knew Ferrari were essentially waiting for Button to pit.

 

[Dave M]

I'm puzzled why McLaren pitted Button too. It seems to me there was nothing to gain and everything to lose. Alonso would have had slightly better tire wear from following but Jenson's extra downforce should have helped limit his wear, and I find it unlikely that the difference would have been big enough to allow an easy pass.

Surely they could have just left him out forever, as Vettel did. So if they knew Alonso would pass them why did they pit? It makes no sense.

They saw Kubica go faster on the primes after his stop. It didn't work like that on Jenson's Mclaren though, could be all sorts of reasons.

It isn't the first time Mclaren have got caught on the stops and it won't be the last. I expect if button hadn't been concentrating so hard to keep Alonso behind him all race he would have questioned it more - but as you saw from the 'radio check' Button wasn't in a chatty mood with the spaniard 1s from his gearbox

 

[Duke]

Question: Would Button have been allowed to pit in the last lap, and cross the start/finish in the pits?

No - they have to complete at least one race lap on each tyre.