Russian Grand Prix.......Spoiler alerts!!

[wraymond]

That's the thing about rules. In so many other things where non-professionals are in judgemental positions, it's liable to interpretation.

[COLVERT]

Originally Posted by clf

Now that is being silly. Are you telling me if you stop at a set of traffic lights you are not a driver?

So what you are saying is Haas were also treated unfairly?

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

You are not DRIVING the car if you simply sit in it and it's not moving. ( It's fair to say you are a driver however. )

The wording in that rule is not specific enough. There are loopholes in it.

Don't tell me that if somebodies young daughter sat in the driving seat of her fathers car she would be classed as driving it. That's a nonsense.

PS. Who's Haas ??? Never mentioned anything like that. You seem to be trying to put words in my mouth. Why would you want to do that ???

You don't have to answer as I'm just curious, that's all.---


All the above is just my personal opinion so if it's not what YOU think then please just ignore it. Makes no odds to me.----


As the saying goes------There's more than one way to skin a cat.

[clf]

Originally Posted by COLVERT

You are not DRIVING the car if you simply sit in it and it's not moving. ( It's fair to say you are a driver however. )

The wording in that rule is not specific enough. There are loopholes in it.

Don't tell me that if somebodies young daughter sat in the driving seat of her fathers car she would be classed as driving it. That's a nonsense.

PS. Who's Haas ??? Never mentioned anything like that. You seem to be trying to put words in my mouth. Why would you want to do that ???

You don't have to answer as I'm just curious, that's all.---


All the above is just my personal opinion so if it's not what YOU think then please just ignore it. Makes no odds to me.----


As the saying goes------There's more than one way to skin a cat.

Haas were penalised under the same rule in Hungary, although the drivers, didnt make the call, equally though, they should have been aware of such a basic simple rule that was infringed upon, and questioned it. The team therefore influenced the drivers.

Quite simply, Hamilton was trying to achieve an advantage, his radio message makes that perfectly obvious. (his words if I recall were 'there is a lot of rubber there, can I do it further down?')

He was aware of a possible infringement of the rules (which is why I believe he was initially punished with the 10 penalty points), sought clarification from his engineer. He was given duff information, to which the team were eventually 'given the 10 penalty points' in the way of a fine.

Hamilton was aware of a potential infringement of the rules, but did it after team clarification (in the eyes of Mika Salo - who may or may not be biased against Hamilton, the drivers' steward, LH was aware, and should have overridden the team - I think this was particularly unfair). The fact that he did it with team assistance, is why he got the time penalties. Team assistance I believe (and should be) is permissible for safety and mechanical integrity of the equipment, but not on 'how to drive the car'.

Now for the driver/person in the car. By your logic (against my explanation of how I saw the incidents) Hamilton pressed the accelerator pedal, therefore he was in control, therefore the driver - he then deserves the penalty points? As you say, more than one way .

As I stated before, I think the penalty was harsh against Hamilton, both in points and the time penalty. I do think a single 5 second penalty would have been more appropriate, since it was the same offence under the same conditions. (if he was made aware of it after the first instance, he would not have done it a second time).

The rules though are clear, there is a designated area at the end of the pitlane for practice starts, and this is noted at the drivers' briefing I believe. Like it or not, Hamilton was aware of it, but was trying to 'stretch' the interpretation of the rules by using the end of the pitlane as this area.

I used to think Hamilton was a breath of fresh air, but he is now so far up his own hole. He is not missing a mentor, but missing his auriga in Niki Lauda.

[clf]

Originally Posted by wraymond

That's the thing about rules. In so many other things where non-professionals are in judgemental positions, it's liable to interpretation.

Whilst I never rated him, I wouldnt say Mika Salo is a non professional, but I do think he had bias.

[wraymond]

I'm afraid it seems you might have misread my post, or I did not take enough care or trouble to make myself suitably clear. I did not mean the stewards or other officials on the day were "non-professional". By "so many other things" I was referring to instances where there were officials appointed without qualifications. Even so, F1 officials can on occasion seem to be not exactly professionally even-handed.
HTH.

However, possibly best not to assume what was in someone's mind at any given time but rely on the recorded evidence. Analytical rigour is great in fiction but hardly reliable in guesswork with insufficient basis.

[clf]

Originally Posted by wraymond

I'm afraid it seems you might have misread my post, or I did not take enough care or trouble to make myself suitably clear. I did not mean the stewards or other officials on the day were "non-professional". By "so many other things" I was referring to instances where there were officials appointed without qualifications. Even so, F1 officials can on occasion seem to be not exactly professionally even-handed.
HTH.

However, possibly best not to assume what was in someone's mind at any given time but rely on the recorded evidence. Analytical rigour is great in fiction but hardly reliable in guesswork with insufficient basis.

I agree with what you have said, believe it or not.

At the end of the day, Hamilton sought to gain an advantage, one that can be deemed to be unfair to others. His team approved this advantage. Both were fairly penalised with unfair penalties.

[baxlin]

Originally Posted by clf

I agree with what you have said, believe it or not.

At the end of the day, Hamilton sought to gain an advantage, one that can be deemed to be unfair to others. His team approved this advantage. Both were fairly penalised with unfair penalties.

Was he specifically seeking to gain an advantage? Or just to get a realistic practice start? Other drivers could have asked the same question of their team, if they had thought of it.....

[clf]

Originally Posted by baxlin

Was he specifically seeking to gain an advantage? Or just to get a realistic practice start? Other drivers could have asked the same question of their team, if they had thought of it.....

Was he specifically seeking to gain an advantage? Or just to get a realistic practice start?

If he got a realistic practice start, he is gaining an advantage (an unfair one, as it was away from the designated area) - but the answer to both questions is yes. Gaining an advantage is the name of the game. From listening to the discussions afterwards, it does seem they LH was trying to gain this advantage by using ambiguity The rules (that I have seen) state the designated area is at the end of the pitlane - so he took it to the very end, however this area is defined prior to the race, so the ambiguity doesnt exist.

Other drivers could have asked the same question, but since they are aware of the rules, and are made aware of the designated area at the drivers' briefing of each race (apparently it is slightly different at each race). So purely as a guess on my part, I would suggest they would not waste time or effort asking their team.

[baxlin]

Good points, I admit, of course.

But re your last sentence, that others don’t bother, IMO, is just another reason why Hamilton is a multiple and current world champion, and they aren’t. Sometimes pushing the envelope backfires, many other times it doesn’t.

Malcolm

[clf]

Originally Posted by baxlin

Good points, I admit, of course.

But re your last sentence, that others don’t bother, IMO, is just another reason why Hamilton is a multiple and current world champion, and they aren’t. Sometimes pushing the envelope backfires, many other times it doesn’t.

Malcolm

I know what you are saying, although all teams do, do it. The Mercedes steering/suspension control system, Racing Point - the pink Mercedes, Lotus 88, Brabham fan car, and the BT49 (can you tell I have been watching a lot of ground effect era videos recently lol?). Then you have Schumacher's win in the pits serving a penalty (Silverstone?) and Monaco qualifying 'crash'.

They all exploited ambiguity in the rules, unfortunately, for Hamilton, this ambiguity did not exist. It could then also be suggested that Hamilton does not pay attention at the drivers' briefing. To be fair, though, that is more likely coming from my disdain for him lol - he simply could have forgotten, as the drivers' briefing will have a lot of detail regarding little nuances for each track. However, each track has this designated, very defined area.

The defined area eliminates the doubt for following drivers, when drivers would slow/stop and accelerate suddenly on formation laps in the past (the only example of this I can think of, is a crash between Schumacher and a Minardi, when he slowed, changing track position, seemingly to 'feel' the line of a corner - this wasnt a practice start, or even slowing down, but it was a move that created uncertainty or confusion for the driver behind).

The bottom line for me is, Hamilton would have known this practice start area existed and was defined, which is why he deserved the penalty - although, my view is he should only have been penalised once for both incidences. Mercedes should have (and ultimately were) be penalised for encouraging it.