2008 F1 Podium Picker Challenge: Belgian Grand Prix: Rd 13

[Jeff Shyu]

Yeah ... I was surprised that the drivers took Jeff's side?

Aaron (who i've known for, err, almost 20 years) would probably think of me as an apathetic ass, and he'd be correct most of the time. when i analyze things though, i try to be as empathetic as I can.

everyone's seen countless footages of F1 in-car cam, where Car-B is in hot pursuit of Car-A. They get in SO CLOSE in the braking zone, and everyone steps on their imaginary brake pedal with the TV because it looks that close. and then moments later, you see Car-A start exiting the corner, and pull steadily away from Car-B.. on and on the cycle continues.

I can't imagine anyone else who'd be more familiar with this type of "frustration", as the drivers themselves. So yeah, i'm really not too surprised that our opinions are similar, when they see Lewis come out of a very slow corner, at speed, tucked in right behind Kimi. I bet every single one of them would love to be able to come out of a corner in that position, and not be called on for gaining unfair advantage.

[Bob Beamesderfer]

The driver's, except Alonso and Bourdais, said the punishment didn't fit the violation. Bourdais, instead of answering the question, said the rules are available for anyone to read. Not that I could find.

[Larry Andrews]

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Five seconds. GIYF.

[Jeff Shyu]

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html

Five seconds. GIYF.

yeah, i found that page in 5 seconds too, but can you find the actual section that the chicane cutting is under?

i actually perused the entire 2008 sporting regulation, and couldn't find it (granted, i did it in about 5 minutes, so it's not exactly thorough).

[Bob Beamesderfer]

http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html

Five seconds. GIYF.

yeah, i found that page in 5 seconds too, but can you find the actual section that the chicane cutting is under?

i actually perused the entire 2008 sporting regulation, and couldn't find it (granted, i did it in about 5 minutes, so it's not exactly thorough).

I searched for "course" and didn't find it, as in "cutting the."

[Larry Andrews]

Section 16.1 Took about four minutes to find. I like how simple their regs are - there's some room for interpretation but absent are any wordy explanations that are intended to stop the rules lawyers.

[Bob Beamesderfer]

Section 16.1 Took about four minutes to find. I like how simple their regs are - there's some room for interpretation but absent are any wordy explanations that are intended to stop the rules lawyers.

I should have searched for "track"

16) INCIDENTS
16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by
any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and referred to
the race director for investigation) which :
- necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41 ;
- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code ;
- caused a false start by one or more cars ;
- caused a collision ;
- forced a driver off the track ;
- illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver ;
- illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.
Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving
more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.

16.2 a) It shall be at the discretion of the stewards to decide, upon a report or a request by the race director,
if a driver or drivers involved in an incident shall be penalised.
b) If an incident is under investigation by the stewards a message informing all teams which driver or
drivers are involved will be displayed on the timing monitors.
Provided that such a message is displayed no later than five minutes after the race has finished the
driver or drivers concerned may not leave the circuit without the consent of the stewards.

16.3 The stewards may impose any one of three penalties on any driver involved in an Incident :
a) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and re-join the race without stopping ;
b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop at his pit for at least ten seconds
and then re-join the race.
c) a drop of ten grid positions at the driver’s next Event.
However, should either of the penalties under a) and b) above be imposed during the last five laps, or
after the end of a race, Article 16.4b) below will not apply and 25 seconds will be added to the elapsed
race time of the driver concerned.

16.4 Should the stewards decide to impose either of the penalties under Article 16.3a) or b), the following
procedure will be followed :
a) The stewards will give written notification of the penalty which has been imposed to the competitor
concerned and will ensure that this information is also displayed on the timing monitors.
b) From the time the stewards’ decision is notified on the timing monitors the relevant driver may cover
no more than three complete laps before entering the pit lane and, in the case of a penalty under
Article 16.3b), proceeding to his garage where he shall remain for the period of the time penalty.
However, unless the driver was already in the pit entry for the purpose of serving his penalty, he
may not carry out the penalty after the Safety Car has been deployed. Any laps carried out behind
the Safety Car will be added to the three lap maximum.
Whilst a car is stationary in the pit lane as a result of incurring a time penalty it may not be worked
on. However, if the engine stops it may be started after the time penalty period has elapsed.
2008 F1 Sporting Regulations 8 of 43 19th May 2008
c) When the time penalty period has elapsed the driver may rejoin the race.
d) Any breach or failure to comply with Articles 16.4b) or c) may result in the car being excluded.

I don't see the words "cut the course," "advantage," or "unfair," or a requirement to give back a position.

[Jeff Shyu]

exactly, i actually found that section before and read that section over 3 or 4 times, hoping there's something i missed. but no, is that is truly the only text of the rule, i'd say it's gray at best.

[Larry Andrews]

Kinda makes y'all's argument look a bit silly, no?

http://www.particlezoo.net/individual_p ... boson.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How's that for off-topic?

[William Chen]

one of the reason I hate is the inconsistency of FIA steward.

did Lewis gain an advantage ? I don't think so, but that's not what pisses me off. Even if he did gain an advantage, it is a very very small advantage that did not affect the outcome of the race. so punishment did not fit the crime. many would argue rule is the rule. but let me give u 1 example. 99% of drivers on LA freeway speeds over the limit. One. it is okay for cops to pull one over for speeding 1MPH, but he can not choose discriminately. you can't choose to pull over Mercedes drivers only. Two. there is also a different penalty for a different crime. you can't confiscate their Benz for going over by 1MPH, but no one would complain if it 100MPH over speed limit.

just finished watching F1 Debrief on Speeds.

what McLaren did in SPA only:
Kovaleinen penalized for that rear-ender
Lewis penalized for not giving back ENOUGH advantage in the chicane incident.

what Ferrari did in SPA only:

1. Mass blocked Red Bull car during Q2's last lap (Red Bull car made 11th or 12th, not able into Q3)

2. Massa sped away (at launch from standing still) in the formation lap, although he is not on pole. why is this important ? They quoted an Indy car official that by speding away on a damp track, Massa found what the track surface condition is for a standing start. so Massa gained a HUGE advantage from learning the amount of throttle to modulate at the start. remember no traction control this year.

3. Kimi passed Massa in the early lap by using run off area.

4. Kimi pushed Massa dangerously off to edge of track. it was an unnecessary dangerous move.

5. Kimi made a double defensive blocking moves at Lewis right at chicane incident. That's illegal, only 1 defensive move allowed.

6. Kimi punted Lewis when Lewis passed him.

7. Kimi passed Lewis under waving yellow flag. he should of gave back the position to Lewis.

8, 9 and 10. Kimi again used run off area to gain advantage 3 laps in a row.

wanna bet if McLaren did the 10 infractions above, they might of gotten some kind of penalty ?

One of the best quote tonite at F1 Debrief was something like - Sometime best decision by stewards is no decision, when the incident doesn't affect the outcome.

[Bob Beamesderfer]

Kinda makes y'all's argument look a bit silly, no?

Silly how? Because quantum physics' infinite realities might negate the stupidity of the stewards in the majority of realities?

[Bob Beamesderfer]

Beyond the theoretical, it was an interesting quali and race. The sport has several excellent drivers, most of whom suffer from driving inferior cars under most circumstances. Now, if the FIA continues to convert F1 into a spec series, we might know who's really the best, but be bored to tears in the process.

[KJ Christopher]

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/n ... 5757.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the code section is mentioned below for those still interested in finding/reading.

Statement from the FIA:

At the Grand Prix of Belgium, run on 7 September 2008, and counting towards the 2008 FIA Formula One World Championship, the Stewards of the meeting imposed a drive-through penalty upon the driver of car No.22, Lewis Hamilton, for a breach of Article 30.3 (a) of the 2008 FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations and Appendix L, Chapter 4, Article 2 (g) of the International Sporting Code.

As the drive-through penalty was imposed at the end of the race, 25 seconds were added to the driver's elapsed race time in accordance with Article 16.3 of the FIA 2008 Formula One Sporting Regulations.

Article 152 of the International Sporting Code states that drive-through penalties are "not susceptible to appeal."

The competitor Vodafone McLaren Mercedes appealed the Steward's decision before the International Court of Appeal in a hearing in Paris on September 22nd.

Having heard the explanations of the parties the Court has concluded that the appeal is inadmissible."