Should Trulli have been reinstated to 3rd?

[Brogan]

As this whole subject still seems topical, I thought I'd do a simple poll.

Disregarding what Hamilton and Ryan said to the Stewards, Trulli still overtook under a safety car and was correctly penalised.
This was later rescinded, as far as I can tell simply because Hamilton and Ryan were deemed to have misled them.

Trulii and Toyota claim Hamilton had "almost stopped" and/or "slowed down to 15mph" but the onboard footage from Trulli's car shows this isn't the case. I suppose some would call this "misleading"...
Unfortunately the FIA for whatever reason have chosen not to release the radio comms from Toyota or telemetry from either car.

So were the Stewards right to rescind Trulli's penalty?

I've enabled vote changing just in case anyone finds themselves being swayed by arguments either way...

 

[Galahad]

In my view, they were not.

I am not seeking in any way to justify or excuse Hamilton or McLaren. They were wrong, were correctly penalised and frankly I think further punishment would not be unjustified (depending on severity).

However I fail to see how their admissions of dishonesty affect Trulli's penalty itself. The onboard footage from the Toyota certainly does not show Hamilton pulling off to the side at 15mph, as if he had a problem. He was on the racing line on the exit of turn four and to my eyes does not slow appreciably - if he did slow a little, it is more likely to be because there is a recovery truck on the circuit around the next bend.

So it seems to me Trulli is still guilty of passing another car while behind the Safety Car and his penalty should have stood.

I have to say that it seems nobody is particularly interested in that aspect of this issue, though.

 

[The Artist.....]

Hmm... GM... I got the impression that Trulli actually did see Hamilton slow considerably - Certainly I know when I saw it online, I didn't think Hamilton had slowed much, but seeing it on the tv, gave much more of an impression of slowing down. (Or at least seemed to, to me at any rate) - and had been slower all the way through the previous sequence of corners. It'd be interesting to see onboard from Lewis' car (which I'm almost positive will exist somewhere) - as it'd give more of an impression whether he was deliberately going much slower, or whether Trulli jumped the gun!

 

[Brogan]

It'd be interesting to see onboard from Lewis' car (which I'm almost positive will exist somewhere) - as it'd give more of an impression whether he was deliberately going much slower, or whether Trulli jumped the gun!

Ask and ye shall receive
Check about 25 seconds in.

And here's another video of the same sequence but without the Hamilton onboard:

If you look at the fencing at the side, it appears to me that Lewis is travelling at a constant speed and it is in fact Trulli who speeds up to overtake and subsequently slows.

 

[Boyle]

If you watch the Trulli onboard with the engine sound you can hear the revs increasing quite a bit. He overtook as there is no way Hamilton slowed to 15mph. Both penalties were right in my opinion and Trulli should not have been reinstated.

 

[Andrea_Moda_Rules]

Trulii should get re-instated to 3rd. This whole 15mph arument is pointless, Hamilton let him pass that is not Trulli's fault. Hamilton should not of let Trulli past pure and simple, McLaren got it wrong there they should of stayed ahead of trulli and waited untill after the race to put any arguments bout hamiltions move on trulli, which I strongly believe wouldn't of happened anyway cause because Hamilton was well within his rights to stay ahead.

 

[teabagyokel]

I think Trulli should have been dropped because I don't think Hamilton slowed, but since I have Toyota in my FL team and Brawn scored all Mercedes points...

 

[Amdathlonuk]

Trulii should get re-instated to 3rd. This whole 15mph arument is pointless, Hamilton let him pass that is not Trulli's fault. Hamilton should not of let Trulli past pure and simple, McLaren got it wrong there they should of stayed ahead of trulli and waited untill after the race to put any arguments bout hamiltions move on trulli, which I strongly believe wouldn't of happened anyway cause because Hamilton was well within his rights to stay ahead.

But surely the rule is:

"No overtaking under the safety car"

This is irrespective if the car in front is doing 15mph or 115mph..........

The rules do not say " no overtaking under the saftey car - unless the car in front is really slow"

The truth as far as I can see it is they're BOTH guilty of breaking the rules.

 

[RickD]

I think Trulli should have lost his points and been disqualified for overtaking under safety car conditions. I also agree with Mclarens punishment so far (thats without the latest round of rubbish that will happen at the end of April).

All Hamilton and Ryan had to say is that they were discussing what to do at the time Trulli overtook. I think the main problem with McLarens radio was that Hamilton said that he had already LET him past, rather than Trulli had already GONE past. Would have made all the difference.

Trulli still shouldn't have got points though for driving like that under the safety car and in the sector the crash had occurred.

 

[bogaTYR]

i think the stewards had no visual of what happened. also, the stewards did not have any technical info like telemetry, onboard video, radio traffic and whatever. which makes sense cos this would mean going through an enormous amount of data and i am not sure the stewards had either the time nor the people for that.

the way i understand it. LH told his story and JT his as well, then both were asked questions. the stewards trusted LH's story and therefor demoted trulli. so in my understanding the actual action on the track was not really relevant at that time. the decision was based on who the stewards trusted or believed most.

when this later turned out to be untrue, the stewards had no choice but to re instate trulli. this cos the evidence on which they based the demotion of JT was untrue. this evidence being the story of LH and nothing else. so the stewards in my view had no other choice.

had the stewards seen anything from the technical info mentioned in my first line, then we probably would have had an entirely different situation and in that case, i would have agreed with GM.

but right now, with the information they had, i think the stewards did the right thing. and the only thing they could do.

 

[Galahad]

It seems incredible to me that a stewards' decision could be based on one driver's word against another.

There are hundreds of examples of penalties given out DURING races based on TV footage, never mind afterwards.

They had plenty of time to look at the videos and listen to the radios. What was the hurry?

The FIA consistently shoot themselves in both feet by making themselves look incompetent. They do it so often one has to wonder whether indeed, they are.

 

[bogaTYR]

GM:

i fully share your amazement, but remember, the incident was not shown on tv either. the stewards meeting was one hour or so after the race. in my view, no time at all to look into any form of technical data, let alone analyse any data. also, from all the info we had so far from the FIA it shows clearly, the stewards asked questions, there is no mentioning at all of any kind of technical data. all there is in the documents is that questions were asked.

if anyone has any other input, then please do. but right now, the only sense i can make of this stewards meeting at all, is that it was LH's story versus the story of JT.

again, i am not defending anything here. i am just saying that if this is indeed the case, then teh stewards had no choice but to re install trulli

 

[Galahad]

I don't know why it would take more than an hour, to be honest.

If it does, delay the meeting.

It's more important to make the correct decision than a quick one. Otherwise someone will turn the decision around in a week's time and whatever your views about the decision itself, that kind of process brings the whole sport into disrepute.

 

[Brogan]

in my view, no time at all to look into any form of technical data, let alone analyse any data

You're kidding right?
It took me 2 minutes to watch both onboard videos and listen to the McLaren team radio.

It would seem some people are just as quick to forgive incompetent stewards as they are to villify Hamilton

 

[bogaTYR]

GM

again, we agree. but thats the way i see what has happened, and that is why i think it right trulli got re instated

we can agree on the procedure or not. thats another discussion. but if this is what happpened, then surely you have to agree the stewards had no other choice. and who in their right mind would tell one story to the stewards and anothe rone to the press? but that another discussion too.

so, my point is that the stewards demoted trulli based on what LH told them, when this turned out to be untrue they had no other option but to re instate trulli.

 

[bogaTYR]

bro,

it might take you 2 minutes but who is to say it would be the same for the stewards? plus then you have analysis and discussion. they would have to get all info from both macca and toyota. seems to me like lots of work.

i so far have not seen any evidence the stewards had anything but the story of the drivers.

 

[bogaTYR]

this part of the FIA doc for the WMSC supports my view completely. just look at point 1 and 2, the problem is with what was said. not with what was shown or whatever

on 29 March, 2009, told the stewards of the Australian Grand Prix that no instructions were given to Hamilton in Car No. 1 to allow Trulli in Car no. 9 to pass when both cars were behind the safety car, knowing this statement to be untrue;

procured its driver Hamilton the current World Champion, to support and confirm this untrue statement to the stewards;

although knowing that as a direct result of its untrue statement to the stewards, another driver and a rival team had been unfairly penalised, made no attempt to rectify the situation either by contacting the FIA or otherwise;

 

[Galahad]

boga - of course, you are correct but you have misunderstood me.

It is up to the stewards to seek out the relevant information to make an informed decision. They failed to do this.

Neither the TV footage nor the radio transmissions would have had to be sourced from the teams, Race Control routinely record all radio transmissions between the driver and the team. The stewards should have known this (or been informed of it) and looked at all the evidence before making a premature decision.

I can understand them making the decision they made based on the information they had, but that is not what this topic is about. They could, and should, have done more to prevent this from making F1 a laughing stock (again).

 

[Jen]

I will admit that I am in two minds on this issue.

But, having said that, I have voted "yes" - for no other reason than Hamilton has admitted to letting Trulli pass. It is quite a complex legal and moral question (although it has all the appearances of simplicity) and would prove difficult to reach a conclusion in a court of law.

Trulli might well have massaged the truth with florid descriptions of Hamilton slowing and waving him through, but that does nothing to detract from Hamilton's admission that he gave way. In those circumstances, the stewards had no other option than to re-instate Trulli's position.

It's not a case of two wrongs in this instance, but it is a case of the greater wrong and that is why Trulli was awarded 3rd place.

 

[Brogan]

Trulli might well have massaged the truth with florid descriptions of Hamilton slowing and waving him through

Is that another way of saying he "misled" the stewards?