Poll Who thinks that the Hamilton grid penalty is not the right grid penalty?

[RasputinLives]

The problem RasputinLives, is that evidence and history indicate otherwise.

Do they though? You have no idea whether any other driver would or would not have got the same treatment because we have no other examples of it happening. If you did I could see your point but right now I don't.

I think at times they're have been stewards decisions that have gone against drivers like Hamilton and Schumacher because of their rep. This one I think really isn't.

 

[KekeTheKing]

McLaren's ineptitude

Don't worry Jez, I've got my share of ire for them as well.

no idea...no other examples

So we're in the same boat. Pure speculation.

I'm done now.

 

[Quintessentially]

This is getting a tad boring now... a quick look at the stewards appointed by the FIA for the race on their official website reveals there is no spaniard among them. t.

A quick look at the Sporting regulations would indicate that two of the seven key officials (who control and monitor the activities of the stewards and marshals) come from the hosting country. Presumably Xavier Bone (clerk of the course) and Silvia Bellot (National steward) doesn't sound Spanish? This is not to say there was certain bias but the penalty issued makes a compelling argument either way. I'm also not sure we need to refer to an unverified Internet source to realise that anti-Hamilton sentiments still runs very high amongst certain Spanish fans and that there was a hint of that when he stopped on the track.

 

[Viscount]

Quintessentially But it wasn't a sporting regulation McLaren broke, it was technical regulation which is decided on by the stewards (who were not Spanish).

 

[Incubus]

. I'm also not sure we need to refer to an unverified Internet source to realise that anti-Hamilton sentiments still runs very high amongst certain Spanish fans.[/quote]

------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot the irony there?

 

[Brogan]

This is not to say there was certain bias but the penalty issued makes a compelling argument either way.

For the last time, a technical infringment is an automatic exclusion.

There is no leeway on this, it has already been confirmed numerous times here, on the BBC, Sky, etc.

What's highly ironic is no-one here claiming the penalty was too harsh claimed he got off lightly when he overtook Rosberg off the circuit at Bahrain.
The stewards said Rosberg did nothing wrong so by all accounts Hamilton should have been penalised.

 

[Incubus]

I'll only say one last thing on this thread (no but really), which is that people it seems to me are confusing what is fair with is within the rules.
The sport isn't governed by fairness, it's gonerned by rules which have to be adhered to. It's the same for everyone.
People claiming the decision was unfair should debate on whether the rule itself is unfair, NOT the way stewards applied it. Stewardstook the only decision to take within the context of the rules they are appointed to enforce.
Maybe some feel the rule is to harsh (and as it happens I agree that it is, the cancellation of LH's time would seem fairer) have a point but that's the rule, and it's the same for everyone.
No blame on this occasion should be attributed to the stewards. It's the rule itself we should be debating, but that is an entirely different matter entirely and maybe should have its own thread uinstead if anybody wants to start one.

 

[Brogan]

I made the same point yesterday Incubus

Whether the penalty is too black and white is a separate issue.

http://cliptheapex.com/threads/who-...he-right-grid-penalty.4973/page-5#post-129488

 

[Viscount]

Brogan Is it just at the end of the session that the car has to have a 1ltr fuel sample available? Could a driver set their fastest lap in qualifying returning to the pits a few minutes before the end of the session with just 0.2ltrs of fuel, then the team adding fuel to the car in the garage before the session ends so that a 1ltr sample was available?

 

[Incubus]

Ah OK Brogan. I hadn't seen that.

 

[Brogan]

A very good question Viscount.

I have no idea but I don't see how the FIA could stop that as refuelling in the garage is permitted.

I'll leave it to someone else to read through the reg's in detail

 

[Incubus]

Logically speaking I wouldn't imagine it would make any difference.
The point of the rule that need at least 1 litre of fuel to take a sample. It doesn't matter how light the car is during quali as long as they can provide that litre for checks by their own means.

 

[Brogan]

Well if the car can be refuelled after a flying lap during the session, why can't it be refuelled after a flying lap at the end of the session?

I suspect though that the rules state at least 1 litre must be available for testing at any time, so if a team did take a risk during the session then they would fall foul of the reg's.
That's just a guess on my part.

Propbably a discussion for another thread though.

 

[RasputinLives]

I'm guessing its to do with getting a sample of fuel thats actually been used in the car whilst its out on the track. You could argue that if a team fueled the 1 litre in at the end of the session they could switch the fuel rigs and put different fuel in knowing for certain it would be that fuel that would be tested. Can't determine which would be taken as a sample if its gone it for actually doing laps .

 

[Quintessentially]

For the last time, a technical infringment is an automatic exclusion.

There is no leeway on this, it has already been confirmed numerous times here, on the BBC, Sky, etc.

What's highly ironic is no-one here claiming the penalty was too harsh claimed he got off lightly when he overtook Rosberg off the circuit at Bahrain.
The stewards said Rosberg did nothing wrong so by all accounts Hamilton should have been penalised.

Automatic exclusion for a car failing to return to the pits under its own power after quali is just one of the many options available to the stewards. Disgression is allowed and there is leeway, even when applying a subtle regulation like this.

Viscount- I believe 'stewards of the meeting' is the phrase they use and includes a nationally appointed official but it's a moot point anyway.

 

[RasputinLives]

Technical Infringment = Exclusion

Don't make Brogan say it again.

 

[Incubus]

I've changed my mind.This is getting quite amusing. In a Carry On kinda way.

 

[The Artist.....]

1. The stewards from the event can be found here: http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1_media/Documents/esp-stewards.pdf - Note no Spanish stewards
2. There are penalties that can have leniency when it is an infringement of sporting regs. There is no such leniency in the rules, other than relating to force majeure, in the technical regs.

Maybe there should be the possibility of discretion when it comes to technical breaches, but where would that lead to?

In 2011, Sauber were thrown out of the Australian GP, since their rear wings breached the rules, due to a manufacturing error. This likely gave no performance advantage, but they were still excluded. Toyota were thrown out of qualifying in Australia 2009, due to a breach of the technical regulations. Even Martin Brundle was excluded from qualifying in Monaco 1991 as he had missed the weigh-bridge on the way into the pits at the end of a qualifying lap!

There are so many examples of breaches of technical regulations leading to a disqualification that this debate really is moot! Given the rules of the game, the punishment was absolutely correct.

 

[Quintessentially]

. I'm also not sure we need to refer to an unverified Internet source to realise that anti-Hamilton sentiments still runs very high amongst certain Spanish fans.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot the irony there?
[/quote]

When watching the BBC feed during quali, you could clearly hear chanting when Hamilton stopped on track and I suspect that was why they cut the feed short. If i remember correctly someone threw a bottle onto the track 2years ago after the SC incident between Alonso and Hamilton at Valencia so I don't believe the anti lewis sentiments have subsided but this is a discussion for another topic.

1. The stewards from the event can be found here: http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1_media/Documents/esp-stewards.pdf - Note no Spanish stewards
.

That is just three of seven 'stewards of the meeting' (not to be confused with race stewards)

http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/81DF225EBCCCA51BC12579C8002D2DEC/$FILE/1-2012%20SPORTING%20REGULATIONS%2009-03-2012.pdf

(Look under 12)


Have a look at page 18 for the full list.

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/f1_media/Documents/esp-media-kit.pdf

But as I said it’s a moot point but I’m happy to be corrected.

 

[Mephistopheles]

What boils my blood is that if it was anyone else but Lewis this discussion would have been over six pages ago if it even warranted it own thread.that is.

Was there a whole thread dedicated to Buemi for a similar offence last year? I don't know because I wasn't a member back then.

I have reread this thread from start to finish and nothing new has been said on the subject since the second page don't people think it is time to put this subject to bed lest we still be here at Christmas still going round and round in circles.

The fact is McLaren broke a technical rule and breaking a technical rule has only two possible penalties they are exclusion from that session or disqualification from the whole event.

If you look at it like that McLaren got off lightly, and when I say McLaren I include Lewis as he is part of the team...