This comment is in no particular defence of any specific team or driver. That said can someone answer me the following: 1. Kimi ran way wide at the start taking 4 wheels off of the marked track surface thereby giving him a considerable run through Eau Rouge and down the straight. He later completed a pass with this 'extra speed' yet he was not penalized. Then 2. Sutil pased Badoer at Pouhon with 4 wheels clearly off the racing surface. Even if Badoer was dead slow Sutil according to the rules had to let Badoer past and then re-pass him at the following corner in order to avoid a penalty. Sutil did not do this and carried on unpenalized. I thought these rules were clarified last year at Spa with the whole Kimi / Lewis incident yet the exact rules were blatantly ignored this year. Kinda hard to give F1 a lot of credit when they make a big stink about the integrity of the rules and then ignore them. Again not pointed to any one driver or team just a general commentary on the race.
1) Kimi's extra speed might also be attributed by the KERS. Going wide in T1 probably made it safer for everyone. 2) Sutils manouver was more as evasive than any other thing, Badoer slowed way too much in an area were it should have slowed that much. Last year's penalty was different, because it was a chicane cut. Designed to keep the cars separated from one another. This two cases were safety run-off specifically for situations like Sutils. If there wasnt run off the would have probably slammed in the back of badoer or go to the grass at great speed.
No problem if Sutil went off the road to avoid Badoer however it was still a pass on a car that continued (not like Badoer broke down and was parking it) therefore as per the regulations, Sutil MUST let Badoer past and then re-pass him after the following corner on the racing surface. A very clear protocol exists in the rules for Sutil to follow in order to ensure a clean pass. This was not followed yet still there was no penalty. As for Kimi a much harder call however there is little doubt that the fact he made no apparent effort to take turn one and then gained a considerable drive because of it was probably worthy of a look by the stewards. Heck I don't want the Ferrari win taken away however I just don't think the rules are being applied consistently.
I'm glad Kimi won and it looks like FIA was looking for a Ferrari win too, because Kimi was obviously in the wrong. Anyone knows who has raced 1) Stay in the throttle to maintain the momentum, but if you leave the racing surface you take risk with the stewards. 2) The right thing to do is back off the throttle and get in line on the racing surface. I'm not saying when I race I always follow this because you can get away with it sometimes, but even if you do it you know it is against the spirit of the rules. A couple races ago I was having a heated class battle and coming off the corner I was faster and couldn't get my brain to tell my foot to lift. I stayed in the throttle, but ended up having to go 4 off to keep from hitting the car in back. This is exactly what happened to Kimi. The funny quote from the other racer after the race was "I can't believe you were passing me on the grass!". BTW, because I'm such a gentleman racer, I didn't complete the pass.
Well, he was forced wide. I'd have to watch again to see if I agree about this giving him extra speed through Eau Rouge. But if so, you're probably right and he should have been penalized. OTOH, IMHO and especially in turn 1, I don't think drivers should be penalized for passing "off track". It's not like he was cutting a chicane; his trajectory was actually longer than the pack's. You should be allowed to use all the track, and then some, to gain as much advantage as possible. The exception being when a feature (ie, a chicane) is put in place to intentionally slow you down.
oh, let's not forget, the rules do not necessarily apply to Ferrari the same as they do to the other teams! wasn't it this year Massa was a flagrant chicane cutter at Monaco, with no penalties?
When I saw Kimi go off in the first turn then reenter, I was thinking "Smooth move Kimi great way to get sent to the back of the grid with a penalty." I have a feeling that the crash with Button, Hamilton, and company was taking up a lot of the stewards attention on lap 1.
People are still on that? so penalize button who take the same route, so did badoer, penalize Barrichello who cut the corner before the button/grosjean crash.... Do you realize that if there was a problem with Kimi the other teams would have made a reclamation?
Probably the stewards would have a problem determining if Kimi´s momentum came from his manouver or from KERS, so they decided to forget it. It was not very clean, but, oh well, hard times and a win is a win.
I'd like to think there is a common sense approach by the stewards when it comes to turn 1, lap 1 of any race. Afterall they don't want a bunch of cars crashing together simply because there isn't enough track for everyone at the same time, and this is more likely on turn 1, lap 1 than at any other time during a race. Obviously someone blatantly taking a short cut or advantage deserves & should be penalised, but no driver should be expected to thread the eye of the needle when there isn't one. The fact is Kimi did appear to turn in initially, but then took evasive action when he realised there wasn't enough room. Furthermore it would be near impossible for the stewards to prove that Kimi's speed through Eau Rouge and down the straight was attributed to his running off at turn one. Any penalty would surely be overturned on appeal as Ferrari would claim that (1) his detour was evasive action, not advantageous (2) he took a longer route, not a short cut (2) his speed was all KERS v a car without it. To back up my theory, take a look at this>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS2sdXx08-Y Clearly Kimi made an attempt to turn in (1:02) but was forced wide by Heidfeld and rejoined the track in 3rd place, having already accounted for Trulli. The gap to Heidfeld was maintained through Eau Rouge however he had a wiggle at the top of Eua Rouge thus prividing Kimi's KERS powered car the advantage down the straight. Clearly nothing wrong with Kimi's actions as far as I'm concerned. ps the view from Hamilton's car .. unbelievable the speed that RB went past him .. I don't know whether he would have made the turn, but for his team mate being hit by Grosjean he didn't have to find out.
IMO Kimi's "extra speed" was a direct result of KERS not of his off the road path that he took through turn 1. Also IMO he was forced to take that line, doing so I think he did the right thing. The car was still in one piece and he could continue the race. Unfortunately for some others there wasn't enough room to avoid some collisions and it ended their days very prematurely.
Here is a replay. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wulTZe3Zz9M Looking at that you have to say that Kimi did get an advantage going wide even tho he didn't cut the corner, as he was able to carry more speed thru that corner and get passed 2 cars. Tough call tho, 1st corner you don't want half the field taken out. If Kimi got penalized so would at least another 3 drivers plus the BMW that hit the back of the Ferrari later on.
+1 Nuff said IMO The problem is in most cases drivers do this because they can take the risk without damaging there car, only risking a penalty, and it seems with Kimi and LH last year they do it because they can premeditated!!.? a barrier or gravel trap it wouldn't happen...not that that is the answer. Consistant rules would solve it!.
It's not a question of consistent rules, Steve, in this case the rule is very clear, it's consistent application of the rules that matters. But, as we've said many times before, it's down to stewards' interpretation of the circumstances in any given case and presumably, if they considered the incident at all, they decided that Kimi gained no advantage by going off the track.
Ok Ian inconsistant interpretations you know what I mean. I'm all for racing like Rob Lay said but as a driver you know it may have consequences using the run off and gaining a advantage. With video replay this was used last year lets face it! LH had his win taken off him a week later, and this was for using his momentum from giving the place back to Kimi then flooring it., and it was ok'd with C Whiting.! I'm happy Kimi got away with it, just annoyed at the system, but happy Max is keeping his snout out of it for the time being.
Ok the consensus seems to be that the Kimi thing could go both ways but what about the Badoer pass by Sutil. That one is about as black and white as it gets.
I think anyone who is being unbiased would agree that Kimi definitely broke the rules and gained an advantage from it. I don't remember the race but once Lewis did a very similar thing - went a bit hot into the first turn and used the runoff area because he overcooked the corner entry. Some cars behind got together and Lewis was penalized for it. Also, when he cut the chicane and gave Kimi the spot back, then overtook, he was penalized for that too. In this case, I think that if it was another driver that did it, and Kimi ended up getting passed, almost everyone would be calling for that other drivers head. I am with Steve... I am glad it didn't turn into a big issue, but I do definitely think Kimi got HUGELY lucky by not getting penalized for it. I also think Grosjean should have been penalized for his idiotic move that took out Hamilton and Button. If he just admitted fault and apologized, it would be one thing, but he actually went out and blamed Button, saying Button ran into him. Sutil's pass on Badoer - same thing. It was absolutely not a kosher pass. It seems the Stewards really didn't want to intervene too much this time, which I guess is good... I prefer less intervention, but the only thing that bugs me is when the rules are not applied consistently. That leaves the door open for one driver to get away with something (like Kimi did this time) and another to get penalized for a similar thing, or even a lesser thing (Lewis at Spa last year). I think it would be better if one set of stewards just officiated every race, which would take out the element of randomness we see now.
+1 IIRC, isn't this in the manifestos of at least one of the candidates (possibly both?) for the crazy mans job? - Inconsistent interpretation of the rules has been a bane of F1 for as long as I can remember. Hopefully that's about to change..... As for the various "incidents" - "That's racing IMHO!" Kimi made the best of a potential race ending situation by getting out of the way. Did he gain an advantage in so doing? Possibly, but at least he didn't take himself and possibly 3-4 other cars out by trying to stay inside the lines.... Sutil -v- Badoer - The stewards had more of a case on that one, but it hardly affected the race, so leave well enough alone maybe? They've got to be at least "aware" of the howls that follow any time they intervene..... I'm sure they don't *want* to in most cases. Bottom line though, it's racing, and the rules are *always* going to be open to interpretation, no matter how they're written or who's interpreting them. My 02c, cheers, Ian
the litmus test for me is answering the question... could Kimi have stayed in line on the racing surface without contact? I believe the answer is yes, he also wouldn't have gained 2-3 more positions.
Agreed. I'm curious to see the reactions of the naysayers the next time the stewards intervene in a way they feel inappropriate.
I'm all for less intervention - I just would like it to be less intevention across the board It seems to me that it was a real travesty that Lewis was penalized last year for the Kimi chicane incident, that was really ludicrous. The other one was Vettel being penalized when he came out of the pits and didn't move over for Massa. I would prefer neither of those incidents were penalized, but more than anything I'd want it to be consistent. And I think that would require the same stewards to be at every race so they can generally be more consistent. Just my .02
Absolutely and I defer to your first hand account but what happened yesterday was the best possible action. IMO it makes no sense to perpetuate a mistake in the name of consistency. Not that I take that as what you're suggesting. A safe and uneventful trip home.
Well I would say your televised account of the event supersedes me watching it from several hundred meters away I suppose it's just more that Kimi went off and came back on track with a better position. He definitely did better being off track than he would have on track... it could be argued he would have done as well on track, but he wasn't on the track, so the argument doesn't hold water. Any benefit gained while off track has to be given back - that's how it has always been. I am glad Kimi got away with it, I'd hate for an after the fact penalty to have been handed down (I'd be really pissed if I came all this way and invested the time to watch the race only to have it adjusted later on). I just wish there would be more consistency. I also sense a few folks getting pissy (not you, others) that people dare suggest Kimi was wrong... a few "get over it" and "quit whining" comments being tossed around. Personally I'd like to have seen Grosjean penalized and I don't care about Sutil or Kimi so much... although I think the argument that they were running last and it didn't matter sort of strikes at the heart of what I hate about the penalties - the inconsistency. Oh well, it doesn't change the fact that it was a great race to watch, and I was very happy with the outcome (although I'd have prefered Lewis and Jenson to have been in the fight). I am looking forward to coming home - although that means i have to attack the mountain of work waiting for me Off to a local pub that has 800 different beers in stock. I only tried 4, and I hope to try 10 more or so before I hit the sack tonight
