Debating F1 Rules & Penalties

Friday 13th June 2008

Today's mailbox sees PF1ers debating not only the pit lane rules but also what constitutes the awarding of a penalty such as the one Lewis Hamilton was handed...

Got something to say? letters@planet-f1.com

Debating The Pit Lane Rules
HA HA HA, Andrew Davies said: "There should be a rule instigated from now on that in racing conditions that you're not allowed to line up two abreast at the end of the pit lane because there is NO OVERTAKING behind the Safety Car."

Following Andrew theories, Kubica and Kimi should have stopped to let Ham pass and exit of pit lane on 1st position? What to do if a team crew do a mistake on pit lane? Freeze all other rivals until this driver is ready???
Elcrowley

...A few points were raised by various people in the last letters page and by Andrew Davies' latest column.

Firstly, the red light was on at the pit exit as the SC and the train of cars was approaching/going past at the time and so any cars in the pits have to wait and join the end. Whether or not Lewis deliberately aimed for Kimi is open for debate and conjecture but if he didn't have the presence of mind to stop behind stationary cars having admitted to seeing a red light, then I doubt he'd have the presence of mind to choose a car to aim for in that split-second.

Secondly, I assume Mr Davies is aware of the rule that overtaking is allowed under the SC in the pit lane, between the entry and exit lines (provided of course its at the speed limit). Otherwise cars would come in and even if they had a shorter stop, have to wait until the car they entered behind had finished. This clearly can't happen as cars and garages are not going to be in the same order. Therefore Kimi was entirely justified to try and get ahead of Kubica, or it may just have been that as he was released alongside Kubica, he should continue at pit-limit speed rather than slow down and risk being hit. We can only guess if he would have tried to get ahead of Kubica or not.

We shall never know.
Matthew Bartram, Loughborough

...All this talk about Kimi being at fault because he was driving side by side with Kubica makes no sense in my honest opinion. It just so happens that Ferrari had a great pit stop putting Kimi even with Kubica.

Upon exiting towards the pit lane the drivers will accelerate to reach the pit lane speed limit as fast as possible, then the driver will continue at the speed limit. In the end, they came out even, why would one of the drivers have to give the lead to the other just because one of them entered the pit lane first?

That would be penalising a team based on their pit position. We cannot forget that many grands prix are won on the pits.

Congrats on such a great site...
Francisco Martinez

...I liked the erstwhile Andrew's Editorial regarding 'The Saga' and mostly agreed with it except one item.

Review Kubica and Kimi in the pits. Kubica begins moving. Kimi starts before Kubica reaches Kimi's pit. Thus Kubica wasn't alongside Kimi when Kimi began moving, and nor was he past him. Kimi would have needed to hold in place until after Kubica went by in order to fall in behind him but he was already released by the lolly. If you're going to control pit lane racing then, it would require an FIA rep in each pit saying, yes, you may go. Imagine the conspiracy theories we'd seen then.

Another possible contributing aspect. Seemed like Kimi was racing to get out ahead. Kubica drew up slightly before the end, thereby putting Kimi slightly further ahead. Hamilton and Nico had both lined up behind Kubica. Hamilton saw him stopped and you can clearly see him veer off his line and lock up his brakes.

It was an accident, caused by not seeing red light. Surprising in this age of technology, the red light isn't flashing on a heads up display or being continually broadcast to him ala NASCAR.

That's racing.
Michael Seidel, Ashland, Oregon, USA

...While I am not defending Lewis for hitting Kimi in the pit lane, I am at a loss how the FIA could have a rule whereby the pit lane could be open for cars to refuel and change tyres and still have a red light preventing cars from leaving the pit lane. This is ludicrous.
Derek Downes, St. Maarten

And More To The Point
A red light is a red light!
Neil Tiney

When Is A Penalty Deserved?
I agree with him (Hamilton) receiving the penalty.

By the same token, whilst some have pointed out that Kimi should have got one for hitting Sutil, that was a very different story, it happened while racing on the track itself, under bad conditions at that.

And if that's the case, then I would question why Lewis never got penalised for hitting the back of Fernando ? (which I don't believe he should have , because that was also a racing incident).
Jean, South Africa

...Firstly, everyone who believes that Hamilton's penalty is too harsh must know absolutely nothing about motorsport, as the pit lane is like holy ground, and any infringements there is the worst kind by far.

And no Hamilton would not have been given a drive trough if he passed the red light; he would have been black flagged, like Montoya and others before, therefore I believe that his penalty is way to lenient, as he destroyed another competitor's race, when he realized his mistake, and it is very continent that he happened to swerve and crash into his main title rival, and not into the car directly in front of him...

A one or two race ban would have been more realistic, because lets face it, if he starts 11th and has a good race he can still finish 3rd at worst, maybe even win if there are safety cars during the race, that is if he manages to exit the pits successfully.

The arrogance of commenting the he was breezing it in the race, and would have easily won it is beyond what I have seen in many years, not even Schumacher was ever as arrogant, and he actually achieved more than Lewis can ever hope to achieve in F1.

Let's consider that Lewis was being hauled in at more than half a second a lap, and only managed the 4t fastest lap of the day...
Nico Roets, South Africa

...I'd like give props to Andrew Davies for being reasonable about Hamilton penalty. BTW, the similar case was Nakajima driving in the back of Kubica (and taking him out of the race) during SC period in Australia, not Kimi loosing the car during race conditions and hitting poor Sutil. BTW, I don't agree with is this bit:

following Lewis's calamitous collision in Montreal fans have pointed out that Kimi Raikkonen hit Adrian Sutil at speed at the Monaco Grand Prix (a totally avoidable accident as he wasn't even trying to overtake) and got no punishment.

In my opinion "an avoidable mistake" occurs when a driver miscalculates, is over optimistic or has a brain fade - whatever, but he tries a move that is bound to end in tears, and it does. Look Alonso and Heidfeld in Monaco. When a driver looses the car, what happens next is no longer "avoidable". I mean, of course it is "avoidable" in the sense that every accident is avoidable one way or another, but it's a case of a honest mistake, not going for a gap that isn't there. And if you look at the Kimi-Sutil accident at full speed, it's clear that Kimi was fighting only not to spin and crash DC in Q2 style. Avoiding or hitting Sutil was just completely beyond his control.

Also, good call on clarifying SC rules. Even without Hamilton, controversy would be probably avoided as the next turn after the pit line is a right-hander, and Kubica was on the inside, so he would have probably kept his position in front of Kimi. But what if Kimi was going along side Kubica but 3/4 of car length behind, wont that 3/4 at the red light, and than overtook him because he next turn happened to be a left one so he had better track position? Would that be a drive through penalty? What if Kubica radioed to his pit wall that Kimi just overtook him outside of the pits, and BMW ordered him to takehis position back during SC? Would that be drive through penalty, too? And why Trulli wasn't penalized for overtaking Kubica in 2007, thanks to being on the move when the lights changed at the pit exit and Kubica was standing while Trulli was on the move? It clearly happened outside of the pits and during SC period(and look what had happened when he tried to get his position back. Obeying the lights in Canada might mean you're screwed).

Oh, and if not for standing alongside Kubica, Hamilton would get black flagged. Watch full speed replay. He was not going to stop at the line, he was aiming at the gap between Kimi and the wall on the left side.

Woah, that was lengthy.
Kuba

...It is pretty sad and funny at the same time to read from some - including some so-called F1 Experts - asking why Raikkonen did not get a penalty for his collision with Sutil in Monaco. Are you all so far up Hamilton's behind that you are blind?

Here's the deal: Raikkonen had a RACING incident. He lost control of his car ON THE TRACK while RACING! Hamilton hit Raikkonen in the PITS while Raikkonen was STOPED at a RED LIGHT!! Get the difference?

HELLO! I am so sick of all this "Hamilton is the greatest" crap! And, please, NEVER EVER compare him to Michael Schumacher again. Hamilton is nothing like, nor will he ever be, a Michael Schumacher.
Ronald Trochelmann

And Should A Drive Take Another's Penalty?
I think Lewis should get the penalty for causing Rosberg's accident as well!

If he's been slowing down like he should have been Rosberg would have done the same instead of suddenly finding the car in front stopping rather abruptly and not having enough time to react!
Cate

Inexperience Had Nothing To Do With It
Please, who are you kidding Sir?

Hamilton's idiotic crash with Kimi in Canada was a no-brainier mistake! A simple accident... it had zero... null... zip to do experience!

An inexperience mistake is trying to win the World Championship on the 1st Corner of the 1st Race by trying to dive pass the inside of 5 cars and causing the inevitable!

Driving into the back of a stationary car(when you can actually see2 cars standing still) is not inexperience... it's frustration coupled with laps of concentration...something Hamilton's Doctor claims he has none of because he is so "mentally strong" and his scores on tests are higher than ever before.

Stop making excuses for "Wonder Boy" - which he ain't.

He's not as good as Ayrton Senna, and he's not as good as Michael Schumacher. End of story. He is no legend. He has won a few races in a good car. He's not the only one to do so... please... stop kissing his British ass.
Gerhard Rautenbach, South Africa

...Since Lewis Hamilton is on the grid of Formula 1 I cannot believe that an older gentleman and experienced racer as Sir Jackie is (maybe that is trouble, he is too old to know what he is talking about) can say certain things he has said. The latest shows that he favours Lewis as he claims that it was his (Lewis's) race, that he was flying, he was in a lead etc...

Is anybody aware of a fact that at the time when accident happened Lewis was behind two drivers (RK & KR) who were on the same strategy as he was, and were catching him in last few laps? Not to mention that other people were in front of him on one-stop strategies. He was not even P3 at the time and yet claims it was a sure win! He was not in the lead, he was not the fastest man on track (fastest lap is Kimi's), so if that is what is called a certain win, then what is an uncertain one?

But having said that was he warned that it was a red light? Why the incident happened is a mystery to me. It will also be in the "we will never knew what happened" category. Too bad that FIA didn't ask for telemetry as in Rascasse incident, then we would know whole story.
Aleksandar Milinkovic, Bosnia and Herzegovina

The Magic Of Montreal
Montreal is becoming the track where extraordinary things happen: last years, Lewis first victory, the unforgettable overtake of Sato over Alonso, the Williams podium finish and the terrifying Kubica accident.

This year: the Lewis mistake over the race leader Raikkonen, the first Polish to win a F1 race, the first one-two podium for the BMW team, the first BMW victory.

There are plenty of reasons to think that Montreal is amid F1 season a good race to break the normality of the previous races. I have been to this race in the last four years and for me is the most important event of the year.

Thank goodness for F1. Thank goodness for Montreal.
Orlando Galan

A Refresher Course For Simon
Dear old Simon says that in 35 years of watching GP racing he has never seen such amateurism - ie Lewis Hamilton. His memory eludes him. The great Senna had more crashes than any other driver in his history of the sport - such was his almost demonic desire to win.

Does he not remember the way he almost caused a major catastrophe when he drove Prost into the pit wall? Does he not remember how he admitted to taking out Prost in the Japanese Grand prix? Does he not remember how when he was miles ahead of everyone, he crashed out in the Monaco Grand? Oh another one.

No team in the last 30 years, or maybe ever, has ever won every Grand Prix in the year. McLaren could have in the 80's when they won everyone bar one, the Italian Grand prix. What happened? Senna made a complete hash of passing a back marker, again whilst miles ahead of everyone. He and the back marker collided and bang went the record.

So dear Simon, other great drivers make silly mistakes. If they didn't, where's the intrigue and excitement.
Michael Duffett

Post to del.icio.us

E-mail Article Print-Friendly Version Subscribe to Letters RSS Feed