Inconsistancies from the stewards - again?

Mr V · 27 Sep 2009, 19:17 (Ref:2549319)

Just wondering, Mark had to let Fernando (and Timo, due to position) back past after taking him on the outside of the circuit, but reviewing the start of the Spa race, Kimi entered the first turn, 4th, ran wide, off the circuit and rejoined 3rd, this allowed him a run on the 2nd placed car coming out of Eau Rouge, but no penalty. When is there going to be consistancy in F1? Or were the 2 incidents different and should be treated differently?

jab · 27 Sep 2009, 19:20 (Ref:2549321)

The 2 incidents should have been treated separately, i.e. Kimi should've been penalised but not Mark. Raikkonen definitely chose to go off the road at Spa. Webber had nowhere else to go today - Alonso went off as well. It's pretty much the same scenario as Monaco 2005, actually - no penalties handed out there

Marbot · 27 Sep 2009, 19:40 (Ref:2549333)

Webber got the place back on Button in Valencia.It seems to work for and against you at times.

**Adam43** · 27 Sep 2009, 20:11 (Ref:2549352)

Well Mark got what he asked for at the previous street circuit as botty mentioned.

As mentioned in the Spa Kimi thread we don't know what was said in the driver's briefing. About first laps, specific corners, etc...

These penalties are distasteful, but I'm not really bothered about inconsistency. Especially as when it happened I thought that he would be penalised, I applied consistency.

koper · 27 Sep 2009, 22:05 (Ref:2549406)

I also thought about the same. In this one it seemed for me as Ferni pushed him outside the kerbs, however I'm not too sure now - I would have to watch it again.
Nevertheless, in 'selected driver quotes' even Mark compared it to Kimi/Spa:
"My race was heavily compromised from there. I thought the incident was fifty/fifty – but the stewards decided I had to let Fernando and Glock through, so I lost the hard work I’d done during my first stint. It was a hard penalty I think, Kimi did something similar in Spa and got away with it"

Jam35 · 27 Sep 2009, 22:13 (Ref:2549410)

With the current FIA overtaking nonsense, Alan Jones would have come second in the 1979 French Grand Prix.

JABWOA · 27 Sep 2009, 22:55 (Ref:2549430)

Webber was robbed on this one. And Glock got a freebie, as he wouldn't have been able to make the move on Alonso if Alonso hadn't run wide, who only ran wide defending from Mark who was in front of him, just on the wrong side.

But we don't know what was said in the Drivers Briefing (as mentioned previously, Spa had some discussions about viable spots on the opening laps.)

marcel82 · 27 Sep 2009, 23:08 (Ref:2549435)

inconsistensies?
how about: Renault almost getting a 1 race ban for sending out a car that has wheel problem vs nobody caring about Red Bull Racing sending out a car that has a brake problem.

Marbot · 27 Sep 2009, 23:48 (Ref:2549448)

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcel82

inconsistensies?
how about: Renault almost getting a 1 race ban for sending out a car that has wheel problem vs nobody caring about Red Bull Racing sending out a car that has a brake problem.

I suspect that when RedBull sent Webber on his way that the brakes were fully operational,if a little on the worn side.It's not like someone said: "Oh look! the brake disc has completely disappeared!....off you go Mark!"

There were other cars in the race that also had obvious brake problems (Button's) but were 'managed' in order to finish the race.

Trev Campbell · 27 Sep 2009, 23:53 (Ref:2549449)

I think it shows just how stupid F1 is at the moment. F1 has pretty much no passing, A guy pulls a gutsy move around the outside !!!! It was on the hectic first lap and then he gets the double penalty of having to let 2 drivers through. Which turned into a triple penalty. When becuase of his road positon due to the penalty the saftey car buggered his race even more.

Also Fisi had a very similar incident later in the race and wasn't penilised !!!!!

scoobiesnoop · 28 Sep 2009, 00:14 (Ref:2549457)

It did seem a bit of a nasty penalty given KR's move at spa but then it's just what we have come to expect from the Stewards. I'm sure they just throw a coin up in the air and call, heads he's penalised, tails he gets away with it.

jab · 28 Sep 2009, 00:56 (Ref:2549466)

The method which they use to decide which punishment to go for is based on this

Marbot · 28 Sep 2009, 01:17 (Ref:2549470)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jab

The method which they use to decide which punishment to go for is based on

Well at least they used a headless chicken,whereas the stewards seem to use a headless slug at times.

johnh875 · 28 Sep 2009, 01:31 (Ref:2549472)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trev Campbell

I think it shows just how stupid F1 is at the moment. F1 has pretty much no passing, A guy pulls a gutsy move around the outside !!!! It was on the hectic first lap and then he gets the double penalty of having to let 2 drivers through.

Agreed, does not do much for the prospect of racing.

As for comparisons with Button, IMO there is a difference between using the inside and outside of a corner, one is shortcutting, one is not.

Armco Bender · 28 Sep 2009, 04:44 (Ref:2549498)

Quote:

Kimi entered the first turn, 4th, ran wide, off the circuit and rejoined 3rd, this allowed him a run on the 2nd placed car coming out of Eau Rouge, but no penalty.

.......let it go V...

1200Datto27 · 28 Sep 2009, 06:07 (Ref:2549512)

I Just rewatched the telecast, and as far as I can tell, the only reason that Alonso was in the position that he was in was that he ran wide in turn one and had all of his wheels on the wrong side of the white line. So it has to be asked, why was this not penalised, especially as MB and JL stated just before the start of the race that the drivers had been warned about cutting turn one and would be penalised for doing so.

Mr V · 28 Sep 2009, 07:29 (Ref:2549535)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

.......let it go V...

I find it hard enough to find things to post about on here nowadays as it is, when i do find something to talk about, i have to go for it

csirl · 28 Sep 2009, 09:13 (Ref:2549573)

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcel82

inconsistensies?
how about: Renault almost getting a 1 race ban for sending out a car that has wheel problem vs nobody caring about Red Bull Racing sending out a car that has a brake problem.

And Red Bull sending out a car which had a mirror fly off without contact.

csirl · 28 Sep 2009, 09:16 (Ref:2549576)

This chicane, run-off area stuff needs to stop - its a farce. If the FIA wants to stop people using chicanes and run off areas, then they should built some physical features in which disadvantage anyone who uses them e.g. large kerbs, speed bumps, gravel, grass, barriers etc.

steve_r · 28 Sep 2009, 09:18 (Ref:2549578)

What would have happened if Alonso had a temporary problem, prior to the decision being made that Webber had to let him back through, that dropped Alonso behind 7 or 8 other cars?

Armco Bender · 28 Sep 2009, 10:32 (Ref:2549613)

..the team would have told him to crash....

bravo · 28 Sep 2009, 10:48 (Ref:2549624)

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_r

What would have happened if Alonso had a temporary problem, prior to the decision being made that Webber had to let him back through, that dropped Alonso behind 7 or 8 other cars?

If he had lost 7 or 8 places then he would have been 6 places behind Webber already.

Splatz the Cow · 28 Sep 2009, 13:07 (Ref:2549705)

Hold on a sec here folks, coz I think it needs to be thought about in a different way from the Spa/Kimi issue.

Webber got in front of Alonso by going outside the circuit marking, and this has always got a penalty when it's occured after the first lap.

He was off the corner by metres, and straight away it looked like an illegal move, don't you think?

It's pretty clear that the FIA did let the Spa incident go because it was at the first corner on first lap, and the were 19,063.5 cars going into it at once.

We may agree/disagree with either or both of the decisions, but they are only the same in that a driver got an advantage by putting all four wheels outside the track. Apart from that one feature, two incidents have many differences, significant enough to warrant different treatment.

Ricky Bobby · 28 Sep 2009, 13:38 (Ref:2549727)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

..the team would have told him to crash....

Pure gold Armco.

neiltb · 28 Sep 2009, 13:45 (Ref:2549731)

it could've been worse, he might have got a drive through

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Stewards	skaife2	Australasian Touring Cars.	18	16 Jul 2009 13:38
Inconsistancies	andymr	Racers Forum	37	22 Jan 2007 22:10
Stewards = God	Archer	Australasian Touring Cars.	21	15 Nov 2003 03:37
SACK the Stewards!!!	Scott75	Australasian Touring Cars.	27	13 Oct 2003 23:39
The Same Stewards At Every Race.	Adam43	Formula One	17	10 Oct 2003 22:38