2009 Belgian GP.

Slutmonkey57b

No, you don't. You might wish you did, but you don't. Kimi drove a great race. But the fact remains that having gone off the track, he rejoined having gained two places. If the stewards were up to the job, then he would have been either penalised, or told to give the places back (like Button had to in the previous race, or Hamilton in the same race the year before.)

It's about consistancy in decision making from the stewards, nothing else.

Ghost Train wrote: »

As for Kimi, he took a chance going out wide and it worked out, Button lost out by doing it, maybe next year there will be a new rule about it

There is a rule about it already, the stewards and the race director just can't be trusted to apply it.

muckwarrior

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

No, you don't. You might wish you did, but you don't. Kimi drove a great race. But the fact remains that having gone off the track, he rejoined having gained two places. If the stewards were up to the job, then he would have been either penalised, or told to give the places back (like Button had to in the previous race, or Hamilton in the same race the year before.)

The difference with those cases is that they took shortcuts. Raikonnen took the long way round, which at any other time besides the race start would be a much slower route. I'd imagine even at the start it's not guaranteed to be faster, only if the cars in the pack manage to hold each other up.

vectra

Did anyone spot another car ( I think a red bull ) going wide off the track half way round the lap and overtaking a car?
I havent heard any criticism about that funnily enough :rolleyes:

Ghost Train

The flag on the pit board looks a bit more Irish than Indian

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/8/9858.html

vectra

Ghost Train wrote: »

The flag on the pit board looks a bit more Irish than Indian

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/8/9858.html

LOL
well
Fisi did drive for Jordan

Ghost Train

vectra wrote: »

LOL
well
Fisi did drive for Jordan

looking at it again maybe it could pass for an italian flag

afatbollix

Ghost Train wrote: »

I thought it used to be a case that some of the cameras were blanks, same weight but no camera. But maybe it is the case these days that they all have real cameras. Maybe they production company just keep back some of the footage, the onbaords they did show were pretty cool

Does look like Button could have given the renault a bit more room, Rubens was lucky nobody moved to the left as he came flying into the corner at the end of the straight

As for Kimi, he took a chance going out wide and it worked out, Button lost out by doing it, maybe next year there will be a new rule about it

every car has a on board camera.. but as there is over 100 cameras being used during a F1 race not all of them are being recorded.. so if its not recorded they cant show replays of it..

Charlie-Bravo

Ghost Train wrote: »

The flag on the pit board looks a bit more Irish than Indian

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/8/9858.html

Looks a bit irish...but the green should be darker!

Defo not the Flag of India...it should be horizontally with orange (or deep saffron) at top, then white, then green and with a wheel in the centre called Ashoka Chakra

There's a restaurant in Greystones called Chakra by Jaipur....I didn't know where the name for the restaurant came exactly from...thanks wiki!!!

Ghost Train

astrofluff wrote: »

Looks a bit irish...but the green should be darker!

Defo not the Flag of India...it should be horizontally with orange (or deep saffron) at top, then white, then green and with a wheel in the centre called Ashoka Chakra

There's a restaurant in Greystones called Chakra by Jaipur....I didn't know where the name for the restaurant came exactly from...thanks wiki!!!

yep, i know its not the indian flag... but maybe it was the closest they had or something? maybe its faded italian flag

here are the three flags

kierank01

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Any detriment in the quality of the tarmac in the run off area is more than made up for by the fact that you have clear space in front of you to accelerate in. You may very well be slower than if you were driving on the racing line on a clear track, but you are still going faster than the cars jockying for position coming off the start line.

I don't really know what all the fuss is, they have been using that 'run off' area for years. I remember seeing 2 cars coming out of the hairpin, and the first went wide, and the second went tight the first car was not any further ahead going into eau rouge, and it would not have lost a position if it exited the hairpin tight.

Slutmonkey57b

vectra wrote: »

Did anyone spot another car ( I think a red bull ) going wide off the track half way round the lap and overtaking a car?
I havent heard any criticism about that funnily enough :rolleyes:

Yes you did - I didn't criticise Kimi, I criticised the stewards who can't be trusted to run the races, and specifically their failure to apply the same rule two races, or two years in a row. Since the races are televised and there are cameras on each car, the stewards and race control have no excuse whatsoever for "missing" either of those incidents, or failing to punish them.

muckwarrior wrote: »

The difference with those cases is that they took shortcuts. Raikonnen took the long way round, which at any other time besides the race start would be a much slower route. I'd imagine even at the start it's not guaranteed to be faster, only if the cars in the pack manage to hold each other up.

The rule is very simple - you cannot gain an advantage by going off the track. If you gain a place you must give it back. A "shortcut" by cutting a chicane is no different from a "longcut" where you gain a speed advantage (or avoid braking).

kierank01 wrote: »

I don't really know what all the fuss is, they have been using that 'run off' area for years. I remember seeing 2 cars coming out of the hairpin, and the first went wide, and the second went tight the first car was not any further ahead going into eau rouge, and it would not have lost a position if it exited the hairpin tight.

The fuss is simple: in the past few years, stewards at practically every track have meddled with the race result, failed to punish obvious rule breaking, issued punishments where none were warranted, issued punishments that were way over the top, punished the wrong driver, or made stuff up as they go along. You could argue that this is a side effect of Max and Charlie Whiting's rule, as they're both very fond of making stuff up as they go along. In either event, it's massively damaging the sport, and opens teams (particularly Ferrari) to allegations of favourable treatment or "special" rules.

amacachi

Sweet Jesus vectra why the **** would I have sour grapes!? I'm a ****in massive Kimi fan as you should know by now and was delighted to see him finally get a win this year, just annoyed I didn't make anything on it when I said he'd do it a week in advance, but just because I'm a fan of someone doesn't mean I won't call things as I see them and the way I see it Kimi gained a big advantage by steaming into the first corner with three cars (at least, can't see more from the onboard) ahead of him, carried more speed through it than anyone else and came out with 2 cars ahead of him. Whatever way you cut it he gained an advantage by going off track.

vectra

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

The rule is very simple - you cannot gain an advantage by going off the track. If you gain a place you must give it back. A "shortcut" by cutting a chicane is no different from a "longcut" where you gain a speed advantage (or avoid braking)
.

So let me get this right.

You are saying that kimi runs wide on turn one while several other cars squabble anf hold each other up.. Kimi is supposed to wait and decide which two cars he should let by once they all get going again..?

by any chance did you see how long it took Barrichello to get going??
He nearly caught them all up just after Eau Rouge.
How can you expect kimi to wait around that long.

I can understand a penalty for doing something like that during a race but not on turn one..
How many races have incidents at turn one?
Isnt it best for stewarts to take a deep breath and think " Good,, No accident that time"

vectra

amacachi wrote: »

but just because I'm a fan of someone doesn't mean I won't call things as I see them and the way I see it Kimi gained a big advantage by steaming into the first corner with three cars (at least, can't see more from the onboard) ahead of him, carried more speed through it than anyone else and came out with 2 cars ahead of him. Whatever way you cut it he gained an advantage by going off track.

as above
He didnt gain an advantage
he avoided a squabble at turn one.
Perfectly acceptable

Slutmonkey57b

You are now decending into the realm of Soccer forum gibberish. If overtaking 2 cars while off the track isn't "gaining an advantage", then there's no use continuing the discussion.

amacachi

The criticism we're making is of the stewards.

vectra

Whatever way you look at it.. Kimi won... and he won cleanly and fairly.. Unlike a certain Mr.Schumacher.. Look at how he won came home first in Shed loads of races and how he won Took titles... Not much criticism there.

EvilMonkey

vectra wrote: »

Whatever way you look at it.. Kimi won... and he won cleanly and fairly.. Unlike a certain Mr.Schumacher.. Look at how he won came home first in Shed loads of races and how he won Took titles... Not much criticism there.

wtf has it got to do with Schumacher? Are you seriously saying no one ever criticized him?

Kimi defiantly gained an advantage he knew he would get away with it and seems to me had it planned if the first corner got too tight he would do it. It was smart.

Kimi is one of my favourite drivers and I am delighted he won! no sour grapes.

andyman

vectra wrote: »

as above
He didnt gain an advantage
he avoided a squabble at turn one.
Perfectly acceptable

So did Hamilton last season, but that was still gaining an advantage even though he gave the advantage and the momentum back to Kimi. I remember arguing this non-stop with you last year.

This situation regarding Kimi is no different. All the cars are bunched up and Kimi has all that room on the outside. The rest of the cars (bar one or two) are all able to get through turn one with out a problem, surely Kimi is capable of doing that as well?

I'm not saying you're wrong re: avoiding a squabble. But you can avoid a squabble and gain an advantage at the same time.

RayM

vectra wrote: »

as above
He didnt gain an advantage
he avoided a squabble at turn one.
Perfectly acceptable

He did gain an advantage. However, I think what he did was completely fine. It's not like he cut a corner or anything. The advantage was gained by running wide, and the FIA can't outlaw understeering into corners. They should probably do something about that turn for next year though - otherwise it'll become a bit crowded, with everyone using it.

With regard to Schumacher, he won those seven titles, fair and square. Even at Adelaide in 1994, when he held his line as Hill tried that ridiculously optimistic lunge down the inside.

muckwarrior

RayM wrote: »

With regard to Schumacher, he won those seven titles, fair and square. Even at Adelaide in 1994, when he held his line as Hill tried that ridiculously optimistic lunge down the inside.

Lol. I suppose in 97 it was Villeneuves fault as well?

RayM

muckwarrior wrote: »

Lol. I suppose in 97 it was Villeneuves fault as well?

Schumacher didn't win the championship in 1997.

Ghost Train

RayM wrote: »

With regard to Schumacher, he won those seven titles, fair and square. Even at Adelaide in 1994, when he held his line as Hill tried that ridiculously optimistic lunge down the inside.

he didn't really hold his line :pac:

I would have been okay with kimi getting a drive through for gaining a place at the start... but I guess at the start of the race there might be a bit of extra leeway given while drivers fight for position? And Kimi was getting pushed wide

If it was a one on one battle between two drivers maybe I would look at it a bit differently

vectra

Ficus wrote: »

I was there last year and was chatting to a race offical and that subject came up, to which he explained that the drivers are afforded a certain amount of leeway for the first turn and running wide around the outside, especially to avoid contact.
.

In a nutshell

EvilMonkey wrote: »

Kimi defiantly gained an advantage he knew he would get away with it and seems to me had it planned if the first corner got too tight he would do it. It was smart.
Kimi is one of my favourite drivers and I am delighted he won! no sour grapes.

Glad you see it my way

andyman wrote: »

So did Hamilton last season, but that was still gaining an advantage even though he gave the advantage and the momentum back to Kimi. I remember arguing this non-stop with you last year.

This situation regarding Kimi is no different. .

No,
Isnt that the main reason Lewis was penalised.
Look back at that race.
lewis lunged down outside Kimi ( which he tried on all drivers all season ) Somehow he seemed to think everyone should back off for him.
Anyhow.
When the overtake failed he cut through a chicane ( making the track shorter, unlike Kimi who made the track longer )
he then gave the place back to Kimi but immediatley raced to gain it back. Had he held off until the first corner and took it back then i dont think he would have got penalised.

RayM wrote: »

He did gain an advantage. However, I think what he did was completely fine. It's not like he cut a corner or anything. The advantage was gained by running wide, and the FIA can't outlaw understeering into corners. They should probably do something about that turn for next year though - otherwise it'll become a bit crowded, with everyone using it.

With regard to Schumacher, he won those seven titles, fair and square. Even at Adelaide in 1994, when he held his line as Hill tried that ridiculously optimistic lunge down the inside.

Held his line...!!
LOL
On three wheels..:D
Defiantly took Hill out.

RayM wrote: »

Schumacher didn't win the championship in 1997.

Black Flagged for the Villi move;)

Robbo

vectra wrote: »

Whatever way you look at it.. Kimi won... and he won cleanly and fairly.. Unlike a certain Mr.Schumacher.. Look at how he won came home first in Shed loads of races and how he won Took titles... Not much criticism there.

Don't forget he basically killed Senna, as has been intimated here...

RayM

vectra wrote:

Held his line...!!
LOL
On three wheels..
Defiantly took Hill out.

Hill unnecessarily lunged down the inside, somehow believing that Schumacher would back off for him(!) Schumacher closed the door, as was his right.

vectra wrote:

Black Flagged for the Villi move

Did you watch that race? He wasn't black flagged at Jerez. How could he have been black flagged when his race was already over as soon as he rammed Villeneuve's car.

muckwarrior

RayM wrote: »

Did you watch that race? He wasn't black flagged at Jerez. How could he have been black flagged when his race was already over as soon as he rammed Villeneuve's car.

Yeah, he wasn't black flagged, just kicked out of the championship afterwards, for a move that was marginally worse than what he did to Hill.

vectra

RayM wrote: »

Hill unnecessarily lunged down the inside, somehow believing that Schumacher would back off for him(!) Schumacher closed the door, as was his right.

Same as lewis Unnecessarily lunged around Kimi in Spa last year?
But
on saying that
Schumacher was on 3 wheels at that point so Hill was justified in what he did. No was would anyone expect a driver to cut him off to win the wdc when he was already out. Now.
If you want to somehow in your cluded world believe the Schumacher was right then best of luck to you

RayM wrote: »

Did you watch that race? He wasn't black flagged at Jerez. How could he have been black flagged when his race was already over as soon as he rammed Villeneuve's car.

Black Flagged... Disqualified.. Whats the difference.. He did the dirty and paid the price.

Dirty driver
always was and always will be remembered for it

Robbo

Is there any thread here that can't, in a moment of semi-autistic monomania, be turned into pissing match on the moral compass of Michael Schumacher?

vectra

Robbo wrote: »

Is there any thread here that can't, in a moment of semi-autistic monomania, be turned into pissing match on the moral compass of Michael Schumacher?

Simply making comparisons.

I have a belief in an old saying :
"What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander"

In other words
if it is ok for Schumie to cheat and get away with it then why not for anyone else.

RayM

vectra wrote: »

Same as lewis Unnecessarily lunged around Kimi in Spa last year?
But
on saying that
Schumacher was on 3 wheels at that point so Hill was justified in what he did. No was would anyone expect a driver to cut him off to win the wdc when he was already out. Now.
If you want to somehow in your cluded world believe the Schumacher was right then best of luck to you

Schumacher wasn't on three wheels. Hill (somehow) didn't realise that he had hit the wall and damaged his car at the previous corner. If he had known, he would have presumably just waited patiently for him to retire. If you watch the clip of that incident, you will see that Schumacher was first into that corner and followed a normal line (damaged car or no damaged car). By which point, Hill had committed to the manoeuvre and had nowhere to go - other than into the side of the Benetton. Schumacher wasn't (and couldn't have been) punished for that, because there was no proof that he deliberately steered into Hill.

And even if I was to concede (despite not being able to read his mind) that Schumacher undeniably, quite deliberately rammed Hill in Adelaide, the premise of your comment that he took (as opposed to won) all those wins and titles is still entirely disingenuous. He was, without even the tiniest scintilla of a shadow of an iota of a doubt, the greatest Formula One driver of his era.

vectra wrote: »

Black Flagged... Disqualified.. Whats the difference.. He did the dirty and paid the price.

A huge difference. He was disqualified from the championship (second place, which was meaningless to him anyway) - not the race. His race results, wins and points from 1997 still stand. The real punishment was when he, in the words of Martin Brundle, "hit the wrong part of the Williams".

vectra wrote: »

Dirty driver
always was and always will be remembered for it

You're clearly not a fan - which, just like your unquestioning support for Raikkonen, clouds your judgement where he is concerned.

The point I'm making is not that Schumacher never cheated. He did cheat. But when he did (like in Jerez 1997 and Monaco qualifying in 2006), he didn't get away with it.

What Raikkonen did on Sunday may well have been slightly less-than-sporting, but that's the difference between great drivers and good drivers. Look at the Champions of the past 20 years. Alonso, Mansell, Schumacher, Senna, Prost, Hamilton and Raikkonen have had their little moments of unsporting behaviour and ruthlessness. Hill, Villeneuve and Hakkinen are exceptions, but they were all merely 'good' drivers, who could only win in cars that were the class of the field.

Raikkonen saw his chance and took it, and won because of it... in a car that does not deserve to win races. It almost makes up for his many displays of mediocrity since winning the Championship.

vectra

RayM wrote: »

Schumacher wasn't on three wheels.

I wouldnt even bother reading beyond this statement from you.

3 wheels

Hit the wall and damaged his steering .
Only one option to win take the title was to cut across Hill.

Thats what happened
Like it or not.

RayM

vectra wrote: »

I wouldnt even bother reading beyond this statement from you.

I wouldn't expect you to. Reasoned discussion doesn't appear to be your strong point, does it?

vectra wrote:

Only one option to win take the title was to cut across Hill.

The corner was his. He was there first. That's the way car racing works. If you dive down the inside of someone, like Hill did, or like Hamilton did in Belgium 2008, the consequences won't always be to your liking. That's the great thing about Formula One. It's risky. Fortune favours the brave. Raikkonen took a risk on Sunday - it paid off nicely. Of course, it would have been sporting for Schumacher to acknowledge that his car was probably broken beyond repair and allow Hill through. Just as it would have been 'sporting' for Raikkonen to stay on the track with everyone else. Again though, that's the difference between the great drivers and the good ones...

vectra

RayM wrote: »

I wouldn't expect you to. Reasoned discussion doesn't appear to be your strong point, does it?

The corner was his

OK
fair enough.

Lets go your way then for a moment

Reasoned discussion.
What reasoning had Schumacher to cut across Hills path?


Explain how exactly the corner was his when his car was not capable of finishing the race?

RayM

vectra wrote: »

Explain how exactly the corner was his when his car was not capable of finishing the race?

Was his car incapable of finishing the race? Could he have been 100% sure of that at the time? At worst, it was 'unsportsmanlike behaviour' (if Schumacher was certain that his car was damaged beyond repair), but it was not against the rules. An opinion also held by the race stewards on the day.

What about his other six Championships though? Did he win or 'take' them? Does Raikkonen's questionable sportsmanship on Sunday mean that (despite breaking no rules) he 'took' the win from Fisichella?

vectra

RayM wrote: »

Was his car incapable of finishing the race? Could he have been 100% sure of that at the time? At worst, it was 'unsportsmanlike behaviour' (if Schumacher was certain that his car was damaged beyond repair), but it was not against the rules. An opinion also held by the race stewards on the day.

What about his other six Championships though? Did he win or 'take' them? Does Raikkonen's questionable sportsmanship on Sunday mean that (despite breaking no rules) he 'took' the win from Fisichella?

I was not talking about his other 6 titles.

We are discussing the particular one that he deliberately took Hill out. A blind man could see that.

It is obvious to all Michael was never going to be the race winner with the car in that state so yes Damon could've, should've waited but Schuie's desire to win got the better of him. For what it is worth, I do have respect for Michael.

As For Kimi last Sunday.
I dont recall him trying to take Fisi out to take the win.
I also do not see how the first corner taken by Kimi had anything to do with the overtake after the safety car that Kimi had on Fisi.

RayM

vectra wrote: »

I also do not see how the first corner taken by Kimi had anything to do with the overtake after the safety car that Kimi had on Fisi.

Without having run wide to overtake those cars on the first corner, would Raikkonen have been running directly behind Fisichella when the safety car went in? Who knows? I'm not knocking him though - it was the best and most determined piece of driving I've seen from Raikkonen since 2007. If Ferrari ditch him in favour of Alonso, I hope he ends up back at McLaren next year.

vectra

RayM wrote: »

If Ferrari ditch him in favour of Alonso, I hope he ends up back at McLaren next year.

You are now officially my friend for life.
I have all fingers and toes crossed for this to happen
I still feel Kimi's downfall was the move to Ferrari. That long wheelbase just does not seem to suit him

:cool:

ottostreet

There hasn't been a word out of the FIA or any official on the 'kimi line', as i call it. Kimi does this regularly. Watch onboard at the start of last years race, and his line around Pouhon last year following Lewis after Lewis got ahead of him. Kimi also overtook Coultahrd and...Kovalainen? using this method around the sweeping right hander at Fuji in 2007..until the FIA say 'No dear drivers, you cannot make the track longer to suit yourself, then Kimi is making the most of an advantage that only he seems to have spotted. If these run off areas were still gravel traps, it wouldnt be happening anyway.

If the FIA or other teams/drivers have an issue with it,why dont they raise it? Otherwise, we should all shut up about something that is still, unquestionably, legal.

ottostreet

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Well I have always stated that the removal of gravel traps was a bad idea. The idea is that if you stuff it off the track then tough, no easy escape.

i completely agree. stuff like hakkinen spinning off at monza 99, and then crying..its the stuff of legend, and happened because his mclaren got bogged down in gravel. i realise that chicane is changed now, but every chicane at monza now has run offs instead of gravel. i hate the sterilisation of the tracks, but drivers who take full advantage of the extra tarmac on the OUTSIDE of corners should not be punished.

Slutmonkey57b

I don't see why. The rules are explicit and state that a driver may not leave the track (denoted by the white lines) and gain an advantage. It makes a point of not differentiating why the driver went off, how he went off, or what curvature of the track was involved.

As usual though, the problem is not with the drivers, it's with the stewards who can't be trusted to see what 90 million people watching the same video feed can see.

Back to the race, this really showed how close everything is this year - less than a minute at the end of the race between the winner and the man second last, over one of the longest tracks in the calender. The thing about Force India's "shock" improvement is that I think people have forgotten that compared to previous years, they were never that far behind. Even 5 or 6 years ago there would be a good 3 seconds in lap time between leading teams and bottom feeders - now there's only just over a second. Unless Luca's driving.

Speaking of which, what sealed his fate as a bad driver more than slowness was watching him in the gravel trap after his qualifying shunt, back end wrecked, uselessly putting his foot down in an attempt to get out.... look in your mirror mate, your right rear is up in the air.

Ghost Train

Yep is great that you don't have the leaders lapping most of the field like other years... just hope it doesn't get in the way of the main title contenders in the last few races, when it comes down to it would be good to have a the main contenders in some close racing on the track, but I guess whatever happens happens

amacachi

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

I don't see why. The rules are explicit and state that a driver may not leave the track (denoted by the white lines) and gain an advantage. It makes a point of not differentiating why the driver went off, how he went off, or what curvature of the track was involved.

Agreeing with that is the last thing I'm saying on the matter.

muckwarrior

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Even 5 or 6 years ago there would be a good 3 seconds in lap time between leading teams and bottom feeders - now there's only just over a second.

Yeah it's great. Also quite surprising considering they all basically started from a clean sheet this year. I thought it would have the opposite effect.