BBC BLOGS - F1 Mole
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
« Previous | Main | Next »

Hamilton makes a swift getaway at Sepang

Post categories:

F1 Mole | 15:21 UK time, Thursday, 2 April 2009

It might not have been the best of days for Lewis Hamilton or McLaren, but the team played a blinder when it came to keeping the world champion away from the media melee in Malaysia.

Hamilton was stripped of his third-place finish in last Sunday's Australian Grand Prix and Toyota's Jarno Trulli reinstated after a hearing in Sepang.

The sport's governing body decided to exclude the Englishman from the results for "misleading the stewards" as they tried to determine whether Trulli broke the sport's rules by passing Hamilton when the safety car was on the Melbourne track.

whitmarsh595_335.gif

McLaren's team orders worked to perfection on Thursday as Hamilton snuck away from the Sepang circuit without answering a single question.

Martin Whitmarsh's first media scrum since taking over as team principal from Ron Dennis provided the perfect distraction.

Whitmarsh, the vein in his temple throbbing, held the world's media captive in front of the McLaren garage as he faced an intense interrogation into Hamilton's disqualification in Australia.

That gave Hamilton enough time to nip out of the garage's side exit and evade the press pack in an overtaking manoeuvre timed to perfection.

A handful of eagle-eyed television cameramen did spot Hamilton, but by the time they peeled away to give chase, it was too late - Hamilton had made his getaway.

McLaren succeeded in ushering Hamilton to safety, at least for tonight, leaving the world champion free to do his talking on the track when first practice starts at 1000 local time on Friday.

Comments

  • 1. At 4:45pm on 02 Apr 2009, cleverbillsmith wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 2. At 4:51pm on 02 Apr 2009, Doonytime wrote:

    I find it hard to believe that Lewis actually 'lied'. That's such a strong word.
    Surely in all investigations, it is the job of the authorities; whoever they may be, to ask the questions and delve and probe to get to the answers.
    It seems the stewards failed, at this time, to ask the right questions, and Lewis answered what he was asked.
    In any case, why they couldn't just revert the race results back to how they were before all this started is beyond me.
    McLaren being penalised - again.
    At least it's only race 1 - there's plenty of time to make up the points and the positions.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 5:07pm on 02 Apr 2009, glidester wrote:

    You have to hand it to Mclaren, another great move by them! They had 4th, but not satisfied they tried to push there luck (and the truth) and end up with no points and egg on their face for their troubles.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 5:11pm on 02 Apr 2009, Z-Kevin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 5. At 5:19pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 6. At 5:27pm on 02 Apr 2009, Ruining wrote:

    I still don't buy that McLaren were capable of "misleading the stewards". Why would they say that they didn't give Lewis orders to let Trulli pass when they knew the FIA had access to all their radio comms?

    Also, if the stewards are that easily misled (despite the fact that they should have reviewed everything in the first place) then in my opinion they don't deserve to be officiating this sport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 5:27pm on 02 Apr 2009, Z-Kevin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 8. At 5:28pm on 02 Apr 2009, SayNoTaSilva wrote:

    Perhaps the stewards could penalise Whitmarsh for not informing the press of Hamiltons location during the press melee... I'd hate to be married to one of those stewards.. just imagine...

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 5:39pm on 02 Apr 2009, Kíllìnghölmê_Clᥠ(aka Charlie Cheesecake) wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 10. At 5:45pm on 02 Apr 2009, jgthirtyseven wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 11. At 5:53pm on 02 Apr 2009, whodaman42 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 12. At 5:54pm on 02 Apr 2009, MUFFCA wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 13. At 6:05pm on 02 Apr 2009, f1-fan-2009 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 14. At 6:09pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 15. At 6:13pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:


    "Vodafone McLaren Mercedes acted in a manner prejudicial to the sport" and "deliberately misleading" the authorities?


    I think I've heard this one before!




    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 6:15pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:


    The honesty, integrity and credibility of Vodafone McLaren Mercedes and their employees takes yet another hammer blow. Their loyal fans and local press are trying really hard to hide their embarrassment.



    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 6:18pm on 02 Apr 2009, 1963Tiger wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 18. At 6:22pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 19. At 6:26pm on 02 Apr 2009, Kasonovo wrote:

    When is Hamilton going to grow up? First race and with a clearly inferior car he manages fourth place. Ferraris are without points and there is going to be an inquiry into whether the cars in front of him are actually legal. If they aren't, they'll be disqualified and those behind will pick up points. Perfect scenario and what does Hamilton do, "Hey let's not build on what we have - let's go for broke!" and manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again! I'm a Brit, I want Hamilton and McLaren to beat Ferrari and everyone else, but I'm beginning to lose interest in F1. It's great it's back on BBC, but it seems no longer about racing on the track, it's all about gamesmanship and scoring points off the track.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 6:30pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:


    It will be interesting to see how the "unbiased" BBC treats the incident, and how they find a way to either downplay it, or excuse the shameful and inexcusable, or challenge the decision in any way.

    ITV's example from last year will be a tough act to follow!




    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 6:33pm on 02 Apr 2009, egour_13 wrote:

    Next the FIA will be penalising Hamilton for speeding!!



    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 6:36pm on 02 Apr 2009, jenksta wrote:

    NikosBg. Thats 5 posts of Hamilton bashing. Anyone would think you are getting a kick out of this!

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 6:41pm on 02 Apr 2009, davery09 wrote:

    I think the FIA's decision was perfectly fair. Lewis and McLaren were asked if they had ordered Lewis to let Jarno Trulli back through, and they both said no. The radio transcript and TV interviews say they did. In the circumstances, the stewards were justified in feeling they were not being entirely above board. Granted, McLaren and Lewis have attracted more than their fair share of attention, but as Eddie Jordan said this is different. They haven't done themselves many favours acting as they have.

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 6:42pm on 02 Apr 2009, jgthirtyseven wrote:

    Is there any chance that the moderator will get around to reviewing comments complained about, rather than just reviewing new comments??!! There is absolutely nothing in my comment at no.10 that I believe breaks the house rules, particularly in comparison to some of the other comments that are being allowed

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 6:45pm on 02 Apr 2009, Dearls wrote:

    Hamilton, Great Driver, Useless Talker

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 6:49pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    Come on NikosBg, are you really that short sighted? Lewis argued with the team that he didn't have to let Jarno past and whilst discussing on the radio Jarno took back his place.
    Imagine talking on your mobile and driving in bumper to bumper traffic, would you stick close to the person in front or hold back a little to make sure you don't shunt them?
    Im sorry but Lewis was in control of the car, not the pit crew, it was down to Lewis to take action, which he didn't, no matter what is said to him on the radio.
    It is down to the stewards to PROVE he let Jarno passed, not just that he drove slowly and was overtaken and from the evidence, that is not the case. It is also down to the stewards to ask questions, and they had the recordings at the time yet they saw fit not to use them, yet now they decide to make an issue of it and be pedantic about it because Lewis and McLaren didn't give them a second by second account. surely it is down to the stewards to gather the evidence before they make a ruling, they failed to do so and it is them who should be penalised.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 6:50pm on 02 Apr 2009, Telloth wrote:

    Why would a race driver lie? Even if you think Hamilton is arrogant and the such, you cannot deny that he wouldn't have lied to the race stewards. In my opinion, this is an absolute disgrace. Maybe they did get the decision wrong, and Hamilton should have stayed back in fourth, but to say he deliberately mislead them......well I seriously doubt that was the case.
    For whatever reason, the stewards have something against Lewis and they have made that blatantly obvious.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 6:50pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 29. At 6:51pm on 02 Apr 2009, kinglouie wrote:

    I would love to make a comment but it seems the BBC and some readers don't like the truth so I had better say nothing.

    F1 is dead.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 6:54pm on 02 Apr 2009, U13879777 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 31. At 6:58pm on 02 Apr 2009, kinglouie wrote:

    I want my license fee back, the BBC is a Government Puppet.

    What happened to free speech, and you have the cheek to complain about China and censorship.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 7:01pm on 02 Apr 2009, kinglouie wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 33. At 7:15pm on 02 Apr 2009, cobrakaidojo1 wrote:

    what ever next, maybe there need to be more stewards how about one per car? this might help to monitor what is going on during the race etc. And with regards to Lewis misleading I think the information given by the driver and the team must only be a guide for them did the stewards not watch the race for them self's with so many cameras and different angles etc can they not make these decisions for them self s with out drive or team input?

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 7:15pm on 02 Apr 2009, ThomThomTiger wrote:

    Kasonovo - 'Going for broke' is what champions generally have to do - make those judgements that could easily go wrong but when based upon an individuals skill and temperament, could pay massive dividends. Who wants a 'play-safe' champion?

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 7:17pm on 02 Apr 2009, smokedog00 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 36. At 7:18pm on 02 Apr 2009, seavideo wrote:

    I'm actually amazed by the so-called "professional" behaviour of the FIA and Racing Stewards who apparently are incapable of conducting an enquiry. Do they have guidelines of how to conduct an enquiry or do they just "wing it"... They have video and audio feeds that they can review which will tell them EXACTLY what occurred. This can be presented to the involved parties and then any clarification questions can be asked. This is the "professional" way to do this. Obviously the FIA and its stewards have a long way to go to reach this standard which results in the absolute mess we are in now.
    If the FIA's goal is to tarnish F1 then this is exactly how to do it!!!
    Shame on them for completely mishandling a simple enquiry.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 7:28pm on 02 Apr 2009, n4w33d wrote:

    Does the audio transmission even clearly mention/say "Hamilton you must let Trulli pass"?
    or "Hamilton do not let Trulli pass"?

    However, in the media interview Hamilton says "I was told to let him pass"...

    Maybe my ears are ageing very rapidly...But during that transmission between Hamilton and Mclaren and the situation when it occurred what are you meant to say? Mclaren themselves were not sure what to do! They were waiting for confirmation but could not get through. If anything, it shows Mclaren want to play fairly and abide by the rules.

    Neither Trulli or Hamilton should have got penalised the way they did in the beginning.

    As Ruining mentioned:
    Also, if the stewards are that easily misled (despite the fact that they should have reviewed everything in the first place) then in my opinion they don't deserve to be officiating this sport.

    QFT!

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 7:30pm on 02 Apr 2009, RabidRooster wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 39. At 7:32pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 40. At 7:35pm on 02 Apr 2009, Kasonovo wrote:

    ThomThomTiger - agreed 'go for broke' on the track, but this is what happened when he was being questioned by the Stewards. And he knows they'll penalise him if there's even a sniff he might have done something wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 7:35pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    And to be completely honest, if F1 is dead and you dislike it so much, why are you commenting?

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 7:39pm on 02 Apr 2009, RabidRooster wrote:

    Why would Hamilton lie if it would be reviewed anyway? Do they think he's an idiot? Unbelievable! He is definitely treated differently to the other drivers. Why would that be?????

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 7:39pm on 02 Apr 2009, leeds_the_way wrote:

    NikosBG

    You all of last night attacking England and Capello, then all of today attacking Hamilton and Maclaren.

    You're coming across as a petulant teenager looking to incite participants of the BBC's website into an angered response. Am I anywhere near the mark?

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 7:40pm on 02 Apr 2009, type-here wrote:

    Who cares? No one (in this country) complained that Schumacher lost 36 points in 1994 for doing very little wrong. Hamilton's got off lightly so far... So the tables have turned, boo hoo.

    Complain about this comment

  • 45. At 7:43pm on 02 Apr 2009, final noodle wrote:

    FIA = USELESS

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 7:50pm on 02 Apr 2009, RabidRooster wrote:

    The censorship here is ridiculous. I bet it make Max Mosley proud. Great use of the license fee BBC!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 7:55pm on 02 Apr 2009, propmoe wrote:

    Yet again the powers to be of F1 decide an outcome of a race. F1 is becoming a farce, let the drivers race and let the fans enjotseeing them do it on race day.

    F1 bras should concetrate on promoting the sport not killing it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 7:59pm on 02 Apr 2009, Sir_Dark_Crusader wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 49. At 8:04pm on 02 Apr 2009, Group_B_KdF_Wagen wrote:


    This is precisely the sort of thing which causes me to find MotoGP and
    WRC a lot more worth my time than F1. In plain English : there is more
    racing and less post-race maneuvering.

    Whether you side with Hamilton & McLaren OR NOT, this stuff is simply
    pathetic.

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 8:18pm on 02 Apr 2009, liverpoolalwaysrock wrote:

    I totally agree that the stewards did not do a good job here. They should find all the evidence before make their decisions in the first place. A very good race a great start of the new season kind of been marred. The stewards may not ask the questions clearly but LH and McLaren did not give all the truth that's obviously and for sure it is misleading.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 8:20pm on 02 Apr 2009, Wazza v3 wrote:

    What is the point of F1? I believe i speak for many when i say thank god i am not a fan of this ridiculous sport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 8:27pm on 02 Apr 2009, Beejay wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 53. At 8:35pm on 02 Apr 2009, Fabbyulous wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 54. At 8:39pm on 02 Apr 2009, Fabbyulous wrote:

    NikosBG

    You all of last night attacking England and Capello, then all of today attacking Hamilton and Maclaren.

    You're coming across as a petulant teenager looking to incite participants of the BBC's website into an angered response. Am I anywhere near the mark?

    --------------------------------------------

    I'm beginning to worry that you're stalking him a little too much

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 8:42pm on 02 Apr 2009, 1967Ross wrote:

    I would like to see an official copy of the transcript from the meeting that took place between Hamilton, Ryan and the Stewards an hour after the race. At the moment all we have are the transcripts of the interview and McLaren's radio. The only other evidence we have comes from the stewards, via the FIA, who say that Hamilton misled them. In light of the Scott Andrew/Liuzzi time penalty affair from last year, I don't have much faith in this last piece of evidence.

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 8:43pm on 02 Apr 2009, ForzaFernando wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 57. At 8:44pm on 02 Apr 2009, 123eanglia wrote:

    Might I suggest in future delaying the podium ceremony until a week after the race? This way all the provisional standings would be confirmed or altered; it'd save a lot of confusion / trophy swapping and trips backwards and forwards to the bookies to return or pick up winnings.

    If this is going to be another farcical season like last year's then I fear a lot of viewers will turn off which would be a shame now that we can watch without all the annoying ads.

    Here's hoping things improve.

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 9:00pm on 02 Apr 2009, Martc6 wrote:

    The FIA and race stewards are killing the sport.
    Are we supposed to believe what we see on the podium or wait until the FIA, Stewards and lawers have gone through every conversation etc etc.
    You can keep changing the regulations all you want to improve the racing but if the result is changed after everyone has packed up and moved on, what is the point of watching F1? You might as well read the paper the following Friday to get the result.
    Progress? I think not..

    Someone get a grip of F1 before we all give up and leave..

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 9:04pm on 02 Apr 2009, Budgeesmuggler wrote:

    Hamilton let Trulli past, most likely under some unclear orders as McLaren weren`t sure what the situation was.
    That was fair, and I think good sportmanship considering Trulli had actually gone off the track.
    Then making a statement to the stewards that he hadn`t let him pass, which in effect gets Trulli disqualified was petty. It`s like diving in football - getting someone penalised unfairly to your advantage.

    I`m English, I want Hamilton, (or Button) to win the title again, and I like that Lewis drives on the edge, but this was over the edge.

    The punishment was fair - McLarens misleading evidence got Trulli DQ'ed so when it gets revealed they get DQ'ed themselves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 9:08pm on 02 Apr 2009, motorsport1 wrote:

    Regardless of the wrongs or rights I just wonder if the stewards would kindly publish the results of the Sundays Grand Prix tomorrow before practice starts. It would mean that the teams could all go home early, saving substantial amounts of money; I could avoid watching a Grand Prix in which the actual finish will bear no relation to the final results, saving me considerable time; and Bernie and Max can end up with the winners they want.

    And I was so looking forward to this new season... ho hum.

    By the way am I the only one slight confused by the penalty for Vettel. I don't believe that Kubica was ever more than half a cars length in front and wasn't on the inside of the turn. At worst it was a stupid racing incident by two men who wanted to win, or dare I say even come second, and who both should have known better. Still, let that not get in the way of another outstanding stewards decision.

    Perhaps in future drivers will settle for finishing where they started on the grid.

    Oh, no, wait, Bernie doesn't want that does he?

    Still better to penalise drivers for trying to hard than penalise no one at all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 9:10pm on 02 Apr 2009, Rich71 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 62. At 9:27pm on 02 Apr 2009, alanborky wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 63. At 9:31pm on 02 Apr 2009, Michael Curtis wrote:

    Why do the FIA make it so hard for themselves. Every car has a camera on it, they have access to the radios. Why don't they do the investigation about what they see and hear and then if they need to ask someone a question get them in.

    Surely watching the footage of the cars would be enough to decide what happened. Aren't the Brawn's racing under appeal as well. Trulli might yet win this race. F1 really knows how to shoot itself in the foot!

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 9:35pm on 02 Apr 2009, alanborky wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 65. At 10:03pm on 02 Apr 2009, nibs wrote:


    And ok, they're trying to break the rules, that's understandable, but they're a laughing stock at doing it!

    First the other genius who takes the swag to the photocopying shop :d

    And then on Sunday when the culprit conceals it from the authorities but before that goes and publicly admits on telly lol

    The guys are simply beyond belief.




    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 10:14pm on 02 Apr 2009, fogcmc wrote:

    This is the kind of thing that turns people off F1. The stewards interfering. The fairest thing would to have Hamilton third and Trulli fourth. Why are they always trying to change things. They should as much as possible leave the racing and results on the track. Why do people think there's a conspiracy against Mclaren and Hamilton...I wonder why???

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 10:25pm on 02 Apr 2009, joebobf1 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 68. At 10:25pm on 02 Apr 2009, Nicolapetrolhead wrote:

    I love F1 but its becoming (or IS) a joke. For the 2nd season running Bernie Ecclestone and his cronies (ie: Max Moseley etc) have imposed new rules and regulations to make the sport more interesting but to slow down the cars! Bernie thinks he is god because he owns F1 and its time he sold out to a younger person who can make just decisions. I am so so angry that the sport I love is being completely ruined by a bunch of badly run twits. aaagghhh

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 10:28pm on 02 Apr 2009, davery09 wrote:

    "n4w33d wrote:
    Does the audio transmission even clearly mention/say "Hamilton you must let Trulli pass"?
    or "Hamilton do not let Trulli pass"?"

    Yes, the transcript shows the team told Lewis, "Lewis, you need to allow the Toyota through. Allow the Toyota through now." It's pretty unequivocable really.

    As far as the "why didn't the stewards have this before" comments are concerned, I'm not sure whether the radio transcripts would have been available to the stewards that soon after the race (1 hour). From the sound of it they only had the video footage and the statements from the teams. The radio feed isn't stored on the same system as the video so I'm guessing it wasn't initially available. The delay in having the second hearing is more down to practicality - the earliest they could have had a new hearing was Thursday as it's the first day of the next race weekend. It's unfortunate, but I'd rather have the correct result than go with how things first appear and hope for the best.

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 10:28pm on 02 Apr 2009, Ben Jones wrote:

    without knowing all the details i couldnt lean one way or the other but if it was mclaren and lewis' wrongdoing it doesnt in any way alter how highly i regard both.

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 10:33pm on 02 Apr 2009, ulrichtheknight wrote:

    In reply to Budgeesmuggler, Trulli was not DQ'd he was given a time penalty. So this is not "tit for tat" punishment.
    The real problem is not with the teams trying their luck. VMM are not the only ones to do this, just the most reported. The problem is the public are rapidly losing faith in a system with no consistency.
    The FIA and all of the associated fat cats have lost touch with what F1 means to millions of people.
    These situations could and should be dealt with behind closed doors and within 24 hours of the result. If there is a question during the race it should mean the suspension of the podium ceremony until it's been investigated. not just hashed up by semi qualified stewards, but looked into by a professional team of informed and experienced people who have knowledge of the sport to bring to bear. Maybe ex team bosses, or ex drivers, or ex chief mechanics. People who know what they are talking about.

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 10:38pm on 02 Apr 2009, Jamie De Freitas wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 73. At 10:45pm on 02 Apr 2009, thomas_mat_77 wrote:

    Why is everyone supporting Hamilton on this issue?
    According to radio transmissions and what Lewis told the media, he let Trulli pass him, so how can he go to the stewards and tell them that Trulli deliberately passed him under safety car conditions? He was wrong and should be penalised but disqualification is a bit harsh.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 10:48pm on 02 Apr 2009, dudebennoo wrote:

    Hamilton is not being treated like an idiot, but as the racing driver that he is...prone to errors when under duress. He passed Truli correctly, and made his own decision to let him back. Then got greedy and tried to gain 3rd place, which was not rightfully his..end of story.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 10:52pm on 02 Apr 2009, redforever wrote:

    The evidence as reported paints MacClaren and Lewis Hamilton in a very poor light.
    F1 is a highly competitive sport, but such behaviour, if its proven, really does the sport no favours. What is particularly dissapointing is the fact that MacClaren and Hamilton are a British team and a British driver, and one would hope that they would show that British value of fair play. Winning points by default is no victory. They need to work harder on the car and gain points be being the fastest and the smartest!

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 10:58pm on 02 Apr 2009, me wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 77. At 11:04pm on 02 Apr 2009, f1fan4howlong wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 78. At 11:08pm on 02 Apr 2009, hammo93 wrote:

    Anyone else here fed up with race being decided 5 days after its happened. Imagine changing the football results 5 days later when a video shows a ball didnt cross the line. Sureley they should be able to make decisions on the day and then after that other evidence has to be put aside. F! is a joke at the moment

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 11:19pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    NikosBg, are you a F1 steward?

    All this Hamilton/McLaren bashing is getting a bit ridiculous.

    None of us have the facts! If the transcript of the stewards meeting with Lewis and McLaren reveals he lied then so be it, but that is not the case at all. All the Hamilton bashers here are going on what has been said by the stewards, and you are trusting that why?

    I cannot see Lewis lying to get a 1 point advantage, and especially knowing full well that after he left the stewards meeting they could very well listen to the radio recording, in addition to him mentioning it to Lee after the race.

    The question however remains, what made them go back to listen to the recording following their decision? Did they find themselves kicking each other for handing McLaren and Lewis a point and feel that they wanted to start the year where last year left off? Or do they just want to make a point to McLaren that they are out to make it hard for them?

    Like with football, perhaps they should consider if something is dealt with during race time and concluded, it stays the way it is decided first time round. If however nothing is done during the race then it can be reviewed after and issue a statement accordingly to that effect.

    I am mad about F1, but this is a real downside to it. I want to see the drivers race, yes I want Lewis to defend his title successfully but by racing, not by getting penalised, and the same goes for the other drivers.

    Perhaps the FIA should have someone to speak directly with the teams involved in an incident at the time one happens, that would certainly solve issues like this, after all they are meant to be watching the race closely from their little 5star box. If something happens on track, immediately an FIA official should be straight in touch with the relevant team to advise what they should do.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 11:25pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    davery09 wrote:

    Yes, the transcript shows the team told Lewis, "Lewis, you need to allow the Toyota through. Allow the Toyota through now." It's pretty unequivocable really.

    As far as the "why didn't the stewards have this before" comments are concerned, I'm not sure whether the radio transcripts would have been available to the stewards that soon after the race (1 hour). From the sound of it they only had the video footage and the statements from the teams. The radio feed isn't stored on the same system as the video so I'm guessing it wasn't initially available. The delay in having the second hearing is more down to practicality - the earliest they could have had a new hearing was Thursday as it's the first day of the next race weekend. It's unfortunate, but I'd rather have the correct result than go with how things first appear and hope for the best.

    -------

    Ok so he was told to do it by the team, does that mean he did? Even Martin Whitmarsh said Lewis disagreed and said he didnt have to and that it was whilst they were discussing this on the radio that Trulli took back his place.

    As far as the transcripts go, if it takes an hour to transfer audio files from a server then they need a new IT company, but I am sure the servers are linked, and if they are not that is yet another flaw they need to resolve. TV viewers can listen to radio comms, so why can't the stewards? Why do people keep guessing on the facts.

    I think stewards need to support their findings and publish the transcript so everyone can see for themselves whether they did the right thing or not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 11:29pm on 02 Apr 2009, TellyNZ wrote:

    I think the main problem was there was no clear TV footage of what happened so the stewards had to relay on the two teams and drivers in question to put forward a honest account of what did happen. It was clear that both teams were pretty confused at the time of the incident. Trulli and Toyota were up front and honest and Mclaren tried to keep things under there hat as usual.

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 11:31pm on 02 Apr 2009, QwaarJet wrote:

    Hamilton needs to grow up. He wasn't popular before this and now people are going to start hating on him, except for some of his blind followers.

    Let's be honest here. Hamilton is a git. He tries to cut corners (literally sometimes) just to get a slight advantage. He's like a really stupid Schumacher.

    Hopefully the British media lay into him rather than excusing every single thing he does wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 11:34pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

    Might as well beat you to it

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 11:34pm on 02 Apr 2009, Digiman16 wrote:

    If the rule is that you cannot overtake under the safety car, then surely it doesn't matter how slowly Hamilton was going. If he was on the track then Trulli is not allowed to overtake. Irrespective of what was discussed on the radio.

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 11:36pm on 02 Apr 2009, Sam wrote:

    1. Hamilton gave a public interview in which he was very clear about being asked to let Trulli re-pass him. Not kept secret from the stewards.

    2. The radio transmission (made public) between the team and Hamilton makes it clear that they took very reasonable steps to get a clear answer from the FIA and "played it by the book".

    3. We have no transcript of the Stewards' interview with Hamilton, just "nudge, nudge, wink, wink" innuendo.

    Yet again a race is decided in a meeting. Why get up at the crack of dawn to watch a race live when you know the result will probably bear no relation to what happens on the track.

    Race control and the stewards need to get their act together, or they'll be getting panto bookings at this rate. If NASCAR can handle complex situations in real time, surely Race Control can respond to repeated requests from a single team to clarify what they should do. It's not McLaren who should be punished. I don't think Trulli should have been given a time penalty either (which, we were told last season, was irreversable). Common sense suggests the outcome should have been Hamilton 3rd, Trulli 4th.

    In fact, has the FIA explained yet what the rules are for what took place, or are they just hiding behind the smokescreen they've created?

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 11:43pm on 02 Apr 2009, clifton1979 wrote:

    The statement from the stewards said: “During the hearing, held approximately one hour after the end of the race, the stewards and the race director questioned Lewis Hamilton and his team manager David Ryan specifically about whether there had been an instruction given to Hamilton to allow Trulli to overtake."

    “Both the driver and the team manager stated that no such instruction had been given."

    “The race director specifically asked Hamilton whether he had consciously allowed Trulli to overtake. Hamilton insisted that he had not done so."

    -----

    Ok publish the transcript of the meeting and prove it!

    Lewis said to the pits that he didn't have to let them pass, they suggested he should and sought clarification, they have admitted that, so i can't see them lying anywhere. To save this whole mess getting out of control, if it hasn't already, they need to publish the transcript and back up their statement.

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 00:11am on 03 Apr 2009, Edward wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 88. At 00:11am on 03 Apr 2009, Nick_Robertson wrote:

    It defies belief that Hamilton and McLaren would outright lie to the Stewards, when they were confident that they had already heard the MClaren radio transmissions! Deliberately misleading the stewards to get Trulli in trouble fully deserves the exclusion he got, and I hope Lewis and the team learn something from this.

    On the plus side, great to see the FIA releasing the radio broadcasts so soon after the decision! This new era of Transparent Stewarding has got off to a great start, even if it's a bit odd that they didn't bother listening to the radio transmissions until after they'd penalised Jarno...

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 00:17am on 03 Apr 2009, sufc63 wrote:

    Another own goal by the FIA.

    Is there any other sport in the world where the result can be altered days (and perhaps, in the case of the diffuser issue, weeks later)?
    Why would anyone bother paying good money to go watch a race when they'll actually get the result in the news headlines long after the event?

    Virtual racing followed by reality results (eventually)!

    Mclaren let trulli through because they were unsure wether hamilton had passed under the safety car and the stewards did NOT provide any clarity at the time. To penalise Trulli was evidently wrong. To penalise Hamilton is evidently wrong.

    This should and could have been clarified behind closed doors immediately after the race. The sensible thing to have done would have been to take no action until then, and then to have let the result stand - trulli 3rd - hamilton 4th.

    Hamilton did not penalise trulli. The stewards did.

    Poorly done.

    Mclaren should close up shop. Refuse to do any more than the absolute minimum required off/outside the track and let their racing do the talking.

    As for those of us who paid to sit in a stand at melbourne and watch the virtual race ... any chance of a refund ?

    I look forward to reading about the malaysian gp result in a couple of weeks !

    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 01:12am on 03 Apr 2009, HamiltonisScottish wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 91. At 01:31am on 03 Apr 2009, whateverfor wrote:

    Its unclear what the BBC are being so sensitive about.

    Is it the reporting of the FIA press release itself?

    Is it offering an opinion on the FIA press release?

    Do either of those constitute defamation? Have lawyers contacted the BBC and issued a warning?

    One thing is for certain, either the FIA press release is wrong, or LH and Mclaren are wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 01:43am on 03 Apr 2009, excellentcatblogger wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 93. At 01:47am on 03 Apr 2009, CrustyFlungDung wrote:

    Why, in the light of the information that the stewards don’t have all the hard facts an hour after the race - comment 69: davery09 - as opposed to team/driver opinion (which is biased and rightly so), do they insist on issuing a verdict?
    Regardless of who was right or wrong the stewards have shot themselves in the foot, the FIA and F1 up the backside and annoyed the hell out of a lot of racing fans – all at once.
    Again.
    Commendable.
    Following on from motorsport1’s hilarious (and remarkably accurate) post perhaps we could have a fortnightly F1 Lottery show instead; the stewards could spend a week arranging the balls in the correct order (red balls first, silver ones last) and then present the winner in a special show, thus maintaining a high level of media coverage.

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 02:53am on 03 Apr 2009, n4w33d wrote:

    From what I have gathered so far is that in the media Hamilton said that Mclaren told him (hamilton) to allow Trulli to overtake. However, when Hamilton and Mclaren were summoned by the stewards/FIA they said they did not give one and another the go ahead for trulli to overtake which contradicts their radio transmission. This would mean that Trulli took his own actions and had overtaken Hamilton.

    Because Trulli reclaimed third spot under the above circumstance it would result in a penalty since trulli had overtaken under a safety. I think the stewards stripped hamilton of the points due to the "lie" he told whcih resulted in trulli getting punished.

    However going back to the radio transmission, it sounded as if both Mclaren and hamilton were just as confused as each other as they could not got clarification of the sort. The same applies to toyota/trulli if you read their report.

    Complain about this comment

  • 95. At 03:04am on 03 Apr 2009, ayjayz wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 96. At 03:04am on 03 Apr 2009, sufc63 wrote:

    Sack the stewards. It's a farce.
    Hamilton was NOT instructed to let trulli pass him. The stewards did not issue any such instruction... his team suggested he 'should' because they could not get an answer from the stewards and couldn't risk his position.
    It therefore follows that lacking a clear instruction from the stewards the team had the right to complain about the overtaking procedure... and get some clarification after the race.
    The stewards have egg on their faces having then got it wrong by penalising trulli and are attempting to deflect criticism of their failings by unduly punishing mclaren.

    Reinstate the original race positions - trulli 3rd, hamilton 4th and lets move on.

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 03:08am on 03 Apr 2009, mjnporter wrote:

    I have to say I was on such a high after the race had finished. I was unsure about all the regulation changes put in place for this year but it was a fantastic race and could not have been looking forward to Malaysia more.

    Now that has all changed, we are back to the shambles of last year and all the focus has been taken away from racing yet again!

    All things aside Trulli and Lewis did a great job to get their cars from the back of the grid to take 3rd & 4th place. Why can't we just applaud this?

    The FIA are weak, there's no other way to put it. A replacement for race stewards should have been put in place long ago.
    I still can not believe that the FIA let the decision on the rear diffuser protest be decided by the race stewards in Melbourne!!

    F1 racing has turned a corner but its never going to be right until the sports governing admits its failings.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 03:08am on 03 Apr 2009, juhaerik56 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 99. At 03:17am on 03 Apr 2009, neilaction wrote:

    The transcript of the radio communication between Hamilton and the team seems clear enough.
    They were unsure of what to do after Jano ran wide and Lewis passed him.
    While the team was trying to clarify things, Lewis "allowed" Jano to pass.
    The team then told Lewis to hold 4th.
    All perfectly reasonable and above board.

    I am right in assuming that the investigation into this incedent was because McLaren sort clarification?

    How the stewards came to a conclusion without checking all the evidence is just more proof that they are not up to the job at hand.
    Teams will always slant things their way and the stewards need to look at all evidence.

    And, if the stewards were organised enough to rule in a more timely manner at the time McLaren were asking for clarification, all this wouldn't have happened.

    But if, and I suspect they did, McLaren or Lewis gave any evidence that was not completely "honest" then they need to cop it.
    You don't have to tell a blatent lie to intentionally convey a "mis-truth".

    At best that is what McLaren have done.

    The stupid thing is that McLaren would, at worst, have kept 4th if they had been completely frank.

    One thing I will add is that the stewards do themselves no favours.
    Their recent history is littered with percieved injustices.
    It shouldn't be a complete surprise that McLaren, and maybe all teams, don't trust them to be "fair" and therefore feel the need to push the envolope.



    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 04:20am on 03 Apr 2009, sufc63 wrote:

    My prediction for the Melbourne 2009 GP:

    1st: Alonso
    2nd: Beumi
    3rd: Bourdais

    The result of the first race will be confirmed after the second race and before the third race (pending any further - yet to be lodged - appeal).

    The final results of the 2nd race (Malaysia) will also be announced sometime before the 3rd race but long after the podium photo opportunity for the 'virtual race' winners and again - only pending some further spurious appeals....

    Now back to the comedy festival in melbourne...

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 05:53am on 03 Apr 2009, Michael Curtis wrote:

    If anything McClaren told Lewis to let Trulli past again after what happened last time when Lewis didn't give the place back and he was penalised. If he misled the stewards why would he give a press interview later in the week saying something different?

    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 06:14am on 03 Apr 2009, robbrady999 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 103. At 06:38am on 03 Apr 2009, U13879777 wrote:

    this Blog is complete rubbish. Most of the comments are deleted - and I imagine that it is because the one eyed bigots and hypoctates that believe McLaren and Hamilton are perfect and good and nice. Rather make it so that NOBODY can comment, rather than me bothering to comment only to find reasonable debate on the issue has been disallowed because of a bunch of morons that don't like what they read.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 08:20am on 03 Apr 2009, Fabbyulous wrote:

    Anyone hearing that radio transmission should now know the decison should have stood. You can't appeal after your driver DELIBERATELY let Trulli backpass.

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 08:22am on 03 Apr 2009, FairF1 wrote:

    Here we are again with yet another attempt to hold back McLaren & Hamilton. When will the people making the decisions learn that all they are doing is driving people away from the sport. How many times over the years have we seen Ferrari & Schumacher get away with far worse things than this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 08:24am on 03 Apr 2009, bindesh_patel wrote:

    Pure and simple: stewards need to ensure all information in the ‘public domain’ is at least reviewed before any hearing and/or decisions. Others cannot be held responsible for oversights of so called ‘experts’

    This kind of 'crap' together with all the whole rear diffuser situation & poor decisions last season; are killing the sport and the public's confidence in it. Ive love F1 and have done so for as long as I can remember..I cant remember it being so poor

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 08:29am on 03 Apr 2009, Fabbyulous wrote:

    Good point - Alonso race win and two Torro Rosso's in second and third should the diffusers be made illegal.

    Complain about this comment

  • 108. At 08:53am on 03 Apr 2009, whatbill wrote:

    As a casual F1 fan, I lost interest in this a few days ago. Can't belive the race has only just been decided. If you're going to use technology you have to use it quickly and make a decision on the outcome of the race that is fixed barring serious corruption or rule breaking.

    As a simple human being I can't work out what Hamilton has done wrong other than be economical with the truth. Apparently it was OK if he was overtaking Truli as a hapless simpleton who had no idea what was going on but if (as reigning world champion) he had evil thoughts about gaining from someone else's mistake then we clearly have to stamp that out. Because F1 is about purity, a level playing field, the love of racing etc. Not in anyway about money.

    Say what you like about cricket or football but a decision is made and it is stuck to.

    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 09:05am on 03 Apr 2009, OriginaI_Nutta wrote:

    What is this about, a driver has conversation about legitimacy of pass under yellow when driver in front goes off track? Not sure of rules so slow and let driver retake place. Race control cannot answer query in real time due race being at critical phase. FIA and Race Stewards have access to all communication and are in a position to review it. If I was FIA Race Steward my questions would:

    Q:Jarno, did you overtake Lewis under yellow?
    A: Yes Lewis was going slow.
    Q: Lewis, why were you going slow?
    A: Lewis, I was talking to pit about legitimacy of my pass under yellow flag as I was not sure. So it was decided to let Jarno past as we could get a definitive answer from Race control.

    Race Steward conclusion. Rules may need clarification as passing under yellow is not allowed. Car off track and rejoining at the end of the race was not a scenario we imagined. Either you disqualify both drivers for overtaking under yellow or you allow result to stand as they crossed the line jenson, rubens, jarno, lewis....

    As it appears at the moment it is another example of the heavy handed treatment of mclaren compared to other teams and makes the FIA look less than competent.

    Complain about this comment

  • 110. At 09:12am on 03 Apr 2009, saintPeteUTD wrote:

    Hamiton hammered yet again!
    I think the stewards sould be sacked!
    If they were so inept that they didn't gather all the relevant information before making their decision on the day, then they are at fault and should be sacked!
    Not much point in watching the "Race" live, you may as well wait for a few days to see who won!
    If this were to happen in a football match then most of the matches in the premier league wound be annulled.
    It's the same as last year, you sit down to enjoy watching the race, but at the end there's no point cheering until you get the result changed, argued about and left feeling let down, yet again!
    Come F1 get your act together, send your stewards on a training course and give us punters what we want.
    In football if the oficials get it wrong on the day then too bad, the results stands, it will all even it's self out by the end of the season!

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 09:25am on 03 Apr 2009, MrAverage wrote:

    Anyone actually bothering to read the explanation given by the FIA will realise that Mclaren and Lewis Hamilton deliberateley tried to mislead the race stewards to gain an extra place. This is not the first time Mclaren have been less than truthful. Spy-Gate as it was called they claimed only one individual had seen the technical dossier, when the truth came out it was known about by several more senior individuals within Mclaren.
    Isn't it about time that Mclaren show a bit more humility, stop throwing there toys out the pram and stop blaming everyone else when something goes against them? They are lucky to even be racing after Spy-Gate!!!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 09:40am on 03 Apr 2009, FIA_Saugen wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 113. At 09:44am on 03 Apr 2009, whatbill wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 114. At 09:57am on 03 Apr 2009, Mike Southworth wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 115. At 09:57am on 03 Apr 2009, James2904b wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 116. At 10:23am on 03 Apr 2009, biglogger wrote:

    What I don't understand is why the issue of what Hamilton/VMM said about Trulli passing or being let past was deemed relevant by the Stewards.

    Hamilton overtook under a Safety Car, which itself is a breach of the regulations unless one of several specifically defined exceptions applied, which wasn't the case. However, the reality is that he had little choice but to overtake, so the Stewards according to their powers of discretion within the regulations could and arguably should have decided not to penalise him for the overtaking move, especially since after Trulli's subsequent re-overtaking Hamilton didn't gain any position on the track.

    When Trulli overtook Hamilton, this again per se was a breach of the Safety Car regulations. There is nothing in the Safety Car regulations that allows for an overtaken driver to take his place back. The Stewards may decide not to penalise a driver for doing so, but this is a matter for their discretion. The overtaking move itself is a breach of the regulations. The only possibly relevant exception within the regulations that could apply is that a driver is allowed to overtake if the car in front slows down with "an obvious problem". That exception didn't apply. Slowing down sufficiently to let another driver past is not the same as slowing down with an obvious problem. Trulli should not have passed Hamilton and doing so was a breach. The question should not have been whether Hamilton let him past, it should have been whether Hamilton slowed with an obvious problem and whether that's what Trulli thought or whether that's what Hamilton did. Anything else is irrelevant. The only consideration for the Stewards is whether they somehow think Trulli was entitled to the place because of Hamilton's previous overtaking move and whether they therefore decide to exercise their discretion not to penalise him. But, that issue depends on their view of Hamilton initial overtaking move and whether that was somehow in their discretion "allowable". It has nothing to do with whether Hamilton later let Trulli past or not.

    In the end, this should have boiled down to some simple questions:

    1) Was it ok for Hamilton to overtake Trulli when Trulli went wide? I would argue the answer has to be yes, since Hamilton had no real choice

    2) Was Hamilton entitled to keep the position advantage he gained from overtaking or should the Stewards have instructed him to give it up? This isn't the same thing as above, the fact he overtook initially means he was technically in breach at that point although the Stewards had the right to decide not to penalise him. They then have a second decision to make, whether or not to allow him to keep the place. If they decided he should give it up, then under the regulations the Safety Car can signal a car to overtake (although how this would happen in practice, I have no idea!!), which they could have done to Trulli. But, they didn't so one has to assume at this point that they were ok with Hamilton having taking the place due to no fault of his own and to keep the place, even though the overtaking move was tehncially not allowed.

    3) Was Trulli entitled to overtake Hamilton? Unless one of the exceptions was applicable, which was not the case, then Trulli's overtaking move was illegal. Even if Hamilton made it easy for Trulli to overtake, he shouldn't have done so and he & his team should have been aware of the regulations.

    All of which means that whether or not Hamilton/VMM told the stewards that they did or didn't let Trulli past is irrelevant to what the Stewards should have been considering. If, Hamilton/VMM misled the Stewards, then that was clearly a stupid thing to do. But, the Stewards shouldn't have been asking about this issue in the first place since it should have no bearing on their decisions on whether or not to penalise Hamilton and/or Trulli for their illegal overtaking moves.

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 10:29am on 03 Apr 2009, jensonsmum wrote:

    i find that all this to-ing and fro-ing over 3rd and 4th place is detracting from the absolutely fantastic result the Brawn team got. we all know that Lewis likes to have it his own way, ask Fernando, but i think that he was following team orders (both to let Jarno pass, and to mislead the stewards)so perhaps his penalty is a tad harsh. Also re Sebastian Vettel and Robert Kubica i am sure that should have been put down to a racing incident. Roll on Sunday!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 10:30am on 03 Apr 2009, dangee wrote:

    lewis and his soprting director both said to the fia that he did not conciously let him past and was just trying to keep with the safety car (fia minutes released say this in them) the fia then got hold of the radio transmissions and there is no way any f1 team can defend that. It is sad that as soon as lewis starts losing he resorts to the stuff that f1 fans hated michael schumacher for.

    If he does this again he's going to have to start asking himself whether he wants the british fans supporting him or the much more competitive (and in my opinion a better driver) jenson button. How often does jenson go of the track when its his fault (if someone can remember a time please let me know) although hamilton lost a championship because of it

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 11:21am on 03 Apr 2009, Sulumor wrote:

    Regardless of who said/did what to who the fact remains that F1 results are increasingly being decided by faceless/unaccountable/unqualified people whose sole contribution seems to be to detract from the enjoyment and gradually turn the sport into a mockery. There is no consistency in their decision process and unless the whole procedure is radically overhauled there is a real danger that F1 will lose popularity and fall into the same disrepute as certain other 'professional' sports.

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 11:24am on 03 Apr 2009, Dougie_ wrote:

    Reading through these comments I wonder if people here are blinded by patriotism.

    Firstly, know the rules & the facts! Lewis legally passed Trulli because Trulli went off the track... what was Hamilton supposed to do? stop?

    Trulli also legally passed Hamilton back, because Hamilton slowed down. Don't believe me? look at the video evidence from Trulli's car. Hamilton was the only car in the picture, they had not reached the train yet. Hamilton obviously backed right off! Trulli then deliberately slowed also, but Hamilton didn't take it back instead choosing to appeal.

    Regardless of what was or was not said in the hearing. Lewis & Dave Ryan would have been well aware that Trulli should not have been penalised for what happened, it was perfectly legal overtake and they let Trulli back. By pretending (or not mentioning) that they agreed to let Trulli overtake they become guilty of a perversion of justice.

    I'm british, I like Hamilton, I want to see him doing well, I was very impressed with his drive in Australia... and I think here his inexperience and niavity got the better of him, I still rate him and want to see him succeed. Its a shame for Dave Ryan, but you make a mistake of this nature you take the pain.

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 11:29am on 03 Apr 2009, Sulumor wrote:

    18. At 10:30am on 03 Apr 2009, dangee wrote:
    It is sad that as soon as lewis starts losing he resorts to the stuff that f1 fans hated michael schumacher for.

    How often does jenson go of the track when its his fault (if someone can remember a time please let me know) although hamilton lost a championship because of it

    I have to disagree with the above post. Schumacher is arguably the greatest driver of his time, and like it or not he possessed a single mindedness and determination that perhaps Lewis also shares (although I feel it is too early to compare the two) While he might have been ruthless and at times 'unsporting' isn't it peculiarly British that anyone who plays aggressively to win is castigated.

    Please remind me how long Jenson Button has been in F1 and how many races he has actually taken part in long enough to risk going off the track in the last few seasons?

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 11:31am on 03 Apr 2009, littlescrit wrote:

    I think biglogger has hit the nail smack on the head. All this conversation over the radio in the final stages of a GP amid the confusion of a Safety Car and multiple crashes is actually completely irrelevant to the issue of whether Trulli / Hamilton broke the rules. This should have been the argument that McClaren put forward. For this reason I find their behaviour and approach baffling and somewhat alarming. The discussion should have gone:

    1) We overtook Trulli because we had to, he'd left the track, we had no alternative.
    2) We tried to get clarification from Race control but they couldn't respond in time - (their view is not reliable anyway)
    3) In the course of this discussion Trulli re-passed us on the track
    4) We remained in position to allow the stewards to resolve

    Any other questions should have been answered fully and truthfully with a polite suggestion that they're not relevant to what happened on the track. Trulli re-passed Hamilton on the track under Safety Car, no sign of problems. Simple. Hamilton going slowly is not an excuse.

    This is getting a little silly now with every race subject to 're-classification' or 're-re-classification'. Never used to be this way.

    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 11:45am on 03 Apr 2009, SayNoTaSilva wrote:

    I think it can all be simplified:

    The problem started because the rules, although too complicated and difficult to understand, are still not comprehensive enough to cover every situation and certainly didn't cover what happened on the last lap of the AGP.

    Whether it was right or wrong for LH to overtake or JT to repass can be interpretted any way you like depending on who you support.

    The bottom line is that we should have simpler rules that everyone can understand and some decent competent stewarding, looking at the evidence before making decisions and not listening to one or other of the parties and then blaming them when they put their own spin on it.

    The real loser here is Formula 1, again. Bernie and Max are motivated entirely by money, and the only way to make them listen is to stop attending races and stop watching it on TV. If enough people did that they would have to listen, but of course that will never happen.

    The only saving grace is that they are both very old, so it can't continue forever. You can't take it with you boys, I don't really understand your mindset, as you will both be remembered as a pair of mercinaries who don't care for F1.

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 11:54am on 03 Apr 2009, longgun101 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 125. At 12:10pm on 03 Apr 2009, vindalooney wrote:

    Unfortunately the TV coverage of the grand prix as covered by Chanel ten here in Australia, didn't allow us to view the race in any comprehensible way, as most of the action was not shown due to Adverts, Wish we could have commercial free TV, So we could sit down and watch the race. Telly here is dominated by advertising. Thank you BBC for a great job, Shame we haven't got James Allen in the commentary with Martin. Lewis will still win the championship when all the politics are over. We should be proud to have him as the Englishman he is. Keep the faith!

    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 4:07pm on 03 Apr 2009, f1historybuff wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 127. At 4:16pm on 03 Apr 2009, red_in_helsinki wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 128. At 5:06pm on 03 Apr 2009, quicksesh wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

    sorry - just enjoyed seeing that there

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 7:08pm on 03 Apr 2009, globalroaming wrote:

    Why are so many comments removed ? TV companies allow foul mouthed celebrity chefs but not reasoned debate. If you ask me and your not, i think the FIA have a conspiracy against LH.

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 7:36pm on 03 Apr 2009, Ironbutterflyrusted wrote:

    I think Martin Brundle`s summary of the situation is correct...using the analogy, `it was an unsuccessful dive in the penalty area` just about covers it for me...but in this situation he was told to dive and agreed with a `cheeky grin` on his face, which was subsequently blown off when their stories conflicted.

    Complain about this comment

  • 131. At 7:52pm on 03 Apr 2009, hackerjack wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 132. At 8:16pm on 03 Apr 2009, red_in_helsinki wrote:

    quicksesh and globalroaming,
    Thanks for your posts. There was nothing foul-mouthed about my comment but it was certainly pointed and I don't really blame the moderators for screening it.
    The jist was:
    Knickers to the politics, let's get on with the racing.

    We all know the names of the "tinkerers" in our sport. I think it's time to re-introduce the "gladiatorial" element and say "all's fair in love and war".
    Everyone else in the world has human rights. Who gave this un-elected body the power to eavsdrop on our commercial-in-confidence conversations?
    I say, ditch the FIA. F1 will survive without it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 8:32pm on 03 Apr 2009, caastf1 wrote:

    In my mind there is a real conspiracy going on in F1 and all I can do is echo what lots of other people are saying that's "let's get rid of all these politics and get on with the racing." Martc6 hit it on the head with his/her comments at 56

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 8:56pm on 03 Apr 2009, jayebe wrote:

    I think that this whole episode is a farse! Why have the stewards taken the comments of LH and the sporting director so solomnly in the first place! They should look at all the evidence and then make a decision. I mean I'm sure that they are not the first and they certainly wont be the last people in Formula One, but also in many other sports and industries to lie about the circumstances of an event. And I know that in my job I am frequently asked to stretch the truth or with-hold the truth by my boss.
    Anyway, is this really worse than having a strange (almost Nazi) themed orgy with some hookers! Nope so get real F1 stewards and do your job properly in the first place. No one deserves anything more than a fine and a ticking off! To deduct points is ridiculous and devalues the sport.

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 11:00pm on 03 Apr 2009, gio300zxtt wrote:

    Errm. Now that I've listened to the team radio as posted by the BBC, I have one question: did the stewards listen to it BEFORE they interviewed McLaren? It's 100% clear what actually happened.
    And if they did, why didn't they say so during the interview? Sorry, that's 2 questions.
    And if they didn't, why not? (sorry, that's 3).
    If they knew what had been said on the team radio, it seems they had laid a huge deliberate trap (granted, McLaren shouldn't have done what they did but entrapment is dirty work at the best of times). If they didn't, that smacks of laziness or incompetence.

    I'm just sad this sort of politics really takes the fun out of following F1. Only been doing it since it was in black and white and now I'm starting to despise the politics.

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 00:38am on 04 Apr 2009, markadler wrote:

    I was so excited with all the new rules and regulations...BUT... The politics of the sport have seem to take precedent over the racing, and sportsmanship. What is going on?? FIA, FOA, FEA whoever they are get rid of them like we need to get rid of all politicians!!

    Clearly releasing this information on a race weekend deliberately can be seen to damage Lewis s self esteem and racing quality!!

    I have always been a Lewis fan because he symbolizes more than just britishness, but also being from mixed ethnic background.

    I ll always be a fan of Lewis but not of F1, and I respect his apology. He does not deserve this!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 00:50am on 04 Apr 2009, MarktheHorn wrote:

    I have not got a problem with Hamilton or Mclaren like some do because I don't know him or any of their team personally to really comment fairly (all sportspeople have a bit of arrogrance and confidence about them - at least he won the title so has a right to have some maybe..and are people who move abroad to live in general life also not English now?)

    However from what I have read (and I am not a great expert) it does seem rather like Lewis and Mclaren DID mis-lead the stewards although I would say why weren't the radio conversation investigated beforehand rather than having Trulli punished..and then re-instated with LH totally kicked out of the race making the whole situation look like a big farce and bad on the sport to the general public.

    I hope from now on people are talking about the racing rather than what might happen in this appeal and that courtroom etc.

    F1 is one of those sports that has its knockers even from loyal fans and it doesn't need futher problems to prove this guys right.

    Shame as I enjoyed the last season or so as some of the races were entertaining (yes there will be boring ones too...but there are good and bad matches etc in any sport!)



    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 08:27am on 04 Apr 2009, f1fan4howlong wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 139. At 08:33am on 04 Apr 2009, f1fan4howlong wrote:

    The issue i cant seem to get out of my head is this.

    The Rules state, that anyone passing under a yellow/safety car, is illegal & will be punished, why is Trulli not being asked why he saw fit to take back his original position?
    Irrespective of who embellished on the truth or not, surely Trulli & Toyota have trangressed the rules, why are the reinstated in the points?

    McLaren mislead the Stewards & have been penalised.
    Trulli & Toyota clearly broke the rules & have been reinstated & rewarded for it?

    Is this not a story or am i missing the point?

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 09:25am on 04 Apr 2009, red_in_helsinki wrote:

    f1fan4howlong, you are so right. Well played.

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 3:43pm on 04 Apr 2009, Inherent wrote:

    you say the Mclaren TEAM did a good job of keeping Lewis away from the media in Malaysia;but can you call the Mclaren garage a TEAM now !

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 5:02pm on 04 Apr 2009, Irishmanincolorado wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.