BBC Home

Explore the BBC

Articles/ all comments

These 237 comments are related to an article called:

Hamilton Appeal Thrown Out !

Page 12 of 12

posted Sep 25, 2008

The really, really smelly thing about this is how Ferrari were represented in the court. Excuse me, but wasn't the dispute between McLaren and the stewards of the meeting?? Their decision was either right or wrong - no thought should have been given to the consequences for another team.

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 26, 2008

Even the less morinic of the tifosi will surely be embarrassed at this latest evidence of one sidedness from the 'sport's' governing body. They have shown a blatant disregard for fairness in the dismissal of what they call an 'inadmissable' appeal. Time and time again they make it up as they go along. Is this the reason they deliberately put vagueness into the rules and their own interpretation of them? Or is it simply that 14 of the 18 permanent members of the FIA are red faced Ferrari shareholders?

| complain about this comment

comment by ma04hew (U8447365)

posted Sep 26, 2008

I think twice this season (Raikkonen and Sutil incident at Moncao and this one(if not more!)) the FIA stewards have shwon their true colours - RED. The sport has taken a real battering, what a disgrace!

Firstly, Lewis had to cut the corner or he would've crashed into Kimi. Lewis let Kimi have the position back, and took him fairly at the next corner.

And it didn't really give Lewis an advantage because Kimi crashed the next lap!!!

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 27, 2008

It's the job of the ruling body in any sport to ensure that fairness and the correct decisions apply. In this case the stewards (presumably under pressure from Ferrari) made a narrow application of the chicane rule. Hamilton clearly was the best driver on that course on that day and deserved to win, especially in light of Kimi's attempt to push him off the course which is what led to him going over the chicane. The basis of the appeal being disallowed was by inventing yet another (hitherto unannounced) interpretation of the rule - namely that a certain time or space should be allowed in addition to giving up the place - which Hamilton demonstrably did. Again this demonstrated favoritism to Ferrari and against McLaren. In view of the continued unpleasant lack of fair play in F1A, I will no longer watch such a biased sport nor will I ever buy a Ferrari - it's a badge of shame!

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 28, 2008

Terribly convenient that there is a penalty that can't be appealed against... Max Mosley says that it's rediculous to suggest there is pro-Ferrari bias, and that if this were true the sport could not survive. Wake up, Max! That's why we're so worried! I guess locking yourself in a dungeon stops you noticing things like Ferrari never being penalised for anything...

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 28, 2008

because most of the people here are British, that is why you support LH, many racers said the decision is right, that is enough. LH is a big shame of GB, he is a man with condescension, but in fact he is a total rubbish.

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 28, 2008

If the appeal was inadmissable on a technicality, then so be it. But one thing is clear - as a result of that incident, and others during the weekend, the stewards in question should never steward another race again.

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 28, 2008

So drive through penalties are not appealable, 14 out of the 18 permanent sponsors are Ferrari, yet and Max (and Bernie) think that the Sport won't survive if we all believe what is now patently obvious to blind bat that F1 is totally biased!

There are only so many FIA enthusiasts to go round Max and Bernie and you have just lost another!

I've just heard that Lewis Hamilton has come 3rd in Singapore well at least he's not come first eh Bernie and embarassed you again!

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 28, 2008

I agree wholehearttedly with the comments made and as I said last time we appareently have to realise that FIA[t] is obviously pronounced with a silent T.

| complain about this comment

comment by andy (U7738817)

posted Sep 29, 2008

Kimi did not stay on the racing line he went wide forcing Lewis off the road , just look at previous laps and see what line he took and after the incident . he went wide maybe not on purpose but he did slide wider than normal.

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 29, 2008

What is lame is you playing the race card and claiming anti british bias as you write on a website that is filled with pro british bias. Get a life!

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 29, 2008

Hamilton did not fully give back the position. That is a fact! Get over it! Stop complainig like little girls and get on with it just like Hamilton did. More importantly people need to stop throwing the race card in this issue....that's weak and not sensible. I don;t think the FIA are racist and I don't think claiming anti british bias is fair.SOme people need to accept losing on this site without blaming the world arounnd them!

| complain about this comment

posted Sep 30, 2008

Sunday's race - Alonso starts 15th and by the 3rd corner is 12th. Now the coverage of the first corner wasn't great mid pack but it looked to me as though he cut the first corner, overtaking 3 cars whilst not on the racing line. Has anything happened ? No. I am a Hamilton fan but can see why the FIA imposed the penalty, however, where is the consistency ? Alonso didn't even attempt to give back the gained positions and whilst he may have been taking avoiding action aren't these the same arguments Hamilton had ? If there was a wall on the first corner Alonso couldn't have done this.

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 3, 2008

It silly.

Anyone who thinks Hamilton is not the best racing driver... ok I cannot argue if people think he is arrogant perhaps (but sometimes I think it is confused with confidence), but he seems to be the ONLY racing driver able to overtake at times.

He SHOULD have been given the race win as he was most deserving of it.

If the rules change to give more clarity after the race, then why does it affect this race?

How can people attribute Hamilton with apparently cheating WHEN IT WAS ALONSO INVOLVED WITH IT AND PROBABLY FERRARI AND EVERY OTHER RACING TEAM WERE DOING THE SAME ANYWAY?! Its only because Alonso admitted to it they got in trouble. What? You don't think Alonso was passing information back across as well?

Hamilton is the best racing driver out there at the moment, whether you like him or hate him. The only thing letting him down is occasionally his or his teams judgement.

This is probably parallels with how peopel felt about Michael Schumacher, but at least Hamilton won't be crashing into people (twice!!) in attempts to win the world championship. AND SCHUMACHER GOT AWAY WITH IT!!

| complain about this comment

posted Oct 6, 2008

The biggest problem with all this is that the rule that caused the issue in the first place still stands uncorrected and unexplained.

This is NOT a decision that upholds the penalty in any way shape or form, it did not even get that far, instead this just tells us that if you get the 25 second penalty, for ANY offence then it can not be challenged.



Whether you support the original penalty or not the point sure is that thre is a rule that clearly states that if any advantage is gained then a penalty must occur. It states nothing of letting the other driver back past and quite rightly so as that would only be apllicable if an overtake had occurred. Had a driver simply missed the chicane while on his own he would not have let anyone back past and thus what is he supposed to do then?

The rule states that any car cutting a corner should effectively be punished, regardless of action following.

What SHOULD happen is that they should bring back the grass and gravel traps at these corners to punish those who cut or go wide. Because I can't see any single penalty system that would be fair in both cases of overtaking or not and it is also not fair to treat them differently.

Anothr solution could be to have a seperate penalty lane out on the track, somewhere where a car would have to proceed through at pit lane speeds but is not as long (or as dangerous*), so penalties of closer to 10 seconds could be applied (there would be a stop and go zone there for longer penalties). Most importantly it would NOT be on the start finish straight so a punishment could not be carried out half-heartedly as Schumacher did on the last lap.

*finding a car who would normally pit behind you not stopping could lead to beign released into their path very easily.

| complain about this comment

Page 12 of 12

HINTS & TIPS

Deleting comments

You are in charge of your own space - if you see an offensive comment, you can delete it

Reasonable debate is allowed - please don't delete a comment just because you don't agree with it

If you are not sure, or feel a comment warrants further attention, you can refer it to a moderator instead