2012 Italian Grand Prix - Monza

[Slife]

I don't know if this was posted but Grosjean took out the three podium finishers today.

Grosjean took out the first place, first.
Grosjean took out the second place, second.
Grosjean took out the third place, third.

I think we can conclude that Grosjean is the oracle.

[Chuckjr]

I don't know if this was posted but Grosjean took out the three podium finishers today.

Grosjean took out the first place, first.
Grosjean took out the second place, second.
Grosjean took out the third place, third.

I think we can conclude that Grosjean is the oracle.

That is an absolutely fantastic realization.

[foxmulder_ms]

It does seem like Kimi Raikkonen and Lotus need a win to a) keep their respective championship hopes alive and b) be taken serious as contenders. Raikkonen is 3d, 1 point behind Hamilton and not even a mention from the pundits, just Simon Lazenby stating he keeps on collecting the points. I'd bet these pundits would still laugh at Ted Kravitz for saying Kimi is a serious contender even though they just got done saying Hamilton is seriously back in it now.

Yes, people are really ignoring Raikkonen. However, since he didn't win any races yet, there is some excuse.

[ParanoiD]

I don't know if this was posted but Grosjean took out the three podium finishers today.

Grosjean took out the first place, first.
Grosjean took out the second place, second.
Grosjean took out the third place, third.

I think we can conclude that Grosjean is the oracle.

MIND BLOWN!

[Shrieker]

Hehehe nice one Slife, I've seen it on some other sites too but your's has the chronology too lol.

[Hail22]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p8-Y8jSqkY[/youtube]

Applauding and thanking the fans...Good PR Alonso +1

and just to clarify...Vettel left basically no space compared to Alonso in 2011:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ejUFPjaVQQ[/youtube]

[Dragonfly]

Why everyone just points at the space left only? Space varies, more important is when and where that space was present or not. Alonso was late in his move deep down in CG. Went for a gap that was not his and he could predict would close as it happened. Therefore got into trouble all by himself.

[andartop]

Why everyone just points at the space left only? Space varies, more important is when and where that space was present or not. Alonso was late in his move deep down in CG. Went for a gap that was not his and he could predict would close as it happened. Therefore got into trouble all by himself.

Because the rules have changed this year to clarify exactly that? It's irrelevant whether Alonso had left more space last year as the rules are different this year.

[beelsebob]

Why everyone just points at the space left only? Space varies, more important is when and where that space was present or not. Alonso was late in his move deep down in CG. Went for a gap that was not his and he could predict would close as it happened. Therefore got into trouble all by himself.

Because the rules have changed this year to clarify exactly that? It's irrelevant whether Alonso had left more space last year as the rules are different this year.

Argh, how many times must this be said. NO THEY HAVE NOT. Rule 16.1 (the rule he was punished under) has not changed in any way shape or form, here it is:

16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and subsequently investigated) which :
a) Necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41.
b) Constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code.
c) Caused a false start by one or more cars.
d) Caused a collision.
e) Forced a driver off the track.
f) Illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver.
g) Illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.
Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.

It does not say anything about leaving a full cars width, only about not forcing another car off the track. Alonso had plenty of room to still be on the track (defined as having at least 1 wheel on or inside the white lines).

Here's the rule that was added which you're getting confused about:

20.3 More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off‐line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.

1) This rule does not apply to the situation at hand, as Vettel was not returning to the racing line after defending.
2) This is not the rule the stewards punished him under:

Offense: Involved in an incident as defined by Article 16.1 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations

[andartop]

I stand corrected.
I guess they expect drivers to always leave enough room on the outside when another car is right alongside to SAFELY make the corner, which would explain Vettel's penalty, but would still not explain other comparable incidents (such as Hamilton forcing Maldonado off track in Valencia right before Maldonado came back to crash onto him) going unpunished.

[Gerhard Berger]

Why everyone just points at the space left only? Space varies, more important is when and where that space was present or not. Alonso was late in his move deep down in CG. Went for a gap that was not his and he could predict would close as it happened. Therefore got into trouble all by himself.

Because the rules have changed this year to clarify exactly that? It's irrelevant whether Alonso had left more space last year as the rules are different this year.

Argh, how many times must this be said. NO THEY HAVE NOT. Rule 16.1 (the rule he was punished under) has not changed in any way shape or form, here it is:

16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and subsequently investigated) which :
a) Necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41.
b) Constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code.
c) Caused a false start by one or more cars.
d) Caused a collision.
e) Forced a driver off the track.
f) Illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver.
g) Illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.
Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.

It does not say anything about leaving a full cars width, only about not forcing another car off the track. Alonso had plenty of room to still be on the track (defined as having at least 1 wheel on or inside the white lines).

Actually the definition is that a driver will have been deemed to have left the track if all 4 wheels are outside the white lines. 2 wheels outside the white line, and he still has part of his car outside the track.

[lukeaar]

16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and subsequently investigated) which :
a) Necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41.
b) Constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code.
c) Caused a false start by one or more cars.
d) Caused a collision.
e) Forced a driver off the track.
f) Illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver.
g) Illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.
Unless it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.

...

Offense: Involved in an incident as defined by Article 16.1 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations

What if they got him on
f) Illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver.
because I swear I remember some sort of clarification about when a drivers front wheels are ahead of another rears (or something like that), that the driver must yield (can't remember the specifics, can someone else quote?).

[lukeaar]

Found a quote:

Although Red Bull and Vettel did not believe that the incident warranted a penalty, Domenicali believes the stewards did the right thing because of the recent rules clarification by the FIA about defensive driving.

"After what happened in Bahrain there was a clarification from race control that the driver in front has to leave space if there is a part of the car that is approaching that is already beside," he explained.

EDIT:
Even better: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101147/

In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said that "any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."

To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."

[f1316]

Found a quote:

Although Red Bull and Vettel did not believe that the incident warranted a penalty, Domenicali believes the stewards did the right thing because of the recent rules clarification by the FIA about defensive driving.

"After what happened in Bahrain there was a clarification from race control that the driver in front has to leave space if there is a part of the car that is approaching that is already beside," he explained.

EDIT:
Even better: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101147/

In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said that "any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."

Yes, and they clarified that the front wing level with the rear wheel constituted a "significant portion of the car".

To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."

[Mandrake]

Found a quote:

Although Red Bull and Vettel did not believe that the incident warranted a penalty, Domenicali believes the stewards did the right thing because of the recent rules clarification by the FIA about defensive driving.

"After what happened in Bahrain there was a clarification from race control that the driver in front has to leave space if there is a part of the car that is approaching that is already beside," he explained.

EDIT:
Even better: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101147/

In the note, a copy of which has been seen by AUTOSPORT, Whiting said that "any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason."

To further clarify the situation he later added: "For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a 'significant portion'."

But this is not the reason he was penalised for. It was "Forcing another driver off track"....and even if he did leave less space than Alonso last year, there was not enough space this year nor last year for 2 cars. In a normal world last would have created a case on which to refer to, but as it was in Italy with a Ferrari involved they never even thought about it.....

In the end it didn't matter, but it just devalued Alonso's performance and the respect I had for him. Such a crying baby....he knew he was having many more chances to pass Vettel, his car was way faster on the straights and not slower in the corners.