For everyone who has never actually a driven a car on a track and attempted to go into a corner at the highest possible speed (e.g. while racing):
Corner exit: The line of the car is dictated by the velocity, the amount of grip and the geometry (radius) of the corner. Attempting to turn in tighter will result in loss of grip, possibly the rear breaking out in the direction you are turning. E.g. turning right and the car will go into oversteer right. Abruptly going off throttle or even braking will result in the same, as it will unsettle the car due to the load of the car changing. In such a corner, the load is on the outside, deceleration will cause load to shift forward meaning less grip on the rear which can result in loss of control and oversteer.
The higher the speed, the higher the loads, the higher the risk of this happening. This will lead to the effect that every car will go towards the outside of a corner on corner exit; thus the "closing gap" for anyone who is on the outside. Being on the inside also has the advantage of covering less distance. At the same speed, the car on the inside will move ahead. I expect a car on the inside, assuming it is slightly ahead, to take that advantage. The onus to 'back' out is usually on the car behind, also because he is in the others blind spot. Respect can be given to the point one can, as dictated by the laws of physics and how committed one is to the corner and the speed one is carrying.
Illustration: Rosberg slightly behind on the outside. Hamilton on the right, slightly ahead on the inside.
This does not apply to corner entry, especially not at a slow corner dictated entirely by mechanical grip!
The problem here is not that Rosberg was carried "outside", it was all about when to turn in. He made a conscious decision to NOT turn in for as long as possible and force Hamilton off the track. Hamilton being slightly ahead, couldn't see Rosberg and assumed he was going to take the corner, hence why a collision happened. On corner entry (not the same as corner-exit), one is bringing the car to the lowest speed of the corner and at that point can decide to choose to steer left, right, go straight without the risk of the rear breaking traction.
If Rosberg had turned in, but gone straight (as a result of no traction), then the collision would have had an entirely different meaning. Then it would have been classed as an unfortunate racing incident because the point could be made that he simply went in too fast and was a by-passenger. He got a penalty because his conscious decision to not attempt to turn in caused the collision that happened.
Again, on corner exit; If Hamilton in Suzuka had decided to wave past Rosberg and concede the position, he might have lifted or turned in harder, but likely caused a loss of control and ultimately taking them both out in the process.
If I was a F1 steward, the telemetry of every single incident would be important to judge how much a driver had control of the situation that caused an incident. I.e. if a driver consciously pushes a car off the track while having reserves (e.g. not driving at the limit, therefore having some level of control over where to point his car, how much steering lock and how much room one leaves for the other), he would be punished for dangerous and disrespectful driving. This applies to drivers on the inside as well as the outside of a corner. I would independently judge which driver was in which position and how much onus was on either to avoid contact. I am assuming the F1 stewards do this, but having seen similar collisions being judged differently, I would assume not always all telemetry is taken into account or is available when taking action.
