Valtteri Bottas has won the Austrian Grand Prix, head lead the race virtually from start to finish. It wasn't all that straightforward however, with Vettel threatening to pass in the closing stages. While the Ferrari driver settled for second, Daniel Ricciardo completes the podium after fending off Lewis Hamilton on a charge.
Didn't we have a thread for all this nonsense discussion?
Yes, the crime is the action, but the penalty must be served looking into the circumstances the crime was committed. And the consequences of the action.Just_a_fan wrote: ↑06 Jul 2017, 14:09
No. The "crime" is the action - the deliberate crashing in to another car. The FIA have now shown that so long as the driver apologizes afterwards then a 10 second stop / go is the punishment he can expect.
Imagine the same situation in, say, Singapore by with Hamilton driving in to Vettel. Anything other than the same 10 second stop / go will be seen as the stewards / FIA interfering in the title.
I fully agree with what Joe Saward said here, but I´m wondering what was his opinion when it was Lewis instead of Vettel the driver who didn´t receive the deserved penalty with stewards saying the same BS... "bad boy, the next one will be punished", as it happened in 2007 when, for example, Lewis car was reintroduced to the track by a crane and he was allowed to score pointsPhil wrote: ↑06 Jul 2017, 13:52That's an incredibly simplistic way to look at it. The incident was as it is because it was deemed to be 'deliberate'. If there was damage or not, is IMO secondary. One may be worse than the other, but the "intent" is what IMO is the biggest issue.
Joe Saward had an interesting take on it:
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2017/07 ... n-penalty/
Joe Saward wrote:When all is said and done, the only conclusion one can reach is that this is an incredibly weak ruling – and a terrible precedent. If the reference about repetition applies to drivers other than Vettel (it is not clear from the wording), then it is clearly an unfair ruling. Why would Vettel be allowed to get away with something outrageous while other drivers are not allowed to? If the repetition reference applies only to Vettel, then any other driver who commits any such offence will be able to argue that there is a precedent for there to be no punishment – beyond some nebulous comunity service.
There may even be legal implications beyond the sport because punishing any future driver when Vettel was not punished in this case would not be fair and that brings into question whether this is good governance. In the Statement of Good Governance Principles, issued by the FIA in 2000, the federation commited itself to ensuring that procedures should be “fair, transparent, accessible and efficient”. In order to be fair to other drivers, the FIA cannot now punish them harshly – because of what it has done with Vettel. And if it does take action, it could open itself to civil action, and perhaps even claims that the federation has not properly upheld its role in the sport.
Wynters wrote: ↑06 Jul 2017, 13:11It should be like this, instead of this we could have journalists making the same question over and over again, because controversy sells.NathanOlder wrote: ↑06 Jul 2017, 11:25Personally, I hope he gets asked one question about it, right at the start, and then the press move on.
No rain it looks like, very warm Sunday though.
He refused to answer the question of intent though... interesting, no way to gracefully get around that. So if he's still refusing to even say whether or not he his Lewis intentionally, any apologies a worth the press release paper they were announced on.
nuf said. Well balanced talk.Asked in Austria about whether he had revised his opinion in the wake of the FIA decision on Monday to not take the matter further, Hamilton said: “I don’t think anything changes, so my opinion stays the same.
“With all due respect, Jean should be sitting next to us to answer some questions perhaps, because I think they didn’t change anything on the Monday. So the message that was sent still remains the same.”
Pushed to say whether he regretted saying Vettel had ‘disgraced’ himself amid high emotions after the race, the Mercedes driver replied: “I don’t feel I was particularly upset after the race. If I was upset it was for other reasons.
“I don’t feel I said anything that I particularly wish to take back, but I still have the same opinion of what happened. It is water under the bridge now, we move forwards, we spoke about it, so there is no point saying much more.”
his fans that's why The ones that spent two weeks discussing steering wheel angles and Lewis' obvious brake check.
