The rule states; not only must the driver give up the corner if he drives off the track, he must gain no competitive advantage for the next TWO corners”

"TWO Corners"

Can you point us to that rule?

canciaro - 07 September 2008 07:47 PM

The rule states; not only must the driver give up the corner if he drives off the track, he must gain no competitive advantage for the next TWO corners”

"TWO Corners"

Dude you can't make up rules.....OK do you work for the FIA?....if so then you can.

Massa: What Lewis did is the sort of thing that can happen, but I think he was maybe a bit too optimistic in thinking he could just hand back the position, albeit only partially to Kimi and then immediately try and pass him again.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/70428

Wow, definitive statement from Massa there!

Be a man and refuse to accept a win under these circumstances

XGC-Jense - 08 September 2008 07:59 AM

Nothing else to say on the matter

Good . Can we quote you on that ?

Ferrari is a disgrace. The World Champion loses it -- again -- and nails the wall, and Ferrari protests Hamilton's pass after he wins the race, on a wet track with hard-compound dry tires. Ferrari doesn't care how it wins: If the car is inferior on the track, Ferrari lobbies in the back rooms like the true guardhouse lawyers that they are. Aside from the fact that Hamilton was driven off the road, on the inside of the chicane, by R., he gave the lead back and R. lost the race because the wall magnetically attracted the Ferrari's nose, at speed.

I am not fan of McLaren or Ron Dennis -- I'd love to see him stranded on a desert island with Max Mosley. But Hamilton won the Belgian G.P. by shepherding his car across the finish line first, and that's what racing is supposed to be about. Except in F1, and except for Ferrari.

Tony Clifton - 08 September 2008 07:01 AM

The FIA officials must have blind as bats last year at the Japanese GP when Massa and Kubica, in the rain, were running off course and cutting corners for 2 or 3 corners on the last lap of the race......in the rain.

Just as they were blind to Hamilton driving like a drunk during the safetycar period and causing Vettel and Webber to crash . If the FIA is so biased , why didn't they penalize Hamilton then ?

ventured -

The FIA's investigation was BECAUSE of the Ferrari protest.

Proof please?

Tony Clifton - 08 September 2008 07:01 AM

What about the start of the race where half the ran wide, off course? Did half the field have to give up positions or did they restart the race?

HUGE difference between running wide and taking the long way around, and cutting the corner to shorten it.

GulfPorsche - 07 September 2008 08:17 PM

Ferrari is a disgrace. The World Champion loses it -- again -- and nails the wall, and Ferrari protests Hamilton's pass after he wins the race, on a wet track with hard-compound dry tires. Ferrari doesn't care how it wins: If the car is inferior on the track, Ferrari lobbies in the back rooms like the true guardhouse lawyers that they are. Aside from the fact that Hamilton was driven off the road, on the inside of the chicane, by R., he gave the lead back and R. lost the race because the wall magnetically attracted the Ferrari's nose, at speed.

I am not fan of McLaren or Ron Dennis -- I'd love to see him stranded on a desert island with Max Mosley. But Hamilton won the Belgian G.P. by shepherding his car across the finish line first, and that's what racing is supposed to be about. Except in F1, and except for Ferrari.

How is Ferrari a disgrace? They are not a disgrace because people make up all this nonsense about them. They failed to win a championship for over 20 years and have managed to dominate F1, on merit, for much of this decade. Just because the FIA is consistently inconsistent and competently incompetent, has nothing to do with Ferrari. It never has.

Any evidence, actual evidence that Ferrari filed a protest? Why didn't their supposed lobbying work in 2005 and 2006? How did they lobby for the championship last season?

GulfPorsche - 07 September 2008 08:17 PM

Ferrari is a disgrace. The World Champion loses it -- again -- and nails the wall, and Ferrari protests Hamilton's pass after he wins the race, on a wet track with hard-compound dry tires. Ferrari doesn't care how it wins: If the car is inferior on the track, Ferrari lobbies in the back rooms like the true guardhouse lawyers that they are. Aside from the fact that Hamilton was driven off the road, on the inside of the chicane, by R., he gave the lead back and R. lost the race because the wall magnetically attracted the Ferrari's nose, at speed.

I am not fan of McLaren or Ron Dennis -- I'd love to see him stranded on a desert island with Max Mosley. But Hamilton won the Belgian G.P. by shepherding his car across the finish line first, and that's what racing is supposed to be about. Except in F1, and except for Ferrari.

Nice try but from everything I am hearing, Ferrari didn't even protest. It was the FIA's decision to review it.

I can definitely see how this would come under review. I don't know the exact rule on this but Lewis did gain an unfair advantage from going off track. He basically let Kimi by and then slipped right in a foot behind his gearbox and gained the advantage again even before the next turn.

I will admit that I am a Ferrari fan but come on people, this one could go either way but to say it is wrong to even review it is just willfully ignorant.