Do you agree with Schumacher being penalised?
- Thread starter DK
- 80 comments
- 9,482 views
- 3,509
- Cumberland, BC
- GTP_BlacqueJack
Yes, because:
"The stewards agreed with Ferrari's interpretation, citing rule 40.13: "If the race ends whilst the safety car is deployed it will enter the pit lane at the end of the last lap and the cars will take the chequered flag as normal without overtaking."
"The stewards agreed with Ferrari's interpretation, citing rule 40.13: "If the race ends whilst the safety car is deployed it will enter the pit lane at the end of the last lap and the cars will take the chequered flag as normal without overtaking."
boiltheocean
Premium
- 7,756
- Samoa
I'm going to say No for all the reasons Ross Brawn pointed out in his case.
- 87,642
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Green flags were displayed, rendering rule 40.13 moot. Normal racing conditions from the SC line to the end, overtake was legal.
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
To quote myself;
I believe Alonso should retain 6th place and that Schumacher was in the breach of the rules.
But a 20 second penalty is absolutely ridiculous. The order should have reverted back to what it was at the safety car line. There was no clarity in the rules, and Schumacher does not deserve that punishment.
- 3,509
- Cumberland, BC
- GTP_BlacqueJack
I agree completely.
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
I agree with him being penalised, but I think the rules need to changed and clarified. If we get a situation where some drivers believe one thing and other drivers believe another thing, there is clearly an issue with the rules.
However, although the rules are pretty vague and pathetic, we can't go ignoring rules just because we feel they are silly, this would set a bad precedent in future. The rules should be enforced 100% all of the time, if there are exceptions needed, then they should be altered and written in, but this should be done reactively, after these incidents occur if and when they do.
I can see both sides of the argument, but the stewards had little choice here, they had a rule to follow and a set of punishments to give out. They cannot start creating their own rule book for each scenario.
However, although the rules are pretty vague and pathetic, we can't go ignoring rules just because we feel they are silly, this would set a bad precedent in future. The rules should be enforced 100% all of the time, if there are exceptions needed, then they should be altered and written in, but this should be done reactively, after these incidents occur if and when they do.
I can see both sides of the argument, but the stewards had little choice here, they had a rule to follow and a set of punishments to give out. They cannot start creating their own rule book for each scenario.
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
The rule should be enforced, Schumacher should not be given 6th position. But as many have stated, even the race marshalls were unsure, because whilst the race was supposedly under yellow flag conditions (as per the rule enforced by the stewards) they were waving green flags as per the new rule for this year; Overtaking after the safety car line.
The stewards have clarified that in this instance (i.e. on the final lap) the new rule would not apply. I firmly believe that Schumacher should have been demoted back to 7th place, given a warning and possibly given the team a fine. He did not cheat, he did not knowingly break a rule to gain an advantage. He saw an opportunity to overtake under green flag conditions and took it. A standard penalty is not necessary nor fair in this situation, and I hope the FIA reverse the stewards decision.
But we've seen from the past, the FIA almost always agrees with the stewards' final decision in the event of an appeal. Schumacher has lost out quite frankly because of the FIA's lack of clarity on the rules, the marshalls' inconsistency with the rules and the instructions from his team which were contradictory to the rule which the stewards enforced.
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Yes, I can't really disagree with that, as you've just re-worded what I said.
The onus is on the FIA to make a "rule clarification" and close this particular confusion.
Also an irrelevant, but annoying observation: Can we please use some common meaning of "marshall" and "steward"? Many posts in this thread and others are inter-changing the two and its very confusing to read.
As I understand it, a "race marshall" is simply someone who stands at the side of the track and helps race control organise the race and keep the track clear of hazards and help drivers.
A "race steward" is someone who watches the race and analyses and hands out punishments for drivers who break the rules.
The onus is on the FIA to make a "rule clarification" and close this particular confusion.
Also an irrelevant, but annoying observation: Can we please use some common meaning of "marshall" and "steward"? Many posts in this thread and others are inter-changing the two and its very confusing to read.
As I understand it, a "race marshall" is simply someone who stands at the side of the track and helps race control organise the race and keep the track clear of hazards and help drivers.
A "race steward" is someone who watches the race and analyses and hands out punishments for drivers who break the rules.
- 333
Complete utter BS! Schumi should not have been penalized. It's obvious here the rule was not clear and demonstrated incorrectly on the track. SC in green flags out so everyone was gunning it all under the impression that they must race to the Checkard. Alonso fell asleep for a split second as a result he got passed.
Mr. Hill just couldn't wait to issue a penalty.
Mr. Hill just couldn't wait to issue a penalty.
- 3,174
- Pinckney, MI
- NISMO_S13
- If I had the money
I didn't know about the penalty until now, but I don't think 20 seconds is right. When I saw it, it looked like Alonso spun the wheels and got off slow and Schumacher tried to avoid him, well and pass him, but a 20 second penalty seems too much. I'd just put him back behind Alonso.
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Complete utter BS! Schumi should not have been penalized. It's obvious here the rule was not clear and demonstrated incorrectly on the track. SC in green flags out so everyone was gunning it all under the impression that they must race to the Checkard. Alonso fell asleep for a split second as a result he got passed.
Mr. Hill just couldn't wait to issue a penalty.
Damon Hill did not issue penalties nor did he rule on it.
Alonso didn't "fall asleep" - he was told to not overtake people and didn't expect others to do it, as there was some misunderstanding on the rules.
The trouble is, the stewards can only give out punishments outlined in the rules. They cannot make up a new punishment on the spot.
As far as I know, the lowest punishment available to them was a 20 second penalty. There is no such thing as a "revert places" punishment. Its just an unfortunate circumstance of being behind the safety car, which made the penalty worse and that it happened at the end of the race, so the stewards couldn't make him give the place back or do a drive through.
Ironically, people complain about the FIA being inconsistent, but in the case of the penalty, they are being perfectly consistent. Which is how it should be, I don't think its right to start handing out punishments depending on circumstances at each race, it starts making it too complicated and more susceptible to the "conspiracies" people always like to talk about, i.e. altering the results to favour certain drivers, handing them less or worse punishments etc.
Note: I am only talking about the penalty, not the rule here. The rule is most certainly a little contradictory and confusing. That does need to be changed.
Last edited:
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
Yep, thats what I was using. Though i'm going to scan my post as it's an easy mistake to make. Someone mentioned in another post that Charlie Whiting had informed the race marshalls of the overtaking manoevre... Hmm, why would he do that? If anything it's the Marshalls that would inform the race director
Must've meant the Stewards.I was wondering if that was the case. If it is, i'm not sure the appeal will solve anything because Schumacher cannot be given 6th place, that would be equally unfair. There must be some way they can reduce the penalty without over-ruling the stewards decision/clarification of the rules. Maybe take the standings from the penultimate lap as the final results?
Last edited:
- 3,174
- Pinckney, MI
- NISMO_S13
- If I had the money
- 333
He technically didn't but,
Hill is the driver representative on the panel of stewards. He was announced last week as one of four stewards for Sunday's Monaco Grand Prix. He knowingly gave his advise that they see Michael Schumacher penalized.
In his own words:
So he's part responsible and took part in the decision made by the rest of the panel. Hate mail is flooding his email as we speak.lol
Last edited:
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Simple answer - same outcome.
Are you trying to imply Schumacher is more controversial than Alonso...really?But my reaction would be the same regardless who broke the rule. If Button had done it I would be saying the same thing.
Well I hadn't read that particular quote, though its not really fair of people to go blaming him for it all as he didn't have much choice - a rule was broken, what else can he say? This wasn't one of the situations for the driver stewards to deal with, as there is no question about the breaking of rules regarding driving.
Damon can do no right it seems..which is ironic considering he was the victim before...It will be a shame if Damon chooses to not do it again or if the FIA don't choose him because of this. He's as honorable and honest as you can get with F1 drivers and he is one of the better people to be steward. Its sad to see people so easily think he has bias.
And to go full circle - yet again Schumacher has been involved with Damon in some way and in one respect has come off better. And I thought this particularly relationship had ended 10 years ago!
Last edited:
- 333
I disagree,
I actually agree with Eddie and David's opinion on the situation that Alonso wasn't informed by Stefano that the race was over or proper instructions finishing the race. If you look closely Alonso timed it wrong and was mashing the pedal trying to prevent Schumi from passing. If he was told that the race was over and not to worry then why was he driving like a mad man possessed to maintain his position?
I just find it hard to believe , they were simply stuck on the new rule that when the SC is in and you pass that white line you can overtake. Then after the race is when they remembered that you cannot overtake. You can see in his body language that he wasn't telling the truth. lol
Last edited:
- 3,509
- Cumberland, BC
- GTP_BlacqueJack
Okay enough already, Schui is not leading the championship! 
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
Hmm, so basically you don't believe any of the facts given to you. I don't see where Alonso was "mashing the pedal". "Look closely"? I don't believe I can see the pedals, only the reactions of Alonso's car, which, by the way, was taking the racing line in a normal fashion.
The only thing differently Alonso could have done was turn in earlier to use the normal racing line, which would have caused a collision with Schumacher who was by that point clearly jumping past.
Again, just like Damon, Alonso can't win - he lets Schumacher through and its "he was napping" and he crashes into him and it would be "Alonso is blind/idiot/moron etc".
The facts of the matter are that there was confusion over the rules, many drivers were told not to overtake (whether you believe that or not is your own thoughts) and no one else tried similar moves. This points to Alonso not fighting Schumacher either because he didn't expect it or because he quickly realised Schumacher wasn't likely to get away with it.
Suggesting Alonso was napping suggests Alonso should have tried the same moves as Schumacher, which were difficult in the first place and secondly, like I said, you would rather Alonso smash into Schumacher? Or are you saying he should have blocked after the Rascasse? He shouldn't need to block after the Rascasse because its not a normal overtaking spot anyway, its impossible unless you know you can overtake...which is quite suspicious on Schumachers part don't you think?
Lets look at the other side of this - Schumacher clearly planned the move in advance knowing Alonso wouldn't expect it, knowing he would yield because of the confusion on rules. How about that for a conspiracy?
Last edited:
Seismica
Premium
- 4,346
- Guisborough
- GTP_Seismica
I was about to say... The Stewards will have listened to the team radios, and have been given evidence that we are not privy to. But you edited that part of your post
I don't think Alonso felt he had to rush at all. But when he came out of rascasse he saw the cars infront accelerating off as if they were racing, and also the green flags. I think he panicked and thats why he lost the place. He was told that he couldn't be overtaken, but surely there was an element of doubt in his mind just before it happened. But he stuck to his guns after the race and rightly so, Ferrari was correct in their interpretation of the rules.
The only problem I have is the penalty given to Michael. Any other driver would have reacted the same way if given the same information both from the team radio and from the race marshalls with the green flags, which both indicated that a move of that type was ok. If anyone is to be given a penalty it should be the race marshalls and/or Charlie Whiting, and the Mercedes team itself, not the driver.
- 27,219
- United Kingdom
Do I agree? No. Ross Brawn had a pretty solid case. Green lights were showing, in anyone's rule book that means the race is on, no restrictions. Schuey made a legal passing manouevre.
The decision just seems a little more like another kick in the knackers to anyone who thinks the sport is governed fairly. And it doesn't do anything to put to sleep the conspiracy theorists who think that Ferrari always gets the upper hand.
The decision just seems a little more like another kick in the knackers to anyone who thinks the sport is governed fairly. And it doesn't do anything to put to sleep the conspiracy theorists who think that Ferrari always gets the upper hand.
- 6,009
- Finland
So apparently the stewards screwed up big time. The rule book says that passing is prohibited until the finish line yet the guys were waving green. But does the action of uninformed stewards override the rule book? I certainly don't think so. If passing is prohibited it is prohibited, full stop. And people like Brawn and Schumacher should know it.
- 1,537
- GTP_Soundtrack
Penalizing a driver for doing his job, while race direction and marshals quite obviously failed to accomplish theirs?
- 333
All I know is from what I see and hear from the teams my opinion is very clear Alonso was caught napping for a split second or he simply miss timed it. They all knew the rules SC in green flag means RACE!
I don't believe that Stefano told Alonso the "correct rules" I watched it over and over and I see Alonso racing to the Checkard.
But other than that this rule clearly needs to be fixed, what an undeserving penalty.👎
- 462
I don't understand why he should be penalize, they waved the green flag, if the stewards made a mistake a driver should not be penalize for it, given he respected the rules under said flag. Schumacher doesn't need to know specific rules since it's the stewards job to know these and wave the proper flag, wich they failed. The driver obey the flag according to their color and that's as far as it goes. Even if the team told Alonso they couldn't overtake by radio they don't rule the race, the stewards do, and Alonso should have stepped on the gas as soon as he saw the green being waved. This could be an easy way out of F1 for Schumacher and bad public relation for the FIA, he still is the most decorated driver of the sport and they will probably revert this decision and give him 6th place. The stewards should be penalized and fined, and when you look how they managed the race I would put the blame on them before anyone else, two safety cars were unjustified, the drain and last turn could AND SHOULD have been localised.
Last edited:
- 1,885
- qld
- GTP_zed300 /zed300
- YA SAY WHAT?!!!!
This is BS, why bother bringing the SC in for the last 300 metres then. The rule has changed just because it's the last lap?
Not only did Alonso mash the go button, Hamilton was power sliding in front of Alonso.
Michael never got to the Ferrari, until after the SC line.
20 seconds, who's the 🤬 hole who came up with that being fair. There is always going to be at least 15 cars in 20 sec at a restart.
Not only did Alonso mash the go button, Hamilton was power sliding in front of Alonso.
Michael never got to the Ferrari, until after the SC line.
20 seconds, who's the 🤬 hole who came up with that being fair. There is always going to be at least 15 cars in 20 sec at a restart.
Enigma
Premium
- 364
- Glasgow
- GTP_Enigma
I think you should look at the footage again, if he thought it was just a cruise to the finish line why did Alonso nail the throttle that hard that he lit up his rear tyres and went sideways (thats what enabled schumacher to make the move in the first place)
Didnt look to me as if ANY of the drivers were doing a gentle cruise over the finish line
Why is it most people on here aswell as Martin, Eddie and DC could see that but you cant?
