Todt: Hamilton "Escaped Six Race Ban"

[TenEightyOne]

Jean Todt has given an interview to the Press Association that covers, as you'd expect right now, a number of topics.

One of those is Lewis Hamilton's now infamous "Ali G" quote that was given in some anger after a frustrating Monaco Grand Prix.

McLaren acted quickly after the outburst and took Lewis back to the circuit to apologise to the stewards for what seemed to simply be a very badly timed joke delivered without much grace or humour.

Todt told the PA; "He wrote to me and it was between him and the FIA. Maybe it would have been a better decision to send him to the judicial court and ban him for six grands prix or something but for me this thing is over."

That's lucky for Hamilton, you have to think that if Max Moseley had still been FIA president then his sensitivity to any suggestions of racism or Nazi-ism could have led to Lewis being in very hot water.

 

[Hun200kmh]

There's no way such a penalty would be imposed in these circumstances, I think Todt only said that as a signal to all guys. "Don't be stupid kids, behave or face harsh consequences".

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm not so sure. If I had been a steward at that race and Hamilton had (even in jest) used a mandatory FIA interview to say that I called him to explain his actions 'because he was black' then I would be very unhappy.

If I called your wife the Angel of the North and went on to say that it was because she was massive and a bit rusty then I'd be using a well known joke in a denigratory sense. Does that make it okay? I'm sure you'd say not.

I think Todt has made the right decision - Hamilton was certainly joking... he just picked a very silly place to do it.

As I said in the OP it's likely that Moseley would have made an example of him - the stink of Nazism is one that it took him a long time to rid himself of.


EDIT: Just found a good interview with Lewis at Formula1.com; he's definitely in a much more contrite mood now when talking about the accidents and his post-race rant.

also I would say I was more to blame than the car that was in front. It is not even easy to see the car, as there is a blind spot as well. Then of course drivers would defend their positions, too. I was rather thinking that perhaps it was more like 80-20, or 70-30, me being more responsible for the fault. Either way I felt that for my relationship with the other drivers, and mostly because of the things that I said afterwards, I felt it was important to correct that and apologize for that.

[Link]

 

[BobK]

So where, exactly, did Todt say "Escaped Six Month Ban" as the title claims? The title implies an exact quote of Todt's words, and I don't see it in the quote supplied.

 

[Northstar]

So where, exactly, did Todt say "Escaped Six Month Ban" as the title claims? The title implies an exact quote of Todt's words, and I don't see it in the quote supplied.

It's 6 races, not 6 months like the title says.

"Maybe it would have been a better decision to put him to the court, to ban him for six Grands Prix. But he wrote to me and I wrote to him and the thing is over,"

Link

Would be very excessive if they did it, a fine would be more acceptable.

 

[Sureboss]

Pretty stupid quote from Todt. It's over, move on.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Wouldn't this topic be more appropriate for the Monaco thread? Does it really merit it's own thread to talk about what someone would've done?

 

[TenEightyOne]

So where, exactly, did Todt say "Escaped Six Month Ban" as the title claims? The title implies an exact quote of Todt's words, and I don't see it in the quote supplied.

Good question - I guess I had some Coulthard-esque brain fade. Fixed, thank you for pointing it out

I thought this was thread-worthy beacuse the comments made by Lewis at Monaco were the product of events at several races rather than just Monaco.

I still think that he was very lucky to escape further censure, we all seem confident that his comments were meant in jest but he chose a silly time to make them and a silly arena to make them in. It could have turned out much worse.

 

[grrlpurple]

Why oh why do I get the feeling that the FIA picks on Lewis a bit too much as it is... he is always being punished for one thing or another and, well, to be fair I really don't feel that his actions justify the punishment on quite a lot of those occassions...

 

[IceMan PJN]

Why oh why do I get the feeling that the FIA picks on Lewis a bit too much as it is... he is always being punished for one thing or another and, well, to be fair I really don't feel that his actions justify the punishment on quite a lot of those occassions...

Perhaps I'm slightly biased because I'm a Hamilton fan, but I have always felt that he's been done a bit unfairly sometimes, but in honesty he at least sometimes brings it on himself. The thing of it is, Hamilton seems to me to be a bit aggressive, sometimes that gains him track position and sometimes hurts him, and sometimes lands him in hot water as it did in Monaco, but in a way that's a good thing because it means he isn't content with just playing it safe but rather will push a bit harder for a better position. I like his hunger that drives him forward, even to take chances, although I hate it when those gambles blow up in his face.

I never have really forgiven the stewards for robbing Hamilton of his 2008 win at Spa. I think it was universally agreed that Spa 2008 was an exciting race and that Lewis totally earned the win, watching Hamilton battle Kimi intently from start to finish with an exciting series of twists at the finish, only for the stewards to hand the win to the best of the rest, to a driver who was nowhere near on par with Lewis and Kimi that day. They amended the rule book after the race, but the fact is that was still after the race. Hamilton was penalized for something that happened in a fuzzy gray area that wasn't adequately defined at the time. That's a fault of the FIA, not of Lewis, but Lewis payed for it. I've never gotten over that.

The thing about the Monaco 2011 incidents for me is that Lewis was fighting for positions on a course where nobody fights for positions. I've seen debates about whether Vettel would have lost the lead had they not been able to change tires under the red flag, but the fact remains that people just don't pass at Monaco, even if the guy up from is practically running on rims. Hamilton illustrated why people don't attempt it - it's so easy for it to end in disaster for somebody. Nevertheless, Hamilton gambled and tried it anyway, making three overtakes among which two resulted in wrecks and penalties. Technically, he shouldn't have done it because of the high probability of disaster, but at the same time he was adding something to what would otherwise have been a parade of absolutely no on-track overtakes.

Lewis still has... what David Hobbs refers to as "big attachments" (or something similar); arguably the biggest attachments on the grid.

Something else comes to mind, here. I was watching F1 Debrief last night and they were discussing the whole Lewis situation post-Monaco, and the comments for which he was under fire. They didn't seem to feel that it was all that unreasonable for Lewis to vent a bit. Drivers invest a lot into a race, and you've got exhausted drivers who have just spent a bunch of time with adrenaline rushing through their veins, and it's perfectly natural to get worked up and emotional. In some other motorsports it's not at all unusual for a driver to chase down another and shout or even punch them, but it's expected that F1 drivers can't even verbally vent their frustrations a bit.

I understand officials not appreciating comments directed against them, but nobody seems to have much sympathy for what the driver is going through.

 

[Ardius]

Why oh why do I get the feeling that the FIA picks on Lewis a bit too much as it is... he is always being punished for one thing or another and, well, to be fair I really don't feel that his actions justify the punishment on quite a lot of those occassions...

Aggressive driving results in aggressive stewarding, it doesn't just apply to Hamilton, its applied to everyone ever.
Why doesn't Heidfeld or Button end up in front of stewards more often? Because they aren't aggressive drivers. Not because the FIA like them.

Sometimes aggressive driving results in great results, sometimes it ends with terrible results. That is how it is.

If you are a referee at a football match and a player repeatedly makes very aggressive tackles, even after you have warned him and given him yellow even red cards before...would you really be lenient every single time afterwards? It happens in all sports, repeat offenders are naturally going to end up with repeat penalties. This is not about being biased or unfair, its simply a matter of fact.

 

[TenEightyOne]

That's a good point - it's the 'conspicuous foul' mentality. Lewis Hamilton drives in a very aggressive 'watch me!' style - that could be the reason that his contretemps are so noticeable... your interest is piqued (not Piqueted) at the point that he approaches the back of any other car.

Spa 2008... tough one. He was inexperienced and, with hindsight, has accepted that he should have left the move until after the hairpin. He would have breezed past Raikkonen anyway, that's what makes the penalty so galling.

Still, the fact remains that drivers aren't allowed to gain or maintain passing advantage while off the track. Hamilton's car made up 85m on Raikkonen's by cutting the corner, that put him under Raikkonen's rear wing in the position for the pass. That's illegal in all FIA-sanctioned motorsport.

I was absolutely gutted by the stewards' decision given that Raikkonen was soooo slow and that the pass was inevitable... but I can see why they felt that the rule couldn't be bent.