Once again, Jackie Stewart is the only one with big enough....

[Scott]

...to speak out against the FIA.

Why has hardly anyone said a thing about the inconsistancy of the FIA by fining Massa instead of giving the penalty they almost ALWAYS give for an unsafe pit release?


From F1 Live


Sir Jackie Stewart has hit out at what he perceives as the lenient penalty handed down to Valencia winner Felipe Massa after Sunday's European Grand Prix.

The Scot, a former triple World Champion and team owner, and a regular media pundit, praised the Ferrari driver's performance on the streets of the Spanish port city but also believes the Brazilian committed a basic error in the pitlane.

During the 57-lap race, FIA stewards delayed imposing a penalty on leader Massa following his controversial 'unsafe' release by his Ferrari pit crew into the path of Force India's Adrian Sutil.

Subsequently, amid speculation that he may lose the win and ten points, stewards decided only to penalise the Ferrari team 10,000 euros.

"For me it was the key moment of the race," Stewart told Switzerland's Motorsport Aktuell. 
 
"I don't know if it was the team or the driver who made the error. But, first of all, I cannot understand why the stewards made their decision only after the race."

"They have all the information that is needed to make a judgement during the Grand Prix," Stewart believes.

He also observes that, "in the eyes of many," the stewards' verdict "underlines once again that in such cases Ferrari is treated with kid gloves."

[Scott]

The FIA's response...weak as usual.  I don't know what watching every angle of the incident has to do with their written infraction and penalties.  As Ali pointed out in her Blog, there is simply no choice for the FIA to fine in this situation.  They must either give no penalty, or give the proper penalty, which was either a drive-through, a stop and go 10 second penalty or if it was not decided until the end, either a grid penalty for the next race or a 25 second finishing penalty (losing Massa the win).  I would be so nervous with Luca as head of the new team committee.

Here is the story from F1 Racing

The FIA's Alan Donnelly has hit back at claims the stewards at Valencia made the wrong call following a controversial pitlane incident involving race winner Felipe Massa.

The three race stewards appointed for the Spanish event, overseen as usual by permanent supervisor Donnelly, decided to reprimand the Ferrari driver's release into the path of Adrian Sutil, but apply only a monetary penalty.

Former triple world champion Sir Jackie Stewart subsequently observed that, "in the eyes of many," the arguably lenient verdict "underlines once again that in such cases Ferrari is treated with kid gloves."

Stewart also told Britain's Daily Mail that F1 stewards are "part-time amateurs" who are not paid properly.

But Donnelly replied: "We watched the incident from every angle. I'm perfectly happy with the decision. Remember that Massa did not gain any sporting advantage."

[Steven Roy]

For once I am one up on Ali in a rules debate although it has taken me long enough.  Everything below is as I have just posted at sidepodcast.  F1 Insight is Chameleon's blog.  I will leave people to judge for themselves why the stewards made this decision.

I have just noticed something as a result of a discussion at F1 Insight. ‘Incidents’ come under article 16 of the 2008 F1 Sporting Regulations and the penalties for such are specified in article 16.3. Ferrari were found guilty of an offence under article 23.1i of the 2008 F1 Sporting Regulations which rather conveniently does not specify penalties.

The judgement can be found here
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/eur_08_document_411.gif

The regulations can be found here
http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/475632E46002BEDAC125744F004312F4/FILE/F1.SPORTING.REGULATIONS.19-05-2008.pdf

[Scott]

I get errors no matter how many times or different ways I try the 'regulations' link

[Ian]

Me too, this page cannot be displayed

[Steven Roy]

Sorry guys.  Somewhere in the address one character is missing but I can't figure out where.  I can't make it work.

Go to

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulations/Pages/FIAFormulaOneWorldChampionship.aspx

and choose the fourth pdf file 2008 Sporting Regulations.

[lkjohnson1950]

It would seem that the stewards are within their perogatives even if it has never been handled this way before.

[Monty]

There may be no prescibed penalties but there is plenty of Precedence. On the same weekend at the same track GP2 drivers were penalised severley for similar errors.
I do not always agree with Brundle but he was spot on when he said it was there for all to see. Ferrari released Massa when Sutil was almost next to him. Sutil could not have stopped and if he hadn't reacted quickly (moving to his left and nearly hitting the wall) they would have definitely collided. Therefore the release was unsafe.
It is also questionable that Massa did not gain competitive advantage. If he had been released at a safe time he would have lost possibly 2-3 seconds which of course could have had an effect on the race (I know he won by a huge margin but that's not the point, he did gain an advantage by being released when he was).
It would have been really tough on Massa if he had been given a drive through (clearly the correct penalty) but other drivers have been similarly penalised for doing 1kph over the speed limit, taking one tyre a few mm over the blend line, catching a tyre on equipment in the next box, etc., etc. Rules are rules and they should be applied to Ferrari drivers in the same way as all other drivers. I know the FIA do not care what paying spectators like me think but this year the FIA's drive to become Ferrari International Assistance (combined with their ridiculous support for Mosley) have ruined the 'sport' so much that my attentions are moving more to tin-tops and bikes.
Sir Jackie for President (of the world). RANT OVER!

[Scott]

Am I reading the wrong place?  It seems that any 'incident' gives the stewards one of 5 options:

16.3 The stewards may impose any one of three penalties on any driver involved in an Incident :
a) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and re-join the race without stopping ;
b) A ten second time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop at his pit for at least ten seconds
and then re-join the race.
c) a drop of ten grid positions at the driver’s next Event.
However, should either of the penalties under a) and b) above be imposed during the last five laps, or
after the end of a race, Article 16.4b) below will not apply and 25 seconds will be added to the elapsed
race time of the driver concerned.

or, no penalty at all.  Nowhere is it written that they can give a monetary fine after the end of the race.

So perhaps the technicality is that it was a team error that caused the incident, not the driver, but even if the team caused an unsafe release from the pit, it was still up to the driver to correct it (as in slowing and pulling in behind immediately like he should have, not at the end of the pit lane, which was quite dangerous) - therefor in my opinion the driver still should have received one of the 4 penalties or have the stewards outright dismiss it.

[Steven Roy]

I should have known better than try to get Ali on a rules issue.  She is right that even though the FIA decided to use the rule they did the penalty should still come from article 16.3.  Clearly they didn't fancy any of the legal penalties so they invented a new one.

Releasing the driver is always a team thing rather than driver responsibility but team and driver are one.  It just looks ridiculous that in GP2 they instantly issued a drive through but in F1 they have to wait until after the race to assess the penalty.  It is plain wrong that any penalty should be assessed when its effect on the result could be considered when it was perfectly possible to assess the penalty soon after the incident. 

Personally I find it absolutely sickening that they mention sporting advantage on a safety issue.  What does sporting advantage have to do with it.  That is like saying Schumacher should not have been penalised for ramming Villeneuve at Jerez because his car broke and he didn't gain an advantage.

[Willy]

I have no interest in reading all the FIA rules to see what options they had but am still miffed at the stewards for not acting as soon as it occured. So what if Massa was leading and driving a Ferrari. Would we have seen such waffling from the stewards if it had been any of the back-marker teams?
I think not.

Good on yah Jackie!!!
Give 'em hell.

[John S]

I think the stewards, right or wrong, may have taken the narrow pit lane into account and since this is a new circuit the pitlane should be wider. Had the pit lane been wider and up to FIA recomendations this incident may not have appeared dangerous, and Sutil who was clearly a back marker could have backed off to allow Massa a clear run.

Yes I did say back off. In Jackie's day the back markers wern't forced to jump out of the way when the faster cars came to lap them, he had to do it the hard way and most of us probably still prefer that.  However if the slow cars now have to give way immediatly on track seems the same should apply in the pitlane as long the lane is wide enough, which it clearly wasn't in Valencia.

If the stewards had imposed a penalty that changed the order of the race they may well have laid themselves, the race track and the FIA open to legal action. F1 teams have the money to pursue actions in courts or arbitrations whether they win or lose, GP teams almost certainly don't.

[Alianora La Canta]

‘Incidents’ come under article 16 of the 2008 F1 Sporting Regulations and the penalties for such are specified in article 16.3. Ferrari were found guilty of an offence under article 23.1i of the 2008 F1 Sporting Regulations which rather conveniently does not specify penalties. {Steven Roy - 10 comments ago}

Good try, but it's not quite that simple. There is a reason why Article 23.1i does not specify penalties; it is classed as an Incident under Article 16.1, which says in brief:

""Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers... ...which:

- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or this Code;
(there are other things described as incidents, but the above is the only one relevant or necessary in this case)

All Incidents as defined by Article 16.1 must be penalised through the methods described in 16.3.

It would appear that the stewards do not know the FIA regulations, which is rather worrying since they are supposed to be judging races on the basis of them!

and Sutil who was clearly a back marker could have backed off to allow Massa a clear run. {John S - previous comment}

Not and stay within the regulations. To have slowed down in the pit lane because Massa was released when he was would have simply demonstrated an illegitimate impediment by Massa of Sutil, which is penalisable under Article 16.1 in its own right (remember that the fast lane is called that for a reason). So Massa would have been penalised twice instead of once. Adrian saved a lot of trouble by carrying on as he was. In any case, informal convention has it that the fast lane has right of way over the inner lane - a question of car preservation more than anything.

If the stewards had imposed a penalty that changed the order of the race, they would have won any legal dispute subsequently received, probably in a summary decision, simply by pointing to the regulations and to the document that the parties protesting the decision agreed to on entry (Article 2.1 of the Sporting Regulations).

[lkjohnson1950]

It all really comes down to amateur race stewards afraid to offend the rich and powerful lest they be asked to not marshall anymore. How about Sir Jackie for official, all powerful race marshall?

[Scott]

Ali, if you are right, then I would guess that McLaren have a case to appeal the stewards desicion and if they won, then the only penalties available would be to have a 25sec penalty against Massa (giving Lewis the win) or a 10 grid penalty, giving them an upper hand in Spa.