Hamilton to lose 3rd place??

[Ian]

Surely if all of Jarno's wheels were on the grass then Lewis was entitled to the place(I'm not a Lewis fan either.) Think back to last year with Kimi and Lewis and a similar situation (apart from safety car)when Lewis went off track(short cut) and took Kimi, Lewis immediately let Kimi pass and then re=took him and got hammered for it. As has already been said, you need to hear the full transcript of everything, pit radio, statements to the FIA, the lot before a valid comment can be made.

[Andy B]

How strange that its taken the stewards and FIA 4 days to come up with this?

[Jericoke]

Surely if all of Jarno's wheels were on the grass then Lewis was entitled to the place(I'm not a Lewis fan either.) Think back to last year with Kimi and Lewis and a similar situation (apart from safety car)when Lewis went off track(short cut) and took Kimi, Lewis immediately let Kimi pass and then re=took him and got hammered for it. As has already been said, you need to hear the full transcript of everything, pit radio, statements to the FIA, the lot before a valid comment can be made.

At least then the FIA clearly stated that Lewis was to allow Kimi the racing line for 2 more corners (my memory is foggy on the exact number of corners). 

[Ian]

It was 2 corners Jericoke, but that was'nt what he was told, the race director was asked several times by RD if it was ok now that Lewis had given the place back and was told "yes." It was only afterwards that Lewis was penalised.

[cosworth151]

If I understand what the FIA claims, they're not penalizing Hamilton for what he did on the track, but for what he said (or didn't say) in the inquiry after the race. That's why I'd like to see a transcript of what exactly was said.

After listening to the McLaren radio tape, I'd also like to know why it took so long for McLaren to get an answer from Charlie Whiting, or even if they ever got an answer at all.

[FW14B]

Everything needs to be a lot more transparent as right now F1 just appears to make very little sense to even die hard fans.  The result is still really TBC and it seems things change every other day.  It is no good for the sport or for fans.

[Scott]

If I understand what the FIA claims, they're not penalizing Hamilton for what he did on the track, but for what he said (or didn't say) in the inquiry after the race. That's why I'd like to see a transcript of what exactly was said.

After listening to the McLaren radio tape, I'd also like to know why it took so long for McLaren to get an answer from Charlie Whiting, or even if they ever got an answer at all.

I don't think you'll ever see one (transcript).  Mclaren has accepted the penalty, and Whitmarsh's defense of the episode was really weak - i.e. there was something to the FIA's findings.

[Wizzo]

Failing that why didn't the stewards call in the evidence from the TV pictures and radio converstions, from the minute or so when all the disputed action took place, before giving a decision. This is top International sporting competition after all not a club race in the middle of nowhere.

Surely the technology is in place to ensure the final results on the day are indeed the final results. Imagine watching a football match live only to find by the time you arrived home one of the goals was disallowed after the referee had re-watched the match - there would be an uproar!

If the rules were clear for all to understand then situations like this would never arise. What happened to the good ol' days? When a driver did something wrong, it would be discussed and then a big black flag was waved out of the window within a couple of laps - not 4 days later!

Many of my friends have started to gain interest in F1 since Hamilton won the championship and they were delighted to see Button win in the opening round. Now, they are completely confused by the events in Australia, so much so they may not watch again.

Talk about more harm than good. 

[Monty]

People are making the mistake of taking the FIA's comments as an indication that Hamilton was lying.
From what is in the public domain and a little I have heard from insiders, Hamilton has been penalised for not volunteering the information that he had delberately slowed to let Trulli pass.
My undestanding is that he was never asked directly. Therefore he did not lie. Both he and the Team suggest that they believed the FIA already knew that the team had told Hamilton to let Trulli past. The team then instructed Hamilton to 'say nothing' to the stewards.
However, I knew that the team had told him to let Trulli pass because Hamilton said so in an interview straight after the race. If I knew, how could the FIA not know??????
This has all come about because the FIA made a stupid decision to penalise Trulli and when they realised their crass mistake they needed someone to blame!
At the moment I am only just holding my interest in F1 because my man Jenson actually won. When the FIA take his points away because of a diffuser design that complied with scrutineering but upset a few team managers, I will switch off forever.

[Scott]

When the FIA take his points away because of a diffuser design that complied with scrutineering but upset a few team managers, I will switch off forever.

Hopefully only until the regime changes.

[Steven Roy]

The whole stewarding process is a joke.  The stewards asked what was said on the radio.  They have access to all the radio traffic.  They don't need to ask they simply have to get off their butts and examine the data.  They asked who slowed down when.  They don't need to ask that either as they have access to the ECU data if they get off their butts.

Both Toyota and McLaren repeatedly contacted race control to get a clarification of who third place belonged to but no-one in race controlwould give an answer.  The race ran right to the end under yellow.  There must have been someone in race control who could have made a decision.

Apparently stewards meetings are not minuted.  So when they say what happened in Melbourne they are going on memory alone because there is no written account of the meeting.  No-one can remember who said what in what order in reply to what exactly if it is not in writing.

I still want to know why Donnelly felt the need to have a meeting with Vettel in Sepang to explain his Melbourne penalty.  Why of all the penalties ever issued does this one need to be explained at the next race?  Has this ever happened before?  Something is very fishy about this.

[SennaMan]

People are making the mistake of taking the FIA's comments as an indication that Hamilton was lying.
From what is in the public domain and a little I have heard from insiders, Hamilton has been penalised for not volunteering the information that he had delberately slowed to let Trulli pass.
My undestanding is that he was never asked directly. Therefore he did not lie. Both he and the Team suggest that they believed the FIA already knew that the team had told Hamilton to let Trulli past. The team then instructed Hamilton to 'say nothing' to the stewards.
However, I knew that the team had told him to let Trulli pass because Hamilton said so in an interview straight after the race. If I knew, how could the FIA not know??????
This has all come about because the FIA made a stupid decision to penalise Trulli and when they realised their crass mistake they needed someone to blame!
At the moment I am only just holding my interest in F1 because my man Jenson actually won. When the FIA take his points away because of a diffuser design that complied with scrutineering but upset a few team managers, I will switch off forever.

The apology by Lewis has overtaken your comments monty and how can they take the points away from BRAWN et all when kimi won Aussie GP in 2007 with a movable floor the FIA ruled illegal and ordered them to remove - WITHOUT any penalty whatsoever?

ooooops, I forgot KR was a special case as he drives for FERRARI

Lol, don't worry monty just be ready to object to their inconsistency if it happens by flooding all F1 sites with our protests