Sebastian Vettel was given a 20-second post-race penalty for gaining an advantage by leaving the race track while passing Jenson Button for second place. This drops him to fifth.
July 22, 2012 by Joe Saward
Sebastian Vettel was given a 20-second post-race penalty for gaining an advantage by leaving the race track while passing Jenson Button for second place. This drops him to fifth.
That is obvious.
Next penalty will be for having four wheels.
Sebastian Vettel must not win this year WDC.
And I am not going to diminish Alonso’s deserved win, or Button excelent drive.
That was clear situation, and we all see that Button slide and drop speed significantly. And that is not enough to convince stewards.
No, Sebastian Vettel must not…
Shame on stewards, amateurish and biased behavior.
Again.
Tosh
Having just looked at the BBC coverage it is blinding obviously that Seb was in the wrong – the overhead camera shows all four wheels over the line. He should have waited, was too impatient. That’s life – silly to criticise the stewards Mikus.
What a load of rubbish
All four wheels left the track to complete the pass; he gained a position by going off the track and that is against the rules. I called it at the moment it happened, I thought it was obvious to all.
Yes, me too. I was very surprised that the BBC commentary, especially David Coulthard, called it as a positive and clever move, clearly having forgotten the controversy over and rulings against such moves in the past. It took Jenson’s radio message to wake them up.
What a load of bulocks, its a bit harsh but it would have happened to any driver.
Methinks your attitude might be a little biased. The rules state you can’t gain advantage with all 4 wheels of the circuit. Vettel did just that, hence the penalty. Pretty simple really.
We are all excellent stewards, aren’t we?
Exceptionally good from my armchair!
Particularly when it affects a British driver Joe! Good fun though.
As Joe says. Vettel made a mistake in not simply giving the place back. The situation with this rule has been made clear this year, and Vettel would have gotten back past Button quite easily before the end of the race.
Seems a little strong. Just rescinding the place and ending 3rd would have been more just.
His team knew what happened. They knew there wasnt time to get a decision from the stewards before the race ended.
They could have told him to let Button back through, but instead decided to gamble and lost.
Nice to see the rules being applied properly in F1 for a change, all too often it seems these penalties are only applied consistently in GP2/GP3.
That would be the worst possible decision. Either it was an illegal move or it was a legal move. If the stewards just reversed the decision that would send out the message drivers can chance an illegal move and the worst that will happen is they’ll just be put back where they started.
If you choose to keep the advantage gained from an illegal move then you get punished. It would be like just making a bank robber give back the money they stole and taking no further action beyond that.
He should have known what he was doing, don’t you think? If not, maybe the team should have advised him on the radio – had time to try again. Jenson knew the rules, clever guy.
If the only penalty was no penalty what would stop people doing it all the time, in the hope they might get away with it?
Plus they are limited by the kind of penalties they can hand out, fines and 20 second penalties are I think the most minor one’s.
Ridiculous ruling, even if this is the FIA rule applied properly. IF there had been say 5 laps left he’d have been made to give the place back and no more…..so why not just knock him back down to 3rd? As usual, a senseless decision that very few people will see as ‘fair’.
I think it was a decent decision.
So why wasn’t LH penalized for going off track to pass Rosberg earlier this year?
I only saw it once, but I thought SV was alongside JB, and JB didn’t leave any room, so SV had no choice but take the long way around.
I think it was justified. Each breach of the rules has penalties outlined by the FIA.
If there were 5 laps left, i still think it would have been reviewed after the race. If there were 20 laps left he probably would have received a drive through.
One has to ask, Why did Christian Horner not advise his driver to relinquish the position?
Same old from the stewards, no consistency, just look at Rosberg and Hamilton in Bahrain. At any given moment of that move Lewis could have backed out of it and didn’t. No penalty given.
RE: Fairness of pen, it’s always harsh when someone gets pen that is vastly worse than their indiscretion. Watching Le Tour this past couple of weeks they’ve got it right with the sprinters. Someone does something unfair in the sprint and they’ll just reverse the positions, nothing more. F1 needs to look at that. Had a sensible rule like that played a part in 2008 the Hamilton Spa incident wouldn’t have cost him the WDC.
Alas, as we all know F1 penalties are rarely truly fair, some to harsh, some to weak.
Actually I find this to be consistent.
The rules were clarified after what happened with Rosberg against both Hamilton and Alonso in that race. Since then the rules have been more strict in regards to overtaking outside of the track limits.
Alonso passed Kubica on a shortcut move. Alonso was to give the position back; Kubica pitted , so Alonso couldn’t drop back, so Alonso was given a drive through penalty.
Vettel passed Button with a shortcut move, didn’t give the place back so they stewards applied a drive through penalty.
Not only fair but consistent.
Agree good solution. Previous situations has resulted in drive-through penalty so 20sec addition to time was in line with previous decisions. Nice to have consistency in rulings.
The reason it is a 20 second penalty is that he did NOT give the place back. He and Red Bull essentially thumbed their nose at the rules. That should be punished with a larger penalty. If he had given up the place, he might have been able to pass correctly before the end of the race and we would not be having this conversation right now. Vettel and his team have only themselves to blame.
I think the ruling was to punish Vettel for not immediately conceding the position.
Vettel knew what he had done, as did his team.
He had the time and pace to repass him.
Basic error.
Not true. He could’ve given up the position on his own. Steward penalty during race likely would’ve been drive-thru.
Hang on, this wasn’t the last corner, Seb could have given the position back if he wanted to and tried again on the next corner (or the same corner, next lap).
One of the ways that drivers can avoid a penalty in this type of circumstance is to give the position back, it’s not the penalty that’s normally given. If the driver chooses not to do that, the penalty that is generally applied for this during the race is a drive-through, which is roughly what they have done here.
Keeping four wheels on the track is a pretty basic concept, if you cannot make the pass back out of it and try again. These drivers know exactly what they are doing – The act of pleading ignorance may work occasionally but this time going for glory in the motherland did not pay off.
A decision pre podium would have provoked a hostile crowd reaction and ruined the atmosphere , bad for worldwide t.v.
Poor Button got the third step and the minature trophy
‘Fatherland’ surely Andrew? Re trophies – one assumes they are swopped at some point – but you’re right.
Not quite. The stewards would not have forced him to give the place back, but would have penalised him if he did not. The penalty would have been a drive through.
Good. Now if they’d like to do something about Alonso’s repeated use of the drag strip at the last turn to widen the corner and gain additional entry/exit speed. Oh, sorry. That’s a Ferrari…
It did not gain a place.
One could argue that if he had lost his lead when not doing that, then he definitely did gain a place now. Obviously that is impossible to judge, though. Is there anything in the rules about repeatedly going outside the track?
Not directly on track, no… but by keeping far enough ahead to prevent on-track challenges (DRS-assisted or otherwise) or avoiding being taken at a pitstop… it could be argued. Not sure if *I’m* arguing it, but I can see that as a point of view…
Nonetheless, both Vettel and Alonso were consistently going off track to gain time, which constitutes an advantage in my book.
Otherwise, I agree with you – Vettel can hardly complain about the letter of the rules being applied, having relied on just that to avoid an engine map penalty
No, but he got pole,was never behind anybody………So could not gain a place.
He could, however, pull away from the opposition by ‘slingshotting’ off a corner.
Or perhaps it was your way.
While it’s not against the rules as written, I think the stewards need to clamp down on ALL occasions where drivers consistently leave the track and gain an advantage, not necessarily a place. As Martin Brundle points out regulary on race commentary, it’s not always about gaining a place, but also about not losing one. If Alonso (or anyone else) manages a faster lap time by going off the track then they are preventing their rivals from catching them, and thus gaining an advantage. Surely that would be fairer!?
Correct IMO. Plus didn’t one of the Force India guys have a lap time scrubbed in Q1 due to taking four wheels off the track at one point? (In the stadium section of the track I believe).
I agree. on tracks like Monaco, the wall of Champions at Montreal, or Singapore for instance, there is often no extra room or margin. Using run-off areas to gain advantage (even if doing so by avoiding to lose advantage) should be punished harshly everywhere, if not by the walls then by the stewards.
Joe, ALL comments are contra your oppinion.
Are you biased?
I have my opinion.
Um, they’re not. Perhaps they were when you made your comment (although I don’t think so), but they’re certainly not all against Joe’s viewpoint now. Quite the opposite.
How exactly is the rule interpreted? Is it OK to go two wheels off but not four? I guess it was determined to be a pretty open and shut case by the stewards, but it seems like any paved runoff area only separated by a painted line could be considered a usable part of the racing surface.
Kimi used to do the exact same trick out of La Source and they said a while ago that this kind of overtake wouldnt be allowed any more. correct decision
That was the first corner right after start where the ‘crowd’ pushed Kimi and couple other cars off the track. The first corner ‘passing outside the track incidents’ have never been penalized for, which I agree with. If you only have a choise between a contact or going off track, the choise is obvious. Even braking would not help as there’s be another car climbing over the back of your car.
It’s little different when it’s 1-on-1 situation. You have a choise of braking as there’s nobody behind.
BTW Schumacher made exactly the same pass on the same spot during his Ferrari years. And he did not get a penalty…
Yes, the first time… then the following year Kimi didn’t even wait to see if he was going to be pushed out, he just deliberately went wide to start with to avoid the crush.
As for Schumacher during his Ferrari years: yes, agreed.
Although it’s in de rules and the rules should be applied to all drivers equally. Then maybe the rules in this case, or better the punishment, could have been a bit less harsh. I do have the feeling that most unbiased F1 fans would have been fine with just 1 place drop. It’s not like it was a premeditated move to pass Button on the outside…yes he could have given the place back or pull his foot of the pedal. But I understand in the heat of the battle that you don’t do the latter. Then the race was over in a little over a lap, also not much time to discuss with the team what the best action should have been.
Maybe the stewards wanted to prove that they would punish a German driver in Germany just like any other….and at another race he would have just been put down 1 spot.
Sorry guys, it’s not that I’m just agreeing with Joe here but I can’t see the problem with the decision; I’ve got nothing against Vettel – a great driver; it’s just that he left the racetrack (which is defined by the white lines or so I thought?) in order to gain a position. Open and shut case as far as I’m concerned. Hard luck Seb but the stewards are correct.
It’s not like the drivers were not warned all weekend, that going outside of the white lines would result in a penalty. Pretty lame responses from all at RBR.
Horner’s comments may have fooled some, but not the two SKY experts,
who happened to be previous stewards.
He looked like a kid who just got caught stealing a candy bar, when they put him on the spot. They just laughed at his answers. Great television.
And, just to NOT looking I don’t like you.
Joe, I read all what you publish, for more then 20 y.) and I have all The Mole articles.
Just have different opinion this time.
Well, he did go right off the track, and maybe the team could have been a bit more savvy and told Vettel to give the place back, and 3rd was better than a penalty….. perhaps they were still high on getting off Scot free earlier in the day
I don’t see why Raikkonen and Kobayashi should benefit – but it’s good that the penalty sends a message: don’t mess with the rules.
I hope they dump a load of gravel on the exit of the hairpin, and turn 1 and the Sachskurve, enough to deter or slow drivers down, before the German Grand Prix in 2014 (or next year if the Nürburgring’s gone tits up)
As others said, if this had happened earlier in the race, and he didn’t give back the position, he would have been given a drive through penalty. (wouldn’t that give Kimi, and Kamui an advantage?) But since this happened in the final laps, and SebV didn’t self correct, he gets a standard 20 sec Penalty, that isn’t unusual.
Why is this penalty so controversial.
It was clearly a move that was illegal and therefore must not be allowed to go unpunished in some way.
a demotion back to 3rd would have been acceptable, however all the drivers know the rules and if they want to ignore them then they have to take the consequences.
Gaining a place illegally would usually be a drive-through, and it is pretty standard practice to give a 20 second penalty as the alternative if no time to rule during the race.
In other words, the right penalty.
As far as Alsonsos use of the corner, it may not have given him a place but it did give time advantages, so I think that he should have been ‘advised’ and reminded to keep on the track, as should all drivers cutting corners – the white lines are there for as reason and the drivers should consider the other side of the line a no-go area, not an extension.
Look on the bright side, given Lewis’ unlapping of himself, he did well not to get a DWB.
Re: Alonso, I’m somewhat sure he didn’t have four wheels clear of the track.
Re: Vettel, the stewards clearly decided Vettel needed to be punished (and they needed to send a message), and swapping places with Button does not really count as a punishment. Vettel pushed his luck and clearly did not make much effort to remain on track. He got hammered for it. End of.
You are somewhat wrong regarding Alonso. However, as he wasn’t passing anybody, penalty would be somewhat silly.
Just take the asphalt runoff away at all tracks so that driver errors will be once again naturally punished by going off, and you will no longer have issues like this.
Excellent decision! Vettel was becoming increasingly frustrated with Button and out of desperation to dispatch him and target Alonso, he went for an opening that was the equivalent of a “shaft of light” at dusk. It was only going to become narrower and disappear. Vettel’s excuse was lame and the stewards, former drivers who’ve all been in that very same position, knew and understood the situation perfectly. The penalty needs to be “firm and just”, to preclude others from trying the same thing. If Vettel only had to give back the one position, then what would he or any other driver have to fear? They would try it again and again, thinking “hey, if it works, great and if it doesn’t I lose nothing”. This is why former drivers are excellent judges of on-track actions by their colleagues.
20 seconds is a fairly standard penalty, a 5 second penalty wouldn’t have shown the consistency many call for.
Given that before the race there was talk of them starting at the back or not being allowed to start at all – Red Bull should count themselves lucky. Quite why Christian Horner didn’t stay a bit quiet at the end of the race, rather defending a blatant infringement i don’t know.
They handed Alonso similar penalty back in 2010, he had passed Kubica out of track after Kubica forced him out. Back in 2010 and in this race both Alonso and Vettel were not very wise to give position back immediately and paid for it. It is just simple as this. No need to cry.
In case of Alonso, he never got a chance to give back the position to Kubica, since Kubica had retired from the race. There was enough evidence of radio communication between Alonso and his engineer, about Kubica’s whereabouts. So while the Spaniard had the right intentions the circumstances prevented him to give back the position.
Having said that, he was still dished out the standard penalty.
Its funny way people watch races. A rule is a rule no favouritsm although I wondered why Vettel was not given a warning for using such stretched off track lines the whole race, how could they penalise Alonso for doing it less. They should scrap that grasscrete idea. It will bring back proper racing. To even suggest Vettel did nothing
wrong is wrong. While in the hairpin he accelerated deciding he was gonna use an off the track line and keep his foot down. For the team to defend that, they deserve the penalty.
The rules don’t say you must stay within the white lines – how could they? What they say is that if you completely leave the track you may not gain an advantage by doing so and you must return to the track in a safe way. To penalise Vettel for using that run off area there would have to be a case that he was gaining an advantage – easier said than proven.
Grasscrete is increasingly in use now because it gives the drivers traction and thus a better chance of retaining control of their car. In that particular spot a gravel trap would have filled up pretty quickly, and grass would have seen a large number of spins. A hard surface is the safest solution at that point.
Yes they do. Here’s the rule:
“20.1 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remins in contact with the track.
Should a car leave the track the driver may rejoin, however this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaing any advantage.
A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason.”
Is better lap time a justifiable reason???
. If not, then Alonso (and all others) rounding the corners by drifting outside of the track could have been penalized…
Not sure why people are complaining about this most obvious decision from the stewards. Button left Vettel room, but rather than slow down and try to pass cleanly, Vettel simply powered on off track. Clearly an illegal overtake that deserves to be penalised. Vettel couldn’t even look the interviewers in the eye after the race, was lying and knew it.
A bit harsh I feel, demoting Vettel to 3rd would have been enough.
It was absolutely clear. Whatever Button did, what he did not do was force Vettel to leave the track. Vettel chose to do that and it allowed him to make the pass. Red Bull would have known there was the potential for an investigation straight away, and had plenty of time to tell Seb to drop the place and take it properly next lap. If you choose to carry on instead then you’re taking your chances. To be fair they seemed to take it with good grace.
Why didn’t the stewards make this decision before the podium celebrations?
Good decision IMO. I am surprised why some of you see that as an action against Vettel. He clearly gained an advantage.
@Mikus
Yes, Button slid, but I see that in the way that he wanted to leave a room for Vettel therefore tighting the corner…He wouldn’t slide if he used whole width of the track and would have better exit speed…
@James Hogan
I would be very disapointed should FIA didn’t punish Vettel. For me more peaple think the same as me.
With regard to your five laps and giving the place back.
The rules are clear – you cannot pass the opponent using off track.
Vettel as well as Red Bull are aware of that.
He still had 1,5 laps to the finish. Ho had plenty of time to give the place back.
Not surprised re the shuffle tho would have thought rearranging 2 and 3 would have sufficed. Seb had used much the same line consistently during the race, maybe the stewards or race controller should have picked up the hot line and had a chat with Christian. Maybe they did and it went unheeded?
Is funny how people only remember what they want. In Silverstone 2010 Alonso got in a similar situation, he overtook Kubica outside the track and the next lap kubica got a problem and retired so Alonso was simply unable to give back position. The outcome was the same as today; 20s penalization for Alonso who lost quite unvaluable points, as Abu Dabhi later demostrated. There is not conspirancy and to simply return to your previous position is a rule which will promote to cheat because the worst you have to fear is to go back to your original position.
Slighty different, as; 1.) Alonso was basically forced off the road, and 2.) Alonso cut a corner (rather than taking a long route round the outside) to take the position.
I think the Stewards got it wrong that day (but correct to the letter of the law I guess), Kubica left him with little option. The similarities are there for all to see, cars turn in side by side, the defending car runs the attacking car out of room. Choice for attacking car? Go wide/off track, or make contact. That’s not a good precedent to set IMO, especially with Maldonardo, Hamilton, Kobyashi and Massa out there!
I wouldn’t have penalised with Alonso in Silverstone 2010 or Vettel in Hockenheim 2012.
Unvaluable points? As in I am having my house unterior decorated?
Sdo agree with the rest of your post though.
If you comment on someones typo, it helps not to do one yourself.
You need to put an apostrophe in “someone’s”…
I don’t really agree with the decision. Wasn’t there something recently about this situation when a car is “significantly” along side? (adjectives must not be allowed in rule books!).
I am not a Vettel fan, and am a Button fan, and I think they got this one wrong.
From the slow mo/paused replay I saw it looked like SV was not alongside JB when he left the track.
Correct.
As a Red Bull supporter (mostly through Webber, but Vettel too) I think the penalty falls into a harsh but fair box. I would agree forcing Vettel to give the place back in the rankings, so Button was promoted to 2nd and Vettel to 3rd, seems nicer but I suppose part of the FIA’s thinking is precedent. The idea is that by imposing a strong penalty on Vettel you create a deterrant against this kind of driving in the future. In theory.
If only they had delayed handing out the trophies until this decision had been made. While I understand that they want to keep the TV audience happy, there are a lot of other circumstances where the officials are allowed to cause delays.
He went all 4 wheels off. He gained a place. Isn’t this EXACTLY what the rule is supposed to punish?
Seems like a good decision to me.
Walt
Maybe the FIA needs to make a clarification of exactly what the actual “race track” is. Can you pass in a run-off area? How about cutting a corner? What is needed is one of those “invisible fences” homeowners use to keep their dogs on the property. Put these in strategic places around the track and if a car crosses this “fence”, a time penalty will automatically be registered. Yes? No?
There ya a clear definition.
White lines denote the track boundaries.
Why settle for a time penalty… Give them a shock collar, then they will learn
Indeed as Joe says – there are white lines painted each side of the race track – these denote the track itself. Anything outside of these white lines is not the circuit, and therefore cannot be used for racing.
Putting invisible fences, crossing which would add time penalties, is a neat idea, but I am sure drivers will start pushing other drivers off the track in that case. So every solution has its own problems.
Was there any communication between Red Bull and the FIA when the incident happened, as we have heard about in previous situations?
There was not much time!
The rules are clear, we have seen this infraction before! S. Vettel did use the area outside the circuit to get ahead, it is not a matter of unfair rules. When this happened before they were given a drive thru penalty, but since the end of race did not allow (for time to process incident and determine response, and 3 laps grace period to serve penalty) for that. It is the equivalent: 20 seconds: which demotes him because it was the last lap. Scream and cry if there were 20 laps yes, but on the last it is a fair penalty plain and simple.
The F1 Sporting Regulations are pretty clear on this point (one of the few where it is, and always has been clear). You must not gain advantage over competitors whilst your car is off-track (outside white lines). It is a little more uncertain when only half your car is over the track boundary line, but when it all is over, it is pretty black-n-white.
The standard Race Director penalty is direction to ‘give back the place’ gained immediately during the race, or a 20 sec Steward’s penalty post-race (drive-thru equivalent) if misdemeanour is very late in GP. We’ve seen that time and time over, for some years.
The ‘condition’ of Buttons tyres, or the grip he got out Turn 6 is irrelevant Mr. Horner. He was there and Vettel was NOT ahead of him on Corner EXIT, until Vettel drove ahead whilst off track. Button left the mandatory car width for Vettel to the exit kerb, but Vettel didn’t use it.
JF IMO: Vettel desperately wanted to win his home GP for the first time. A win in July for the first time. I don’t think he was ever going to happy with second place, and he was clearly very miffed to be fighting for second with Button, and not have a clear pace advantage to get up the road and ‘fight for first’ with Alonso. He wanted to be in it for the GP win, and passing Button in a patient way, with laps diminishing, was not on his mind. Alonso taking HIS win, was foremost in Vettel’s mind. JF
Now if only those who think that swapping places had the same fortitude to just consult the rules, that you did.
But that spoils the fun of outrage.
Anyone who thinks that the penalty was out of line doesn’t know F1.
I thought they would just rescind the position taken, but I guess that’s up to them. However, I would like to know why there’s a runoff strip there in the first place. It’s way after the apex of the slowest corner on the circuit. If it had been grass I doubt Vettel would have attempted it. And lets be honest folks, if the roles had been reversed I doubt Vettel would have been as dignified as Button was over the incident.
Given the F1 steward’s fickle and punitive nature, this was an uncommonly fair punishment. Vettel should count himself lucky he got off as lightly as he did. He was destined for punishment, the only question was how much. 20 seconds is quite lenient given the history of F1′s stewards.
I understand that Vettel fans aren’t happy, but the truth is that everyone makes mistakes. The rules state that no driver may take an advantage from an off track excursion. In this case, Vettel’s *entire* pass was completed while he was off track! It rarely gets much clearly than that. For those that say he had no choice but to depart the track, well, they’re wrong. Even if he couldn’t have backed out (and he could have) it would not be a valid excuse for refusing to give back the position.
Vettel erred not once, but twice. Once when he made the move, again when he didn’t give back the position. He was destined for a penalty, to think otherwise was hubris.
I don’t find it surprising that Vettel didn’t give back the position. The initial pass showed that he was suffering from poor judgement. Once the red mist had taken hold, he wasn’t likely to wash it away so easily.
What I do find completely surprising is that Red Bull’s brain trust didn’t order Vettel to give back the position. Had Vettel been driving for McLaren, I have little doubt that such an order would have been sent within seconds.
This wasn’t just Vettel’s error. Horner, Marko and the rest of Vettel’s fan club truly dropped the ball today. They left a lot of points on the table for no good reason. A true own-goal.
But 20 seconds? Surely a place swap would have sufficed?
That is a fair penalty!
A swap would not equate to a penalty for a clear breach. Part of any penalty is an element of severity to recognise such a breach and deter others from breaching in the future.
A 20s penalty is the only post race option available to the stewards for incidents that would have incurred a drive-through during the race.
It seems Button was wise not to comment when prompted by Lauda.
Hate the new driver Podium interview format, any idea what the thinking behind the change was, short and then press interviews instead? I was hoping it was a one off for Silverstone. We need you up there asking some decent questions – side gig.
I agree it spoils the podium ceremony.
It does. And also the interviewer is usually picked for his celebrity, not for his analytical mind or other journalistic skills. Not currying favour, but Lauda is justly famous for his on-track skills but that doesn’t mean that he’ll ask good questions or conduct an interview well.
I didn’t realise they did it at Silverstone as well as New Zealand coverage didn’t show it, I thought it was some weird German thing going on. What happens after the podium interviews do they still go back to the press room or do they go to that pen where all the drivers walk around the inside?
‘Weird German thing going on’……………Brilliant. You Kiwis. The Silverstone one was Jackie Stewart, good guy but cringeworthy interviewing.
Many of the post-podium interviews were done by James Allen, but he now does BBC Radio 5Live commentary. There must be people available to do it properly.
I don’t like it either – I know it’s not the intention, but it feels a little like the interviewer is taking the “thunder” away from the top three drivers (“here’s three times World Champion Niki Lauda”)
It’s ‘Infotainment’, they stick a mike in a tired drivers hand and he’s expected to give ‘entertaining’ answers to the crowd, awkward until the drivers adapt. Damn sure Button may have eloborated on Vettel’s maneuver in the traditional post race on camera sit down (also seen on track side screens, usually) He likely would have been booed making justified comments from the podium.
Given that they started the custom in Silverstone, they will have to live with it at least till end of the season, just for the sake of fairness to rest of the circuits on the calendar. Why should the track side fans be denied of the opportunity to see podium winners share their initial impressions of race. After all people pay more to be at the track side.
Vettel went off track throughout the race to SAVE TYRES …less turn-in requires less grip … simples!
So if he was consistently going off track to gain an (indirect) advantage, maybe he should also be given a 10 grid penalty for Hungary? :
What people seem to be forgetting, other than the black-and-white rule about leaving the circuit, is that if this had happened on other tracks such as Monaco and Montreal, Seb would have been in the wall and out of the race had he tried such a move. I don’t even think the punishment is harsh, it’s simply fair.
Joe,
While it is difficult to say what is going on in someone’s head I think Vettel was suffering from Silver mist. IE McLaren had gotten to him. His words to the press after getting out of the car was to complain about Lewis unlapping himself. The gestures in the car at the time confirm this and he wanted to stick it to McLaren, the last thing on his mind was being sporting and handing back the position to a team he was mad at. That is where Horner et al on the pit wall SHOULD have stepped in, especially after the McLaren/Button radio exchange and told him to hand the place back. But they did not, maybe because when asked to not to use KERS by the team earlier in the race he refused that too. Vettel has some growing up to do, but without a manager and being in a team that can’t discipline him, he has to see these issues himself. But we know he sees it as the FIA sticking it to him and his team so for now the odds are somewhat slim.
PS can’t agree more that the podium interviews suck and really fail to get anything of substance out of the drivers. I could not care less about seeing an old driver on the podium. Get someone in there that is a professional and might have a chance at provoking a decent comment. How come you have never been asked to do the job Joe?
It’s a shame for Vettel and the team. They clearly had plenty more speed than JB, a sensible decision would be to yield the position or the overtake, then get him on the next lap, as it was clearly a dodgy overtake.
Always easy with hindsight and without red mist though.
Personally i think it was a bit harsh – drivers were consistently using more than the race track. Given buttons tyres were going off, Seb was sensible to give button some room on the exit of the corner otherwise he could have got taken out (a la perez / maldonado), especially bearing in mind Button went to the outside of the track on the corner exit. It wasn’t the quickest way through the corner (it’s not like overtaking by cutting a chicane) – by the letter of the law then yes he was guilty, but i think common sense could have been applied.
I guess I just don’t like it when penalties punish people for racing.
Vettel should really count himself lucky to only be demoted to 5th place. A few years ago that kind of action would have put him into a gravel trap and he would have either been beached, or lost places trying to get out.
When Hamilton, overtook Vettel at the same corner, he was in the same position as Button. That time Vettel cut back to the inside to try and regain the place, but was unable. If he had tried the same with Button it’s almost certain he would have got past him, as Buttons tyres were gone.
There has to be some punishment for leaving the track. Usually the fact that you are leaving the track is the punishment in itself. However there are a number of corners at tracks now where there is a section outside the track that the drivers regularly use. Maybe the FIA show punish everyone who uses them regardless of the situation. It would only take a race or two for drivers to stop doing it on such a regular basis.
I was bit puzzled by Vettel’s fist waving at Hamilton as he unlapped himself, it looked like a tantrum. Hamilton was perfectly entitled to unlap himself as is anybody else. Ungentlemanly behaviour!
I think it was the right decision, but the TV coverage made it look a bit like sour grapes on McLaren’s part, after all, Button couldn’t really have stayed ahead?. What Vettel said afterwards sounded reasonable (i.e. that Jenson was sliding and he wasn’t sure where Button was) but I think the truth was Vettel had gone a little bit too deep into the hairpin and the only way to make sure he stayed ahead was to go wide on the exit. I think what the FIA could do where a decision like this is made post-race is to make sure TV companies have access to all the relevant footage and data available which the stewards used to reach their decision. I also think the podium interviews are awful.
I don’t think Vettel’s “I didn’t know where you were” excuse was reasonable – Button was in front of him, then Button wasn’t, and he still wasn’t ahead of him after two or three corners.
He must have known he’d passed Button, and even if he didn’t realise he’d gone off track completely to do it, the team must have known.
Joe – how is Vettel regarded in F1 circles? Especially amongst you and your colleagues.
I find it more than coincidental that he managed to ou-accelerate Button out of the hairpin with all 5 wheels basically on a painted piece of tarmac – perhaps the Exhaust Blown technology helped here?
It certainly seems that whenever Webber has the upper hand – the EBD that Red Bull have clearly developed seems to help Vettel get the upp-hand back against Webber.
I think he is very smart.
That’s what it was – he had ‘five wheels’!
Some very silly posts on this subject, so maybe I will put my two pence worth in a few points that people should try to remember;
1, The Stewards clearly were asked to look at the overtake, indeed Brundle said that they would straight away in the Sky commentary. Clearly this rather proves wrong the “Seb did nothing wrong” brigade, as seasoned F1 commentators saw that he had been off the track.
2, The Stewards have all the information available, all camera angles and all telemetry from both cars, Derek Warwick was the driver steward and clearly saw something in Vettel’s actions that warranted a penalty. Have you seen all the information? Have you done as many laps in a racing car as Derek Warwick? If the answer is no then maybe you should respect his decision.
3, Seb had a few choices to make, at the apex of the hairpin he must have realised that he wasn’t far enough ahead to prevent Jenson from taking the racing line on exit, he could have backed off at that point and tried to get a good exit, and get by at the next sequence of corners, he chose not to do this. After running wide at the exit he could have blended the throttle and tucked in behind Jenson, he chose not to do this. He could have blended the throttle and let Jenson by on the next straight, he chose not to do this either. If Seb had done any of these things it is highly likely that he would have got by later the same lap or at the same corner on one of the following laps. This would have resulted in a secure second position and no penalty. Simply a case of a poor choice from Seb, and not something we would see Alonso doing.
4, Even if reversing the positions was a penalty available to the stewards (it isn’t) then why would they do this? This would simply encourage other drivers to not hand positions back in the future, why bother if there is effectively no penalty? You might as well take the risk and hope noone notices!
Seb is a double-world champion. Surely he has garnered enough skill to lift off the throttle in that situation?
As the old saying goes, if there was a barrier there, he would have crashed — or he would have just lifted off.
Red Bull had the benefit of a “Letter of the Law” decision in the morning re engine mapping so they cannot complain if they get another in the race when SV passes off the track.
As a Vettel fan I must condemn him for his stupid maneuver. As soon as he went around the outside of Button, I threw my hands up in the air and shouted “WTF ARE YOU DOING!?”. It was a terrible move to be sure. I instantly recognized it for the mistake it was. He could have salvaged a third place, or even fought for second at the next turn. But his heat of the moment greed got him a fair fifth place. Hopefully he will not make such mistakes again.
I am also disappointed in his pit crew for the split second pause at the end of a slow stop. A little bit quicker of a stop and he would have come back out ahead of Button.
Through all of this debate I am reminded of Spa 2008 and the penalty assessed. http://www.streetfire.net/video/lewis-hamilton-vs-kimi-raikkonen-battle-at-spa-2008_2246023.htm
Am I right in thinking that the 20 second penalty is the only one available to the stewards? As others have commented, a place swap may have been fairer but from what was said after the race I got the impression that wasn’t an option.
There was also a comment that the time loss in the pits is actually less than 20 seconds so in that respect the penalty was harsh but I guess they have to choose a representative figure. The only other option would be to take the median of all pit times over the race which would be fairer but much less transparent to the viewing public.
I do agree with the points saying that even if you don’t gain a place by going off track you can gain an advantage from either a quicker lap time or less tyre wear. However, surely there is a precedent here for punishment – didn’t Seb have a qualifying time disallowed last year from shortcutting – can’t quite remember the track, middle or far east? I do remember he retired from the race first corner in the end so it was fairly immaterial. Weren’t the rules specifically changed due to this?
If you look at the BTCC, there drivers are warned about exceeding track limits and given a penalty for repeated transgressions. Surely this would be a sensible rule in F1 as well now we have so many tarmac run-off areas and sections of grasscrete as there is now scope for gaining time or reducing tyre wear by going off track as you no longer have the built-in penalty that walls, gravel and grass give. As we now have sector timings instantly available it would be easy to evaluate whether an advantage was gained by comparing with previous laps. If time was lost due to an excursion then it can be accepted as a mistake, if no time lost you could argue it could save the tyres. A time gain should be a definite warning.
We’ve said it before. We will continue to say so. The steward’s decisions leave too much room for interpretation and the FIA are responsible for that. In Bahrain Lewis overtook Nico off the track with no sanction. Schumi overtook Trulli a few years ago with no sanction and there many more such cases. The problem is inconsistency. This has been known for ages. Why does the FIA not take action? Why are they unable to make rules & sanctions which need no interpretation?
At least in these cases it should be straightforward, it’s not as complicated as torque chart settings or double diffusor stuff!
This time losing 3 places was too harsh though. Again the rules and the FIA are to blame since there is no milder sanction that could be applied. And this is precisely why FIA might make a few modifications and the end of the season as Charlie has suggested very recently. Without mentioning steward interpretation, of course, as anyone would expect!
The incident with hamilton in bahrain was not as cut n dry as this one with Vettel.
Hamtilton went off track but when he rejoined he was not infront of rosberg. Also the move by rosberg was far to aggressive as it was a deliberate move and left no room. Hamilton simply had no where else to go or lose his front wing. It’s all well and good saying he can brake but then you could argue rosberg was guilty of blocking. It would have been reasonable for hamilton to expect rosberg to leave room hence following through with the move. If it had been monaco then rosberg would have been no better than schumachers move on barrichello.
Joe, it this has been covered then I apologize. What happens to the trophies that are handed out on the podium when one driver moves up and another driver moves down? Does the driver and team being moved down the standings have to give back the trophy? Curious.