Some of the things I've seen are funny though. Like one I read suggested he shouldn't be allowed on the podium as his flag subtly resembles cigarette advertisement for Ferrari.
I rarely care to read Jolyon Palmer articles. I have just read his article about the move on Lewis by Charles. Up front, I am really pleased for Charles but I find his article on Monday is reasonably balanced and its conclusion, professional stewards, I absolutely agree with. Had the incident resulted in a crash, they both could have been out and the risks it posed, in light of recent events, potentially dangerous. The inconsistency with similar incidents is valid too. I hope the FIA do bring in professional stewards. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/49629863
Hamilton and Leclerc were racing, it was on the edge, but thats what its all about, no problem lets have more of it, thanks guys. Two first class drivers showing the world how its's done. In my opinion Palmer is an "also ran" and I don't consider his opinions worthy of reading. On a different note, anyone remember the John Player Special girls during the 70s GPs, now that's what you call cigarette advertising.
I am not arguing. I am not a one driver fan and I was rooting for Charles. Said so on this thread before hand. You miss my point, which is professional stewards. I started by saying I don't normally read Palmer articles, he also was agreeing it was a good race which is why I credit him with a balanced article for once. Professional consistency is what I am advocating. So, when another driver does similar it is handled in the same way irrespective of the race venue and driver. At the moment it is a lottery.
Consistence and openness would really help. OK so sometimes there are elements that are taken into consideration we don't see. I think the stewards need to present their conclusions, so we have a chance to understand their decisions.
It was a bit dirty, but Max & Lewis have both gotten away with worse, as have Perez and Magnusson further down the grid. as to the ciggies, I remember racing cigarette packs around the top of tables when I was a kid. No surprise that I smoke tbh. bastards.
I was just in shock that I was largely in agreement with Palmer for once. The actual incident, I don't think it was going to work as an overtake in any event. The sport just needs to be consistent. On a different track, different stewards, could easily have concluded a differently. I am glad Charles won. I don't like Verstappen but has he been the victim of stewards decisions, when doing something similar, because of public opinion and his other antics. The main event for me, was Vettel. There is something going on inside that head of his. I really am thinking he should retire this season but make the decision now so Ferrari can find a replacement. Then we might see a true Ferrari resurgence.
F1's rules are cyclical because they bow to popular pressure. They were strict with Vettel in Canada and got a lot of bad press, so they adopted the "let them race" policy and let Verstappen off for his move on Leclerc in Austria. Charles has said that being on the receiving end of that encouraged his more aggressive style since then. Eventually the pendulum will swing the other way and we'll see a bunch of penalties. Personally I don't think the inconsistency was unfair in this case, because the drivers were all informed about the yellow card system in Spa and from a fans perspective the battle in Monza was great to watch.
I felt the coming together by Charles on Lewis was a bit naughty, but didn't warrant a penalty in my opinion.What concerns me more is the use of the back & white flag which really opens the door for at least one illegal lunge without being penalised?
depends how they use it. Looking back at the race as a whole I've decided CLC should have been given a penalty. Not for the single offence, but because he also cut the first chicane, that's 2 illegal moves to block moves on him. That should be 2 B&W flags.
I think Ferrari International Assistance had reformed for the GP. They were never going to give him a penalty in Italy when winning, especially after the Canada fallout. If they were brave they would have told him to give the position to Hamilton after the chicane cut, as it turns out he probably would have retaken the position such was the state of Hamiltons tyres. CLC could really have gone into Ferrari folklore then!
What? Naaaaaah! There was no advantage gained there at all. It would have been nuts to tell him to give up the position. Am I looking at the wrong incident here?
He out braked himself defending a position and cut the chicane to keep position So advantage gained. As Ern said, probably s second B/W flag. We're all pleased CLC won, but the rules precedents going forwards are now wide open again on limits to defending a position.
How many black and white flags can you have before an actual penalty? I remember playing F1 world championship on N64 and getting a few "they've given you a warning flag" from my engineer before getting a black flag or something.
Hamilton wasn't attempting an overtake when Lerclerc went off and if anything looked closer to him afterwards. There was no advantage. Do people really want the stewards involved every time a driver makes a mistake?
They have a special lane they're supposed to use if they mess up, like Hamilton had to use when he got squeezed, but using it would've definitely cost him the position. I also think the 'emergency corner cut' is being used far too much, they wouldn't dare do it if Prost was still racing, he'd get them DSQ'd.