Unlucky to have got a penalty though. I don;t see why an innocent mistake shoudl get punished like that. Is the world so ****ing crap that we have to equal everything out now? What happened to chance/luck/fate etc? Schuey should get a penalty if Hamiton did. Just because it didn't seemingly damage Perez's car does that make it okay? Of course not. If one driver gets a penlaty for running into the back of a car, then the next driver to do should also get a penalty. Or is it getting to the state that there are too many penalties being dished out? What happened to racing!?
Think so. If the stewards 'investigate' the incident after the race I think they can do a penalty for the next race. Common senses says there should be no penalty, consistentcy of applying the rules says there should be.
Your talking out of your hat chris. Lewis made a rash move and ended up ruining a competitors race. The Schumacher incident was much more 50/50 in the blame stakes and resulted in no damagr to the competitor's car and race but resulted in the end of Schumachers race. The two are not comparable and a penalty for Schumacher cannot be justified, Hamilton's penalty was clearly justified
By precedent I mean has a similar incident resulted in a similar next race penalty. If I remember correctly Hamilton has been investigated numerous times post race for similar incidents but has cone away penalty free
No need for the insults. He tried to overtake around the outside, which he then backed out of then tried to tuck in behind Massa!? How is that a rash move!? Rather than try and stick it around the outside he played safe, but Massa was slower on the apex as he took a tighter line than usual which would appear to have caught Hamilton off guard, or Hamilton simply misjudged cutting back in behind Massa. 50/50!? Even Manny would be hard to defend Shcuey running clean into the back of a competitor! How could that have been Perez fault?
So why can a precedent not be set now? If there were never any incidents in teh history of the world there could never be a precedent for future ones! The precedent is that one driver ran into the back of another and got a penalty. Therefore the next driver to run into the back of a car should also get a penalty. Personally I hate all these penalties. They ruin the races, make drivers think twice about overtaking as if they make a slight msjudgement they will get penalised. Its making the racing too sterile.
Name them. He has been penalised many times post race, but he has finsihed the races so it makes the application of a penalty easier.
And what gives you the opinion that a drive through and a 5 place grid penalty are equal penalties in their severity
Heres where we will find out what Seb is made of, Button is flying and catching him by 2 seconds a lap.
If a penalty can't be given in the race it usually carries over to a grid penalty in the next race. Just because Shcuey is out of the race, is that considered punishment enough for him? What if he had taken Perez out as well? No penalty then? They need to look at what actually justifies a penalty now as they seem to get handed out too easily. IMO Hmailton did not deserve a penalty today as it was not a reckless or deliberate move. Penalties should be wher someone has been reckless or it is clear it was deliberate.
Nice charge from Button. Pity McLaren didn't release him a few laps earlier. Not the most scintillating race but not the worst.
If - how can you hand out a penalty on the basis of ifs? Hamilton ruined soneones race and was able to continue, he deserves a penalty. Schumacher ruined only his own race. That is what justifies penalties. What the driver has done, not what if the driver had done.
