According to Brundles post race report the 20 sec penalty for Hamilton and Alonso came about solely as a result of Alonso and Ferrari approaching the stewards after the race regarding Hamiltons blocking manouvers, I am not sure exactly what Alonso or Ferrari figured they had to gain if anything.
They would be well advised to build a faster car, that normally does it, I hear the Ferrari team management have returned to Italy to discuss just that. So expect no change then !
If the stewards hadn't called them in in the first place I doubt Alonso would even have mentioned it, although he is a bit fixated on Hamilton.
AG, as I understand it, the stewards did not react until the issue was raised by the Ferrari people, but I could be wrong.
If Alonso went past without problems against Lewis it looked to be a podium for him, ofc that didn't happen. If the crash between them didn't happen I reckon the complaint of weaving would of never come up, IMO, it's them milking a chance to get over their rivals, they all try to do it. I don't believe that (Ferrari International Assistance) bollox. You just have to look at Valencia last year with the safety car for proof that's not the way it looks.
Silver, I think there has been a certain bias shown by the FIA towards favoring a certain Italian team over the previous years, I do think that bias has now diminished and is not so obvious now. I agree if Alonso had finished on the podium then the issue would probably not have been raised.
If they hadn't brought both parties together to investigate the crash though, I doubt Ferrari would've mentioned the earlier "weaving" incident. As for the FIA favouring Ferrari. In Autosport's McLaren launch feature pre-season, Mark Hughes went into some detail about the relationship between McLaren, Ferrari and the FIA. Apparently between '98 and '09 Ferrari had an agreement with the FIA of a secret rules veto. Apparently this all came out in 2009 during the row over the future of the sport, where Ferrari were threatening a breakaway because of the FIA's insistance on a ã50m budget cap. Around that time, Ron Dennis and Max Mosley both resigned their posts. I think the fact the two of them openly loathed each other would've meant that the FIA tended to go against McLaren. But the parties enjoy a much healthier relationship now that Todt is in charge of the FIA and Whitmarsh in charge of McLaren. I think the whole organisation (the FIA) is more impartial and transparent now that Mosley is out and their special relationship with Ferrari has been severed.
AG, it does seem that Todt is managing to maintain a more transparent and fair application of the rule book, the introduction of drivers onto the weekend stewards panel has so far proved a pragmatic approach works well for all.
I didn't spot Hamilton moving twice when seeing it live, and according to this neither did the stewards - but fact is, rules are rules, you cannot move more then twice to defend position. Hamilton moved twice - he broke the rules. I'm not surprised that Alonso and Ferrari comlpained - his rear wing was broken and if Hamilton didn't move twice Alonso might have passed him on the straight and avoided the incident that happened a lap later. If Ferrari suspected Hamilton was cheating they have every right to complain.
Alonso broke his wing because of a driver error on his part, the unforced error occured when Hamilton was not defending his position, therefore the same incident could have happened the previous lap had Hamilton not have moved off line.
AG - you also failed to mention the fact that eventually it came out from Bernie that Ferrari were paid more than any other team - and you wonder why R.Dennis and others are/were a bit pissed off with them. Ferrari and Schuy - what a deadly combination.
The FIA favouring Ferrari was in the Schumacher days, if they were still in favour of them, Alonso wouldnt have been penalised in Silverstone and Hamilton would have been black flagged in Valencia.
My comment is in relation to 'Apparently between '98 and '09 Ferrari had an agreement with the FIA of a secret rules veto'. Mind you I would be amazed if it (the finance bias) was now stopped.
Im pretty certain if Ferrari had a secret deal then they are not the only ones. Some things have baffled me about Mclaren, Red bull and even Renault ;( bending some rules with FIA not doing anything
Well, sadly it's true that Ferrari had a unique and beneficial deal with the FIA whereby they held a veto over the rule book and they recieved virtually double the cash payout from FOM than any other team for many years. Possibly some other teams had special relationships with the powers that be, however there is hard evidence to support the reports the Ferrari were treated favorably compared to the other teams.
