Brazilian GP 2007 - spoilers
Discussion
flemke said:
from Autosport.com:
World championship leader Lewis Hamilton is one of three drivers under investigation by the race stewards at the Brazilian Grand Prix for breaching the wet weather tyre rules.
McLaren's Hamilton, Honda's Jenson Button, and Super Aguri's Takuma Sato were deemed to have used two sets of wet weather tyres during the first free practice session at Interlagos, in breach of the Sporting Regulations.
Article 25.3 of the F1 Sporting Regulations states: "No driver may use more than one set of wet and one set of extreme weather tyres during P1 and P2."
Of course, that could mean that a driver may not use two sets of each in each of P1 and P2.
It is a perfectly proper use of English to interpret this rule as saying that "one may only use one set of each type in each of P1 and P2".
If they meant, "one may use no more than a total of one set of each in the combined P1 and P2", then they should have written it that way.
he used them both in the same session - one set for the install lap then they changed tyres and he went out again. no advantage could have been gained but still clearly a breach of the (strange?) rules...World championship leader Lewis Hamilton is one of three drivers under investigation by the race stewards at the Brazilian Grand Prix for breaching the wet weather tyre rules.
McLaren's Hamilton, Honda's Jenson Button, and Super Aguri's Takuma Sato were deemed to have used two sets of wet weather tyres during the first free practice session at Interlagos, in breach of the Sporting Regulations.
Article 25.3 of the F1 Sporting Regulations states: "No driver may use more than one set of wet and one set of extreme weather tyres during P1 and P2."
Of course, that could mean that a driver may not use two sets of each in each of P1 and P2.
It is a perfectly proper use of English to interpret this rule as saying that "one may only use one set of each type in each of P1 and P2".
If they meant, "one may use no more than a total of one set of each in the combined P1 and P2", then they should have written it that way.
Regional said:
How in Gods great name can Maclaren get it wrong with Lewis tyres?
They know the rules, why push it when they are under scrutiny?!
Three different teams have been accused of the same thing, so there may well be more to it than what's been reported.They know the rules, why push it when they are under scrutiny?!
- slaps head in frustration**
Regional said:
How in Gods great name can Maclaren get it wrong with Lewis tyres?
They know the rules, why push it when they are under scrutiny?!
With the single tyre make this season Bridgestone are investing a lot of money for very little PR. This is how they get press time They know the rules, why push it when they are under scrutiny?!
- slaps head in frustration**
(yes, I know that's what the supersofts were for, I'm trying to be funny)
andyps said:
sjn2004 said:
Funny isn't it, Ferrari went out on the wrong tyres in Japan and nothing happened and that was during the race proper.
Just what we have come to expect. In fairness, Ferrari get a drive through penalty though didn't they?They should have been forced to come in and change the tyres for safety reasons and then, separately, they should have had a penalty that was a real penalty and that cost them track position.
andyps said:
sjn2004 said:
Funny isn't it, Ferrari went out on the wrong tyres in Japan and nothing happened and that was during the race proper.
Just what we have come to expect. In fairness, Ferrari get a drive through penalty though didn't they?I believe what they were told if is they didnt change their tyres they'd be black/orange flagged and made to come in and change them anyway. By coming in straight away they could re-fuel their cars, I think if they'd come in because of the flag, theyd not been able to refuel as per a drive-through / stop/go type penalty. In reality though they plain got it wrong and would have had to change anyway.
AJS- said:
Obviously parallels with the last 3 way title shoot out
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xhlCKunj-DA
Whether that's good for McLaren, or bad for a team with big internal rivalries I don't know, but worth watching just for Murray Walkers bizzare yelling.
I can remember that race! I was 8
Interesting that the last three times the title has gone to the wire with three drivers in contention, the challenger ie Alonso, has gone on to win. Whatever happens i'm gonna be glued to the tv sunday evening!!!http://youtube.com/watch?v=xhlCKunj-DA
Whether that's good for McLaren, or bad for a team with big internal rivalries I don't know, but worth watching just for Murray Walkers bizzare yelling.
I can remember that race! I was 8
Edited by AJS- on Friday 19th October 18:54
Much as I would love Hamilton to win the championship, I've always been both a Ferrari and Kimi fan. And shame on me, I've only just realised, looking at the stats that Kimi has the most wins and most fastest laps. Must say something, and I'm now really torn as to whom I want to see win the championship.
Ah, well, if it comes down to it, a fan of Ferrari since I started watching in the 1950's, I must go for Kimi - but next year, Lewis....
Ah, well, if it comes down to it, a fan of Ferrari since I started watching in the 1950's, I must go for Kimi - but next year, Lewis....
flemke said:
andyps said:
sjn2004 said:
Funny isn't it, Ferrari went out on the wrong tyres in Japan and nothing happened and that was during the race proper.
Just what we have come to expect. In fairness, Ferrari get a drive through penalty though didn't they?They should have been forced to come in and change the tyres for safety reasons and then, separately, they should have had a penalty that was a real penalty and that cost them track position.
LocoBlade said:
Nope, they certainly never got a drive-though for tha infringement, Massa only got his for re-taking Heidfeld under the safety car having spun on his (unsuitable) intermediate tyres and dropped behind him.
I believe what they were told if is they didnt change their tyres they'd be black/orange flagged and made to come in and change them anyway. By coming in straight away they could re-fuel their cars, I think if they'd come in because of the flag, theyd not been able to refuel as per a drive-through / stop/go type penalty. In reality though they plain got it wrong and would have had to change anyway.
To be honest, I was so annoyed at yet another breach of the requirements by Ferrari that I didn't pay much attention to the next few laps after seeing what they were doing, but thanks for the clarification. Shows even further that there was no penalty.I believe what they were told if is they didnt change their tyres they'd be black/orange flagged and made to come in and change them anyway. By coming in straight away they could re-fuel their cars, I think if they'd come in because of the flag, theyd not been able to refuel as per a drive-through / stop/go type penalty. In reality though they plain got it wrong and would have had to change anyway.
skinny said:
ferrari said they didn't get the email (where it stated that under safety car start in wet weather you need extreme wets) in time, so the FIA let them off...
Very convenient, and I bet the Italian Police would back that statement up if required. Strange that the commentators knew about it, but just one team didn't....team underdog said:
Interesting that the last three times the title has gone to the wire with three drivers in contention, the challenger ie Alonso, has gone on to win. Whatever happens i'm gonna be glued to the tv sunday evening!!!
Definitely. Haven't been this excited about a race for a long time.No penalty for Hamilton or the other drivers, just a fine for the teams and those wet tyres taken away so they can't benefit from having an addtional scrubbed set.
A clean fight to the finish (I hope!)
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63446
A clean fight to the finish (I hope!)
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/63446
I cannot understand the logic of the FIA on this one.
surely the tyre rule is not for expense reasons considering how much money there is and is spent in F1.
So the issue must be to do with fairness of competition.
Thats good in principle but it goes against 'safety' concrens.
surely a modern F1 team should be allowed to have a 'scrubbed in set of wets' to call on should conditions dictate.
Surely all the teams have more than one set of wets for each car so would easily be able to have a scrubbed and non scrubbed set to use.
I think the rule should be dropped and that teams are allowed a set of new and scrubbed wets to use.
seems an awfully silly rule.
I know in karting to keep costs down at some race meetings you are restricted to one set of tyres so that someone with big pockets can't put new slicks on for every race but in F1 , blimey if a team can't aford tyres they shouldn't be on the grid.
surely the tyre rule is not for expense reasons considering how much money there is and is spent in F1.
So the issue must be to do with fairness of competition.
Thats good in principle but it goes against 'safety' concrens.
surely a modern F1 team should be allowed to have a 'scrubbed in set of wets' to call on should conditions dictate.
Surely all the teams have more than one set of wets for each car so would easily be able to have a scrubbed and non scrubbed set to use.
I think the rule should be dropped and that teams are allowed a set of new and scrubbed wets to use.
seems an awfully silly rule.
I know in karting to keep costs down at some race meetings you are restricted to one set of tyres so that someone with big pockets can't put new slicks on for every race but in F1 , blimey if a team can't aford tyres they shouldn't be on the grid.
Edited by mark69sheer on Saturday 20th October 12:28
Just back from Sao Paulo - spent an hour of Friday morning's first practice in the Red Bull garage. 
Chatting to the guys there, consensus is they reckon if it's dry Lewis will win the race - if it's wet, Kimi.
A colleague of mine related a conversation he had with Mika Hakkinen on the subject of the drivers' championship. His opinion was that Lewis deserved it because he hadn't really put a foot wrong all year (apart from Shanghai), whereas Fernando was, to quote: "a little bit asshole.."
Chatting to the guys there, consensus is they reckon if it's dry Lewis will win the race - if it's wet, Kimi.A colleague of mine related a conversation he had with Mika Hakkinen on the subject of the drivers' championship. His opinion was that Lewis deserved it because he hadn't really put a foot wrong all year (apart from Shanghai), whereas Fernando was, to quote: "a little bit asshole.."
team underdog said:
Interesting that the last three times the title has gone to the wire with three drivers in contention, the challenger ie Alonso, has gone on to win. Whatever happens i'm gonna be glued to the tv sunday evening!!!
The title eventually went to:- whoever was 2nd before the final race 4 times (Surtees, Piquet, Piquet, Prost)
- whoever was 1st before the final race 3 times (Brabham, Hill, Fittipaldi)
- whoever was 3rd before the final race 1 times (Farina)
1950: Giuseppe Farina – Juan-Manuel Fangio, Luigi Fagioli
1959: Jack Brabham – Tony Brooks, Stirling Moss
1964: John Surtees – Graham Hill – Jim Clark
1968: Graham Hill – Jackie Stewart – Denny Hulme
1974: Emerson Fittipaldi – Clay Regazzoni – Jody Scheckter
1981: Nelson Piquet – Carlos Reutemann – Jacques Laffite
1983: Nelson Piquet – Alain Prost – René Armoux
1986: Alain Prost – Nigel Mansell – Nelson Piquet
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff