Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
If something’s as predictable and as dangerous as what happened yesterday, it’s fairly indefensible.
As Masi pointed out, exactly the same re-start happened in the F3 race, and they managed it without smacking into each other. If they can, then the (supposedly) 20 best single seat drivers ought to be able to manage as well. The fault lay entirely with the drivers at the back.
I'd love to see Mugello on the calendar, but as anyone who's been there will tell you, it's a proper nightmare to get in and out of on race day, and there's no money to stage it, and the teams will have nailed the strategy. I do love the fact that they were flat out for most of it, and that the track notes indicated that the track ends where the gravel begins...I wish all GP circuits were as simple, Yes Herman, I'm looking at you.
My impression was it’s too narrow for 20 of todays stellar fast F1 cars on track at the same time.
Absolutely - it looked way too tight at some points, especially at the start / restarts when the cars were bunched together. It almost looked like a karting circuit.
More FIA dickery (in my opinion).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/54152046
Did Lewis go too far? I don’t think so. And I certainly don’t view that shirt as political or religious.
IMO he did go too far - but I'm not sure if it is Merc or FIA that should be upset.
I think it's always useful to switch the politics/cause to one you don't believe in and see if you feel the same. If he had a T shirt with "Free Derek Chauvin - he was just restraining a convicted armed robber and doing his job" on it how would you feel? If I switched my email signature to promotion of Greenpeace or Amnesty (or pro capital punishment or climate denying) I think my employer would have something to say.
All for high profile sportsmen having (eloquent) opinions but when you are doing your job you are doing your job - his job is to be the world's fastest advertising hoarding.
Eye I think he isn’t stupid and if people who are in the public leave it to others to protest they are wasting their potential to advance change.
There again he may have got it wrong. And I may have it wrong in supporting him.
He is risking more than me though.
(Don’t start me on his fashion sense though.)
Watching the starts reminded me of the '87 Austrian GP at the old Osterreichring (sp?) where there was barely enough room for 2 cars side-by-side and that caused 2 restarts due to startline incidents. Great track but running an F1 race there was at it's limit in terms of safety IMO.
As Masi pointed out, exactly the same re-start happened in the F3 race, and they managed it without smacking into each other.
Yes, and that’s a significant part of why I think his comments make him look foolish: he evidently doesn’t understand the chaotic (in the scientific sense) stochastic nature if it.
In other words, it’s predictable that it will happen, but that doesn’t mean that it will happen every time, or even that you can predict when it will happen. The fact that it didn’t happen in the F3 race simply doesn’t mean that the F1 drivers were the problem.
The "problem" with the restart was Bottas, surely, and he was fully within his rights to do what he did.
Good race, fantastic circuit. Only one guaranteed overtake spot? That's one more than many circuits. 🙂
The “problem” with the restart was Bottas, surely,
Nope. He maintained a constant speed until just before the line when he gunned it. That’s why no one hit him/there weren’t any problems in the front half of the grid/pack. The problem was from those towards the back of the midfield, trying to second guess when each other would go, but not overtaking before the line, hence the accelerating and braking that caused folk to hit each other.
when you are doing your job you are doing your job – his job is to be the world’s fastest advertising hoarding
When you're being human your job is to be humane.
Jeff Follmer, the president of Cleveland's police union, criticised [NFL player] Hawkins for wearing the "pathetic" T-shirt, said he should concentrate [on] playing football, and demanded an apology from the [Cleveland] Browns. In a statement, Hawkins said:
“My wearing of the T-shirt was a stance against wrong individuals doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason to innocent people. If I was to run away from what I felt in my soul was the right thing to do, that would make me a coward and I couldn't live with that.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/extra/1g500y2qln/From-Trayvon-Martin-to-Colin-Kaepernick
If he had a T shirt with “Free Derek Chauvin – he was just restraining a convicted armed robber and doing his job” on it how would you feel?
Are you genuinely saying that we (or Mercedes, who according to Wolff are fully supportive of Hamilton's actions) should treat the message "don't let people get away with repeatedly shooting unarmed black people" and the message "stand up for people's right to kill black suspects as a part of their job" as equal?
One thing really stood out for me in the coverage. The sound of Schumi's old Ferrari. Ah, those were the days.
Lewis seems to have ignored that her boyfriend had shot one of cops and her address was still the registered residence of her ex boyfriend who is a drug dealer and the intended target of the warrant. Of course she should still be alive but as ever reality is more complex than a simple slogan
Lewis seems to have ignored that her boyfriend had shot one of cops and her address was still the registered residence of her ex boyfriend who is a drug dealer and the intended target of the warrant. Of course she should still be alive but as ever reality is more complex than a simple slogan
This is why the FIA don’t want messages on T-shirts, certainly about specific cases.
Fifty years ago, a lot of people thought Martin Luther King Jr. was an extremist and were in favour of locking up Muhammad Ali. With a bit of hindsight, it's pretty obvious who was on the right side of history and who was on the wrong side. Hard to see future generations looking upon the FIA as being smart about this nonsense.
Lewis seems to have ignored that her boyfriend had shot one of cops and her address was still the registered residence of her ex boyfriend who is a drug dealer and the intended target of the warrant. Of course she should still be alive but as ever reality is more complex than a simple slogan
The point of having human rights, rule-of-law, etc. is that people who are guilty are protected from police abuse of power just as much as innocents are. Just because someone's a shitbag doesn't mean that cops can just open fire blindly. Judge/jury make the decision about guilt or innocence, not police. But what you're saying here is not that she was guilty of anything, but that she had unsavoury friends, so it's ok for cops to shoot her. You're on the wrong side of history on that one.
Are you genuinely saying that we (or Mercedes, who according to Wolff are fully supportive of Hamilton’s actions) should treat the message “don’t let people get away with repeatedly shooting unarmed black people” and the message “stand up for people’s right to kill black suspects as a part of their job” as equal?
Pretty much yes. You are falling into the trap of allowing your opinion about the messages stance to affect your judgement. Both messages (the one he wore and the one I made up) are an appeal to law enforcers to change their decision making. One might be reprehensible to most clear thinking folks but otherwise...I don't think there is much difference. To allow Hamilton to wear that on the podium in a democracy would be to open the door to allow another driver to wear their slogan of their choice you don't like. That's a slippery slope.
Don't get me wrong - I think it is brilliant he has an opinion and wants to voice it. There's just a time and a place. Make independent press conferences (he is a big enough name that the media wold turn up), speak at a rally/march, write articles in the press/social media. But imo when you are doing your job you are doing your job. He is paid to be covered in sponsors logos and be photographed winning car races where when someone watches the footage are thinking primarily about car races. To hijack that set up for your own cause (however positive or right thinking) is not on and ultimately not a very sustainable way of protesting. Famous actors don't break off mid scene to don a protest T shirt out of context with the film they are in - they use their fame impactfully at other times. It's a better model imo.
He is paid to be covered in sponsors logos and be photographed winning car races where where someone watches the footage are thinking primarily about car races.
He's paid to market Mercedes. They approve of his activism because it shows them in a good light.
From the BBC story linked to above:
F1 and the FIA have mounted an anti-racism and pro-diversity campaign this year, which includes anti-racism demonstrations before every race.
Hamilton has been at the centre of the demonstrations, as the sport's most high-profile figure and its only black driver.
The spokesman said that the FIA had been working with Hamilton on its diversity programme this year.
Mercedes F1 boss Toto Wolff said on Saturday that Hamilton had the organisation's full support in his desire to highlight racial injustice and that it was up to him what T-shirts he wished to wear to demonstrate that.
Wolff said: "No question - it is entirely his decision. Whatever he does, we will support.
and:
The only reference to politics in the statutes is a requirement on the FIA to "refrain from manifesting discrimination on account of race, skin colour, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic or social origin, language, religion, philosophical or political opinion, family situation or disability in the course of its activities".
The sporting code forbids competitors from "affixing to their automobiles advertising that is political or religious in nature or that is prejudicial to the interests of the FIA".
He's allowed to wear whatever tee-shirt he wants and Merc are happy for him to do so. FIA look like dicks on this one.
So if another owner with a different moral standpoint (and lord knows there are some weirdos in F1) approved/encouraged their drivers to wear slogans that you did not agree with on the podium would you like to see the FIA/F1 standby there too?
So if another owner with a different moral standpoint (and lord knows there are some weirdos in F1) approved/encouraged their drivers to wear slogans that you did not agree with on the podium would you like to see the FIA/F1 standby there too?
Obviously, if they breached this part of the statutes, they would be told that it is not acceptable.
The only reference to politics in the statutes is a requirement on the FIA to “refrain from manifesting discrimination on account of race, skin colour, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic or social origin, language, religion, philosophical or political opinion, family situation or disability in the course of its activities”.
Hamilton has done the opposite, he has advocated for people being treated equally. (It's important to understand that "Black lives matter" really means "Black lives matter as much as White lives". It doesn't mean "Only Black lives matter.")
Pretty much yes. You are falling into the trap of allowing your opinion about the messages stance to affect your judgement.
That's not a trap. Hopefully, outside of purist stoicism and open racism, we can be be broadly objective that not shooting innocent people is A Good Thing, whilst kneeling on a restrained suspect's neck until they asphyxiate is A Bad Thing. It's curious that you use "just doing a job" as both a reason to criticise someone speaking out against the former, and a hypothetical reason to defend the latter.
Don't forget that F1 has always been, and still is, awash with messages that have a stance: as you point out, the cars and drivers are largely just expensive billboards. The once-ubiquitous pro-tobacco messaging may have passed, but we still have plenty of pro-oil messaging, which has no shortage of baggage in terms of environmental issues and dubious business practices. Yet the teams are also choosing to add their own messages: We Race As One, End Racism, the rainbow symbol, and so on. Are they also going too far? No-one has yet chosen to add a "killing a handcuffed suspect is just doing a job" slogan, because both they and the overwhelming majority of the audience would find it abhorrent.
There is a reason why hate speech is legislated against whilst the promotion of kindness isn't. And it's not because legislators have fallen into "a trap", it's because we collectively find hate to be A Bad Thing and kindness to be A Good Thing.
For sure, citing specific cases moves a step on from making a general point. And proposing a specific response goes a step further still. But both of those things have always been important features of any rights movement, and if the FIA takes issue with them then I'm sure Hamilton will welcome the opportunity to eloquently defend the messages he displays.
He is paid to be covered in sponsors logos and be photographed winning car races where when someone watches the footage are thinking primarily about car races. To hijack that set up for your own cause (however positive or right thinking) is not on and ultimately not a very sustainable way of protesting.
Except that by stepping up his messaging, he is now photographed sending messages where when someone—outside of F1's normal audience—sees the images they are thinking primarily about that message. And to what extent is it hijacking that for "his own cause" when Mercedes are vocally backing him and sending the same message themselves? That's good advertising for them, because most people don't like racism or innocent people being shot. F1 is all about advertising and marketing, and whether you take a cynical or generous view of it, Mercedes and Hamilton's anti-racism messaging and Mercedes' marketing are aligned.
In any case: human rights are not "his own cause". We're all humans.
But what you’re saying here is not that she was guilty of anything, but that she had unsavoury friends, so it’s ok for cops to shoot her
im not saying that at all. I actually said she should still be alive. But the way Lewis is portraying the incident is very different to the reality of what happened according to the NY Times. According the report the police raided the house with a warrant and one of the people in the house shot a policeman. Police returned fire as she was hit. Of course the shouldn’t have shot her but Lewis makes it sound as if they did it deliberately
As I understand it, she says the police kicked in the door and her boyfriend open fire in the belief that it was a robbery. The police then just opened fire blindly. The criticism of the police isn't that it was deliberate murder, but that they were extremely reckless.
If it was a one-off screw up, it wouldn't be such a big political issue. Problem is, American police seem to be unbelievably reckless in their use of force. There are dozens of news stories so bad that they are hard to believe, but this is the one that made me realize just how clueless American cops can be:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48158787
That's the one where an Australian woman called in a possible rape behind her building and then went out to meet the cops wearing her pajamas, only to be shot dead when she approached the cop's car.
Or this incident where cops pushed a 75 year old man over backwards, causing a fractured skull. The cops just ignored him and kept walking, then when they were asked about it later, they tried to say he tripped and fell. Hard to believe anything cops say after seeing that.
Or this one, where an unarmed protester was beaten on and sprayed with tear gas by cops dressed up as combat troops.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_2Lkb3h77Y
Thing is, those three incidents were with White victims who were clearly not posing any threat, so that makes it harder for cops to claim they were acting in self-defense. If it was a black man and there weren't any cameras around, it would be the standard, "He was a low-life suspected drug dealer and we shot him when he reached into his pocket because we felt threatened and thought he had a weapon."
Can this be brought back to a discussion about F1 and open a different thread about the above if they want to discuss what happened?
Can this be brought back to a discussion about F1 and open a different thread about the above if they want to discuss what happened?
This.
+2
There's plenty of other threads for that.
Anyhow, Sochi - normally not the most interesting race of the season. But there again Spa was a bit dull, and Imola (which I normally don't rate either) was great. Mugello was mean to be dull but I think somebody forgot to send that memo too. What chances of Sochi being interesting, or will it just be working out how Vlad is going to make his ritual appearance.
I don't actually mind Sochi - usually plenty of fun at the end of the straight and round that 180 degree corner.
Just got to focus on the mid-field battles now - they'd be better handing Lewis the Championship trophy now and letting him go home till next spring and stick Russell in his car! 🙂
they’d be better handing Lewis the Championship trophy now and letting him go home till next spring and stick Russell in his car!
Now that'd be great to watch!! 🙂
and Imola (which I normally don’t rate either) was great.
Well let's hope so, but its not taking place until October!
Doh - that should've been Monza! Imola is a great circuit and it'll be interesting to see how current f1 cars compare to ye olden dayse
I hope Sochi is a good race. I don’t like street circuits as a rule because they done seem to allow racing to take place. I’m happy to be proved wrong this time
Sorry, Sochi is a terrible track and I reckon its got the potential to be a complete snore fest & a political nightmare - Putin will make an appearance, He'll claim he's made a vaccine, there will be fans in the stands, mother Russia will be wonderfull etc etc. The race will be rubbish as Lewis will drive off into the distance, followed by Verstappen and Bottas then the Racing points. Williams and Haas still wont score any points.
Imola should provide a bit of a challenge, especially as its a 2 day GP (ie no Friday practice). Will be good to see who can get up to speed on whats another old school risky circuit, especially if Lewis needs this win to beat Schumachers record of 91 wins.
Bottas always runs well there though, so he might manage to provide a bit of sport for Hamilton.
+1 on paying more attention to the midfield now. I hope Lewis gets all schumi’s records, but it’s a bit dull now.
I think it'll depend on how much Lewis wants to demolish Bottas. If Lewis really wants to really deliver a mental hammer blow to Bottas, beating Bottas at a track where he's historically gone well should do it. it would also open up the lead in the championship you beat Lewis in every remaining race, that he could quite happily finish second each time and still beat you - that's gotta be demoralizing.
If the F1 circus goes back and I hope they do they need to move the start-finish line back towards the start of the straight, the crash wouldn't have happened if it was early in the straight like most circuits.
And although Bottas didn't strictly do anything wrong, watching the restart and it just looked like an accident waiting to happen, I was not surprised.
Yes very droll. Like it. Kimi obviously relates to James Hunt. He's sported a Hunt replica helmet before. And entered a snowmobile race as James Hunt. There are less characters in F1 in the modern era.
Another ex-Ferrari chief in at F1/FIA? How unusual...
stefano-domenicali-formula-1-ceo
To be fair to Stefano (in case he's reading!) he seems like a good, popular choice for the job.
The fault lay entirely with the drivers at the back.
Entirely?
How about Bottas backing up the pack to a ludicrous extent and race control for allowing him to do it legally?
If you have a rule that allows one person to gain an advantage at a risk to everyone else then you can't blame them.
The safety car line should have been at the start of one of the shorter straights with another run off for the safety car to get out of the way.
So Domenicali, Todt, and Brawn running things. First reaction was Ferrari International Assistance, then I looked up the championship standings and realized that this cunning plan might not be going to plan.
You know how if you run into the back of someone it's your fault? Well, that.
Domenicali didn't exactly leave Ferrari on good terms. He was essentially ousted for kicking up a fuss about Ferrari prioritising Italian staff at the expense of skilled staff. He also directly opposed the transfer of road car personnel to the Ferrari F1 team as he said they're incompatible.
Domenicali is a good fit, he has petrol for blood and knows this sport is about people as much as machines and money.
then I looked up the championship standings and realized that this cunning plan might not be going to plan.
Surprise! the FIA have decided to reverse the World Championship standings for the last race of the season!
You know how if you run into the back of someone it’s your fault? Well, that.
Generally, but there are exceptions: i) A racetrack isn't a public road so you don't expect cars to stop suddenly and following a few inches off someone's gearbox is normal. ii) On a public road, if the car in front of you runs into a stationary car and you were following at a safe distance, and then you plough into that unexpected blockage, it's not the same as rear-ending someone who stopped at traffic light.
The problem, as I understand it, is that the guys in front accelerated in anticipation of Bottas nailing it, but misjudged it, then they suddenly backed off. The guys behind were driving blind and trusting the guys in front only to have to slam on the brakes.
How about Bottas backing up the pack to a ludicrous extent and race control for allowing him to do it legally?
Bottas held steady. Seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do
Entirely?
How about Bottas backing up the pack to a ludicrous extent and race control for allowing him to do it legally? If you have a rule that allows one person to gain an advantage at a risk to everyone else then you can’t blame them.
You could argue that Mugello as a circuit has to take some blame, in that the start/finish line is at the very end of quite a long straight so the effect of the lead car bunching the pack is exaggerated, but this was spoken about at the drivers briefing, and presumably they'd just watched the F3 race go through the exact same thing...(a mid race re-start) . hols2 has nailed it really; the guys at the back guessed wrongly, realised their error, and backed off.
Did someone send Mercedes a different set of rules to the rest of the grid? 1 second clear again and Red Bull 1.5s off the pace.
By this stage of relatively static regulations the front of the grid is tightening not widening.
Did someone send Mercedes a different set of rules to the rest of the grid? 1 second clear again and Red Bull 1.5s off the pace.
By this stage of relatively static regulations the front of the grid is tightening not widening.
I think it's an unintended consequence of the 'Single Engine Mode' rule. Merc may not have the Party Mode anymore but their engine is so far ahead of the others in terms of how hard they can run it anyway that their constant life option is miles above everyone else. On full beans they may have had 30bhp more than the others but due to their engine being able to run at that higher output for x amount of time they can run at eg 950bhp all day long where as everyone else is stuck at 900bhp therefore their advantage has actually gone up! It's similar to the old Turbo days where BMW could get 1500bhp for a qualy lap but were down to 700bhp for a race where the TAG unit was 'only 1100bhp for qualy but could run at 800bhp for a whole race (figures from old books and magazines so might be out slightly but you get the jist).
Big ol’ shunt in F2 at turn 3, all ok, makes you wince to watch though...
Can’t see this ending well.
No, and the result conversation will be for the other thread but that’s the equivalent of putting tape of Hamilton’s mouth on the BML issue. Is censorship with no flexibility plain and simple.
It’s going to be an interesting day. Hamilton is now on an opposing strategy with not the best tyre and punching a big hole on a long straight for Verstappen and Bottas. His best hope is he comes out the first corner in second and the mid field causes a safety car so he can dive in and get some mediums pdq I suspect.
Felt sorry for Lewis yesterday but he knows he drove a blinder to get pole, he was on softer tyres but in a dodgy position back in the pack..
Make things a bit more interesting today at the start at least. I wonder of the pressure of potentially equalling Schumacher's record is getting to him?
I think Hamilton is probably quite relaxed because he knows he can cruise to the championship and Schumacher's record is just a matter of time. Bottas and Verstappen are fighting for second in the championship, and both will be desperate to win some races. Very good chance of top runners trying alternate strategies, with Ricciardo and the McLarens hoping to sneak onto the podium if someone has problems or gets strategy wrong.
the mid field causes a safety car
5 out of 6 Russian GsP have had safety cars so fingers crossed it happens early enough.
Kimi matches Reubens 322 GP’s today, that is one hell of a milestone.
Safety Car after 1st Lap great news for Hamilton and I really think Verstappen needs to practice his starts.
2 x 5 sec penalty for LH for practice starts let the moaning commence
More entertained by him having 10 points total on his license. 2 more and misses a race.
2 more and misses a race.
Would love to see George Russell given a turn in that Merc.
Seems a shame that Lewis was given the points on his license when he clearly asked the team if it was okay to do so and they said yes. Lewis already paid the price in the time penalties, a team fine would have been more appropriate.
Seems a shame that Lewis was given the points on his license when he clearly asked the team if it was okay to do so and they said yes
Not at all unfair, it’s his job to know the rules too
mashr
Full Member
Seems a shame that Lewis was given the points on his license when he clearly asked the team if it was okay to do so and they said yes
Not at all unfair, it’s his job to know the rules too
Clearly the FIA dont agree with you now points rescinded, I think they have now done the right thing & fined team. Shame they ruined race though with unusual 2 x 5 second penalty.
Shame they ruined race though with unusual 2 x 5 second penalty.
I’m a Lewis fanboy but I though he did do it twice so 2 penalties? Am I confused?
I’m a Lewis fanboy but I though he did do it twice so 2 penalties? Am I confused?
No, that’s it.
Shame
theyMercedes ruined race though withunusual 2 x 5 second penaltyidiotic breach of rules.
FTFY. The blame for that goes on Mercedes for an idiotic breach of the rules, not on the race officials for enforcing the rules.
The point is, the stewards have been very relaxed with that rule until this weekend.
The point is, the stewards have been very relaxed with that rule until this weekend.
For example?
Not sure if this shows on here, but this amused me!...
👍🏼😁
Kryton57
Full MemberThe point is, the stewards have been very relaxed with that rule until this weekend.
Speaking of 'relaxed with rules' it seems like Charles has been getting a bit of an easy ride. I know it was lap 1 but it wasn't like they were 4 wide going into t1. He just ran Lance off the road. Basically the same as Lewis did to Albon, except obviously Lewis got a penalty.
edit: video
https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/j0sz2m/leclerc_no_penalty_vs_hamiltons_penalty/
Stroll into Leclerc was identical to that of Albon into Hamilton (yes I placed them that way round on purpose) in that a faster car (Stroll, Albon) goes around the outside, they have a straighter exit whilst the car on the inside line is still turning, the fast moving outside car then entangles themselves with the inside car (their rear wheels are essentially between the front and rear wheels of the inside car (Hamilton, Leclerc) and they drive the front of their rear wheels into the back of the front wheels of the inside car. The faster car on the outside then spins. Stroll/Leclerc = Albon/Hamilton, but Hamilton got a penalty and points on his license....Why, because it affected the outcome at the top (and Red Bull made a big deal of it)...otherwise, its just a racing incident in the midfield. It wasn't fair on Hamilton at the time - Albon drove into him and Lewis was on full lock, driving around the corner. Albon should've given more space, as should Stroll. Racing incident that you brought on yourself.
No consistency.
The pitlane start rule is a pure safety rule so there is no ambiguity about it, it's either penalty or it's not. I know at Mugello they were allowed to do practice starts further along the pitlane exit due to it's compromised design, same at Singapore IIRC too. From the radio you can clearly hear Hamilton question it before doing them and the team ok'ing it so the penalties as they now stand are fair and act as a deterrent for others. A real shame the 10 seconds ruined a potentially good battle up front but they would have every team doing it at the next race if they had let it slide. Safety trumps racing.
Good to see the press are trying to push the 'I'm being targetted' line from Lewis whereas if you read/listen to the whole interview what he's actually saying is that Mercedes, as the pace-setters, are being used to shape future decisions about rules. It's been the same all the way through the sport from the 50's with engine size changes, through the 80's with Chapman's Ground Effect innovations and twin chassis experiments through to Renault's Mass Damper. Mercedes are in a similar position to McLaren in '88 and Williams in '92-93 where they have such a great team and car advantage that it's obvious the FIA are going to try and peg their advantage back. The difference is that in '88 McLaren knew the turbo era was ending so had one last hurrah while other teams focussed on '89 whereas Williams were so far ahead on all fronts that if they weren't made slower through a regulation change they would have been as dominant then for as long as Mercedes are now. Hamilton is just trying to cut off any further rule changes before they do find the 'Magic Bullet' that is the key to their dominance.
No consistency.
Exactly, I was against Hamilton getting that penalty and against Leclerc getting one, BUT if Hamilton does get a penalty then Leclerc needs to also. This system of different stewards is no good.
Also on Leclerc though, he also got away with driving two laps with no seatbelt but Lewis got a ticking off for loosening his to wave at fans after the race, ignoring the covid rules and putting pics of it on social media, the fuel discrepancy in abu dhabi (should have been a DQ), continuing to drive with a broken front wing after he could have pitted. I'm sure there's more as well.
edit- monza last year, on hamilton 😁
The pitlane start rule is a pure safety rule so there is no ambiguity about it, it’s either penalty or it’s not.
+1 except
I know at Mugello they were allowed to do practice starts further along the pitlane exit due to it’s compromised design, same at Singapore IIRC too.
Which is arguably ambiguous. However, unless the "Mugello clause" had been deemed to apply at Sochi the team were in breach of the regs. Lewis asked for clarification so he knew there was a potential issue.
As for Leclerc Stroll, racing incident, typical lap 1 stuff, nothing to deserve a penalty. If anything, Stroll's line changed rather rapidly at the exit of the turn - possible blocking manoeuvre?