Alonso full of mistakes.

[autogyro]

Its partly because of the exhaust blown diffuser.
The one on the Ferrari upsets the cars balance.
RB knew this and are winding Ferrari up as part of their second half of season plan to disrupt the opposition using Alonsos Latin temprement to ensure a bad drive when under stress.

[ISLAMATRON]

They pushed the rules to the limit, and decided to risk it escalating to a proper penalty. It's not cheating, is saying we thing it is OK and send it to the stewards if you must. Charlie did, the stewards ruled and Ferrari obeyed the rules. The rules, not Charlie's opinion.

They cheated plain and simple and were penalised for cheating and the penalty was multiplied because they tried to cheat again by arguing the penalty for cheating, meanwhile the SC came out.

[GTO]

Ok, by your previous 2 posts, I was doubtful whether you liked Ferrari. But by using the word cheat 4X in the same sentence again, I think we may now get your point.

[andrew]

They or Alonso? I would suspect that the answer is Alonso as his 3 laps would have ended the lap the safety car appeared so he could then not pit as he was likely trying to maximise his lead over the car behind. If it was Ferrari I guess he would have never pitted and we would still be waiting for him to serve his penalty.

[vall]

served the drive through after cheating, and only after trying to argue out of the penalty for their clear cheating.

Alonso cheated the corner & Kubica and then the team tried to cheat the system, at least they didnt get away with it.

how did you come to this conclusion? He did not cheat the corner. He was forced off. Both cars arrived in the slow corners exactly side by side. In the past we have seen many similar situations where the drivers cleanly drove through the corners side by side and not pushing each other off (even for many more corners).

[andrew]

Alonso gained a position by going off the track. The position of Kubica's car is irrelevant.

[vall]

Alonso gained a position by going off the track. The position of Kubica's car is irrelevant.

so for you forcing drivers off track when exactly side by side is OK?

[myurr]

Alonso gained a position by going off the track. The position of Kubica's car is irrelevant.

so for you forcing drivers off track when exactly side by side is OK?

It's such a common maneuver, and one that Alonso himself has pulled many a time, that yes. The point is that Kubica didn't force Alonso off at all, he merely positioned his car on the inside and pushed to the outside. Alonso always had room to slow down and back out of it - he CHOSE not to, instead running wide over the grass and gaining an advantage. There was no contact, Alonso always had room, he just couldn't drive on the line he wanted to because Kubica placed his car there.

Race control clear agreed, and judging from the posts so does pretty much everyone on this forum including many Alonso fans. Where there is some argument it is about the penalty and it's fairness. Frankly the fact that it is now clear Ferrari were told three times that Alonso had to give the place back including immediately after the fact shows that both the overtake and the subsequent handling was emotionally based for them rather than rationally based. Had they listened to race control and the advice they themselves asked for then we wouldn't be debating this at all.

[Pup]

It's completely irrelevant if Kubica forced Alonso onto the grass or not. The rules say that you don't pass off-track; they are unconcerned with how one got there.

Alonso should have conceded the spot, plain and simple. Then if Ferrari felt wronged by Kubica, they should have asked the stewards to penalize him.

[vall]

Alonso gained a position by going off the track. The position of Kubica's car is irrelevant.

so for you forcing drivers off track when exactly side by side is OK?

It's such a common maneuver, and one that Alonso himself has pulled many a time, that yes. The point is that Kubica didn't force Alonso off at all, he merely positioned his car on the inside and pushed to the outside. Alonso always had room to slow down and back out of it - he CHOSE not to, instead running wide over the grass and gaining an advantage. There was no contact, Alonso always had room, he just couldn't drive on the line he wanted to because Kubica placed his car there.

Race control clear agreed, and judging from the posts so does pretty much everyone on this forum including many Alonso fans. Where there is some argument it is about the penalty and it's fairness. Frankly the fact that it is now clear Ferrari were told three times that Alonso had to give the place back including immediately after the fact shows that both the overtake and the subsequent handling was emotionally based for them rather than rationally based. Had they listened to race control and the advice they themselves asked for then we wouldn't be debating this at all.

well, after Spa 08 many were arguing that LH was forced out by Kimi even though in this case Kimi was at least 1/2 car ahead. In this case (and for what matters during the pit-lane incident with Vettel) LH had the option to brake of back off. Hi chose not do it, but then it was not a problem.... In Alonso's case both cars were exactly side by side, but Bob was driving as there were not car there

[vall]

It's completely irrelevant if Kubica forced Alonso onto the grass or not. The rules say that you don't pass off-track; they are unconcerned with how one got there.

Alonso should have conceded the spot, plain and simple. Then if Ferrari felt wronged by Kubica, they should have asked the stewards to penalize him.

16) INCIDENTS
16.1 "Incident" means any occurrence or series of occurrences involving one or more drivers, or any action by any driver, which is reported to the stewards by the race director (or noted by the stewards and referred to the race director for investigation) which :

- necessitated the suspension of a race under Article 41 ;
- constituted a breach of these Sporting Regulations or the Code ;
- caused a false start by one or more cars ;
- caused a collision ;
- forced a driver off the track ;
- illegitimately prevented a legitimate overtaking manoeuvre by a driver ;
- illegitimately impeded another driver during overtaking.

Unless in the opinion of the race director it was completely clear that a driver was in breach of any of the above, any incidents involving more than one car will normally be investigated after the race.

[Pup]

Your point?

The rules don't say that if one driver breaks a rule, another gets to break one, too. Like I said, if Ferrari felt wronged, they should have petitioned the stewards to investigate.

Neither Ferrari nor Alonso are the stewards, and they need to stop acting like they are.

[vall]

Your point?

The rules don't say that if one driver breaks a rule, another gets to break one, too. Like I said, if Ferrari felt wronged, they should have petitioned the stewards to investigate.

Neither Ferrari nor Alonso are the stewards, and they need to stop acting like they are.

my point is that he was forced out and did not cut the corner in order to overtake. But Charlie looked at only what one side of the story - what Alonso did. We do not know, but perhaps Ferrari were arguining with him about Bob pushing Alonso off..

[Pup]

And I will tell you probably what Charlie told Ferrari: Alonso wasn't being penalized for being forced off track; he was being penalized for overtaking another car while he was out there.

[l4mbch0ps]

Pup has it right on. Two wrongs don't make a right. Kubica may have broken the rules, in which case Ferrari should have relinquished the position, and demanded a stewards ruling. Furthermore, they then should ACCEPT the ruling - unlike what they seem to do with every ruling that doesn't go their way.