This is weird explanation but let's roll with it. Unexpected? The whole track was wet and he did drive this corner many times, it wasn't a first run. Was it as unexpected as the other driver in front and change of grip under breaking for Hulkenberg in Brazil 2012? How about avoiding high speed collision while being pushed off by the other driver as a justifiable reason? Oh, I see you have this covered by including other competitor, how convenientsimieski wrote:There's enough unknowns and guesswork as it is, let's not add to the list things the Fia defines in readily available documentation. So from the sporting regs:ringo wrote:Isn't the rule at least one wheel?
He may have had his rear wheel on the track.
Anyhow he didn't gain much there, with quite a number of drivers doing the exact same thing.
20.2 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.
Should a car leave the track the driver may rejoin, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any advantage.
A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason.
If pulled up on it by the stewards I dare say less grip than expected on a damp track would fall within the bounds of a justifiable reason. But typically this isn't something the Fia seem to concern themselves with in qualy, or even the race, unless another competitor is involved.

Never mind about this one, there's a loophole apparently, although I can't see all four wheels, it must be it. Fine, using simple test - if it was a driver I support I wouldn't complain. There will (there already were) plenty of examples of gigantic hypocrisy on the part of audience, (pseudo)journalists and FIA when it comes to penalties.
I hope race's going to be good, one of the few remaining warm days wasted on this garbage

