Dhananjay Khadilkar/DNA
 
Mumbai, Sep 10: The 2008 Belgian Grand Prix will go down as one of the most memorable races in Formula One history. However, the thrilling wheel-to-wheel battle between Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen has already been overshadowed by the controversial decision of stripping the McLaren driver of his well-deserved win.

It may be recalled that championship leader Hamilton was handed a 25-second penalty that stripped him of a victory and dropped him to third place.

Former world champion Niki Lauda termed it as the worst judgement in the history of F1. “It’s absolutely unacceptable when three (stewards) influence the championship like this,” the Austrian driver was quoted as saying.

If Lauda was outraged, it was clear that Hamilton did not expect this decision. In fact speaking before the stewards’ announcement, Hamilton had claimed that whatever he had done was fair and square.

“This is motor racing and if there’s a penalty, then there’s something wrong because I was ahead going into that corner, so I didn’t gain an advantage from it,” the Briton said in the post race press briefing. However, it was clear Hamilton had his apprehensions. “I think it would be absolutely wrong. But you know what they’re like, so we will see,” he remarked.

Hamilton’s remark is a pointer to a widely held perception in Formula One — the red car (Ferrari) always rules. One doesn’t have to go long back to understand why people feel Ferrari always gets a better deal than McLaren.

Only a fortnight ago at the European Grand Prix in Valenica, Ferrari’s Felipe Massa, the eventual winner, got away with a $10,000 fine when many believed the Brazilian should have been handed a stop-and-go penalty for the unsafe release from the pits.

Also, last year, McLaren was disqualified from the team championship and were handed a massive $100 million fine for their role in spy scandal that involved Ferrari. The British newspapers were unforgiving in their criticism of this decision. “The decision will long be remembered as being farcical and disgraceful by all in motor racing,” The Independent screamed.

The Times was also critical “Hamilton produced one of his most daring performances, only to have victory taken away from him by a hugely controversial retrospective punishment by the race stewards.” If Hamilton is to be believed, he had no other option but to cut across the chicane.

Hamilton said he had to take the escape route. “He (Raikkonen) pushed me wide. I was a little bit ahead and I was on the outside of turn one. He (Raikkonen) pushed me to the point where I would either have been on the kerb and crashed into him or have to go on the escape route, so I went on the escape route,” he remarked. Meanwhile, McLaren released a statement saying that Hamilton didn’t achieve this win because of an illegitimate advantage.