Every time there's a dubious racing incident, the forum ends up in acrimonious debate. It occurs to me there's a rule change they could impose that would make the drivers better balance the risks and turn this into an objectively measurable system. Simply this: In any contact, the driver making the transverse movement is considered at fault. (This is almost but not quite the same as saying the driver who changes his racing line, but as expressed is objectively measurable. You'd need an escape clause for the stewards to rule otherwise in exceptional circumstances. If both drivers make transverse movements then it's a no-fault incident.) The offending driver in a contact may finish no better than immediately behind the car he hit. (In addition to any other penalties the stewards think up.) What this means is, drivers can do all the risky overtakes they like, but if it goes wrong, the person it hurts the most is guaranteed to be them. It also obviates the bizarre rule about only one defensive move allowed, by punishing overly aggressive defence. If a faster car is cruising past a slower, and if the lead car moves to block which results in contact, then it was the defender making the transverse movement who's going to suffer. Hamilton fanboys will instantly object because these rules clearly would have brutalized him this season; but keep in mind they would also have got him past Schumacher. What they do is reward clean driving and successsful risk taking.