2021 - Race 14 Itallian GP at Monza

[F1nKS]

Should be interesting week leading up with Silly Season fully about to come to a conclusion and memories about how Monza last year gave us Gasly, Sainz and Stroll on the podium.

With the Bottas announcement, everything else should start rolling out.

[F1nKS]

Qualifying on Friday
Spring Qualifying on Saturday

[F1nKS]

There is interesting drama going on with Maze-spin and Schumacher. It seems to be about to come head.


Rookie teammates Nikita Mazepin and Mick Schumacher spent Saturday evening firing verbal shots at each other through the media after a contentious incident in qualifying for the Dutch Grand Prix.

Mazepin called Schumacher "cheeky" - is that a British insult?


"At least it's consistent and you know where you stand. What I don't like is when people are cheeky fighting for P19. I think it just shows their true nature."

[airshifter]

Qualifying on Friday
Spring Qualifying on Saturday

I'm just waiting for one of these sprints to end up in major carnage and screw some teams up. And even when they don't it's just still a strange way to do things if you ask me. But at least we don't have sprinklers.... yet!

[F1nKS]

I'm just waiting for one of these sprints to end up in major carnage and screw some teams up. And even when they don't it's just still a strange way to do things if you ask me. But at least we don't have sprinklers.... yet!

Yeah. There should be more points for it than what they are getting due to the risk involved.

Perez drive was screwed (by his own making) in the GB grand prix. Had a decent qualifying (5th), but made a unforced error which caused a eventual DNF and so he started at the back for the grid and just couldn't do anything.

[F1nKS]

Mercedes are destroying Red Bull in qualifying. Only Mclaren competitive so far against Mercedes.

[F1nKS]

Out in Q1

16. Latifi
17. Tsunoda
18. Schumacher
19. Kubica
20. Mazepin

[F1nKS]

Bottas is taking a new engine this weekend and will take penalties for the race.

[F1nKS]

Out in Q2

11. Vet
12. Stroll
13. Alonso
14. Ocon
15. Russell

[F1nKS]

Q3 - first run

1. Hamilton
2. Verstappen
3. Norris
4. Riciardo
5. Bottas
6. Gasly
7. Leclerc
8. Sainz
9. Perez
10. Giovinazzi

[F1nKS]

Finals

1. Bottas
2. Hamilton
3. Verstappen
4. Norris
5. Ricardo
6. Gasly
7. Sainz
8. Leclerc
9. Perez
10. Gio

[F1nKS]

Bottas is taking a new engine this weekend and will take penalties for the race.

I wonder if Mercedes will reconsider now with Bottas on pole.

[Fortitude]

FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN GRAN PREMIO D’ITALIA 2021 - PRACTICE 1
10 12 Sep 2021 Autodromo Nazionale Monza, Monza

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2021/races/1076/italy/practice-1.html


FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN GRAN PREMIO D’ITALIA 2021 - QUALIFYING
10 12 Sep 2021 Autodromo Nazionale Monza, Monza

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2021/races/1076/italy/qualifying.html


What the teams said – Qualifying in Italy
Becky Hart
10 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.what-the-teams-said-qualifying-in-italy-2021.56Lq0KsLJ38O2MuoqcZ9sS.html


Bottas takes P1 in qualifying, but is set to start Sunday’s Italian GP from last after changing power unit
10 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-takes-p1-in-qualifying-but-is-set-to-start-sundays-italian-gp-from.3yi55U2Ny24Ou2UJjVruWO.html


Verstappen says it would be ‘unrealistic’ to have hoped for more than P3 in Monza qualifying
10 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.verstappen-says-it-would-be-unrealistic-to-have-hoped-for-more-than-p3-in.7wVSwKqEOtJXiqMgbYuKiI.html


Gasly proud of AlphaTauri after navigating ‘cat and mouse’ quali to take P6 for F1 Sprint
10 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.gasly-proud-of-alphatauri-after-navigating-cat-and-mouse-quali-to-take-p6.7I08F04CJCsA7IlDyl60Dn.html

[airshifter]

This could end up interesting tomorrow for the Sprint Race. With Bottas up front, do they risk trying to let Lewis by without Max slipping through? And if they don't most likely at some point Valterri will fade, possibly leaving Lewis in the center fighting off Max.

Of all the times for Bottas to beat Lewis, this really wasn't the best for the team.


Either way, it looks like Merc has the pace advantage at the temple of speed. Lewis should run away with the win unless something dicey happens of race pace is a lot different than we are expecting. Strong run by the Mclarens, surprised they slipped in Q3. It could still shake up some though, as the track was ramping up so fast and the tow coming into play so much that the race could really spread them out, or see plenty of trains with DRS.


They need to do something about the pit exits and outlaps NOW before it ends in shambles. Probably not an easy thing to fix, but they have to do it before we see major carnage.

[Nitrodaze]

I wonder if Mercedes will reconsider now with Bottas on pole.

Too late, the deal is done!

[Nitrodaze]

It is going to be an interesting start to the sprint race. With Hamilton and Verstappen attacking Bottas and both Mclarens attacking Verstappen and possibly Hamilton. The Mclarens are quick at this race, hence Verstappen would be looking over his shoulder on that long straight to the first corner where the Mclaren is quicker.

I think a Mclaren is going to end up in the top three coming out of turn one. This is one race where Bottas need to keep on the pace of both Hamilton and Verstappen and not fade backwards in race time.

[Zico]

What a snore fest... Ah well. At least tomorrow should be a bit more interesting with Lewis having to go full attack.
Glad to see McLarens aggressive softs strategy paying off.

The Sprint idea sounded good.. but has failed to live up to expectations, they should probably just can it.

[Bagwan]

What a snore fest... Ah well. At least tomorrow should be a bit more interesting with Lewis having to go full attack.
Glad to see McLarens aggressive softs strategy paying off.

The Sprint idea sounded good.. but has failed to live up to expectations, they should probably just can it.

No .
It sounded stupid , and lived up the expectations .

[F1nKS]

Only thing interesting about this race was how fast and far Hamilton dropped.

Too bad about Gasly, he actually had good start and in the end just got unlucky.

[Bagwan]

Only thing interesting about this race was how fast and far Hamilton dropped.

Too bad about Gasly, he actually had good start and in the end just got unlucky.

From the conspiracy corner comes the thought that , because Merc was supposed to be fast here(as Bottas was) , an uncharacteristic bad start from Lewis in the stupid sprint makes room for more entertainment than a romp into the distance .
That comes after the rare event when the towed car didn't go faster than the towing car in the qually on Friday .

[Fortitude]

FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN GRAN PREMIO D’ITALIA 2021 - PRACTICE 2
10 12 Sep 2021 Autodromo Nazionale Monza, Monza

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2021/races/1076/italy/practice-2.html


FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN GRAN PREMIO D’ITALIA 2021 - SPRINT
10 12 Sep 2021 Autodromo Nazionale Monza, Monza

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2021/races/1076/italy/sprint-qualifying-results.html


HIGHLIGHTS: Missed the F1 Sprint at Monza? Catch all the action right here
11 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.highlights-missed-the-f1-sprint-at-monza-catch-all-the-action-right-here.6m8lhQFtsPg6Ewmrj7mzWD.html


Verstappen still wary of Mercedes threat despite ‘crucial’ Sprint result at Monza
11 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.verstappen-still-wary-of-mercedes-threat-despite-crucial-sprint-result-at.3Lh1TJNKAm34FyzHjpwntU.html


Ricciardo promises 'full attack' in Italian Grand Prix as he clinches front-row start at Monza
11 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.ricciardo-promises-full-attack-in-italian-grand-prix-as-he-clinches-front.33K07ZVT3GKCSvMiDjOT7s.html

[Nitrodaze]

Only thing interesting about this race was how fast and far Hamilton dropped.

Too bad about Gasly, he actually had good start and in the end just got unlucky.

Hamilton messed up big time. This is how championships are lost.

[The Black Knight]

Hamilton messed up big time. This is how championships are lost.

Based on each drivers performance to date this season Verstappen deserves to be champion this year. Hamilton had the race win if he hadn't bottled it today. His own fault, one of way too many mistakes he has made this year.

[Average Sim Racer]

To be honest, Mercedes have been under-performing since pre-season testing and regulations changing. Hamilton's moves this season are often of a more desperate driver in a slower car. I am reminded of Vettel in a Ferrari.

Overall, the random sprint race and penalties for mechanical failures are not a good idea for a fair sport. Neither is the points system.

[airshifter]

It looks like Hamilton has his work cut out for him tomorrow unless someone has a bad start. Once in the dirty air, he really didn't even make a challenge on the McLarens, and they were losing ground to Max and Valterri. Out in front, Bottas didn't seem to have any issues, and I was shocked that Max seemed to be able to stay with him. I'm not really sure if either of them pushed it much though, as they traded some fast laps but there was little to gain in really pushing it.

Sucks for Gasly. Though it was his own mistake, I think he would have finished getting past Hamilton. I'm surprised he didn't back off, but at that point nobody could really do a damage assessment on the wing, and with the short sprint, he wasn't going to recover from a replacement anyway.

If the Merc engine problems continue and Lewis has to take penalties, Max might be out of that potential problem zone as far as points go.

Lewis has lost most of his positions this year on starts, and Max has had quite a few really good holeshots as well. The only hope for the race is that Merc has good long term race pace, and can find the gaps to use it. Valterri might have a hard day just to work up to the points.

[truefan72]

Well…crazy max has done it again.
Pure madness. Squeezed Hamilton on lap one and then oddly claims that hamilron sidnt leave him space even though he mounted the curb and pretty much turned into Hamilton. 100% Mad max fault.
Of course stupid Brundle is trying to play neutral talking about a race incident. Laughable. If it was anyone but max he would be all over them. Wtf is he talking about. Laughable commentary.

[The Black Knight]

Well…crazy max has done it again.
Pure madness. Squeezed Hamilton on lap one and then oddly claims that hamilron sidnt leave him space even though he mounted the curb and pretty much turned into Hamilton. 100% Mad max fault.
Of course stupid Brundle is trying to play neutral talking about a race incident. Laughable. If it was anyone but max he would be all over them. Wtf is he talking about. Laughable commentary.

Agreed plus Max was far less alongside Lewis there than Lewis was on Max at Copse in Silverstone. If Max doesn't get a penalty for that then it makes a joke of F1. I fully expect no penalty for him such is the idiocy of F1 stewards. Brundle is a moron and has no business commentating anymore.

[truefan72]

SkyF1 is really pissing me off. Lol “they took each other off” Nope! Mad Max took out Hamilton. End of story! Didnt even check on Hamilton. Class act! Smh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[truefan72]

Norris needs to pipe down. He isn’t faster than Ricciardo at all.
Also RBR continue their stupidity by not telling Perez to give back the spot. And Perez should have known better

[denkimi]

Ah, i see the usual Hamilton fanboys have arrived.

Hard to tell who's at fault here, neither of them has done anything to avoid the accident. I would put the blame more towards hamilton because he didn't leave enough space and pushed max off.

[F1nKS]

Well I guess Sprint Qualifying was successful. This race would never have had this much drama had the pole order not been shaken up by the spring qualifying.

[Zico]

Max was 3/4 of the way alongside and Lewis simply didn't leave enough space.. what was Max supposed to do? How you guys above can still blame Max is pretty hilarious.

Ah well... at least Lewis didn't go on and win it this time and Max still gained some net points and extended his championship lead this time.

[F1nKS]

Norris needs to pipe down. He isn’t faster than Ricciardo at all.
Also RBR continue their stupidity by not telling Perez to give back the spot. And Perez should have known better

If Perez had given the spot back, Bottas would have also passed at the same time. If Bottas had gotten past then, he would have had a chance to win the race. So RBR was minimizing how much the Mercedes points gain.

[F1nKS]

Ricciardo better not forget to do the "shoey"

[The Black Knight]

Max gave Hamilton no room on the first lap, Hamilton gave Max the same treatment in return, except Hamilton actually gave Max slightly more room. Max should have gone over the chicane like Lewis did.

[truefan72]

great day for Mclaren. Congrats Danny and Lando.
Great drive back from Bottas
Russel finishes p9 solid.
double points for Alpine again
and very good double points for Ferrari.

I'm out because I know the predictable nonsensical arguments that are going to ensue trying to defend the buffonery of Mad Max .
We shall see what the stewards are going to say. But the lunacy of SkyF1 commentary just adds to my frustration.

Once again, really happy for Mclaren. It has been a long journey back and what a result!

[truefan72]

Max gave Hamilton no room on the first leo, Hamilton gave Max the same treatment in return, except Hamilton actually gave Max slightly more room. Max should have gone over the chicane like Lewis did.

yup. Just like every other car did. All except max. It is amazing how the guy forgets what he did on lap 1 and then has the audacity to complain.
He was behind, and knew 100% he wasn't going to make that pass, but stuck his nose in anyway in typical mad max fashion, thinking the other driver would just move out of the way.
mind you trying to make the pass on the kerbs as well. it was a mazepin worthy move.
Nothing about the move was a racing incident.
I will also in fairness issue slight blame to the useless Mercedes pit stop crew who continue to be shambolic on pit stops. a 4:2sec stop is unacceptable and this is a typical occurrence in the past 2 seasons.
Hamilton should have come out P2 and chasing Ricciardo down.
But At the end of the day, mad max takes the cake.
And the dude didn't even bother to check on hamilton.
Maniac.

[Zico]

Max gave Hamilton no room on the first lap, Hamilton gave Max the same treatment in return, except Hamilton actually gave Max slightly more room. Max should have gone over the chicane like Lewis did.


Perhaps.. but that still doesn't make Lewis not at fault for this one.

[denkimi]

Max gave Hamilton no room on the first lap, Hamilton gave Max the same treatment in return, except Hamilton actually gave Max slightly more room. Max should have gone over the chicane like Lewis did.
He should. But he didn't have to.

And if he didn't, lewis had to give him space, which he didn't.

I call it a racing incident. Both could have easily avoided it, but both chose not to give in.

[The Black Knight]

He should. But he didn't have to.

And if he didn't, lewis had to give him space, which he didn't.

I call it a racing incident. Both could have easily avoided it, but both chose not to give in.

You blamed Hamilton for Silverstone and Hamilton was far more alongside Max in Silverstone than Max was alongside Lewis today. If this was a racing incident so was Silverstone.

[Zico]

You blamed Hamilton for Silverstone and Hamilton was far more alongside Max in Silverstone than Max was alongside Lewis today. If this was a racing incident so was Silverstone.

Did Max not leave Lewis space at Silverstone?

[truefan72]

Horner and max are giving some of the most twisted interviews ever. applying severe mental gymnastics to explain the incident, and TBF the reporter asked max point blank what happened at lap 1 and he litereally had nothing to say about it, apart from "it is a different situation"
horner comes out and provides laughable commentary about respect etc. when he was the one going to crazy extremes after silverstone.
You know he knows he is wrong by insisting it is a racing incident. useless

[The Black Knight]

Did Max not leave Lewis space at Silverstone?

Lewis was further alongside at Silverstone. Lewis gave Max the same treatment Max gave him on the first lap today. Max can't have it all his own way. If being further alongside a driver and colliding means it is the drivers fault on the inside (Hamilton in Silverstone) then being further back and colliding means it has to be Max's fault today. And Max had plenty of room to go over the chicane today just like Lewis did on the first lap.

Respect to Damon Hill and Herbert they are the only ones calling it as it is.

[denkimi]

You blamed Hamilton for Silverstone and Hamilton was far more alongside Max in Silverstone than Max was alongside Lewis today. If this was a racing incident so was Silverstone.
I blame hamilton here too. But that was a 300km/h accident, while this is a 50km/h accident.

The main issue here is that verstappens car got launched in the air, without that they would have just banged wheels and nothing terrible would have happened. This was not bad enough anyone a penalty, just a freak incident.

Had either of them known how it would end, they would have backed off.

And please look again at the video's. At the moment they touched they where next to each other. They touched rear to rear. In silverstone hamilton was clearly begind, that was front to rear.

[The Black Knight]

I blame hamilton here too. But that was a 300km/h accident, while this is a 50km/h accident.

The main issue here is that verstappens car got launched in the air, without that they would have just banged wheels and nothing terrible would have happened. This was not bad enough anyone a penalty, just a freak incident.

Had either of them known how it would end, they would have backed off.

And please look again at the video's. At the moment they touched they where next to each other. They touched rear to rear. In silverstone hamilton was clearly begind, that was front to rear.

The speed of the corners are irrelevant.
In Silverstone when they both committed to the corner Hamilton was only a couple of inches from being fully alongside. It was the speed differential throughout the corner which caused the cars to touch in different parts in Silverstone. When Max committed today he was further back than Lewis was at Silverstone. He should not have committed or else he should have gone over the chicane when he saw the door closing. By the time they were nearly side by side today there was no chance Max was making that corner. At any point Max could have backed out, at no point could Lewis have done much different. In fact I think Lewis actually moved slightly right to avoid Max once his car started oscillating as at that point he probably knew what was going to happen.

Both are either a racing incident or it was Lewis fault in Silverstone and Max's fault today.

[Zico]

[


Lewis was further alongside at Silverstone. Lewis gave Max the same treatment Max gave him on the first lap today. Max can't have it all his own way. If being further alongside a driver and colliding means it is the drivers fault on the inside (Hamilton in Silverstone) then being further back and colliding means it has to be Max's fault today. And Max had plenty of room to go over the chicane today just like Lewis did on the first lap.

Respect to Damon Hill and Herbert they are the only ones calling it as it is.

No, the criteria for leaving space is determined by if they were over a certain percentage alongside or not, and if they are.. the defending driver has to leave space.
Its not a case of if one was more alongside than the other then that rule magically disappears as you seem to think.

In both incidents one left space, the other didn't.

[denkimi]

The speed of the corners are irrelevant.
In Silverstone when they both committed to the corner Hamilton was only a couple of inches from being fully alongside. It was the speed differential throughout the corner which caused the cars to touch in different parts in Silverstone. When Max committed today he was further back than Lewis was at Silverstone. He should not have committed or else he should have gone over the chicane when he saw the door closing. By the time they were nearly side by side today there was no chance Max was making that corner. At any point Max could have backed out, at no point could Lewis have done much different. In fact I think Lewis actually moved slightly right to avoid Max once his car started oscillating as at that point he probably knew what was going to happen.

Both are either a racing incident or it was Lewis fault in Silverstone and Max's fault today.
You do understand that lewis cannot be fully alongside when his front wheel hits max'es rear wheel?

And the speed of the corner is very relevant. In silverstone lewis knew that the only outcome would be a big crash. Today the outcome would have been wheels banging without damage in 99% of te cases. What we saw today was nothing out of the ordinary in racing terms, drivers bang wheels all the time. Only the outcome of this incident was a bit extreme, due to the lauching of the car.

To me both incidents were lewis fault. But today this was only a very minor incident, unfortunately with big consequences. Nobody should be punished here.

[The Black Knight]

[



No, the criteria for leaving space is determined by if they were over a certain percentage alongside or not, and if they are.. the defending driver has to leave space.
Its not a case of if one was more alongside than the other then that rule magically disappears as you seem to think.

In both incidents one left space, the other didn't.

Hamilton left him the same room as Max gave him in the first lap and Hamilton was far more alongside than Max was. If Max feels the first lap was fair then Hamilton was fair in the later incident. Thew Stewards ruled that no action was necessary there, so the precedent was set, Lewis had no need to give Max room in turn 2. In the end, Max didn't use his brain today, Lewis did. That's the big difference.

[Zico]

Hamilton left him the same room as Max gave him in the first lap and Hamilton was far more alongside than Max was. If Max feels the first lap was fair then Hamilton was fair in the later incident. Thew Stewards ruled that no action was necessary there, so the precedent was set, Lewis had no need to give Max room in turn 2. In the end, Max didn't use his brain today, Lewis did. That's the big difference.

You are moving the goalposts again.. so we are comparing the first lap incident today instead now? I haven't watched the full race yet so I can't comment on that one but if thats the case then yes, I'll no doubt agree... but you compared todays incident with Silverstone.

[The Black Knight]

You do understand that lewis cannot be fully alongside when his front wheel hits max'es rear wheel?

And the speed of the corner is very relevant. In silverstone lewis knew that the only outcome would be a big crash. Today the outcome would have been wheels banging without damage in 99% of te cases. What we saw today was nothing out of the ordinary in racing terms, drivers bang wheels all the time. Only the outcome of this incident was a bit extreme, due to the lauching of the car.

To me both incidents were lewis fault. But today this was only a very minor incident, unfortunately with big consequences. Nobody should be punished here.

Lewis didn't know a big smash was imminent in Silverstone, plenty of cars have overtaken successfully at Copse throughout the years, it's just both drivers wouldn't give an inch. It was a racing incident.

Today, Max knew the sausage Kerbs were there and went over them even though the door was closed. He made an error of judgement, I hope it wasn't a professional foul as Toto said. He should have backed out or gone over the chicane. He absolutely should get a penalty, otherwise just like with Portugal 2019, first lap Monza and Imola this year, he'll continue these sort of moves and maybe next time he'll kill himself or another driver.

[The Black Knight]

You are moving the goalposts again.. so we are comparing the first lap incident today instead now? I haven't watched the full race yet so I can't comment on that one but if thats the case then yes, I'll no doubt agree... but you compared todays incident with Silverstone.

No I have been comparing all three incidents if you look back at my posts and saying that if lap one was a racing incident today, so was Silverstone and so was the incident that took them both out today but actually I think Max knew the sausage kerb was there today so I think blame is more in his court the more I think of it.

[Zico]

No I have been comparing all three incidents if you look back at my posts and saying that if lap one was a racing incident today, so was Silverstone and so was the incident that took them both out today.

Ok,
I replied with 'perhaps' to your first lap comparison and I do agree that if that is what happened in the first lap and the Stewards deemed it a racing incident then fair is fair and so this should be too... but I'm seeing little/no correlation or equality with todays collision and the Silverstone one. Max left room there... Lewis also received a nothing penalty and went on to win.

[The Black Knight]

Ok,
I replied with 'perhaps' to your first lap comparison and I do agree that if that is what happened in the first lap and the Stewards deemed it a racing incident then fair is fair and so this should be too... but I'm seeing little/no correlation or equality with todays collision and the Silverstone one. Max left room there... Lewis also received a nothing penalty and went on to win.

3 place grid drop for Max at the next race and 2 penalty points.

[truefan72]

Well the stewards agreed with my assessment and Verstappen has been given a 3 place grid drop at the next GP and 2 penalty points/

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021%20Italian%20Grand%20Prix%20-%20Offence%20-%20Car%2033%20-%20Causing%20a%20collision.pdf
Here is the ruling:

"Fact - Collision with car 44 in turn 2.

Offence - Breach of Article 2 (d) Chapter IV Appendix L of the FIA International Sporting Code.

Decision - 3 Grid Place Drop at the driver’s next event.
(2 penalty points imposed, total of 2 points in the 12 month period)

Reason - The Stewards heard from the driver of car 33 (Max Verstappen), the driver of car 44 (Lewis Hamilton) and team representatives, reviewed the video evidence and determined that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the collision with Car 44 at Turn 2.

Car 44 was exiting the pits. Car 33 was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, Car 44 was significantly ahead of Car 33. Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside Car 44, although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44. During the hearing the driver of Car 33 asserted that the cause of the incident was the driver of Car 44 opening the steering after Turn 1 and “squeezing” him to the apex of turn 2. The driver of Car 44 asserted that the driver of Car 33 attempted to pass very late and should have given up the corner either by backing off sooner, or by turning left behind the kerb.

The Stewards observed on CCTV footage that the driver of Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have “the right to racing room”. While Car 44 could have steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident, the Stewards determined that his position was reasonable and therefore find that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the incident.

In coming to the penalty the Stewards emphasise that they have only considered the incident itself and not the consequences thereof.

The Stewards Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits"

I wonder if Brundel will now eat humble pie and admit he was wrong and if DiResta will do the same.
This is a well deserved penalty and a culmination of all the bully driving that Max has engineered.
This time he nearly injured a fellow competitor because he doesn't care or is unwilling to compromise with anyone on the track.

[Zico]

3 place grid drop for Max at the next race and 2 penalty points.

So I see.. that's harsh and clearly wong IMO. Strange that Lewis was the one who left no room despite Max clearly being alongside.. and yet Max gets the penalty.
Maybe his earlier squeeze on Lewis had some influence on that decision or they just want to keep it nip and tuck to the wire.

[F1nKS]

Great drive the Mclaren boys!

Norris and Danny Ric will need antibiotics for next race to recover from the bacteria they drank.

[Zico]

Well the stewards agreed with my assessment and Verstappen has been given a 3 place grid drop at the next GP and 2 penalty points/

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021%20Italian%20Grand%20Prix%20-%20Offence%20-%20Car%2033%20-%20Causing%20a%20collision.pdf
Here is the ruling:

"Fact - Collision with car 44 in turn 2.

Offence - Breach of Article 2 (d) Chapter IV Appendix L of the FIA International Sporting Code.

Decision - 3 Grid Place Drop at the driver’s next event.
(2 penalty points imposed, total of 2 points in the 12 month period)

Reason - The Stewards heard from the driver of car 33 (Max Verstappen), the driver of car 44 (Lewis Hamilton) and team representatives, reviewed the video evidence and determined that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the collision with Car 44 at Turn 2.

Car 44 was exiting the pits. Car 33 was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, Car 44 was significantly ahead of Car 33. Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside Car 44, although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44. During the hearing the driver of Car 33 asserted that the cause of the incident was the driver of Car 44 opening the steering after Turn 1 and “squeezing” him to the apex of turn 2. The driver of Car 44 asserted that the driver of Car 33 attempted to pass very late and should have given up the corner either by backing off sooner, or by turning left behind the kerb.

The Stewards observed on CCTV footage that the driver of Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have “the right to racing room”. While Car 44 could have steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident, the Stewards determined that his position was reasonable and therefore find that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the incident.

In coming to the penalty the Stewards emphasise that they have only considered the incident itself and not the consequences thereof.

The Stewards Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits"

I wonder if Brundel will now eat humble pie and admit he was wrong and if DiResta will do the same.
This is a well deserved penalty and a culmination of all the bully driving that Max has engineered.
This time he nearly injured a fellow competitor because he doesn't care or is unwilling to compromise with anyone on the track.


If the Stewards decision is gospel and default proof of right and wrong, I didn't see you eating any humble pie when the Stewards penalised Lewis at Silverstone. Just sayin..


Anyway.. its interesting that we seem to have a new set of unwritten rules. Getting alongside to just behind the front wheels is no longer deemed to be enough anymore....and thats fair enough but they have set a new precedent now which they really have to abide by going forward.

[truefan72]

If the Stewards decision is gospel and default proof of right and wrong, I didn't see you eating any humble pie when the Stewards penalised Lewis at Silverstone. Just sayin..


Anyway.. its interesting that we seem to have a new set of unwritten rules. Getting alongside to just behind the front wheels is no longer deemed to be enough anymore....and thats fair enough but they have set a new precedent now which they really have to abide by going forward.

No humble pie to eat.
I was annoyed with the decision in Silverstone,
I accepted the penalty they gave him, Hamilton took his penalty, and then came back to win.
It was you guys who could not even accept that outcome.
This time around...Crickets
No talk of dangerous driving or nearly injuring Hamilton.
Verstappen didn't even have the decency to check on Hamilton.
No class, at all.
oh well

[Zico]

No humble pie to eat.
I was annoyed with the decision in Silverstone,
I accepted the penalty they gave him, Hamilton took his penalty, and then came back to win.
It was you guys who could not even accept that outcome.
This time around...Crickets
No talk of dangerous driving or nearly injuring Hamilton.
Verstappen didn't even have the decency to check on Hamilton.
No class, at all.
oh well

In that case I guess there is no humble pie to eat for them either then.

You talk about dangerous driving and Max not being concerned about another driver after what Lewis did at Silverstone... with Max having suffering an enormous impact and having to go to hospital for scans and meanwhile Lewis is away celebrating like he'd just won the championship, lording it up and clearly not giving a flying duck? Thats rich.. and double standards.

[denkimi]

a 3 place drop seems harsh considered they gave lewis only a meaningless 5 seconds for sending max into the wall.

but hey, at least the season will stay exciting this way.

[denkimi]

If the Stewards decision is gospel and default proof of right and wrong, I didn't see you eating any humble pie when the Stewards penalised Lewis at Silverstone. Just sayin..


Anyway.. its interesting that we seem to have a new set of unwritten rules. Getting alongside to just behind the front wheels is no longer deemed to be enough anymore....and thats fair enough but they have set a new precedent now which they really have to abide by going forward.

don't bother with him. you can't expect sane comments from religious people.

[Fortitude]

FORMULA 1 HEINEKEN GRAN PREMIO D’ITALIA 2021 - RACE RESULT
10 12 Sep 2021 Autodromo Nazionale Monza, Monza

https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2021/races/1076/italy/race-result.html


'Deep down I never lost faith or belief' says Ricciardo after taking first win since 2018
12 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.deep-down-i-never-lost-faith-or-belief-says-ricciardo-after-taking-first-win.14fmweIUAMzIpcubxgoJiQ.html


Verstappen says Hamilton ‘ran me out of road’ in pair’s spectacular Italian Grand Prix coming together
12 September 2021

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.verstappen-says-hamilton-ran-me-out-of-road-in-pairs-spectacular-italian.598fVA8CjvDA53ULRnFAIm.html


Verstappen handed three-place grid drop for Sochi after crash with Hamilton at Monza
12 September 2021

Max Verstappen has been handed a three-place grid penalty for the Russian Grand Prix after the stewards judged he was to blame for causing a collision with Lewis Hamilton at Monza.
As Hamilton exited the pits after his first stop, Verstappen was running down the main straight – having lost a lot of ground because of a slow pit stop – and they were side by side heading down to the first corner.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.breaking-verstappen-handed-three-place-grid-drop-for-sochi-after-crash-with.1DxVWlOKHcI6R086WzbvWI.html


Horner: Verstappen entitled to more room in 'racing incident'
Today, ‎16‎:‎45
Red Bull's Christian Horner was reluctant to blame either Lewis Hamilton or Max Verstappen for their race-ending clash, but felt that his driver was entitled to more room on track.

https://racingnews365.com/horner-verstappen-entitled-to-more-space-in-racing-incident


Formula 1
Verstappen: Hamilton ‘kept on squeezing and squeezing’
By Edd Straw and Scott Mitchell

Max Verstappen says he had nowhere to go in his battle with Lewis Hamilton in the first chicane during Formula 1’s Italian Grand Prix, saying that the Mercedes driver “kept on squeezing me”.
The resulting collision put both drivers out of the race, with the stewards summoning both drivers for a post-race investigation.
Verstappen felt that Hamilton needed to leave him space mid-chicane as they battled after the Mercedes driver emerged from the pits.
He argued that he was left with no option but to hit the sausage kerb, which resulted in his Red Bull then hitting the Mercedes and both drivers retiring.

https://the-race.com/formula-1/hamilton-kept-on-squeezing-and-squeezing-verstappen/


12 Sep 2021
Hamilton 'squeezed me to left' says Verstappen after Monza collision
After an eventful Italian Grand Prix, Red Bull's Max Verstappen looks back on a day when nearly everything went "wrong", including his spectacular crash with championship rival Lewis Hamilton.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/video.hamilton-squeezed-me-to-left-says-verstappen-after-monza-collision.1710709886264659516.html


Max: Hamilton ‘ran me out of road’ in Monza crash
Date published: September 12 2021 - Jamie Woodhouse

https://www.planetf1.com/news/max-verstappen-italy-crash-thoughts/


Verstappen: Hamilton left me with 'nowhere to go'
Today, ‎16‎:‎20
0 comments
The Red Bull driver feels that Lewis Hamilton "kept on squeezing" him, which led to their incident at the Italian Grand Prix.

https://racingnews365.com/verstappen-hamilton-left-me-with-nowhere-to-go

[The Black Knight]

a 3 place drop seems harsh considered they gave lewis only a meaningless 5 seconds for sending max into the wall.

but hey, at least the season will stay exciting this way.

They gave Lewis 10 seconds in Silverstone iirc.

[denkimi]

They gave Lewis 10 seconds in Silverstone iirc.

excuse me then, you are right.

[F1nKS]

a 3 place drop seems harsh considered they gave lewis only a meaningless 5 seconds for sending max into the wall.

but hey, at least the season will stay exciting this way.

RBR probably use the next race to take their engine penalty anyway.

In the end, Hamilton and Mercedes have to feel like this is one that got away from them. They obviously were the fastest car, but screwed up sprint qualifying and had they not screwed up Lewis pit stop they would have been well ahead of Max and probably win the race.

The racing gods are playing games.

[F1nKS]

a 3 place drop seems harsh considered they gave lewis only a meaningless 5 seconds for sending max into the wall.

but hey, at least the season will stay exciting this way.

So Masi basically said that had Max been able to continue, they would have given him a time penalty, but instead they have to give him a grid place penalty



As both drivers retired from today’s race, Verstappen had to be given a penalty for a subsequent round, as Formula 1 race director Michael Masi explained.

“If they had continued, it would have been a time penalty in the race,” said Masi. “However, they didn’t.

How in the world can the stewards see a 10 second penalty being the equivalent to a 3 place grid drop?

FIA has some of the stupidest rules and logic.

Red flag - free tire changes and replace any parts you need to. From what I can tell, the Red Flag rules historically were only used for extreme weather, or really bad crashes where they might need to change tires for safety - now they give out red flags like M & M's.

That is why Gasly won last year - he hadn't pitted and got lucky with a red flag and got a free tire change - not due to his driving prowess. Otherwise he would have been just tooling around in the mid-field.

Rain - lets call driving around the track a couple times behind a car with flashing light a "RACE".

Penalties - a bunch of illogical mumbo jumbo sprinkled in with first lap "unwritten rules".

So lets look at the 3 latest crashes. Hamilton, Bottas and Verstappen were found guilty.

Hamilton was found guilty of ruining a race and is given a 10 second penalty that meant nothing as it still allowed him to win the race.

Bottas found guilty of taking out 3, including at least one power plant which will meant 20 place penalty. Get a 5 place grid penalty.

Verstappen takes out Hamilton who probably would have won the race, 3 place grid penalty.

If you are going to find these guys "guilty" then you have to impose penalty that fits the crime, or all the whining needs to shut up. Because all the FIA is enabling.

[The Black Knight]

So Masi basically said that had Max been able to continue, they would have given him a time penalty, but instead they have to give him a grid place penalty




How in the world can the stewards see a 10 second penalty being the equivalent to a 3 place grid drop?

FIA has some of the stupidest rules and logic.

Red flag - free tire changes and replace any parts you need to. From what I can tell, the Red Flag rules historically were only used for extreme weather, or really bad crashes where they might need to change tires for safety - now they give out red flags like M & M's.

That is why Gasly won last year - he hadn't pitted and got lucky with a red flag and got a free tire change - not due to his driving prowess. Otherwise he would have been just tooling around in the mid-field.

Rain - lets call driving around the track a couple times behind a car with flashing light a "RACE".

Penalties - a bunch of illogical mumbo jumbo sprinkled in with first lap "unwritten rules".

So lets look at the 3 latest crashes. Hamilton, Bottas and Verstappen were found guilty.

Hamilton was found guilty of ruining a race and is given a 10 second penalty that meant nothing as it still allowed him to win the race.

Bottas found guilty of taking out 3, including at least one power plant which will meant 20 place penalty. Get a 5 place grid penalty.

Verstappen takes out Hamilton who probably would have won the race, 3 place grid penalty.

If you are going to find these guys "guilty" then you have to impose penalty that fits the crime, or all the whining needs to shut up. Because all the FIA is enabling.

It was agreed with the teams before the season began that should a situation like today arise where a drive deemed at fault for a crash not be able to continue that a grid penalty would be applied at the next race. Much like the budget cap you can't simply go changing the rules afterwards because you find yourself in a situation that doesn't suit you.

[truefan72]

It was agreed with the teams before the season began that should a situation like today arise where a drive deemed at fault for a crash not be able to continue that a grid penalty would be applied at the next race. Much like the budget cap you can't simply go changing the rules afterwards because you find yourself in a situation that doesn't suit you.

furthermore a 10 sec penalty in race, is far worse than a 3 place grid slot. TBH
At worst, verstappen will start in p5/6 as opposed to dropping back much further with an in-race 10second penalty.
A big difference.
If I am being honest, a fair penalty would be to start the next race and get a 10 second penalty at his first pit stop

[The Black Knight]

furthermore a 10 sec penalty in race, is far worse than a 3 place grid slot. TBH
At worst, verstappen will start in p5/6 probably as opposed to dropping back much further with an in-race 10second penalty.
A big difference.
If I am being honest, a fair penalty would be to start the next race and get a 10 second penalty at his first pit stop

I think the penalty should have been a little harsher simply because Max has form for this kind of thing and doesn't seem to be learning but it's good something has been done.

Lewis is lucky to be alive today. Halo saved his life thankfully. I think it was pretty classless of Max the way he just walked past Lewis. I mean, his car just went over the guys head, your first action after something like that should be to see if he is okay, F1 is secondary to someone being alive. It's not like Silverstone where Lewis was told Max was okay and didn't know he was in hospital.

[truefan72]

I think the penalty should have been a little harsher simply because Max has form for this kind of thing and doesn't seem to be learning but it's good something has been done.

Lewis is lucky to be alive today. Halo saved his life thankfully. I think it was pretty classless of Max the way he just walked past Lewis. I mean, his car just went over the guys head, your first action after something like that should be to see if he is okay, F1 is secondary to someone being alive. It's not like Silverstone where Lewis was told Max was okay and didn't know he was in hospital.

That really bothered me.
A complete lack of empathy whatsoever.
He caused the collision, his car was on top of the other, he actually revved the engine as you can clearly see the back wheels spinning up, then got out and walked away without a single bit of attention or concern towards Hamilton. classless guy.

[Average Sim Racer]

Lewis was the slower car coming from the pit lane squeezing the faster car into a kerb barrier that sends cars into the air. The FIA need to look at track limits and why Lewis thought it was ok to not give more room to let two cars take the corner.

[F1nKS]

If I am being honest, a fair penalty would be to start the next race and get a 10 second penalty at his first pit stop

That would be consistent and fair.

[Average Sim Racer]

It's a completely different incident. If Max squeezed Lewis into a kerb that sent his car into the air then I don't think Lewis gets a penalty.

[truefan72]

Lewis was the slower car coming from the pit lane squeezing the faster car into a kerb barrier that sends cars into the air. The FIA need to look at track limits and why Lewis thought it was ok to not give more room to let two cars take the corner.

you serious?
lmao

[Average Sim Racer]

you serious?
lmao

No. I think sausage kerbs are okay and strict track limits don't ruin the sport or cause more harm at all. I also think Lewis only gets penalised because he is black and he is all about equality which is why he doesn't pay any tax in the United Kingdom.

[N. Jones]

No clue who was a fault there but the FIA sure does know. Either way it's going to make Russia another interesting race.

[Warriwa]

Well done Ricco!!!
I have never seen Max back out of a corner.
Ever.

[denkimi]

Lewis is lucky to be alive today. Halo saved his life thankfully. I think it was pretty classless of Max the way he just walked past Lewis. I mean, his car just went over the guys head, your first action after something like that should be to see if he is okay, F1 is secondary to someone being alive. It's not like Silverstone where Lewis was told Max was okay and didn't know he was in hospital.
shall we mention how lewis tried to drive off while verstappen was getting out of the car? and again when verstappen was walking behind him?

they were both classless shitheads here.

[airshifter]

Ahh... I knew the internet would be alive with finger pointing as soon as I watched the collision. Opinions all turn into facts, trusted sources from previous incidents are discarded for the next, and everyone is the expert. It never disappoints. :D



But first....

Except for the collision, this was an overall great race for Monza. Though passing was tough, it could be done.

Danny Ric got an absolute blazer of a start, caught Max out, and made it stick through the turn. And it continued to stick, with chasing at the lead being difficult for all the cars. He didn't put a foot wrong the entire race, and found himself on the top of the podium once again.

Lando did much the same, though he did lose the one position for a period of time. Once he was back up front, he did everything he could to fight off Hamilton, and made it work.

Well done to McLaren... even without the collision a great race for them, and when the frontrunners take each other out, they inherit the top two steps of the podium. It's been a while since we've seen a "Shoey", and they all shared in it. It's been a long time coming for them and they deserve it. One of the best podium celebrations in quite a while really.


Bottas drove a blazer of a race. He came through the pack much quicker than I expected, and made it look easy. Naturally it got much tougher once with the frontrunners, but overall he was a solid performer. The hard tires for the Mercs didn't really work the way I thought they might, but overall they still had great pace and made them work.

Perez had a decent race, but the off track pass was obviously a lasting advantage, and in the end he couldn't make enough time up to make the penalty go away. This is what I dislike about the FIA and stewarding decisions. To me, that was an instance where within seconds they should have made him give the position back. When a driver gains an advantage, it also disadvantages all drivers behind, and really the compensation of a time penalty isn't always even close to fair. Had Bottas been in front, he might have had a shot at Lando at some point. As it turned out likely not, but either way it does no favors to the car behind and being held up.

Good showing by the Reds as well. McLaren were just a step ahead today, but the Ferrari was still at least in the hunt. Leclerc got a bit lucky at the end with the red flag stop, but they both raced well. Russell had the red flag stop and ended up with that car in a position it can't really race to, but it was there when it mattered. As for Stroll.... a quiet race and did well. The Alpines rounded out the top 10 and showed strengths and ability once again.

Poor Seb seemed to get bounced around like a ping pong ball. He didn't catch a break the entire race it seemed.



As for the collision, I'm still not quite sure what to think of the move or the decision. Max did dive in really late, but really almost all great passes involve diving in late by out braking someone. Once they both turned in on turn one, Max really didn't have the option to go straight across any more, as he would have just bounced the sausage curbs at a slightly different angle and still bounced into Lewis, unless Lewis completely backed out. As it was, once both turned it, the Lewis squeeze (which he was entitled to do) made the back tire of the RB bounce up just enough to meet the Merc tire and ride over.

Even the stewards decision states that Lewis could have "steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident" but didn't have to due to track position being reasonable. So they are essentially saying that if you "own" the racing line, you can not avoid the collision and allow it to happen, yet not be just as much at fault. It's confusing really. Had Lewis been that far alongside at Silverstone and they hit like that when Max turned in, no telling how far both of them might have launched. When all four wheels can contact it's almost always a sure thing that both cars will take a hard hit in some form, and that's what ended up happening. When they actually collided Max was well alongside, only about a half a wheel short of Hamilton.

I'll also say that without the sausage curbs, moves like this happened all the time, and the usual outcome was that the car on the inside of turn two could back out after the dive, and they both drove away. When the curbs are set up like that within track limits areas, they should either be full length and follow the contour of the track, or they shouldn't exist.

I don't think the penalty was harsh, but at the same time I don't want a rule that says you can't make a late move. Late moves are what makes racing great. If they want to enforce it they way they have been, they may as well paint a line and state that whoever crosses that point of line first owns the corner, and won't be at fault. Both of them scrubbed enough speed off to avoid the collision in the way it happened, but neither gave an inch. I think Max would have been even more likely to cause a major collision if he had turned left over the curbs sooner, it's just that the collision would have happened slightly differently.


As for any of it being intentional, I think it's just silly. As for respect and checking on the other driver, neither of them took the high road. Max knew full well that Lewis was at in decent shape, as he was trying to back out as Max exited the RB. Probably not the smartest thing for either driver. Had Lewis shut off the car and not done that, I would have expected Max to walk up the Merc and make sure he could get out at least. As it was, neither really showed much concern for the other in my opinion, as it was clear both were moving just fine.




Bagwan's conspiracy corner is going to have a tough time with this one.... :laugh:

[Fortitude]

'Hamilton tried forcing Verstappen to cut the corner in vain', says Alonso
12-09-2021 22:16 | Updated: 12-09-2021 22:37
by GPblog.com

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/93985/hamilton-tried-forcing-verstappen-to-cut-the-corner-in-vain-says-alonso.html


Hamilton reacts to Verstappen's grid penalty: 'Proud of the stewards'
12-09-2021 18:29 | Updated: 12-09-2021 19:24
by GPblog.com

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/93962/hamilton-reacts-to-verstappen-s-grid-penalty-proud-of-the-stewards.html


Internet reacts to Verstappen's punishment: "BS in my opinion"
12-09-2021 18:28 | Updated: 12-09-2021 19:24
by GPblog.com

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/93959/internet-reacts-to-verstappen-s-punishment-bs-in-my-opinion.html

[Fortitude]

Martin Brundle: “Max hasn’t done anything wrong there. It is fair enough to go around the outside. Lewis can’t cross over until the white line finishes… …and Max’s car hit the rollover hoop of Lewis’s car, that is where the damage has come from!”


Verstappen & Hamilton Clash at Turn 2 | 2021 Italian Grand Prix
Sep 12, 2021
FORMULA 1

Title rivals come together once again! Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton clash at Turn 2, causing a double retirement and for a safety car to be deployed. Thankfully, both drivers walked away unharmed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VSwwZYDW94

[Nitrodaze]

Here we go again.

[Nitrodaze]

It was a bloody ess double corners. Anybody in their right mind would know there was no way they would be able to overtake through there especially coming from behind. That accident was 100% Verstappen's fault and very dangerous. It was a very stupid attempt at overtaking.

When a driver has a poor judgement of an imminent crash occurring then he has become dangerous to every driver on the grid. I think people can attempt to excuse this very stupid sort of driving. But a fatality is very much on the cards this season due to this kind of reckless determination we are seeing with Verstappen. To put everything on the line is to invite a moment when it would be the ultimate sacrifice.

Horner is an idiot. Verstappen or someone else would get killed at this rate.

[Nitrodaze]

Well the stewards agreed with my assessment and Verstappen has been given a 3 place grid drop at the next GP and 2 penalty points/

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021%20Italian%20Grand%20Prix%20-%20Offence%20-%20Car%2033%20-%20Causing%20a%20collision.pdf
Here is the ruling:

"Fact - Collision with car 44 in turn 2.

Offence - Breach of Article 2 (d) Chapter IV Appendix L of the FIA International Sporting Code.

Decision - 3 Grid Place Drop at the driver’s next event.
(2 penalty points imposed, total of 2 points in the 12 month period)

Reason - The Stewards heard from the driver of car 33 (Max Verstappen), the driver of car 44 (Lewis Hamilton) and team representatives, reviewed the video evidence and determined that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the collision with Car 44 at Turn 2.

Car 44 was exiting the pits. Car 33 was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, Car 44 was significantly ahead of Car 33. Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside Car 44, although at no point in the sequence does Car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of Car 44. During the hearing the driver of Car 33 asserted that the cause of the incident was the driver of Car 44 opening the steering after Turn 1 and “squeezing” him to the apex of turn 2. The driver of Car 44 asserted that the driver of Car 33 attempted to pass very late and should have given up the corner either by backing off sooner, or by turning left behind the kerb.

The Stewards observed on CCTV footage that the driver of Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have “the right to racing room”. While Car 44 could have steered further from the kerb to avoid the incident, the Stewards determined that his position was reasonable and therefore find that the driver of Car 33 was predominantly to blame for the incident.

In coming to the penalty the Stewards emphasise that they have only considered the incident itself and not the consequences thereof.

The Stewards Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits"

I wonder if Brundel will now eat humble pie and admit he was wrong and if DiResta will do the same.
This is a well deserved penalty and a culmination of all the bully driving that Max has engineered.
This time he nearly injured a fellow competitor because he doesn't care or is unwilling to compromise with anyone on the track.

I guarantee the Anti-Hamilton brigade would not agree with this very clear verdict of obvious bad judgement by Verstappen. The fellow is trying too hard to try to beat Hamilton. What we are seeing here is ugly.

The poor pitstops for both set up this crash. I don't think there is anyone on the current grid who has won races with three teams; Redbull, Renault and Mclaren. What a racer Ricciardo is. Except Alonso of course; Renault, Mclaren and Ferrari

[Average Sim Racer]

I don't have to be anti-Hamilton to point out that he used to smash into Massa for fun and Albon etc.

[denkimi]

Besides the usual hamilton fanboys, i have only seen people call it a racing incident.

[Nitrodaze]

Besides the usual hamilton fanboys, i have only seen people call it a racing incident.

Ha ha ha LOL

You are so predictable

[Nitrodaze]

I don't have to be anti-Hamilton to point out that he used to smash into Massa for fun and Albon etc.

We can say similar things for Verstappen and any driver on the grid. Try to say something original.

[Nitrodaze]

furthermore a 10 sec penalty in race, is far worse than a 3 place grid slot. TBH
At worst, verstappen will start in p5/6 as opposed to dropping back much further with an in-race 10second penalty.
A big difference.
If I am being honest, a fair penalty would be to start the next race and get a 10 second penalty at his first pit stop

Unfortunately, time penalty is only applied during the race. With the 3 places drop, Verstappen can recover to a podium position or even win the race depending on the conditions. Regardless, that is the only applicable penalty for this occasion.

[Nitrodaze]

Anyway.. its interesting that we seem to have a new set of unwritten rules. Getting alongside to just behind the front wheels is no longer deemed to be enough anymore....and thats fair enough but they have set a new precedent now which they really have to abide by going forward.

The problem here is Verstappen was trying force open a gap in a tight corner. Any other driver would realize that it was not possible to overtake there and try a better line to attack on the next corner. It surprises me when you guys defend stupidity. That was a crash or give way move. It was daft but calculated to prevent Hamilton from winning the race if he was not going to win it himself.

[pantealex]

i don't think there is anyone on the current grid who has won races with three teams; redbull, renault and mclaren. What a racer ricciardo is. Except alonso of course; renault, mclaren and ferrari

kimi

[Nitrodaze]

kimi

YES of course Mclaren, Lotus and Ferrari

[Nitrodaze]

I watched the incident again and it is quite clear that it was fortuitous that the halo was introduced before Verstappen joined the F1 grid. This incident would have definitely killed Hamilton if it wasn't on the car. There is no doubt about that. Verstappen is a very dangerous driver.

The fact that he did not check if Hamilton was hurt shows he doesn't really care what happens to the other driver either. Ruthless and callous, a very bad combination

[Average Sim Racer]

We can say similar things for Verstappen and any driver on the grid. Try to say something original.

That's the point. You are making him out to be the worst driver on the grid. Pringles.

[denkimi]

Ha ha ha LOL

You are so predictable
I'm wondering why i keep trying to have a decent discussion with fanboys like you.

Its always ends up the same, a waste of time because they are stuck in their religious loop of blaming everybody else for everything.

[denkimi]

That's the point. You are making him out to be the worst driver on the grid. Pringles.
No point in arguing with fanboys like him. Unfortunately not all such morrons stick with football to express their blind hate.

[Nitrodaze]

No point in arguing with fanboys like him. Unfortunately not all such morrons stick with football to express their blind hate.

There is no hate in my posts buddy. You on the other hand are quite entertaining with your responses.

I call it as l see it regardless of the driver. I cannot say that for you .

[Nitrodaze]

That's the point. You are making him out to be the worst driver on the grid. Pringles.

No that is not the point you were making. You were attacking the victim of the crash. There is hard racing and there is sheer recklessness. And what we saw on sunday at the Italian grandprix was reckless by Verstappen. And you have to be very biased not to see it as it was.

[Nitrodaze]

Ok let's talk seriously about this crash. I honestly think it was a racing incident. But the incident was avoidable with a little commonsense. A majority of drivers during the race have yielded to the car ahead to get through that corner safely. Verstappen is fully entitled to challenge Hamilton going into the corner. The main reason why Verstappen is blamed for the crash was his error of judgement in not knowing when to back down and fight at the next corner. Everyone else including Hamilton took to the escape path around the sausage kerb in corners when the space available to the attacking car approaching corners have become unrealistic. Hence, why the stewards indicated that Verstappen was predominantly to blame for the crash. The wording is no different to how they saw the Silverstone crash. Thus, there is some consistency here.

The problem with this crash was that it was potentially fatal. Which has escalated the risk factor of the championship battle. It has reached a point now where the FIA, F1M and both teams fighting for the championship need to objectively look at the situation and dial down the level of risk reached so far.

[Average Sim Racer]

No that is not the point you were making. You were attacking the victim of the crash. There is hard racing and there is sheer recklessness. And what we saw on sunday at the Italian grandprix was reckless by Verstappen. And you have to be very biased not to see it as it was.

I don't take kindly to being lied about or victim-shaming.

The recklessness from Verstappen is no worse than the recklessness from Hamilton, especially at a similar age. That was the point. That was not denying recklessness. I'm not prepared to argue. My position is clear as is my conscience.

I feel it is a racing incident given the stewards' previous rulings and track limits and two drivers unwilling to compromise and both being reckless. I would have to be biased from previous poor decisions to want to penalise an over-taking driver.

I already stated in my opinion it is a different kettle of fish to blame an over-taking driver with momentum for being squeezed into a sausage kerb by a slower car with new tyres coming from the pit lane. The car coming from the pits has to be extra careful in that situation as they are the one re-joining the race track and causing the obstacle at a tight corner with a hazard off-track.

I feel no differently to this than the racing incident of Bottas and Russell in which again Russell was blamed as the over-taking driver despite Bottas being slower and purposefully discarding his line in poor conditions and forcing Russell dangerously off track with a careless blocking move to the right under breaking.

My genuine position is the car in front has more responsibility to leave space at tight over-taking corners and the FIA are not caring about protecting the line of the over-taking driver.

If you are arguing that it is reckless to over-take when there is no clear and obvious gap then Hamilton ought to have been black flagged and had grid places dropped for Silverstone, with Mercedes paying for the damages to Red Bull's car.

In this incident Mercedes have a point to raise with the FIA about sausage kerbs ruining their car unfairly and endangering their driver.

If you argue Max has a responsibility to not go over the sausage kerb then in my opinion you also have to argue Lewis has a responsibility to respect the sausage kerb as a dangerous track limit for Max.

Lewis has had decisions in the past at Monza, for example when Leclerc pushed him off track and got a warning, but the difference is it wasn't in the wet or with sausage kerbs so it wasn't as reckless as when the Mercedes cars have done it recently.

Again, I am not denying the recklessness or victim shaming. I am recognising the scale of danger in context. Bottas and Lewis deserved warnings, perhaps more for being reckless in defensive situations where there was even more danger off-track than what Leclerc did.

[Nitrodaze]

My genuine position is the car in front has more responsibility to leave space at tight over-taking corners and the FIA are not caring about protecting the line of the over-taking driver.

If you are arguing that it is reckless to over-take when there is no clear and obvious gap then Hamilton ought to have been black flagged and had grid places dropped for Silverstone, with Mercedes paying for the damages to Red Bull's car.

In this incident Mercedes have a point to raise with the FIA about sausage kerbs ruining their car unfairly and endangering their driver.

If you argue Max has a responsibility to not go over the sausage kerb then in my opinion you also have to argue Lewis has a responsibility to respect the sausage kerb as a dangerous track limit for Max.

Lewis has had decisions in the past at Monza, for example when Leclerc pushed him off track and got a warning, but the difference is it wasn't in the wet or with sausage kerbs so it wasn't as reckless as when the Mercedes cars have done it recently.

Again, I am not denying the recklessness or victim shaming. I am recognising the scale of danger in context. Bottas and Lewis deserved warnings, perhaps more for being reckless in defensive situations where there was even more danger off-track than what Leclerc did.

Your problem is you have double standards. When Verstappen did it at the start of the race it was fine with you. When the favour was returned you proclaim more room should have been given. You are as confused as you are pretentious of holding a genuine opinion on the matter. All you have is a biased opinion that is blind to one side and accusative to the other regardless of the actuality of the situation. You lack objectivity, hence you can only talk rubbish on the matter.

Why the hell should the car in front give more room to a car well behind. For a start that is not racing. That is not what Mercedes or any team pay their drivers to do. It actually is the obligation of the car behind to know when an overtaking manoeuvre is untenable and use their better judgement to avoid causing a crash.

And no, you have completely misjudged the scale of this incident relative to the incidents that you have quoted. You have the luxury to make those statements because there was no fatality. The Redbull car could be clearly seen to have knocked Hamiltons head forward and downwards. It was situation that could have resulted in a broken neck if the security devices on that car had not done their job.

My beef with your post is the insensitivity to the potential fatality that we are lucky was averted.

[F1nKS]

No point in arguing with fanboys like him. Unfortunately not all such morrons stick with football to express their blind hate.

Jolyn Palmer actually has an excellent analysis of the incidents. He shows a clip of Giovanazzi pulling the almost same move as Verstappen. The difference was Leclerc ended up giving Giovanazzi a little extra room, where Hamilton did the opposite and squeezed Verstappen.

Leclerc still ended up in front of Giovanazzi even though he gave room, and Hamilton probably would have been in front of Max also. But I think we are seeing how desperate Hamilton and when he is under pressure he makes mistakes and bad judgments.

[Average Sim Racer]

Your problem is you have double standards. When Verstappen did it at the start of the race it was fine with you. When the favour was returned you proclaim more room should have been given. You are as confused as you are pretentious of holding a genuine opinion on the matter. All you have is a biased opinion that is blind to one side and accusative to the other regardless of the actuality of the situation. You lack objectivity, hence you can only talk rubbish on the matter.

Why the hell should the car in front give more room to a car well behind. For a start that is not racing. That is not what Mercedes or any team pay their drivers to do. It actually is the obligation of the car behind to know when an overtaking manoeuvre is untenable and use their better judgement to avoid causing a crash.

And no, you have completely misjudged the scale of this incident relative to the incidents that you have quoted. You have the luxury to make those statements because there was no fatality. The Redbull car could be clearly seen to have knocked Hamiltons head forward and downwards. It was situation that could have resulted in a broken neck if the security devices on that car had not done their job.

My beef with your post is the insensitivity to the potential fatality that we are lucky was averted.

I don't think I have double standards and I don't think it is my problem. You're insensitive to the fact it was the sausage kerb that caused the near-fatality. If you want to blame Max for going over it instead of taking an escape road then fair enough, but I seriously don't think he intended to be airborne with his back wheels flying into Lewis. He intended to make the corner legally and had no room.

And I'm fine with you ruling that the car behind should be the one always to blame because then it means that Lewis was to blame for the Leclerc incident at Monza and Lewis was to blame for the Silverstone incident. My position was that Lewis wasn't to blame for the incident with Leclerc at Monza and the FIA set a dangerous ruling that has escalated out of hand.

I don't feel halos saved Lewis. I feel sausage kerbs endangered him. As they have done many drivers. I would say the same if it was Lewis airborne over Max. I don't think it is reasonable or appropriate to suggest that his recklessness is the only significant factor. Racing is highly dangerous for many reasons. Half of it is due to most of the drivers racing unsafely, and half of it is due to the FIA not recognising cars bouncing in the air and bouncing back in common situations due to their track limit enforcements is negligent.

[denkimi]

Jolyn Palmer actually has an excellent analysis of the incidents. He shows a clip of Giovanazzi pulling the almost same move as Verstappen. The difference was Leclerc ended up giving Giovanazzi a little extra room, where Hamilton did the opposite and squeezed Verstappen.

Leclerc still ended up in front of Giovanazzi even though he gave room, and Hamilton probably would have been in front of Max also. But I think we are seeing how desperate Hamilton and when he is under pressure he makes mistakes and bad judgments.
I'm not sure.

Normally going around the outside there should not work because you compromise your exit speed too much and lose out at the straight.

But hamilton had just left the pits so his tyres were still cold, which would also comprise his exit speed.

So perhaps verstappen actually could have made it stick in the end. Perhaps not. But i understand why lewis didn't want to try it out and decided to push him off.

[Nitrodaze]

Jolyn Palmer actually has an excellent analysis of the incidents. He shows a clip of Giovanazzi pulling the almost same move as Verstappen. The difference was Leclerc ended up giving Giovanazzi a little extra room, where Hamilton did the opposite and squeezed Verstappen.

Leclerc still ended up in front of Giovanazzi even though he gave room, and Hamilton probably would have been in front of Max also. But I think we are seeing how desperate Hamilton and when he is under pressure he makes mistakes and bad judgments.

I would not argue with your perspective it is a reasonable one. But you are missing the point. That move by Hamilton was payback for Verstappen doing exactly the same thing to him earlier in the race. When Verstappen squeezed Hamilton, Hamilton had the good sense to abort and take the escape route around the sausage kerb. When Hamilton squeezed Verstappen, he did not have the good sense to take the escape route, hence the crash.

It was a tit for tat situation. Hamilton had no obligation to give any room. Verstappen got a taste of his own medicine and he simply showed he is still quite immature as a racer.

[Nitrodaze]

I don't think I have double standards and I don't think it is my problem. You're insensitive to the fact it was the sausage kerb that caused the near-fatality. If you want to blame Max for going over it instead of taking an escape road then fair enough, but I seriously don't think he intended to be airborne with his back wheels flying into Lewis. He intended to make the corner legally and had no room.

And I'm fine with you ruling that the car behind should be the one always to blame because then it means that Lewis was to blame for the Leclerc incident at Monza and Lewis was to blame for the Silverstone incident. My position was that Lewis wasn't to blame for the incident with Leclerc at Monza and the FIA set a dangerous ruling that has escalated out of hand.

I don't feel halos saved Lewis. I feel sausage kerbs endangered him. As they have done many drivers. I would say the same if it was Lewis airborne over Max. I don't think it is reasonable or appropriate to suggest that his recklessness is the only significant factor. Racing is highly dangerous for many reasons. Half of it is due to most of the drivers racing unsafely, and half of it is due to the FIA not recognising cars bouncing in the air and bouncing back in common situations due to their track limit enforcements is negligent.

Now you are showing naivety. The point was the sausage kerb should have been avoided in the first place as a crash was inevitable otherwise.

[Average Sim Racer]

Now you are showing naivety. The point was the sausage kerb should have been avoided in the first place as a crash was inevitable otherwise.

I think he avoids the sausage kerb if Hamilton doesn't force him into it. You can see from Hamilton's steering input that he squeezes unnaturally with multiple shifts of the steering wheel.

[F1nKS]

I would not argue with your perspective it is a reasonable one. But you are missing the point. That move by Hamilton was payback for Verstappen doing exactly the same thing to him earlier in the race. When Verstappen squeezed Hamilton, Hamilton had to good sense to abort and take the escape route around the sausage kerb. When Hamilton squeezed Verstappen, he did not have the good sense to take the escape route, hence the crash.

It was a tit for tat situation. Hamilton had no obligation to give any room. Verstappen got a taste of his own medicine and he simply showed he is still quite immature as a racer.

If that was Hamilton's mindset, then it actually demonstrates his lack of maturity and even an even darker side to him. And if this was a tit for tat, then we can assume the the GB grandprix was too - and that was the race where somebody could have been killed, not in the Monza low-speed corner.

I personally don't think Hamilton was serving "payback", it was just a racing incident that actually very common in that corner in Monza. Hamilton was flustered probably with his pit stop and to find him coming out right among Norris and Verstappen - another Mercedes strategy failure.

Then you had Max who was feeling the "red mist" from his own team pit mistake. He sees Hamilton coming out of the pit, knows he's on cold tires thus this he knows he has a chance to beat him through the corner so he goes all in. It is a remarkable probability problem.

Milli-seconds earlier or later, a foot here or foot there this probably not a thing. It is amazing how all the events and decisions that came together to bring these two together at this corner.

From most of all the people (in the profession of discussing f1) that I watch or talk about F1 seem to agree this was a "racing incident" and if you have to apportion blame then Max was a little more at fault than Hamilton but Hamilton's hands are not clean.

[Nitrodaze]

I think he avoids the sausage kerb if Hamilton doesn't force him into it. You can see from Hamilton's steering input that he squeezes unnaturally with multiple shifts of the steering wheel.

I think if he was not trying to force a space to open up for him, he should know that Hamilton was going to squeeze him and he should have taken the escape route in order not to damage the car. But Verstappen did not mind the car been damaged or that a crash would occur. It was within Hamilton's right to close the door on Verstappen. To suggest that he had to give space is ridiculous. He did not as Verstappen did not have to give space when he squeezed Hamilton off the track at the beginning of the race.

I would like to know how much Redbull has paid to fix damages resulting from crashes alone this season. I am sure it is the highest in the paddock.

I think Hamilton is still being very gentle. He is not driving at the level of aggression that he was when he was duelling with Rosberg. As a result, Verstappen is taking liberties. And he has now escalated it to the point where the FIA and F1M need to be particularly concerned. Because the next step is Hamilton is going to escalate his racing to match what Verstappen has just done and probably more. And the next time, Verstappen would be experiencing a similar situation. Only he might get killed in the process.

[Nitrodaze]

If that was Hamilton's mindset, then it actually demonstrates his lack of maturity and even an even darker side to him. And if this was a tit for tat, then we can assume the the GB grandprix was too - and that was the race where somebody could have been killed, not in the Monza low-speed corner.

I personally don't think Hamilton was serving "payback", it was just a racing incident that actually very common in that corner in Monza. Hamilton was flustered probably with his pit stop and to find him coming out right among Norris and Verstappen - another Mercedes strategy failure.

Then you had Max who was feeling the "red mist" from his own team pit mistake. He sees Hamilton coming out of the pit, knows he's on cold tires thus this he knows he has a chance to beat him through the corner so he goes all in. It is a remarkable probability problem.

Milli-seconds earlier or later, a foot here or foot there this probably not a thing. It is amazing how all the events and decisions that came together to bring these two together at this corner.

From most of all the people (in the profession of discussing f1) that I watch or talk about F1 seem to agree this was a "racing incident" and if you have to apportion blame then Max was a little more at fault than Hamilton but Hamilton's hands are not clean.

I agree it was a racing incident. No racing is clean per se. But the onus lies with the attacker to not cause a collision. Because that is where his racecraft is expressed; to attack and overtake cleanly. It is not ok if the attacker crashes into the defender who is perfectly entitled to defend.

And to say it is immature to give Verstappen a taste of his own bad driving is ridiculous. This is the only way to convey his feelings about how Verstappen is being reckless.

[truefan72]

It is funny how those referencing Palmer only focus on the Gio bit. Not verstappen essentially shoving off Massa a couple of seasons prior, which was practically identical to what he attempted on Sunday. Mind you in that same race, he tried to pass Massa foolishly again at retofilo and got a puncture for that attempt. Despite his bullish driving and moaning, the stewards deemed it a racing incident. It shows that the guy never learns and is still reckless and a danger to others. Still crickets on his lack of sportsmanship towards checking on Hamilton. I cant even imagine the vitriol if the situation was reverse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nitrodaze]

It is funny how those referencing Palmer only ficus on the Gio bit. Not verstappen essentially shoving off Massa a couple of seasons prior, which was practically identical to what he attempted on Sunday. Mind you in that same race, he tried to pass Massa foolishly again at retofilo and got a puncture for that attempt. Despite his bullish driving and moaning the stewards deemed it a racing incident. It shows that the guy never learns and is still reckless and a danger to others. Still crickets on his lack of sportsmanship towards checking on Hamilton. I cant even imagine the vitriol if the situation was reverse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ha ha , tell me about it. The Anti-Hamilton brigade would be up in arms with all manner of castigations.

[F1nKS]

I agree it was a racing incident. No racing is clean per se. But the onus lies with the attacker to not cause a collision. Because that is where his racecraft is expressed; to attack and overtake cleanly. It is not ok if the attacker crashes into the defender who is perfectly entitled to defend.

Hence Hamilton getting a penalty in GB and Verstappen getting the penality in Monza.



And to say it is mature to give Verstappen a taste of his own bad driving is immature is ridiculous. This is the only way to convey his feelings about how Verstappen is being reckless.

Mature driver would have had the long game in mind - Hamilton whether Verstappen came out of the corner in front or not, was going to be ahead of him at the end of the race. So in the end, not a bad result for Verstappen to be shown "feelings", when it clear he was in the 3rd best car this weekend.

[Average Sim Racer]

I think if he was not trying to force a space to open up for him, he should know that Hamilton was going to squeeze him and he should have taken the escape route in order not to damage the car. But Verstappen did not mind the car been damaged or that a crash would occur. It was within Hamilton's right to close the door on Verstappen. To suggest that he had to give space is ridiculous. He did not as Verstappen did not have to give space when he squeezed Hamilton off the track at the beginning of the race.

I would like to know how much Redbull has paid to fix damages resulting from crashes alone this season. I am sure it is the highest in the paddock.

I think Hamilton is still being very gentle. He is not driving at the level of aggression that he was when he was duelling with Rosberg. As a result, Verstappen is taking liberties. And he has now escalated it to the point where the FIA and F1M need to be particularly concerned. Because the next step is Hamilton is going to escalate his racing to match what Verstappen has just done and probably more. And the next time, Verstappen would be experiencing a similar situation. Only he might get killed in the process.

Well, there is no doubt the squeezing is a problem for both parties. I empathise with when Lewis got squeezed by Leclerc at Monza and I feel it was reckless of the FIA not to penalise it more, as the F1 drivers have taken liberties in terms of thinking squeezing is okay, Verstappen included.

I genuinely feel other drivers give other drivers room at that situation which just happened between Lewis and Max. I feel if Lewis lets Max avoid the sausage kerb, then if Max pushes Lewis off track, it is Max's fault and he should be penalised.

I get that Lewis probably feels Max won't be penalised enough if he does give more room but the problem is he squeezed Max way too late and didn't even have the speed at the first apex to be the dominant car owning the line into the second apex.

If he squeezes Max early then I feel Max goes down the escape road or tries an outside line at the second apex.

I genuinely don't feel Max intends to damage his car over a sausage kerb or run into another car to the point of damaging them both. More to the point, his past experience may have informed him that the move was okay there with a bit of the sausage kerb.

But yeah, maybe Verstappen and co. ought to have been penalised more for contact in the past.

This contact was entirely kerb related because he had no room. If the kerb is lower or spits him out differently there is no crazy contact.

[Nitrodaze]

Well, there is no doubt the squeezing is a problem for both parties. I empathise with when Lewis got squeezed by Leclerc at Monza and I feel it was reckless of the FIA not to penalise it more, as the F1 drivers have taken liberties in terms of thinking squeezing is okay, Verstappen included.

I genuinely feel other drivers give other drivers room at that situation which just happened between Lewis and Max. I feel if Lewis lets Max avoid the sausage kerb, then if Max pushes Lewis off track, it is Max's fault and he should be penalised.

I get that Lewis probably feels Max won't be penalised enough if he does give more room but the problem is he squeezed Max way too late and didn't even have the speed at the first apex to be the dominant car owning the line into the second apex.

If he squeezes Max early then I feel Max goes down the escape road or tries an outside line at the second apex.

I genuinely don't feel Max intends to damage his car over a sausage kerb or run into another car to the point of damaging them both. More to the point, his past experience may have informed him that the move was okay there with a bit of the sausage kerb.

But yeah, maybe Verstappen and co. ought to have been penalised more for contact in the past.

This contact was entirely kerb related because he had no room. If the kerb is lower or spits him out differently there is no crazy contact.

Hamilton took the racing line through the corner, Verstappen saw and knew that. To give room would be to yield the racing line to Verstappen. That is not how to go racing. So stop dicking around.

[Nitrodaze]

Hence Hamilton getting a penalty in GB and Verstappen getting the penality in Monza.



Mature driver would have had the long game in mind - Hamilton whether Verstappen came out of the corner in front or not, was going to be ahead of him at the end of the race. So in the end, not a bad result for Verstappen to be shown "feelings", when it clear he was in the 3rd best car this weekend.

You have a knack of talking rubbish. What long game. He had to do just what he did,. It was up to Verstappen to take the long view or crash.

[The Black Knight]

Does anyone here think Verstappen would have attempted that crash were it Norris coming out of the pits?

From ESPNF1:

Again, we may never know, but it's interesting to pose the question of whether Verstappen would have made the same move against any driver other than Hamilton. There's no doubt that by committing to Turn 2 without having his car ahead, Verstappen was risking a collision.

A collision with another driver at that corner -- Ricciardo in the opening stint of the race, for example -- would have been disastrous for his title chances as it would have taken him out of the race and given Hamilton a free run at victory. But against Hamilton, the same move either takes them both out, resulting in zero sum game, or, if Hamilton makes space, gives him a slight chance of holding the position.

The answer is no he wouldn't. This is why Toto probably wasn't far off when he called it a tactical foul. He gets the move done, Max wins. He doesn't get the move done he takes them both out. Max also wins in this situation. It was a win win situation for Max and since he was most likely to take the engine penalty in Sochi anyway, which will negate the 3 place grid drop, then Max has net gained from this incident.

I think there needs to be F1 rule changes where if you have a grid drop and choose to negate it with a engine penalty that the penalty moves to the race afterwards. As it stands now he got a pretty much irrelevant 2 penalty points on his license and kept the championship lead. It's a big win for Max either way.

[Nitrodaze]

Does anyone here think Verstappen would have attempted that crash were it Norris coming out of the pits?

From ESPNF1:


The answer is no he wouldn't. This is why Toto probably wasn't far off when he called it a tactical foul. He gets the move done, Max wins. He doesn't get the move done he takes them both out. Max also wins in this situation. It was a win win situation for Max and since he was most likely to take the engine penalty in Sochi anyway, which will negate the 3 place grid drop, then Max has net gained from this incident.

I think there needs to be F1 rule changes where if you have a grid drop and choose to negate it with a engine penalty that the penalty moves to the race afterwards. As it stands now he got a pretty much irrelevant 2 penalty points on his license and kept the championship lead. It's a big win for Max either way.

Of course not. He would damage the car with no upside to benefit from.

[Firstgear]

Does anyone here think Verstappen would have attempted that crash were it Norris coming out of the pits?

hahaha...I like how you phrase the question. "attempted that crash"
Yes, his attempt was quite successful.

[truefan72]

Does anyone here think Verstappen would have attempted that crash were it Norris coming out of the pits?

From ESPNF1:


The answer is no he wouldn't. This is why Toto probably wasn't far off when he called it a tactical foul. He gets the move done, Max wins. He doesn't get the move done he takes them both out. Max also wins in this situation. It was a win win situation for Max and since he was most likely to take the engine penalty in Sochi anyway, which will negate the 3 place grid drop, then Max has net gained from this incident.

I think there needs to be F1 rule changes where if you have a grid drop and choose to negate it with a engine penalty that the penalty moves to the race afterwards. As it stands now he got a pretty much irrelevant 2 penalty points on his license and kept the championship lead. It's a big win for Max either way.


Of course not. He would damage the car with no upside to benefit from.

That's why I would advocate for a 10 second in race penalty at the next race instead of a 3 place grid drop.
A racing incident should merit an in-race penalty.
I would have applied that to Bottas and Stroll as well for the Hungary incident. In fact I would have made it a 10 sec stop and go for both of them.

[The Black Knight]

That's why I would advocate for a 10 second in race penalty at the next race instead of a 3 place grid drop.
A racing incident should merit an in-race penalty.
I would have applied that to Bottas and Stroll as well for the Hungary incident. In fact I would have made it a 10 sec stop and go for both of them.

I think the penalty needs to be taken in a way there is no advantage, another option may be that should a new engine be applied and the driver have a penalty that penalty automatically becomes a 10 second stop go at the end of lap one. That should deter teams from attempting to bypass the penalty.

[Firstgear]

I just had a thought about this incident. It's hypothetical, and maybe a bit silly, but here goes:

Moments after the crash, Hamilton puts it in reverse and spins his tires trying to get out from underneath the RB and out of the gravel. I assume the engine revving brought the temps up, resulting in the team telling him to turn off the engine.

What if, instead of putting it in reverse, he had just waited calmly for a minute or two (or 5) until Max's car had been removed? Could he have gotten out of the gravel on his own without the weight of the RB on his car? Would the engine temps stayed low enough for him to wait that long? Would he have been allowed to rejoin, and perhaps un-lap himself behind the safety car?

[F1nKS]

You have a knack of talking rubbish. What long game. He had to do just what he did,. It was up to Verstappen to take the long view or crash.

You are the king of false takes and "rubbish". You have your fan-boy head so far stuck up Hamilton gluteus maximus, nobody can have a rationale conversation with you in this chat room. All you are is the monkey who throws his poop. You never add anything of substance.

Max is ahead, as long as Hamilton doesn't finish the race, that is a win. If he could damage Hamilton's gearbox and engine - that would be another win.

[The Black Knight]

I just had a thought about this incident. It's hypothetical, and maybe a bit silly, but here goes:

Moments after the crash, Hamilton puts it in reverse and spins his tires trying to get out from underneath the RB and out of the gravel. I assume the engine revving brought the temps up, resulting in the team telling him to turn off the engine.

What if, instead of putting it in reverse, he had just waited calmly for a minute or two (or 5) until Max's car had been removed? Could he have gotten out of the gravel on his own without the weight of the RB on his car? Would the engine temps stayed low enough for him to wait that long? Would he have been allowed to rejoin, and perhaps un-lap himself behind the safety car?

His rear wing was broken so I don't think continuing was a possibility regardless

[Average Sim Racer]

There were also a lot of other bits hanging off his car, so even if the team felt they could continue with rear wing damage, the FIA would have eventually called it too dangerous to be driving around there.

I'm not anti-Lewis, but to be blatantly honest, his attempt to show the FIA and the world, "this is what happens if you race hard against me and don't enforce instant penalties", actually just shows to me that he can't race hard without causing more damage than the other drivers. He needs someone like Lauda around to point it out to him. Also, although I am not anti-Lewis, I am anti-Hamfosi, so no point engaging with me as I am a naive retard and unwilling to attend.

[The Black Knight]

There were also a lot of other bits hanging off his car, so even if the team felt they could continue with rear wing damage, the FIA would have eventually called it too dangerous to be driving around there.

I'm not anti-Lewis, but to be blatantly honest, his attempt to show the FIA and the world, "this is what happens if you race hard against me and don't enforce instant penalties", actually just shows to me that he can't race hard without causing more damage than the other drivers. He needs someone like Lauda around to point it out to him. Also, although I am not anti-Lewis, I am anti-Hamfosi, so no point engaging with me as I am a naive retard and unwilling to attend.

If Max had shown he was willing to give Lewis room throughout the season like he should have in Imola and not nearly blown him off the track as in Spain I am pretty sure we'd have not had Silverstone or Monza incidents. Lewis has given Max plenty of room on many occasions so they could race hard, Max has never given Lewis any. I don't see why Lewis should give an inch to Max moving forward until such time as Max affords him the same respect he has afforded Max.

Lewis has been racing for years without coming together with rivals. The only difference here is that Max believes only he should be left room and he should never give room.

The best thing that could happen to Max this year would be for him to lose the championship because of these crashes. It would be a hard lesson but one he needs to be taught.

And actually I don't want Lewis to win the championship because I don't want anyone to beat Schumacher's 7 titles however for Max's long term career I think a title loss over these incidents would be good for him.

[Firstgear]

Also, although I am not anti-Lewis, I am anti-Hamfosi, so no point engaging with me as I am a naive retard and unwilling to attend.
You're not the first to bang heads with Nitro when it comes to Lewis. He's actually quite reasonable, except when it comes To Lewis. Then he loses all objectivity.

[Firstgear]

And actually I don't want Lewis to win the championship because I don't want anyone to beat Schumacher's 7 titles....
And that's one reason I'd like Lewis to win another. So that he beats Schummel's record.

[truefan72]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/red-bull-slow-monza-pit-stop-resulted-from-fia-clampdown/6669249/

Red Bull: Slow Monza pitstop resulted from FIA clampdown

you gotta love Horner's complete inability to take any personal responsibilty for anything.
This is laughable.

[Average Sim Racer]

If Max had shown he was willing to give Lewis room throughout the season like he should have in Imola and not nearly blown him off the track as in Spain I am pretty sure we'd have not had Silverstone or Monza incidents. Lewis has given Max plenty of room on many occasions so they could race hard, Max has never given Lewis any. I don't see why Lewis should give an inch to Max moving forward until such time as Max affords him the same respect he has afforded Max.

Lewis has been racing for years without coming together with rivals. The only difference here is that Max believes only he should be left room and he should never give room.

The best thing that could happen to Max this year would be for him to lose the championship because of these crashes. It would be a hard lesson but one he needs to be taught.

And actually I don't want Lewis to win the championship because I don't want anyone to beat Schumacher's 7 titles however for Max's long term career I think a title loss over these incidents would be good for him.

Perhaps there is a point to analysing Max's behaviour on track and his previous issues in terms of racing hard vs. causing damages. But my point is more that I don't think Lewis achieved anything by taking Max out at Silverstone or at Monza. What I mean by that is, even if Mercedes are behind this year, the way a previous champion ought to drive is different to a challenger learning. Lewis could be back in 7th in the Championship and it still doesn't make sense for him, in my humble opinion, to keep taking Max out in order to protect himself. It has the opposing blowback. If Schumi did to Hill what Lewis did to Max at Silverstone, he would have had a black flag, and a race ban, and grid places. And the Hill fans would have seen it as right and fair and just and sporting and all those good things the British stand for.

For example, whether Lewis finished 1st or 2nd this year, I would still recognise his achievement in the slower car at times. But I am less likely to if he races worse than Max to get back at him. Although, that said, I do feel Mercedes and Lewis were hampered a bit by the FIA when they were on top and following the rules and not making mistakes. Not this season though. If Mercedes are no longer on top, they are increasing their version of no longer following the rules, and making more desperate mistakes.

[Average Sim Racer]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/red-bull-slow-monza-pit-stop-resulted-from-fia-clampdown/6669249/

Red Bull: Slow Monza pitstop resulted from FIA clampdown

you gotta love Horner's complete inability to take any personal responsibilty for anything.
This is laughable.

They have imposed new rules in regards to things such as cost caps and mechanical damages and grid penalties and pit stops and he is speaking out about what he feels is unfair for all teams. The headlines come from a reporter questioning him on it. It looks bad PR but in reality I do feel that he ultimately has more spatial awareness and intelligence in certain areas than the entire FIA combined and their committees keep ruling that he loses even if he follows their own procedures.

Also, I was thinking about this the other day, although it is a bit conspiratorial. How easy would it be for Mercedes to pay a Red Bull mechanic to forget a new button imposed by the FIA half way through the season and vice versa... or how easy would it be for a third party to interfere with its functioning.

[Zico]

They have imposed new rules in regards to things such as cost caps and mechanical damages and grid penalties and pit stops and he is speaking out about what he feels is unfair for all teams. The headlines come from a reporter questioning him on it. It looks bad PR but in reality I do feel that he ultimately has more spatial awareness and intelligence in certain areas than the entire FIA combined and their committees keep ruling that he loses even if he follows their own procedures.

Also, I was thinking about this the other day, although it is a bit conspiratorial. How easy would it be for Mercedes to pay a Red Bull mechanic to forget a new button imposed by the FIA half way through the season and vice versa... or how easy would it be for a third party to interfere with its functioning.

You are sounding a bit like Bagwan dude... with your conspiracy theory... except he wouldn't agree with you as he reckons Merc are just sandbagging for effect and will still go on to take both titles... hey he could well be right, there is a microscopic possibilty of that being the case, I just don't see it as being very likely... or yours, no offence.

I don't think any team member in their right mind could be bought by a rival team and I dont think any team would try it because if rumbled/grassed on, the financial implications of being booted out of the championship for a year and multi million dollar fine... as well as having the cheat label destroy the brand... just makes it non financially viable. Nor could I see Merc trying to pull a stunt like that tbh.

[Average Sim Racer]

You are sounding a bit like Bagwan dude... with your conspiracy theory... except he wouldn't agree with you as he reckons Merc are just sandbagging for effect and will still go on to take both titles... hey he could well be right, there is a microscopic possibilty of that being the case, I just don't see it as being very likely... or yours, no offence.

I don't think any team member in their right mind could be bought by a rival team and I dont think any team would try it because if rumbled/grassed on, the financial implications of being booted out of the championship for a year and multi million dollar fine... as well as having the cheat label destroy the brand... just makes it non financially viable. Nor could I see Merc trying to pull a stunt like that tbh.

I don't think it is likely either. Hence, I feel what Horner explained was the truth and the headline twisted it. But not for the reasons you listed as there have been many weird in team cheating attempts that never made sense if they were caught and penalised to the full extent.

[Bagwan]

You are sounding a bit like Bagwan dude... with your conspiracy theory... except he wouldn't agree with you as he reckons Merc are just sandbagging for effect and will still go on to take both titles... hey he could well be right, there is a microscopic possibilty of that being the case, I just don't see it as being very likely... or yours, no offence.

I don't think any team member in their right mind could be bought by a rival team and I dont think any team would try it because if rumbled/grassed on, the financial implications of being booted out of the championship for a year and multi million dollar fine... as well as having the cheat label destroy the brand... just makes it non financially viable. Nor could I see Merc trying to pull a stunt like that tbh.

Sandbagging is not against the rules , but they still wouldn't want to be caught doing it .
If you want to forget a button , it would be easier to ask Lewis to do that magic than to ask someone new .

[Nitrodaze]

I think the penalty needs to be taken in a way there is no advantage, another option may be that should a new engine be applied and the driver have a penalty that penalty automatically becomes a 10 second stop go at the end of lap one. That should deter teams from attempting to bypass the penalty.

This approach makes more sense. The engine change sort of nullifies the penalty and takes control out of the hands of the stewards.

[Nitrodaze]

I just had a thought about this incident. It's hypothetical, and maybe a bit silly, but here goes:

Moments after the crash, Hamilton puts it in reverse and spins his tires trying to get out from underneath the RB and out of the gravel. I assume the engine revving brought the temps up, resulting in the team telling him to turn off the engine.

What if, instead of putting it in reverse, he had just waited calmly for a minute or two (or 5) until Max's car had been removed? Could he have gotten out of the gravel on his own without the weight of the RB on his car? Would the engine temps stayed low enough for him to wait that long? Would he have been allowed to rejoin, and perhaps un-lap himself behind the safety car?

He would have cooked the engine while waiting for the Redbull to be removed. Attempting to reverse out as quickly as possible was the only play available.

[Nitrodaze]

His rear wing was broken so I don't think continuing was a possibility regardless

If he managed to get out, he could have limped to the pits and have the car fixed and maybe salvaged the situation with a point or two.

[Nitrodaze]

You're not the first to bang heads with Nitro when it comes to Lewis. He's actually quite reasonable, except when it comes To Lewis. Then he loses all objectivity.

What are you saying? Are you saying Verstappen is right to crash into Hamilton. Because that is what we are talking about. Do you think he could have avoided that crash but was a good idea to crash into Hamilton? Was it ok that he nearly killed Hamilton?

If you remove Hamilton from the picture and say it was another driver in the car fighting him for the championship, would your answers not be the same?

If your answers to these questions are yes, then you are the one with a problem; an Anti-Hamilton problem. As my views would be the same regardless of the driver in the Mercedes.

[Nitrodaze]

They have imposed new rules in regards to things such as cost caps and mechanical damages and grid penalties and pit stops and he is speaking out about what he feels is unfair for all teams. The headlines come from a reporter questioning him on it. It looks bad PR but in reality I do feel that he ultimately has more spatial awareness and intelligence in certain areas than the entire FIA combined and their committees keep ruling that he loses even if he follows their own procedures.

Also, I was thinking about this the other day, although it is a bit conspiratorial. How easy would it be for Mercedes to pay a Red Bull mechanic to forget a new button imposed by the FIA half way through the season and vice versa... or how easy would it be for a third party to interfere with its functioning.

Dear lord, you never cease to surprise me with your posts.

[Nitrodaze]

I don't think it is likely either. Hence, I feel what Horner explained was the truth and the headline twisted it. But not for the reasons you listed as there have been many weird in team cheating attempts that never made sense if they were caught and penalised to the full extent.

Horner cannot see the truth if it smacked him in the face. The crash bills are beginning to hurt Redbull and as usual, he points an angry finger at the FIA and F1M. It is ridiculous to even suggest that Mercedes was responsible in some way for the poor pitstop of Redbull. It is offensive to Mercedes to make such a suggestion. I think you should think carefully before you post.

[The Black Knight]

If he managed to get out, he could have limped to the pits and have the car fixed and maybe salvaged the situation with a point or two.

I doubt it, not for a rear wing, they take too long to change nowadays.

Anyone know the actual time it takes to change a rear wing these days? I haven't seen a team do it in race for a very long time.

[Bagwan]

He would have cooked the engine while waiting for the Redbull to be removed. Attempting to reverse out as quickly as possible was the only play available.

These cars can be restarted with the power in the batteries .

[Zico]

Even if his car wasn't beached or damaged... By the time the crane would have lifted Max's car off Lewis it would likely have been far too late to get back into the race to achieve any worthwhile result.

[Bagwan]

Even if his car wasn't beached or damaged... By the time the crane would have lifted Max's car off Lewis it would likely have been far too late to get back into the race to achieve any worthwhile result.

But , It would have been heroic , eh ?

[Nitrodaze]

These cars can be restarted with the power in the batteries .

Assuming he can restart it after such a shunt.

[Nitrodaze]

I doubt it, not for a rear wing, they take too long to change nowadays.

Anyone know the actual time it takes to change a rear wing these days? I haven't seen a team do it in race for a very long time.

I agree, it would have been a long shot at best.

[Zico]

But , It would have been heroic , eh ?

Well, I'd certainly have been impressed with his presence of mind to have read and processed the whole situation so well to have opted to wait .. but...if he then came back to win I'd also 100% be doffing my hat to your Merc sandbagging conspiracy theory.

Tbh, I think I'd have just being rolling on the floor laughing at the huge psychological blow just experienced by Max... and how that was going to impact future races. Viewing figures would be going through the roof. :D

[Nitrodaze]

Interesting development

Redbull's Horner thinks Hamilton who was the victim of the Monza crash where he had to used his head to prop the Redbull as it bounced over the Mercedes should have been penalized with the same penalty that the stewards issued to Verstappen for his part in the crash. I did not hear him advocate that at Silverstone.

How about that?

[Zico]

Interesting development

Redbull's Horner thinks Hamilton who was the victim of the Monza crash where he had to used his head to prop the Redbull as it bounced over the Mercedes should have been penalized with the same penalty that the stewards issued to Verstappen for his part in the crash. I did not hear him advocate that at Silverstone.

How about that?

What about that?

Are you suggesting that because the wheel drove over his head, that should be a key point on whether he deserves a punishment or not?

How is that even relevant?

[The Black Knight]

I think what need to be put into perspective here is that Verstappens crash into Hamilton in Monza was actually a lot more dangerous than the incident between the two in Silverstone. Verstappen went in sideways into the barrier, this is the best possible angle one can crash at. Even 20 years ago Verstappen would have come out of that crash with little more than a scratch and I remember Michael Schumacher having a very similar incident in Copse at around the same speed in one of the free practice sessions many years ago and he went onto race the next day.

On the other hand, had the Monza crash occurred 4 seasons ago, it is almost certain it would have been fatal for Hamilton, or at the very best he would have ended up crippled for the remainder of his life.

I agree however that this is not relevant to the punishment but I think people seem to think just because it's 51G it's more critical, but that's not the case.

[Nitrodaze]

What about that?

Are you suggesting that because the wheel drove over his head, that should be a key point on whether he deserves a punishment or not?

How is that even relevant?

Make your point!

[Zico]

Make your point!

I already did.. and tbh I couldnt really make it any clearer for you than I already have... BK understood it perfectly.

Stop stalling.

[airshifter]

Even if damage to the Merc was minimal, I seriously doubt that anyone would hook up a strap to the RB without Lewis out of the car. Any bad swing of the car on top could send it the drivers direction. Unless he couldn't get out, they would likely just get the top car stable and get the driver out.

And once the driver is out of the car, I can't think of any time where cars were untangled and then a driver got back in and drove off. I'm fairly certain that once the driver is out, they are going to be calling it a day.




As far as accident danger.... back at Silverstone people argued that it shouldn't matter and risk to the drivers was only showing emotional response. How quickly things change when the roles of who might be at danger are reversed.

[Fortitude]

Martin Brundle: “Max hasn’t done anything wrong there. It is fair enough to go around the outside. Lewis can’t cross over until the white line finishes… …and Max’s car hit the rollover hoop of Lewis’s car, that is where the damage has come from!”


Verstappen & Hamilton Clash at Turn 2 | 2021 Italian Grand Prix
Sep 12, 2021
FORMULA 1

Title rivals come together once again! Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton clash at Turn 2, causing a double retirement and for a safety car to be deployed. Thankfully, both drivers walked away unharmed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VSwwZYDW94


Red Bull chief accuses Lewis Hamilton of faking injury after Max Verstappen crash
Hamilton said he has suffered headaches and 'a tight neck' as a result of the incident at Monza, but Red Bull advisor Helmut Marko described it as a 'show'
By Daniel MoxonSports Trends Writer
09:47, 16 Sep 2021
Updated09:48, 16 Sep 2021

Seven-time F1 world champion Lewis Hamilton has sensationally been accused by a top Red Bull employee of faking injuries sustained in the crash he had with title rival Max Verstappen.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/formula-1/lewis-hamilton-fake-injury-helmut-24997077


Red Bull Boss Slams Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes for Faking His Injuries After Italian GP Crash
Pawan Atri

World champion Lewis Hamilton of Mercedes and Red Bull's Max Verstappen were involved in a collision during last weekend's Italian Grand Prix at Monza. The British driver was rushed to the hospital almost immediately as the crash left him seriously injured.

https://sputniknews.com/20210916/red-bull-boss-slams-lewis-hamilton-and-mercedes-for-faking-his-injuries-after-italian-gp-crash-1089101442.html


Ex-Bridgestone man questions ‘bias with certain stewards’
Date published: September 17 2021 - Michelle Foster

The stewards declared Verstappen was “predominantly” to blame for Sunday’s crash.

However, former Bridgestone F1 tyre man Van de Grint disagrees, saying both drivers could have done something to avoid a collision.
“If we have to describe the crash, I think it’s a racing incident,” he said in RTL GP’s Slipstream podcast.

“What you can expect, what we predicted months ago. These two didn’t give anything.

“Max could have used the escape road, Hamilton could have left a bit more space. Neither wanted to. Each had their reason for that too.”

https://www.planetf1.com/news/certain-stewards-bias-max-verstappen/


'Clear I'm in his head!' Max Verstappen fumed at Lewis Hamilton's 'silly comment'
By Charlie Bradley
15:29, Sat, Sep 18, 2021 | UPDATED: 15:29, Sat, Sep 18, 2021

Max Verstappen is putting up a big challenge to seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton this season, and the two drivers have clashed on the track on multiple occasions. Just last weekend, at the Italian Grand Prix in Monza, Verstappen and Hamilton came together at the first chicane of the famous track, leading to both drivers retiring from the race. Red Bull has continued the war of words this week as they defend their Dutch driver, who received a three-place grid penalty for the next race in Russia. Red Bull chief Helmut Marko has accused Hamilton of putting on a “show”.

He said: “It was a normal racing accident, all the stories around it were pulled by Mercedes,” Marko told Sport24 Auto. “Verstappen had already got off when Hamilton tried to get out of the gravel trap with the return. The medical car saw this and drove on.

“And then a show is pulled off that poor Hamilton is suddenly injured, et cetera.”

Other drivers have also offered their view on the incident – Ferrari's Carlos Sainz has said it is "pretty clear" who was at fault but has refused to disclose who he would pin the blame on.

He added: “They are fighting for a championship. You’re more exposed to these kinds of incidents [in that scenario] like we’ve seen in the past.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1493171/max-verstappen-news-lewis-hamilton-comment-monza-crash-red-bull-formula-one-spt


Ralf Schumacher hits out at Hamilton dramatising
SEPTEMBER 21, 2021

Lewis Hamilton and Mercedes were "too dramatising" in the wake of the seven time world champion's scary incident with title rival Max Verstappen at Monza.

That is the view of former F1 driver Ralf Schumacher, who nonetheless agrees that Hamilton is a "colourful" driver who "gives Formula 1 a lot".
However, Schumacher thinks the 36-year-old went over the top by suggesting he was actually injured as a result of Verstappen's Red Bull climbing over his roll-over hoop at Monza.

"I think Lewis was too dramatising of it, considering that he flew to New York the next day to attend an event," he told Sport1, referring to Hamilton's appearance on the red carpet at the Met Gala.

Schumacher also hit out at Mercedes boss Toto Wolff for always rejecting any critique of Hamilton.

"If there is any criticism at all, Toto comes right out and says 'That's not how you talk about a seven-time world champion'," Schumacher noted.

https://www.grandprix.com/news/ralf-schumacher-hits-out-at-hamilton-dramatising.html

https://grandpx.news/schumacher-hits-out-at-hamilton-dramatising/


Alonso: Verstappen is the best driver in F1 right now
Paul Velasco
20 September, 2021

Fernando Alonso believes that Max Verstappen is the best driver in Formula 1 because Red Bull have built the team around their young star, and thus hard to beat according to the Spaniad.

https://www.grandprix247.com/2021/09/20/alonso-says-verstappen-is-the-best-driver-in-f1-right-now/

[denkimi]

I think what need to be put into perspective here is that Verstappens crash into Hamilton in Monza was actually a lot more dangerous than the incident between the two in Silverstone. Verstappen went in sideways into the barrier, this is the best possible angle one can crash at. Even 20 years ago Verstappen would have come out of that crash with little more than a scratch and I remember Michael Schumacher having a very similar incident in Copse at around the same speed in one of the free practice sessions many years ago and he went onto race the next day.

On the other hand, had the Monza crash occurred 4 seasons ago, it is almost certain it would have been fatal for Hamilton, or at the very best he would have ended up crippled for the remainder of his life.

I agree however that this is not relevant to the punishment but I think people seem to think just because it's 51G it's more critical, but that's not the case.
It depens on what you consider dangerous.

The accident itself in monza was not dangerous at all, just wheels banging at low speed. But due to the curb trowing the car in the air the outcome was unexpectedly dangerous. In pretty much al other cases this would have been a completely forgettable moment.
Nobody could foresee that anything so dangerous was going to happen there.

But in silverstone, at those speeds, it was always going to be dangerous. Any 300 km/h crash is a big risk, even when in hindsight nobody got seriously hurt.

That's why these punishments are just not correct. Doing a stupid attempt at overtaking in a slow chicane is not comparable to doing a stupid attempt at overtaking in the fastest corner of the race.

[Zico]

Make your point!

Still waiting on you to answer my question, its a yes or no answer.

[Nitrodaze]

It depens on what you consider dangerous.

The accident itself in monza was not dangerous at all, just wheels banging at low speed. But due to the curb trowing the car in the air the outcome was unexpectedly dangerous. In pretty much al other cases this would have been a completely forgettable moment.
Nobody could foresee that anything so dangerous was going to happen there.

But in silverstone, at those speeds, it was always going to be dangerous. Any 300 km/h crash is a big risk, even when in hindsight nobody got seriously hurt.

That's why these punishments are just not correct. Doing a stupid attempt at overtaking in a slow chicane is not comparable to doing a stupid attempt at overtaking in the fastest corner of the race.

I suppose, you need someone to die first before you acknowledge that it was dangerous. Knowing you, you would say the opposite if it was the Redcbull of Verstappen under the Mercedes of Hamilton. In this scenario, you can also imagine Horner spewing his heart out at how dangerous Hamilton was and why he should be banned from racing altogether for causing a crash and dumping his race car on Verstappen's head. Since the whiner lacks any sense of morality or a modicum of a sense of fairness, we have him asking for Hamilton to be penalized for being a victim in the crash.

[Nitrodaze]

Still waiting on you to answer my question, its a yes or no answer.

You made a loaded statement, you mean more than you let on.

[Fortitude]

Daniel Ricciardo DEFENDS Max Verstappen for his role in crash with Lewis Hamilton at Monza by claiming Dutchman 'wouldn't have turned his back' if he knew his title rival was injured
• Daniel Ricciardo has defended Max Verstappen's actions after his Monza crash
• Verstappen's car mounted Lewis Hamilton's after colliding at the Italian GP
• Dutchman appeared to turn his back on Hamilton and walk back to the paddock
• Hamilton suffered a neck injury as a result but was saved by the car's 'halo'
• Ricciardo believes Verstappen didn't realise that Hamilton was injured
By Sam Mcevoy For Mailonline
Published: 13:43, 22 September 2021 | Updated: 15:39, 22 September 2021

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/formulaone/article-10016837/Daniel-Ricciardo-DEFENDS-Max-Verstappen-role-crash-Lewis-Hamilton-Monza.html


Marko hits out at Hamilton’s ‘funny outfit’
SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

Red Bull’s Dr Helmut Marko has hit out again at Lewis Hamilton, following reports the seven time world champion suffered a neck injury as a result of his Monza clash with Max Verstappen.
Marko has already called out Hamilton and Mercedes’ “stories” about the injuries, adding that the 36-year-old Briton and his team put on a “show” in the aftermath.
Former F1 driver Ralf Schumacher sided with Marko, accusing Hamilton of “dramatising” the incident.
“The whole incident was certainly not life-threatening,” Dr Marko told the German broadcaster n-tv.
“If he had really serious neck pain or any problems, he would not have been in New York the next day in the very funny outfit he appeared in,” the 78-year-old Austrian added.
“If you go on a seven-hour flight with an injured neck after an incident like that, it couldn’t have been all that serious,” said Marko.

https://grandpx.news/marko-hits-out-at-hamiltons-funny-outfit/


Max Verstappen defended by Daniel Ricciardo for role in Lewis Hamilton crash
Ricciardo emphasised that he does not believe Verstappen would have “turned his back” if he knew Hamilton was injured
Harry Latham-Coyle

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/motor-racing/formula1/max-verstappen-lewis-hamilton-crash-ricciardo-b1924674.html

[Zico]

You made a loaded statement, you mean more than you let on.


Do I? I'm curious as to what you think that might be then seeing as I don't even know what it is myself.

I just found your opinion that if someone gets hurt in an incident then that should play a part in any ruling against them, absurd.

If you don't want to explain or elaborate what you meant for fear of looking a bit daft then thats fine but don't snap at people who question it. You are just bringing even more attention to yourself.

[denkimi]

Do I? I'm curious as to what you think that might be then seeing as I don't even know what it is myself.

I just found your opinion that if someone gets hurt in an incident then that should play a part in any ruling against them, absurd.

If you don't want to explain or elaborate what you meant for fear of looking a bit daft then thats fine but don't snap at people who question it. You are just bringing even more attention to yourself.
I don't think there much use in trying to start a discussion with someone who's opinion on facts solely depends on which drivers are involved.

They call such people fanboys and their perception of reality changes when their god is involved.

[Nitrodaze]

I don't think there much use in trying to start a discussion with someone who's opinion on facts solely depends on which drivers are involved.

They call such people fanboys and their perception of reality changes when their god is involved.

Yeah yeah !!!

[truefan72]

I suppose, you need someone to die first before you acknowledge that it was dangerous. Knowing you, you would say the opposite if it was the Redcbull of Verstappen under the Mercedes of Hamilton. In this scenario, you can also imagine Horner spewing his heart out at how dangerous Hamilton was and why he should be banned from racing altogether for causing a crash and dumping his race car on Verstappen's head. Since the whiner lacks any sense of morality or a modicum of a sense of fairness, we have him asking for Hamilton to be penalized for being a victim in the crash.

Horner is an embarrassment to F1

[F1nKS]

Horner is an embarrassment to F1

That is a little drama queenish. Drive to Survive loves him!

Like it or not - F1 Show. They need/want personalities. Because whether you like it or not - that is where the money is. They want social media presence, drama, personalities, Instagram, driver's girlfriends on youtube, etc. They are eating up the Toto vs. Horner.

Engineering is boring.

[Zico]

I think what need to be put into perspective here is that Verstappens crash into Hamilton in Monza was actually a lot more dangerous than the incident between the two in Silverstone. Verstappen went in sideways into the barrier, this is the best possible angle one can crash at. Even 20 years ago Verstappen would have come out of that crash with little more than a scratch and I remember Michael Schumacher having a very similar incident in Copse at around the same speed in one of the free practice sessions many years ago and he went onto race the next day.

On the other hand, had the Monza crash occurred 4 seasons ago, it is almost certain it would have been fatal for Hamilton, or at the very best he would have ended up crippled for the remainder of his life.

I agree however that this is not relevant to the punishment but I think people seem to think just because it's 51G it's more critical, but that's not the case.

I don't think the actions of either drivers or the speed that it happened at were particularly dangerous in that sense but the somewhat freak landing of Max on top of Lewis certainly was and is a handy reminder that despite my initial misgivings, the Halo is actually a pretty fantastic and effective safety device. I'm just very thankful that both walked away unscathed.

[Zico]

Engineering is boring.

:) Speak for yourself, I'm more into that than the circus show.

[Zico]

I suppose, you need someone to die first before you acknowledge that it was dangerous. Knowing you, you would say the opposite if it was the Redcbull of Verstappen under the Mercedes of Hamilton. In this scenario, you can also imagine Horner spewing his heart out at how dangerous Hamilton was and why he should be banned from racing altogether for causing a crash and dumping his race car on Verstappen's head.

It turned it with the wheel landing on his head it was dangerous, sure... but if you are comparing recklessness and the speed between the two incidents in terms of responsibility its not even close, but despite that, as some sort of warped point scoring exercise between both of them you still feel the need to compare them.
Not only do I find this fanatical and cultish but the fact that you feel the need to use them in that way tells me that you know deep down that the danger aspect of what Lewis did at Silverstone registered deeply within you... that you feel the need to try to diminish it by make a bigger deal about Monza.



Since the whiner lacks any sense of morality or a modicum of a sense of fairness, we have him asking for Hamilton to be penalized for being a victim in the crash.

Did he state that as being his reason?... or are you just whining your usual warped nonsensical pish?
Could it just be that Horner (rightly or wrongly) feels aggrieved, in that his driver got penalised and Lewis did not, when he feels that Lewis was just as much to blame?

[F1nKS]

:) Speak for yourself, I'm more into that than the circus show.

I hear you.

But still, nobody cares about eigenvalues or eigenvectors. They are dear to my heart as a structural dynamics engineer, but they make the average person's eyes glaze over when I talk to people about them.

:rotflmao:

[airshifter]

I suppose, you need someone to die first before you acknowledge that it was dangerous. Knowing you, you would say the opposite if it was the Redcbull of Verstappen under the Mercedes of Hamilton. In this scenario, you can also imagine Horner spewing his heart out at how dangerous Hamilton was and why he should be banned from racing altogether for causing a crash and dumping his race car on Verstappen's head. Since the whiner lacks any sense of morality or a modicum of a sense of fairness, we have him asking for Hamilton to be penalized for being a victim in the crash.


You made a loaded statement, you mean more than you let on.

Have you really become so paranoid that you assume anyone who doesn't share your view has an hidden agenda against your favorite drivers, or have you become so arrogant that you think playing online psychologist suits you well? You seem to make a lot of arguments based on assumptions that you know a poster better than they know themselves, and it comes across as quite childish at best.

If something as simply as a clear yes or no question gets you all paranoid and pompous towards others, you really should rethink your views on posting in a public forum.





That is a little drama queenish. Drive to Survive loves him!

Like it or not - F1 Show. They need/want personalities. Because whether you like it or not - that is where the money is. They want social media presence, drama, personalities, Instagram, driver's girlfriends on youtube, etc. They are eating up the Toto vs. Horner.

Engineering is boring.


:) Speak for yourself, I'm more into that than the circus show.

I could live without all the drama myself. But it has become more and more part of the show. Why? Because some believe all this game playing and crap talking really matters, when really it's been going on for years but not covered as much.

And though I'm not into the minutia to the extent that F1nKS is, I do enjoy the tech side of F1 as much as the racing. The fact that the series exists has led to a lot of automotive innovation in a number of areas. As a test bed the series is just amazing, with a lot of innovation banned not long after introduction. But the fact that it's now out and exists always leaves it there as potential for street cars and/or other series.