Still can’t get over how it’s been like a flick of a switch. Oscar loses form the same week he gets told to give up a place and it lasts all the way through to now when McLaren get picked up for a dodgy car. Thats too blatant for me.Interesting that Zak Brown refuted Oscar’s claim about being asked to support Lando in this race… essentially calling him a liar.His constant utterances of racing “clean” to equally support both drivers is straight out gaslighting and has to piss off Oscar.
And why was Oscar suddenly driving like a demon, head and shoulders better than the rest… it’s like he was in a different car.
Some insidious stuff going on at McLaren.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
F1 2025 Qatar F1 Grand Prix
- Thread starter Nuggs Bunny
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
It's all max. He sets the tone.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Crimson Azure
Moderator
- Moderator
- #380
Haven't watched the race but from what I hear it was another masterclass in incompetence from McLaren.
Yeah i guess, but realistically is there a better option for him out there?
Red Bull: We complain about favoritism now, Piastri on Red Bull would be the current situation on steroids. Max hasnt had a proper competitor as number 2 driver since Ricciardo. Helmut Marko is much worse than Zak Brown. Max would tell Piastri get ****ed every second race
Mercedes: Kimi and George are locked in there, dont see that changing. Think George WDC push comes next year
Ferrari: Pass. Disasterclass
Williams: Maybe.. but I still think they're a ways off consistently challenging for podiums, let alone race wins
Aston: Stroll isnt getting replaced, Alonso could maybe but they havent shown much either. Bit like Williams
Like it or not, he's not getting a better shot at wins or titles anywhere else.
For once it was Karun Chandhok of all the Sky F1 team who had the balls to call it out for what it was - McLaren not splitting the strategy and giving Piastri the call he was entitled to and going in to change tyres as a shocking call that makes zero sense.
"I truly believe today was a prime example where McLaren should have had a one-two.
"They did not split the strategy. That emphasis on trying to keep it equal perhaps, by not bringing both cars in, they have allowed Max to jump ahead.”
As he rightly pointed out - Piastri was the best driver all weekend, qualified on pole and had the best start and was comfortably leading the race when the SC made its entrance. For McLaren not to make the obvious call for Oscar to pit on the SC - as other teams did was simply because they were too afraid to disadvantage Norris who would have had to stay out rather than being double stacked and likely coming back out behind Antonelli.
www.skysports.com
This was a decision based on a foundation of what was best for Norris rather than Piastri and it cost Piastri the race win and the maximum point haul, allowing Verstappen to jump Piastri in the leadership race.
Strangely and totally out of character from the driver's perspective he usually take, Brundle was far too willing to forgive McLaren and their bumbling excuses. Kravitz saying in his post-race notebook segment that he 'doesn't think the McLaren decision will affect the outcome of the championship' is just mind numbingly illogical.
"I truly believe today was a prime example where McLaren should have had a one-two.
"They did not split the strategy. That emphasis on trying to keep it equal perhaps, by not bringing both cars in, they have allowed Max to jump ahead.”
As he rightly pointed out - Piastri was the best driver all weekend, qualified on pole and had the best start and was comfortably leading the race when the SC made its entrance. For McLaren not to make the obvious call for Oscar to pit on the SC - as other teams did was simply because they were too afraid to disadvantage Norris who would have had to stay out rather than being double stacked and likely coming back out behind Antonelli.
Qatar GP: Did McLaren's decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under Safety Car cost him Qatar win? Karun Chandhok analyses at SkyPad
Karun Chandhok is at the SkyPad to analyse whether McLarens decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under the Safety Car on lap seven cost him the win at the Qatar GP.
This was a decision based on a foundation of what was best for Norris rather than Piastri and it cost Piastri the race win and the maximum point haul, allowing Verstappen to jump Piastri in the leadership race.
Strangely and totally out of character from the driver's perspective he usually take, Brundle was far too willing to forgive McLaren and their bumbling excuses. Kravitz saying in his post-race notebook segment that he 'doesn't think the McLaren decision will affect the outcome of the championship' is just mind numbingly illogical.
Last edited:
I must've missed it, did Piastri ask to pit for the SC?
Jatz
Moderator
- Sep 7, 2008
- 62,890
- 47,393
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Philadelphia Eagles
- Moderator
- #385
He'd have to be putting a lot of faith in potential but Aston Martin probably makes as much sense as anywhere with Newey on board and the unlimited cash of Stroll. Not to mention Lance wouldn't be much of a challenge.
It doesn't seem quite as big a gamble as Ricciardo to Renault but it's still a decent gamble.
- May 20, 2017
- 6,043
- 9,905
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Of course it was lap 7 too right?
With tyres being given 25 lap maximums we have a 57 lap race with a safety car on lap 7...
If I didnt know any better Id say it was scripted.
With tyres being given 25 lap maximums we have a 57 lap race with a safety car on lap 7...
If I didnt know any better Id say it was scripted.
Barrybran
Premium Platinum
- Jun 18, 2016
- 59,442
- 112,006
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Perth Scorchers
The Sky post-race crew called it out to Stella's face as wellFor once it was Karun Chandhok of all the Sky F1 team who had the balls to call it out for what it was - McLaren not splitting the strategy and giving Piastri the call he was entitled to and going in to change tyres as a shocking call that makes zero sense.
"I truly believe today was a prime example where McLaren should have had a one-two.
"They did not split the strategy. That emphasis on trying to keep it equal perhaps, by not bringing both cars in, they have allowed Max to jump ahead.”
As he rightly pointed out - Piastri was the best driver all weekend, qualified on pole and had the best start and was comfortably leading the race when the SC made its entrance. For McLaren not to make the obvious call for Oscar to pit on the SC - as other teams did was simply because they were too afraid to disadvantage Norris who would have had to stay out rather than being double stacked and likely coming back out behind Antonelli.
Qatar GP: Did McLaren's decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under Safety Car cost him Qatar win? Karun Chandhok analyses at SkyPad
Karun Chandhok is at the SkyPad to analyse whether McLarens decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under the Safety Car on lap seven cost him the win at the Qatar GP.
This was a decision based on a foundation of what was best for Norris rather than Piastri and it cost Piastri the race win and the maximum point haul, allowing Verstappen to jump Piastri in the leadership race.
Strangely and totally out of character from the driver's perspective he usually take, Brundle was far too willing to forgive McLaren and their bumbling excuses. Kravitz saying in his post-race notebook segment that he 'doesn't think the McLaren decision will affect the outcome of the championship' is just mind numbingly illogical.
The problem McLaren had was if they pitted one driver and not the other, whoever lost would have been crying foul (or conspiracy in this thread), so they would have had to double stack to continue the 'equal treatment', with every other car behind them coming thru the pitlane as well it would have been a high pressure situation for sure. The cars behind them have nothing to lose and everything to gain, whereas McLaren had it all to lose, and lost anyway 
For once it was Karun Chandhok of all the Sky F1 team who had the balls to call it out for what it was - McLaren not splitting the strategy and giving Piastri the call he was entitled to and going in to change tyres as a shocking call that makes zero sense.
"I truly believe today was a prime example where McLaren should have had a one-two.
"They did not split the strategy. That emphasis on trying to keep it equal perhaps, by not bringing both cars in, they have allowed Max to jump ahead.”
As he rightly pointed out - Piastri was the best driver all weekend, qualified on pole and had the best start and was comfortably leading the race when the SC made its entrance. For McLaren not to make the obvious call for Oscar to pit on the SC - as other teams did was simply because they were too afraid to disadvantage Norris who would have had to stay out rather than being double stacked and likely coming back out behind Antonelli.
Qatar GP: Did McLaren's decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under Safety Car cost him Qatar win? Karun Chandhok analyses at SkyPad
Karun Chandhok is at the SkyPad to analyse whether McLarens decision not to pit Oscar Piastri under the Safety Car on lap seven cost him the win at the Qatar GP.
This was a decision based on a foundation of what was best for Norris rather than Piastri and it cost Piastri the race win and the maximum point haul, allowing Verstappen to jump Piastri in the leadership race.
Strangely and totally out of character from the driver's perspective he usually take, Brundle was far too willing to forgive McLaren and their bumbling excuses. Kravitz saying in his post-race notebook segment that he 'doesn't think the McLaren decision will affect the outcome of the championship' is just mind numbingly illogical.
The thing is, when it happens 4-5 times and costs a handful of points each time, it does affect the championship race when he’s only 16 behind going into the last weekend.
They were saying the same shit back when they had to switch places.
By not doing it they’ve ironically tipped the scales because in the past they’ve favoured the lead driver and now the goalposts have changed?The problem McLaren had was if they pitted one driver and not the other, whoever lost would have been crying foul (or conspiracy in this thread), so they would have had to double stack to continue the 'equal treatment', with every other car behind them coming thru the pitlane as well it would have been a high pressure situation for sure. The cars behind them have nothing to lose and everything to gain, whereas McLaren had it all to lose, and lost anyway
Monza was the same, Lando got preferential treatment because he was in front. Why not now?
It really depends if they thought stopping was the best strategy or not. From my experience the team in the lead often makes the error of overvaluing track position just like Lewis in hungary when the entire field pitted and even Abu Dhabi 21 when Lewis just stayed out and stayed out while Max pitted multiple times and Lewis ended up on 44 lap old tyres.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Jul 14, 2022
- 4,223
- 6,726
- AFL Club
- West Coast
It’s not track position if you’re forced to put an extra time though. Can’t be compared to other races.
smasha
It's Time!
Clown Show.
- Mar 20, 2007
- 31,665
- 31,012
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Plus there had been no indication in the previous 6 laps (+the 19 from the sprint) that McLaren had the level of pace to pull a 20 second gap on Max, which is what you would be asking them to do once you left them out, gifting the rest of the grid a free stop.
NSWCROW
Make me an Admin!
****en Barnum and Bailey
Can’t help but feel that penultimate lap mistake by Kimi might be the difference in AD.
Max and the two McLaren’s are clearly the fastest cars so it’s fair to assume the podium next week will be any combination of Max/Oscar/Lando.
However with Lando gaining those two extra points by passing Kimi, Max now needs one of the Mercs or someone else unexpectedly to stand up to have a chance even if he wins the race. If he was 10 points behind and only needed Lando to finish third I would be a lot more confident in him actually pulling this off.
On a side note, who would’ve thought at the start of the year that Carlos losing his Ferrari seat would end up looking like a win by season’s end. Vowles and Williams are clearly cooking up something special. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if they’re back consistently challenging for podiums a year or two into the next regs. Would be awesome to see them back at the top again.
Max and the two McLaren’s are clearly the fastest cars so it’s fair to assume the podium next week will be any combination of Max/Oscar/Lando.
However with Lando gaining those two extra points by passing Kimi, Max now needs one of the Mercs or someone else unexpectedly to stand up to have a chance even if he wins the race. If he was 10 points behind and only needed Lando to finish third I would be a lot more confident in him actually pulling this off.
On a side note, who would’ve thought at the start of the year that Carlos losing his Ferrari seat would end up looking like a win by season’s end. Vowles and Williams are clearly cooking up something special. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if they’re back consistently challenging for podiums a year or two into the next regs. Would be awesome to see them back at the top again.
Brilliantly said.
McLaren gave up the (extremely likely) Piastri win to avoid harming Norris.
Piastri - as the lead driver - should have had pit priority the same as they have done all season.
However, if Oscar pitted, then Lando either:
Pits - forced to double-stack, loses 2-3 seconds and likely drops to 5th or later on track.
Stays Out - Loses 10-12s of track time with the later pit.
'Papaya Rules' hurts Oscar (yet) again. They're like the evil genie that gives you 'exactly' what you ask for.
