2021 Formula One Season

Remove this Banner Ad

jabba5114

Club Legend
Jan 23, 2014
2,283
1,441
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Not being a fan of either driver but i do think its a racing incident. I can see where fans of either driver can find fault in each other though. Horner can just shut the fu** up never liked him. I will say it was a little immature of max though he is championship leader no need to go crazy on the opening lap. You don't need to win every race to win the championship

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
Nov 8, 2000
82,355
81,650
Head in the clouds
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Nottingham Forest

This is a pretty good account of what happened.

This also was interesting:


A lot of people commenting based on the look or the emotion, rather than the actual rules and what happened.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sigwald

All Australian
Sep 28, 2003
734
135
Soest, NL
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Amsterdam Devils
This is the best analysis I have seen of the incident.
I often like his videos, but on this occasion the data and his assumptions contradict each other a bit too much for my taste. It reads more as an opinion than an analysis.

Edit: I am very impressed with James Allison's view on the rules regarding the 10 seconds penalty, as an aside.
 
Last edited:

happy_eagle

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 20, 2007
23,954
18,055
AFL Club
West Coast
The way Horner and Marko have carried on is disappointing. The whole 'stick up a wheel up the inside of Copse' narrative is deliberately misleading. He was almost alongside and he yielded more than Max did to make that corner, thus the front to rear contact.

It was nowhere near the reckless move they are making it out to be and the whole consulting lawyers to get Hamilton suspended spiel is massive sooking. Helmut is such a ******* Helmet. Honestly, he's always been a prat.

I used to really like Horner. Used to.
Does anyone know what Dr Helmut Marko's actual qualifications are ?
 

Skull Face

Club Legend
Aug 27, 2019
2,703
2,813
Australia
AFL Club
Carlton
Well, let's have a look at this "new" data that Red Bull are throwing around, because it tells a bit of a different story...

View attachment 1183112

First of all, it shows how strong the tow was along the straight. The Merc was set up for higher top end speed anyway, but Lewis reaching 315 was even higher than his Qualifying run where he maxed at 307. And before anyone starts on how that somehow "proves" he wasn't going to make the corner, know that racing in Qualifying is about exit-speed more often than entry, during a wheel-to-wheel it's common to sacrifice exit speed, and therefor lap time, if you can gain a position. And looking at how the Merc was all over the back of the Red Bull earlier in the lap, and knowing that it was basically the last spot where he could realistically overtake (because despite Horner saying otherwise overtakes have been made at Copse), I think it's fair to say that Lewis's top speed is high, but not ridiculously so.

Max has seen him, is forcing him to the outside, like he did (with great success) in the sprint race, but then Lewis sells a magnificent dummy, and before Max can properly protect the inside the Mercedes is halfway alongside the Red Bull, squeezed up against the wall. They both lift for Copse, Max corrects momentarily when he realises Lewis has not backed out of it (great onboard footage), but then turns in hard towards the apex anyway.

This is a thing that Max has been doing for years now, like many great drivers before him, he's proud of it, and everyone knows about it: he does not yield. Not even when the car pulling alongside is someone trying to unlap himself. There are many quotes of different drivers on how they take extra care when racing Max. It's an art in oneupmanship and intimidation to put your car in a position where there will be contact unless the other backs out if it, and make it work so many times. Senna had a similar philosophy. And it's been working on Lewis for the whole season, in Portimao, in Spain, in the Sprint race, even earlier in that lap there are two moments where Lewis backs out to avoid contact. Max just does not yield.

So when Max turns in, there's not much Lewis can do at the speed he's going, he's committed (or as Alonso says, he can't just vanish). So he slams on the brakes. To make the corner, but also because the space that Max left him is diminishing quickly.

Does he miss the apex? Maybe, he has taken that corner wider than most the whole weekend (except for his go at Leclerc), and when they both entered the room was there. The stewards think he missed it at least, but don't hold him fully responsible, because I assume that's what the 10s penalty is based on. I don't think it's by much, however. Because despite "missing" that apex, and despite the jolt his steering gets upon impact, he does still make the corner. And that's why I also think the idea that he didn't brake (the telemetry showed he clearly did) and that he wasn't going to make the corner anyway are overreactions by Red Bull.

And why I think it was a text book racing incident. When you never yield, this stuff will happen if the other is not yielding either. If Max had backed out in Brazil and let Ocon go (It was dumb by the Frenchman, but why fight him when you've got everything to lose?) he would have won that Grand Prix. Similarly, if Max had given more room (again he has more to lose) Hamilton may (or may not) have made the corner, but the Red Bull is clearly the faster car at the moment, so it may well have cost him another win. When you never yield, it will at times cost you. And knowing the Verstappens, he's not going to change, so chances are it will happen again somewhere in the future.

Also, just a quick note on the comparison with the Albon-collisions. Despite the onboard matching up nicely, they are completely different circumstances.

TL:DR: Racing incident, no malice or intent on either driver; two cars, when going for the same bit of road and neither driver backing out, will collide.
Lol just lol, this is a turn where even if you start extreme left hand side turn in flush the apex you still are borderline running wide on the exit.

And lol at him maybe missing the apex, you can fit another F1 car between Lewis and the apex of the turn. Make no mistake he was getting past or causing a crash, 3rd time he has done so in the last 18 months.
 

Admiral Byng

Brownlow Medallist
May 3, 2009
20,524
16,520
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Perth Scorchers
I think it is time for Red Bull to just STFU and get on with preparing for the next race. Would not want to see Max start the next race in the wrong headspace because of the war of words.

Not everyone is convinced. I buy the line that Hamilton was more at fault, but he copped a penalty. He still won in spite of the penalty, or maybe it gave him extra incentive.

But whatever, it is done now and will not be revised or changed, until next season. It is a long, long season this year, and we are not even half way through yet. Max and Red Bull just need to settle down for a few decent wins and they'll be well a ahead again before they know it.
 

lionbear

Geelong Member from 2016
Feb 25, 2007
12,039
8,164
Reg Hickey Stand Level 2
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
49ers, Indians, Storm
I think it is time for Red Bull to just STFU and get on with preparing for the next race. Would not want to see Max start the next race in the wrong headspace because of the war of words.

Not everyone is convinced. I buy the line that Hamilton was more at fault, but he copped a penalty. He still won in spite of the penalty, or maybe it gave him extra incentive.

But whatever, it is done now and will not be revised or changed, until next season. It is a long, long season this year, and we are not even half way through yet. Max and Red Bull just need to settle down for a few decent wins and they'll be well a ahead again before they know it.
Wonder if Red Bull are doing the Lewis Hamilton Radio trick, saying one thing on the public communication but actually in the back ground have moved on.

Because whether you agree with the fault being Lewis or not, the accident was bad but it is not blatant Lewis, so it should have been moved on from by about Tuesday afternoon.

Stop and go Penalty vs time penalty is not something that should be debated about 5 days later.
 

imadodgyumpire

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 10, 2011
21,573
16,212
Somewhere near Rachael Neiberding
AFL Club
Carlton
I think it is time for Red Bull to just STFU and get on with preparing for the next race. Would not want to see Max start the next race in the wrong headspace because of the war of words.

Not everyone is convinced. I buy the line that Hamilton was more at fault, but he copped a penalty. He still won in spite of the penalty, or maybe it gave him extra incentive.

But whatever, it is done now and will not be revised or changed, until next season. It is a long, long season this year, and we are not even half way through yet. Max and Red Bull just need to settle down for a few decent wins and they'll be well a ahead again before they know it.
Wonder if Red Bull are doing the Lewis Hamilton Radio trick, saying one thing on the public communication but actually in the back ground have moved on.

Because whether you agree with the fault being Lewis or not, the accident was bad but it is not blatant Lewis, so it should have been moved on from by about Tuesday afternoon.

Stop and go Penalty vs time penalty is not something that should be debated about 5 days later.
Hamilton has gained an advantage in the championship because of the collision.

Until Verstappen clinches the championship, or if he does, then this moment will be hanging over the head of the series for the rest of the season.

People nowadays are less and less interested in the notion of "he didn't mean it" when it has a big effect on the current standings. Plausible deniability is not good enough anymore.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Jul 5, 2011
34,038
48,875
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
On Red Bull's appeal:

The Stewards note, with some concern, certain allegations made in the Competitor's above letter. Such allegations may or may not have been relevant to the Stewards if the Petition for Review had been granted. The Stewards may have addressed these allegations directly in any decision that would have followed. The Petition having been dismissed, the Stewards make no comments on those allegations.
Effectively implying that Horner and the Red Bull team argued it was a deliberate act by Hamilton. Seems to have been confirmed by the Mercedes statement.

Not sure I can handle this level of spiciness.
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Jul 5, 2011
34,038
48,875
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
WTF does that quoted FIA statement even mean? That's some next level double-speak
Red Bull argued some pretty serious stuff, but because the stewards don't think they had a valid appeal anyway (who imposes further penalties more than a week after a GP?) they don't have to entertain the argument.

I am sure (given the use of an Albon re-enactment, the presence of Horner, and RB's post-crash comments) that they were arguing Hamilton intentionally and maliciously punted Verstappen off.
 

gaskin

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 19, 2009
20,451
21,925
On board the Russ Bus
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
LFC, Glory, Wests, Seahawks
They were saying before FP1 started that the FIA wouldn't even be entertaining Red Bull's appeal unless they had new and valid information. You would have to assume they had something there that made the stewards fell like they had to have another look.
 

Forward Press

Premium Platinum
Jul 5, 2011
34,038
48,875
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Man Utd
They were saying before FP1 started that the FIA wouldn't even be entertaining Red Bull's appeal unless they had new and valid information. You would have to assume they had something there that made the stewards fell like they had to have another look.

Red Bull submitted four pieces of evidence, which were all slides created by the team, to show:

  • GPS data available to them of both Hamilton and Verstappen’s car
  • GPS data drawing “various alleged comparisons" with the line taken by Hamilton when passing Charles Leclerc for the lead later in the race at the same corner
  • Alleged lap simulations of the incident
  • What was described as a “re-enactment” of Hamilton’s lap one line at Silverstone based on a lap allegedly driven by Alex Albon
If a team submits something to the FIA, they have to look over it. That's common sense. However, it appears to have gone no further.

After looking at the information presented to them, the stewards deemed it did not qualify as a “significant and relevant new element”.

They added that some of the slides were “not ‘discovered’ but created for the purposes of submissions to support the petition for review. And they were created based on evidence that was available at the time of the decisions. That clearly does not satisfy the requirements of Article 14.”

As a result they dismissed the request for a review, which means Hamilton’s penalty stands, as does his victory.
tl;dr - nothing new, RB's evidence reviewed because that's what the FIA does, dismissed with a statement admonishing Red Bull, Mercedes a bit angry about it
 

Remove this Banner Ad