Side by side and you say there was no way he was going to pass him? Take off the blinkers or go watch Golf.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Printable View
Side by side and you say there was no way he was going to pass him? Take off the blinkers or go watch Golf.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Side by side, that why he clipped the rear wheel with his front spoiler. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
But i don't expect any kind of unbiassed view from you anyway. Hamilton could throw nails across the track or shoot his opponents tyres with a gun and you would still defend him.
Ha ha Denkimi you are such a clown. Or high on something.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Thanks for reminding me, I forgot how much I disliked Horner and crew, back in the days of "Fettel". :sailor:Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Ends up Seb is a pretty good dude, :cool:
Get your facts straight buddy. Go check out the slow-mo video of the incident on the skysport website. Then come back and tell us what you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Lewis Hamilton & Max Verstappen crash: Brit's comments back in 2018 are awkward now
By Harneet Singh Sethi
Published: 20 Jul 2021, 12:50
C&P extract;
After him and Max Verstappen contrived a collision, both blamed it on the other, but only one could blame and celebrate, and that was Hamilton. The majority of F1 fans, however, believe it was the Brit who caused the collision.
Following his sensational win, Hamilton said: "[On Saturday] I went down the left-hand side and I really regretted not going for the gap that was down the right-hand side and so I dummied him, moved to the left and then moved to the right for that gap.
"I was pretty far up alongside him but I then could see he wasn't going to back-out and we went into the corner and then we collided. Of course, that's never the way I ever want to win a race or just in general to race but these things do happen."
Quite measured words, aren’t they?
However, the balance of the words are outweighed by the underlying contradiction. Reason being, what happened to Verstappen here is very similar to what happened with Valtteri Bottas in 2018, with the driver causing the collision being Sebastian Vettel - who Hamilton was fighting at the time for the title.
Of course, neither did Vettel win the race - he finished fifth, while Bottas finished seventh - nor did Hamilton lose the championship, but here’s what he said of the clash, as per Sky Sports: "Ultimately, if you ruin someone's race because of a mistake, and you're able to come back to a place ahead of the other person, that penalty doesn't outweigh your mistake. You shouldn't be able to finish ahead of the other person if you take them out of the race. It's like you're violating the speed, but just let you go."
Obviously, nothing wrong with contradicting yourself, but this is elite sport and there’s only so many times you cut your own words to smithereens as per your convenience.
Read MORE here;
https://www.givemesport.com/1724603-...re-awkward-now
Lewis Hamilton issued 'statement of intent' to Max Verstappen but FIA may have to step in
Damon Hill believes Lewis Hamilton sent Max Verstappen a clear message during the British Grand Prix.
By Claire Cottingham
PUBLISHED: 10:32, Tue, Jul 20, 2021 | UPDATED: 12:57, Tue, Jul 20, 2021
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-a...en-FIA-F1-news
JULY 20, 2021
Hamilton eyed victory or death in British GP says press
Lewis Hamilton charged for "victory or death" before title rival Max Verstappen was tipped into a 51G crash at Silverstone's Copse corner on Sunday.
That is the view of one international media outlet in the highly-charged aftermath of the lap-1 incident that is now the major talking point in the British GP aftermath.
Former F1 driver Ralf Schumacher told Sky Deutschland that Hamilton's move was a "complete misjudgement" and "not a typical overtaking manoeuvre".
"If Lewis had stayed there, he would have pushed Max off the track. Instead, he pulled back and touched his rear wheel.
"Everyone knows from karting that you can't do that. It's damn dangerous to do it at that place," Schumacher added.
1997 world champion Jacques Villeneuve told one outlet: "I think the pressure to not be beaten by Max at his home track was so great that he subconsciously accepted the risk.
I think he would have taken his foot off the gas in any other race," he added.
The Spanish sports daily Marca agrees.
"It was either victory or death for Hamilton at Silverstone, who said 'Basta!' to Verstappen on the first lap," the newspaper editorial reads.
"The Englishman refused to take his foot off the accelerator in front of his home crowd, and his doggedness led to a brutal accident for his Dutch rival."
Suddeutsche Zeitung correspondent Elmar Brummer opined: "Victory number 99 is perhaps the most questionable of Hamilton's career. And one of the most important.
"The tone of the entire championship may change now."
And Luigi Perna, of La Gazzetta dello Sport, surmised: "Hamilton made it clear that he is ready to do anything for the championship."
Corriere della Sera's Daniele Sparisci reported: "At Copse corner, Hamilton grabbed victory from Leclerc and also introduced us to his dark side."
Italian blogger Leo Turrini said: "I admire Lewis immensely, but a veteran doesn't make that kind of move at Copse on the first lap.
"The end result was Verstappen in hospital and a bad joke of a penalty. After all, you can win in many ways, but certain gestures cross lines and have consequences.
"I don't think Max will forget this," he added.
Finally, former Marussia car designer Igor Ermilin told Izvestia news agency: "Hamilton is guilty, but the stewards spared him.
"A ten second penalty for such an action is ridiculous. He threatened Max's life and caused serious damage to his car.
"Lewis should have been disqualified," he insisted.
https://www.grandprix.com/news/hamil...ays-press.html
Ecclestone hits out at stewards: 'That penalty was not justified'
20-07-2021 08:25 | Updated: 20-07-2021 09:04
by GPblog.com
Bernie Ecclestone has been critical about the punishment for Lewis Hamilton. According to the former CEO of Formula 1 the Briton should have received a much higher penalty for his collision with Max Verstappen.
The whole Formula 1 world is in an uproar because of the incident of Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen. The two collided during the British Grand Prix. However, while Verstappen was in hospital, Hamilton celebrated his victory. So what went wrong in giving the penalty?
''In the old days we would have said it was one of those things, a racing incident. It was clear that everyone was doing his best to win the championship. But if the stewards needed to get involved then they should have given Lewis more than a 10-second penalty. It should have been 30 seconds,'' Ecclestone said to Sportsmail.
https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/89625...ink=inarticle1
Red Bull hire lawyer to investigate action against Hamilton says Marko
20-07-2021 10:50 | Updated: 20-07-2021 11:01
by GPblog.com
Helmut Marko has suggested Red Bull Racing have hired a lawyer to investigate the punishment of Lewis Hamilton. Helmut Marko told Austria's Kronen Zeitung. Marko is still angry after the incident.
Red Bull Racing and Max Verstappen were in such good shape prior to the British Grand Prix. In both championships they had a large margin, but with the retirement of Verstappen that lead has disappeared completely. Red Bull is now investigating whether a heavier penalty can still be imposed on Hamilton, with the help of a lawyer.
''He [the lawyer] has to investigate what we can do in such a situation within the frameworks of sports law,'' the Austrian argues. ''It was fortunate that nothing serious happened to Max. The car, and possibly the engine, are broken. You can't let that happen. A suspension (for Hamilton) would be justified."
https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/89636...-hamilton.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortitude
Sorry buddy, you can put out this stuff for as long as you want. We know what happened. 50:50 racing incident.
How you don't find it odd that a team is seeking legal advice for a racing incident tells me you are so consumed with your preference of perception of events, objectivity is pointless as far as you are concerned.
You are simply demonstrating "Politically Correct Prejudice" by attempting to whip up hatred with your posts. It is subtle but very clear to its purpose. We see it and don't buy it.
https://e1.365dm.com/21/07/768x432/s...20210720101325Quote:
Originally Posted by joe1888cfc
Through Woodcote corner, we see here that Verstappen did not make any effort to take the apex of the corner which would have been the fastest line through the corner. But swings well out to cut off Hamilton. This is ok , it is racing. This is the sort of racing that continued next into Corpse corner where the accident occurred. So please be fair about it.
When racing hard, accidents do occur. That is just inevitable and essentially what racing is about.
At Corpse Corner, this is how Martin Brundle of Skysport saw it. Please note this quote was from the skysport website.
Essentially, Verstappen turns in which caused the contact and the inevitable accident. Now, the main point here is that Hamilton did not drive into Verstappen, but placed his car in such a position to force Verstappen to take a wider line through the corner which would have messed up his line coming out of the corner. And Hamilton would have certainly used the powerful straight-line speed of the Mercedes to get ahead before the sequence of corners where the Mercedes was weaker than the Redbull. That said, There is a rumour that Redbull has evidence that Hamilton went in that corner hot and would not have made it through the corner. It kind of contradicts the fact that Hamilton backed off his speed and did not follow Verstappen of the track out of control. But we shall hear more about this without a doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Brundle SkySport
I think it is as clear as day that both drivers were equally at fault. Verstappen with 33 points ahead in the championship standings, should have been thinking about not jeopardizing his lead in the championship, by taking a precautionary wider line around the corner. He made a very poor judgement and risked it all which resulted in an accident. And he goes on social media claiming he was hit by Hamilton. Which was also clearly not the case.
Hamilton on the other hand had nothing to lose. He had a right to be right where he was, even though being there puts the onus on Verstappen to either cause an accident or compromise his line through the corner. It was a brilliant strategy but a risky one. The outcome fell to Verstappen on how it would turn out. But it was equally risky for Hamilton as he risked a tyre puncture and/or front wing damage which may have ruined his chance of winning the race.
But it was simply brilliant racing. The aggressive defending, the stalking and the pouncing to launch the attack. It was simply fantastic to see these two brilliant drivers duel. It was hard racing not for the faint-hearted. As it took the fight to a point of mutual desperation. We could see Verstappen's desperation to maintain the lead through the fast corner and straights where the Mercedes was simply mighty. And we could see Hamilton's desperation to get ahead before Verstappen gets to the sequence of tight corners where the Redbull was mighty.
That said l remain happy that Verstappen got out of it unscathed.
and there's the other hammi fanboy. i was already wondering wat took you so long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
great to see how some people can be such big fans of someone they are able to ignore the reality. i wish i could live such a simple life too.
Yea yeaQuote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Just ignore- some people don't understand racingQuote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Brundle: Red Bull claim to have damning Hamilton data
20th July 2021, 13:45
The Formula 1 pundit has revealed Red Bull have evidence that Lewis Hamilton entered Copse corner on lap one significantly quicker than any other time in the race.
Formula 1 pundit Martin Brundle has revealed that Red Bull have data to prove that Lewis Hamilton entered Copse corner on the first lap faster than any other occasion during the British Grand Prix.
Hamilton collided with title rival Max Verstappen on the opening lap at Copse at high-speed which resulted in the Red Bull driver retiring from the race. Red Bull are yet to rule out an appeal and Brundle says the team may have new evidence which would be needed to make an appeal to the FIA.
"Red Bull felt it was a professional foul, an intentional accident from Hamilton," Brundle wrote in his post-race Sky Sports F1 column. "They were incandescent, their potential world champion was bruised, their car expensively wrecked in this new cost cap era, and with possible grid penalties to come from any engine and ancillary damage.
"They would score zero points from the race and both championship leads would be seriously eroded. I am told by Red Bull there is data to prove Lewis was significantly faster into Copse than at any other time and he would not have made the corner without running wide, and inevitably contacting Max.
"Presumably, that will be made publicly available and if Red Bull feel they have 'new evidence' they may well make an appeal to the FIA as to their perceived degree of fault and leniency regarding Hamilton."
Brundle thinks the 10-second time penalty for Hamilton means the stewards saw it as a 70/30 incident with the blame, going towards the seven-time world champion. He also feels that a collision between Hamilton and Verstappen was inevitable.
Read MORE here;
https://racingnews365.com/brundle-re...-hamilton-data
Can Red Bull's lawsuit against Mercedes succeed?
20-07-2021 16:47 | Updated: 20-07-2021 17:06
by GPblog.com
Recently news emerged that Red Bull Racing is taking legal action against Mercedes regarding the time penalty the Briton received for his incident with Max Verstappen in the first lap of the Silverstone Grand Prix. But on what grounds can Red Bull Racing take this legal action? What are the possibilities?
Helmut Marko had been quite clear earlier and Christian Horner was also adamant: "If you put a driver in hospital and you still win the GP, even with the penalty, it doesn't feel like a penalty," Horner said after Hamilton's win. Red Bull has 14 days to submit a letter of intent for the right to reassess to the FIA, according to Motorsport-magazin.com. If they decide to do so, the stewards of the race in question must first rule on whether the evidence presented is important and new. If so, the case will be reopened.
https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/89662...s-succeed.html
Verstappen's crash financial blow for Red Bull, engine examined by Honda
20-07-2021 06:31 | Updated: 20-07-2021 09:04
by GPblog.com
A day after the crash there is an update on the condition of Max Verstappen. On Verstappen.com you can read that the Dutchman feels pretty good under the circumstances.
Verstappen ended up hard in the tyre wall during the British Grand Prix after a collision in Copse corner. Lewis Hamilton was on the inside of the Dutchman and with a tap on the rear wheel, Verstappen spun into the tyre wall with a 51g impact. A day after the crash, the Dutchman is doing well.
https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/89620...-by-honda.html
Horner says Mercedes’ lobbying of F1 stewards was “unacceptable”
F1
Lewis Larkam
20 Jul 2021
Red Bull Formula 1 team principal Christian Horner says Mercedes’ lobbying of the stewards during the British Grand Prix was “unacceptable” and should not be allowed.
Mercedes boss Toto Wolff visited the stewards to argue his team’s view of Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen’s controversial collision on the opening lap of Sunday’s race at Silverstone.
Horner later went to see the stewards in person himself after finding out that Wolff had been to put forward Mercedes’ case.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/983473...s-unacceptable
Max Verstappen 'very motivated' after Lewis Hamilton crash costs Red Bull £650,000
Max Verstappen is hungry to bounce back after a crash with Lewis Hamilton at Silverstone which has cost Red Bull a huge amount of cash.
By Luke Gardener
PUBLISHED: 14:58, Tue, Jul 20, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:58, Tue, Jul 20, 2021
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-a...0-Helmut-Marko
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp0GG4y3is8&t=887s
so Palmer...Racing incident
What was interesting was the Saturday sprint race (40secs into the video) where on the same corner Hamilton was the one on the outside, slightly creeping ahead, and Verstappen then pushed his car from the inside apex to out wide, and Hamilton was wise enough not to simply turn in. I wonder where all those folks were lamenting Verstappen not keeping to the inside apex, knowing a car was on the outside. (specifically Hill and Button) lol...crickets.
Come Sunday, roles are reversed, and Hamilton keeps his inside line, and Verstappen simply turns in with no notion of giving room.
I'd say, it was a pretty clear cut. On Saturday, he ran him out-wide, on Sunday he tried to jam him inside.
Also included was the 2018 Sainz Grosjean incident on the same corner lap one, where Grosjean was right on the apex and curbs. Sainz turned in anyway and they had a coming together.
That was deemed a racing incident.
I really think the stewards let their emotions get in the way of the actual facts.
Because that 2018 incident was way more problematic IMO and it still was a racing incident.
The only difference is that both cars were out.
I bet you if both Hamilton and Verstappen were out, they would say; "Racing incident" SMH
Are you looking for a PR job with Red Bull?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fortitude
spamming this forum seems like the least likely route to go.
lol
That was a fair and very objective analysis. It is what it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Redbull supporters and Hamilton haters would refuse to see it as it is; obviously. But we move to the next one.
Ha ha LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by truefan72
Just another clown.
Great analysis from Jolyon there. It shows Lewis has a brain and used it on Saturday, Max didn't use his on Sunday.
We're also forgetting about Ocon in Brazil with Max. Although I regard it largely as Ocon's fault, mainly because he was lapped, Max could have given more room. Hamilton after the race said you always give the guy on the inside room. Just like in 2018 it appears Max has learned nothing.
I'd say it's around 70/30 in the incident , aligning with what Brundle read the FIA steward's decision to be , in terms of how the world press are seeing it .
And , a great number of articles being written from all kinds of places are seeing the penalty as too small .
Of course you folks defending Lewis will "poo poo" this post , but do look around and see you are in a great minority in your opinions on this one .
Seriously ?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Max had no blame in that one .
Ocon was a complete tool there .
They should have let Max get to him in the garage .
I don't think the argument is to defend Hamilton per se. It is to state that it was a racing incident. And on this point, you would find most of the racing experts agree. Including Brundle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
What most anti-Hamilton post on here has been trying to peddle, is that it was solely Hamilton's fault. And they begrudge him the fact that he won the race even with the penalty awarded.
I and most posts on here refuting that notion and are simply saying it was a racing incident, and Verstappen was not an innocent party in the accident. The Palmer youtube podcast indicated more serious similar collisions in the past that were declared a racing incident and thus were not punished.
If you are quoting from Fortitude's random sources which are mostly from non-racing specialists or Redbull's rhetorics, then l would have to say you have disappointed me.
I disagree. He was winning that race. All he had to do was to let Ocon go as he was unlapping himself. But like the Silverstone scenario, he threw the race win away crashing in a fight that he did not need to fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Unfortunately, Verstappen is in a championship-winning car but he still lacks some level of maturity. If he ends up losing this championship which looks unlikely at the moment, it would most likely be due to this immature aspect of his racing.
I can see that basic comprehension is not one of your forte's, it's actually you who needs to re read my post, in fact I'll try and make it real simple just for you and hopefully you will finally understand instead of just carrying on with your continual sarcastic condescending mockery and woke culture accusations of prejudice and racism, not only to me and also anyone else who disagrees with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
I simply don't want to see a championship won in a war of attrition between two bitter rivals with strong personal feelings affecting their racecraft and won by the driver who punts his rival into the wall more times or most successfully, I can't think of anything more lame or dangerous and IMO that's not racing.
I'm concerned one or both of these two are going to get seriously hurt because the penalty system in place is so lame that its not that much of a deterrent.
Why not have a rule where if you are involved in an incident that is judged to predominantly your fault you can score no more points than your collision 'victim' ?
Does someone have to be seriously injured or die first?
Essentially that is what we have been saying. It was a racing incident. just like many others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
IMHO Max took a risk that Lewis would back out, and that is the only thing he was wrong about. As the regs currently stand, the driver on the racing line and leading dictates the corner with the stipulation that they must leave a cars width to the opposing car. Lewis was grossly off line, had missed the apex, and was carrying too much speed for a corner that would have two cars in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
Don't get me wrong. Max would have been wise to just back out and let Lewis go wide, pass or not. Playing the long game would have worked much better. But neither driver is thinking about those details at 180 mph heading into the corner really. They are thinking that they have the corner and their opponent doesn't.... that's why they are good drivers.
You really should read the entire piece before you use it as a professional opinion that backs your own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Quoted from the Brundle piece.....
"Max was not at fault although for his own race and championship campaign he could have left a little more space on the inside given Hamilton was bound to be compromised on that line, and perhaps have been less convinced that Lewis would yield."
If you are disappointed about an unknown source from another poster and questioning them on it, you might want to take a look in the mirror and consider how it makes you look to only use part of a persons opinion that you agree with, while ignoring the part you don't.
And in the end, even the former drivers can't agree on the issue. I don't value Brundle's position any more than the other drivers, and they have varied versions of where they think the blame lies in the case. There is no absolute authority on any of it, other than the enforcement arm that is the stewards. The rules are written in a way that they provide a guideline and not much more really. Short of having all kinds of geometric markings on any corner showing differing approach angles, spaces, limits, along with rules that clearly state "driver A owns the corner if they make it to angle XYZ first"...... controversial calls will be a thing in the future as well. But as usual, often people on the internet want to feel that their opinion is absolute fact. Come on folks.... humans are humans, subject to biases and favoritisms, whether conscious of it or not, and yelling at the internet doesn't make us win anything.
Maybe people should just accept that their opinion is just that... their opinion. Others can agree or disagree with it all they want. But it's certainly no reason to start the insults, claims of racism, and general hate and discontent. IMHO it's just childish and proves that people are grasping at straws to claim that the only valid opinion is the one they hold. Posting over and over and over saying the same things doesn't make an opinion any more valid either.... it just usually proves that the person who won't budge on their opinion thinks that the world around them is wrong and they are the only ones that can fix it.
How dare you actually focus on a way to make solid rules that allow racing and keep things safe. Pick a side, become a fanboi extremist, and shout from the rooftops! :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
Yeah, the rules right now just kind of still suck at clarity, and they are leaving the door open for these kinds of things. Racing will be racing, but there has got to be a better way to sort things out and keep it somewhat safe. It's sort of a catch 22 situation.... if the rules are too strict racing suffers. If the rules are too loose, racing suffers.
But I agree the penalty system really doesn't hurt a lot of times. Especially the time based penalties, as they give advantage to guess who????... As usual the top teams. While Merc and RB can pretty much recover from a time penalty, the farther back cars are in the pack the more positions it often costs them.
There was partial blame to Max, he could have left Ocon a little more room. Hamilton was right behind it as it happened and he said afterwards that you always give the other guy plenty of room. If Hamilton were in Max's position that day, I doubt him and Ocon would have collided. Ocon, though, was predominantly at fault and it was a stupid move to begin with. Max has had a range of these incidents now and in each one of them he had the ability to give the other guy more space.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I knew Max wouldn't back out. He's not that kind of driver and has not learned that living to fight another day is sometimes the better option. Hamilton has learned this which is why he backed out in Spain and Imola but one driver cannot have it is way the entire time. But you've summed up on your post exactly why it is a racing incident, both drivers could have done things differently to avoid the incident.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Also, on Brundles quote
Brundle has contradicted himself in that sentence. You can't absolve Max of blame and then say he could have left a little more space, although I would change that to he "should" have left more space, just like LeClerc did even though Hamilton was further behind into Copse at that point than he was on Max. That's the difference between a driver using (LeClerc) and not using his brain (Max).Quote:
"Max was not at fault although for his own race and championship campaign he could have left a little more space on the inside given Hamilton was bound to be compromised on that line, and perhaps have been less convinced that Lewis would yield."
Well this sort of racing is dotted across the very depth of F1 history. From Senna and Prost, Senna and Mansell, Schumacher and Hill, Rosberg and Hamilton, Verstappen and Ricciardo, Vettel and Webber, Vettel and Verstappen, Raikonnen and Verstappen and the list goes on and on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zico
This is motor racing. To be the best in a season, one must defeat the best. When racing with the best, how well you measure comes down to how well one uses their head and their racecraft. The crash was avoidable. If it were any other driver it may not have happened as they would properly judge that situation better.
So your post was properly understood and l think this degree of racing is very uncomfortable for you. I get that. But this is motor racing at the highest level, not a sunday drive around the M25.
The idea of ruining the race of a driver that survived a collision because the other driver's race was terminated by the collision is rubbish. You are effectively saying drivers should be banned from winning the race if they were involved in a collision. This is the worst crap anyone has said on here. How the hell is that entertaining?
The spirited drive to recover 10 seconds and taking the win was very entertaining as it was not certain that he could pull it off or whether Leclerc would allow it.
As usual, your perception of things is quite at odds with reality. I really wonder if you watched the race through someone else's window. Hamilton was actually on the inside for the right-hander and on the racing line. Verstappen was ahead but off the racing line, and was trying to get back onto the racing which caused the collision. No one is suggesting that Verstappen should have backed off. As a matter of fact, that is the last thing that he should have done. What he needed to do was to take a wider line through the corner to avoid what was obviously going to be a crash. You like to spout on here but half the time you do not know what the hell you are talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Once again, if you read Brundle's post, you would find that he sees it as a 70:30 fault distribution between the drivers and argued that it was the reason that a Stop and Go penalty was not awarded to Hamilton. So Verstappen had 30% of the fault from the stewards perspective and Hamilton 70%. But he goes on to say that in his opinion, it was a racing incident at best. Which l have been trying to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Once the stewards decided to award a penalty, they actually award what was the most that should be applicable in the circumstances. Hamilton did not win the race because of the penalty award to him. Under normal conditions, he would have been out of contention for the race win. He won the race because the race was red-flagged. Which afforded Mercedes the chance to replace his cracked left front wheel that was involved in the crash. Without the red flag, Hamilton's race was done.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
If you took the time to objectively look at the situation, you would understand these facts. Of course, if you are looking through a prejudiced tinted glasses, you would not see these details. This was one of those situations where the stewards were between a rock and a hard place. No decision they made was going to be free from criticism. This is why l now understand why the penalty was given. And they called it right by picking a middle road for all concerned. To be fair they did a very good job of it.
I think that had Hamilton been eliminated from the race the Stewards would have labelled this a racing incident. I think they felt because Verstappen had been eliminated from the race there needed to be a punishment for Hamilton but didn't hold him wholly to blame and that was reflect in the lenient penalty they gave him. Had he been eliminated, on the other hand, I think they would have decided both competitors had suffered enough.
Here's my opinion on that .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Airshifter is one of the most un-biased posters we have here .
You are not .
Ha, You certainly are not. I would respond strongly to any bias from any poster on here. That is not being biased. But l admit that l take no prisoners in my responses. l challenge you to find any post of mine that is biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
I was once full of praise for Mercedes for what they have achieved since returning to F1 as l have done for Hamilton for what he has done since recovering from the five years slump at Mclaren. If that is being biased, then l am guilty as charged.
that's unfortunately how many people are.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
but once you learn who they are and know who they will unconditionally defend its actually quite amusing to read their posts.
the main problem in this case was that hamilton wrecked his front wing and got to repair it for free during red flag. Without that he would have been at the back of the pack or even have to retire. in any care he wouldn't have won and there would have been far les discussion.Quote:
Yeah, the rules right now just kind of still suck at clarity, and they are leaving the door open for these kinds of things. Racing will be racing, but there has got to be a better way to sort things out and keep it somewhat safe. It's sort of a catch 22 situation.... if the rules are too strict racing suffers. If the rules are too loose, racing suffers.
But I agree the penalty system really doesn't hurt a lot of times. Especially the time based penalties, as they give advantage to guess who????... As usual the top teams. While Merc and RB can pretty much recover from a time penalty, the farther back cars are in the pack the more positions it often costs them.
all we need to avoid this in the future is a rule that says that anyone who has his car worked on during red flag, has to start the restart from the pits .
https://www.racefans.net/2021/07/19/...om-retirement/
Agreed .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrodaze
Guilty as charged .
The only issue I see with having "worked on" cars restart from the pit lane would be that in some of these incidents there is collateral damage (ie- cars rolling over damaged bodywork) where the driver is completely innocent , caught up in confusion .Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Every team uses the red flag pitlane park to change tyres, adjust wings and do other fixes. Such a rule as you have suggested would ban all work to be done on the car when they park in the pitlane under red flag conditions. The teams would collectively not like that idea. This would be seen as an adverse change which would be to detriment of the other teams due to a reaction to Hamilton and Mercedes.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
Besides, repairing cars under red flag conditions do not always work out. If the time it takes to fix a particular problem cannot be carried out before the end of the Red flag then retirement is assured. This adds to the entertainment, since the engineers are on the clock to get repairs done before the end of the indeterminate duration of the red flag or retire the car.
This has been part of F1 since its inception. Hence there is no reason to change it.
that's part of the game, it wil never be completely fair unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
it's just so that nowadays, because they use safetycars and red flags all the time, you can cause an accident, damage your own car and get away with it. a few years ago this would have messed up lewis'es race just as bad as verstappens. the damage caused is in itself a big punishment and a big reason to stay out of collisions. if you can get away with it for free, there is much less more incentive to avoid it.
people often refer to drivers like schumacher or senna, but they would not have put their opponents in the wall at 300km/h. they were hard racers, but in their time such accidents could get them killed.
Lewis Hamilton 'was to blame' as David Coulthard weighs in on Max Verstappen row
David Coulthard says Lewis Hamilton was to blame for the Max Verstappen British Grand Prix crash.
By Claire Cottingham
PUBLISHED: 14:12, Wed, Jul 21, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:12, Wed, Jul 21, 2021
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-a...ish-Grand-Prix
Lewis Hamilton v Max Verstappen: Red Bull 'have data' to lay blame for Silverstone crash at Brit's door
By George Dagless
Published: 21 Jul 2021, 10:48
Red Bull are said to possess data that shows Lewis Hamilton was going faster into Copse on lap one than at any other time of the British Grand Prix on Sunday, potentially suggesting that the Briton was to blame for the incident with Max Verstappen.
Battle lines weren't just drawn on Sunday afternoon just after 3pm at Copse corner, they were carved in stone, and both camps from Toto Wolff and Christian Horner down to fans on social media were quick to pull the trigger in the blame game.
https://www.givemesport.com/1725087-...-at-brits-door
‘Data shows Hamilton wouldn’t have made the corner’
Date published: July 21 2021 - Jon Wilde
Martin Brundle says Red Bull have told him they have data that shows Lewis Hamilton would have run wide at Copse had he not collided with Max Verstappen.
But rather than Hamilton’s car entering the gravel on lap one of the British Grand Prix, it was Verstappen’s Red Bull – which did so at high speed and hit the barrier with a 51G impact, putting the Dutchman out of the race and in hospital for precautionary medical checks.
Red Bull were furious at Hamilton’s manoeuvre as the two World Championship contenders duelled for the lead, the Mercedes driver ‘dummying’ Verstappen by challenging up the inside only for their wheels to make contact as they turned into the corner at 160mph.
After the race was red-flagged, Red Bull team principal Christian Horner was straight on the radio to FIA race director Michael Masi, saying: “Every driver who’s driven at this circuit knows you don’t stick a wheel up the inside at Copse.”
https://www.planetf1.com/news/martin...hamilton-data/
Hamilton using 'every weapon in his arsenal' in Verstappen fight - Wolff
Sam Hall
Wednesday 21 July 2021 04:00
Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff has highlighted Lewis Hamilton's recent visits to the simulator as evidence the seven-time F1 champion is using his entire "arsenal of weapons" to defeat Max Verstappen.
With no running on Friday morning, Hamilton travelled the short 10-mile distance from Silverstone to the team's factory at Brackley to use the simulator to steal a march on his rivals.
Hamilton has previously declared his dislike for the simulator but is finding it a useful tool this year in his championship fight with Red Bull's Verstappen.
“The simulator wasn’t his most favourite tool in the past," said Wolff. "We have developed it to a level that is quite good, maybe best in class and he has started to see the benefits of it.
“This fight is so tough that you need to grab every marginal gain and that is why we have progressed together to better understand the car also with the tool of the simulator.”
https://www.gpfans.com/en/f1-news/67...n-fight-wolff/
"Wound up" Hamilton drove like an "amateur" in Verstappen crash - Horner
Ian Parkes
Monday 19 July 2021 07:00
Red Bull team principal Christian Horner believes Lewis Hamilton was "wound up" after losing F1's maiden sprint race and ended up driving like 'an amateur' in the build-up to the first-lap clash with Max Verstappen in the British Grand Prix.
Horner was left fuming with Hamilton in the wake of an incident that has lit the blue touchpaper to an explosive campaign over the remaining 13 races as the title rivals give no quarter in their bid for the championship.
Horner initially described Hamilton as "desperate' and "dangerous" and is convinced that what unfolded during the sprint led to that state of mind and Verstappen's 51g impact with a tyre barrier at Copse Corner and a subsequent trip to hospital.
Following what he felt was a "strong" day for Verstappen on Saturday with the sprint win, Horner felt that "added to Lewis’ desperation".
"Having lost the sprint, he was pretty wound up and that’s why he made an ill-judged move," said Horner.
"He ran wide into the corner with too much speed. That move was never on.
"Lewis is a world champion with seven titles and that was an amateur’s mistake and a desperate mistake. We were just very lucky someone wasn’t seriously injured."
https://www.gpfans.com/en/f1-news/67...-crash-horner/
Perhaps those involved directly could be made to start from pit lane , and those affected peripherally could ask for special dispensation during the red flag period .Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
They already have to have an FIA rep there to assure parts changed are the identical .
Some years ago , Max might not have made it out of that one .
In the beginning , he would likely have been thrown from the car , not having a seatbelt at all .
As safety has improved the respect for the other guy has dropped .
Key words for me in this one were something like "I knew Max wouldn't back out of it ".
What does that say ?
It says Max is an idiot that has to learn that it's more important to win the war than all the battles. I don't expect him to have learned that yet, he's not the brightest spark but a few more of these incidents added to his portfolio, and there will be many, then maybe eventually it'll get through.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Or , to put it a different way , maybe he'll learn he can't necessarily trust Lewis to back out of an impossible move .Quote:
Originally Posted by The Black Knight
It's fun how there's more than one way to look at it , isn't it ?
Does it say , I knew we would touch ?