2019 Austrian GP - Redbull Ring

[Nitrodaze]

I think we've seen this kind of pass many times already and it's something that the stewards let slide most of the time, so I would be extremely surprised if that got a penalty. It's a kind of racing I dislike and something that Verstappen does a lot (hence my dislike of him), but still I'm not expecting a penalty. On top of that, the sport look terrible if we had a second victory-deciding penalty in just three races.

Incidentally, I'm also gutted that Honda is getting another race win in F1 after they dragged McLaren to the bottom with their rubbish engines. Seems like they've upped their game, but it was too late for the Maccas.

And that was an amazing recovery drive from Sainz, who has been invisible today, but was only 4 seconds behind Norris a few laps before the end of the race until what I suspect was tyre degradation struck him. It's pretty impressive that he clawed his way back to 8th place anyway.

I think the Canada decision has created a real problem in F1 at the moment. For a start, it has caused most infractions that would normally attract a caution, to be punished squarely. Ricciado and especially Hamilton's three place grid drop, were not dangerous and should have been cautions from the stewards but were both punished at the full extent of the rules.

I heard Brundle say Verstapenn was entitled to that move as he had the racing line. Which l quite disagree, having the racing line is not an entitlement to shunt other cars off the grid. It was clear that on the second contact between Leclerc and Verstapenn, there was considerable force from the Redbull on the Ferrari. Clear enough to show that it caused the Ferrari to be forced off the track. There is also the argument that Verstapenn should have given Leclerc a cars width at that corner, which he didn't. But you can also argue the he was already on the racing line, hence has no obligation to yield the racing line which Leclerc was seeking to take from him at that corner.

Before Canada, this is one occasion that many would call hard racing but certainly not fair racing. But it is the sort of winning that we love to see in F1. But the rule book also frowns at contact that forces another car off the track and in another instance demand that both drivers must give each other a cars width while fighting for position through a corner. If the stewards are to maintain the consistency that has carried through to Hamilton via Ricciado, l fail to see how they would not penalized Verstapenn. This ruling is equally as controversial as the Vettel incident, as this is another occasion where a race win shall be taken away from another driver that has won the race on merit and has received the trophy through a formal ceremony. It is also at the home track of the Redbull; which incidentally is the reason that the ceremony appear to be performed quickly before the stewards had time to conclude their result; which places even further pressure on the very awkward situation.

Yes, this is a rulling that would attract stiff criticism whichever way the stewards decide to rule. If they rule this as a racing incident, they would be accused of inconsistency and anti-Ferrrari prejudice. If they rule against the Redbull, they would be adding one more disgruntled powerful team to a growing list of discontented recipients of the stewards decision. Like Ferrari before, they would be said to be killing the sport with rules.

The fact remains, once a precedent has been set, the stewards have to follow through with it, else they become a morkery to the sport.