2021 Race 10 - British Grand Prix

[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.

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.

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.

You really should read the entire piece before you use it as a professional opinion that backs your own.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.