[Official] British Grand Prix 2021: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 10 of 23

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Good point about Shumi in 98. I guess I forgot about him because he didn’t take the penalty till after he finished!

Not according to the stewards

Im with you though....a 13 year old me broke his voice screaming at the TV over that one

[Lancsbreaker]

As the dust settles (just a bit), a couple of thoughts have occured to me as I read through the additions to this thread:


Much talk has been of Hamilton "hitting" Verstappen - although technically from what I saw, immediately prior to the impact Hamilton was backing out (his car was falling back relative to Verstappen as he had been 90% alongside), and Verstappen was travelling relatively quicker, and from what I saw Verstappen's rear wheel came from behind Hamilton's front wheel before striking it......so in fact Verstappen "hit" Hamilton.


Secondly I was concerned that Verstappen's wheel's outer rim essentially disintegrated, causing the tyre to be able to leave the rim, which may well have contributed to the force of the impact with the barriers, as there were only three wheels producing any slowing friction. I can't remember seeing such a failure before...... (I know Mercedes stated that Hamilton's wheel was "cracked").

[crmalcolm]

Masi has provided his version of why he feels the stewards reached the decision they did, and gives an indication of how it relates to the LH / CL overtake later in the race at the same corner:

'The big part was similar to what happened with Charles later on. He could have stayed tucked in closer to the apex, and that was where they found that – I think the wording was quite clear as per the regulations – that he was ‘predominantly to blame’. He wasn’t seen as wholly to blame for it but seen as predominantly to blame. He could have tucked in further and that may have changed the outcome, but we don’t know, we judge it on the incident itself.'

In the racefans article, they put forward an interpretation which is a more measured assessment than some of what has been posted (online in social media platforms):

FIA F1 race director Michael Masi underlined the view that the stewards’ objection was not whether Hamilton should have made the move in the first place, but that he didn’t execute it well enough. I.e., he was far enough alongside to attempt the pass, but by running wider than he should have done he caused an avoidable accident.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Masi has provided his version of why he feels the stewards reached the decision they did, and gives an indication of how it relates to the LH / CL overtake later in the race at the same corner:

'The big part was similar to what happened with Charles later on. He could have stayed tucked in closer to the apex, and that was where they found that – I think the wording was quite clear as per the regulations – that he was ‘predominantly to blame’. He wasn’t seen as wholly to blame for it but seen as predominantly to blame. He could have tucked in further and that may have changed the outcome, but we don’t know, we judge it on the incident itself.'

In the racefans article, they put forward an interpretation which is a more measured assessment than some of what has been posted (online in social media platforms):

FIA F1 race director Michael Masi underlined the view that the stewards’ objection was not whether Hamilton should have made the move in the first place, but that he didn’t execute it well enough. I.e., he was far enough alongside to attempt the pass, but by running wider than he should have done he caused an avoidable accident.

Which, taking emotion and bias out of this is a balanced and fair reflection of events. This was picked up in Palmers video on the F1 Youtube channel last night.

It will be interesting to see if Red Bull try to go ahead with their lawyers and try to get the penalty increased, i for one doubt it will work...although theyve got hamilton penalised before but thats because Red Bull brought substancial new evidence.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Off the top of my head, this is the sixth time a driver has won a race despite serving an in race penalty

1993 Brazil- Senna
93 Germany Prost
98 Canada- Schumi
09 Germany- Webber
11 Canada - Button
21 Britain- Hamilton

good list!

thought it was brilliant how Ferrari worked that British GP. no internet, no instant discussion, no hours of post race broadcast locally to me, and was weeks until any specialty magazines showed up for me to learn about the aftermath of it but at the time of watching it and the confusion of it all, i felt it was extremely clever.

everyone once in a while something similar happens in the NFL where a coach who really took the time to learn the rule book pulls out some archaic rule/play leaving everyone else to look amateurish.

anyways, not saying what LH/Merc did was that though.

09 Webber...that was his first win right? that was an excellent recovery after his drive through.

good reminder that penalties dont always ruin races. sometimes they can even enhance them.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

09 Webber...that was his first win right? that was an excellent recovery after his drive through.

good reminder that penalties dont always ruin races. sometimes they can even enhance them.

Agree entirely.

Incident happens. Stewards review. Rules applied. Penalty served. Race on!!

[chillibowl]

speaking of clever Ferrari strategies, Ross Brawn very diplomatic view on the LH/MV incident:

They raced each other hard for half a lap, and it was thrilling. Imagine how dramatic the Grand Prix would have been if that had been the whole race.

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/a...tGpiwqzXX.html

i guess my question is, had the contact not happened, how much longer did he expect the 'drama' to last for?

as we saw in the sprint race just the day before and all things being equal, had LH let Max through cleanly at Copse that probably would have been it for the race. baring a bad pitstop or a mechanical failure, Max would have just driven off in the distance. Lewis' choice to start on the mediums and finish on the hards all but guaranteed that right?

while i still think of this as a racing incident, that corner was really the whole race for Lewis.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Which, taking emotion and bias out of this is a balanced and fair reflection of events. This was picked up in Palmers video on the F1 Youtube channel last night.

It will be interesting to see if Red Bull try to go ahead with their lawyers and try to get the penalty increased, i for one doubt it will work...although theyve got hamilton penalised before but thats because Red Bull brought substancial new evidence.

I stumbled across the video last night and found it very interesting. I thought Jolyon explained the situation very well and having raced in many formula (including Formula 1) himself, his real life experience added further authority to his comments.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Agree entirely.

Incident happens. Stewards review. Rules applied. Penalty served. Race on!!

But according to Horner’s logic, his own driver’s penalty wasn’t enough because Webber still won!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

But according to Horner’s logic, his own driver’s penalty wasn’t enough because Webber still won!

Yeah, true. Don't expect the Red Bull camp to be consistent with their views on what is / isn't acceptable.

They will give you their narrative that suits their agenda, and regularly they have been shown to carry a certain level of hypocrisy.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

FIA F1 race director Michael Masi underlined the view that the stewards’ objection was not whether Hamilton should have made the move in the first place, but that he didn’t execute it well enough. I.e., he was far enough alongside to attempt the pass, but by running wider than he should have done he caused an avoidable accident.[/I]

A thoroughly excellent brief summary of the position, IMO.

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

A thoroughly excellent brief summary of the position, IMO.

...which also calmly undermines Horner's innacurate and intemperate ravings.

[Taxi645]

For good measure the onboard footage of T1 from the again excellent Jolyon video:
https://youtu.be/Rp0GG4y3is8?t=855

The footage (not analyses necessarily) confirming the point I was making earlier that if Verstappen hadn't gone wide and leave so much room, there would already have been contact at T1.

[Taxi645]

Just for balance I will add, before I get accused of having a certain flag under my alias ; I still agree that at copse both drivers were not without blame and the whole Marko/Horner humbug about race bans and lawyers is pretty tiresome and indeed in case of the latter hypocritical.

[S griffin]

Well now Horner’s saying he doesn’t like team bosses who complain to the stewards! So I guess you only speak to the stewards when they call you, Christian?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Well now Horner’s saying he doesn’t like team bosses who complain to the stewards! So I guess you only speak to the stewards when they call you, Christian?

I'm loving Toto's comments:

“I was told that there was a rant on the radio to Michael about all the badness in the world,” said Wolff. “And then I went up and gave my opinion.

“I think it’s fair enough. I’ve been to the stewards many times in my life.”

Masi said he has not concerned about team principals speaking to stewards in person during a race, pointing out it happened at the Italian Grand Prix last year when Hamilton queried a penalty during a red flag period.

“If we have an incident after the race, we invite the teams and the drivers to come up and appear before the stewards,” said Masi. “We had the case in Monza last year when Lewis went and spoke to the stewards to understand and have a look at the whole thing. It’s during the suspension, so that ability exists, there’s no reason not to.”

"All the badness in the world"

[Beau2]

Frankly, I don't really listen to what either Toto or Horner have to say. They are both team managers and will try their best to discredit the opposition whilst pumping up the egos of their own drivers or car...I ignore most of what both of what they say because they are just playing 'the game'. They are both as bad as each other, unfortunately. Sure it is interesting tit-for-tat media frenzy stuff but it is all rather meaningless.

Yes, Horner did come across as rather over the top and passionate but in reality it is no different to Mercedes bleating over rear wings or how fast pit stops are.

Max is ok, Hamilton won. Toto and Horner will likely swap roles at the next incident to suit their own agendas and no-one will be right or wrong, it will just be conjecture.

[S griffin]

I thought Toto’s remark about Christian being ‘a windbag who likes to be on camera’ was quite accurate!

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Yeah, true. Don't expect the Red Bull camp to be consistent with their views on what is / isn't acceptable.

They will give you their narrative that suits their agenda, and regularly they have been shown to carry a certain level of hypocrisy.

As has every single other team in the paddock.
Every team has self interests.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Beau2

Frankly, I don't really listen to what either Toto or Horner have to say. They are both team managers and will try their best to discredit the opposition whilst pumping up the egos of their own drivers or car...I ignore most of what both of what they say because they are just playing 'the game'. They are both as bad as each other, unfortunately. Sure it is interesting tit-for-tat media frenzy stuff but it is all rather meaningless.

Yes, Horner did come across as rather over the top and passionate but in reality it is no different to Mercedes bleating over rear wings or how fast pit stops are.

Max is ok, Hamilton won. Toto and Horner will likely swap roles at the next incident to suit their own agendas and no-one will be right or wrong, it will just be conjecture.

I would like to know the delay between the incident occurring and Wolff sending Michael Massi an Email with chapter and verse of the regulations pertaining to the incident quoted, together with diagrams and sketches covering said incident.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by wnut

I would like to know the delay between the incident occurring and Wolff sending Michael Massi an Email with chapter and verse of the regulations pertaining to the incident quoted, together with diagrams and sketches covering said incident.

I think the diagram was a photo of a diagram from the rules.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Beau2

Yes, Horner did come across as rather over the top and passionate but in reality it is no different to Mercedes bleating over rear wings or how fast pit stops are.

I respectfully disagree.

Its one thing to complain/ ask the FIA to check the legality of a car....Red Bull and others are as guilty of doing that to the Mercedes car in the past, but its an entirely different thing to accuse another driver of trying to kill/ injure one of yours, calling someoene disrespectful etc etc etc.

The rhetoric from Horner, Marko, Max during and after the race was quite distastful and over the top, especially given the amount of incidents both red bull drivers have been involved in over the last few years.

I didnt hear other team managers make such accusations about Max in Portugual last year for instance (both Strolls and Perez incident on the Sunday)

[bella]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Which, taking emotion and bias out of this is a balanced and fair reflection of events. This was picked up in Palmers video on the F1 Youtube channel last night.

It will be interesting to see if Red Bull try to go ahead with their lawyers and try to get the penalty increased, i for one doubt it will work...although theyve got hamilton penalised before but thats because Red Bull brought substancial new evidence.

i agree (and also with your comments about horner). i think one thing that they overlooked because they only look at the specific incident (fair) is that max was weaving all over the place right from the start. lewis' on board showed he kept to a single line, and was clear and decisive with his car movements. max was over-defending, and acting in the manner in which has prompted just about everyone to say "he's going to have an accident some day when someone doesn't yield for him".

with horner mouthing off like his life depended on it whilst also not being very committed to what he was actually saying, he managed to deflect attention away from max's driving and towards his wellbeing. max deserved a reprimand at the least for that weaving, and he obviously hasn't had one.

all that said, i look forward to the next installment of the max vs lewis show. there's beef now. it's gonna be great.

[wnut]

This was a good analysis with some interesting camera angles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au5PtZa8fKU

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by wnut

I would like to know the delay between the incident occurring and Wolff sending Michael Massi an Email with chapter and verse of the regulations pertaining to the incident quoted, together with diagrams and sketches covering said incident.

From memory, watching it live, not very long after the red flag was thrown - 15-20 minutes tops?