Driving standards/ stewarding

[Aysedasi]

Not convinced. At all. All that does is to continue to promote the lunge to get your front wheels in front of the other cars back wheels. If that then means that the driver - in front (in front, I emphasise) has to back out and effectively let the other guy through, that isn't my idea of a solution. So much seems to be predicated now on the basis that the driver in front has to accept most of the responsibility. Arguably, front wheels in front of rear wheels is not significantly alongside, not so much as to give the driver behind some divine right to be allowed through, particularly if the move to put them there was inviting a collision in the first place.

[PhilipR]

Why do we need to analyse every incident in minute detail? Why do we need a guilty part and a penalty every time a minor incident happens?

In racing incidents happen especially with very competitive drivers - most incidents are quite minor and as a competitor you accept that another competitor might spun you out or hit you and make you lose position/the race.

Also this principle of being ahead at corner is quite vague - if you divebomb you will be ahead but out of control - Ver was ahead in the left hander because he could break later and carry more speed on the outside - but would have been seriously compromised and need to go a lot slower to make it round the right hander

As far as I am concern the Ver-Ham was 2 in 1 do not go - both suffered from it -move on. No need for penalties and analysis

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

To me these rush to the apex to claim the corner rules is one of the worst rules changes we've had this year. A lot of time and energy and political strive was spend on creating cars that can race each other and luckily they succeeded and then they go and introduced a set of rules that actually promotes ending wheel to wheel fights (either by one winning or by crash) in just one corner.

Most of the epic fights we know from the past lasted multiple corners or even laps. It's such a pity they have devised these rules that actually discourages multi corner battles.

It's interesting that you view the rules as being applied on a single corner incident, when the stewards' actual decision was based on the multi-corner actions of both drivers.

"The stewards determined that Verstappen attempted to pass Hamilton on the outside of Turn 1 by braking very late. He did not complete the pass in Turn 1 and his excess speed compromised his entry into Turn 2, at which point he made contact with Hamilton. While the stewards recognise that Hamilton could possibly have given a little more room at the apex of Turn 2, the stewards determined that Verstappen was predominantly at fault."

[Anyopenroad]

Any set of rules has to be based on the assumption that drivers would prefer not to crash rather than overtake or be overtaken. Verstappen’s post-race comments make it clear he was indifferent to crashing into Hamilton and on several occasions last year both of them chose a collision over backing down.

I don’t think it matters much what the rules are in that situation, unless the sport decides to hand out very severe penalties for causing a collision. That used to be what happened, but everyone got upset because it means ‘racing incidents’ (the sport’s most vague term) get penalised. So we’ve swung the other way for a bit.

[S griffin]

I hate seeing every incident investigated, but I think the stewards are right to do something when a driver tries an overambitious move which has little to no chance of coming off and relies on the driver in front giving room

[NaBUru38]

I think it's clear that Verstappen was perfectly capable of making turn 2 with no issues, as long as Hamilton gave him two meters. But Hamilton didn't, instead he turned as if Verstappen wasn't next to him.

I agree that the basic rule should be that drivers must leave room for each other.

Last week, Argentine TV show P1 interviewed a dozen drivers. Half of them thought that the driver in front has the right to do whatever they want. In my opinion, that rule prevents clean overtaking.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

I think it's clear that Verstappen was perfectly capable of making turn 2 with no issues,

I don't think it is clear - he didn't make the corner even using Hamilton's car for retardation!!!


Although I still think the most telling part is the comment from Verstappen "I went around the outside and I immediately felt he was not going to leave space, so I just went for it" - that seems like an open admission that he knew a collision would occur and accepted that course of action. That doesn't mean that Hamilton is not entirely at fault - but Verstappen's involvement was a premeditated entry into a collision, and hence why he was "predominantly at fault" and received the 5s penalty and license endorsement.

[Taxi645]

Slaps forehead for not making clear that this isn't about the Hamilton -Verstappen clash in itself but the driving standard rules that makes such clashes more likely. I have no interest in discussing, the incident itself and who was or was not to blame.

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Not convinced. At all. All that does is to continue to promote the lunge to get your front wheels in front of the other cars back wheels. If that then means that the driver - in front (in front, I emphasise) has to back out and effectively let the other guy through, that isn't my idea of a solution. So much seems to be predicated now on the basis that the driver in front has to accept most of the responsibility. Arguably, front wheels in front of rear wheels is not significantly alongside, not so much as to give the driver behind some divine right to be allowed through, particularly if the move to put them there was inviting a collision in the first place.

We've gone through this before, it is not about yielding, giving up position or letting through. It is about the requirement of when to leave racing room. Hamilton let Verstappen perfect racing room on the outside of turn 1. Did he yield his position by doing so? No of course not, but it did allow the fight to continue into turn 2. If under these proposed rules Hamilton would have to leave room at the apex (costing him entry and mid corner speed) and Verstappen having to leave Hamilton space at the exit (costing him mid corner and exit speed) who knows, they might have gone side by side onto the second straight and maybe even continuing the fight into turn 4.


The current rules just promotes rushing towards the apex to stay ahead and hope for the best afterwards.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

It's interesting that you view the rules as being applied on a single corner incident, when the stewards' actual decision was based on the multi-corner actions of both drivers.

"The stewards determined that Verstappen attempted to pass Hamilton on the outside of Turn 1 by braking very late. He did not complete the pass in Turn 1 and his excess speed compromised his entry into Turn 2, at which point he made contact with Hamilton. While the stewards recognise that Hamilton could possibly have given a little more room at the apex of Turn 2, the stewards determined that Verstappen was predominantly at fault."

With the proposed rule: Any car must leave another car room on track in any part of the corner if the other cars wheels are still in front of it's back wheels, it would be irrelevant if it's a single corner, two of five corners. As long as you're in a corner the requirement stands.

Originally Posted by S griffin

I hate seeing every incident investigated, but I think the stewards are right to do something when a driver tries an overambitious move which has little to no chance of coming off and relies on the driver in front giving room

With the proposed rule, if you dive on the inside you would have to have your front wheels in front of the other guys rear wheels before corner entry to be entitled to be given room. Further more, you would still be required to leave the outside guy space on exit as long as his front wheels are before your back wheels.


So the move, where you dive bomb the other guy and effectively push him off track is not allowed, because you didn't leave him room on exit. It goes both ways.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

I think it's clear that Verstappen was perfectly capable of making turn 2 with no issues, as long as Hamilton gave him two meters. But Hamilton didn't, instead he turned as if Verstappen wasn't next to him coming clattering over the kerbs having no chance of making the corner without compliance from Hamilton......

Just amended that bit for you.

[NaBUru38]

Verstappen went over the kerbs because Hamilton didn't give him any room.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Verstappen went over the kerbs because Hamilton didn't give him any room.

Or - he went over the kerbs because he was trying for a gap that wasn't there.

It can be looked at (and counter-argued) endlessly. The simple facts are that:
Verstappen knew there would be a collision (by his own admission).
Verstappen deliberately entered into the collision situation (by his own admission).
Verstappen was found predominantly at fault.

As a driving standard - it fell well below what would be expected (unless deliberately entering into a collision is acceptable).
As a stewarding matter - the decision was reached and not many in the sport seem to disagree with the punishment (even Red Bull).

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Verstappen went over the kerbs because Hamilton didn't give him any room.

Senna famously used to aggressively attack a driver he didn’t know to see if that driver gave way or collided. If the driver backed out, Senna knew he could be bullied. If they collided, Senna knew to be more careful.

Verstappen does the same thing, apart from the second part. He dives up the inside even when he knows the other driver will not back out. That’s what happened here. He knew Hamilton would not back out, but tried the move anyway - we have that in his own words. This isn’t tough, bullying driving, it’s just reckless.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by NaBUru38

Verstappen went over the kerbs because Hamilton didn't give him any room.

Because Lewis didn't have to give him room. Because Max wasn't alongside enough. Hence: Max was penalised.

[greentrumpet]

Max is very aware that LH has won a GP in every year, apart from this one. He was determined to wreck LHs race. He was punished by the FIA on the evidence they had, since then he's admitted it was deliberate. The FIA should increase his punishment, not least for bringing the "sport" into disrepute.

[peebee2]

Admitting you weren’t backing out isn’t the same as deliberately crashing someone though is it…

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Admitting you weren’t backing out isn’t the same as deliberately crashing someone though is it…

It is when you don't have the right to the corner, yes.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

It is when you don't have the right to the corner, yes.

I doubt the authorities see it your way.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Admitting you weren’t backing out isn’t the same as deliberately crashing someone though is it…

Verstappen: "I thought 'okay, we don't need space, and we're just going to collide"

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by greentrumpet

Max is very aware that LH has won a GP in every year, apart from this one. He was determined to wreck LHs race. He was punished by the FIA on the evidence they had, since then he's admitted it was deliberate. The FIA should increase his punishment, not least for bringing the "sport" into disrepute.

Do you have any spare tin foil? I would suspect not

[Born Racer]

In general, I'm in favour of drivers simply giving room if there is any sort of overlap, but the main challenge for them is to do so when an overtaking driver first gets any part of their car in front of them, i.e. approaching an apex or on exiting a corner, or when exiting a corner and trying to run their car out on the natural racing line when there is still an overtaking car in the vicinity with any overlap.

[Beau2]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

It is when you don't have the right to the corner, yes.

Frankly in this regard, both Hamilton and Max are as bad as each other. I could dig up countless quotes by Hamilton when he's said he could see another driver was going to do something but he himself decided not to take evasive action , or to continue with a manoeuvre that wasn't really possible and an accident was caused. However, that would be pointless.

I find it more interesting that Verstappen's only penalty and driving issue this year has come when it's involved Hamilton, yet it's Hamilton who has been involved in far more scrapes and incidents this season.

The main concern as far as driving standards is concerned is neither of them race well together when they are in each others vicinity, and yes Hamilton should take some of the blame for that. At this point it's almost inevitable they will get together again - and that is a problem.

[Beau2]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Verstappen does the same thing, apart from the second part. He dives up the inside even when he knows the other driver will not back out. That’s what happened here. He knew Hamilton would not back out, but tried the move anyway - we have that in his own words. This isn’t tough, bullying driving, it’s just reckless.

I hate to say it but this is exactly what Hamilton did at Silverstone last year. He knew Verstappen wasn't going to back out, actually admitted that he saw Verstappen wasn't backing out in his post-race interview yet still continued to stick a wheel up the inside in a gap that he knew was likely to close.

We had big issues about using the word reckless to describe that incident back then - going into legal definitions and all sorts. Hamilton also said that he chose to back off with his later pass on Leclerc, even though he was given more space (it's not really true Leclerc have Hamilton more space - Hamilton just used the space he was given on the second occasion - but that's besides the point)

The biggest issue here is that both Hamilton and Verstappen are changing their racing styles whilst battling each other on track.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Beau2

I hate to say it but this is exactly what Hamilton did at Silverstone last year. He knew Verstappen wasn't going to back out, actually admitted that he saw Verstappen wasn't backing out in his post-race interview yet still continued to stick a wheel up the inside in a gap that he knew was likely to close.

There is a difference between 'likely' and 'will'.

I can't recall Hamilton saying he knew the gap was going to close (before the incident). His words after were - "With Max, you know he's very aggressive. And then today, I mean I was fully alongside him, and I didn't have enough space,"

That is very different to knowing in advance that a collision will occur.

[Skam85]

These guys are (mostly) the best of the best. They didn't come down in the last shower. Every single driver knows what will happen if they take certain action in wheel to wheel battles with each and every other driver on the grid.

Nothing Max said should come as a shock. If Lewis takes his line, and I do too, we crash. They crashed. Not exactly an earth shattering revelation.

Doesn't mean Max deliberately smashed into his car.

Vettel in Baku 2017 is deliberate crashing into another driver. Max in Brazil 2022 is not.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Skam85

If Lewis takes his line, and I do too, we crash. They crashed. Not exactly an earth shattering revelation.

It is exactly this view of Max's decision making that many have taken issue with.

The part 'we crash' is absolute. Max had a decision to make (do I also take the line) and he knew the outcome (a crash). He chose to take the line, and in so doing deliberately chose to crash.

If you intentionally choose an action where you know the outcome is a crash - how can that not be seen as a deliberate collision?