2021 São Paulo Grand Prix - Interlagos, Nov 12-14

[SmallSoldier]

The question on my mind is, if it is deemed acceptable to run another car off the track and by such a large extent, where should the FIA draw the line? Do they need to draw a line?

If there is no line per se, and we can run cars off track however far we want, what is the point of having a race track? Drivers are free to make their own version of the track. It also means all overtakes can only be done before the braking zone - because all you need to do is barge the other car off track in the corners regardless of how much faster they are.

If there is a line to be drawn, where should it be? Isn't this the purpose of the white line to define the track limits?

I agree we should "let them race" but surely there is a point when it becomes a safety concern when someone is effectively driving into you. To me, that isn't racing. Any driver can play chicken and crash into another car, you just don't need to give a sh1t about crashing, or killing the other driver.

A larger issue is with consistency on the message (not that FIA / Stewards are known for consistency)… But, if the likes of Norris were penalized for “Missing the corner and not living enough room” (while staying on track) when battling Perez in Austria, how is this not falling in the same category?

I don’t think the protest will go anywhere, but I’m having a hard time understanding how are they going to justify it

[drunkf1fan]

He also says that he doesn't want the stewards "deciding the world championship" - but imagine for a moment that Lewis would not have managed to overtake, then the stewards would have been close to actually deciding the championship in giving Max a 28 point lead with three races to go by not interfering and not applying the rules as appropriate.

The silly thing is regardless of if they give the penalty or not they are deciding the world championship. If you don't want to make a key decision then don't be a steward. I hate this in football too, the i don't want to give a red card 10 mins in or 1-1 with 10mins to go in a title fight because it will ruin the game or effect the championship. NO there are rules and if you let a guy who deserves a red card stay in a game and they win that game because of that then you're changing the outcome by ignoring the rules.

Max broke the rules so ridiculously badly it's a joke and in not giving a penalty they are unfairly allowing him to get more points and at the time could also have led to a change in who won the race itself. It's far worse to refuse to enact a penalty than to actually give one fairly when it comes to having an effect on the outcome and I don't know why so many sports allow this inaction over rule breaking as if somehow it's just being fair and letting it play out.

[dans79]

The silly thing is regardless of if they give the penalty or not they are deciding the world championship. If you don't want to make a key decision then don't be a steward.

I've often questioned if the stewards don't want to make the hard decisions, or if they have been told not to.

As someone who's been A competitive individual since I was a little kid, I don't care one bit about "the show", or how "entertaining" it is to casual fans, I care about the sport!

If the FIA & Liberty want F1 to be seen as a sport, then it needs to be governed like one.

[Andres125sx]

I'm honestly not sure how some people would handle the penalty system we had just a few years ago.

Let's not forget that not long ago, the most lenient penalties were a drive through, and a stop and go. Now we have 5 and 10 second time penalties that can be easily overcome if you have a front of the grid car. Now under the "let them race" mantra, even a 5 second penalty is deemed to severe by many. Liberty seems to truly be turning F1 in to the WWF on wheels, where everything is fair and legal unless it hinders someone's favorite driver.

Well said


Anycase I find it amazing how some people can excuse his favourite driver for pushing someone off track. Even Lewis penalty in Silverstone was too lenient, not even a penalty here is a very dangerous precedent. Now any driver who´s being overtook at the outside can push his rival off track to prevent the overtake?

Anyone defending this should go to a real track and learn something about respect to your rivals, and common sense. When it´s himself who´s being pushed out he will surely change his mind, but from an armchair it´s easy to defend such a dirty maneouver

[AeroDynamic]

I’ll say it again. Blaming the stewards or getting mad at them for deciding the championship is backwards. Blame the driver for not racing within the rules and ruining the spectacle. Taking it out on the stewards is why we are going to keep going in circles. We just need to hold the driver accountable; like, “hey racer, why you being dirty for? You ruin your reputation and the championship now that the racing is being decided by penalties because of your pathetic racing manouvres”

[Wil992]

I assume you know Ho Pin Tung, a racing driver and F1 analyst, who always gives his unbiased analysis after every race on everything that happened in the race.

I don't know why people are dunking on Ho-Pin Tung and, I suspect, not reading what he actually wrote.

Paragraph 1: Tyre grip has a limit
Paragraph 2: If you exceed that limit, bad things happen. Verstappen brakes later than Hamilton, on a tighter radius, and is already going faster. To maximise grip, he would brake in a straight line.
Paragraph 3: Verstappen doesn't try to make the corner, because he knows he's going too fast.
Paragraph 4: Had he turned tighter he'd spin and hit Hamilton.

Does anyone actually disagree with this?

Ho-Pin Tung isn't saying Verstappen didn't divebomb Hamilton and force him off the track. He's saying the opposite of that. Verstappen came in too fast (only Verstappen knows if it was deliberate), couldn't make the turn, so drove off the track with Hamilton trapped on the outside. As intent has no bearing on the rules, Ho-Pin Tung is actually in the Mercedes camp.

He could say exactly the same about Bottas in Hungary. He came in too fast, couldn't brake in time, hit Norris. To say those things isn't to argue Bottas didn't deserve a penalty, it's merely an observation of the facts.

I don't think anyone is really disagreeing with Ho-Pin's recounting of events (I agree with him too), but he did (deliberately) leave out the context of the situation. Namely, why Max was so late in the brakes to start with and why was he on the throttle on so early if he knew he was already heading off the track.



Now the above could either be because Max made a genuine mistake, or he was deliberately running Lewis off the track in a desperate attempt to maintain his lead.

I disagree with that analysis from Ho-Pin Tung, it's accurate but based on some incorrect assumptions, imo.
First off all, he mentions max grip, all perfectly factual, but he's implicitly stating that because all of that is true, it applies to this scenario, ie max was at the limit of grip at all times, therefore he had no choice but to run wide. That's the part where he's wandered into assumption. From the telemetry it's clear max gets off the brakes early, this is how he ends up alongside and travelling 40kph faster by mid corner. consequently i just don't buy the 'limit of grip' argument, he's on fresh tyres, albeit off the racing line, he's not braking, and he's got hardly any steering input. He's nowhere near the limit of adhesion as he approaches the apex. So the factually correct statements that the concept of grip exists, don't apply to this situation.

[KeiKo403]

I think the ‘let them race’ sentiment is unjust. By definition, taking part in that event, they are racing.
This racing series has sporting regulations which all competitors are aware of, maybe not fully aware of but for the most part they know what they’re doing.

Red Bull calling ‘let them race’ indicates IMO that they knew it was a dirty move by Max likely to result in a penalty, otherwise why say it if you believe there to be nothing wrong and feel the stewards are also able to see the same.

Even if you say Max had to limit his steering input as otherwise braking and steering at the same time would’ve caused instability and potentially an uncontrollable spin risking Hamiltons car, so Max was being a gent here that doesn’t limit him being responsible for having his car in that situation at the time.

The rules shouldn’t look at intent or consequence. The rules don’t say you have to leave a cars width when racing side by side*
*unless you aren’t in control of your car.

Ultimately I’m a hypocrite here because I agree with Max doing what he did, he’s racing for a WDC and he’s determined to get it however he can, surely that’s the life ambition of all 20 of those drivers. Can’t fault him for trying. What we can do however is fault the stewards and by extension the FIA for letting this become acceptable.

I fully agree with a couple of comments I’ve read about stewards keeping away from WDC deciding penalities. Applying a penalty where it’s deserved isn’t the FIA/stewards deciding the WDC. The driver in the wrong is the one deciding the WDC, almost as if he’d rather lose the WDC due to ‘outside factors, like stewards decisions’

[El Scorchio]

I'd imagine even if there's no further action over this one (I don't expect there to be- even if the telemetry looks pretty damning) that he's now used up all his 'free lives' and another similar incident will now be met with appropriately strong punishments, simply because for the sake of the sport, they can't allow the title to be won in that manner.

[AeroDynamic]

I thought the outcome of an incident has no role to play in racing code violations

its all well and good that the other driver push out of the track by 4 car widths didn't fall for it and get taken out. Its great that it didn't cost the win to the rightful winner. But why does that make it 'ok' ? the racer had an unfair advantage staying in front. next time that might cost the rightful victory to the driver that should have won. Or maybe they won't yield but get taken out which is an unfair advantage to the driver who has a points lead.

All this talk about how much steering there was, or why there wasn't enough, doesn't matter. He went off track by several car widths and he needed to do that to stay in front – which his a lasting advantage. It's bizarre the isn't obvious to the stewards already.

[dans79]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/monto ... t/6794780/

Montoya never disappoints when he gets his dander up!

Speaking on This Week with Will Buxton about the incident, Montoya felt Verstappen was taking the F1 title fight implications into consideration, knowing Hamilton needed to finish ahead of him to strengthen his championship hopes, and that he wasn’t going to make the corner due to how late he braked when fighting Hamilton.

“My honest opinion, the way I think Max looks at it is: if they crash he gains points,” Montoya said. “As long as Lewis doesn't finish ahead of him, he's in a better situation for the championship.

“Lewis was alongside him and cleared him in the braking zone. There was no way as late as he braked he was gonna make the corner. I don't think he had much of an intention of making the corner.

“I don't have anything against Max. I actually really like Max and Red Bull, and they've done an amazing job to bring the fight to Mercedes. But I think they're being surprised of how good Mercedes was.”

Montoya also felt it was inconsistency from the FIA over on-track incidents, pointing to the penalties handed out to Lando Norris and Sergio Perez (twice) during the Austrian GP earlier this season.

“In Austria, when people were going side by side and the guy in the outside wasn't given enough room in the corner, because there was gravel, they were penalised, the guy in the inside. And here that guy drove him completely off the race track. How do you justify [it]?”

Montoya added: “Why is Max getting away with this and some other guys don't? I mean, are they applying the rules the same for everybody? Or is Max getting treated different because he's young or whatever you want to call it? I'm gonna put another name out there. If Mazepin did that would he then been penalised?”

While he felt an investigation would have been expected for the incident, Montoya also believed Verstappen was within his rights to defend his lead against Hamilton.

“When I've done it, I got in trouble for it!” Montoya said. “Did Max do the right thing to defend that? Yes. Max did the right thing to defend the situation and the position.

“It was either to duel or let him win the race, at the end of the day he still won the race. But was he in a position to go that far on the braking zone?

"I think he was expecting for Lewis to turn and worst case scenario Lewis doesn't finish the race and he finishes the race. Because Lewis is around the outside. So Lewis had a lot to lose.

“I think Lewis was really smart not to even try to turn in, because Max was going for the crash. It was a little bit of a return move at Silverstone. Yes, it's a lot slower corner, but the precedent was kind of the same thing. He missed the apex.

"Look how Lewis got criticised for the crash in Silverstone – a really fast corner – because he missed the apex. Max didn't even try to make the corner.”

[NathanOlder]

How long will it take for us to hear whats going on ? Its been nearly 2 hours since the meeting started, the teams have plenty to get on with on a thursday before a race weekend.

[dans79]

Other drivers applying pressure to the FIA now!

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/lecl ... d/6795327/

Leclerc

Leclerc insisted he had no preference in terms of outcome.

"Honestly, I really don't mind. But whatever is allowed, then I just want it to be clear as a driver. That's the only thing that matters to me.

"If this is allowed, then overtaking around the outside is going to be very difficult.

"But yeah, whatever the situation, the decision is, I'll just adapt my driving to it; so I'm fine with both."

Sainz

Leclerc's Ferrari teammate Carlos Sainz agreed that drivers will be watching the Verstappen case, but wasn't surprised the Red Bull driver went unpunished in Brazil.

"A driver uses every opportunity to his advantage," he said.

"To know well if this hasn't been penalised at the last race, if I'm in a similar position, I know I can do something similar.

"I think the car on the inside always has the preference and the ability to run the other car wide, but if the car on the inside also goes wide, that is what we need to clarify.

"I mean, lately it's been a bit more like that. But if you really put your view back into for example, Austria [this year], then you there's a couple of things to review.

"What happened in Austria actually is with some cases is very similar. So yeah, I'm sure there will be some conversation in drivers' meetings just to clarify a bit."

[siskue2005]

So Leclerc will emulate Max if it is not punished

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/lecl ... d/6795327/

"To know well if this hasn't been penalised at the last race, if I'm in a similar position, I know I can do something similar.

"I think the car on the inside always has the preference and the ability to run the other car wide, but if the car on the inside also goes wide, that is what we need to clarify.

[El Scorchio]

So Leclerc will emulate Max if it is not punished

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/lecl ... d/6795327/

"To know well if this hasn't been penalised at the last race, if I'm in a similar position, I know I can do something similar.

"I think the car on the inside always has the preference and the ability to run the other car wide, but if the car on the inside also goes wide, that is what we need to clarify.

I do not blame him in the slightest.
And this is exactly the problem with the confusing and erratic way the penalties are applied. They've now said in effect it's ok to do what Verstappen did and just drive your opponent 50 feet off the road if they want to avoid contact with you, which sets a precedent- and basically ends the practice of ever being able to overtake anyone round the outside.

Until someone does it this weekend or sometime soon and gets penalised for it (because that will happen as sure as night follows day) and we are right back to square one.

[nimoraca]

Hamilton is avoiding giving any opinion on the incident and keeps talking how there needs to be respect on and off track. If he is not pressing for this why is the team doing it? Seems kind of strange.
He probably understands that Max is ready to crash out if given opportunity so he needs to put himself in a situation where there is no such opportunity.