2025 British Grand Prix - Silverstone, July 04 - 06

[Tvetovnato]

Because the drivers were complaining about visibility before the sc, a crash happened because of it, just letting them continue when nobody could see anything and the rain was coming down heavier made no sense

They could have used VSC? The drivers would stay spread out, the race would be neutralized and chances of crashes would be minimized.

If I was calling it I would let them race until there is real need to stop (a crash) but if they wanted to reduce risk, just put a boring VSC.

VSC actually sounds like a great idea, I wonder why don't they use it in such conditions.
Might be because drivers can play with the delta and go full beans occasionally (for a turn or two) even with VSC on.

About the delta, I don’t understand why they don’t just set speed limiter like a slow zone in WEC. Then no one gains or loses, same speed for all.

[Shrieker]

Holy sh---t, didn't know the hulk didn't have a podium all these years lol ! Good on him.

[bluechris]

You guys you still discussing really if it was penalty or not? Have you saw Max onboard? I could had said also in a dry race that it was a bit harsh and maybe 5 sec was ok but with spray? No way Jose.

[stephen]

Congratulations to Nico! It has finally happened for him. What a race for him, started at P19 and finished on the podium. Well Deserved.

[Hammerfist]

Yeah congrats to Nico on his first podium. As a Hamilton fan I honestly didn’t mind he couldn’t get Nico. Nico deserved it more and he was way overdue for this result. Well done.
Terrible mistake by Piastri. Is he starting to shoot himself in the foot to let Lando grab this wdc? I hope not but the trend isn’t favoring him at the moment. I think this fight will go down to the last race. So exciting for f1.
They should have red flagged the race when the torrential rains came.

[Watto]

Only just caught up with all the post race stuff and can't say I was a fan of Stella and Oscar post race. It gave an awful kit if Horner/Max vides look we have a picture vibes to it even if I do think it had some merit to ti - I'm thinking the who was ahead at the apex when Max went off got the penalty for gaining a lasting advantage. The penalty there to Max was correct even though I think some of the pictures probably made it look far more line ball than was made out too a bit like with Oscar here the penalty was right but not as obvious as some critics made out either. It had a bit of a sore loser feel to it rather than you made a mistake. Its probably the first time I think I;ve heard anything from them that stood out to me that way normally they re both pretty good at accepting and moving on.

[DDopey]

"When the clerk of the course had declared that the safety car was coming in that lap and the lights were extinguished, Car 81 suddenly braked hard (59.2 psi of brake pressure) and reduced speed in the middle of the straight between T14 and T15, from 218 kph to 52 kph, resulting in Car 1 having to take evasive action to avoid a collision.
This momentarily resulted in Car 1 unavoidably overtaking Car 81, a position which he gave back immediately.
Article 55.15 of the FIA Sporting Regulations required Car 81 to proceed at a pace which involved no erratic braking nor any other manoeuvre which is likely to endanger other drivers from the point at which the lights on the safety car are turned off.
What Car 81 did was clearly a breach of that article. In accordance with the penalty guidelines, we imposed a 10 second time penalty to Car 81."

Seems to me a reasonable explanation.

The steward’s ruling is both very interesting and wrong, because it contains a false assertion. It asserts, without evidence, that car 1 “unavoidably” overtook car 81.

This is just plain false. Car 1 overtook car 81 because its driver was caught napping and not paying attention.

Car 1 could have avoided overtaking car 81 if its driver was looking at the road instead of whatever else he was doing, which was probably fiddling with knobs on the steering wheel or chatting with his race engineer.

The truth is that neither driver should have been penalised, because no harm occurred and both continued on with their race.

But if either car was to be penalised it should have been car 1, for nearly causing a collision by failing to pay attention.

As an expert racer the driver of car 1 should know that it is the prerogative of the lead driver, on safety car release, to warm his brakes and tires and control the pace of the release to his advantage.

In fact given that the driver of car 81 stated that he drove the same way four laps in a row, it is not inconceivable that the driver of car 1 manufactured the incident by deliberately overshooting then complaining about it on the radio. He knows the FIA are desperate to keep him in the series and might feel pressured to act on his complaints.

To see such a blatant false assertion in the stewards’ report to justify their manipulation of the race is highly disappointing, and their failure to consider the alternative scenario seems a peculiar omission.

The result is not the reason for the penalty, it’s the action itself. It’s there for context, not as a reason.

[TimW]

You guys you still discussing really if it was penalty or not? Have you saw Max onboard? I could had said also in a dry race that it was a bit harsh and maybe 5 sec was ok but with spray? No way Jose.

Exactly. I guess they do not remember this one:


That's why hard braking is not allowed anymore after the safety car lights are off, wick is exactly what Oscar did. 10 seconds harsh? Feels like it, but probably would have felt differently if there had been a mugello like crash.

[Waz]

The steward’s ruling is both very interesting and wrong, because it contains a false assertion. It asserts, without evidence, that car 1 “unavoidably” overtook car 81.

Is it not entirely plausible that Red Bull gave evidence to the stewards (in the form of testimony from the driver of car 1) that car 1 was unable to avoid overtaking car 81?

Possible, however also possible for the data to be cherry picked. Did the stewards use the data from the previous 4 laps of Piastri braking in the same place each time?

Max is good enough to notice the pattern and deliberately plan an overtake. He just looks at every conceivable advantage to pounce on.

If they're driving the same speed, maybe he was just a few meters closer, or braked a second later than he could.

Oscar was punished for a "what if" scenario. It's also correct that Max should have at least been investigated properly for overtaking under SC. It's noticeable that the last few races with SC he has been driving alongside other cars again.

Edit: there should have been 2 separate investigations into the SC incident.

[Waz]

Congratulations to Nico! It has finally happened for him. What a race for him, started at P19 and finished on the podium. Well Deserved.

He's having a great season isn't he? Second race in a row he started P19 and finished in the points. I hope Audi have a good engine ready for next year.

[basti313]

You guys you still discussing really if it was penalty or not? Have you saw Max onboard? I could had said also in a dry race that it was a bit harsh and maybe 5 sec was ok but with spray? No way Jose.

The big question is still to me...when did this nonsense start?

Past: They left some space, accelerated strongly and pushed the brake. Like this it was obvious that they are warming the brake and no issue behind.
Now: Just push the brake at an arbitrary moment.

Did this start with Russel? I guess not? Since when is this going on like this and why didn't we see issues before?

It's also correct that Max should have at least been investigated properly for overtaking under SC.

No. Read the penalty guidelines they just gave out. This is no penalty, thus, no investigation.

[ENGINE TUNER]

You guys you still discussing really if it was penalty or not? Have you saw Max onboard? I could had said also in a dry race that it was a bit harsh and maybe 5 sec was ok but with spray? No way Jose.

Exactly. I guess they do not remember this one:


That's why hard braking is not allowed anymore after the safety car lights are off, wick is exactly what Oscar did. 10 seconds harsh? Feels like it, but probably would have felt differently if there had been a mugello like crash.

Except it was proven that the leader, Bottas, did not brake and kept a constant speed and was therefore not given a penalty. It was drivers anticipating the start, then braking hard, exactly what verstappen did yesterday, that triggered the pile up. Verstappen should have been penalized yesterday, and in Canada and every other time he passed or got side by side to another car under SC conditions.

1:05 of this video shows bottas did nothing wrong

[dren]

Holy sh---t, didn't know the hulk didn't have a podium all these years lol ! Good on him.

He's come close a few times and even should probably have a victory if he didn't collide with Hamilton in Brazil.

[Dee]

You guys you still discussing really if it was penalty or not? Have you saw Max onboard? I could had said also in a dry race that it was a bit harsh and maybe 5 sec was ok but with spray? No way Jose.

Exactly. I guess they do not remember this one:


That's why hard braking is not allowed anymore after the safety car lights are off, wick is exactly what Oscar did. 10 seconds harsh? Feels like it, but probably would have felt differently if there had been a mugello like crash.

Except it was proven that the leader, Bottas, did not brake and kept a constant speed and was therefore not given a penalty. It was drivers anticipating the start, then braking hard, exactly what verstappen did yesterday, that triggered the pile up. Verstappen should have been penalized yesterday, and in Canada and every other time he passed or got side by side to another car under SC conditions.

1:05 of this video shows bottas did nothing wrong

It was Piastri that sped up and Max responded. Piastri did not keep to a constant speed. Piastri sped up for enough time that the spray made it impossible for Max to see him until he was nearly on his gearbox. It was the length of time that Oscar accelerated for before braking that caused the whole thing in combination with the amount he braked.

[TimW]

Except it was proven that the leader, Bottas, did not brake and kept a constant speed and was therefore not given a penalty. It was drivers anticipating the start, then braking hard, exactly what verstappen did yesterday, that triggered the pile up. Verstappen should have been penalized yesterday, and in Canada and every other time he passed or got side by side to another car under SC conditions.

1:05 of this video shows bottas did nothing wrong

The point is that after that incident, it was added that specifically after the safety car lights are off, erratic acceleration and braking is not allowed.
Bottas did not do that and was cleared
Piastri did do that and got a penalty

And when Piastri accelerated, verstappen should not have accelerated?!?!? No driver on the grid would do that.