It does. He just had the circumstances, conditions, car, team, and engine behind him to survive such a setback. All I said earlier is there will come other seasons and circumstances where another driver / team in a very good car will make (his) unnecessary but costly incidents of his making, the critical factor of losing a championship he could have otherwise won.Ryar wrote: ↑08 Nov 2021, 07:27I highlighted about Max not having mentioned in the Silverstone verdict, because you apportioned blame to Max, without officials having said anything about it!AeroDynamic wrote: ↑08 Nov 2021, 07:18Why do they need to mention max? They aren’t serving him a penalty, so they don’t need to outline his fault in the incident to Lewis. Predominantly is not wholly. It means more to blame than the other, and as I said before, it’s pure speculation how much They blamed Hamilton. But given he got an equivalent penalty to Max in Monza, and RB called Monza a racing incident, then that demonstrates the line the FIA have been taking this year, and how little they thought of Hamilton’s move.. after all, red bull complained that max nearly died, and the car was a huge bill. Yet the FIA felt a few seconds was appropriate, despite how Lewis was able to continue and max wasn’t. The post crash circumstances gave them plenty angle to blame Lewis wholly or near wholly, to give a very harsh penalty.. but it didn’t come. Hmm. Something can’t be right, he must be almost fully to blame from what you keep inferring, but FIA didn’t agree with what red bull felt was appropriate. Sigh, must be MaFIA.. Monza was looked at similarity to Silverstone, despite Most people Agree that both were racing incidents. the ones that don’t, are mostly made up of partisan followers behind one or the other camp / driver.
FIA sporting rules clearly say and the race director has highlighted, they don't consider the impact in an incident. So, they have a rule book and they use it to dish out penalty. Everything else is subjective and irrelevant for officials. Whether the penalty dished out to Lewis is appropriate or light, is a matter of subjective discussion, considering the damage it did to Max's car and the real potential physical danger of it. For all practical and official intent and purposes, Lewis was to blame in Silverstone. That incident cannot be attributed to prove that Max doesn't know how to handle a championship fight situation.
They don’t need to say anything about it, the fact they couldn’t and didn’t blame Hamilton wholly, by default means they recognise max was to blame for the incident as well, just not as much as Lewis. Based on the penalty, it couldn’t have been as much as those hysterical grieving red bull employees called it
Yes I know what the FIA want us to believe but everybody watching doesn’t believe that rings true every time. a lot of viewers have valid opinions to see the inconsistency of penalties, and why it appears naive to take their word as gospel.
And yes it can because we’ve watched over the last several years where he’s been improving from. He was known for throwing away numerous results with crashes, to the point where even the journalists were asking him why he has so many incidents.. to which, max, with an embarrassed look on his face, paused before saying “I don’t know”. Funny, because the paddock has been knowing for years.
