Motorsport

Creating a seige mentality, not sure he actually thinks this way (probably does)

Hahaha very fair point. He's not horner though

Oh dear Toto. That is embarrassing. Should take a cue from Lewis who has pretty much taken the adverse decisions on the chin all weekend and just got on with it.

Now being staunchly denied by McLaren. Weird, story really took off over the last couple of hours.

Sounds like it raged fiercely in your house Solid, then burnt out just as fast

Heard nothing from the major news outlets, but then again, they don't do reporting so much these days

"F1 race director Michael Massi acknowledges that they did not have access to Verstappen's onboards in the incident with Hamilton. After seeing them, he assures that the action was 100% punishable"

This guy is a Spanish F1 journalist. Not seen this reported elsewhere so either he had an informal chat with Massi or it's a joke that doesn't translate or it's a typo.

If genuine then you'd have to say Mercedes have excellent grounds to appeal. Still find it crazy they didn't bother to look at the telemetry even without the cockpit video. That alone would have the steering angle and pedal inputs that should be enough to establish intent. It's just negligent.

Shouldn't we have the missing angle by now anyway? How long does it take to download? I do hope they don't accidentally lose it.

The F1 car cameras can only broadcast one camera on a car at a time to the live feed I believe. It switched to the rear wing cam as Hamilton was overtaking as standard so it is indeed a case of needing to download the footage from the car.

Seems like it will be forgotten about but it once again highlights how much reform is needed in what is and isn't acceptable on track, especially when the aim of this upcoming set of regs next year is for cars to be able to hang on to another's gearbox much more easily.

I understand why they didn't have the angle at the time, it's almost certainly a fundamental RF bandwidth limitation so I'm fine with that. My complaint is why ignore the other data that they did have?

Norris and Perez both got penalties for forcing another driver off the track at Austria, and I can't really see what the difference is with Max. If anything it was way more blatant as he left the track himself and was behind at the point of corner entry.

We are repeatedly told that the stewards don't judge the consequences of an incident, merely the action, but once again a blatant 'move or we crash' action from Max is allowed because Hamilton just barely managed to avoid contact. I make that five times this year (Imola, Spain, Silverstone Brooklands, Monza, Brazil) that he's now had to leave the circuit to avoid Max hitting him.  I'm not saying all were entirely Max's fault btw, Lewis wasn't entitled to space at Monza for example.

Tsunoda hitting Stroll was a classic 'yield or crash' move as well, except Stroll chose crash. The steward's rationale for that penalty was that the move was 'optimistic' and he 'braked too late' and was therefore wholly to blame. Both judgements must logically apply to Verstappen on Hamilton as well, because logically they accepted that Max was doing his best to stay on the circuit (rather than force another driver off). So the only difference is the fact that Stroll turned in, which they repeatedly claim isn't a factor...

Attempted murder evidently isn't a crime the stewards are interested in. If the victim survives the would be murderer gets off scot-free and encouraged to have another go.

I also don't want loads of in race penalties. I think they can let them race and still set the right tone. Outline the rules of engagement, then get tougher with awarding penalty points after races.

For instances where there was no contact but the move was still overly aggressive just give them a few penalty points. That way the repeat offenders get benched before another driver gets punted out of a race rather than after.

Also freezes Pourchaire out from one potential entry point for the next 3 years. Lots of lower grid spots tied up in seemingly medium term at least pay driver roles.

Onboard footage has been released from the Red Bull now.

Just looks a case of outbraking himself trying to leave it as late as possible and getting the initial understeer from that to me. Certainly no opening of the steering or anything particularly sinister. Should really have been made to give up the place or possibly given a 5sec penalty but I don't think it's worth turning into another Silverstone level farce.

Very similar to Silverstone really in that it was a bit of a desperate one up the inside with understeer caused by the entry speed. Full lock any sooner would have only caused more understeer. If it had caused a collision it would have been a 'predominantly to blame' job I think. But no contact gave them an easy way to hide.

Think it only highlights the need for there so be some sort of clear definition on when and where a corner is 'won' though, regardless of the excuses of driver error. Getting extremely late braking wrong should be punishable without the need for any context or consequence.

Both events have to be viewed through the same prism really. Lewis shouldn't have been expected to move out of the way on Sunday any more/less than Max should have in Silverstone.

It goes to show though that while they like to say they don't base their decisions on the outcome of an event, they actually absolutely do. Had contact been made on Sunday Max would definitely have been punished for it to the tune of either 10 seconds or another 3 place grid drop. The only outcome they don't base decisions on is the wider connotations incidents have on championship standings. Maybe if they did that though, it might encourage people to play ball a bit more.

I read a brilliant suggestion below the line on another site. Whenever a driver runs all four wheels off the track, take away their ERS and DRS for the following lap.

I think that's really elegant. Might not work at every circuit so may need reviewing ahead of each weekend, but intuitively, you'd think that the time loss from no toys will be substantially greater than the advantage gained from running wide. It's more fun than being asked to yield and would be an effective deterrent.

Unsurprisingly, Merc have just requested a review. Will be very interesting to see how the FIA play this.