Formula 1 Etihad Airways Abu Dhabi Grand Prix 2021Formula 1

[pumaATTACK]

It's a fair outcome. Neither driver did anything wrong, so they should not be punished for driving to the conditions created, and annulling the race punishes neither because it doesn't affect their outcomes. We can't say Hamilton would have won had the officials followed the law correctly, so there's no reasonable cause to inflate his outcome.

Which is why it's best to just let the race remain as it was. I don't like he idea of changing it in court or retroactively changing the results, as that leads to a whole can of worms for future incidents to be undone.

It was an unfortunate few minutes of blown calls, but it would be a bigger mistake to alter a championship once it's over.

 

[Famine]

It would shuffle Sainz, Norris and Leclerc's championship standings though.

Indeed, as did the SC shenanigans (apparently Masi only cared for the leaders) and I'd expect compensation claims filed by the teams which lost out.

Ultimately we need the least damaging outcome, which will likely be annulling the race.

 

[GroupB]

It's a trust issue with most people wondering if they will watch F1 again.

Forget about the fans, what about the competitors - the corporations who rely on the sport for the publicity and the employees who rely on the sport for their livelihoods.
How can they be sure they won’t be the next ones to be sacrificed for entertainment’s sake? There’s a lot of money on the line that depends on the sanctioning body always following its own rules.

 

[Samus]

Like I said above, that was one possibility and the only one that Merc was ready for. They didn't seem to consider any other possibility while RB had everything covered.

Red Bull didn't "cover" anything in some tactical master stroke, they just made a free pit stop and hoped for the best. Do you think they would have made that same call with BOT 5 seconds behind? Of course not. RB had a luxury that Merc didn't, with absolutely nothing to lose.

That's just how it is with SC, more often than not the person in 2nd has the advantage. Merc have been caught out before because they know whatever they do, the team in 2nd will do the opposite and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

[pumaATTACK]

Red Bull didn't "cover" anything in some tactical master stroke, they just made a free pit stop and hoped for the best. Do you think they would have made that same call with BOT 5 seconds behind? Of course not. RB had a luxury that Merc didn't, with absolutely nothing to lose.

That's just how it is with SC, more often than not the person in 2nd has the advantage. Merc have been caught out before because they know whatever they do, the team in 2nd will do the opposite and there is nothing you can do about it.

Which is why the only strategy thing Merc could have done is pit under the first VSC. Forcing Max to stay out on the hards and with Lewis' pace he easily would have caught Max.

The only problem with that is we all know Max would never let Lewis pass and it would either be decided by a penalty (whether or not they actually cared to penalize Max that time) or a crash...

 

[Samus]

Which is why the only strategy thing Merc could have done is pit under the first VSC. Forcing Max to stay out on the hards and with Lewis' pace he easily would have caught Max.

The only problem with that is we all know Max would never let Lewis pass and it would either be decided by a penalty (whether or not they actually cared to penalize Max that time) or a crash...

Yes, so it's obvious they wanted to avoid that. Just look at the laps HAM spent behind PER. I've never seen him so tentative in attempting to pass another car, he was so afraid of shenanigans. In the end PER was just about the right side of clean and fair, but HAM didn't trust him at all. If that were another car I've no doubt he'd have flown past.

So if he was like that with PER, imagine the apprehension with VER himself.

 

[pumaATTACK]

Yes, so it's obvious they wanted to avoid that. Just look at the laps HAM spent behind PER. I've never seen him so tentative in attempting to pass another car, he was so afraid of shenanigans.

So if he was like that with PER, imagine the apprehension with VER himself.

Yup exactly. He already avoided one super late lunge on lap 1. Theres no way Max would have been clean in the final laps.... I dont blame Lewis for taking that stance, he wanted to win it on his driving not a stewards decision.


Lewis has more class than I do... I would have forced Max off the track on the final lap. But he probably knew he would get a penalty for that......

 

[andrea]

 

[pumaATTACK]

Also, I keep seeing people blaming Netflix for their Drive to Survive plot.

When has DTS ever been about the championship fight? They only want small drama between teams.... not a historical documentary of the 2021 championship fight.

 

[McLaren]

Video from Stroll at the end, language warning.

Spoiler

You guys aren't blaming Masi for playing a part, you're accusing Masi of throwing the race, and arguing that RB's title should be stripped because it was rigged.

Most of us came to the conclusion Sunday or yesterday that Max should keep his title.... The issue is with Masi.

The rest of your post continues to ignore what actually went on in the moment & acts like this is an American sport of 2-teams where 1 gets favored and 1 gets screwed, & it's accepted because... it's 2 teams, one is naturally going to argue against whilst the winning team will naturally take the win. Doesn't work that way in F1; other drivers have full argument to ask why they weren't afforded the opportunity Max was.

 

[BrainsBush]

That's going to be a big party this Thursday!

https://www.fia.com/fia-prize-giving-2021

Full line up? Is it mandatory to be present for all/any driver(s)?

 

[O604]

Also, I keep seeing people blaming Netflix for their Drive to Survive plot.

When has DTS ever been about the championship fight? They only want small drama between teams.... not a historical documentary of the 2021 championship fight.

Interesting point. What happens when they see that 10,000,000 people watch only 10 minutes of the last episode. And they could achieve the same viewership with a single Youtube clip.

Just like the last few seasons could be replaced by a clip of the Grosjean incident.

If money talks, then why waste money? DTS is popular but it's expensive to make.

 

[Famine]

Also, I keep seeing people blaming Netflix for their Drive to Survive plot.

When has DTS ever been about the championship fight? They only want small drama between teams.... not a historical documentary of the 2021 championship fight.

The best bit is that Netflix/Box2Box had zero access to Verstappen this year, and "limited access" to Mercedes. So this won't even feature.

 

[GroupB]

Video from Stroll at the end, language warning.

Spoiler

You know, looking at that blue flag deployment, I’m not so sure that Masi didn’t doubly screw up by contriving a finish. I think Max might have reeled Hamilton in anyway or at least gotten thrillingly close. It would have been a super-tense entire lap rather than the quick kill we got.

 

[pumaATTACK]

You know, looking at that blue flag deployment, I’m not so sure that Masi didn’t doubly screw up by contriving a finish. I think Max might have reeled Hamilton in anyway or at least gotten thrillingly close. It would have been a super-tense entire lap rather than the quick kill we got.

Hamilton likely would have sped away into turn 1 and been too far for Max to catch but it would have been possible. Sure would have been more "entertaining" than what we got.

 

[kilesa4568]

Has anyone heard anything about the appeal? A few people (pundits) have mentioned rumours that Mercedes were going to pull the appeal but apart from them congratulating Red Bull and Max shortly after, there's been no news at all from them. Being an F1 fan, my first thought was that I hope they don't follow it up but after thinking about how the season played out, the racing standards involved and how they were handled, I doubt it could damage it any more than it already is.

I'll still watch it but it's lost most of its premier sporting event appeal for me this year. Instead of talking about the best man and strategy winning or doing well, everyone talks about who got away with what. Pinnacle of motorsport, my arse.

 

[Grayfox]

Has anyone heard anything about the appeal? A few people (pundits) have mentioned rumours that Mercedes were going to pull the appeal but apart from them congratulating Red Bull and Max shortly after, there's been no news at all from them. Being an F1 fan, my first thought was that I hope they don't follow it up but after thinking about how the season played out, the racing standards involved and how they were handled, I doubt it could damage it any more than it already is.

I'll still watch it but it's lost most of its premier sporting event appeal for me this year. Instead of talking about the best man and strategy winning or doing well, everyone talks about who got away with what. Pinnacle of motorsport, my arse.

Mercedes has asked the most evil of people to deal with this.
These people are LAWYERS.

And we all know Lawyers move slower than a rocket transport platform.

 

[Monkey Man]

Sky released a video of the onboards on the last lap and a half including some of the radio messages. After the 2nd straight when Lewis knew he couldn't take Max around the outside of the new corner he gave up on it and backed off. It's at that moment he said the FIA had 'manipulated the event.' If Lewis continued at his normal pace he would have been a lot closer at the line.

Ahh... thanks man; didn't know that.

 

[United6694]

I don't think "scared" is the right word, but certainly exceptionally cautious about it. I mean... look at what has happened every time the two have been on track together, and every time Verstappen has got away without punishment for it. Including at Saudi, where Hamilton's race pace was undeniably considerably better than Verstappen - he got run off the road, and then brake-checked.

That aside, would you be scared of something obviously dangerous to you? Verstappen has shown willingness to put you into a wall, brake-check you at 2.4G, and attempt to drive their car away from a crash they caused while their wheels were on your head. It would seem that caution not to put your car in that position again when there was no need to is the wise choice.

Snipped your post,

Twice in the French GP Max passed and there was no contact whatsoever, one example I grant you, but saying every time certainly isn't true.


Has he shown willingness to put Ham in the wall? I think he the way he races is that he is happy to have a crash or pass, but outright putting someone in to a wall that is certainly a big claim imo.

Monza incident can be viewed through whichever lens of the drive you support (along with who caused it), I would say there was no way for certain Verstappen could have known his wheels were resting on the helmet of Hamilton at the time so suggesting that is a pretty serious accusation no? I thought he tried to get going again once the car came to a stop, not whilst still mid air? And in that incident Hamilton is not innocent either, wasn't he trying to reverse out whilst Verstappen was standing up and getting out of his car? If both are true then both are extremely dangerous of course. I haven't watched this back so happy to be corrected if I haven't remembered correctly.

Anyway, a couple of thoughts from the season overall, no need to share my view on the last race as everything has pretty much been said on both sides. Although I will say I was barely able to hold my cup I was that nervous. Haven't felt like that watching a race since Brazil 06 watching MSC's performance of coming through the field after the puncture.

I think overall this season Mercedes were / looked a bit complacent / took their eye of the ball at times, I feel like they got a bit too comfortable after the lack of serious challenge in 2019 / 2020 and it showed at certain points I feel.

Things I would change going forward;

Red flags, stop letting teams fix cars, im sure the TV graphic says race suspended, so paused right? So why can cars be worked on and fixed?

VSC, close the pit lane, this is meant to neutralise the race. So neutralise it, why is the pit lane open?

SC, again, close the pit lane for duration.

And for the love of god, stop broadcasting FIA / Team radio. Let them moan behind the scenes but no need to share that with the world.

 

[kilesa4568]

Mercedes has asked the most evil of people to deal with this.
These people are LAWYERS.

And we all know Lawyers move slower than a rocket transport platform.

They took one to the race but nobody has said it's in the lawyers hands now. Not that I've seen anyway but you could be right. The silence is starting to look like a case is being prepped...

A sorry state of affairs.

 

[OJBrit]

Fact is, refs play a part in every race and every game, and even if they make mistakes, it's up to the teams to weather storm.

Yes, but it is also in the ref's remit to follow the rules. This is the equivalent of a ref giving Team A a penalty for fouling a player from Team B in Team B's own penalty area. (FYI that would be a free kick to Team B under the rules.) Saying that a ref making up their own rules and applying it to the championship rivals in the championship showdown which also heavily favours one participant over everyone else in the event is correct and we should accept that as a mistake is a serious error of judgement from you. Not one sports fan should ever accept that.

Another argument I'm hearing is to eliminate the direct communication between the director and the teams. Makes sense on the surface. But a defense for that has been, "when do you see a soccer coach run onto the field and talk to the refs?"

Wait...they don't do that in soccer? That's standard procedure in American sports. How the hell else is a team supposed to call a timeout if they can't communicate directly with the refs? Players and coaches all have direct communication with the refs, it's just the nature of the game. In baseball, the team manager will literally run onto the field and scream in the umpire's face until they get thrown out. I don't see why this is a problem. It does lead to discussions of refball every now and then but guess what?

We get over it and we move onto the next game. Ultimately if the refs don't like a player or coach's conduct, they get penalized and tossed off the floor but again that is a subjective ref decision that can have huge consequences on the game. Imagine if Masi got pissed and tossed both Toto and Horner off the wall? Now that would've been fun to watch.

The coaches/ managers have the fourth official to speak to and air their grievances to. They can call the ref over to discuss a matter but on the majority of occasions just take notes to feed back to the ref. The ref should only speak to a coach/ manager if they are telling them off or giving them a card. Otherwise they cannot focus on officiating the game due to the fact a lot of managers would constantly be in their ear. Also the ref's are in the middle of the field of play and the managers are not. How would they speak to them without entering play?

 

[O604]

Press has to switch to the FIA election soon, no?

I've been reading up on it a bit.

Bin Sulayem, a 14-time Middle East rally champion and regional motorsport and touring heavyweight, is campaigning under the slogan ‘FIA for Members’, is assembling his ‘slate’ of 14 office bearers as required by FIA statutes and internal regulations, and recently announced Brazilian-born Fabiana Ecclestone, wife of former F1 CEO Bernie, as sport vice-president for the South American region should be elected.

Like seriously?

 

[andrea]

Lights on but no one is home.

 

[WiisardNic]

Lol dude you are so off base.


You are acting like Merc had time to adjust to the blown call…

Yes Lewis should have given up track position after being told no unlapping of cars will be happening. Yeah that sounds right.

Yes, this is one of the ridiculous things I've heard across many places. The call changing had no bearing on Mercedes decision to pit or not, as this came AFTER they were all bunched up. If the call was made to unlap everyone at that point, and then Lewis pitted (as I've seen being suggested some places), he would have started the last lap in 6th place. Not 6th in the queue, but actual 6th place.

Joke?

It's was a poor choice by F1 to put someone so directly connected to scandal as CTO. If something similar happens, it should be looked at.

There we go, a bit of misinformation. Pat Symonds is nowhere near this, because its not a technical matter. To suggest otherwise is completely ludicrous, irrespective of his past misdemeanours.

I was incidentally reading about Crashgate again for reasons unrelated to this Grand Prix but something about it has leapt off the page at me; at the time in 2008 the pitlane was closed under safety car conditions until the entire field was behind the safety car itself. In an era of no refuelling, wouldn't a reintroduction of this rule negate the whole "free pitstop" offered to some but not others under the safety car? Track position would be paramount, arguably to the benefit of on track action and fan perception.

Of course, Crashgate happened under this ruleset but there were plenty of other factors at play and there is no guarantee that such a thing would happen again.

Yeah, the rule makes more sense now that there is no refuelling. Maybe it can be limited to "you can come in for tyres if there is an actual puncture, but it has to be the same compound" or something like that.

That's going to be a big party this Thursday!

https://www.fia.com/fia-prize-giving-2021

Full line up? Is it mandatory to be present for all/any driver(s)?

I believe it is mandatory for the top 3. So Max, Lewis, Valtteri.

Snipped your post,

Twice in the French GP Max passed and there was no contact whatsoever, one example I grant you, but saying every time certainly isn't true.

Has he shown willingness to put Ham in the wall? I think he the way he races is that he is happy to have a crash or pass, but outright putting someone in to a wall that is certainly a big claim imo.

Monza incident can be viewed through whichever lens of the drive you support (along with who caused it), I would say there was no way for certain Verstappen could have known his wheels were resting on the helmet of Hamilton at the time so suggesting that is a pretty serious accusation no? I thought he tried to get going again once the car came to a stop, not whilst still mid air? And in that incident Hamilton is not innocent either, wasn't he trying to reverse out whilst Verstappen was standing up and getting out of his car? If both are true then both are extremely dangerous of course. I haven't watched this back so happy to be corrected if I haven't remembered correctly.

Thank you. Spot on. To suggest that anytime Max and Lewis are together, Max will cause a crash, well.. that's just not true is it. It's only the absolute #haters that are suggesting this. Even back in the day when Lewis and Felipe baby were like magnets to eachother, no one would say that about Lewis, that he is deliberately trying to punt him off into the wall. Might have said that he was a bit sloppy, or aggressive, but deliberate? C'mon

 

[GroupB]

Via CNN (which shows how big this has gotten)

 

[McLaren]

Another article being shared on Reddit from a lawyer's perspective, but I didn't see if it's the same one passed around.

Still really hoping Lewis is fine and wanting to let everyone know he'll be ready to go next year. This Merc. silence is unfortunately keeping him quiet as well.

 

[Famine]

To suggest that anytime Max and Lewis are together, Max will cause a crash, well.. that's just not true is it.

"Hey, remember in that one race where it didn't happen" isn't quite the flex against the pretty self-evident reality that you might think it is.

It's only the absolute #haters that are suggesting this.

What is an "absolute #hater" and how does one qualify as one?

I don't hate anyone absolutely, and I am quite clearly citing the multiple occasions across the season - including one in the exact same race - where Max Verstappen has sent his car fully up the inside of Hamilton, barely in the same country as the apex, with somewhere between only just enough lock to keep the car on circuit and nowhere near enough lock to even keep the car on circuit, daring Hamilton to try and make the turn and crash or cede the place.

This was ruled against by the FIA as recently as the 2016 season, when Rosberg did the same thing at turn three at Austria, though from considerably nearer the middle of the track in the braking zone, alongside Hamilton, by not turning into the corner.

Also in Austria in 2019, Max Verstappen did it to Charles Leclerc with a full send, understeer past the apex (and even a correction against the line of the corner) and wheel-to-wheel contact, and was not penalised.

Also in Austria but this season, two drivers were penalised three times between them - Lando Norris and Sergio Perez - at 5s a time for running a car wide leaving turn four (only without the full steam divebomb).

All of these should have been penalties; Appendix L is still pretty clear about this:

Appendix L, Chapter IV, Article 2b
Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off-line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.

However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited. Any driver who appears guilty of any of the above offences will be reported to the Stewards.

In the British GP, Hamilton was penalised 10s for it, again without the full steam divebomb (he was alongside on the straight and at the first angle change), as "causing a collision", hence the 10s penalty, though I guess the fact he was in a heavy car on cold tyres and didn't try to steer Verstappen to the outside played a part in ruling that it was not deliberate.


Meanwhile Verstappen has done it again and again, and several more agains, and faced no penalty for doing so, continually performing "manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track".

The only time he's had a penalty in these... "battles" this season is in Saudi, and that wasn't even for the full-send divebomb yeeting his opponent (Hamilton again) off the track, but for leaving the track and gaining an advantage (5s) and causing a collision (10s) with a brake check - which, and it's up to you whether you agree or not, seems a little worse than the half-arsed sideswipe Maldonado gave Hamilton at Monaco in qualifying (5 place penalty) and the even half-arseder sideswipe Schumacher gave Villeneuve in 1997 (full season disqualification).

Then after that, Hamilton was warned he was close to a black and white flag for [checks notes] running an opponent wide (without contact), which shows that apparently the officials do watch for this sort of thing... just not when there's a 33 on the car. And this was indeed a justifiable position:

That's crowding a car off, by not turning in when it's on the outside, just like Rosberg did to him in 2016. And what Verstappen did in Abu Dhabi on lap one isn't, apparently. Could and should be a penalty if Norris, Perez and Perez in Austria were, as should Verstappen in Brazil, Imola, Barcelona, Monza, Saudi, and Abu Dhabi (and I think British GP Sprint? I'm hazy on that).

I'm not sure who I'm supposed to be absolutely #hating by agreeing Norris, Rosberg, and both Perez penalties were right, and Hamilton and Verstappen's lack of them were wrong, but I guess I'm not #hating right.


Now apparently, unlike people who think this isn't a thing that's happened repeatedly this season, Mercedes seemed to be acutely aware of it and did not want the championship to be determined by whether Verstappen could be trusted to be alongside Hamilton in a situation where it's the championship or bust.

This is why, along with the expectation that the hard tyres would last to the end and then another 10 laps and that race control would follow both the legislation and its own statement four minutes previously, it did not pit the clearly faster Hamilton.

They were reasonable expectations. Were.


The drivers themselves all seem quite baffled about it. We've heard from Alonso, Ricciardo, Stroll, Vettel, and Norris so far over this, and none has said anything but how strange it is or how glad they are they weren't involved, and Russell has slammed it but then you can probably cite his Mercedes connections under "of course he has"; still I wonder what the GPDA, of which Russell is the director, will say. I'll bet we don't hear from Perez, Gasly, or Tsunoda about it, even if directly asked (I'm going for "We have to trust in the FIA to do the right thing").

That said, the drivers have been saying things about Red Bull's conduct all season - Norris "a brake-check's only 10 seconds", Vettel "I'll do the front wing, maybe it's only €25,000", Leclerc "If this [Brazil] is allowed ... I'll adapt my driving style to it". It's almost like... they know something.

 

[toastet]

Another thing I noticed re-watching the whole safetycar situation which I personally didn't saw anyone talking/writing about: The other loosers. In this case especially Danny Ric/McL.

Before the SC he was around 1-2 seconds behind Ocon on P11 and had fresher tyres than Esteban. So there was good potential to steal P10 from him. As we know it would've been P10 anyway and P9 possible with the retirement of Perez.

As the SC came on track he was the first car in the midfield pack gambling and pitting for soft tyres which lost him 2 places to Leclerc and Vettel on to P13 (P12 after Perez got out). But the problem the gamble didn't work wasn't his ability. It was just due to the fact he came out behind Max. He was the first car not getting waved-by because Max was already in front of him. And that just to the fact Masi decided to not stick to the rules and the normal behaviour letting anybody in the same (back)lap by. Knowing every point is pure $ I would be absolutely furious as Zac Brown. He'd have close to 1.5 laps to light up his tyres before the pack of backrunners got to their final lap under green and the chance to overtake Vettel, Lec, Oco, Alo and Norris, all on tyres with minimum 20 to 40 laps driven was just robbed.It it so wrong robbing someone points and $ just to the fact the WDC-leader who is second in the race is in front of him and they want to get a one lap "battle" for the WDC without beeing fair and applying their normal procedures.

 

[OutlawQuadrnt]

Mercedes has asked the most evil of people to deal with this.
These people are LAWYERS.

As much as I don't like having this race litigated, the alternative is the FIA will escape any further scrutiny. I know there are people that want to be diplomatic about all this or are too afraid to speak their minds believing that is the better route to take but they would only be covering their eyes on a serious problem that is front and center. This has happened too many times already.

I still think that the best outcome at this juncture is Mercedes agreeing to drop the protest in exchange for a formal apology from the FIA and a commitment to meaningful reforms. Max would be fully free to enjoy his title and Lewis would add to his legacy as the driver that chose the integrity of the sport over personal accomplishments.

 

[WiisardNic]

"Hey, remember in that one race where it didn't happen" isn't quite the flex against the pretty self-evident reality that you might think it is.

What is an "absolute #hater" and how does one qualify as one?

I don't hate anyone absolutely, and I am quite clearly citing the multiple occasions across the season - including one in the exact same race - where Max Verstappen has sent his car fully up the inside of Hamilton, barely in the same country as the apex, with somewhere between only just enough lock to keep the car on circuit and nowhere near enough lock to even keep the car on circuit, daring Hamilton to try and make the turn and crash or cede the place.

This was ruled against by the FIA as recently as the 2016 season, when Rosberg did the same thing at turn three, though from considerably nearer the middle of the track in the braking zone, alongside Hamilton, by not turning into the corner.

Also in Austria in 2019, Max Verstappen did it to Charles Leclerc with a full send, understeer past the apex (and even a correction against the line of the corner) and wheel-to-wheel contact, and was not penalised.

Also in Austria but this season, two drivers were penalised three times between them - Lando Norris and Sergio Perez - at 5s a time for running a car wide leaving turn four (only without the full steam divebomb).

All of these should have been penalties; Appendix L is still pretty clear about this:

In the British GP, Hamilton was penalised 10s for it, again without the full steam divebomb (he was alongside on the straight and at the first angle change), as "causing a collision", hence the 10s penalty, though I guess the fact he was in a heavy car on cold tyres and didn't try to steer Verstappen to the outside played a part in ruling that it was not deliberate.


Meanwhile Verstappen has done it again and again, and several more agains, and faced no penalty for doing so, continually performing "manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track".

The only time he's had a penalty in these... "battles" this season is in Saudi, and that wasn't even for the full-send divebomb yeeting his opponent (Hamilton again) off the track, but for leaving the track and gaining an advantage (5s) and causing a collision (10s) with a brake check - which, and it's up to you whether you agree or not, seems a little worse than the half-arsed sideswipe Maldonado gave Hamilton at Monaco in qualifying (5 place penalty) and the even half-arseder sideswipe Schumacher gave Villeneuve in 1997 (full season disqualification).

Then after that, Hamilton was warned he was close to a black and white flag for checks notes running an opponent wide (without contact), which shows that apparently the stewards do watch for this sort of thing... just not when there's a 33 on the car. And this was indeed a justifiable position from the stewards:

View attachment 1099517

That's crowding a car off, by not turning in when it's on the outside, just like Rosberg did to him in 2016. And what Verstappen did in Abu Dhabi on lap one isn't, apparently.


Now apparently, unlike people who think this isn't a thing that's happened repeatedly this season, Mercedes seemed to be acutely aware of it and did not want the championship to be determined by whether Verstappen could be trusted to be alongside Hamilton in a situation where it's the championship or bust.

This is why, along with the expectation that the hard tyres would last to the end and then another 10 laps and that race control would follow both the legislation and its own statement four minutes previously, it did not pit the clearly faster Hamilton.

They were reasonable expectations. Were.


The drivers themselves all seem quite baffled about it. We've heard from Alonso, Ricciardo, Stroll, Vettel, and Norris so far over this, and none has said anything but how strange it is or how glad they are they weren't involved, and Russell has slammed it but then you can probably cite his Mercedes connections under "of course he has"; still I wonder what the GPDA, of which Russell is the director, will say. I'll bet we don't hear from Perez, Gasly, or Tsunoda about it, even if directly asked (I'm going for "We have to trust in the FIA to do the right thing").

That said, the drivers have been saying things about Red Bull's conduct all season - Norris "a brake-check's only 10 seconds", Vettel "I'll do the front wing, maybe it's only €25,000", Leclerc "If this [Brazil] is allowed ... I'll adapt my driving style to it". It's almost like... they know something.

Yes, I agree that there are many examples of these moves not being penalised, but by other rulings they should have, and vice versa. See Austin 2015, and arguably, Lewis on the first restart at Saudi Arabia could also be seen as crowding. I'll always stand by the fact that if Austria 2019 meant Max didn't get penalised, neither should have Rosberg in Austria 2016. And by that same metric, Lewis was rightly not penalised for Austin 2015. But all 3 are instances of crowding the car, and even then, Rosberg didn't do it over the edge of the circuit! (which is referenced in the sporting code/regulations you just quoted). That's more of a cop on the FIA and the Stewards, than on Max himself.
The hypocrisy in driving standards was spoken when Max/Toto labelled Perez's defence as "dangerous driving" when he did the exact same thing 5 years ago. Now, that's not your hypocrisy, I'll cop that as well. But, that's the type of "us vs them" mentality that is creeping its way into people defining driving standards. Because Max has been in incidents because he's unyielding (and to me, personally the only ones he has done wrong this year, he has been penalised for except Brazil), doesn't mean he is always the problem. Same with Lewis, the things he has done wrong this year, he has also been penalised for.

In terms of being a #hater, to me, its when you're saying that everything someone does is wrong. It's clear from your posts you are a Red Bull/Max hater. All of his elbows out moves (and all bar Brazil, the ones that weren't penalised were fine), were abhorrent and illegal and NINE TIMES he should have been penalised and banned 3 times (which is accruing 36 penalty points in a year by the way).

On your last point though.. We already know that they were all tongue in cheek. Except for Leclerc. Norris we know always jokes around with Verstappen on those types of things. And Vettel wasn't talking about Red Bull's conduct, he was speaking out against the penalty itself. Because he's done those things before with no punishment.
Leclerc's statement though.. is spot on. Brazil should have been punished, and it wasn't. So thank God it did in Jeddah.