Sir Lewis Hamilton?

[Brizzle]

As I said above, Mercedes couldn't pit under the SC.

If they pitted Verstappen stays out. Max is in the lead.

There was no guarantee the race would restart and indeed Christian Horner would be reacting how Wolff did and the RB fans would be shouting 'fix'. That they fixed it for Lewis to win.

That's the point here. They didn't apply the rules as they are written consistently. They made up the rules to get 1 lap in.

Which is wrong. A whole season decided on 1 lap in unbalanced conditions, when there is no precedent to do what Masi did.

1 - Only allow 5 cars to clear.. not 8 (so there cars between 2nd and 3rd).
2 - Not bring the safety car in the following lap after that announcement was given.

I'm not saying take the title away from Max. That's not what anyone wants. But until Max wins another one, there will always be an asterisk for me.

So for future decisions and applications of the guidelines you think the race director needs to look at what tyres each driver is on before making a decision?

I agree that the rules being open to interpretation with another rule that says 'race director can override these anyway' seems a bit pointless. But using the 'uneven tyres' as part of the defence for why it is wrong is not looking at the situation objectively.

 

[The Nomad]

So for future decisions and applications of the guidelines you think the race director needs to look at what tyres each driver is on before making a decision?

I agree that the rules being open to interpretation with another rule that says 'race director can override these anyway' seems a bit pointless. But using the 'uneven tyres' as part of the defence for why it is wrong is not looking at the situation objectively.

Of course it is.

Lewis was on the hard tyre which was about 40 laps old and the slower compound anyway

Verstappen pitted for fresh soft faster tyres which were only a few laps old on that final lap.

If Lewis pitted yes he'd have had the fresher tyre, Verstappens would have been about 20 laps old. But it wasnt guaranteed the race would restart. So why would you give up your position in that circumstance?

Verstappen has literally nothing to lose. Hamilton did.

As a poster said above. Any other race would have been finished under a safety car, so the rules were made up on the fly anyway.

It should have been red flag both cars equal shootout.

 

[kingjulian]

Actually speaking.

1. It was not a red flag situation.
2. Safety car is simply part of F1...many have benefitted and many have lost due to SC.
3. It unfortunate SC happened in the last 6 laps of the championship with the battle right down to the wire.
4. People who are asking for Red Flag over SC are asking for a situation the drivers are able to pit and change tires without losing position. A) the situation doesn't demand b) its being asked only because it would favour the driver sitting on worn tires.
5) when SC was announced the option to pit was available to both drivers. It was a strategy call by Merc... doesn't matter that Verstappen was told. Merc gambled the race will end under safety car end of story.
6) the rule to allow lapped cars to unlap themselves is controversial in the first place, it's only there to spice up the action after safety car artificially.
7) red bull and Merc were both on the blower asking Masi to restart and end the race respectively trying to back the position they gambled on.
8) but the fact that the decision to restart the race was not made considering who is on what tyre is the right thing to do.
9) the decision to allow only 5 cars to unlap themselves , instead of 8 to allow for championship decider end on a race lap instead of under SC was dodgy. But equally Massi can point that neither Merc not Red bull should have been on the blower as much as they did through the season to make the decision and announcement on restarting quicker allowing for the entire set of lapped cars to be unlapped (which shouldn't be allowed in the first place).
10. Both Wolf and Horner need to have a hard look at themselves for going down this route since Silverstone/Monza of constantly harassing the race director during the race.
11. Let the race restart after SC is the correct thing to do. The way it was done was hurried ....but it was equally more shambolic that a team principal is allowed to influence so much to end the race under SC ( ultimately that is more death of racing spirit than the fact three cars were not allowed to unlap so that the SC can come in before last lap.) The race result then purely depended on what each team gambled to do....they can't blame Masi, it was their strategy call no body forced them to do that. Unless you are assuming if Hamilton pitted the race director would have automatically ended the race under SC.....if you do, then there is not much point in discussing.

 

[kingjulian]

Of course it is.

Lewis was on the hard tyre which was about 40 laps old and the slower compound anyway

Verstappen pitted for fresh soft faster tyres which were only a few laps old on that final lap.

It should have been red flag both cars equal shootout.

Its not the job of race director to give equal shoot out in the last lap. If we go down that route then why not allow for a standing start again to see more equal footing and more position changing in the top 10 spots?

 

[The Nomad]

Actually speaking.

1. It was not a red flag situation.
2. Safety car is simply part of F1...many have benefitted and many have lost due to SC.
3. It unfortunate SC happened in the last 6 laps of the championship with the battle right down to the wire.
4. People who are asking for Red Flag over SC are asking for a situation the drivers are able to pit and change tires without losing position. A) the situation doesn't demand b) its being asked only because it would favour the driver sitting on worn tires.
5) when SC was announced the option to pit was available to both drivers. It was a strategy call by Merc... doesn't matter that Verstappen was told. Merc gambled the race will end under safety car end of story.
6) the rule to allow lapped cars to unlap themselves is controversial in the first place, it's only there to spice up the action after safety car artificially.
7) red bull and Merc were both on the blower asking Masi to restart and end the race respectively trying to back the position they gambled on.
8) but the fact that the decision to restart the race was not made considering who is on what tyre is the right thing to do.
9) the decision to allow only 5 cars to unlap themselves , instead of 8 to allow for championship decider end on a race lap instead of under SC was dodgy. But equally Massi can point that neither Merc not Red bull should have been on the blower as much as they did through the season to make the decision and announcement on restarting quicker allowing for the entire set of lapped cars to be unlapped (which shouldn't be allowed in the first place).
10. Both Wolf and Horner need to have a hard look at themselves for going down this route since Silverstone/Monza of constantly harassing the race director during the race.
11. Let the race restart after SC is the correct thing to do. The way it was done was hurried ....but it was equally more shambolic that a team principal is allowed to influence so much to end the race under SC ( ultimately that is more death of racing spirit than the fact three cars were not allowed to unlap so that the SC can come in before last lap.) The race result then purely depended on what each team gambled to do....they can't blame Masi, it was their strategy call no body forced them to do that. Unless you are assuming if Hamilton pitted the race director would have automatically ended the race under SC.....if you do, then there is not much point in discussing.

Ok KJ - flip the narrative and Lewis won, would you be saying all the above? Of course not.

1. It was not a red flag situation - Neither was it a restart immediately on the same lap situation.
2. Safety car is simply part of F1...many have benefitted and many have lost due to SC - agreed, but never in those circumstances
3. People who are asking for Red Flag over SC are asking for a situation the drivers are able to pit and change tires without losing position. A) the situation doesn't demand b) its being asked only because it would favour the driver sitting on worn tires - you're missing the point
4. when SC was announced the option to pit was available to both drivers. It was a strategy call by Merc... doesn't matter that Verstappen was told. Merc gambled the race will end under safety car end of story. - Its also something that needs looking at IMO.
5. the rule to allow lapped cars to unlap themselves is controversial in the first place, it's only there to spice up the action after safety car artificially. - Under your own criteria #1 - the rules were not followed
6. red bull and Merc were both on the blower asking Masi to restart and end the race respectively trying to back the position they gambled on. Merc were not asking for a restart actually - they asked for no safety car.
7. Both Wolf and Horner need to have a hard look at themselves for going down this route since Silverstone/Monza of constantly harassing the race director during the race. - 100% agree
8. Let the race restart after SC is the correct thing to do. The way it was done was hurried - Not according to the rule book - but you can continue to ignore that if you like.
9. ultimately that is more death of racing spirit than the fact three cars were not allowed to unlap so that the SC can come in before last lap. - Why? That benefitted Max. So we should just ignore the cars between Max and Sainz? Seems like you are making a select narrative here.

 

[kingjulian]

For 9 its the job race director to restart race as soon as safety permits. Not to end a race under SC...it's within racing spirit to want the race restart ignoring all else. That is their job...not to look at who is on which tyre. To want the race to end under SC is not within that spirit. Michael Masi practically printed this on his t-shirt by saying let them race.

What is your gripe?

1. Red Flag should have been chosen instead of SC? In any given year we have at least two such crashes in Monoco and if the car is stranded in the racing line between walls it's SC every single time. Usually recovery is completed promptly within 2 laps. You don't red flag a session for this....you are asking to go against precedent and make race director take decision in favor of the driver you like. Silverstone was red flagged because that was a 51g crash and ambulance was on track.
2. Or is it that the lapped cars should not have been allowed to unlap themselves? - As much as I hate this rule, it is what it states in the rules that cars should be allowed to unlap themselves.so that the racing for position can happen without interference from lapped cars. This is a shit rule, but it's there to artificially spruce up racing. Not the first time F1 takes this approach (DRS)
3. Is it that only 5 cars unlapped. Clearly this is contradictory to the rules...but it's their rules and they literally interpreted on the spot to ensure race ends under green (which they have been saying is top priority) i can understand why merc would call unfair. But race end under green vs race ends under SC (the person who had the strategy to take the right tyres) would be saying unfair that the race control didn't make an attempt to go racing. Either way one party was going to cry unfair....as a race director it might be ok to take the decision to race in this situation....it's a tough break that Merc gambled against this.

It could have just as easily happened the debris clearing and decision making was completed in 2 or 3 laps allowing plenty of time for all 8 cars to unlap themselves as per the rules....the result would not have changed after decisions that set this in motion.

Toto was definitely on the phone asking for race to end under SC... don't kid yourself. Toto was also asking for letting the lapped cars be in between Hamilton and Verstappen.

 

[kingjulian]

It's definitely got everyone talking. It is the conversation at work...this is the effect of 2021 title charge. F1 2021 has achieved what F1 has failed to achieve in nearly a decade.

 

[The Nomad]

For 9 its the job race director to restart race as soon as safety permits. Not to end a race under SC...it's within racing spirit to want the race restart ignoring all else. That is their job...not to look at who is on which tyre. To want the race to end under SC is not within that spirit. Michael Masi practically printed this on his t-shirt by saying let them race.

What is your gripe?

1. Red Flag should have been chosen instead of SC? In any given year we have at least two such crashes in Monoco and if the car is stranded in the racing line between walls it's SC every single time. Usually recovery is completed promptly within 2 laps. You don't red flag a session for this....you are asking to go against precedent and make race director take decision in favor of the driver you like. Silverstone was red flagged because that was a 51g crash and ambulance was on track.
2. Or is it that the lapped cars should not have been allowed to unlap themselves? - As much as I hate this rule, it is what it states in the rules that cars should be allowed to unlap themselves.so that the racing for position can happen without interference from lapped cars. This is a shit rule, but it's there to artificially spruce up racing. Not the first time F1 takes this approach (DRS)
3. Is it that only 5 cars unlapped. Clearly this is contradictory to the rules...but it's their rules and they literally interpreted on the spot to ensure race ends under green (which they have been saying is top priority) i can understand why merc would call unfair. But race end under green vs race ends under SC (the person who had the strategy to take the right tyres) would be saying unfair that the race control didn't make an attempt to go racing. Either way one party was going to cry unfair....as a race director it might be ok to take the decision to race in this situation....it's a tough break that Merc gambled against this.

It could have just as easily happened the debris clearing and decision making was completed in 2 or 3 laps allowing plenty of time for all 8 cars to unlap themselves as per the rules....the result would not have changed after decisions that set this in motion.

Toto was definitely on the phone asking for race to end under SC... don't kid yourself. Toto was also asking for letting the lapped cars be in between Hamilton and Verstappen.

Rule 48.12 in the FIA own rulebook:

Unless the clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap

I.e. Lap after the announcement is made.

Rule 48.12 also says LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE’ should be sent to all competitors.

That wasn't followed either.



Now returning to the top, I agree that the norm is for races to finish under a SC - however, perhaps there needs to be a rethink of that entirely i.e. crash within x laps from the end warrants an immediate red flag.

Tyres should not be changed under a red flag unless a puncture is found (FIA and the Tyre manufacturers will have that telemetry real time).

For example.

 

[The Nomad]

Toto was definitely on the phone asking for race to end under SC... don't kid yourself. Toto was also asking for letting the lapped cars be in between Hamilton and Verstappen

I don't disagree with any of this. But the point remains, it should have been all or none.
Not some, as Horner wanted and was granted.

 

[Brizzle]

Rule 48.12 also says LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE’ should be sent to all competitors.

That wasn't followed either.



For example.

This could be interpreted as the message being sent to all drivers, but not that all lapped drivers are instructed to unlap themselves, just that everyone is informed.

Beautiful levels of ambiguity in the guidelines.

 

[The Nomad]

This could be interpreted as the message being sent to all drivers, but not that all lapped drivers are instructed to unlap themselves, just that everyone is informed.

Beautiful levels of ambiguity in the guidelines.

Thanks Christian for confirming that. That's exactly what RB hid behind.

 

[Rosco]

I hope Lewis wins the title via some legal appeal.

It will completely undermine any legacy he might have

 

[Whaddapie]

Thanks Christian for confirming that. That's exactly what RB hid behind.

Not sure that RB hid behind anything, mate... They lobbied for what suited them, Mercedes lobbied for what suited them and the chips landed where they did. If you're looking for fault, it's not with either driver nor either team, it's with the race officials, surely?

 

[The Nomad]

Not sure that RB hid behind anything, mate... They lobbied for what suited them, Mercedes lobbied for what suited them and the chips landed where they did. If you're looking for fault, it's not with either driver nor either team, it's with the race officials, surely?

Yep, sorry if I wasn't clear. I don't want the result over turned. Neither team did anything outside what was given to them.

The officials and particular Masi was to blame for what unfolded into a particularly divisive ending. You either loved it (mainly RB fans or those who just wanted a new champ).. or hated it (mainly Merc fans, or those who were pretty neutral).

Things have to change next year, there needs to be a code of conduct for both Horner and Wolff. The playing of the audio on the TV showed a different light.

For me there also needs to be a tightening around the rules. If they want to make it a 'spectacular ending' and not under the SC each race. Fine.. but some rules in place to do so.. not what we got on Sunday where it was just mish mash. Make stuff up on the fly 'for 1 lap'.. because the race director says so. Article 48.X

 

[Brizzle]

You seem very salty Nomad. The point is - the rules (unhelpfully in my view) are open to interpretation. You are looking at the interpretation that would see Lewis win as 'correct' and others are looking at alternative interpretations as 'correct'. With the rules as they are, Masi could have taken many courses of action and all of them could have been held without protest (like the one he took).

Ross Brawn has already stated that comms from Team Principals will be stopped, which is great. You can tell from the quotes that they are aware of the broadcast they get. Masi saying "this is a motor race" was not a helpful comment from a Race Director. He needs to build authority and not get dragged into the circus that Toto & Horner have created.

This works in most sports - but one of the worst things as a fan or spectator is seeing things happen and not knowing 'is that allowed?'

 

[The Nomad]

You seem very salty Nomad. The point is - the rules (unhelpfully in my view) are open to interpretation. You are looking at the interpretation that would see Lewis win as 'correct' and others are looking at alternative interpretations as 'correct'. With the rules as they are, Masi could have taken many courses of action and all of them could have been held without protest (like the one he took).

Ross Brawn has already stated that comms from Team Principals will be stopped, which is great. You can tell from the quotes that they are aware of the broadcast they get. Masi saying "this is a motor race" was not a helpful comment from a Race Director. He needs to build authority and not get dragged into the circus that Toto & Horner have created.

This works in most sports - but one of the worst things as a fan or spectator is seeing things happen and not knowing 'is that allowed?'

I am a bit salty. As I said previously, the rules were not followed - he made them up for the spectacle.

Just last year at the Eifel GP.


Masi said that was the only reason for the length of the safety car.

"That one was the fact that we had to, there's a requirement in the sporting regulations, to wave all lapped cars past," Masi said.

"I think from that point, it was position 6 onwards that was still running.

"So 10, 11 cars, that had to unlap themselves, and therefore the safety car period was a bit longer than what we would have normally expected."


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f...eifel-gp-safety-car-decision-4978255/4978255/

 

[Whaddapie]

I read and heard in the hours that followed Sunday's climax that the rules are vague and 'fluid' within the over-arching principal that everybody - drivers, teams and officials - want as much actual racing as possible to take place and that everything possible needs to be done to ensure that no race ends under caution unless it's 100% unavoidable... There are rules & guidelines in place, but the one consistent goal is to get them racing again a.s.a.p. at all time, especially at the end of races, and this principal supersedes anything else that's written.

It feels to me - a fanatic as a kid, but just now returning to the sport over the past two seasons as an adult, so hardly an expert anymore - that that's exactly what Masi did, and so, if what I read and heard on Sunday is correct, it doesn't feel like he did anything wrong... Unusual, yes. But not wrong.

Is the definition I provide here accurate? If so, then Lewis was incredibly unfortunate, but he wasn't cheated. If not, then yes, it was daylight robbery.

Also, the last 3.2 miles of this race means that we've all forgotten another head scratching decision made by the officials on the first lap... How the blinking flip was LH deemed to have 'given back his advantage' by cutting turn 5 and 6, as he tore away into the sunset?!?!?

It really was a crazy and incredibly frustrating day. Changes MUST be made, that much is clear.

 

[The Nomad]

I read and heard in the hours that followed Sunday's climax that the rules are vague and 'fluid' within the over-arching principal that everybody - drivers, teams and officials - want as much actual racing as possible to take place and that everything possible needs to be done to ensure that no race ends under caution unless it's 100% unavoidable... There are rules & guidelines in place, but the one consistent goal is to get them racing again a.s.a.p. at all time, especially at the end of races, and this principal supersedes anything else that's written.

Is the definition I provide here accurate? If so, then Lewis was incredibly unfortunate, but he wasn't cheated. If not, then yes, it was daylight robbery.

As above - Masi just last year said "That one was the fact that we had to, there's a requirement in the sporting regulations, to wave all lapped cars past"
Indeed he brought the Safety car in the following lap I.e. 1 lap after the message was displayed. Not the same lap.

The whole 'vague' and 'fluid' argument is a new one, made to try and bail Masi out here.

Also, the last 3.2 miles of this race means that we've all forgotten another head scratching decision made by the officials on the first lap... How the blinking flip was LH deemed to have 'given back his advantage' by cutting turn 5 and 6, as he tore away into the sunset?!?!?

This was was more grey, I had a little sympathy with Max here. The rules need tightening.

The rules as they are written, (not the "let them race" mantra), is that:

If you pass a car, you must leave enough room for the other car to make the corner. (Think Silverstone and why Max was so upset as he turned into Lewis, Lewis never actually left the track but was deemed to be at fault).

However, the stewards deemed that Max didn't leave enough room and forced Lewis off the track. (Think Saudi where Lewis was warned of a black and white flag for a very very similar incident when he eventually did pass Max).

However, since Brazil where Masi and the stewards started to lose control... there was a more "let them race" approach, i.e. Max could dive into (and not make) corners, but wasn't at fault in Brazil according to the stewards (still baffles me). But was found at fault in Saudi.

 

[Squiggles]

I read and heard in the hours that followed Sunday's climax that the rules are vague and 'fluid' within the over-arching principal that everybody - drivers, teams and officials - want as much actual racing as possible to take place and that everything possible needs to be done to ensure that no race ends under caution unless it's 100% unavoidable... There are rules & guidelines in place, but the one consistent goal is to get them racing again a.s.a.p. at all time, especially at the end of races, and this principal supersedes anything else that's written.

It feels to me - a fanatic as a kid, but just now returning to the sport over the past two seasons as an adult, so hardly an expert anymore - that that's exactly what Masi did, and so, if what I read and heard on Sunday is correct, it doesn't feel like he did anything wrong... Unusual, yes. But not wrong.

Is the definition I provide here accurate? If so, then Lewis was incredibly unfortunate, but he wasn't cheated. If not, then yes, it was daylight robbery.

Also, the last 3.2 miles of this race means that we've all forgotten another head scratching decision made by the officials on the first lap... How the blinking flip was LH deemed to have 'given back his advantage' by cutting turn 5 and 6, as he tore away into the sunset?!?!?

It really was a crazy and incredibly frustrating day. Changes MUST be made, that much is clear.

Yeah, I generally side with this view. The SC needs bringing in at the first opportunity. There's only one GP in each country a year; the people going deserve as much racing as possible. The mistake made was that other lapped cars should have also pass the SC, rather than just the ones between Lewis and Max. That is where Masi has ballsed up, but given the pressure and intensity at the time, with two principles shouting down your ear, it's pretty understandable.

You're spot on with the earlier incident. It needed investigating. Hamilton stole 3-4 seconds there.

 

[Brizzle]

I read and heard in the hours that followed Sunday's climax that the rules are vague and 'fluid' within the over-arching principal that everybody - drivers, teams and officials - want as much actual racing as possible to take place and that everything possible needs to be done to ensure that no race ends under caution unless it's 100% unavoidable... There are rules & guidelines in place, but the one consistent goal is to get them racing again a.s.a.p. at all time, especially at the end of races, and this principal supersedes anything else that's written.

It feels to me - a fanatic as a kid, but just now returning to the sport over the past two seasons as an adult, so hardly an expert anymore - that that's exactly what Masi did, and so, if what I read and heard on Sunday is correct, it doesn't feel like he did anything wrong... Unusual, yes. But not wrong.

Is the definition I provide here accurate? If so, then Lewis was incredibly unfortunate, but he wasn't cheated. If not, then yes, it was daylight robbery.

Also, the last 3.2 miles of this race means that we've all forgotten another head scratching decision made by the officials on the first lap... How the blinking flip was LH deemed to have 'given back his advantage' by cutting turn 5 and 6, as he tore away into the sunset?!?!?

It really was a crazy and incredibly frustrating day. Changes MUST be made, that much is clear.

You are exceptionally spot on. It is human nature that Lewis Hamilton's fans look at this and feel any interpretation that made him less likely to win is 'cheating'. Unfortunately, no one was cheated, rather a situation no one has seen before emerged and there was a very small time window for the race director to get the cars finishing under a green flag - something he says ALL team principles agreed to as a way of working.

 

[Woland]

All I know is that if a result that's beyond question can suddenly be reversed by circumstances out of either competitors hands, then it's not a sport, it's a game of chance, and not worth anyone's time - never mind emotional investment

 

[kingjulian]

If you pass a car, you must leave enough room for the other car to make the corner. (Think Silverstone and why Max was so upset as he turned into Lewis, Lewis never actually left the track but was deemed to be at fault).

I'm sorry but this reveals the clear bias. Its ridiculous.

The track turns right. Max is on the outside ...he has to turn right.

Verstappen left more than a car's width on the inside. Hamilton simply carried too much speed. Never hit the apex. Even after bumping Verstappen (body braking) he was on the kerbs as he exited the corner. Never in a million year he was making that corner without the bump on Verstappen. He went in way too hot....It's plain enough for anyone to see in the video. If it was Verstappen who did that I bet you would be coming on here and saying "dirty Verstappen knew what he was doing".

I can hear the arguments against why Verstappen shouldn't crowd out a car while defending like he did at Brazil and the. Saudi Arabia. But at Copse what Hamilton did was a far more severe offence.

They both raced hard to prevent the other from winning right through the season...sometimes crossing the line. That aggression is expected from a champion. But don't need to twist facts and blame someone else like saying Verstappen turned in to Hamilton.

That's the racing line at Copse...it was to the right of where Hamilton was at the point of contact....to say Verstappen turned in shows the clear bias.

 

[The Nomad]

I'm sorry but this reveals the clear bias. Its ridiculous.

The track turns right. Max is on the outside ...he has to turn right.

Verstappen left more than a car's width on the inside. Hamilton simply carried too much speed. Never hit the apex. Even after bumping Verstappen (body braking) he was on the kerbs as he exited the corner. Never in a million year he was making that corner without the bump on Verstappen. He went in way too hot....It's plain enough for anyone to see in the video. If it was Verstappen who did that I bet you would be coming on here and saying "dirty Verstappen knew what he was doing".

I can hear the arguments against why Verstappen shouldn't crowd out a car while defending like he did at Brazil and the. Saudi Arabia. But at Copse what Hamilton did was a far more severe offence.

They both raced hard to prevent the other from winning right through the season...sometimes crossing the line. That aggression is expected from a champion. But don't need to twist facts and blame someone else like saying Verstappen turned in to Hamilton.

That's the racing line at Copse...it was to the right of where Hamilton was at the point of contact....to say Verstappen turned in shows the clear bias.....

[/QUOTE]

That's the point though.. Max could have gone wider through Copse.. he shouldn't have to you could argue.

Lewis couldn't go any wider at Abu Dhabi. Therefore could be argued as being forced off (which is what the stewards decided).

You want it both ways. It can't be both.

 

[kingjulian]

You recommend taking the more scenic route over the kerb at 300 kph?

 

[Whaddapie]

You are exceptionally spot on. It is human nature that Lewis Hamilton's fans look at this and feel any interpretation that made him less likely to win is 'cheating'. Unfortunately, no one was cheated, rather a situation no one has seen before emerged and there was a very small time window for the race director to get the cars finishing under a green flag - something he says ALL team principles agreed to as a way of working.

This certainly is what happened, it seems to me, based on reading and listening a lot over the past two days... It must be the most frustrating thing ever, to LH and his fans, and I understand their annoyance at it all, but I really don't think anything 'wrong' happened. Sometimes, one-in-a-million chances happen...

 

[The Nomad]

You recommend taking the more scenic route over the kerb at 300 kph?

There was plenty of width between where he was hit and the kerb.

Right now your bias is coming to the fore.

I've already said if Lewis was in the wrong there then Verstappen was in the wrong at least in Brazil and Saudi.

The incident at turn 6 in Abu Dhabi was on par with the incident in Saudi when Lewis finally passed Max. And Lewis got a warning

 

[kingjulian]

All I know is that if a result that's beyond question can suddenly be reversed by circumstances out of either competitors hands, then it's not a sport, it's a game of chance, and not worth anyone's time - never mind emotional investment

Al the various interpretation of the rules and constant finding of loopholes and closing the loopholes has been happening since I started watching as a 11 year old.

If the safety car comes in a lap earlier for instant with all the 5 cars remaining where they are...the result for example would be no different as Verstappen was the only driver with fresh softs in that pack and the speed difference is massive. There would be nothing to blame the race director on...but still circumstances would have played a big role in such a result....because safety car was triggered by an accident.

Red flag with no tyre change is a solution that improves some aspect worsens some other aspects. If 5 laps (that's what red flag and restarting the session means) to go with Verstappen on a much fresher hard compared to Hamilton may also have ended in the same result.

Red flag with both driver being able to change to new fresh soft tyres might have been the most favourable outcome. This would have been second only to ending the race under SC or restarting the race in the last lap with 5 lapped cars in between Verstappen and Hamilton. Naturally Hamilton fans are thinking at this point that one of these would have been more fair given the unfortunate crash of the Williams car did happen just about 5 laps before the end. That is only their interpretation of fairness, as each of this decision would then contravene some rule or spirit of racing.

F1 has never been about water tight rules....I don't even imagine such water tight rules is possible in car racing as the situations and the interpretations keep changing. So not sure it is worth watching F1 or any motor sport for that instance for pure sport values.

 

[Woland]

I've heard that many different rules and interpretations I dunno what's going on, but why are people allowed to make up their space while the safety car is out? Should have to keep the distance. Also, why be allowed what is basically a free pit stop when it benefits everyone behind and no-one in front?

I started Sunday wanting Verstappen to win just to do various mate's head in, but that was fucking stupid. Billions of dollars spent and for what? The toss of a coin.

 

[The Nomad]

If the safety car comes in a lap earlier for instant with all the 5 cars remaining where they are .the result for example would be no different - We'll never know, I still think it would have been close and a fairer contest.

Red flag with no tyre change is a solution that improves some aspect worsens some other aspects - Agree, but I think this is one rule where it works. Otherwise, if you want to allow all cars to change tyres. Then the race position should revert back to the point of the crash on the restart.

I've also said that I don't believe any car should be allowed to pit under a SC unless
a) They were involved in a collision / have damage (because that takes longer than a tyre change to sort out)
b) Have a puncture because the telemetry is available to the team, FIA and tyre manufacturers so shouldn't be able to be manipulated.

here would be nothing to blame the race director on...but still circumstances would have played a big role in such a result....because safety car was triggered by an accident.
One thing that I found odd was it took 5 laps to clear the track. Should have been cleared much quicker, and they'll need to look at that for next year. I know they are volunteers but damn.

Red flag with both driver being able to change to new fresh soft tyres might have been the most favourable outcome. That's the current rules, I'm not in favour of that unless see point above - reverts back to race positions at point of impact.

That is only their interpretation of fairness, as each of this decision would then contravene some rule or spirit of racing. That is indeed the issue, I said several posts ago the general consensus is:

RB fans/ Max fans / Just want a new champion = Fair outcome etc
Merc fans / Lewis fans / most neutrals = Not fair etc.

Do I think Max should have won overall? Yes - I just wasn't in favour how it played out is all. Left a very sour taste

For what it's worth, I thought Mercedes made 3 fatal errors on Sunday.
1) pitting Hamilton so early,
2) Putting a set of scrubs on
3) Not pitting the second lap under the VSC. It would have been tight, but the VSC doesn't apply in the pitlane.

 

[kingjulian]

There was plenty of width between where he was hit and the kerb.

Right now your bias is coming to the fore.

I've already said if Lewis was in the wrong there then Verstappen was in the wrong at least in Brazil and Saudi.

The incident at turn 6 in Abu Dhabi was on par with the incident in Saudi when Lewis finally passed Max. And Lewis got a warning

I never denied...Verstappen was wrong in both Brazil and Saudi. He corwded Hamilton out of the track on both occassions when defending from the inside. Against the rule. Clear as a day. He was stupid to even try that in Brazil with the speed differential...he couldn't have kept doing that lap after lap. He should have focussed on finishing second and taking the battle deeper.

But the at the slower speed in those two incidents it's possible to adjust and run wide to avoid. As it happened no clash, incident didn't change the result. At Copse, at that speed, it's more committed than that. At that speed you can't suddenly mid corner decide ..."oh I want to try an even wider much slower line"...it's a flat out corner. Room was left on the inside. Rightly punished. It was a heavy crash and Verstappen didn't do anything wrong. No turning in as you say.