A superb penultimate f1 race in store , or , maybe not !!

[DPG]

Like it was at Silverstone...

Silverstone had a massive impact (pun intended) on the championship. Lewis gained 25 points and Max 0. Not only that but Max's engine was cracked and had to be changed at the next race, penalising him further. Retribution was due and was delivered yesterday. Congrats. to Max and Red Bull.

If those cars had been the other way round we wouldn’t have even been talking about it as Lewis would have avoided the accident like he has many times already this season.

Then all the Max fanboys would have been squirting off at what a great move that was.

 

[sp3ctre]

Can we have a civilised conversation about this without resorting to childish names for those involved and using childish terms, it’s getting a bit old now.

 

[Flyingfifer]

Like it was at Silverstone...

Silverstone had a massive impact (pun intended) on the championship. Lewis gained 25 points and Max 0. Not only that but Max's engine was cracked and had to be changed at the next race, penalising him further. Retribution was due and was delivered yesterday. Congrats. to Max and Red Bull.

100% correct and the Lewis fans will always try to ignore or deflect this, the reality is that at that stage, the way the merc was performing its likely that by punting Max off he gained 32 points in the championship (25 that race and 7 the following race where max had to take the engine penalty).

So without Lewis doing that the championship would have been over long ago.

End of the day Max won the championship and absolutely deserved to do so. Roll on the new cars in 2022 and a (hopefully) far more balanced grid

 

[Dav the wheel nut]

 

[BMWZ4MC]

Honestly all this whingeing over a guy that races like they used to in't tholden days....what do you guys want, a traffic light system saying wether they're allowed to make a move or not...? Teddy bears for comfort when they're passed...? Whinge machine Hammy was even crying about Perez FFS...! What a 42 carat Ponce...! Man the f**k up, either race or retire, but shut the moaning when someone passes with a hard manoeuvre...James Hunt for one wI'll be turning in his grave..! :lol: :wink:

AISI it's not about who won or how they drove, it's about being able to rely on the written rules - the teams sign up to the rules at the start of each season and they become, in effect, a contract between the team and the FIA.

If the Race Director can change/ignore the written rules whenever he/she wishes it means the teams have no standard reference and, potentially, the result of every race can be decided by the whim of the Race Director.

You can't have a race director and not let him make a quick decision, may as well not have one.

By the same token, you can't/shouldn't have a Race Director that changes the rules - he's supposed to know them inside out and apply them as written. As I said earlier, it's not about the result, it's about following FIA regulations.

In the case of the cars unlapping themselves, according to the regulations he only had two choices either no unlapping or all cars unlapping themselves - he chose neither and allowed selected cars to unlap themselves and there's nothing in the regulations that allows him to take that option. In addition, he also ignored the regulation that says the safety car has to complete an additional lap after the unlapping.

If he had to make a quick decision it would have been between none/all cars unlapping as those are the choices in the rulebook. If he'd decided on no unlapping, the safety car could have come in that lap and there would have been one racing lap left. Deciding to allow selected cars to unlap and then bring the safety car in immediately was obviously a considered decision to ignore the regulations in the interest of creating a last lap spectacle - but that's not within his remit!

Like it was at Silverstone...

Not really, IIRC the Silverstone decision was made by the stewards (as required by the rules) not by Masi, he'd have had no say in it.

The stewards rule on racing incidents, applicable penalties, technical infringements etc. They may communicate their decisions via the Race Director/Clerk of the course but he has no say in those decisions.

The Race Director is not a steward, he's in charge of how practice, qualifying and the race itself is run along with safety (safety cars, virtual safety cars, red flags) etc. and the restarts after SC/VSC/RF but he's supposed to do so according to the FIA regulations.

The stewards view of an incident may come down to opinion & interpretation of a racing incident but the Race Director is supposed to follow the rules as written - some of those rules do allow for judgement calls but most of those are safety related e.g. 'If in the opinion of the Race Director it is unsafe to...."

Having read the full Steward's adjudication on the Mercedes protest, it's obvious that Masi got it completely wrong

From the published decision "the Race Director stated that the purpose of article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that would 'interfere' in the racing between the leaders"

Unfortunately for him, the regulations say nothing like that and, even if they did, who are the 'leaders'? What about Carlos Sainz who was running in 3rd, surely he should have been given the same opportunity to challenge LH/MV and would have been right on MVs tail at the restart but only removing lapped cars between LH & MV meant that he didn't get the opportunity.

FIA may be trying to close ranks and protect themselves from an obvious cock-up and will probably reject the appeal at the next stage but I tend to think that Mercedes have a good chance of winning if the matter ends up at CAS when there will be no vested interest parties making the judgement and it will be based purely on the F1 regulations.

I don't think it'll change the result but, hopefully, it'll help prevent future contrived 'last-lap thrillers' such as this - if it doesn't then F1 might as well drop all sporting pretence and start marketing itself as 'WWF on Wheels'

Well said Perry, in every post.

Regardless of who is champion and who deserved the title, the FIA engineered a farce of a final lap for a Hollywood finish rather than the finish dictated by the rule book. It was an utter disgrace.

 

[buzyg]

Honestly all this whingeing over a guy that races like they used to in't tholden days....what do you guys want, a traffic light system saying wether they're allowed to make a move or not...? Teddy bears for comfort when they're passed...? Whinge machine Hammy was even crying about Perez FFS...! What a 42 carat Ponce...! Man the f**k up, either race or retire, but shut the moaning when someone passes with a hard manoeuvre...James Hunt for one wI'll be turning in his grave..! :lol: :wink:

AISI it's not about who won or how they drove, it's about being able to rely on the written rules - the teams sign up to the rules at the start of each season and they become, in effect, a contract between the team and the FIA.

If the Race Director can change/ignore the written rules whenever he/she wishes it means the teams have no standard reference and, potentially, the result of every race can be decided by the whim of the Race Director.

You can't have a race director and not let him make a quick decision, may as well not have one.

By the same token, you can't/shouldn't have a Race Director that changes the rules - he's supposed to know them inside out and apply them as written. As I said earlier, it's not about the result, it's about following FIA regulations.

In the case of the cars unlapping themselves, according to the regulations he only had two choices either no unlapping or all cars unlapping themselves - he chose neither and allowed selected cars to unlap themselves and there's nothing in the regulations that allows him to take that option. In addition, he also ignored the regulation that says the safety car has to complete an additional lap after the unlapping.

If he had to make a quick decision it would have been between none/all cars unlapping as those are the choices in the rulebook. If he'd decided on no unlapping, the safety car could have come in that lap and there would have been one racing lap left. Deciding to allow selected cars to unlap and then bring the safety car in immediately was obviously a considered decision to ignore the regulations in the interest of creating a last lap spectacle - but that's not within his remit!

Like it was at Silverstone...

Not really, IIRC the Silverstone decision was made by the stewards (as required by the rules) not by Masi, he'd have had no say in it.

The stewards rule on racing incidents, applicable penalties, technical infringements etc. They may communicate their decisions via the Race Director/Clerk of the course but he has no say in those decisions.

The Race Director is not a steward, he's in charge of how practice, qualifying and the race itself is run along with safety (safety cars, virtual safety cars, red flags) etc. and the restarts after SC/VSC/RF but he's supposed to do so according to the FIA regulations.

The stewards view of an incident may come down to opinion & interpretation of a racing incident but the Race Director is supposed to follow the rules as written - some of those rules do allow for judgement calls but most of those are safety related e.g. 'If in the opinion of the Race Director it is unsafe to...."

Having read the full Steward's adjudication on the Mercedes protest, it's obvious that Masi got it completely wrong

From the published decision "the Race Director stated that the purpose of article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that would 'interfere' in the racing between the leaders"

Unfortunately for him, the regulations say nothing like that and, even if they did, who are the 'leaders'? What about Carlos Sainz who was running in 3rd, surely he should have been given the same opportunity to challenge LH/MV and would have been right on MVs tail at the restart but only removing lapped cars between LH & MV meant that he didn't get the opportunity.

FIA may be trying to close ranks and protect themselves from an obvious cock-up and will probably reject the appeal at the next stage but I tend to think that Mercedes have a good chance of winning if the matter ends up at CAS when there will be no vested interest parties making the judgement and it will be based purely on the F1 regulations.

I don't think it'll change the result but, hopefully, it'll help prevent future contrived 'last-lap thrillers' such as this - if it doesn't then F1 might as well drop all sporting pretence and start marketing itself as 'WWF on Wheels'

Well said Perry, in every post.

Regardless of who is champion and who deserved the title, the FIA engineered a farce of a final lap for a Hollywood finish rather than the finish dictated by the rule book. It was an utter disgrace.

Yup it was a sham and a sad end to the season. I don't care that much who won. F1 lost. :thumbsdown:

 

[Flyingfifer]

7D012924-E2FD-4EA8-A035-5873FF59C9B7.jpeg

Fantastic :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

This season has been a farce in terms of the rules, the massive swinging pendulum of bad decisions going for and against each of them.
Silverstone for example, Hammy should have been disqualified for punting max into the barrier in a move that was never ever on and incredibly dangerous at the upper end of high speed. He ended Max's race, destroyed an engine and almost ended Max... But the FIA decided that a wee 10s penalty would be fine and he swaggered to take first place and a free 25pts. Yet when they came together in Monza Max is hit with a 3 place penalty!? Zero consistency.

 

[Ed Doe]

Honestly all this whingeing over a guy that races like they used to in't tholden days....what do you guys want, a traffic light system saying wether they're allowed to make a move or not...? Teddy bears for comfort when they're passed...? Whinge machine Hammy was even crying about Perez FFS...! What a 42 carat Ponce...! Man the f**k up, either race or retire, but shut the moaning when someone passes with a hard manoeuvre...James Hunt for one wI'll be turning in his grave..! :lol: :wink:

AISI it's not about who won or how they drove, it's about being able to rely on the written rules - the teams sign up to the rules at the start of each season and they become, in effect, a contract between the team and the FIA.

If the Race Director can change/ignore the written rules whenever he/she wishes it means the teams have no standard reference and, potentially, the result of every race can be decided by the whim of the Race Director.

You can't have a race director and not let him make a quick decision, may as well not have one.

By the same token, you can't/shouldn't have a Race Director that changes the rules - he's supposed to know them inside out and apply them as written. As I said earlier, it's not about the result, it's about following FIA regulations.

In the case of the cars unlapping themselves, according to the regulations he only had two choices either no unlapping or all cars unlapping themselves - he chose neither and allowed selected cars to unlap themselves and there's nothing in the regulations that allows him to take that option. In addition, he also ignored the regulation that says the safety car has to complete an additional lap after the unlapping.

If he had to make a quick decision it would have been between none/all cars unlapping as those are the choices in the rulebook. If he'd decided on no unlapping, the safety car could have come in that lap and there would have been one racing lap left. Deciding to allow selected cars to unlap and then bring the safety car in immediately was obviously a considered decision to ignore the regulations in the interest of creating a last lap spectacle - but that's not within his remit!

Like it was at Silverstone...

Not really, IIRC the Silverstone decision was made by the stewards (as required by the rules) not by Masi, he'd have had no say in it.

The stewards rule on racing incidents, applicable penalties, technical infringements etc. They may communicate their decisions via the Race Director/Clerk of the course but he has no say in those decisions.

The Race Director is not a steward, he's in charge of how practice, qualifying and the race itself is run along with safety (safety cars, virtual safety cars, red flags) etc. and the restarts after SC/VSC/RF but he's supposed to do so according to the FIA regulations.

The stewards view of an incident may come down to opinion & interpretation of a racing incident but the Race Director is supposed to follow the rules as written - some of those rules do allow for judgement calls but most of those are safety related e.g. 'If in the opinion of the Race Director it is unsafe to...."

Having read the full Steward's adjudication on the Mercedes protest, it's obvious that Masi got it completely wrong

From the published decision "the Race Director stated that the purpose of article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that would 'interfere' in the racing between the leaders"

Unfortunately for him, the regulations say nothing like that and, even if they did, who are the 'leaders'? What about Carlos Sainz who was running in 3rd, surely he should have been given the same opportunity to challenge LH/MV and would have been right on MVs tail at the restart but only removing lapped cars between LH & MV meant that he didn't get the opportunity.

FIA may be trying to close ranks and protect themselves from an obvious cock-up and will probably reject the appeal at the next stage but I tend to think that Mercedes have a good chance of winning if the matter ends up at CAS when there will be no vested interest parties making the judgement and it will be based purely on the F1 regulations.

I don't think it'll change the result but, hopefully, it'll help prevent future contrived 'last-lap thrillers' such as this - if it doesn't then F1 might as well drop all sporting pretence and start marketing itself as 'WWF on Wheels'

Well said Perry, in every post.

Regardless of who is champion and who deserved the title, the FIA engineered a farce of a final lap for a Hollywood finish rather than the finish dictated by the rule book. It was an utter disgrace.

Bang on Perry, couldn't have put it better myself.

For the record, I don't have any issue with Max winning the championship - I feel (as others appear to) that what has happened here is a contrived result where the only loser is the Sport. I feel quite sad for Max that these were the conditions in which he won his first championship - he's a great racer* and deserved to win it on merit on track, not by some ridiculous maneuvering in the background by the FIA. Ditto I feel for Hamilton, that he was robbed of an 8th championship, one which he also thoroughly deserved, having driven a thinkers championship campaign all season.

The other thing that may have already been mentioned but is worth also recognising is the decision for only some cars to unlap themselves could actually have influenced the outcome of the constructors championship below the Merc & Red Bull fight, which has significant financial consequences in terms of prize money for those teams. The inconsistent application of the rules has negatively affected them in order to produced a contrived result for the top two.

If Masi was so desperate to 'go motor racing' as he so flippantly put it on the radio to Toto after the race, he should have immediately red-flagged the race after the crash, and then had a rolling or standing start and sprint to the end with the remaining 4 laps. That would have produced a cracking race-ending, without circumventing the regulations, or affecting safety. As it was, changing his mind on the lapped cars and circumventing the rules to produce a controversial spectacle and prevent another 'boring hamilton victory' made for utterly ridiculous viewing, and has produced a situation that sadly cannot now be undone.

What a shame.


Still I hear there is still real racing over in the BTCC if anyone watching f1 these days even cares for it? :fuelfire:

 

[Ed Doe]

7D012924-E2FD-4EA8-A035-5873FF59C9B7.jpeg

Fantastic :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

This season has been a farce in terms of the rules, the massive swinging pendulum of bad decisions going for and against each of them.
Silverstone for example, Hammy should have been disqualified for punting max into the barrier in a move that was never ever on and incredibly dangerous at the upper end of high speed. He ended Max's race, destroyed an engine and almost ended Max... But the FIA decided that a wee 10s penalty would be fine and he swaggered to take first place and a free 25pts. Yet when they came together in Monza Max is hit with a 3 place penalty!? Zero consistency.

Hang on though - speed aside, how was Silverstone that different from Vertsappen's lunge up the inside at Brazil, or in Jeddah, or in Abu Dhabi? In all situations, Max chucked it up the inside incredibly late, and was then going too fast to make the apex, ending up going so deep into the corner that he left no racing room on the outside for Hamilton. In addition if Hamilton had 'done a Max' in any of these situations, and just turned into the apex anyway, he'd have crashed into Max, just like the incident at Stowe but with the protagonists reversed.

In addition I'd just like to point out that if Max drove with a bit more maturity and intelligence, he'd have ceded the place to Hamilton at Stowe, netted the 2nd place points, and would have been ahead by the end of the season anyway. Max's poor decisions regarding overly-aggressive wheel-to-wheel fights on track, supported/vindicated by the FIA not taking a more clear approach to what is acceptable and what is not, and penalising accordingly are more than partly to blame for Hamilton even being in the fight to the last race.

And this takes me into what I believe the main issue with the situation at Stowe this year, and indeed many of the other races this season is - the setting of the rules of engagement and consistent application thereof. This is what has been lacking all season. Drivers need it to be clarified and then they need properly slapping when they overstep. As it is, we've got Verstappen believing that he's being demonised for moves which are (speed excepted) no different from Hamilton's move at Silverstone, and all sorts of ridiculously toxic social media arguments erupting over a lack of consitency (which again in my view stems from a lack of clarity on the rules). Great news for Liberty Media, s**t for the sport.

Situations like this will continue to happen all the while the FIA do not clarify and set a clear structure for wheel-to-wheel engagement, and unfortunately their decisions will continue to play an outcome in races to come. It saddens me that on many occasions this year the discussion has centred around the FIA involvement in the race and decision-making, rather than the race itself.

As a bit of an aside, and with my conspiracy theorist hat on, I did wonder when Liberty Media bought F1 if we would start to see interventions to create a spectacle. Difficult to look back on this season without slightly wondering if all this shite around the rules (which has undoubtedly created massive publicity, and brought many more viewers in who want to see the controversy etc.) has been orchestrated to any extent by Liberty.... I dunno saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, but some of the calls this year have been frankly laughable.

 

[sp3ctre]

I dunno saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, but some of the calls this year have been frankly laughable.

I know what you mean... I have the same thoughts about Liberty and the FIA as I do the Government.... is there some devious masterplan are are they just completely inept?

 

[john-e89]

Would anyone be saying anything if Max hadn't pitted for softs and Hammy had kept his lead between the two of them in a last lap shoot out...? Merc certainly wouldn't I think. As I said shoot Masi if you want, he made the call in his best opinion of not finishing behind a safety car as well as clearing the track after the shunt, guy had a lot on his plate to be fair. Hammy has had far the rub of the green this year, Merc were outwitted this time, Max had the luck for once. Get over it, 7 titles ain't bad and he's not finished yet.

 

[Ed Doe]

I dunno saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, but some of the calls this year have been frankly laughable.

I know what you mean... I have the same thoughts about Liberty and the FIA as I do the Government.... is there some devious masterplan are are they just completely inept?

Probably a little column A, little column B :lol:

But seriously, it does make one wonder a tiny bit, all those shonky decisions running up to a final race in which the main title protagonists are level pegging on points....... Makes for an 'unmissable' climax, against a backdrop where Hamilton had regularly sown the championship up with a couple of races to spare. I daresay the Abu Dhabi organisers, paying MILLIONS to host the race have been a bit put out on more than one occasion in past years that their race has been irrelevant to the title fight...

Heyho, I try to console myself that F1 hasn't been truly about racing for years. But it still does feel rather a shame that the first proper title battle in the hybrid era has been so affected by the FIA.

 

[Ed Doe]

Would anyone be saying anything if Max hadn't pitted for softs and Hammy had kept his lead between the two of them in a last lap shoot out...? Merc certainly wouldn't I think. As I said shoot Masi if you want, he made the call in his best opinion of not finishing behind a safety car as well as clearing the track after the shunt, guy had a lot on his plate to be fair. Hammy has had far the rub of the green this year, Merc were outwitted this time, Max had the luck for once. Get over it, 7 titles ain't bad and he's not finished yet.

No, but you can absolutely bet Red Bull would have, because they'd have wanted no cars to be let through so they could have had an extra lap to have a go at Hamilton. Besides none this is strictly relevant. The simple fact is Masi affected the race outcome through a decision not in keeping with the letter of the FIA regulations. If he can't cope with following a clearly defined set of regulations then he has no place being Race Director.

As said already - he didn't make the best call, if he wanted to maximise racing he could have called a red flag, and then we'd have had 4 laps of racing to the end.

As you say, we'll all get over it - life goes on and all that, but let's not confuse 'rub of the green' with 'affecting the outcome of a race and championship by not following the letter of the regulations'.

 

[john-e89]

Would anyone be saying anything if Max hadn't pitted for softs and Hammy had kept his lead between the two of them in a last lap shoot out...? Merc certainly wouldn't I think. As I said shoot Masi if you want, he made the call in his best opinion of not finishing behind a safety car as well as clearing the track after the shunt, guy had a lot on his plate to be fair. Hammy has had far the rub of the green this year, Merc were outwitted this time, Max had the luck for once. Get over it, 7 titles ain't bad and he's not finished yet.

No, but you can absolutely bet Red Bull would have, because they'd have wanted no cars to be let through so they could have had an extra lap to have a go at Hamilton. Besides none this is strictly relevant. The simple fact is Masi affected the race outcome through a decision not in keeping with the letter of the FIA regulations. If he can't cope with following a clearly defined set of regulations then he has no place being Race Director.

As said already - he didn't make the best call, if he wanted to maximise racing he could have called a red flag, and then we'd have had 4 laps of racing to the end.

As you say, we'll all get over it - life goes on and all that, but let's not confuse 'rub of the green' with 'affecting the outcome of a race and championship by not following the letter of the regulations'.

It's not that simple though Ed, he's got a track to clear, Marshall's to look out for, teams and drivers shouting at him, a best way to finish descion to make at the last race of the season all in a very short space of time, to say he was under pressure is putting it mildly.

We're all slightly biased in our views depending which driver we want to win, me included, I'm glad Max had the luck yesterday that Hammy has had during the season, 3 dnf's to 1 etc, hey that's Motorsport, it happens, but I am also trying to see it from a human perspective as well without trying to be too biased and I don't think Merc would be saying anything had Max not pitted for softs, which if we're being perfectionists here they should do, no difference is it, that would be wrong if that's the line people want to take. It's sport, it ain't perfect on anyone all the time, sometimes you need the rub of the green.

 

[Flyingfifer]

Hang on though - speed aside, how was Silverstone that different from Vertsappen's lunge up the inside at Brazil, or in Jeddah, or in Abu Dhabi? In all situations, Max chucked it up the inside incredibly late, and was then going too fast to make the apex, ending up going so deep into the corner that he left no racing room on the outside for Hamilton. In addition if Hamilton had 'done a Max' in any of these situations, and just turned into the apex anyway, he'd have crashed into Max, just like the incident at Stowe but with the protagonists reversed.

As I've said...

This season has been a farce in terms of the rules, the massive swinging pendulum of bad decisions going for and against each of them.

Lewis has a big list of incidents as well. The difference is Hammy is the only one to have smashed the competition off the track completely and swagger home with 25 free points :idunno:

In addition I'd just like to point out that if Max drove with a bit more maturity and intelligence, he'd have ceded the place to Hamilton at Stowe, netted the 2nd place points, and would have been ahead by the end of the season anyway. Max's poor decisions regarding overly-aggressive wheel-to-wheel fights on track, supported/vindicated by the FIA not taking a more clear approach to what is acceptable and what is not, and penalising accordingly are more than partly to blame for Hamilton even being in the fight to the last race.

If Lewis drove with more maturity and intelligence he'd have ceded the place to Verstappen at Stowe, not almost kill his rival and gain 25 free points. It works both ways. But in Silverstone Lewis was way wide of the apex and realistically never looked like he would have made the corner himself regardless of Max being there. If you want to talk about overly-aggressive racing then ok but you need to be honest and accept that Lewis was never making that move and left it to Max to get out his way :idunno:

And this takes me into what I believe the main issue with the situation at Stowe this year, and indeed many of the other races this season is - the setting of the rules of engagement and consistent application thereof. This is what has been lacking all season. Drivers need it to be clarified and then they need properly slapping when they overstep. As it is, we've got Verstappen believing that he's being demonised for moves which are (speed excepted) no different from Hamilton's move at Silverstone, and all sorts of ridiculously toxic social media arguments erupting over a lack of consitency (which again in my view stems from a lack of clarity on the rules). Great news for Liberty Media, s**t for the sport.

There is ample evidence that he was being demonised, especially by the likes of Sky Sports who it seems regularly scratch Hammy sack with their chins :rofl:
As I said the rule application this year has been a shambles in both directions and I am glad you agree.

As a bit of an aside, and with my conspiracy theorist hat on, I did wonder when Liberty Media bought F1 if we would start to see interventions to create a spectacle. Difficult to look back on this season without slightly wondering if all this shite around the rules (which has undoubtedly created massive publicity, and brought many more viewers in who want to see the controversy etc.) has been orchestrated to any extent by Liberty.... I dunno saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, but some of the calls this year have been frankly laughable.

I tend towards Hanlon's razor in this sort of situation
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"


Again, the correct driver won the championship its just a shame it happened in this way and to be honest I think the way that Merc is conducting themselves at the moment is a disgrace and does a massive disservice to the sport as a whole, turning up to the last race with a barrister ffs... get a fking grip.

 

[enuff_zed]

Just off to put a few quid down on Michael Maxi (spelling intended) resigning before Xmas :roll:

 

[DPG]

I see what you mean about the silverstone incident,
It’s not like Max saw Lewis or had any room

 

[john-e89]

I see what you mean about the silverstone incident,
It’s not like Max saw Lewis or had any room

BD825A96-3774-4632-B5A9-55C2B2131AC3.jpeg

Good photo, clearly shows Max had at least 3/4 of his car ahead turning in, 100% his corner, Ham needed to back out of it but didn't and caused a potentially fatal punting off at a time when the championship was slipping away from him so he made a desperate move which was never going to work because he knew if Max got ahead he was away and uncatchable. Stupid and incredibly dangerous from a desperate man. If we're going to moan about yesterday then Ham ought to have got at least a two race ban or more for that manoeuvre at one of, if not the, fastest corners on the calender.

 

[DPG]

I think Lewis did back off but not enough to avoid the collision

 

[john-e89]

Not very good driving then was it to say the least. 7 titles, been in the sport 15 odd years, utterly reckless and desperate.