Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Actually, watching it again, I don't think the wheel comes off the car, I think the tire comes off the rim.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Formula One on Sky
- Thread starter philspursuk
- Start date
Actually, watching it again, I don't think the wheel comes off the car, I think the tire comes off the rim.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
lots of angles here,
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...nship-rival-hamilton.1705633023907399833.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/...nship-rival-hamilton.1705633023907399833.html
RunTMC
Steven Caulker
Ok I’ve watched beginning several times over now. First of all these 2 are unbelievably excellent drivers and both so aggressive. But I think Verstappen was more at fault for this even though it “looked” like Hamilton may be more at fault.
Initially Verstappen was excellent defensively pushing Hamilton wide with each attack. Now in the straight and bend before the incident Hamilton holds a straight line and Verstappen moves across and bumps him wheel to wheel. No problem, nice aggressive defence. And so Verstappen was able to own the corner and even though Hamilton was slightly ahead he yielded.
The next straight and bend for the crash the roles were reversed. Hamilton on the inside Verstappen on the outside and neither yielded. In fact Verstappen tries to cut across, Hamilton doesn’t actually move towards MS. He had a right to protect his corner/space.
Also something I hadn’t realised but was mentioned by Toto Wolfe, regulations say that if your axel is halfway up the car on the outside then you own the corner. So from my position on the couch, Hamilton owned that corner and Verstappen should have yielded
Initially Verstappen was excellent defensively pushing Hamilton wide with each attack. Now in the straight and bend before the incident Hamilton holds a straight line and Verstappen moves across and bumps him wheel to wheel. No problem, nice aggressive defence. And so Verstappen was able to own the corner and even though Hamilton was slightly ahead he yielded.
The next straight and bend for the crash the roles were reversed. Hamilton on the inside Verstappen on the outside and neither yielded. In fact Verstappen tries to cut across, Hamilton doesn’t actually move towards MS. He had a right to protect his corner/space.
Also something I hadn’t realised but was mentioned by Toto Wolfe, regulations say that if your axel is halfway up the car on the outside then you own the corner. So from my position on the couch, Hamilton owned that corner and Verstappen should have yielded
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
Verstappen drives the racing line, the only line you can drive that corner at speed! He was also clearly ahead. Hamilton has no chance of making the corner without slowing down, which he doesn't do until it's too late.
It's very poor from such a good and experienced driver.
In fact it's so poor that it has elements of Schumacher vs Hill and Senna vs Prost. Not saying he did it on purpose, but he knew very well where the racing line is, and he did nothing to prevent the accident.
Just watched all the angles on the video you linked and I think you're right.
Looks like the spin of the tyre made it run along the car and look like a tethered wheel.
The anti-Hamilton bias is strong with this one
Their both at fault and if you can't see and admit that then I'm sorry.
Hamilton could maybe have been a bit tighter but approach angle was against him really, and yes he could have backed out a little too - but he is fighting for the title so that isn't going to happen if he believes he has the position to get through.
Verstappen was overly aggressive imo, he knew Hamilton was there and with the points etc in his favour he should have run a bit wider rather than trying to swipe across the front of Hamilton - very likely a lap or two later he would have gotten past and won.
He'd already jinked to the left, he should have done so again to give more room.
NoLimits01
Goran Bunjevcevic
Mad max tries to bully other drivers with overly aggressive driving expecting them to yield, when they don’t accidents happen.
At the moment there seems to be a very pro Redbull bias in F1 management that means you can’t touch one of their drivers without getting a penalty and you definitely can’t touch their golden child right now
Oh and I’m happy to declare that I dislike Mad Max as much as Kandi dislikes Hamilton so my posts are biased against him and Redbull
At the moment there seems to be a very pro Redbull bias in F1 management that means you can’t touch one of their drivers without getting a penalty and you definitely can’t touch their golden child right now
Oh and I’m happy to declare that I dislike Mad Max as much as Kandi dislikes Hamilton so my posts are biased against him and Redbull
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
Why did Hamilton get a penalty then? Huh? Maybe because those who actually know something about racing also thought that was a bit over top from Hamilton. Would love to see the reactions had it been the other way round. Would never hear the end of it from fans and not least cry baby Hamilton himself!
Diamond Lights
Alan Hutton
as i said, both were aggressive, Karun Chandhok, a great F1 Pundit and former driver, said it was a racing incident, nothing more. Charles Leclerc said it was a racing incident, nothing more.
Verstappen's statement post race was even worse. Straight out the Horner playbook.
Verstappen's statement post race was even worse. Straight out the Horner playbook.
Diamond Lights
Alan Hutton
I'd imagine Charles Leclerc knows something about racing and it happened in front of him, and he said it was a racing incident.
People are talking as if Hamilton delibrately drove into Verstappen. If we want to penalise hard racing then this is the way to go.
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
There's a difference between a fair fight and dangerous driving. Putting the nose of the car on the inside of that corner is dangerous. Had he been in front of Verstappen it would be a different story, but he wasn't. Hamilton knew he fudged up, as he went off the throttle just before the impact, but too late. He made an error, and got penalised for it. Rightly so.
He's gotten away with similar things so so many times before. Hamilton has time and time gotten away for free with exactly the same as others have received penalties for.
Unfortunately that seems to be the trend for the last few races.
Because in their eyes he was more at fault than Max, it is really that simple.
If they had deemed it as a deliberate act then they would have acted accordingly.
And to be fair, I would not say the stewards know anything about racing given their weird and inconsistent penalties throughout several seasons.
(I'm assuming you mean them as that is where the penalty originates from)
The irony with your last comment thou.. I mean can't you just admit that in the grand scheme of things it would have been a much wiser move for Max to simply allow a bit more room rather than just cutting across and assuming there would be no car there?
(And no, I don't favour either of the two drivers)
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
Nah, he was alongside*, what Hamilton did was no more dangerous than Max turning in on him. The narrative that Horner is trying to sell is that Hamilton squeezed Verstappen off of the track and straight into the wall, whereas in truth, there was a massive amount of tarmac for Max to use on the outside. Verstappen fudged up his exit from the previous corner and it was inevitable he was going to lose the place, he should have been smart enough to accept that and make sure he was tight on Lewis going into Maggots (which is what Hamilton did in the sprint race in a reverse of the situation I think).
Redbull get really tinkled off when another team drives into one of their cars, that's their job.
*As per F1 stewarding guidelines, if you are on the inside going into a corner you don't need to be ahead to have it.
mephitis
Niko Kranjcar
This I'm afraid.
With regards the actual incident? 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. Both drivers were giving no quarter (as should be the case, it's racing not dancing) and the inevitable happened.
As Brundle pointed out Hamilton received the 2nd most lenient penalty. I think the stewards did this as they had to be seen to be doing something, given there recent decisions in such circumstances. If it had been Hamilton that was wiped out Verstappen would have got the same.
Finally, as Leclerc said (fellow driver in the best place to judge) "Racing Incident".
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
I agree, they don't treat situations equally, had it been two drivers lower down the race and championship standings they wouldn't have done anything, it's because its the reigning champ and the challenger, it's as much a marker for the rest of the season as anything else, same as what Horner is trying to do I guess, hoping he can build a narrative that leads to harsher treatment for Lewis.
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
Oh??? So now he was at fault suddenly. At least slightly.
Everyone's been telling me Hamilton did absolutely nothing wrong ever. He's the greatest driver ever, and and never does anything wrong.
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
No he would not, and everyone knows it. Everyone else gets a 10 sec stop and go for even farting on the grid.
You should be careful the soapbox isn't slippery
I never said anything other than they were both to blame, and I stand by that.
Take away the aggressive edge they have then it's nothing more than overly polite British racing, "after you sir", "no I insist, after you"
And if you tell me (us) that roles reversed Max wouldn't have tried to stick it up the inside then you're full of the proverbial.