Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules

Who was at fault in the first lap incident?

Hamilton
47
41%
Verstappen
15
13%
Racing incident
54
47%
 
Total votes: 116

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Fiki wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:23 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:58 pm
Any predictions on what the new evidence is.

For it to be admissible it has to have been:

Not evidence the stewards were aware of at the time of the original verdict.

Unavailable at the time to the party lodging the appeal of the original verdict.

Substantially different to evidence used in the original verdict.

This would rule out telemetry data or different camera angles.
Could evidence that was available but unexamined at the time of the GP be admissable as "new", I wonder? Telemetry has been named by some on the forum. I think it's possible Red Bull hope to get the penalty increased, by making the stewards/FIA see that Verstappen bore no responsibility in the accident. An increased penalty could make all the difference come the final stage of the season, should Max's accident engine indeed need to be replaced.

The business of F1 versus what little seems to remain of the sport of F1.
If it was available to either the stewards or the complainant at the time, then it's not admissible. If it was available to a third party (eg Mercedes) but they didn't share it with the stewards/the stewards were unaware of it, then it's admissible.

But it still has to clear the criteria of being fundamentally different to evidence already considered to pass the first stage.

That's also important, the first stage isn't the appeal, it's too determine if an appeal is legitimate (ie, the new evidence meets the criteria) - clearing that bar doesn't actually have any bearing on whether the appeal will be a success. It could even backfire and the new evidence could lead to Hamilton being cleared of wrong doing and his penalty points taken away (and maybe even 10 seconds subtracted from his race time, although as that wouldn't change the result it isn't really worth doing) - they could even decide Max was at fault and penalise him.

But the only new information they are likely to add is video evidence, which will fall into one of three types: another angle of the crash (this would fail to progress to appeal) - a video analysis using the telemetry (something like Crashalong's videos on YouTube) which would be dismissed for the same reason as Chandok's video with Ferrari, or some kind of smoking gun (Hamilton saying things that imply he deliberately made sure Max went off)

It's unlikely that a video exists of Hamilton outright saying it was deliberate (even in the unlikely event that he did do it deliberately) because that would be a stupid thing to let slip. It's possible they may attempt to argue that reading between the lines on his comments that they are inferring it was deliberate. And I think as this is an opinion of interpretation it also will fail.

The final suggestion is that they have looked at the telemetry and are going to argue this was Hamilton's fastest entry into Copse all weekend and he would never have made the corner. This also fails as being new evidence as the stewards would have known his speed at the time and would have had the option of looking at his corner speeds all weekend. Also, that itself isn't proof he wouldn't make the corner. He could have been doing 1,000mph and Mercedes can just argue their car has the downforce to take copse at that speed. Hamilton had only got to that speed because of the tow from Max, Mercedes had been planning that overtake All weekend because they had analysed the GPS data from the red bull and seen the Honda engine was not deploying MGU-K at the apex of Woodcote to prevent damage, so they could set up to take advantage of that

User avatar
Mercedes-Benz
Posts: 1136
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Location: India

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Mercedes-Benz »

There are 21K dislikes in the British GP video. Which seems to be 9 or 10times more than normal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRt8hXFb0Vg&t=42s
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"

mikeyg123
Posts: 19792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by mikeyg123 »

Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:04 am
Fiki wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:23 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:58 pm
Any predictions on what the new evidence is.

For it to be admissible it has to have been:

Not evidence the stewards were aware of at the time of the original verdict.

Unavailable at the time to the party lodging the appeal of the original verdict.

Substantially different to evidence used in the original verdict.

This would rule out telemetry data or different camera angles.
Could evidence that was available but unexamined at the time of the GP be admissable as "new", I wonder? Telemetry has been named by some on the forum. I think it's possible Red Bull hope to get the penalty increased, by making the stewards/FIA see that Verstappen bore no responsibility in the accident. An increased penalty could make all the difference come the final stage of the season, should Max's accident engine indeed need to be replaced.

The business of F1 versus what little seems to remain of the sport of F1.
If it was available to either the stewards or the complainant at the time, then it's not admissible. If it was available to a third party (eg Mercedes) but they didn't share it with the stewards/the stewards were unaware of it, then it's admissible.

But it still has to clear the criteria of being fundamentally different to evidence already considered to pass the first stage.

That's also important, the first stage isn't the appeal, it's too determine if an appeal is legitimate (ie, the new evidence meets the criteria) - clearing that bar doesn't actually have any bearing on whether the appeal will be a success. It could even backfire and the new evidence could lead to Hamilton being cleared of wrong doing and his penalty points taken away (and maybe even 10 seconds subtracted from his race time, although as that wouldn't change the result it isn't really worth doing) - they could even decide Max was at fault and penalise him.

But the only new information they are likely to add is video evidence, which will fall into one of three types: another angle of the crash (this would fail to progress to appeal) - a video analysis using the telemetry (something like Crashalong's videos on YouTube) which would be dismissed for the same reason as Chandok's video with Ferrari, or some kind of smoking gun (Hamilton saying things that imply he deliberately made sure Max went off)

It's unlikely that a video exists of Hamilton outright saying it was deliberate (even in the unlikely event that he did do it deliberately) because that would be a stupid thing to let slip. It's possible they may attempt to argue that reading between the lines on his comments that they are inferring it was deliberate. And I think as this is an opinion of interpretation it also will fail.

The final suggestion is that they have looked at the telemetry and are going to argue this was Hamilton's fastest entry into Copse all weekend and he would never have made the corner. This also fails as being new evidence as the stewards would have known his speed at the time and would have had the option of looking at his corner speeds all weekend. Also, that itself isn't proof he wouldn't make the corner. He could have been doing 1,000mph and Mercedes can just argue their car has the downforce to take copse at that speed. Hamilton had only got to that speed because of the tow from Max, Mercedes had been planning that overtake All weekend because they had analysed the GPS data from the red bull and seen the Honda engine was not deploying MGU-K at the apex of Woodcote to prevent damage, so they could set up to take advantage of that
Yeah, the only thing I can think of that would fulfil the criteria needed to reopen the case would be some kind of strong evidence of Hamilton having crashed deliberately. Anything less than that strikes me as a waste of time. The stewards are going to be extremely reluctant to find a different verdict anyway. It just sets such a precedent that they can really do without.

Note for clarity - I'm not saying Hamilton did take Verstappen out on purpose or that the existence of evidence that suggests he did is remotely likely.

Option or Prime
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Location: UK

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Option or Prime »

Isn't this Christian Horner playing mind games. That is to be seen to be supporting his driver and try to paint Lewis Hamilton in a different, more villainous light.

On the collision, some have said it will make MV more aggressive, I think a couple of things might happen, first it might make other driver less likely to give in to his aggressive tactics and second with much more to lose it might have the opposite effect, making him more circumspect. Its a lesson LH learned a few years ago.

Fiki
Posts: 8396
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Fiki »

Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:04 am
Fiki wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:23 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:58 pm
Any predictions on what the new evidence is.

For it to be admissible it has to have been:

Not evidence the stewards were aware of at the time of the original verdict.

Unavailable at the time to the party lodging the appeal of the original verdict.

Substantially different to evidence used in the original verdict.

This would rule out telemetry data or different camera angles.
Could evidence that was available but unexamined at the time of the GP be admissable as "new", I wonder? Telemetry has been named by some on the forum. I think it's possible Red Bull hope to get the penalty increased, by making the stewards/FIA see that Verstappen bore no responsibility in the accident. An increased penalty could make all the difference come the final stage of the season, should Max's accident engine indeed need to be replaced.

The business of F1 versus what little seems to remain of the sport of F1.
If it was available to either the stewards or the complainant at the time, then it's not admissible. If it was available to a third party (eg Mercedes) but they didn't share it with the stewards/the stewards were unaware of it, then it's admissible.

But it still has to clear the criteria of being fundamentally different to evidence already considered to pass the first stage.

That's also important, the first stage isn't the appeal, it's too determine if an appeal is legitimate (ie, the new evidence meets the criteria) - clearing that bar doesn't actually have any bearing on whether the appeal will be a success. It could even backfire and the new evidence could lead to Hamilton being cleared of wrong doing and his penalty points taken away (and maybe even 10 seconds subtracted from his race time, although as that wouldn't change the result it isn't really worth doing) - they could even decide Max was at fault and penalise him.

But the only new information they are likely to add is video evidence, which will fall into one of three types: another angle of the crash (this would fail to progress to appeal) - a video analysis using the telemetry (something like Crashalong's videos on YouTube) which would be dismissed for the same reason as Chandok's video with Ferrari, or some kind of smoking gun (Hamilton saying things that imply he deliberately made sure Max went off)

It's unlikely that a video exists of Hamilton outright saying it was deliberate (even in the unlikely event that he did do it deliberately) because that would be a stupid thing to let slip. It's possible they may attempt to argue that reading between the lines on his comments that they are inferring it was deliberate. And I think as this is an opinion of interpretation it also will fail.

The final suggestion is that they have looked at the telemetry and are going to argue this was Hamilton's fastest entry into Copse all weekend and he would never have made the corner. This also fails as being new evidence as the stewards would have known his speed at the time and would have had the option of looking at his corner speeds all weekend. Also, that itself isn't proof he wouldn't make the corner. He could have been doing 1,000mph and Mercedes can just argue their car has the downforce to take copse at that speed. Hamilton had only got to that speed because of the tow from Max, Mercedes had been planning that overtake All weekend because they had analysed the GPS data from the red bull and seen the Honda engine was not deploying MGU-K at the apex of Woodcote to prevent damage, so they could set up to take advantage of that
Thanks for your extensive post Alien. It will be interesting to see on what grounds they have launched their appeal.
mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:53 am
The stewards are going to be extremely reluctant to find a different verdict anyway. It just sets such a precedent that they can really do without.
I can't believe they want a different verdict, I would expect them to seek a more appropriate penalty.

By chance I watched Netflix's episode on Pièrre Gasly's Italian GP win of last year. After Leclerc's crash the pitlane was closed initially, though Hamilton did make a pitstop. His penalty struck me, as I had forgotten all about it - not at all difficult at my age. :) After the restart, Hamilton received a 10 second stop-and-go penalty, which removed any chance of a race victory, and rather appropriate. No danger was involved in the incident at all, unlike the one in the British GP.
I'm not one to take the stewards to task over inconsistency, their job is difficult enough as it is. But I do find the difference between the two penalties disproportionate. Because of that, I hope the appeal will go ahead. It should be interesting.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Herb
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Herb »

Fiki wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:26 am
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:04 am
Fiki wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:23 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:58 pm
Any predictions on what the new evidence is.

For it to be admissible it has to have been:

Not evidence the stewards were aware of at the time of the original verdict.

Unavailable at the time to the party lodging the appeal of the original verdict.

Substantially different to evidence used in the original verdict.

This would rule out telemetry data or different camera angles.
Could evidence that was available but unexamined at the time of the GP be admissable as "new", I wonder? Telemetry has been named by some on the forum. I think it's possible Red Bull hope to get the penalty increased, by making the stewards/FIA see that Verstappen bore no responsibility in the accident. An increased penalty could make all the difference come the final stage of the season, should Max's accident engine indeed need to be replaced.

The business of F1 versus what little seems to remain of the sport of F1.
If it was available to either the stewards or the complainant at the time, then it's not admissible. If it was available to a third party (eg Mercedes) but they didn't share it with the stewards/the stewards were unaware of it, then it's admissible.

But it still has to clear the criteria of being fundamentally different to evidence already considered to pass the first stage.

That's also important, the first stage isn't the appeal, it's too determine if an appeal is legitimate (ie, the new evidence meets the criteria) - clearing that bar doesn't actually have any bearing on whether the appeal will be a success. It could even backfire and the new evidence could lead to Hamilton being cleared of wrong doing and his penalty points taken away (and maybe even 10 seconds subtracted from his race time, although as that wouldn't change the result it isn't really worth doing) - they could even decide Max was at fault and penalise him.

But the only new information they are likely to add is video evidence, which will fall into one of three types: another angle of the crash (this would fail to progress to appeal) - a video analysis using the telemetry (something like Crashalong's videos on YouTube) which would be dismissed for the same reason as Chandok's video with Ferrari, or some kind of smoking gun (Hamilton saying things that imply he deliberately made sure Max went off)

It's unlikely that a video exists of Hamilton outright saying it was deliberate (even in the unlikely event that he did do it deliberately) because that would be a stupid thing to let slip. It's possible they may attempt to argue that reading between the lines on his comments that they are inferring it was deliberate. And I think as this is an opinion of interpretation it also will fail.

The final suggestion is that they have looked at the telemetry and are going to argue this was Hamilton's fastest entry into Copse all weekend and he would never have made the corner. This also fails as being new evidence as the stewards would have known his speed at the time and would have had the option of looking at his corner speeds all weekend. Also, that itself isn't proof he wouldn't make the corner. He could have been doing 1,000mph and Mercedes can just argue their car has the downforce to take copse at that speed. Hamilton had only got to that speed because of the tow from Max, Mercedes had been planning that overtake All weekend because they had analysed the GPS data from the red bull and seen the Honda engine was not deploying MGU-K at the apex of Woodcote to prevent damage, so they could set up to take advantage of that
Thanks for your extensive post Alien. It will be interesting to see on what grounds they have launched their appeal.
mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:53 am
The stewards are going to be extremely reluctant to find a different verdict anyway. It just sets such a precedent that they can really do without.
I can't believe they want a different verdict, I would expect them to seek a more appropriate penalty.

By chance I watched Netflix's episode on Pièrre Gasly's Italian GP win of last year. After Leclerc's crash the pitlane was closed initially, though Hamilton did make a pitstop. His penalty struck me, as I had forgotten all about it - not at all difficult at my age. :) After the restart, Hamilton received a 10 second stop-and-go penalty, which removed any chance of a race victory, and rather appropriate. No danger was involved in the incident at all, unlike the one in the British GP.
I'm not one to take the stewards to task over inconsistency, their job is difficult enough as it is. But I do find the difference between the two penalties disproportionate. Because of that, I hope the appeal will go ahead. It should be interesting.
The "inconsistency" is because the stewards don't (or shouldn't be) looking at the consequences of an infraction.

The Silverstone crash was a minor bit of contact really, just with massive consequences, the Monza issue was quite a serious safety-related breach (entering a closed pit-road could be very dangerous).

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Fiki wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:26 am
By chance I watched Netflix's episode on Pièrre Gasly's Italian GP win of last year. After Leclerc's crash the pitlane was closed initially, though Hamilton did make a pitstop. His penalty struck me, as I had forgotten all about it - not at all difficult at my age. :) After the restart, Hamilton received a 10 second stop-and-go penalty, which removed any chance of a race victory, and rather appropriate. No danger was involved in the incident at all, unlike the one in the British GP.
I'm not one to take the stewards to task over inconsistency, their job is difficult enough as it is. But I do find the difference between the two penalties disproportionate. Because of that, I hope the appeal will go ahead. It should be interesting.
Penalties are not there to functionally remove a race winning opportunity. The stewards are not there to decide who may or may not win - unless it is disqualification level offence (which is a totally different issue)

The reason for Hamilton's penalty in Imola being so severe is two fold. One - the penalty was made disproportionately more severe than intended because of the red flag. Under normal circumstances it would have dropped him down to the low points positions.

Secondly, the penalty for this offence was very specifically made very draconian, at the request of the teams. This was after Daniel Ricciardo received a 5s time penalty for doing the same thing in Brazil 2016 and after the race the teams said to the FIA that with such a minor penalty it meant that there was an incentive to take the hit for the penalty and gain the advantage from pitting under safety car conditions. As the pit lane is only closed for safety critical reasons, they asked for the maximum time penalty to be applied so there was no competitive advantage from pitting in a closed pitlane.

User avatar
Black_Flag_11
Posts: 8116
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Black_Flag_11 »

Option or Prime wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:37 am
Isn't this Christian Horner playing mind games. That is to be seen to be supporting his driver and try to paint Lewis Hamilton in a different, more villainous light.

On the collision, some have said it will make MV more aggressive, I think a couple of things might happen, first it might make other driver less likely to give in to his aggressive tactics and second with much more to lose it might have the opposite effect, making him more circumspect. Its a lesson LH learned a few years ago.
Yes this is just Red Bull trying to inflict as much damage from this incident as they can on Mercedes. I'd be shocked if any further punishment was given, at most they might give Hamilton 3 penalty points, rather than the 2 he was given, though I doubt it.

Red Bull wont expect anything to actually come from this, they just want to make Hamilton second guess himself in wheel to wheel combat and dent his confidence as much as possible, and make a big deal out of it for the stewards so that, should Hamilton do anything dodgy in the near future, he is more likely to receive a penalty/harsher penalty.

Fiki
Posts: 8396
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Fiki »

Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:40 am
Fiki wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:26 am
By chance I watched Netflix's episode on Pièrre Gasly's Italian GP win of last year. After Leclerc's crash the pitlane was closed initially, though Hamilton did make a pitstop. His penalty struck me, as I had forgotten all about it - not at all difficult at my age. :) After the restart, Hamilton received a 10 second stop-and-go penalty, which removed any chance of a race victory, and rather appropriate. No danger was involved in the incident at all, unlike the one in the British GP.
I'm not one to take the stewards to task over inconsistency, their job is difficult enough as it is. But I do find the difference between the two penalties disproportionate. Because of that, I hope the appeal will go ahead. It should be interesting.
Penalties are not there to functionally remove a race winning opportunity. The stewards are not there to decide who may or may not win - unless it is disqualification level offence (which is a totally different issue)

The reason for Hamilton's penalty in Imola being so severe is two fold. One - the penalty was made disproportionately more severe than intended because of the red flag. Under normal circumstances it would have dropped him down to the low points positions.

Secondly, the penalty for this offence was very specifically made very draconian, at the request of the teams. This was after Daniel Ricciardo received a 5s time penalty for doing the same thing in Brazil 2016 and after the race the teams said to the FIA that with such a minor penalty it meant that there was an incentive to take the hit for the penalty and gain the advantage from pitting under safety car conditions. As the pit lane is only closed for safety critical reasons, they asked for the maximum time penalty to be applied so there was no competitive advantage from pitting in a closed pitlane.
Again a very interesting post Alien, thanks.

5s was indeed a minor penalty and the move to increase it logical. What I find hard to reconcile though, is that entering a closed pitlane is seen as a bigger foul than causing an avoidable collision at racing speed in a fast corner. I don't believe closing the pitlane has anything to do with safety critical reasons, at least not in the pitlane.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

User avatar
Johnson
Posts: 1959
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Johnson »

The pit lane is only closed for safety reasons, it was closed at Monza because men were in the pit lane entry pushing a broken down car.

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Exediron »

Johnson wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:09 am
The pit lane is only closed for safety reasons, it was closed at Monza because men were in the pit lane entry pushing a broken down car.
Indeed.

I support having a hard line between sporting penalties (such as avoidable contact) and safety penalties. Safety penalties should be draconian; any driver who endangers the marshals or other personnel should be effectively removed from the race. Unlike a fellow driver, they didn't consent to the danger and they're not protected by a car.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (9 wins, 23 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

Fiki
Posts: 8396
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Location: Belgium

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Fiki »

Johnson wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:09 am
The pit lane is only closed for safety reasons, it was closed at Monza because men were in the pit lane entry pushing a broken down car.
Good point, I stand corrected. Which car was that?

Edit: I found it, it was a Haas.
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

FrogInARaceCar
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2020 1:18 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by FrogInARaceCar »

Fiki wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:57 am
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:40 am
Fiki wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:26 am
By chance I watched Netflix's episode on Pièrre Gasly's Italian GP win of last year. After Leclerc's crash the pitlane was closed initially, though Hamilton did make a pitstop. His penalty struck me, as I had forgotten all about it - not at all difficult at my age. :) After the restart, Hamilton received a 10 second stop-and-go penalty, which removed any chance of a race victory, and rather appropriate. No danger was involved in the incident at all, unlike the one in the British GP.
I'm not one to take the stewards to task over inconsistency, their job is difficult enough as it is. But I do find the difference between the two penalties disproportionate. Because of that, I hope the appeal will go ahead. It should be interesting.
Penalties are not there to functionally remove a race winning opportunity. The stewards are not there to decide who may or may not win - unless it is disqualification level offence (which is a totally different issue)

The reason for Hamilton's penalty in Imola being so severe is two fold. One - the penalty was made disproportionately more severe than intended because of the red flag. Under normal circumstances it would have dropped him down to the low points positions.

Secondly, the penalty for this offence was very specifically made very draconian, at the request of the teams. This was after Daniel Ricciardo received a 5s time penalty for doing the same thing in Brazil 2016 and after the race the teams said to the FIA that with such a minor penalty it meant that there was an incentive to take the hit for the penalty and gain the advantage from pitting under safety car conditions. As the pit lane is only closed for safety critical reasons, they asked for the maximum time penalty to be applied so there was no competitive advantage from pitting in a closed pitlane.
Again a very interesting post Alien, thanks.

5s was indeed a minor penalty and the move to increase it logical. What I find hard to reconcile though, is that entering a closed pitlane is seen as a bigger foul than causing an avoidable collision at racing speed in a fast corner. I don't believe closing the pitlane has anything to do with safety critical reasons, at least not in the pitlane.
At least at Monza, the reason the pitlane was closed is that there was in theory a car recovery operation in progress around the pit entry, so a car entering the pitlane unexpectedly might endanger the marshals (IIRC they hadn't actually started yet because the pitlane had only just closed).

The problem with the "ignore the context, punish the action" philosophy is that you sometimes get peverse results (see: Valencia 2010, where Lewis overtook the safety car marginally after the line and got a penalty that appeared to leave him in a better place than he would have been had he done the right thing). Also, the drivers are also aware of the context and you have to be damn sure that they aren't taking advantage. It wouldn't be appropriate to approach Schumi's attempt to take out Villeneuve at Jerez '97 without the context of the championship situation.

User avatar
MistaVega23
Posts: 1998
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:29 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by MistaVega23 »

Not sure if anyone's seen this but an some interesting comments from Horner:

https://youtu.be/naDVLIqLI_o
#KeepFightingMichael

IDFD
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:14 pm

Re: Forum verdict on the Hamilton/Verstappen collision

Post by IDFD »

EPROM wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 7:33 pm
To IDFD, Lewis had already conceded the corner earlier in the turn when he backed off. Pretty clear where the order of primacy lay after that point. And the assertion that others view this as 100% Lewis' fault ("as much as you want to blame Lewis 100%") is a red herring / moving the goalposts of the discussion (nice try). Rarely is anyone 100% at fault / not at fault in this sport. Claiming that others are claiming such is not sincere (IMO).
It's been claimed numerous times on this forum in the past 12 days. Where people are saying Max isn't to blame at all for the contract. I mean that's the whole point of this Red Bull appeal isn't it?

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by pokerman »

IDFD wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:32 pm
In football a frivolous appeal would see you receive an extra game ban.

The FIA need to stamp down on this and make sure it doesn't become routine.
Apparently that's what Max Moseley use to do, Jordan appealed a one race ban for Eddie Irvine and he ended up with a 3 race ban. :)
Last edited by pokerman on Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by pokerman »

UnlikeUday wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:33 pm
A gentle reminder for Horner (check from 0:09 seconds):
Indeed whether Max is on the inside or the outside he always expects the other driver to back down, in this instance he never got as far alongside as what Hamilton did at Silverstone, Stroll didn't end up in a barrier so it's not deemed as dangerous?

I have to wonder if Red Bull do go for the Mercedes/Hamilton jugular with use of lawyers can such things as this be brought forward?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Forum verdict on the Hamilton/Verstappen collision

Post by pokerman »

KingVoid wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 7:21 pm
IDFD wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:49 pm
Do you at least acknowledge this is partially because people jump out of Max's way because of how aggressive he is so they usually go the extra mile to avoid incidents?
Maybe you should have told that to Leclerc at Silverstone 2019, who raced Verstappen harder than anyone has raced Hamilton in recent history, and yet they kept it clean.
And it's not just Lewis. It's on camera with Bottas and Seb both saying you give Max a wide berth because he's an aggressive driver so if you don't try and stop the crash both cars are going out. It's a good reputation for Max to have because it makes his life easier but it isn't fair or good driving just because others jump out of his way.
That press conference was completely cringe. Three drivers making fun of the aggression of one driver who wasn’t even there to defend themselves. Two of those drivers (Hamilton and Vettel) have been collecting penalty points for fun in recent years, while the other driver (Bottas) is so bad at racing that his inability to overtake is a meme.

Perhaps they should look at themselves first.
Leclerc raced hard against Max at Silverstone because of what happened in Austria were Max deliberately drove Leclerc off the track in order to win the race, it was Leclerc's message to Max that he wouldn't be bullied anymore.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Forum verdict on the Hamilton/Verstappen collision

Post by pokerman »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:12 pm
IDFD wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:49 pm
mikeyg123 wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:43 pm
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:31 pm
WHoff78 wrote:
Tue Jul 27, 2021 5:38 pm

The thing is though Max is very aggressive in all scenarios. I don't see how you can compete with that except for backing out when the risk is too high (which Hamilton has done on multiple occasions) and matching the aggression at the right moments - easier said than done.
In this case Hamilton was every bit as aggressive as Max but he will have to do that at moments while the Red Bull is the faster car. It's incredible that there was not contact earlier in the lap. Prior to Brooklands I believe Max makes a clear move to the inside but then aggressively try's to forces Hamilton to the outside on the approach so that he has a better line. It's amazing that they don't touch at that point. Fully expect there to be more contact going forward and it is going to come down to who plays the percentages better. Dangerous game though.
The thing is that Who the hell is Max to be able to do as he pleases and everyone else has to tip toe around him because he refuses to adhere to the same etiquette as everyone else driving in FIA sanctioned events??!?!?

Do you not see the preposterousness of your statement?

So if a driver were to hit the scene who didn't like to turn left and simply drove straight over all left hand turns because that's what he feels like doing, everyone else should take note of that and adjust their driving accordingly to allow him to just cut all left turns straight?

This is the pinnacle of motorsport and if you want to play with the big boys you do it fairly and without ruthless intent if you want to be regarded as one of the elites.


This is just a snippet of some of Max's antics, which set a clear precedent...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkAoSghdD6Y&t=31s
Hamilton has been penalised 3 times for crashing into other cars since Max's last penalty for hitting anyone.
Do you at least acknowledge this is partially because people jump out of Max's way because of how aggressive he is so they usually go the extra mile to avoid incidents?

This is why Max and Red Bull are so angry. They're not used to actually racing people anymore. We've already seen 2 or 3 times this season where Lewis would usually keep it in but he knows it's Max and it isn't worth the crash so had backed off as Max won't be fair and will crash / go over the limit.

And it's not just Lewis. It's on camera with Bottas and Seb both saying you give Max a wide berth because he's an aggressive driver so if you don't try and stop the crash both cars are going out. It's a good reputation for Max to have because it makes his life easier but it isn't fair or good driving just because others jump out of his way.
Where has Lewis actually backed out this season? Imola he certainly didn't.
What happened when he didn't, Max banged wheels with him and forced him off the track, I think the actually backing off bit was Hamilton having to avoid Max's car as he endeavoured to re-join the track.

The other one was Barcelona were Horner himself said that if Hamilton had not backed out of it then he would have ended up in the barrier during his gushing praise of Max's pass.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by pokerman »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:53 am
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:04 am
Fiki wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 3:23 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:58 pm
Any predictions on what the new evidence is.

For it to be admissible it has to have been:

Not evidence the stewards were aware of at the time of the original verdict.

Unavailable at the time to the party lodging the appeal of the original verdict.

Substantially different to evidence used in the original verdict.

This would rule out telemetry data or different camera angles.
Could evidence that was available but unexamined at the time of the GP be admissable as "new", I wonder? Telemetry has been named by some on the forum. I think it's possible Red Bull hope to get the penalty increased, by making the stewards/FIA see that Verstappen bore no responsibility in the accident. An increased penalty could make all the difference come the final stage of the season, should Max's accident engine indeed need to be replaced.

The business of F1 versus what little seems to remain of the sport of F1.
If it was available to either the stewards or the complainant at the time, then it's not admissible. If it was available to a third party (eg Mercedes) but they didn't share it with the stewards/the stewards were unaware of it, then it's admissible.

But it still has to clear the criteria of being fundamentally different to evidence already considered to pass the first stage.

That's also important, the first stage isn't the appeal, it's too determine if an appeal is legitimate (ie, the new evidence meets the criteria) - clearing that bar doesn't actually have any bearing on whether the appeal will be a success. It could even backfire and the new evidence could lead to Hamilton being cleared of wrong doing and his penalty points taken away (and maybe even 10 seconds subtracted from his race time, although as that wouldn't change the result it isn't really worth doing) - they could even decide Max was at fault and penalise him.

But the only new information they are likely to add is video evidence, which will fall into one of three types: another angle of the crash (this would fail to progress to appeal) - a video analysis using the telemetry (something like Crashalong's videos on YouTube) which would be dismissed for the same reason as Chandok's video with Ferrari, or some kind of smoking gun (Hamilton saying things that imply he deliberately made sure Max went off)

It's unlikely that a video exists of Hamilton outright saying it was deliberate (even in the unlikely event that he did do it deliberately) because that would be a stupid thing to let slip. It's possible they may attempt to argue that reading between the lines on his comments that they are inferring it was deliberate. And I think as this is an opinion of interpretation it also will fail.

The final suggestion is that they have looked at the telemetry and are going to argue this was Hamilton's fastest entry into Copse all weekend and he would never have made the corner. This also fails as being new evidence as the stewards would have known his speed at the time and would have had the option of looking at his corner speeds all weekend. Also, that itself isn't proof he wouldn't make the corner. He could have been doing 1,000mph and Mercedes can just argue their car has the downforce to take copse at that speed. Hamilton had only got to that speed because of the tow from Max, Mercedes had been planning that overtake All weekend because they had analysed the GPS data from the red bull and seen the Honda engine was not deploying MGU-K at the apex of Woodcote to prevent damage, so they could set up to take advantage of that
Yeah, the only thing I can think of that would fulfil the criteria needed to reopen the case would be some kind of strong evidence of Hamilton having crashed deliberately. Anything less than that strikes me as a waste of time. The stewards are going to be extremely reluctant to find a different verdict anyway. It just sets such a precedent that they can really do without.

Note for clarity - I'm not saying Hamilton did take Verstappen out on purpose or that the existence of evidence that suggests he did is remotely likely.
I think that with Hamilton the fact had already backed out of it takes away any thoughts of it being deliberate shown by him going from his front wing being level with Max's front tyre to Hamilton's front tyre being just ahead of Max's rear tyre.

I believe telemetry shows that Hamilton had decreased his speed by 13kph while Max actually increased speed by 2kph so while Hamilton had backed out of it Max still had his foot planted.
Last edited by pokerman on Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3689
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by tootsie323 »

pokerman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:55 pm
I believe telemetry shows that Hamilton had decreased his speed by 13kph while Max actually increased speed by 2kph so while Hamilton had backed out of it Max still had his foot planted.
This is a point that interest me. It's been mentioned that Hamilton went into Copse as fast as he had all race and was not going to make the corner exit. Yet Verstappen went in faster (by virtue of pulling back ahead) and, whilst on a wider entry, was he expected to make the exit himself?
It's a bit f an aside to the incident itself but, as I said, it's piqued my curiosity.
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by pokerman »

tootsie323 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:11 pm
pokerman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:55 pm
I believe telemetry shows that Hamilton had decreased his speed by 13kph while Max actually increased speed by 2kph so while Hamilton had backed out of it Max still had his foot planted.
This is a point that interest me. It's been mentioned that Hamilton went into Copse as fast as he had all race and was not going to make the corner exit. Yet Verstappen went in faster (by virtue of pulling back ahead) and, whilst on a wider entry, was he expected to make the exit himself?
It's a bit f an aside to the incident itself but, as I said, it's piqued my curiosity.
Yeah it's a bit of a fallacy that because Hamilton entered the corner at 314kph he was actually going to try and take the corner at that speed which would have not been possible, he merely was trying to make Max back off like that was ever going to happen.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 38031
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by pokerman »

An interesting interview that Max gave the morning of the race on C4.
Interesting interview between Mark Webber and Max on Sunday morning - shown during C4 build up program.

Mark asked Max about what he thought the Merc drivers might do.

"Merc is going to throw everything at this Max, they had the race last night, in terms of splitting the stategy and the compounds, with Valteri trying to win the start, which didn't work, so they would have learnt some information from that race.

Do you think that, today, Vallteri also can play some part in upsetting what Red Bull have in mind for you."

Max's reply

"I feel quite relaxed - I know they will go flat out and try to make it difficult for me, but at the end of the day I have nothing to lose.

They have a lot to lose.

I know that I am in the lead of the championship, and I can fight, so it's fine, I'm ready for it."
This is the attitude Rosberg took into the Barcelona 2016 race, if we crash I still have a big lead, of course I'm not saying it was intended by Max but the frame of mind backfired somewhat, I guess he couldn't perceive Hamilton surviving a crash that would put him out of the race.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 100 (1st)
Pole Positions: 101 (1st)
Podiums: 176 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Well the stewards threw the appeal out. No further action.

KingVoid
Posts: 3367
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am

Re: Forum verdict on the Hamilton/Verstappen collision

Post by KingVoid »

pokerman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:39 pm
KingVoid wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 7:21 pm
IDFD wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:49 pm
Do you at least acknowledge this is partially because people jump out of Max's way because of how aggressive he is so they usually go the extra mile to avoid incidents?
Maybe you should have told that to Leclerc at Silverstone 2019, who raced Verstappen harder than anyone has raced Hamilton in recent history, and yet they kept it clean.
And it's not just Lewis. It's on camera with Bottas and Seb both saying you give Max a wide berth because he's an aggressive driver so if you don't try and stop the crash both cars are going out. It's a good reputation for Max to have because it makes his life easier but it isn't fair or good driving just because others jump out of his way.
That press conference was completely cringe. Three drivers making fun of the aggression of one driver who wasn’t even there to defend themselves. Two of those drivers (Hamilton and Vettel) have been collecting penalty points for fun in recent years, while the other driver (Bottas) is so bad at racing that his inability to overtake is a meme.

Perhaps they should look at themselves first.
Leclerc raced hard against Max at Silverstone because of what happened in Austria were Max deliberately drove Leclerc off the track in order to win the race, it was Leclerc's message to Max that he wouldn't be bullied anymore.
There was nothing wrong with Verstappen’s move in Austria though. Hamilton did that move all the time to Rosberg with minimal backlash.

JN23
Posts: 3893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by JN23 »

Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:13 pm
Well the stewards threw the appeal out. No further action.
Where you seeing this?

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

JN23 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:16 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:13 pm
Well the stewards threw the appeal out. No further action.
Where you seeing this?
"The Verstappen/Hamilton incident will not get a tail. The stewards have assessed that there is no significant additional evidence to punish Lewis Hamilton more severely after Red Bull's review request.

Now focus on the Hungarian Grand Prix, I think.#F1"

User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9907
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by UnlikeUday »

JN23 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:16 pm
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 4:13 pm
Well the stewards threw the appeal out. No further action.
Where you seeing this?
Saw on a tweet now:

'The stewards have decided that there is no extra proof to tell Hamilton deserved a harsher punishment. Red Bull lost this battle'
Feel The Fourth

User avatar
UnlikeUday
Posts: 9907
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by UnlikeUday »

Marko was so confident hoping Lewis would get a 1 race ban!!!!!!!!!!
Feel The Fourth

JN23
Posts: 3893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by JN23 »

Thanks ATH and Uday :thumbup:

IDFD
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:14 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by IDFD »

With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

mikeyg123
Posts: 19792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by mikeyg123 »

IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:04 pm
With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

Red Bull didn't appeal. All they did was ask if there was grounds to.

IDFD
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:14 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by IDFD »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:11 pm
IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:04 pm
With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

Red Bull didn't appeal. All they did was ask if there was grounds to.
Okay. Well they should be fined for trying to bring new evidence in talking all week about how Hamilton deserved a race ban and for going to the stewards with such nonsense.

Though I'm sure you think this was perfectly normal behaviour that we often see in the sport trying to get someone else's penalty increased 2 weeks after an incident in race.

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:11 pm
IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:04 pm
With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

Red Bull didn't appeal. All they did was ask if there was grounds to.
I think this is arguing semantics. The first stage is technically asking for an appeal, and they have to clear that before they can proceed with the appeal. And if you make this request, it has to be done with the intent of proceeding with the appeal.

So yes it can be argued they didn't appeal, because they were denied the option to appeal.

This is essentially like someone's wife accusing them of going to the strip club, after she got forwarded text of him telling his mates he was going to the strip club, received photos of him catching the bus to the strip club and obtained a video of him asking the bouncer if he could go in to the strip club, but his defence being "I didn't go too the strip club, they wouldn't let me in because I was wearing trainers"

Umbiggy
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2021 7:19 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Umbiggy »

mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:11 pm
IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:04 pm
With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

Red Bull didn't appeal. All they did was ask if there was grounds to.
I think they did to all intents and purposes. They wasted everyone’s time, and it was evidently hugely frivolous. About the only thing the stewards wouldn’t have access to at the time is a confession of intent by Hamilton, so short of that it’s a bit silly tbh.

Red Bull havent shown themselves in a good light at all this last fortnight for me and have come across as very sore losers. Yes it wasn’t ideal but Max was far from blameless himself either and whilst they have a right to feel a bit aggrieved, they’ve went on like children at times and won’t endear themselves to the fans in my opinion

mikeyg123
Posts: 19792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by mikeyg123 »

IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:17 pm
mikeyg123 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:11 pm
IDFD wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:04 pm
With such a ridiculous bit of action from Red Bull they really should have faced some sort of action like you would in other sports.

Just a fine of sorts that would go in to youth level racing. Otherwise everyone may as well appeal everything and waste everyone's time.

Red Bull didn't appeal. All they did was ask if there was grounds to.
Okay. Well they should be fined for trying to bring new evidence in talking all week about how Hamilton deserved a race ban and for going to the stewards with such nonsense.

Though I'm sure you think this was perfectly normal behaviour that we often see in the sport trying to get someone else's penalty increased 2 weeks after an incident in race.
I don't think there's anything wrong with asking if you have grounds to appeal.

The fact it's two weeks later can hardly be blamed on Red Bull.

IDFD
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 5:14 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by IDFD »

I can understand being upset / annoyed about the incident but Red Bulls behaviour has been embarrassing for the sport and themselves.

I've got friends who have no interest in F1 messaging me asking why Horner comes across as such a whining idiot from snippets/headlines they've seen on social media. It's not a good look for the sport at all.

JN23
Posts: 3893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by JN23 »

Part of Red Bull's new evidence was 'a re-enactment of Hamilton's lap 1 line' based on a lap by Albon in a Pirelli tyre test. Odd...

User avatar
Alienturnedhuman
Posts: 4482
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by Alienturnedhuman »

Well here is their evidence. I think Ferrari using Chandok's video suddenly looks far more credible.

JN23
Posts: 3893
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am

Re: Hamilton/Verstappen British GP 2021 Collision Discussion

Post by JN23 »

I'm intrigued by the last paragraph of the document, wonder what those allegations are?

Post Reply