Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Monte-Carlo, 2014

Rosberg’s pole confirmed as stewards take no action

2014 Monaco Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Monte-Carlo, 2014Nico Rosberg will start the Monaco Grand Prix from pole position as the stewards chose to take no action over the incident at Mirabeau.

Rosberg’s second pole position in Monaco had been under threat after the stewards announced they were investigating why he stopped at Mirabeau on his final lap.

The Mercedes driver appeared to lose control of his car at the corner and came to a stop in the run-off area. As that brought the yellow flags out his team mate Lewis Hamilton was unable to improve his time.

But after examining video and telemetry evidence the stewards ruled “no offence was committed by the driver of car number six [Rosberg] as they “could find no evidence of any offence related to the turn five incident”.

The two Mercedes drivers will therefore start tomorrow’s race from the front row of the grid.

2014 Monaco Grand Prix

Browse all 2014 Monaco Grand Prix articles

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

206 comments on “Rosberg’s pole confirmed as stewards take no action”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3
  1. Ouch, that hurts Lewis.
    Nico is in the house, as Lewis said in his “yachts and jets” speech.
    Who’s the hungriest now?

    1. Just confirms that NR can not beat LH fair and square at the moment.

      Would be very surprised if one of the two following scenarios doesn’t happen at corner 1 tomorrow:

      1 The two Mercedes racers collides

      2 LH Takes the lead after outbreaking/pushing through.

      1. and how does my comment make you take the conclussion I assume Nico cheated?

        1. We would have to agree that if Nico did cheat, only proves that he’s more Hungry :p

          Hunger makes you commit desperate measures :p

          1. Paul (@frankjaeger)
            24th May 2014, 20:19

            I don’t think it makes him more hungry, maybe desperate

      2. @tvm I don’t believe it confirms that at all. Rosberg was quicker for the majority of the weekend, and his S1 time was no slower than Hamilton’s (in fact I believe, it was marginally faster).

        1. The majority of the weekend? You mean besides all free practices? Hamilton was faster in all of them.

        2. Hamilton’s total time would have been faster even with S1 being slower, that has been determined by way of perfect laps, it was LH’s fastest S1.

          All ways a question if LH could have done it, but there are two in the pack that can pull a fast one on command, thats LH and SV, qualy isn’t over until they park.

          And NR knows this :)

        3. @vettel1 what majority of the weekend are you talking about? Hamilton was ahead in Fp1, Fp2, Fp3 and Q2

          1. Ha ha i thought same thing, Vettel dont no what he is talking about how as Ros been quicker or majority of weekend more like LH as.

        4. have you forgotten what happened in spain,,,,,nico was faster until lewis nicked in on his last flying lap.

        5. are you forgetting ham took Q2 and was ready to carry on the performance. I however wont dwell on those ROS Kangaroo tactics, The start and the first corner will speak volumes tomorrow…… watch this space

      3. There is no doubt Lewis will be tasting blood. He will absolutely be determined to take that victory tomorrow, perhaps even more so now with Rosberg’s antics and gleeful celebration of a pole that was a bit dubiously earned. We the viewers win.

        1. “Dubiously earned”? The stewards found no evidence for any wrongdoing at all. They have access to all the relevant data such as telemetry.

          Unless, of course, you have some evidence in your possession that the stewards don’t. Do you?

          1. Doesn’t mean cheating but benefitting of his own mistake I presume.

          2. I’m sure he made a mistake, but he capitalised on it and his OTT display at gaining pole was a disgrace.

      4. Just confirms that NR can not beat LH fair and square at the moment

        He just did…

        1. I beg to differ.

          1. Beg all you like, it won’t change the facts.

          2. @raceprouk – I wouldn’t say it’s a “fact” that Rosberg cheated. In fact I think he didn’t but having said that, your logic means that it’s a “fact” that Maradona didn’t handball it into the net against England.

          3. I know I should be grossly offended, but I just cannot fathom why. Maybe you could shed some light on it @jason12?

            @petebaldwin – That’s not really a fair comparison, as the evidence against Rosberg (if there’s any at all) is far from conclusive.

          4. @raceprouk

            You dont know the facts anymore than I do, only NR does and chance are we will never know.

          5. @tvm – And where and wiich facts you’re holding to have that opinion?

          6. You’re right @tvm, I don’t have all the facts, and by your admission, neither do you. But the stewards do, and no amount of begging will change that.

          7. @raceprouk @hipn0tic

            But the stewards do

            Same stewards who only reprimanded Raikkonen for hitting Magnussen, (Remember LH got a drive through for the same move some years back). Means nothing.

            Take a pick:

            A) Hamiltons’s brain games actually worked and NR did end in the barrier because of the pressure, meaning he buckled and could not produce a lap when it mattered but ended causing a yellow = not fair and square but by accident.


            B) he put it there on purpose = not fair and square but by cheating.

            Somewhat cheating, I still only believe it was a heat of the moment thing rather than a well thought out plan, not condemning mind you, still think NR is a great racer.

          8. Different stewards

          9. @raceprouk

            How clever Dave, so which option is it, A or B?

          10. Option C – an honest mistake made pushing too hard trying to better his first run knowing Hamilton won’t leave a single hundredth to spare

          11. Thats option A, pushed over his limit by hes team mate. :)

            But lets leave it at that.

        2. Fairly? Really? Reversing on to the track while a driver up on your time is about to destroy your time is fair. We obviously have different morales

          1. And why Hamilton wasn’t 1st at the time? Do tou know for sure that Hamilton had the pole if it wasn’t for that? NO! Who was on Pole? Nico,
            What said the stewards? That it was a matter that it could happen in racing, if instead of Nico was Ricciardo, Vergne or other than Nico and instead of Ham it was Chilton, Alonso this wasn’t even a subject of discussion.

    2. The problem is Nico will be perceived us cheater despite the result. I think Lewis will exploit it. What Nico needs to do now is not only winning in Monaco but beat Lewis in Canada and keep the momentum for the remaining of the season. If Lewis gets P2 tomorrow and takes back championship lead in Canada and keeps beating Lewis when they get back to Europe, Nico will not be looking good on the picture.

      If I was Lewis manager I’d tell him: keep cool, go get your podium finish, focus on demoralizing your “enemy” in Canada and the press will get their “bad guy” who can only beat you through cheating…

      1. [EDIT]

        The problem is Nico will be perceived as cheater despite the result. I think Lewis will exploit it. What Nico needs to do now is not only winning in Monaco but beat Lewis in Canada and keep the momentum for the remaining of the season. If Lewis gets P2 tomorrow and takes back championship lead in Canada and keeps beating Nico when they get back to Europe, Nico will not be looking good on the picture.

        If I was Lewis manager I’d tell him: keep cool, go get your podium finish, focus on demoralizing your “enemy” in Canada and the press will get their “bad guy” who can only beat you through cheating…

      2. If I was Lewis, I would try some kamikaze moves tomorrow. If they both crash out, Lewis still holds onto his championship lead.

        1. NO. I don’t want this to end like that!

    3. Just confirms that a competitive team with 2 drivers willing to become a WDC, is not a friendly team. It was bound to happen this… people were saying: “look Red Bull and Ferrari how you deal with it!” but it happens, friendly doesn’t last… happened in Red Bull in 2010, it’s starting to happen here aswell.

      Having two roosters in the same cage will always be tight. Which it’s fantastic. They’ll go to the wire now… more than before.

      1. Only yesterday we read that piece where Alain Prost mentions, its almost inevitable that it’s going to happen, and it only needs a small thing to start …
        Guess we now got that @fer-no65.

        1. @bascb indeed, it’s all balance and equilibrium, friendly faces and all, but a little thing can make it go crazy.

    4. @omarr-pepper – We’ll see who is the hungriest tomorrow afternoon. If Hamilton manages to win this, it will be a huge psychological blow to Rosberg…

      1. @petebaldwin Well, a blow yes, but it will be up to NR to make sure it isn’t huge. These guys have sports psychologists to help them not get too high on the highs or low on the lows.

        Consider that NR did overdrive the car in his attempt to get pole. He knows that. That’s all he’s guilty of but it means nobody knows better than NR that he has his work cut out for him all season long. This is one race in spite of some claiming it is the pivotal one. Those same people wouldn’t forgo the rest of the season and just hand LH the WDC. It is not pivotal because NR, if he is WDC material, will take from this weekend and grow with it. Either way. If either of these drivers don’t want to clash it is up to each of them to raise their game and stay ahead of the other.

        I think NR will have a bit of a personal battle just living with overdriving the car and nearly blowing it. But his crew should help him with that.

        If LH wants to play the underprivileged, and now the cheated card, that is on him and just shows his own character. I hope he’s done with that. I’m sure LH knows that Senna also grew up privileged. And he had a whole different hunger altogether.

        Anyway the winner is…the fans.

        Sorry for the digression.

    5. @omarr-pepper All I have to say about the Hungry comment by Lewis is that it was a cheap shot. He seems to be playing a victim card. A sympathy seeker. Oh I had a Poor Childhood And so I want to Win more races……. Ridiculous….

      Now I understand what Button said earlier about Lewis and his Mind Games !!!!!

      1. Please! Don’t be so naive about how the world works. Nico grew up a very different life compared to Lewis. That is an undeniable fact. It’s a unpleasant fact because if you’re the guy who had the privileged upbringing, you feel like your efforts are being diminished when your privilege is pointed out. Its not a cheap shot, is the TRUTH! LH just said they came up differently(fact). He said he is hungriest, which every competitive athlete will claim they are.

        1. who’s being naive here ? why talk about nico’s privileged upbringing, he can talk all about his own life ?

          1. Why not talk about it? It’s a striking difference between the two. You do know Monaco is Rosberg’s hometown and we are in fact at the Monaco GP?? Its not like the comments come out no where. It would have been weird of LH made this statement in Melbourne or China. In the states we had a Presidential election between Obama and Romney. Guess what? Backgrounds and upbringing matters. Thinking that is irrelevant and should be omitted is being naive.

          2. @f1007 +1 Exactly Lewis was playing the Mind Games using his upbringing as the issue. Politics is different from Sports. In politics you gain points through these aspects. In Sports you gain points through winning not through gaining sympathy and upbringing aspects.

            Lewis is trying to be smart here using Nico’s family legacy and childhood against him. As @f1007 mentioned let him speak all about his past why speak about others !!! who is he to speak about Nico’s childhood ?

      2. Mark in Florida
        24th May 2014, 23:10

        Yea poor old hungry Hamilton starving to death with only 68 million in the bank. Come on talk about being disingenuous. This is the same hungry kid that Ron Dennis supported all of those years? Hunger in motorsports isn’t measured by what you start with its where you finish.

    6. so Nico can outdo Lewis either by unfair move like this or DNF.
      He does not deserve WDC.

  2. Glad about this. I think the whole thing was a little overblown, perhaps because the drama of the quali was ruined by the off, and perhaps because of Hamiltons petulant response in post-quali interviews.

    1. +3 COTD

    2. Interesting you refer to Lewis being petulant. I think when you’re up a few tenths on pole and can’t complete your lap due to your teammates mistake, you have every right to be miffed. Rosberg stole one no question. But it’s a long season, and these things have a way of working themselves out. It’s amazing Lewis has the championship lead so soon after getting no points while his teammate got a full 25 in the season opener due to a failure on Hamilton’s car. If it had been reversed, and Rosberg had suffered that failure, Lewis would be leading the championship 125 points to Rosberg’s 72…..just goes to show what kind of deficit Hamilton had to overcome to regain the lead after the season opening disaster off the line.

      1. Rosberg stole one no question

        Are you that divine that you have the ability to know this?

        If it had been reversed

        If‘s and had‘s don’t count in sport, they just don’t.

        1. I have to say I did think it was a bit strange that rosberg drove to the end of the run off before then deciding to reverse back up it and rejoin the course. He was almost stopped as he took the run off so why drive to the very end? Of course the yellow flags would remain out longer by doing so…….

          1. He was looking to see if he could turn around instead of reversing.

      2. I understand the frustration from him of course, bottom line is he was marginally down in the first sector, and these things happen at Monaco if you’re going to leave anything on the table for the last lap. I felt his response and the way he sulked in the interviews was disappointing for a 29 year old man.

        1. @mattshaw85 Rosberg has been quicker in both short sectors (1 and 3) throughout the day while Lewis owned the long sector 2, being faster on sector 1 was a good indication for landing a better time than Nico, that’s why he was so confident and then disappointed.

          1. Fact is we will never know who would have been quicker, which is what makes it all the more disappointing, not only for the drivers and their relationship but also for the viewers, in this situation with the qualifying playing such a major part in Sundays race, should we look more at the rules in qualifying session.

        2. @mattshaw85
          Judgemental comments like yours are what’s disappointing.

          It’s so easy for living-room-armchair-observers to judge how drivers should be acting after being robbed of the chance to complete a lap for pole, because we’ve been in similar situations as well….oh wait.

          1. This article might change your mind.

      3. @medman I agree that he has every right to be miffed, though he did seem to hint in one of the post-session interviews that he thought it may have been deliberate, which I though was a tad distasteful even considering his obvious annoyance.

        1. Yeah that’s what got me. It’s really not a good idea to imply that your team mate was cheating. That is a huge accusation to make (or in this case imply). It comes across as being rash and unfair to jump to conclusions in such a way.

        2. Pretty much that, yeah @vettel1. It’s one thing to say its a huge disappointment, but quite another one to go on and say its “to be expected” and even continuing that he is planning to crash into Rosberg if Nico holds the first corner, just like Senna did to Prost.

          If he does that, I would say he (Hamilton) deserves a several race ban because it would be clearly on purpose.

      4. +1
        innocent or not, anyone deserves to be miffed at missing out on what should have been your fastest lap

      5. @medman being petulant in the opinions, not about the track. And yes, his opinions are quite strange from time to time.

      6. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts…

    3. So you take issue with LH’s petulance, but NC fist pumping and celebrating as he exits his car right next to the guy he just screwed over is no bother? Hmmm…hollow pole is all we can call it.

      1. Its pretty obvious there is no love lost between the two, hopefully some sparks fly.

    4. +1

      So many people apparently have no qualms with accusing Rosberg of cheating because it “looked” strange. If it wasn’t for the history with Schumacher at Rascasse in 2006 and the media sensationalizing everything I don’t think this opinion would have gained any foothold.

      I’m especially disappointed in the Sky F1 team for their desperate attempts to encourage this speculation as if it has no potential for collateral damage. These are the kind of accusations that can permanently taint the image of a driver. I seriously doubt they would have given this speculation any credence if the roles were reversed and it was Hamilton instead of Rosberg who went off and by proxy, denied his teammate the opportunity to set a faster lap.

      Herbert was playing devils advocate and was actively fueling the speculation with talk about the steering inputs of Rosberg as if that alone is evidence of guilt. I actually think it looked a bit questionable myself but I don’t think it’s remotely fair to jump from that opinion to accusations of foul play. I don’t have an issue with the opinion that it looked sketchy but I do have a major issue with the apparent desire to correlate this with accusations of cheating. Are people really this blinkered and desperate to court controversy?

      Kravitz is entertaining and I enjoy his pit-lane reporting and notebooks but he has a susceptibility to sensationalize events to suit the agenda of the broadcaster he works for with a worrying lack of tact. He sat on the fence on this issue to protect his own image but took the opportunity to tell us all what rival team bosses had supposedly told him – that they believed Rosberg was effectively cheating.

      Doesn’t he realize that these RIVAL TEAM BOSSES likely have their own agenda to destabilize the team harmony at Mercedes and/or do whatever they can to instigate an opinion that Rosberg was cheating because it may have led to a penalty for Rosberg? So long as it doesn’t diminish their own integrity and image of course.

      Kravitz played into their hands as he broadcast this opinion, whether genuine or not, without naming the bosses who are perceived as respectable, experienced and authoritative figures and thus would add plenty of weight to the speculation whilst simultaneously leaving them completely detatched from any culpability. If the bosses wanted to make this opinion known, they should have said so themselves instead of using a mule to do their bidding. We should all know by now that when under the veil of anonymity, people have a tendency to say and do things they would never dream of otherwise.

      Croft was more than eager to point out that the Twitter activity he was reading had a 70/30 split of opinion in favour of those who believe Rosberg intentionally caused the yellow flags and painted that as being representative of general consensus which is a shocking logical fallacy. I’m sure he knows full well that Twitter comments are highly likely NOT to be representative of general opinion. Those who feel aggreived or annoyed or want to court controversy are far more likely to tweet than those who are not. He even slipped up and said “everyone thinks” before correcting himself – a strong indication of bias towards broadcasting a particular viewpoint.

      Then there’s Lazenby who was acting like a school kid watching a fight break out in the playground, doing everything he could to suggestively court controversy. He even started referring to Rosberg as “the German” which really irked me.

      Finally there’s Hamilton, who acted like a petulant brat once again. He’s not the kind of person anyone should want to have as a friend. He’s only nice and friendly when everything is the way he wants it to be. I’ve come to expect this kind of behavior as normal from Hamilton yet a large group of fans support him at every turn when he is like this. It’s not Rosberg I’ve lost respect for after qualifying, it’s most of the Sky F1 team and Hamilton. I’m British and I support him as a driver and acknowledge his immense talent but I certainly don’t support him as a person. The most marketable sports star? My arse…

      1. I hasten to add that I think it was actually a good thing for the FIA to investigate the incident, even if only to be prudent in light of what happened in 2006 with Schumacher. It also helps to clear the air a bit.

        I also forgot to mention that I think Brundle, Hill, Davidson and Pinkham maintained a fair approach to addressing the issue. In my opinion they did nothing wrong by analysing the sequence of events with replays or being sceptical about how it unfolded, or in Pinkham’s case, questioning Rosberg on the issue without asking loaded questions.

  3. Chris Phillips
    24th May 2014, 17:28

    Certainly looked fishy to me. Well it will add spice to the race tomorrow (hopefully!)

  4. Meow-mix, anyone?

  5. Graham (@guitargraham)
    24th May 2014, 17:28

    As much as anything else this is Schumacher’s legacy around monaco. it HAD to be looked at

    1. Well said – It’s all down to the fact that it happened before. I saw nothing wrong the moment it happened – I was more in the lines of furious the moment he went off thinking lewis would get him.

    2. That darn Schumacher and parking it at Rascasse all those pole laps in 1994, 1996, 2000 and 2012 as well. Not to mention all the times he parked it as Rascasse to win the race in 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2001. A very tainted legacy, only rivaled by Senna’s legacy at Suzuka.

      1. :-) @npf1 never gets old eh?

  6. Cue first corner mayhem.

    1. I thought about that too…..

    2. I can’t wait. I’d be gutted if we were robbed of a decent race because Rosberg had to spend the start of the race stuck behind the Red Bulls whilst Hamilton disappeared off into the distance.

    3. Could be. But 2nd on the grid is often in danger of being overtaken at Monaco (most reliable pass in the whole race), reckon HAM might be worrying more about keeping RIC behind than chasing ROS.

  7. If Lewis had been given pole then it would have been tainted, so, as far as Lewis is concerned, this is the better outcome given the circumstances. Expecting to set a time after the chequered flag is out is a bit hopeful around Monaco, Lewis knows that.

    1. And you think Nico’s pole is not tainted?

  8. Shame it’s over, the amount of drama was just too awesome.

    I adore F1 fans on the internet.

    1. Yeah, it was fun for a minute. I didn’t think that the off was deliberate and didn’t have an opinion on the reverse, but all of the drama from Hamilton, the media, and the internet was hilarious.

      1. Do I have to feel guilty if I really want that first-corner-incident that´s in the air to happen?

    2. Don’t know if I should feel guilty for loving this kind of controversy… Can’t wait to watch tomorow’s first corner :)

  9. See. Told you. End of the story, because it was growing in the media very rapidly.

  10. That answers a few people’s questions.

    1. @neelv27
      No it doesn’t, i don’t know what video the stewards were looking at but as for me the were some evidence that confirms that something unusual was going on :
      You just have just to look at Rosberg’s first lap and the second one to notice that in his second attempt he was way off the racing line heading into Maribeau, he was in the middle of the road far from the barriers while in his first attempt he was very close to the barriers which is very normal in Monaco in order to minimize the lap time. That tells that he was preparing for this maneuver and was careful to crash into the walls. The second evidence is that he locked up his wheels at the end of the braking zone whereas when it happens to the drivers to lose the breaking point they immediately react by attacking the brakes and locking up the wheels something Roseberg didn’t do fearing that he could crash into the wall, instead he locked up his wheels after he slowed down and was in control of the car just to show that he lost the car under breaking. The third evidence is the reverse back to the track and he said that he didn’t knew what position Hamilton was until he saw him coming.
      The thing this year Rosberg knows that he can’t compete with Hamilton on equal terms, he only won in Australia due to Hamilton’s DNF that’s the truth so instead he is trying to destabilize Hamilton with these dirty tricks. To be honest i don’t have any problems with drivers playing mind games or doing dirty tricks, i like the way the likes of Prost Shumacher, Alonso and even Vettel race but the thing is that Britney really needs to man up.

      1. i don’t know what video the stewards were looking at

        Much more than what we have as they have access to all the CCTV camera footage.

        Additionally they have full access to all the teams telemetry from every second of the weekend & have an Ex-F1 driver (Derek Warwick this weekend) working with them to give them the point of view of a driver. They also have a lot more tools to analyze the data.

        The steward are far better placed to judge if it was deliberate or not than us lot who have only what we see on the TV broadcast.

        1. How long did it take the FIA (with telemetry) to determine Piquet Jr. intentionally crashed in Singapore 09? Oh yes, it took Piquet Jr. being fired.

          1. @austus

            They didn’t check the telemetry after the accident (there was no reason for it at the time, since no one suspected anything).

            They checked it after Piquet confessed, and that’s how they determinednit was indeed intentional.

      2. I think you’re the last person in this place to judge if the stewards are right or not.

        And that’s because most of what you post tend to be wrong. Very wrong.

        Self-awareness can do wonders if you give it a try.

      3. i don’t know what video the stewards were looking at

        My guess is complete footage from every trackside camera and every on board camera on every car. Certainly far far far more than you have available.

  11. Hmmm… Somehow I sense a Red Bull win tomorrow, unless of course Mercedes make a “gentleman’s agreement” between their drivers pre-race about who pits first, which I don’t really see happening.
    Personally I think Rosberg has gotten off rather lightly, especially with the reversing part. But still, turn 1 should be interesting.

    1. I really doubt anyone would be scoring full points in F1F prediction round for this race unless ofcourse they chose one of the RBR drivers to win this race. :D
      Have a feeling both Mercs are going to collide at first cornor tomorrow.

  12. Uzair Syed (@ultimateuzair)
    24th May 2014, 17:36

    What a pathetic decision. Rosberg deserved at least a five-place grid penalty.

    1. For what?

      1. Reversing on track while other drivers are running is a demotion to the back of the grid. Forget the accident, it’s the reversing on to the track. For some reason the stewards did not look at this.

        1. its allowed under yellow when the track workers instruct you to.

    2. Nice to see people with access to the telemetries like yourself are here to fight the good fight!

    3. @ultimateuzair
      How did you come to that conclusion? Drivers are allowed to make mistakes, even when it is to their benefit.
      If it cannot be proven that he did it on purpose, then there is no way to punish him for going off.

    4. Five places would not nearly be enough. 57 places would be far better. Make him start from somewhere near Marseille.

    5. what a pathetic comment

    6. @ultimateuzair It’s only pathetic because it wasn’t the decision you wanted.

    7. *tantrums*

  13. I’m glad the FIA conducted a thorough investigation on this one: had they not bothered to do so, I could imagine the media would have completely overblown the whole situation and Hamilton’s discontent may have been aggravated, with some fairly nasty consequences for their relationship within the team.

    And I do believe their conclusion was the correct one. Had they found him even partially guilty, surely their only option would be disqualification (unless they had ruled it as simple impeding), which would be a ludicrously harsh punishment for what barely compares in malevolence to the infamous Schumacher incident of 2006, which was quite clearly deliberate.

    1. Looking at Hamilton’s demeanour after qualy I think their relationship is already broken now, irrespective of what stewards have decided. Expecting some mayhem at the first corner of the race tomorrow.

      1. I think it’s been broken since around China.

        1. I think it was sort of fine in china. Yes lewis was beating Nico and Nico said on podium that he hates coming second to lewis and that is all fine. Nobody loves coming second to their teammates. But what Nico did here (acc to lewis) was wrong and probably Lewis will draw line from here onwards.

    2. @vettel1 – I agree. I think there was an element of Rosberg knowing he could keep the yellows out by reversing but I don’t think it’s anything any of the other drivers wouldn’t have done – including Hamilton. How would he have known whether the yellows would have not stayed out had he waited at the end of the escape road and by not reversing, he would have ruined everyone’s lap.

      Also for the sake of the race, both Mercs on the front row is essential because they’ll stay together whereas having one stuck behind a Red Bull for the opening stint and letting the other disappear up the road isn’t going to do the “Rate the race” score any favours.

    3. I feel the only teammates who get along with each other are on teams with no chance of winning and even then its rare. Those guys wanted to destroy each other since the first practice session in Melbourne.

  14. Hamilton’s annoyance and suspicion were perfectly justified. I don’t see being deprived the chance to compete as petulant.

    However it depends how he reacts: blows Rosberg away for the rest of the season, or allows the idea that Rosberg got one over him (whether that’s true or not) to eat away at his concentration and decisions.

    1. I don’t see being deprived the chance to compete as petulant.

      And what about implying without any proof that Rosberg had gone off deliberately, as he did to Sky Sports in his interview after qualifying? That to me is being petulant.

      1. Show me a previous truly great F1 driver who hasn’t done anything you woulddescribe as petulant? Alonso? Senna? Schumacher? Nope….

        1. @petebaldwin So because others have done it, it’s ok? How about you actually refute the substance of my statement instead of justifying Hamilton’s behaviour by reference to other examples of similar behaviour?

          1. @colossal-squid – I didn’t say it was acceptable or ok. I love the psychology side of F1 though and it’s interesting that all of the best F1 drivers seem to fall into similar categories.

            I wouldn’t “refute the substance” of your statement because frankly, you are 100% correct in what you say. I am merely pointing out that what Lewis has done is no different to what any other “great” F1 driver would have done.

        2. Bad argument. Prior occurrence by different entity doesn’t make it acceptable.

          1. It isn’t an argument. It is an observation.

            I am not defending Hamilton, I am simply commenting that his actions closely mirror those of Alonso, Schumacher and Senna.

    2. “being deprived the chance to compete”

      Q3 is 12 min long.

      1. Not in this case. And given the choice between having the first minute of the 12 minutes and the last minute, which would you choose?

        Some of you have a hard time differentiating between petulance and anger, by the way.

        1. My point was he had plenty of time and an actual attempt of competing for pole in that time, your point about being deprived the chance to compete is invalid.

          And some of us…? I did not even mention Lewis and his reaction, but since you did, let me break it down for you:

          “I don’t see being deprived the chance to compete as petulant.”

          Yes, nor would anyone else, since no one would assign emotional traits to a situation. A situation or an event is not a person, and it does not have a personality.
          And as I have already mentioned, your description of the situation is invalid to begin with.
          If we assume you were trying to argue that Lewis’s reaction following the events were not petulant, as some did, then here is what the words mean:

          petulance – unreasonably irritable or ill-tempered

          anger – a strong feeling of displeasure or hostility

          Seems to me that one is caused by the other, and to be angered and upset by a random event that is known to be highly likely, the effects of which could have been prevented by oneself, is indeed unreasonable, hence it is reasonable to say he was being petulant, by the very definition of the word I just learned.

          And with respect to which minute of the session I would choose:
          I would choose multiple minutes, preferably when the track is clear, as did Lewis, Nico and others, but you seem to have missed the fact that there was a qualifying competition going on all trough the first 11 minutes as well, by insisting there wasn’t.

          1. your point about being deprived the chance to compete is invalid

            There was a yellow flag –> he couldn’t compete during the last minute or have the same shot as Rosberg –> he was deprived the chance to compete. Of course yellow flags can happen any times for any reason, and he did indeed have the preceding 10 minutes to try and better Rosberg, but that doesn’t make the original statement at all untrue.

          2. Sorry, the petulance comment was meant for those above – and my original comment was missing a chunk and didn’t make complete sense. But the point still stands, he was angry immediately after the event and given the information he had at the time (seen by himself on track) had reason to be. Just because he may have been wrong in hindsight doesn’t make his response at the time either unreasonable or (therefore) petulant.

            And you can bet that when Hamilton sees the in-car footage of Rosberg he’ll know for certain, more than anyone else on the planet, whether it was deliberate or not. Same car, same track, same day, same conditions.

          3. . Just because he may have been wrong in hindsight doesn’t make his response at the time either unreasonable or (therefore) petulant.

            David BR2, I actually do know what petulance means, and can correctly distinguish it from anger. Firstly, as @mateuss correctly points out, anger refers to an individual’s emotional state. Petulance describes an individual’s actions. There’s a difference there that you fail to grasp. You claim that Hamilton’s actions were done out of anger but were nonetheless reasonable and therefore not petulant. However, I put it to you that a person who implies that his team mate may have cheated in order to gain pole, without any proof, and which has been subsequently been proven to be a false accusation is petulant.

            Maybe next time before you so assuredly remark that people are confused by the English language, you ensure you’re correct yourself. This time you were not.

      2. @David BR2: Hamilton had the chance to beat Rosberg in the first run. Chance missed.

  15. Good. If Rosberg had made that mistake in Casino, then overdone it to try and make up time in some kind of elaborate plot, he’s the smartest driver in the world. I’ve been really annoyed at Lewis’ comments this weekend; firstly insulting Rosberg’s upbringing and then saying he was on the “Pole lap”. He was still a fraction slower that Rosberg into the first sector, he had no way of knowing he would be on pole, and Rosberg has been faster this weekend.

    1. Actually he was faster.

      1. @jcost No Rosberg was marginally quicker in S1.

        Rosberg’s fastest S1 in Q3 was 19.826 whereas Hamilton’s supposedly “Pole Lap” S1 was 19.906 which was his personal best.

      2. Did he? I thought it was just a personal best in S1, Nico still being the fastest of the two in that sector.

    2. Sorry @jmc200, probably Autosport got it wrong.

      Both drivers were on their final Q3 flying laps, with Rosberg holding a narrow provisional pole, when he locked up at Mirabeau and slid down the escape road.

      Hamilton had to back off for the resultant yellows and then abandoned his lap, which had been a few hundredths of a second faster than Rosberg in sector one.

      Since P3 (maybe P2 as well) Nico has been faster in S1 and S3 (shorter sectors) and Lewis much faster in S3 so all he needed was to be a fraction slower in both 1 and 3 and deliver a monster S3. He was improving…

    3. He couldve easily pushed too much, knowing in the worst case scenario, he would stick it in a wall and still be on pole. Regardless, depending on what Hamilton thinks of the accident, this could turn into a 88, 89 or 07 situation.

    4. Agreed, his car has really gone to his head, he isn’t more skilled or wise than he was last season. Race drivers should learn to do their talking on track, rick kids whining about richer kids is lame. He’s just making himself look stupid.

  16. Pls how did LH insult NR upbringing @ Jack?

  17. I was expecting stewards to be unable to say whether Rosberg did it on purpose and making a lame decision of giving him a penalty for impending. I’m glad they didn’t do that and the fact they didn’t in my opinion tells that stewards could see from the telemetry that it was quite obviously an accident.

  18. i was sure that LH Matured Enough but……………………
    same old LH now i’m sure that NR will win WDC becuse LH can’t handel the presurr and think that evrybody aginst him lol

  19. Chris Phillips
    24th May 2014, 17:53

    Leona Lewis?

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.