Lewis Hamilton, Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Spa-Francorchamps, 2014

Rosberg denies Hamilton’s account of Spa crash

2014 Belgian Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine


Nico Rosberg has denied Lewis Hamilton’s explanation for the crash between the pair of them in Belgium, but declined to offer his own version of the events.

“I’ve been told what Lewis said in the press and the way he has stated his version of the events,” Rosberg said in a video posted to his official YouTube account today.

“All I can say is that my view of the events are very different. But the thing is it’s just better that I don’t now give all the details of my opinion and things like that. I hope you respect that.”

Lewis Hamilton, Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Spa-Francorchamps, 2014Following a discussion between the pair of them and Mercedes management yesterday, Hamilton told media Rosberg “basically said he did it on purpose. He said he did it on purpose. He said he could have avoided it. He said ‘I did it a prove a point’.”

Rosberg did not address Hamilton’s claim. “I prefer to just keep it internal, you know,” he said.

“We had a very good discussion, an important discussion after the race. As when such things occur we must sit down and review them and that’s what we did. Everybody gave his opinion, now we need to move forward.”

Rosberg expects further conversations about the incident will take place before the next race: “There will be another discussion for sure because we need to see if we need to change our approach in the future, as we did in Hungary. And we will do that.”

“The good thing is we really have great leadership in the team with Paddy [Lowe], Toto [Wolff] and with the help of Niki [Lauda],” he added. “And that really is important in such situations.”

“And therefore I’m confident that as always we’re going to find back to our way and keep on fighting in Monza.”

2014 Belgian Grand Prix

Browse all 2014 Belgian Grand Prix articles

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

257 comments on “Rosberg denies Hamilton’s account of Spa crash”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3
  1. You mean Hamilton’s “woe-is-me” tale might not be entirely accurate? Color me flabbergasted.

    1. Nico Rosberg, no matter how much some people want to paint him, is simply a cheat. Here are the reasons why I believe so.
      Over the course of the year, the man has carried out a string of very questionable maneuvers that have found him at the center of the contoversies.
      1) In Bahrain he broke a MercedesAmgF1 rule against turning up the engine thereby having an unfair advantage over a team mate. Even with his engined turned up, he was beaten. Since MercedesAmgF1 did not punish him for that, I guess Hamilton had to do same in Spain.
      2)In Monaco his questionable weaving and steering maneuvers led to a red flag at a crucial point in qualifying session thereby effectively handing pole position to him. He was not punished by the stewards. In fact one of them- Derek Warwick said, “..you will not find a more honest driver in grand prix racing than Nico,..”
      3) In Canada, he decidedly floored his car while going through a chicane thereby avoiding an overtake attempt by his teamate. If it was an honest error, did he slow down afterwards? No. Later on in the same race, Lewis Hamilton handed a position back to Nico Rosberg after cutting the same chicane while struggling with failing brakes. Was Nico punished by the stewards for gaining an advantage by speeding accross a chicane and effectively cancelling any chance of an overtake by his team mate? No.
      4)Look at the Spa incident. Nico’s poor start cost him 2 places. Instead of the man to keep a cool head (as people claim he is super intelligent), calculate his chances and take actions as the race progresses (as Lewis does whenever he is starting behind Nico), the man 1st turned up his engine against the orders of the team in the first lap of a 44 lap race thereby unfairly cancelling any advantage his team mate had built up from making a better start. Soon he was charging behind his team mate. As all spectators and TV viewers have seen season-long -starting from Bahrain, Nico is all but calculative and has I must say a bad race craft. Over the season we have seen him charging and barrelling into every corner to make a pass. Passes which he consistently finds difficult to make is quickly dealt with by other drivers. (I must add hear that Danny Ricciardo has quietly made some of the most incredible passes and wheel-to-wheel races of the season) Many people have said that Nico could have won in Bahrain had he been more calculative. The opportunities to pass were there but he is too hot blooded. Here at Spa, yet again we saw a Rosberg who barged into a position – with his engine turned up- where there was no space and instead of taking the same action taken by Vettel at the same spot a lap earlier, which BTW played into Rosberg’s advantage, he saw red when Lewis did not yield his well earned racing line and in the heat of the moment, turned his car right into his team mates rear wheel. Yet again, he was not punished. Was the incident even investigated? Totto Wolff in Nico’s defence said Nico was mis-quoted after the incident but went further to say in his own words that Nico said he was “proving a point” by turning into his team mate.
      These are the actions of someone who is in my opinion deranged and quite dangerous. Here is a fella who would do anything without minding the consequences at any given time, on track because he feels entitled for whatever reasons and that is dangerous for motor racing.
      I have been watching F1 for decades but in all the years, I have seen quite different drivers with different emotional states and the stories that follow them. Nico Rosberg is one who plays very very dirty. What is most worrying is the impromptu and impulsive decisions he makes on track that keep playing to his favour. And consistently, the stewards have been at his side. After all, “.. you will not find a more honest driver in grand prix racing than Nico..” – F1 steward, 2014 season.

      1. +1

        Fully agreed.

        1. Rosberg is portrayed as calm and calculated, methodical as though he is some sort of modern day Prost which is obviously isn’t the case (check BBC’s malaysia pre-race coverage “Professor Nico” where he cooks up chemistry with Ms Mckenzie) Rosberg when put under stress quickly reverts to desperation and panics (Bahrain, Monaco,Canada,Spa) and does what ever he can at the time despite potential repercussions because he knows skill for skill he just cannot beat Lewis and he doesn’t know why.

          1. Exactly, thing is though, he is intelligent enough to mask deliberate errors with honest ones, stopping the stewards from doing anything to him.

          2. Rosberg is potrayed as Prost? It must be a thing for this year, since Hamilton wanted to play Senna.

      2. O yes, Nico Rosberg is the dirtiest driver out there… you seem to hate him a lot!
        At least you gotta hand him that he is extremely intelligent! He is never punished by the stewards and he always benefits from his “mistakes”!!
        Yes he has a been a bit lucky, that is it…. Dont paint him as Machiavelli…
        I can not believe that he deliberately wanted to crash Hamilton, just look what happened to Alonso and Vettel! There was no puncture for vettel but alonso lost his endplate…
        It was just a racing incident, and had it been that Nico lost his front wing while hamilton escaped unharmed and went to win the race, we wont be having all this crap.
        And im not a Rosberg fan. I agree hamilton has been unlucky but dont blow this out of proportion.

        1. ‘hate’ is a strong word which I don’t like using. I see Nico simply as a cheat and I have just pointed out the reasons. It took me so many races and incidents to arrive at this conclusion. That does not mean I ‘hate’ him.
          I would however like to know what you think about someone who comes into a room and says I did something ‘to prove a point’.

          **Pls don’t ask me for the quote’s source cos it is everywhere on the internet and that is coming from Toto Wolff. Let’s forget what hamilton says since he is too involved in the incident.**

          1. Well the quote’s source is really very important. isnt it? He hasnt said that publicly and Toto has denied how Hamilton put it.
            But leave that for a moment, just tell me do you really think that Nico crashed deliberately? I mean dont you think as i previously mentioned, it could have easily gone the other way? and Alonso-Vettel is an example from the same race.
            It seems too far fetched and too perfect to be deliberate.
            It was a racing incident, as per this logic and the stewards, move on…

          2. As regards your other points:
            1) well that doesnt mean he is a cheat. hamilton also ignored team instructions in the last race, he had his reasons to do so. I wont say that he was a cheat. similarly seb ignored team orders in malaysia (what year was it? 2012?), its not cheating, its drivers doing everything they can to move in front,
            2)Monaco: stewards didnt penalize him bcz there was nothing deliberate. you can keep believing whatever you want, but its just not reality.
            3) again, stewards thought that it is on the edge but not illegal. unless you believe that fia/stewards are just hell bent on crowning Rosberg the champion, there is no issue here.
            4) “the man 1st turned up his engine against the orders of the team in the first lap of a 44 lap race thereby unfairly cancelling any advantage his team mate had built up from making a better start” forgive my ignorance but i havent come across this, where is it mentioned?

            But even if one were to believe (like you) that all these instances were deliberate, then you gotta hand this guy that he is one hell of a genius! Always on the border, always getting the benefit but never penalized!
            “These are the actions of someone who is in my opinion deranged and quite dangerous” Deranged? really?

          3. 2)Monaco: stewards didnt penalize him bcz there was nothing deliberate. you can keep believing whatever you want, but its just not reality.

            No. The stewards did not penalise him because there wasn’t sufficient evidence to suggest it was deliberate. That’s not the same thing as “nothing deliberate”.

          4. @fluxsource
            The stewards did not penalise him because there wasn’t sufficient evidence to suggest it was deliberate. That’s not the same thing as “nothing deliberate”
            Man! are you kidding me? what do you even mean by that? by your reckoning all the incidents that are not penalized can be construed as deliberate!

          5. @sohebbasharat

            Man! are you kidding me? what do you even mean by that? by your reckoning all the incidents that are not penalized can be construed as deliberate!

            The point I’m making is that we don’t actually know if it’s deliberate or not. Saying “the stewards didn’t penalise him, so it can’t have been deliberate” assumes that the stewards came to the correct decision. It’s pointed out quite often on this site that many people often disagree with them.

            I’m not accusing Nico of doing it deliberately, just saying pointing out that just because the stewards didn’t penalise him doesn’t makes someone’s belief that he cheated invalid.

        2. Links are not being allowed so I am gonna help you with a few sites not so you change your opinion but to back up the quote I cited earlier.
          Skysports F1, Planet f1, Autosport, BBCsport, adamcooper F1, etc.
          I don’t know what else you mean by ‘publicly’. Is a podium needed?
          Toto Wolff has gone from calling Nico’s action ‘unacceptable’ to saying the guy’s words were misconstrued but that he did it ‘to prove a point’. It is expected of him to do damage limitation.
          To answer your question, having seen the videos a number of times and seeing his steering movement towards the other car, yes, I believe he did it deliberately. And not apologising afterwards cements it.
          You apologise when u make a mistake that hurts someone else don’t you?

          1. ok, i see there is no point debating! we can agree to disagree. have a good day (or night)!

        3. If that was a racing incident then Nico should have issued an apology for his aggressiveness.

        4. Mark in Florida
          26th August 2014, 15:35

          Apparently if you like Hammy anything that happens to him negatively is either cheating or some kind of conspiracy. Give me a break from the nonsense, Hamilton is one of the most aggressive drivers on the track. He has made some very stupid moves himself in the past. He crashed into Kimi in pits and also beached himself in the gravel etc. etc. Just because someone else does something that could be considered a dumb move doesn’t make it a deliberate act.

        5. If the championship was being led by Alonso, Kimi, Ric, then it would be easier to say ok, but when you see Rosberg struggling to pull off overtakes on JEV but leading the championship it just devalues the title. That is one thing I like about Moto GP, title rival being taken out by injuries aside champions don’t just get lucky and pick up points because of their rivals engine failures and so on. We all want to see the real racers rise to the top. If Lewis doesn’t do it then I seriously hope Riccardo takes it in a last race showdown because I really do not think Rosberg deserves it. Check the link for what Rosberg really thinks about moral wins


          Nico’s dad Keke famously condemned Michael for the stunt, Nico on the other hand??? Was Monaco and accident absolutely not.

      3. I’m no Rosberg fan or apologist, but each and every instance you just indicated sounds like the kind of actions that made other drivers legends.

        Turning the engine up? Multi-21 ring a bell?

        Qualifying shenanigans? A dime a dozen in the golden years

        Can’t argue with the chicane cutting, but I’m not sure that’s something we haven’t seen from almost every driver on the grid this year. The fact that Hamilton handed his spot back with a wounded car doesn’t hold a lot of relevance.

        Spa: putting your nose in where it doesn’t belong and forcing a competitor, or even a teammate, to make the call to either have a collision or yield and avoid it is a bygone pastime of so many who are hailed as “greats” today. Senna and Prost routinely did that to each other, Villeneueve v. Arnoux comes to mind, and Vettle v. Webber over the past 4 years works as a more recent example.

        I don’t commend Rosberg for what he did and I don’t think it was smart, but there’s a huge gap between malice and competition. That gap is blurry as it is large, but you’ve fabricated the presence of malice with no room for uncertainty that it isn’t the case.

        1. “..each and every instance you just indicated sounds like the kind actions that made other drivers legends”.

          Isn’t it interesting that your mention of those various incidents took place over various seasons with various players involved but here we are talking about all of them personified in one man and barely half way through a season? What does it say about the man?

          Most importantly, to be a legend you have to be able to develope a car and not resort to data mining. Say what you will about Lewis Hamilton and his contribution to MercedesAmgF1′ s growth, the facts are there that in his first year with the team, they came second in the constructors’ championship (while the team he left plummetted) and the following year, they have the title almost sealed and may win the drivers’ championship as well.
          Most importantly, I hasten to add, running team mates off tracks is not a prerogative of only one man.

          1. You’ve gotta be joking if you actually think the car is fast because of Hamilton. The car is 100% because of the dozen of engineer hires from every team on the grid that happened in the last two years. If someone deserves credit for this car, it is Ross Brawn.

          2. Hamilton is the fastest driver. But maybe Mercedes being a German company would prefer a German as world champion.

          3. @tata I completely agree with @austus that you’re just mad if you think Hamilton is the reason that Mercedes are now competitive. I and 100% sure that they would have been just as competetive had Lewis not joined, especially since they started development in MID 2011.

        2. Would you have the same opinion if Lewis was the one who did all those things?

          1. BTW That question was to everyone that says Nico was on the right

      4. It would be interesting to see more information on Rosberg turning up the engine power setting. He caught Hamilton surprisingly quickly after a poor start. It would also explain why Mercedes management were so annoyed with him: he’d used the extra power to attack Hamilton early on, causing the incident, when they were expecting the race between the two to be decided much later in the race (maybe with agreement between the drivers that they would or could both change power settings under ‘fair play’ conditions). If so, that’s two serious points of contention: breaking trust on the engine, and then ‘not avoiding’ an accident with the botched overtake attempt made by taking that unfair advantage.

        And if all that’s true, could Mercedes respond by somehow blocking Rosberg’s ablity to mess with the engine settings? Would seem a good solution.

        1. Actually he didn’t turn up the engine, the comment that you’re replying to is very biased and is wrong there. And to the second part: yes, but if and only if they did it to Hamilton as well, but that would mean neither could adjust their engine at all, because the engineers can’t touch the settings in the race, only the drivers can change it. Otherwise, the engineers would control everything from the pit wall. And if they did it to nico and not lewis, nico could complain to the FIA and merc would probably get at best a huge fine, at worst, a points penalty for giving one driver clearly superior equipment to the other

      5. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        26th August 2014, 0:15

        I wouldn’t go as far as to say he’s deranged, but he’s definitely not the measured, composed and calculating driver that the media have bigged him up to being.

        I just can’t believe he essentially did it on purpose. He said he could’ve backed out, but didn’t just to prove a point. Toto Wolff has confirmed he said this, so yes it is true. It’s also the reason why Nico wants to keep it from public view, and as he so eloquently puts it “keep it internal”.
        He knows what he did.

      6. And he’s leading… and heading for his first WDC

      7. Hamilton is a whiner……every time he has a problem he goes to the press or the stewards directly. With Alonso at McLaren over the pit issue….right or wrong he went running to the stewards. With McLaren when he published the internal lap data on his Twitter account. Now with Mercedes when he went to the press with his version of the incident and the internal team discussions over the Rosberg incident. Over the last 2 weeks he has been bragging that he intends to “hurt” Rosberg in future races…..but his real problem is that he is delivering half the value in points for more than twice the money!!!

      8. ban for 3 races for hitting popular person :)

      9. Yes but NicoR is still a better person than you know who, Lewis Hamilton, in case I have to spell it out for you. I will not waste my time in listing LH’s indiscretions besides he is just a cry baby and NO body likes a cry baby in a man’s world. Thanks, rnr

        1. Do you know Nico personally to prove he’s a better person? I’m not saying Lewis is but unless you know someone outside the TV you really don’t know how they are in real life.

        2. Who you calling a cry baby? I really had something in my left eye……..take a closer look! ;-)

      10. I could not have said it better myslef

      11. @tata, omg, do you have a life other then collecting Nico’s incidents? Do you do the same for other drivers like, let’s say, Ham? Would be nice to publish them too.

      12. Obviously you are a fan of Hamilton which too all from day one Hamilton has displayed no concept of what it is to be a team player. I was suprised Rosberg has kept his composure throughout Hamiltons antics this far into the year. He has finnaly got at taste of his own medicine , regardless if it is in practice/qualify/race. unless everything goes as he wants he starts to blame brakes cold/ bad box blag blah blah . Take the good with bad / lucky to be where he is Vettal/Riccardo and team showed what a team is supposed to be, I like Nico but Hamilton will never be a team player unless on a new crybaby sport

    2. +1
      He has been completely unprofessional about this whole incident and much of the race (trying to retire early).

      1. I’d argue that asking to retire in that scenario was incredibly professional. Considering the limits on engine components and the severe penalties for exceeding them, AND that the Hungary fire has put him in a worse position that Nico, avoiding putting miles on the engine seems a very rational thing to do when face with a race where a point is very unlikely.

        1. Agreed. I don’t understand why people keep saying he is a quiter…

          He’s already an engine behind on Nico so if chances to score points are slim to none, saving the engine is the sensible thing to do.

          Hamilton said as much on the radio when he said “we should save the engine, guys”and also said it during the post-race interviews.

          From the outside looking at this discussion without having a horse in this race, to me it seems like this is just a severe case of selective memory from ROS fans.

          In general I think fans on both sides are rather selective in how they view their enemy’s actions and often just plain blind when looking at their hero’s.

          Try this for a second: Imagine this was a GP2 or WSR3.5 race and you had no horse in this race. What would you then think about the incident and the comments made (I didn’t pull out to make a point)…

          To me it’s pretty clear he didn’t deliberately cause an accident, he just didn’t care if it happened. At least he didn’t care as much as he did for ‘making a point’.

    3. As I recall from the Rosberg in car camara there was a slight left steer to clear his front from Hamiltons rear followed by an immediate right flick resulting in contact.
      Not a fan if either driver but I do see a pattern with Rosbergs driving.
      Go Daniel R!!!

    4. Give me a break. Rosberg is not penalized only because he is points leader. The fix is in. F1 and Mercedes are putting on a fine show. It’s not a sport.

    5. Please read overtaking rules as I am about to post on a non biased account just what I seen.
      ie not right or wrong opionion just facts whag I see :-)
      I am not being patranising by it im just starting a disscusion and some thing to go on in a min ok.
      before I post tho know the rules and corners it will help.
      A list of anyones past has nothing to do with it so take it out of mind you need a clear head ok noif your a fan of lewis its rosbergs fault or if rosberg fan you say lewis this lewis that. Im not intrested on this im intrested why the fia didnt do anything and they cleary should as it was an easy choice yes 100% rosberg according to now. So why fia did not see this and if lewis is so so so right why would you not challenge fia after and go for it if its so 100% :-)
      And get the wrong righted :-) umm
      the team can put another drivef if a ban is given yes so not too hard for the team and shows it was alll true.
      if this is not happening then please stop accussing as lewis can nof out money where his mouth is.
      Im not attacking here im simply saying lewis brought this up not me.
      I like racing and this is very intresting if nothi g else yay.
      so empty minds and read rules on overtaking if not known ok simples.
      right now next post will be a break down of the inccident how I seen it happen with the rules I knew, please prove me wrong I can take it being wriong im after open minds here to see if I have found what it was all about.
      thank you all

  2. I wonder if he agrees with Toto’s version?

    1. Several other racing news sites quote Toto saying that Hamilton’s version isn’t what was said. I guess they chose not to run that here, but you can find it easily.

      1. Ryan (@ryanisjones)
        25th August 2014, 19:44

        Rosberg said he could have backed off but chose not to. He inferred it was down to Lewis to leave him space. Lewis said Rosberg could have backed off and chose not to. He inferred that Rosberg intentionally caused an accident. Toto said Rosberg could have backed off and chose not to. He inferred it was not down to Lewis to leave space but Rosberg did not intentionally cause an accident.

        Now I think everyone can agree that Rosberg could have backed off but chose not to. From a driving perspective Rosberg is in the wrong. His car was not sufficiently alongside Hamilton for Hamilton to be required to give him space. Both drivers could have avoided an incident but the F1 rules make it Rosberg’s responsibility. Toto would not be a smart man to come out and say this though, as the FIA would have to act due to the action being deliberate.

        The hypocrisy is getting ridiculous though. Their previous duels should have no baring on this situation. If they are affecting Rosberg, then shouldn’t we be questioning his mental state? His ability to handle pressure? Should we not be berating him for putting drivers at unnecessary risk? Or are these criticisms only reserved for Hamilton. He deserves the boo’s, he deserves the investigation and like Hamilton in 2011 should go have a long think about what he is doing and get his head straight.

        1. Hamilton did give Rosberg enough space. There was more than a cars width of the track next to Rosberg at the moment of the crash and it was Rosberg who turned in at Hamilton. He had far more space than Alonso or Button had when trying to pass Magnussen.

        2. Chris (@tophercheese21)
          26th August 2014, 0:17


        3. Lewis first said he left room for Nico to pass. IF that was true than there would of not been an incident/crash. Thanks, rnr

          1. It was true, and as such the incident was avoidable. Which I don’t think anyone is really disagreeing with.

        4. Mark in Florida
          26th August 2014, 15:45

          Hamilton will generate so much drama for himself that he’ll have a nervous breakdown. Diva driver ha ha ha. Go Daniel just keep doing your thing.

        5. This is the most intelligent and accurate comment I have read on this issue.

          1. And I will be first to agree

      2. Do you know that Hamilton said “He did it on purpose” in this case people chose to assume that “it” meant “crashed into me” he could have meant he put his car there on purpose to prove a point, or it could also mean he didn’t back out to prove a point, or he hit me to prove a point. But Lewis said “it” so wasn’t Lewis misquoted?

  3. I’d be more surprised if anyone actually thought Nico wouldn’t have a differing opinion to Lewis. Let’s wait and see.

    1. Indeed. He’s talking about “moving forward” when he pulled the “Bahrain card” yesterday…

      1. This has been blown out of proportion !

        I’ve never seen this happen before in F1 ?


  4. Just some other video I found on the internet:


    I’m already real tired of this crash. Reading of the FIA to punishing Rosberg, what? Such a shame this stupid racing incident put such a shadow over what was a mighty race.

    1. Yeah people forgot that Ricciardo put a storming drive in to win this race. He and Bottas are always there to capitalise, much like Alonso.

      Also, even as a fan of Lewis I have to say that nearly all of the incidents with Massa were his fault. India was a racing incident.

      1. I agree, people have been so enthralled in the issue between Lewis and and Nico that they have completely over looked Ricciardo and Massa’s drive which was a great drive.

        1. @daraxf1 The last article which went up before this one highlighted the quality of Ricciardo’s drive (and Bottas’s which I think you might have meant instead of Massa’s?).

        2. Yes Riccardo and Bottass put on a show

    2. Yes, but it has a massive influence on the WDC

      1. @f1-neil In 2020 I’ll remember this race and forget who won the title but as far as I am concerned (right now) neither Hamilton or Rosberg deserve it. I don’t really care who of the two wins it. I want to see good racing. There are much more worthy drivers on the grid right now who deserve to be in such a dominant car.

        1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
          26th August 2014, 0:19

          So Lewis is unworthy because his teammate took him out of a decisive race? Pfft.

          He has every right to be extremely annoyed with Nico!

        2. In 2020 i’ll remember this race because DanRic won it , not because someone lost an end-plate and someone got a puncture..

    3. Why have people brought up past incidents like this. Its like saying look at this he’s done this before he’s done it again. Its just silly. Look at the incident on its own. Yes it is a racing incident, yes it doesn’t need a penalty, but it was Rosberg who caused it. Something that happened 3 years ago is irrelevant.

      1. @addimaf1 – People bring up past incidents because sometimes they indicate patterns. Sometimes the incidents support/make valid points, sometimes not. But to imply that the past is irrelevant, as if you can learn nothing from it in this instance, silly.

        re: “…but it was Rosberg who caused it.” – That’s your opinion. I think it was a combination. Hamilton has moved harshly on Rosberg before, in my opinion, most memorably (again, to me) in Bahrain. In this instance Rosberg could have backed out completely or gone off track, but likewise Hamilton could have simply left a bit more space and cut over 3m later. Neither avoided it.

        Here is why I am more disappointed in Hamilton. In that position the best that can happen (from Hamilton’s point of view) is that Rosberg backs out and gets passed due to slowing down. Even if that happens, it would surely only be temporary. The worst that can happen is Hamilton loses out big, which he did. And yet he still moved over assuming someone else would move out of the way. Putting one’s rear wheel in line with someone else’s front wing is risky. And this is where past incidents, even years ago, come into play. Hamilton and Massa wrecked into each other more times than I can remember that season (was it ’11 or ’12?) and if nothing else Hamilton should have learned to give space. Not because he needs to be submissive or a pushover, but because being needlessly aggressive (note the adverb) will hurt where you finish.

        1. Ryan (@ryanisjones)
          25th August 2014, 22:07

          re: “…but it was Rosberg who caused it.” – That’s your opinion.

          No, that’s the rules. The car in front is not required to leave space unless the trailing car is sufficiently alongside. Hamilton would have never been punished for that incident but Rosberg could have. Rosberg for the most part, is completely in Hamilton’s blind spot, so there is little chance Hamilton would even be able to see his wing.

          All past event’s, Bahrain included, do not justify the actions of Rosberg. Also, the reason the rules require a space to be left is mainly because of Hamilton. In 2011 Massa kept turning in on Hamilton when his Hamilton’s front wheel was half way up his car (Monaco, India)

          1. @ryanisjones

            The car in front is not required to leave space unless the trailing car is sufficiently alongside.

            Correct, although you’ve just shot yourself in the foot.

            The F1 sporting regulations state –

            For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.

          2. Ryan (@ryanisjones)
            26th August 2014, 18:01

            Nice try Nick…

            The F1 sporting regulations state –

            Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.

            For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.

            This is not the case in corners.

        2. Rosberg did get hurt by this incident…. he lost his front wing…

          What is worthy of FIA investigation is the numerous instances of driver’s get tyres cut by people running their front wings into their rear tyres. This is the real issue in this incident. If Hamilton’s tyre had not been cut and punctured then he’d have been fine and Rosberg would have suffered.

          1. sorry !!!

            trying to post a link , arghhhhhhh

    4. As far as I know, the only place that mentioned that the FIA might want to punish Rosberg, is the BBC in its article about what Hamilton said @xtwl, so I am far from convinced the FIA is even considering looking at this

      1. @bascb, that’s why I wrote ‘reading’. Just the fact there is a writer somewhere that beieves this…

        1. Thanks for the video though, it was nice to those back. Crazy when you see how both get on and off track etc, while nowadays everything around overtaking and blocking is so much more regulated

  5. So Nico disagrees with Lewis’ version, yet refuses to offer his own. How very helpful!
    I’d say Lewis’ was a bit OTT, but Toto’s comment about Nico saying he had a point to prove was very telling. Again, for me Toto is probably telling the truth but obviously slightly tamed for PR etc. Thing is, what kind of point is there to prove if it’s crashing into your teammate when the gap is inevitably going to close?! Brain fade at its finest.

    1. There’s a lot going on here… Rosberg is still bitching on about past races which suggests he bears a grudge and is hung up on it. People say how bright he is, likening him to Prost ‘The Professor’, and that he speaks 5 languages, but on this occasion (and this occasion only) his words have been misinterpreted… because Wolff can’t deny what he said (they have already confirmed that Hamilton’s claims about what Rosberg said were accurate) they are trying to back pedal, which is just lame management. David Coulthard stated that it is common thinking in the paddock that Hamilton is the better racer. Nico has proved that here. He offers no explanation because he doesn’t have one.

    2. Well, it is good to know that at least one of the employees (pilots) is not going to discuss internal matters / Meetings on the media, don’t you agree?

      1. Well, to Hamilton’s credit, this time it wasn’t the car’s telemetry

  6. Is what Lewis said true: “No”
    What did you actually say: “…I haven’t seen it yet”
    Joking aside, I think Nico’s losing it. If he wants to play the dirty game, he can have the championship. “It’s just an empty cup” – Hudson Hornet.

    1. Im pretty sure that if it wasn’t on live TV Nico would have said he never hit Lewis

  7. Smart move, Nico. Keep it internal. No problem getting away with a cover-up because the woeful F1 press pack are so scared of Bernie taking away their passes for criticising the show they’ll never ask any tough questions. Shame you didn’t manage an apology, though. Smug is never a good look. And you’d better get used to the boos. My advice? Try and get Derek Warwick on the stewards panel for Abu Double. Wink, wink.

    1. Dan, you obviously weren’t watching the post race coverage by Sky. Natalie asked a very long string of very pointed questions towards Rosberg which were clearly making him uncomfortable.

      1. Very pointed? Don’t make me laugh. He said he didn’t see what happened and needed a video replay!!!

        Natalie Pinkham fluttering her eyelashes in the pen isn’t my idea of hard-hitting journalism. Nor Brundle and Co going on about ‘the show’. Apart from Ant Davidson and Mark Hughes, Sky F1 is abysmal.

    2. I for one am glad he’s keeping quiet. I’m a bit bored with this and saying more will just perpetuate the talk. It’s an awful lot of talk over what was probably a poorly explained racing incident. I know this political drama is part of F1 but there’s other drivers doing other things. There’s hardly any talk about that intense moment when we didn’t know Ricciardo was going to win or not or any of the other splendid moments. Personally, I think this is just like the ‘who’s hungrier’ talk and might take away from Monza or even give a stale atmosphere to the final races.

  8. Yesterday his line was ‘I won’t give you my opinion because I haven’t seen it yet’. I’m amazed he’s found a way to make his position seem less credible than it was 24 hours ago. There may be a weaker defence than ‘he’s wrong but I won’t tell you why’, but none springs to mind.

    Unless I’ve missed it in one of his post-race quotes, I haven’t seen him say anywhere it was a racing incident or an innocent mistake. If that’s the case, I think that’s revealing.

    And I say that as someone who didn’t perceive any malicious intent in the move at first.

    1. Can you please write an article with your opinion and possibly a poll?

    2. Defense of what exactly? Your making the assumption he feels the need to defend his position.

      What is there to defend when you feel you did nothing wrong?

    3. In the official statements issued by the team after the race, Rosberg claims he did see it as “a race incident”. Here you have it:

      That was a tough race. We had the pace to win today but the incident cost us a top result, so I’m really disappointed because for the team it was a bad day. As drivers, we are here to entertain and to show the fans a good time, so our duels are always on the limit. I regret that Lewis and myself touched, but I see it as a racing incident – just as the stewards did. I was quicker down the straight and went to the outside as the inside line was blocked. I gave it a go and, after we touched, I realized that my front wing was damaged and thought that was it. In the next second I saw that Lewis also had a problem, which was very unfortunate for him and for the team. We sat down quickly after the race but there will be some more meetings to be held in to avoid races like today.

      1. Do you seriously think he actually said that? Rather than just signing off the official PR release or whatever drivers have to do with these official team statements?

      2. Acknowledge your mistakes is good for your image. Nico have said “I am sorry” on the podium. I know Lewis is not many folks fave guy and whenever he does something civic, people say “he is acting” but acting or not, he usually apologizes his peer drivers and team for his mistakes.

        1. *Nico should have said sorry on the podium*

          1. Has Hamilton ever congratulated Rosberg for a win on podium no he is to much of a crybaby

        2. @jcost

          Lewis is not many folks fave guy

          What are you saying man? He has a very big fanbase in a lot of countries.

          1. But people dont get excited about Rosberg.
            not even at a Hulkenberg, Bottas, Massa level, let alone a Hamilton, Alonso, Raikkonen level.

            Fans of the sport, myself included, respect NR. But nothing about him gets me fired up.

      3. As drivers, we are here to entertain

        What an odd comment. Here was me thinking the drivers were there to produce results and that any entertainment was just a happy coincidence. Mercedes certainly didn’t hire Rosberg to entertain the fans.

        1. As much as people think its about sports its not, its an entertainment business. F1 competes with all other entertainment businesses. So if fans aren’t entertained they will switch to something else, perhaps football which is on at the same time as F1 on most occasions. Ross Brawn hired Nico but brought Schumy out of retirement why? Because it would get fans excited of the possibility of Schumy dominating again. Its the same as when Michael Jordan came back to the Wizards, more tickets were sold because people were intrigued. The fans are more important than the sport because if they don’t come then the stadiums don’t make money and choose to leave the sport. If fans don’t watch on TV then all those wonderful sponsors you see on the sides of peoples cars pull their money from F1 and put it into some other sport Vodafone ring a bell? Everyone has a motive here but all those motives are driven by the fan base. So its not just about the sport.

    4. That’s because he doesn’t actually think it was a mistake or racing incident. Hamilton claimed that Rosberg had explicitly blamed him for the collision, which was also confirmed by Lauda after said meeting.


    5. Sorry Keith, you are assuming. I am pretty sure it was a race accident. Noone can calculate such a precise incident, where the other guy has a puncture and you only get a small piece of broken wing. It’s fanta-F1. He attached, made a small mistake, got luckier than lewis. Hamilton on the other hand is a liar; he claimed stuff Nico has not said, uses the press like a child uses his mom and cannot stand the pressure.

      1. I agree it was a racing incident. Just because nico isnt going on about it forever doesnt mean that he intentionally crashed. He would be insane to do so, it could easily have been the other way around.

      2. @nuvolari71 What am I assuming?

      3. I’m not sure he indented to cause a puncture, but would that really be so difficult? Given how many sharp extensions there are on a wing, it doesn’t seem unlikely that contact would result in a puncture. Nor have punctures caused by front wings been all that rare in the past few years have they?

        1. Ted on Sky said that Pirelli said that there is 90% chance for a tyre puncture when hit by the side while little chance if hit directly on the surface of the tyre. That also explains why Vettel could continue after being hit even harder from Alonso. Alonso didn’t hit the side of his tyre but the the back of it. If we assume Rosberg knew about this high possibility and if we see in slow motion his move from his cockpit on how he turned on Hamilton the moment his tyre was there you can’t help but get suspicious.

    6. @keithcollantine I’m pretty sure that given all the criticism Hamilton has got for whining (and justly in my opinion) I think Rosberg just doesn’t want to attack his teammate in the press. Also see @dan_the_mclaren_fan ‘s comment below.

    7. Spot on analysis here, Keith. I appreciate you not avoiding the controversy in Hamilton’s favor and its not sensationalized if its backed up by both Hamilton AND Rosberg. What I find funny is the only guy left backpedaling, again, is Wolff. “No No No, Rosberg did not do it on purpose!” Even though he said it during the team meeting that he did, and Hamilton wasn’t afraid to tell the media this.

      The fans were aware of it too, they saw the replays. They know the score – front wings cut tires all the time – Nico rosberg takes a small risk to get a huge reward and likely decided to cut a tire if Hamilton got in front. Its a very scheming-like move that I think is starting to unfortunately become a hallmark of Rosberg this year. Its disappointing, as I have always rated him so highly as a driver.

      1. @d3v0 “Even though he said it during the team meeting that he did, and Hamilton wasn’t afraid to tell the media this.” It souds like you were present on the said meeting or have a transcript

      2. And Hamilton would not have done the sme, come on. Hamilton would have inflictes asd much damage as possible and that is the question not being asked right now , what if roles were reversed I beleive both Mercedes would have been retired and I like that but Nico opted for a point solution

    8. Not interested in being part of your brit-journo-conspiracy group. Bann me please, jackass.

      1. Ahh democracy, just love it, :)

    9. Nope I don’t agree, Nico really feels bad for the team, but even he got a nice advantage in the WCC and should be happy.

      HAM has block him in most races and touch him too, and anyone will play any trick he can as ROS should, this is not the boy scout club is a F1 WCC, ROS is winning so far and also he has wipe the floor with HAM in the pole trophy run, so I think HAM whining is just him literally cracking under the pressure that ROS always win.

  9. That’s one thing I like about Rosberg : his professionalism. While Hamilton has been constantly using the press to attack his teammate, Nico has always remained calm. He didn’t go to Lewis level to fight him back in the press (you don’t get points for that). Moreover, Lewis doesn’t care at all about Mercedes’ reputation, he only wants to be champion. While Nico pays attention to that. He doesn’t want the team to suffer more after a bad incident, and he won’t say anything more that might weaken his team. Lastly, Nico shows himself as a more mature person in this situation. While Lewis goes whining in the press about the evil little german driver, Nico always said words like “this is our problem, we have to solve like adults, face to face, without the help of the press”.

    Some might not agree, or say that Nico is a cunning character who will do anything to appear good, even when he does bad things. But I believe that Nico is a honest person, and, so far, I like how he handles this rivalry with Hamilton!

    1. So causing an incident, intentionally or not, with your team mate is more damaging than a driver expressing his honest opinion on the matter? If Nico intentionally didn’t back out then that shows that he is thinking only of himself rather than the team. If he had waited for a better opportunity rather than fighting in the red mist he would have at the very least finished second. None of this would have happened had Nico been using his head at the time, as most people think he does very well.

      1. Well I just believe this accident is a racing incident. Rosberg was faster, so he tried to overtake Lewis. But it just ended in contact, unfortunately. It’s just bad luck for Lewis and for the team.

        But while Lewis has been shouting to the whole world that Nico did it on purpose, that he just wanted to destroy his race, Nico just said “this is our problem, and we’ll solve it like adults behind closed doors”. I think that’s a mature way of handling the situation, regardless of what really happened on the track.

        1. I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the incident, as Toto and Niki both confirmed that Nico chose not to avoid the collision, even though he could have.

          I may be looking at this simplistically, but the fact that Nico has kept mum, and that his team bosses agree with his teammate, suggests that he has something to hide. Let’s wait and see though before we all argue any further.

          1. I usually don’t post here anymore.

            Rosberg didn’t comment after Hungary as well, and he could surely have brought up Malaysia and Germany from last year, where he did do the courtesy to his teammate. That, which you can’t identify, is class, and Rosberg displayed it than Hamilton, Lauda and Wolff combined.

    2. I’m shocked, Nico has being terrible with he’s comments and actions this season and you’re praising he’s professionalism. He’s videos are appalling.

    3. @dan_the_mclaren_fan – “That’s one thing I like about Rosberg : his professionalism.”

      It could be argued that professionalism on the track is more valuable than thousands of after words or glaring silence.

      1. So let us talk about professionalism on track. Rosberg sacrificed himself on both occasions he was called to do so for the benefit of the team. Hamilton on the other hand, he was asked to do something once, and he didn’t. Worse still, he knew that the team favours driver ahead, yet he was whinging about strategy at Monaco, getting the team some unnecessary criticism.

        1. You can’t use all the team orders that have been issued as the same though because the Malaysia 13 incident was clear that even if Rosberg passed Hamilton there was nothing to gain from it for Mercedes, they would have the same amount of points. Remember the previous few seasons Merc had been performing not too well so the chance to score some big points early in the season, the team weren’t to know that they would continue to be that competitive all season.

          This season is entirely different, they have such a car advantage that it’s been clear all season that the WDC will come down between the 2 merc drivers. If Hamilton had slowed down to allow Nico past in Hungary he would have finished behind him and lost more ground in the championship so it’s understandable that he didn’t ete him through as the team themselves admitted.

    4. If Nico remained calm the incident wouldn’t have happened, if he remained calm he wouldn’t have been festering for four weeks over Hungary or even as far back as Bahrain and out to prove a point, if he remained calm he wouldn’t have made comments about British fans and reading up on conduct (this interview did not go down well with Mercedes either) An apology to mechanics on both sides of the garage would be nice if nothing else and doesn’t need to be done behind closed doors.

      1. You do realise that he was more on the money than not? You do know that Pinkham, who was asking pointed questions, is also a Brit?

    5. Seriously, you think Rosberg is professional?! He just cost his team big points with a really poor piece of driving yet he doesn’t even apologise. And in Monaco he ruined his team mates chance of pole in a highly questionable incident but still celebrated like he’d just won the world championship.

      Yes Hamilton can be a bit of an idiot at times but I’m sure he’d have been really embarrassed & would have apologised straight away on both occasions if it had been the other way round.

      Rosberg is just a spoilt & calculating little rich kid used to getting his own way.

      1. That calculated spoilt rich kid apologised after Monaco, but did Hamilton display the good grace to accept it? Did he not bring Monaco up too? This is all very one sided i’m afraid, and if you want to suggest that you’re may be a fair/ neutral observer, report it all.

        1. That’s a really good point, that after Nico apologized after Monaco qualy, hamilton didn’t have the good grace to accept it, so what’s the point anymore? Nico’s tried.

          1. That’s a bogus argument. If you wrong someone, you should apologise, but that doesn’t mean he has to accept your apology. If I sleep with your girlfriend, I think that “I’m sorry” just won’t cut it.

    6. Dan, for one I fully agree with your assessment. Rosberg is handling it as a adult, whereas Lewis has completely, childishly, lost it. Cannot come back from the level of public whining he has stooped to.
      Racing incidents happen. Close encounters happen -> and this blind nationalism in favour of Hamilton (also unprofessional by you Keith above) is for a non-brit, non-German, striking.

      ps. Hamilton is fast, but not Senna fast, compared to any of his teammates. Time to realise it.

    7. Wow. Now Lewis, once again he’s the bad boy. You talking about being calm, I think Lewis was pretty calm talking to reporters…

      “People are what they do, not necessarily what they say. There are people who do what they say, but many, if not most, don’t do what they say”

      Nico was the one who forced a car out and its Lewis harming Mercedes? You were this close from saying people were actually booing Hamilton…

    8. ‘Honest’ isn’t the adjective I would use, clever seems more appropriate …

    9. Lewis doesn’t care at all about Mercedes’ reputation, he only wants to be champion. While Nico pays attention to that.

      Rosberg is no better than Hamilton in that regard. The title is on the line so Rosberg will do what is necessary to get himself that title, as anyone would. His mistake at Spa has only harmed Mercedes’ reputation and handed another win to Red Bull. But Mercedes’ reputation is not a concern of his, even if you think it is.

      Nico has always remained calm

      He certainly hasn’t. He was still riled four weeks after Hungary regarding Hamilton ignoring team-orders. When he gets heated, he makes mistakes, like at Spa after losing the lead and in Hungary after the safety car, for example. When he is in wheel-to-wheel battles, he doesn’t seem calm in his thinking. His driving can be desperate, and not very calculated.

      The thing is, he is expected to make mistakes, he is battling for the title. Everyone makes them. But to think he has remained calm is delusional.

  10. What Toto said, in that “Nico said he could have avoided it but didn’t to prove a point” Is essentially no different that Hamilton saying he did it on purpose, because how can you NOT purposely avoid a collision and at the same time NOT cause a collision deliberatly.

    They. are. one. and. the. same.

    1. Wolff’s comment was just a signal to Todt/FIA that Mercedes weren’t going to shop Rosberg. They don’t want him punished by FIA with points deducted or a race ban and even more negative publicity.

      Mercedes should be aware though that a Rosberg title win isn’t going to do their image that much good at this stage: it’s on the verge of being discredited with his tactics at Monaco and Spa, the engine mapping issues, and the simple fact Hamilton has had so many more mechanical issues this season.

      Above all I’m astounded that Rosberg didn’t offer a genuine apology for taking Hamilton out of the race. Really. The same after the Monaco incident. He needs to learn the meaning of sport.

      1. He did apologize after monaco. Hamilton either is harder on the car or just has worse luck

        1. The only other driver I can think of who is consistently unable to apologize decently for ruining another driver’s race because of their own mistake is Maldonado. Says it all. Jumping around celebrating at Monaco after grabbing pole in that way was far from being an apology. It just seems a desperate, win at all costs attitude, and should have alerted people to what Rosberg will do to win this year. Mercedes have been very slow on the uptake and continue to feed his negative behaviour. Their business I guess.

  11. Can we just put Nico and Lewis in front of Judge Rinder and get this problem sorted out, once and for all!

    1. That would be hilarious. He would take the pair of them down a peg or 2.

  12. Nico does know that if he goes into the discussion that who-said-what and who’s opinion is the right one, the discussion would just go on and on and there would be no winners there. He has stated that in his opinion it was a racing incident and that is is.

    As for the Hamiltons opinions, it is understandable that emotions runs high and after cooling down, while not changing his opinions, he may choose different words.

    Mercedes would have better PR if they would have just stated that they are, at this time, paying the price for being “sport first team” and letting the two drivers compete, instead of getting into who-said-what discussion. Whatever decisions they might take after this, could have been done behind closed doors.

    1. @blackbox – Very well said, especially the last paragraph. Merc may want to hire you on..

    2. Good lord, can we nominate this for COTD? It’s the only level-headed comment I’ve seen from either side to this point.

      1. @bob-loblaw As great as it would be to see @blackbox ‘s comment as COTD, Keith is too biased towards Hamilton

    3. @blackbox The “it’s a nice problem to have” line will not wash when a blunder by one of your drivers took the other car out and cost the team a win.

      1. What happened was misfortunate for Mercedes. And for Hamilton, he had the worst luck. Everybody agrees on that. The fact still is that it happened and you cannot reverse it.

        Whether “one of your drivers took the other car out” or if it was a racing incident happening in the heat of the WC battle, is a thing that people have different opinions about and there is no absolute truth to be found. Drawing battle lines based on the answers from the drivers just after the race when they are full of adrenaline is just silly.

        The important issue IMHO is how should Mercedes have handled the situation both internally and externally.

        Internally they of course should just find a solution that things like this will not happen again (or at least reduce the risk). This discussion should be taken place behind closed doors, otherwise the public and the media will just rip it apart. They should have enough senior staff to do this.

        Externally (PR) Mercedes had an excellent opportunity to make the best out of the unfortunate situation and came out as “true sports team” but instead they were caught up (at least in public) with the meaningless who-said-what discussion which just adds fuel to already tight relationships between the drivers.

        All that being said, this incident has IMHO been blown way out of proportions and we should get back to racing and enjoy the tight battles on track instead of this.

  13. Why didn’t Toto Wolff send out any team orders at the time of the fight for the place,just before the incident between them both, occurred?

    1. Why would he? This is the first time either of his driver’s has made a misjudgement when racing each other. What would the team order actually be? Would they then prevent the cars from ever racing each other besides in pit windows or during the dash to the first corner?

  14. Either of them could have prevented that accident, but only one instigated it. Arguably the car behind has more responsibility for not causing the accident, although some might say a brilliant racer shouldn’t leave it to chance. Ultimately, for me, it was an error of judgement – by a matter of inches – that wouldn’t have happened if either driver had left a greater margin for error. This is where psychology and the team’s management come in. Hamilton’s driving looked measured, whilst Rosberg’s looked motivated by will rather than calculation. Reports about Bahrain coming up in briefings is also telling. Rosberg hasn’t beaten Hamilton in a wheel-to-wheel fight, and that’s often considered a big measure of who is the best driver, and the best racer. Rosberg’s statements have also focused on how he was faster, so took the initiative. In one, he says “I was faster” so many times it becomes conspicuous. I think this is where management should step in. I’d be encouraging him to play to his strengths, like setting up the car, managing the tyres, and staying consistent – all things qualities he has over Hamilton. So when he gets behind him, and maybe has a pop at overtaking, he can bail out with having to prove anything. “I’ll undercut him at the pitstops” he’ll be saying in his helmet, rather than “have some of that!”.

    1. I think the way the pair of them deal with setbacks/mistakes is interesting…

      Rosberg tends to get plaudits for coming across as the calm and professional driver with the media, whereas Hamilton is seen as the opposite. What this fails to take into account is that this is the PR side of things only.

      It seems clear now that Rosberg lets things fester internally (Bahrain, Hungary etc). Hamilton is more likely to blow up after a race, but quickly moves on and rarely lets it affect his driving these days.

      Rosberg needs to make sure he stays calm on the inside on-track as well as off it, or the anger he is building up inside will affect his championship run-in. If he manages that, he has a great chance of winning the title this season; especially with a cushion in both points and engine parts.

  15. Good on Nico. This is an internal issue within the Mercedes team and should be resolved in that way, rather than Hamilton’s approach of whinging to the press. So bored of this non-incident getting much more publicity than it deserves!

    1. Agreed! Who cares if people crash into each other on purpose because they want to “prove a point”? In fact, we should introduce a new rule: “if you want to make a point, you are allowed to take your competition out of the race, by causing a collision”. That would be great for the sport.

  16. Keeping things like this ‘internal’ only promotes deep suspicion, why can’t Rosberg see that? Nobody in their right mind trusts internal investigations and rightly so. Transparency is everything. If you want respect, make your case out in the public domain where it is exposed for all to see – and then defend it.

    If Hamilton hadn’t come out and said what happened in that meeting none of us would be any the wiser, and Rosberg would still have his Mr Nice Guy veneer suitably intact. As it stands, he has been exposed and is doing everything in his power to lessen the damage.

    1. Spot on…

  17. First let me say how refreshing it is to see drivers duke it out on twitter, rather than chucking their HANs devices at each other on track after an incident! I’m glad F1 lacks that nonsense nowadays.

    I really hate to see this drama, espeically between two guys who are so talented and have a good personal history. But I have to blame Nico in this soap opera. Hamilton should be fuming. He goes too far most of the time, but this time he has been quite restrained. He got taken out by his teammate in a clumsy move and the teammate refused to own up to it. Nico should just admit he messed up and move on. Seriously, it’s not like he just totally locked up and rammed a guy—this is just one of those small errors that all drivers make. Just admit it.

    I’m sure the suits in Stuttgart, having seen their cars take each other out of the first two spots, are not even trying to hear about what Nico “really meant.” I tend to think that one result of of Nico being stiff-necked about this will be the unfortunate appearance of strict team orders at Mercedes. I think the races between them will now be over as of the first pit stop window.

  18. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    25th August 2014, 17:40

    I believe the point Nico wanted to make was that he CANNOT pass Lewis while racing with similar equipment or even with better tyres. He has proven that point over and over again. Sad because he’s actually a pretty good driver. I would rather see Nico lose like a man and improve and do better next year. There’s no shame in losing if you give it your best especially at that lever and against a driver like Lewis. But stealing the victory, there’s nothing more shameful.

    1. +1
      True, unfortunately there have been plenty of shameless title winners over the years. Rosberg would be just one more.

      1. And you are qualified to brand anyone shameless title winner! Wow

    2. For such comments I just hope he wins by 18 points.

      1. If Hamilton breaks down at Abu Dabhi (and history tell us he is more likely to), Rosberg can create a 50 point gap.

      2. Absolutely! It is emabarrassing to read such a witch hunt against Nico, I remember indicents between team mates to write o book and I never saw such a childish behaviour in the media like Hamilton’s.

  19. It’s worth remembering that Toto originally backed Lewis’s account before saying that Hamilton misinterpreted the words.

    1. I think Toto went into damage control to stop a FIA investigation.

      1. Exactly. He only backtracked for the good of the team.
        Aside from all of the main stuff I like how Toto isn’t as polished with this kind of stuff as someone like Horner.
        It really is a different set up at Merc with Wolff and Lauda continually shooting from the hip.

      2. If not that then he realised that saying one of his drivers intentionally hit the other wasn’t great PR. I imagine he’s rather annoyed that Hamilton ever let the words from the meeting get to the press, but then again Wolff probably should have avoided confirming those words to be correct himself…

        My stance on this has changed somewhat. Rosberg is obviously at fault for the manoeuvre, and that was always clear. I was very annoyed to see him take advantage from it and compound ruining his team mate’s (and of course main rival’s) race by making a further mistake which lost his team the win- much though it gave a great race, my opinion of a driver who turns a 1-2 into a 2-DNF can’t be high. But I thought it was probably just a clumsy move, possibly just a mistake in that he hadn’t fallen back quite enough and so accidentally was close enough to clip the rear tyre. That was giving him the benefit of the doubt, although I wasn’t sure if in actual fact it was a case of poor race craft. So having confirmed that he thought having only his wing just up the inside was a legitimate tactic changes that from clumsy but unfortunate to foolish and certainly worthy of derision. That he supposedly has claimed that he specifically knew that putting his car there would result in contact if Hamilton didn’t leave space- which he really had no obligation or expectation to do- is even more ridiculous. It seems unlikely that he intentionally did it hoping for contact, but given he knew contact would be on the cards if he put his car in what was a ridiculous position, I can’t rule it out.

    2. The ‘nonsense’ remark from Wolff is odd as there is effectively no difference between what Hamilton said and what Wolff said.

      Hamilton: “[Nico] said he could have avoided it. He said ‘I did it to prove a point.'”

      Wolff: “Nico felt he needed to hold his line. He needed to make a point… What we saw there was that Nico was not prepared to take the exit, and that caused the collision.”

      Deciding not to take the exit is indeed causing a deliberate collision. There is no misinterpretation. Even Lauda confirmed Rosbergs position on the matter after the meeting.

      Further, Rosberg placed the blame squarely at the feet of Hamilton, not once suggesting he was even slightly at fault. Strange considering that all drivers (including Rosberg himself) employ the same defensive measures day in day out, in all categories of motorsport. Bizarrely, his assessment of Hungary is also at odds with him laying the blame on Hamilton for such a defence.

      “… Lewis didn’t let me by, although he was ordered to do so, so that’s obviously not good and we need to discuss that internally.

      “The thing I am most annoyed about though is the last lap though because I had a little opportunity and just so close, but didn’t manage to use it you know, just like 30cm missing or something.

      What [Hamilton] did was ok, the way he defended, because the guy on the inside, it’s his corner, so the guy on the outside needs to you know, make it far enough in front so that the other guy can’t push him out and I didn’t manage to do that so that’s what annoys me most.

      “But ok, still in front in the championship, a long summer break now so I get to think about it a little bit, I look forward to that – although not now at the moment I’m still annoyed actually, but er tomorrow I look forward to it and then onwards and upwards for Spa.”

      He was annoyed because he couldn’t make the pass stick, so he entered this race with his head clouded in frustration, not a good mentality for someone expected to go wheel to wheel with rivals at 200 mph.

  20. Here’s what I think:
    Racing incident. However, I don’t see why someone can’t be deemed to have caused the racing incident. It was clearly Rosberg’s fault. I’m not going to get into what I think should or should not be punished through a penalty system. That’s an entire issue on its own.
    I will say that as soon as it happened, I was thinking of Hamilton always prattling on about emulating Ayrton Senna. I think it was Brundle who said something like, “Ayrton would always leave it up to you. He’d put his car where there was going to be a crash, and would let you decide whether that crash would happen. As soon as you backed off, he knew he had you.”
    I remember Rosberg twice being the reason why both Mercs didn’t crash in Bahrain. He’s tired of it. This is the point he was proving.

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.