Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Baku City Circuit, 2017

Vettel may face FIA hearing over Hamilton collision

F1 Fanatic Round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

In the round-up: FIA president Jean Todt may summon Sebastian Vettel to an FIA hearing over his collision with Lewis Hamilton in the Azerbaijan Grand Prix.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Back to work again 💪 Off to England for the sim 🏎 #keeppushing

A post shared by Max Verstappen (@maxverstappen1) on

Comment of the day

Could improvements to the Safety Car procedure prevent the kind of incidents we saw on Sunday?

The FIA really need to do something about drivers conduct behind the SC because this is not the 1st time that the leader has been accused of playing games on a restart and it isn’t the 1st time we have seen contact or near misses.

They perhaps need to look at how IndyCar do it. The leader must maintain a steady pace, No weaving, No accelerating/braking and no driving super slowly to the point where the pack behind all nearly crash into each other. There is then a designated ‘go’ zone where the leader is permitted to accelerate to try and ensure nobody tries to jump the start or anything (with restarts occasionally waved off if he is judged to have).

With the way they do it in IndyCar you rarely (if ever) see the sort of nonsense on restarts that have been seen in F1 many times going back years. Michael Schumacher for example always used to play games on restarts that more than once caught drivers behind out.
@StefMeister

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Danny D, Hezla, Stefano, Wanon and Tino852!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

  • Michael Schumacher surprised by putting his Ferrari on pole for the French GP today in 1997

131 comments on “Vettel may face FIA hearing over Hamilton collision”

  1. Hearing Force India are changing their name for ‘Force 1’ from 2018 onwards..

    I see a lot of effort went into that one then..

    1. Imagine if The Donald bought them, he could call it “Air Force 1”.

    2. Saves a lot of money on re-branding and re-painting !

      1. Yeah, they can just paint over the NDIA

    3. @nemo87 oh dear… maybe they could call it F1 for short.

      Or maybe refer to it as F1 Force One if Trump is racing.

      1. Being more serious, if that’s true, then they have dropped the wrong bit from the name. Naming the team after a country isn’t the best, but Force makes it sound like it’s a superhero or something. Force 1 is even worse! More like Farce 1…

        1. I see you’re point, but Super Aguri is still the best team name in F1’s history to me

          1. *your

          2. To be fair, Super Aguri has a great ring to it. I’m not sure if it’s the combination of the sounds, but it does work very well.

            But imagine Force Aguri, it doesn’t have the same catch. Super India doesn’t either.

      2. F1 F1 team? :)

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          28th June 2017, 3:17

          Will he be driving one of the cars? That would be something to watch… Donald VS Bernie, may the fastest man win :-)

        2. F1 team.

        3. The F1 F1 F1 car

    4. I’m one with the force, the force is with me

      It’s great marketing wise!!

      1. Perfect…the drivers can wear Vader helmets!

    5. If Force India changes its name to something without ‘India’ in it, trust me it will lose a hell of a lot of casual fans in here.
      My friends (who don’t follow F1 at all) are always keen to know how well they’re doing only because the name has India in it and they’re interested because of it.

      1. @sravan-pe Isn’t the whole reason they’re changing it because it has India in it though? Because of the whole Vijay Mallya vs Indian Government debacle.

        1. @hugh11
          I don’t know if that is the definitive factor, but it could be a possibility. This article claims the change is to “give it a more “international flavour” and make the Formula 1 team more attractive to potential new sponsors”

    6. @nemo87 they sell the naming rights, it could be a good revenue stream. Imagine “Force China” or “Force Azerbaijan”…

    7. Andy (@andybantam)
      29th June 2017, 21:57

      Making it ready for sale to a none Indian owner, perhaps?

  2. Neil (@neilosjames)
    28th June 2017, 0:48

    I half thought… well, a reasonably sized part of me suspected… that because the stewards took so long to give the penalty on Sunday, that they’d got on the phone to Todt/an FIA higher-up first to check it was OK. So I wasn’t expecting any sort of further action.

    It’ll be a pleasant surprise if I’m wrong.

    1. With Todt’s massive French-sized ego anything is possible

  3. If they use the Indycar system, i think they need to ban passing on the first lap or first half of the lap.

    The leading would be a sitting duck to slip streaming if they had a set spot to have to restart from especially in places like Baku and Monza. That’s not really very fair.

    1. @theoddkiwi yeah, I thought the same. If they take away the unpredictability of the restart, not only it’d take away a major opportunity to shuffle the field, but it’d be even more of a mess…

      The main problem here was the ridiculously long way until the Safety Car line… BUT they restarted the race 3 times, and at no point there was any issue besides Vettel-Hamilton. So we can conclude that it’s part of racing and these guys can indeed handle it.

      1. Well, except Vettel that is .

    2. I agree, but then I don’t think we should change the system at all. I like the system we have as it adds an extra strategy element for the drivers.

      The lead driver wants to keep everyone guessing as to when he’s going to go, while the following cars want to sit as close as possible so they’re ready to pounce when he does.

      As long as it’s within the rules, then it’s fair game. Hamilton was deemed fair, so in this case Vettel played the game and lost. Had the initial contact happened and Vettel not reacted the way he did, then we wouldn’t even be discussing this.

    3. There’s no point banning the lead driver from going ‘super slowly’ when he’s continually on the radio complaining that he’s being prevented from going faster. A lot of the issues were related to the hard tyres Pirelli had brought to the track. But the main problem with the restarts last Sunday was that the safety car line was effectively a third of the way down the main straight – that’s just a poor design and something the FIA should step in and alter for next year.

      These are all issues specific to the conditions of this particular race, and I can see nothing that points to a need to change F1 safety car rules in general.

    4. The only thing needs changing is the safety car itself, it’s too slow.

      1. For a great many reasons, chiefly its ability to go out at any time in any condition for any length of time, only a road car is practical. The Merc is a genuine super car and is driven by a very fast driver. If you were in that car, it would feel like an all out racing lap – which just demonstrates how fast f1 is.

        So we can’t practically have a faster safety car, but even if we could, should we? What after all is the point of a safety car? To control the pace of the field, in order to create a safe enough track for marshals to work, that safety condition has been calculated – and an appropriate target lap time selected. Surely taking the cars round faster would create a less safe track for the marshals, and what would we gain for that increased risk?

        1. Currently the SC is driving slow because it cant go faster not because its unsafe to go faster. I mean they could be full throttle on the parts where marshals aint doing any work.

          Give them a Mclaren roadcar if it has to be a roadcar but you can just aswell throw in a gt3 car or something like that.

          The SC is a slow merc because Merc is paying for it and thats all.

          1. They go slow around the whole track so that the marshals have time to clear the track. Not just so that they go slow past the marshals. There is nothing really wrong with the speed of the safety car.

          2. The SC is not slow, if you go for a lap with him while leading the cars around I bet many will be sick afterwards.

          3. HyperCars, like the mclaren you mention would not pass the mechanical reliability test, sorry to burst your bubble, but mclaren road cars break down a lot, because they are pushing the limits so hard.

            Also in no way is that merc “slow”, and I cannot respect any opinion to the contrary

    5. Or one lap with VSC after SC, or put safety car line to corner rather than before usually long starting straight.

      1. “mclaren road cars break down alot”

        mclaren using Honda in their road cars now?

  4. Link to Joe Blogs F1 takes you to the Verstappen Autosport article.

    Also, something I did not expect but I am agreeing with Jordan here. I know I’m in the minority, but it doesn’t feel like a big deal to me with the Vettel incident. I know it was the wrong thing to do, and there is no excuse for it, yet it doesn’t feel like all that big of a deal to me. Just my opinion.

    1. I agree, but also I’m a Ferrari fan so admittedly biased. Hamilton wasn’t damaged, it was low speed. Seb just lost his temper and he should’ve known better.

    2. yup, the links aren’t right @keithcollantine

    3. Agree. Nothing can justified what Vettel’s unsportsmanlike. But people make a bump at low speed using term like ‘using his car a weapon’ as if that a fatal action. It’s like saying Lewis threating to do a Senna to Rosberg as punishable death threat.

      1. I think the point is Vettel clearly has anger management issues and this needs nipping in the bud before he does something else.

        This isn’t just from this incident, we saw him in Mexico have a complete melt down and put his competitors in danger at a higher speed.

        1. Plus remember when he took webber out at full race speed?

        2. Exactly @john-h. Last time (Mexico) the FIA even told him that he would not get away with the same thing again, surely this was worse than how he banged wheels with Ricciardo and then called Whiting names.

      2. Speed doesn’t matter. If I hit you with a feather or balloon, I am using those items as a weapon regardless of the damage done. Vettel used his car to hit someone. Therefore he used his car as a weapon. Stop excusing bad behaviour.

      3. Paolo VECCHI
        30th June 2017, 6:31

        Guys, I am a Ferrari supporter, and so I know I’m full of….but please…remember the beauty of the 80 and 90 formula one. Years of bad boys racing…and Jeez, that was formula one. VILLENEUVE -ARNOUX banging tires for laps… Ham…please don’t be a b___t, Texas 2 years ago.. you banged Rosberg tyre and you sent him out of the track… let not be hypocritical here at least. The radio moaning was childish…. we all want a formula one more like in the past, we don’t want robots or moaning children, we want boys races….and obviously with limits that Vettel with this little slap at Hamilton didn’t cross.

    4. It seems everyone inside Formula 1 (apart from Hamilton) thinks it’s not a big issue to be honest. Except for the press!

      1. I feel like the press needs a story. Aside from the race in Baku, F1 is not very exciting. For experienced race fans it may be. But generally speaking, F1 is borning. The same cars generally finish in the same positions. There are minimal passes after the last round of pit stops. Media needs something to talk about, therefore…

    5. It doesn’t feel like a big deal to some people because they are judging it on its outcome, not on what could have came of it.

      It was -potentially- incredible stupid and dangerous given it could have caused unseen damaged to the wheel/suspension only for it to manifest at 210mph on the next straight.

      1. This is precisely what I think. It is one thing for cars to accidentally come together and something break, but it is entirely different when the damage was caused by a purposeful bump. Also vettel could not have know that hamilton would not suddenly accelerate (it would have been a great opportunity to do so and I certainly would have done so as vettel would have been left at an almost standstill while the field went past him). If that had happened at the moment he steered into him it could have been a lot worse with hamiltons rear tyres going over vettels front tyres.

        1. Vettel was too close when the restart was still several seconds away. The safety car was 6 car lenghts ahead before they took that corner, How did Vettel accelerate so hard being so close to the car ahead. Unless he was distracted doing something inside his car.

  5. @theoddkiwi so let’s kill two birds and ge rid of DRS too.

  6. Good move on the hearing. They need to make it clear to all drivers that actions like that intentional or (if you believe some on here) not, is not acceptable.

    I still do not understand people continuing to insist that Hamilton brake checked Vettel.

    He did not brake check him, Vettel simply accelerated out of the corner and Hamilton did not (as per his prerogative).

    Vettel’s reaction, whether you try to excuse it through red-mist or anything else (as some have tried to, as if it makes it any less worse) was uncalled for. It was not a collision that can be excused as a racing incident, it was intentional whether he remembers it or not, red-mist or not. It was at safety car speeds, he drew up along side and turned in and made contact out of pure anger. Inexcusable in my book in any sport.

    The reason it has become a big deal is because a) Vettel refused to acknowledge it b) The punishment was far too lenient and seemed reluctantly applied.

    If any other driver had done the same thing in a fit of anger, I would expect the same punishment. This has nothing to do with who it is. It is about the action. Just imagine if Maldonado had drawn up alongside Alonso and barged into his car. There would be an immediate outcry. It should not matter who it is. Four time world champion or rookie. It was appalling.

    I would say grid penalty at the least would be appropriate!

    1. Jeez mate, you sleeping at night?

      1. The flashbacks to the incident do not help……lool ;) …..yes….that is a joke….a joke!!!

        Other than that – like a log…..

    2. +1 @mach1, road rage is not an acceptable excuse.
      PS. Maldonado did it to LH after Q3 once, can’t remember the official response, PM blamed LH.

      1. If you want to review the 2011 Spa incident, it’s here

        http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/08/27/maldonado-handed-penalty-hamilton-reprimand/

        At the time nobody was sure as to what LH had done wrong, PM on the other hand was on a mission that likely dated back to the infamous incident at Monaco 2011. PM seemingly carried on the feud and also took out LH at the 2012 European GP, for which he received a grid penalty and Hamilton no penalty. The pattern was becoming clear by then.

        The stewards undoubtedly take into account past behaviour when handing out penalties. Had the Monaco incident happened later in Maldonado’s career the outcome vis-a-vis penalties would I’m sure have been different, it seemed at that time they didn’t realise just how aggressively he raced. His GP2 record should have been a clue however..

        Similarly Vettel needs to watch out that he doesn’t end up regarded as the man who sees himself above the petty rules of conduct that govern the race craft of other ‘mere drivers’, it’ll end in tears for him.

      2. @hohum Q2 Spa 2011. Hamilton passed Maldonado on the final corner as he had to post a lap to get to Q3. Maldonado was trying to do the same but Hamilton’s move left him with a time that wasn’t fast enough. He then hit Hamilton after the time was up and the laps were finished on the run to Eau Rouge. Only given a grid penalty for some reason.

  7. Good move from FIA. It’d be great if Vettel was cited to a hearing, even if they don’t do anything to him. This sort of thing should not happen.

    The penalty is not the issue here. The FIA should draw a line in the sand so it never happen again.

    1. @fer-no65

      Just expect a public apology from Seb.. nothing else. He’ll say he regrets his actions and promise it will not happen again. I’m sure he’ll be smiling and snickering as soon as he’d done with his speech written by Ferrari’s PR team.

      What a sham

      1. A public apology is the bare minimum he should give. That sort of behavior needs to be stamped out. This is not bumper cars or NASCAR. An accidental collision under racing conditions can be excused, but (even if accidental*) doing that under safety car conditions in pure anger isn’t.

        *I still don’t buy that it was accidental. Vettel is one of the breast drivers in the world and they were doing 30mph. I, an average road driver, and avoid hitting anything at 30 while speaking on the phone and changing radio stations. I can even do so while gesticulating wildly and shouting at an idiot who just cut me up. If I can, surely Vettel can!

      2. @todfod it’s better than nothing if you ask me. That’s what I meant. If he has to apologise it means that he admits being at fault, which is the bare minimum he should do.

      3. @todfod

        So the same as when Alonso brake tested Coulthard and Doornbos.

      4. @todfod you were right, ey?

        1. @fer-no65

          I can’t confirm Vettels snickering ;)

    2. If the FIA was headed by anyone other than Todt, punishment would have already happened.

      As it is Todt is pretending to flex muscle but will still do nothing

    3. Todt wants him summoned? Same Todt who was Ferrari team boss when Schumacher hit his title rival at the last race in 1997? Did he summon Schumacher after that incident and give him a dressing down? Never heard even remote rumours to that happening.

      1. Did he need to? Schumacher was excluded from the championship.

        Some people…

        1. Excluded from the Championship which he had taken himself out of anyway, and got to keep his poles and wins and points for 97 in spite of being excluded. In other words a meaningless slap on the wrist, and that was in a Championship fight at speed, not going 30 mph under controlled conditions.

  8. With regard to comment of the day, these things have happened before, as you said. Hamilton braked hard in Japan in 2008, and Vettel went into Webber as a result. Vettel launched then braked during the 2012 Singapore Grand Prix, and nearly sent Button into the back of him (and to this day I don’t know why Vettel didn’t get a penalty), and Vettel ended up having an incident further down the field in Abu Dhabi 2012. I recall at Valencia and Spa (also both in 2012 coincidentally), because the safety car line is before the last corner, drivers have dived up the inside and caused a collision, but that’s a move of desperation. And now it was Hamilton and Vettel again. Those are the only major ones I can think of off the top of my head.

    Like many others, I have come to like Vettel a lot more since he has been at Ferrari, but it is true that a lot of these have been his fault, either partially or entirely. I was initially quick to blame Hamilton for the initial incident in Baku, but I wouldn’t apportion any blame now. From each on board of the accident, I can see how the other could be seen at fault, so I’d leave that there as far as blame goes. What I would say is that the procedure has been the same for a long time now, and generally works well. There have been a few incidents over the years, often with the same names cropping up.

    Whatever way the safety car ends, all the cars will go from slow to fast. There will always be problems with incidents occurring every now and then. Ironically, the only way to stop the problem is to do standing restarts, which then present their own set of issues.

    Banning overtaking, as a comment above suggested, for a portion of the lap will lead to other problems, such as cars bunching at much higher speeds if one is going slowly.

    I can’t say I know a lot about the IndyCar method mentioned, but it sounds like they might as well just follow the safety car to the first line and then all go from there.

    However, as I’ve commented previously, I really think they should leave it. It is exciting to watch, and if it is a challenge for the drivers to get it right then that’s good.

    1. @strontium, Congratulations on a fair and balanced comment (not many around), one thing to be aware of when looking at onboard video, without a stationery background or access to the data, it can be very hard to judge whether car x is slowing or car z is accelerating .

    2. Japan 2007.
      Extract from Wikipedia.

      Following the race, Sebastian Vettel faced a 10-place penalty for the next race in Shanghai, China, for causing the collision with Mark Webber which put both drivers out of the race, but this punishment was reduced to a reprimand. When new evidence was presented to the FIA, it began an investigation of Lewis Hamilton for dangerous driving and causing the collision himself. Hamilton was leading the race right in front of Webber, before suddenly braking and forcing Webber to follow suit lest he be penalised for overtaking behind the safety car; the collision occurred when Vettel’s car ran into the back of Webber. Hamilton might have faced either disqualification or a grid penalty for the next race,[5] but the FIA decided not to impose any penalty.

      This was probably lingering in Vettels mind.

      I however will not judge either party as I have not seen the race. Thank you paywall.

      1. Great point!
        It was a great race, one of the best I’ve seem in ages.
        Hope they change nothing (other than the unreliability of most of the cars and the power/performance deficits of the Honda engines). Everything else was great!

      2. Not sure what’s the point of that, the stewards cleared Hamilton of any wrongdoing, so no amount of historical references can change that.

        Vettel lost control of his emotions and let his anger get the best of him, it’s that simple. You guys are trying to make it look like he had a very good reason for doing what he did, he doesn’t. It was stupid, petulant & potentially dangerous. So stop trying to absolve him of any wrongdoing.

        I know for a fact that had the roles been reversed & Lewis did what he did, no one would be looking for reasons to blame Seb.

        1. Oh yes you would.

      3. Crikey, I hope Japan 2007 wasn’t what what SV was referring to, that was 10 years ago when both LH and SV were virtual rookies!

        Elephants or what?

    3. If Seb is called to a hearing, then great ….. but he has had his punishment for what happened and I think an additional slap on the wrist/reprimand from the FIA is warranted. At first I was in favour of a ban but do we really want the possibility of the WDC being decided in an office.

      As long as Seb learns he cannot pull of stunts like that, regardless of the perceived cause, that and a public apology should do, I am already guessing that behind closed doors Ferrari have already had their say …. that was a bad day for Seb and terrible PR for Ferrari.

      The FIA also needs to get tough on inconsistent, lenient on the race stewards and their laughable and pathetic decisions, this is just another example of their weakness and inability of the FIA to manage the sport within their own Rule Book.

    4. That Fuji race was in atrocious conditions. Even the lead driver, Hamilton was finding it difficult seeing the safety car and braked because he was about to overtake it several times. Webber also braked because he was about to overtake Hamilton.
      Secondly the carbon brakes were not getting enough heat which then required much harder braking.
      The FIA realised the conditions were too bad visibility wise hence didnt punish anyone. But curiously Webber was able to do the right thing and stay on the opposite lane to the driver ahead, Hamilton, while braking, but Vettel didnt do likewise and rammed him

  9. @stefmeister re COTD: I respect your opinion, but couldn’t disagree with it more!

    I don’t think the FIA needs to do anything to clean up the restart process. How the drivers behave behind the safety car is all part of the game. There’s nothing wrong with letting the leader set the pace as the safety car peels off into the pits, all the drivers are weaving trying to keep heat in their tyres, the field is naturally all bunched up… and its all fine.

    Enforcing additional rules around restarts will further sanitise how drivers actually drive the cars. Under the current approach, these restarts are usually one of the most exciting parts of the race. Granted incidents happen, because cars are all close to eachother, but its all part of the game. These are the best drivers in the world and we want them to race. I don’t think we should be telling them how to drive when they’re behind the safety car.

    At best you introduce a minimum speed limit for the leader – Hamilton going 50km/h was too slow for me. But it would be better if there was a code of conduct that all drivers adhere to. A recent example would be clarifying the Verstappen / moving-under-braking rule. Lets not prescribe when the drivers should or should not press the throttle, nor limit how much they want to turn the steering wheel.

  10. “Hamilton going 50km/h was too slow for me. But it would be better if there was a code of conduct that all drivers adhere to”

    Lead driver dictates the pace once the safety car lights go out, he drive at that pace after the first safety car, why wasn’t it an issue then?

    And there is a code of conduct they all must adhere to, I believe it’s 27.7c in the sporting regs, Seb broke that rule.

    1. Vettel served a 10 second stop – go penalty for his actions in the race. He was penalized by the race stewards for his actions. Penalty points were added to his license. He was found at fault.

      What more would you like to see happen? Ban him so Hamilton can make up some points?

  11. forgive me for this but can someone recall what happened to the rule regarding restarts following a red flag, l thought the plan was to reintroduce grid starts?

    1. I believe this was an idea at some stage put it didn’t make it into the final sporting regs.

      However, if the race starts behind the SC in the wet, then when the track is ready to race a standing start will occur. See here.

    2. Ferrari, Seb fan
      28th June 2017, 8:10

      That’s next year.

    3. I think this is still waiting for approval by the World Motor sports Council and will only happen next year. Currently there’s a full grid restart only if the race had to be started behind a safety car because of wet conditions.

      1. Thank you all

  12. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
    28th June 2017, 7:12

    Just out of curiosity, can anyone remember what penalties Maldonado got for taking a swipe at Lewis at Spa in 2011 and then Monaco on Perez (2012) I think?

    1. 5 place grid penalty for Spa. 10 place grid penalty for Monaco. Maldonado was an angry man.

      1. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
        28th June 2017, 22:24

        Thanks John.

  13. Just read that Verstappen’s simulator test has been cancelled due to the ransomeware virus (link).

    1. So the simulator’s “engine” too had (the risk of) problems? 😊 Oh, Max, Max, Max, it looks like you’ve got Webber’s car.

  14. Levente (@leventebandi)
    28th June 2017, 8:20

    From Joe’s article
    “The first thing I spotted were two scrawls, close to one another: the first said ‘Briatore’, the second ‘sewage’. There are some who might argue that the two are related subjects”
    Happy to hear, that there are people thinking about him the same 😂

  15. There is one piece of news that *should* have been in the Round-up but wasn’t, especially after last weeks relatively extensive coverage on how Sauber allegedly favourise Ericsson over Wehrlein:

    http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/19742071/marcus-ericsson-painful-let-sauber-teammate-pascal-wehrlein-points

    While running in tenth and believing, correctly as the race results prove, that he could have retained that position, Ericsson was *ordered* to yield his position to Wehrlein, an order he complied with. This piece of news should finally put to rest any rumours of favouritism against Wehrlein as the opposite seems more likely.

    1. Well that’s why the new investors wanted Kaltenborn out. Now she is gone, her favoritism against Wehrlein is gone too.

      I don’t see the issue here anyway. Sauber decided that it would be most likely to get that point if they had Pascal in front (since he was faster) and let Ericsson try to hold off Vandoorne first. Seems perfectly logical.

      Look at what happened in Canada with Force India. If they had told Perez to let the faster Occon past, Vettel would have had a hard time getting past Perez and it’s extremely unlikely that he would then still have gotten past Occon. Obviously Sauber wanted to prevent that mistake.

      1. FFS! Didn’t you listen to what the drivers had to say and how Wehrlein emphasised that Kaltenborn stood for equality between the drivers? SHAME ON YOU!!!

  16. Regarding Vettel: What do people here think if you compare that to Dani Rics INTENTIONAL wheelbanging in China with Vettel?

    Ric after China, about Sebs pass on him:
    “I was honestly a bit bored, so I just thought let’s bang some wheels and get the crowd excited,” Ricciardo said “I’d be lying if I said it wasn’t intentional, but I knew there was no harm done.
    “A little bit of smoke for the fans.”

    I mean, I am not saying Vettel was wrong and he shouldn’t have been penalize etc… Yes he was wrong and Ham didn’t do anything wrong, and Vet was penalized rightly. But banging wheels is not that big of a thing that many make it out to be in this case. Proven by the fact that I didn’t see anyone complaining about Ric doing that INTENTIONALLY at far greater speeds which means he risked comperatively much more than Vettel here..

    1. Reading your post the impression that you think Vettel did it unintentional comes to mind.
      Forget that on.. it was a very deliberate action!

      1. Right I do believe that, see just 2 comments further below, but for this argument to make sense I am assuming worst case, which is intentional, esle it wouldn’t make sense to compare it to Ric’s admittedly intentional wheelbanging.

    2. Ricciardo was just joking. It was actually Vettel who changed his line and made the wheel contact

  17. Somehow I see a difference between a close overtake where the cars slightly touch versus an irate driver ramming into the side of another car.

    1. @patrickl

      But it wasn’t just a close overtake where they touch accidentily. They touched because Ric wanted it, and in both cases it was wheel on wheel with no damage done.

      (BTW I believe it was unintentional from Vettel, due to the fact that he didn’t have both hands on the steering wheel, people would tend to have both hands on their wheel if they try to make a move like that. Obviously he might have done it intentional with one hand as well.. But I just don’t think Vettel is that “cool”. But for the sake of the argument I assume here Vet did it intentional as well.)

      1. @skylien Riccardo vs Vettel was good aggressive racing. Riccardo was also half joking when he said that too. If you watch the video you will see Riccardo didn’t purposely hit Vettel, he actually let Vettel hit him. Vettel steered toward him in order to get into position for the next corner and Ricciardo refused to give way by driving straight until after they touch wheels. That is so different than purposely steering into and hitting another car during a safety car period.

        Vettel is a supremely skilled driver, he is quite capable of keeping an f1 car going in a straight line at 30mph even with both hands waving in the air, he could probably do it in his sleep. For an F1 car to veer sideways like that a slow speed the steering wheel requires a sharp and purposeful input from the driver, an accidental knock from a gesticulating hand would not be enough to move the wheel like that.

        1. @the-last-pope

          I don’t want to get into the discussion of was it intentional or not, but staying with the assumption it was. If someone says something like this “I’d be lying if I said it wasn’t intentional” then he is not joking. Also Ric was also going left just a bit before as well. That was proper and intentional wheelbanging by Ric that was absolutely unnecessary, but Dan made it just for the fun it. All where in praise (including me) and jumping for joy, and if Vettel does it (obviously for a wrong and stupid reason at a stupid time) then many treat it something like the worst possible act you could do. That is not a consistent view of both incidents and its ramifications.

          So I say. Vettel it was the wrong place wrong time wrong reason, but the action itself… Nothing much to talk about if you compare it to everything that is done on track otherwhise..

          I don’t think this is like a brutal foul in football, but more like putting your body where your oppened can feel you to show him you are there. It is ok during racing, but not during half time or when the game is interrupted just like a SC phase.

          1. *opponent*

          2. Also with my first sentence I mean Vettel, if he did it intentional or not..

          3. https://youtu.be/IxqqslQ-Qqo

            Watch this video and you will see Ricciardo made no move to hit Vettel. He purposely rubbed wheels with Vettel but made no specific maneuver to do so other than driving straight on a straight. Ricciardo did not turn left into Vettel at all.

            Your football equivalent is also incorrect. A car or other road vehicle when used incorrectly and in anger is a deadly weapon, like a kitchen knife. Humans have for makeshift weapons, fists, feet, forehead, elbows and knees. You use any of these in football as a weapon, you are going to get sent off and banned, whether its during play or not.

            What Vettel actually did is more the equivalent of a Cricket batsman swinging their bat (A deadly weapon) around threateningly at the bowler because he didn’t like the ball that had just been bowled at him. He’d get banned for life if he was a cricketer.

          4. @the-last-pope

            Well, I watched it and Ric’s trajectory goes intentionally slightly to the left side of the track in purpose of intentional wheel banging or “swinging his bat around threateningly” as you seem to call it for completely no other reason than to have some fun! I mean come on, he said clearly he did it on purpose, what more do people want as proof?! Well whatever, that is my opinion, that is what Ric said but let’s just disagree.

          5. Ricciardo contunued going straight. The edge of the race track doesn’t follow a straight line

  18. For once I agree with old Eddie, Red card all the way along, the FIA is turning into a joke, always there for Ferrari, beginning with suspensions controversy in the preseason and now with Vettel, some stewards must be blind of visually deficient to the point of not realising how fare went Vettel into his manoeuvre, they should rectify and give him a race ban, that will bring him down to earth.

  19. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
    28th June 2017, 9:19

    While I’m not totally sure Massa would have won, is certainly would have been possible. I certainly think he will have been 2nd, But looked stronger than Stroll in the race. I think he may well have had the pace to beat Ricciardo because of the speed of the Williams on the fast parts of the tracks. After all, Stroll was under 5 seconds behind. That will have been quite something if Massa won. The longest gap ever between wins. I would have loved it if that happened.

    He’s just been very unlucky this year.

    He probably would have easily got 6th in Russia. But he had a slow puncture which resulted in 9th which was still a decent recovery. That is a possible 6 points missed out on.

    In Spain, He had to avoid Kimi and Verstappen coming back on track from the collision with Bottas. This gave him a puncture. Then later, he almost suffered a load of damage when Stoffel crashed int him. So unlucky. The team believe this cost him a potential podium. I disagree there. But I think he could have managed 4th but as the Force India’s were very quick too, I’d say that he missed out on about 10 points.

    In Canada, The Williams was clearly very strong as Massa, who is known not to be at his best in qualifying beat both of the Force India’s. He may have had a bad start but he got took out instantly! Unlucky again. I’d say this race will have been a very likely podium but I’ll stick with 4th. 12 points.

    In Canada, he missed out on a strong possibility of winning down to a retirement again. If he didn’t win, he almost certainly will have been 2nd so he missed out on 18.

    So I would say he could possible have got more than this but I think he’s missed out on a minimum of 46 points if all the other retirements had been the same. His points at the moment being behind Sainz and only just being ahead of Strlll don’t reflect on his performance at all. He would have over 60 points now and be ahead of both Forci india drivers. If I’m honest, both Ocon and Perez haven’t had the best of weekends in Monaco or Baku. Massa has been decent everywhere other than China. He hasn’t made any big mistakes even in practice if I am correct.
    He’s just been very unlucky, but then so have drivers like Verstappen and Kvyat.

  20. F Truth (@offdutyrockstar)
    28th June 2017, 9:33

    I notice all the tifosi suspiciously quiet about Merc’s ‘qually mode’ now…

    1. Considering Ferrari are the one suspected of illegal oil burning tactics, they better stay mum on the issues.

      The hilarious part is that they still trail Mercedes in qualifying XD

      1. Not as hilarious as where Alonso is with Mclaren.

  21. As far as verstappen and reliability concerns..

    RBR is last on the lap charts.. behind: McLaren!
    RACE LAPS COMPLETED IN 2017
    Force India 956
    Mercedes 946
    Ferrari 903
    Sauber 829
    Haas 809
    Toro Rosso 749
    Williams 745
    Renault 738
    McLaren 716
    Red Bull 685

    1. That’s a sad statistic. Renault are so lucky Honda managed to mess up even more. Otherwise all journalists would be queueing at RBR to try and get some more “we will quit”-threats every weekend

    2. It’s just ridiculous that Renault is actually competing with Honda on this one. I thought Honda was so rubbish that they were in a league of their own.

      I guess it doesn’t take in to account the number of engine units Honda has already gone through… because that would show the true picture of the disaster that is Honda. But nonetheless, Renault cannot be proud of this stat at all. They should really have gotten their act together this season. I can imagine that Red Bull are going flat out to secure an Audi or Porsche deal for the future.

    3. But Honda have used about 4 or 5 times the number of engines.
      Engine1, FP1 and part of FP2
      Engine2, FP2 and part of FP3
      Engine3, Qualifying and part of part of race.
      Engine4 start of next race weekend.

  22. Personally I would be pleased to see Vettel get a further penalty for dangerous driving, he drive alongside another car and while ranting and waving his hand, veered into the other car quite hard.

    However, I am of the opinion that he didn´t hit him on purpose, the car followed the direction his head was looking in. It i one of those things, the car will tend to head off in the direction that you are looking in.

    That is not an excuse though, he should have maintained control of his car and for not doing so he deserves a penalty as he could have caused a bigger crash and injuries.

    I say drop him down out of the points and be done with it.

    1. If the car heads where im looking i would have ran over every lady in this town by now.

    2. Complete over reaction, the whole thing is a storm in a tea cup

  23. Sigh. Todt’s already given interviews that totally debunks this “angry Todt” image some of the press is trying to draw…

  24. It’s clear Verstappen wants out of Red Bull. His comments are coming thicker and faster than even Alonso’s. On the surface, I can see why he might want out since it is unlikely that Red Bull will match Merc and Ferrari next year. However, it is far from impossible either. Merc have had trouble this year setting up their car and Ferrari are well… mercurial. It’s a much more competitive situation this year than we have seen in the last 3 years and I expect next year to be more competitive again, so Red Bull will almost certainly be closer to the front. It isn’t outside the realms of possibility the RB will win the championship next year. Newey is back and they are making appreciable gains each week.

    So what is Verstappen’s game here and where does he want to go? Does he want to go to Merc and play second fiddle to Hamilton? How about Ferrari and play second fiddle to Vettel?

    Verstappen has had the measure of Ricciardo this year. Of that there is no doubt, but it is hardly the walkover the Dutch media and his fans are suggesting. In some sense, he has been lucky with his retirements as everyone is feeling sorry for him. However form is temporary, and it’s only been 8 races and RIC might own him for the rest of the year. He hasn’t made it past lap 5 in 3 of the last 4 races, so we are only judging him on qualifying and starts, but over race distance, who knows what might have happened. He might have crashed on lap 10 in Baku for all we know. Heaps of others did.

    My question is around his recent comments and actions. He is constantly bagging RB and Renault at the moment. Does he really think that Merc or Ferrari would want his as a #2 driver to their stars if they think he will go there and bag them as well? Merc and Ferrari would have to pay millions to RB to buy out his contract. Would they seriously do that for someone who thinks he is above the team? If I was them, I would only do it if I thought that he was miles better than the 2 stars that I already had.

    My advice to MV. Shut up and let the media tell your sob story. Don’t bag your team, because your next team will think you will do it to them as well if times get tough. Also, don’t ever not turn up to media conferences like you did in Baku. The media (and fans) will tell your story whether you like it or not. But if you dis them and get them off side, they will tell your story and you probably won’t like what they have to say.

  25. I think I’ve now seen “I could have won the race” comments from Alonso, Perez and Massa. Along with the various incidents it could also have been Hamilton, Vettel, Bottas or Raikkonen. Any more? ;-)

    1. @jimg Verstappen, LOL. Where’s Captain Hindsight when we need him, LOL.

  26. The desperation to make Lewis Hamilton the Tiger Woods of F1 continues unabated. Since he lacks Tigers actual talent, it is necessary for the press and FIA to intervene to make it so.

    “There are some in F1 who think he should have been disqualified.”

    And there are some, like Jacques Villeneuve, Jackie Stewart, and Bernie Eccelsone, who say that Hamilton was at fault. But hey, let’s not allow that to interfere in your little Soviet-style show trial.

    1. Are you saying he was drugged up and asleep at the wheel?

      1. And you wonder why Formula 1 isnt popular in America? Street racing on a crap circuit because Flav is a good business man and makes 5 million to get the deal. A race that is more than a parade behind the mercedes and a driver that shows some passion for racing and we have controversy. Vettel is a 4 time world champ and I agree he should know better. But he also knew that little harm would come from it. Any difference than Bottas closing his eyes and taking a stab into a corner where he had no hope. Thats not smart and its intentional. And someone please explain how he got his lap back when there’s no passing under the safety. Those with the power make the rules. And change them

  27. There is already rules about not weaving or moving unexpectedly when behind safety car but fia doesn’t read their own rules. It is not a rule issue. It is an issue with the decision making.

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.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.