[Official] Italian Grand Prix 2021: Grand Prix Weekend Thread

[BTCC frog]

I think Lando Norris deserves a mention for that pass on Leclerc into Curva Grande. For me that was the best overtake of the season so far.

[john ruston]

The comments on the LH/MV incident are up to usual standard on here.
Think the stewards who have all the information and knowing they will get a kicking if anything they do is questionable can’t afford to get it wrong.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by john ruston

The comments on the LH/MV incident are up to usual standard on here.
Think the stewards who have all the information and knowing they will get a kicking if anything they do is questionable can’t afford to get it wrong.

If you compare to Silverstone it is a similar impact penalty and similar fine to have a go, but not if it goes wrong. I suppose.

But I disagree with giving a penalty for both. But they are being consistent, unfortunately.

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by john ruston

The comments on the LH/MV incident are up to usual standard on here.
Think the stewards who have all the information and knowing they will get a kicking if anything they do is questionable can’t afford to get it wrong.

I agree with this comment and the action the stewards took was in relation to the incident itself.


What might become clearer in the months to come is whether the sight of a car flying over the head of Sir Lewis will have lessened his feelings of invulnerability.He might just become a bit more apprehensive and thus cautious in a wheel to wheel situation.

[Tourer]

Nail-biting stuff here in Oz right through that race - couldn't believe it was "real" until Dani Ric crossed the line - great to see a McLaren 1-2 and Dani back up there after the way his year has been. That podium, for everyone on it, was just pure unbridled joy - so good to see people who enjoy winning and show it.

Lando's move to pass Leclerc was "pass of the day" in my view - both the Big Mac drivers had good days. Also really pleased to see Valtteri pass so many cars on his way forward from right down the back - prime example of not giving up.

Don't care all that much about the Max/Lewis he said/she said thing - felt it was a racing incident (still do), the stewards think different, penalty applied and we move on - three VERY different races in three weeks, rounding off at glorious Monza - we get to catch our breaths and then it's off to the Russian front!

Oh & it was clearly good to be an Australian of Italian descent at Monza - Oscar Piastri won in F2 as well!

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Mazepin causes a spin.

Not particularly creative myself but I reckon someone creative could come up with an original nickname for Mazepin based on this post!

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

If you read the Stewards' full adjudication, they came to a similar decision to the Silverstone incident between the two, but this time they judged Verstappen to be predominately at fault and in their opinion he had left his passing manoeuvrer too late.

Didn't Hamilton get zero penalty points for Silverstone though?

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Seems a little harsh.

Not really.
Had I been officiating as a steward I'd have listened to his excuses and then warned him about the things he'd missed.
I would have considered a race suspension.

If you follow the onboard it is clear while he is still less than halfway alongside Hamilton and that there is no way he is going to get around the corner on the inside.
That chicane is NOT a piece of track where you can RACE through side by side, even at at 60kph.
The cars are too long and don't have enough lock to enable you to do that with crashing into each other or forcing the other person off the road.
Even in the early part of the corner from Max's camera you can see that Hamilton is lining up from apex to apex.
The natural path for the corner.
There was never any opening to get properly alongside to force the issue.

When he did get alongside his left side was clearly off the racing surface before any contact was ever made.
The only way he even got alongside was by leaving the racing surface which was why the curbs threw him up and on the path he was taking contact would only been avoided if Hamilton backed out of it and let Max have the whole width of the track to resume his race.
But the curb threw him up over Hamilton before that could happen.

So it was Max's actions that caused the collision, not Hamilton's.

What Max should have done was taken the through road and conceded the the position because on turning into the chicane his front wheels were already clearly behind the front wheels of Hamilton
Effectively he caused an otherwise avoidable collision.
It is not a racing incident because the stewards deemed that his passing effort was initiated too late.
From the video angles I would totally agree with that summation.

But there was no way he was going to do that because he didn't want to have to get past Hamilton again when he knew Hamilton had enough speed to make it very difficult for him to do so. He didn't have enough advantage to guarantee an easy pathway.
Ralf Schumacher, an FIA credentialed media person these days made the comment on air that the best thing Max could do in this situation was to take Hamilton out.

That may be partly the reason why Hamilton's boss is suggesting a professional foul.
It may have been but its hard to prove.

[dsg]

Lewis pushed Max off at Silverstone. In Monza Max pushed Lewis off on lap 1 and I though they were both partially to blame at turn 1. Lewis could have left a bit more room but turned in and Max should have backed off or gone over the kerb because the gap was always too small and closing.

Hopefully they continue to take each other out in the remaining races and Danny, Lando, Charles, Carlos and a few others can enjoy the spoils like today.

[Alan52]

Many opinions.On Sky Brundle and di Resta blamed Hamilton,Herbert and Hill blamed Verstappen and Massa called it racing incident.I’m sort of with Felipe but have no problem with the penalty.Now Will Red Bull use Sochi to take their engine penalty given they already have a grid penalty?

[Sodemo]

I think it was more of a racing incident, both drivers didn’t want to give way, if I had to apportion blame it would be 60:40 to Verstappen. I think the difference with these two drivers is that in most cases, Lewis knows when to back out, but Max seems unwilling to back out at all when making risky moves.

[GTRMagic]

Do you reckon His Ronness was on the ode cologne to Mr Brown to offer his well wishes for the first McLaren victory in 9 years

[steve_r]

Much as I am enjoying the LH v MV championship duel this season, it is great to see races with different winners. So often we have seen cars move over and wave through any Mercedes or Red Bulls coming through the field, but in this race the McLarens had the pace to maintain a lead and Perez / Bottas had to work hard to make up positions too.

[S griffin]

Having watched the highlights, I can't see what Max did wrong, Lewis didn't leave him much space.

Alpha Tauri really had an awful weekend, contrast that with last year. Giovinazzi once again fails to make use of an excellent starting position

Mazepin once again up to his old tricks

[davec]

I have seen many comments about Verstappen not checking on Hamilton but 2 things are important on this.

1. Verstappen will not have seen how close he was to Hamilton's head and when he got out of the car his rear wheel was over the front of Hamilton's car but not particularly in a worrying position. We saw it differently and the photo after the event that is shown would not have been seen by Verstappen at the time.

2. When he walked away from the car Hamilton was clearly OK (he did look) and was trying to reverse his own car out from under the Redbull.

BOTH drivers have made mistakes this year and certainly neither team/driver combination are looking like saints at the moment. I think that both teams will not be too unhappy with the results as Verstappen was looking like having a bad weekend after Qualifying and Hamilton was looking similar after the sprint. For it to be a lost weekend for both with minimal points change I think will not upset them too much. Both could see it as a lost opportunity AND damage limitation in equal measures!

[ascarracinguk]

Ive refrained from commenting until this morning to let emotions go down a bit.

Tbh i think the stewards have called both the Silverstone incident and Imola pretty much spot on.

In both incidents they have recognised that both drivers could have done more to avoid the incident, but both drivers chose not to.

I would certianly apportion more blame on Max for this one. He had an out, just run onto the runoff, like hes expected hamilton to do 3 times this year in wheel to wheel combat, but chose not to do it.

Read into that what you will, but it was either driving angry, a bit sloppy, or the shear stubburness of never wanting to back down.

I dont fully subscribe to the Damon Hill train of thought, but i do suspect Max knew he had little to lose in that incident....force his hand with hamilton and still walk away with the championship lead, let hamilton go and Lewis could have won the race.

I think the biggest tell, was Horner in his interview....when he says it was 50/50 a racing incident, he knew Max was predominantly to blame LOL!

Awesome win by Mclaren, Ricciardo and a podium by Norris too...thats what im concentrating on after this one. 2 years in a row and 2 great feel good podiums at Monza!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

I would certianly apportion more blame on Max for this one. He had an out, just run onto the runoff, like hes expected hamilton to do 3 times this year in wheel to wheel combat, but chose not to do it.

Read into that what you will, but it was either driving angry, a bit sloppy, or the shear stubburness of never wanting to back down.

The one thing I am reading into it is the choice of word 'combat'.
It could have been described as wheel to wheel competition, or racing or even battle. But combat is probably closest to how Verstappen (and maybe Hamilton) see their positions.

The use of the word combat can imply purposeful violence, and we have seen that previously in comments after Silverstone, such as 'Hill: Drivers can’t use their car as a weapon.'.

I'm not suggesting you have chosen to use the word combat in this way, but pointing out how it is an example of the strength of words used by many that can lead to subconscious views of events.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Not really.
Had I been officiating as a steward I'd have listened to his excuses and then warned him about the things he'd missed.
I would have considered a race suspension.

If you follow the onboard it is clear while he is still less than halfway alongside Hamilton and that there is no way he is going to get around the corner on the inside.
That chicane is NOT a piece of track where you can RACE through side by side, even at at 60kph.
The cars are too long and don't have enough lock to enable you to do that with crashing into each other or forcing the other person off the road.
Even in the early part of the corner from Max's camera you can see that Hamilton is lining up from apex to apex.
The natural path for the corner.
There was never any opening to get properly alongside to force the issue.

When he did get alongside his left side was clearly off the racing surface before any contact was ever made.
The only way he even got alongside was by leaving the racing surface which was why the curbs threw him up and on the path he was taking contact would only been avoided if Hamilton backed out of it and let Max have the whole width of the track to resume his race.
But the curb threw him up over Hamilton before that could happen.

So it was Max's actions that caused the collision, not Hamilton's.

What Max should have done was taken the through road and conceded the the position because on turning into the chicane his front wheels were already clearly behind the front wheels of Hamilton
Effectively he caused an otherwise avoidable collision.
It is not a racing incident because the stewards deemed that his passing effort was initiated too late.
From the video angles I would totally agree with that summation.

But there was no way he was going to do that because he didn't want to have to get past Hamilton again when he knew Hamilton had enough speed to make it very difficult for him to do so. He didn't have enough advantage to guarantee an easy pathway.
Ralf Schumacher, an FIA credentialed media person these days made the comment on air that the best thing Max could do in this situation was to take Hamilton out.

That may be partly the reason why Hamilton's boss is suggesting a professional foul.
It may have been but its hard to prove.

I think this is almost entirely spot on.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

The one thing I am reading into it is the choice of word 'combat'.
It could have been described as wheel to wheel competition, or racing or even battle. But combat is probably closest to how Verstappen (and maybe Hamilton) see their positions.

The use of the word combat can imply purposeful violence, and we have seen that previously in comments after Silverstone, such as 'Hill: Drivers can’t use their car as a weapon.'.

I'm not suggesting you have chosen to use the word combat in this way, but pointing out how it is an example of the strength of words used by many that can lead to subconscious views of events.

Yeh, youre reading too much into it!....i mean battle is just as strong as combat lol!...unless of course theres been a battle in history without puroposeful violence

[Taxi645]

To me the handling of this race by the stewards and it's wording sets a very undesirable presedent. It punishes the drivers who dare have a go on the outside and are already in a more volnurable position (Hamilton T4 lap 1) and Verstappen T1 at the crash and rewards those on the inside (same situation vice versa).

Lap 1 T4 is a 5s penalty for Verstappen in my book.

On the crash, if we looked at the wording:
The verdict read: “Car 44 [Hamilton] was exiting the pits. Car 33 [Verstappen] was on the main straight. At the 50m board before Turn 1, car 44 was significantly ahead of car 33.

“Car 33 braked late and started to move alongside car 44, although at no point in the sequence does car 33 get any further forward than just behind the front wheel of car 44."

The above is the case for a very large part of any non-DRS inside overtake ever. Should attempting such a much on the inside also be punished or only when you do it on the outside (where the driver is already much more vulnerable)?

I have two problems with this:
1 The wording makes up new rules along the way. Since when is a driver expected to yield a corner when he is more than half way before the apex?
2 As said, it's set's a very unwanted precedent. Are attempts at passes now only allowed when you are an unknown amount in front (cause not in the rules) at an unkown distance before the corner (because not in the rules)? Well better not attempt any non-DRS pass in the future then, because you never know what they make up after the incident...

To me it was a racing incident that could've been avoided by Verstappen yielding the corner (not required by the rules before the race) or taking the escape road (by which he would've lost the position) or Hamilton leaving space (as required by the rules).

So in summery 5s penalty for Verstappen lap 1 and racing incident at the crash. They way they have done it now they have twice rewarded the guy on the inside leaving no room and twice punished the guy on the outside trying to race and relying on the inside guy to race fair and leave room.

EDIT: also this interpretation and wording rewards behaviour of the inside guy being able to go faster through a corner and therefor ending up more foward BECAUSE you don't also task your tires to make a shorter arc.


That said, with cars this big it is very hard to navigate the first chicane side by side (although Hamilton and Norris prooved otherwise at lap 1). Smaller cars would help in this scenario, but yeah it does provide drama and something to talk about. PR gold this for F1.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Yeh, youre reading too much into it!....i mean battle is just as strong as combat lol!...unless of course theres been a battle in history without puroposeful violence

I'm using battle as a verb, not noun:

Doctors battled throughout the night to save her life.
...a lone yachtsman returning from his months of battling with the elements.
In Wyoming, firefighters are still battling the two blazes.

but yes, maybe battle is also a bit strong.

[AnnoyedMoose]

Originally Posted by john ruston

The comments on the LH/MV incident are up to usual standard on here.
Think the stewards who have all the information and knowing they will get a kicking if anything they do is questionable can’t afford to get it wrong.

They get it wrong all the time. For instance why did Verstappen get two penalty points for Monza and Hamilton didn't for Silverstone?

There were several other incidents at the chicane. They seem to have reacted to the outcome rather than the actual incident.

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by AnnoyedMoose

There were several other incidents at the chicane. They seem to have reacted to the outcome rather than the actual incident.

I think this is an interesting point. It kinda feels like a driver can attempt a gung-ho move without penalty if the other driver gives way, but if the other driver holds their ground and there’s a crash, the move gets punished. I can understand this logic, but it does somewhat undermine the claim that it is driving rather than outcome which is considered.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by AnnoyedMoose

They get it wrong all the time. For instance why did Verstappen get two penalty points for Monza and Hamilton didn't for Silverstone?

There were several other incidents at the chicane. They seem to have reacted to the outcome rather than the actual incident.

Same can be said for Silverstone can it not? looking from the outside that incident was no different to the Renault clash in 2019 i think?

I dont subscribe to the notion that 'they get it wrong all the time'.

Ive been in stewards rooms when these decisions are made, the amount of data via videos, throttle traces, steering angles etc etc that they have compared to those on social media is astonishing and base their decisions on that.

For us to sit here and say they get it wrong all the time is somewhat laughable tbh...that statement is based on what? a live feed video.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by AnnoyedMoose

For instance why did Verstappen get two penalty points for Monza and Hamilton didn't for Silverstone?

Hamilton did receive two penalty points following the incident at Silverstone.

The Stewards, having received a report from the Race Director, have considered the following matter and determine the following:
No / Driver -
44 - Lewis Hamilton
Competitor -
Mercedes-AMG Petronas F1 Team
Time -
15:04
Session -
Race
Fact -
Causing a collision with car 33 in turn 9.
Offence -
Breach of Article 2 d) Chapter IV Appendix L of the FIA International Sporting Code.
Decision -
10 second time penalty
2 Penalty Points (4 points in a 12 month period)