F1 World Champion 2014
Lewis Hamilton
Belgian GP steward: “It took 10 seconds to decide there was no case to answer”
News
Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton
Posted By: James Allen  |  27 Aug 2014   |  1:36 pm GMT  |  333 comments

Former F1 driver Emmanuele Pirro, who was the driver expert on the panel of FIA stewards at the Belgian Grand Prix, has said that the decision not to investigate the Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton collision took them very little time to reach.

Speaking to Italian sports daily La Gazzetta dello Sport, Pirro, 52, said, “We needed less than 10 seconds to decide that the contact was innocuous and not worth pursuing. It was something venial that had unfortunate consequences, but the contact came in a few millimetres, in other words neither of the two cars had sudden movements.

“There was no intention, perhaps Rosberg was a little cunning and clever to try it, but in the end the main problem was what happened within the team. The contact between Alonso and Vettel on the final lap, for example, was much clearer, but there again there was no investigation.”

Emmanuele Pirro

Pressed on his view that there was nothing intentional about it, given that Hamilton has said since that Rosberg did it ‘on purpose”, Pirro said, ” How can you say that a driver does something like this on purpose? Rosberg did not have a chance to pass and usually in such situations, it’s you who crashes and loses. But if he wasn’t happy, it’s because of the little bit of sporting cunning.”

XPB.cc

Hamilton’s former team mate at McLaren, Jenson Button, has backed his fellow countryman, saying that Rosberg was definitely at fault, “I am sure Nico would look at it and say ‘I don’t know what was I thinking’”, said Button.

Mercedes was due to hold a thorough debrief meeting at the team’s Brackley headquarters yesterday to go through the incident in detail and decide on the next course of action.

Team boss Toto Wolff has said that this debrief would yield a set of rules by which the drivers must conduct themselves for the remainder of the championship and indicated that this will include team orders in certain situations, to ensure that the team secures the best possible result from every race from now on. A clear 1-2 was on the cards at Spa, instead of which the team scored just 18 points for Rosberg’s second place.

Toto Wolff

Speaking in Spa on Sunday about the debrief meeting in prospect, Wolff said, “What we have to do is see it as a matter of principle, what has happened, and take the consequences and make sure it doesn’t happen again.

“We had the conversation before, at the beginning of the season. It was an absolute no-go to crash into each other.

“We’ve had mega-exciting races where they were fighting fair and square with great excitement for all of us. And at that stage they were on top of the situation and we were on top of the situation.

“And now it’s come to a point, in the second half of the season, where it’s getting very tight, and probably we need to tackle that with more intensity to make sure we stay within the boundaries we’ve set at the beginning of the season.”

Featured News
MORE FROM JA ON F1...
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:
333 Comments
  1. Leone says:

    Pirro said, ” How can you say that a driver does something like this on purpose?
    Because, when you were child, we saw Piquet Jr and MS doing more than this on purpose !

    But sorry, may be, it’s normal from a Briatore’s friend point of view !

    1. zombie says:

      Leone, ask yourself why Nico would do something like this in purpose and put his race in jeopardy too when he is actually leading the championship ? From every angle of the footage one can see Nico trying to avoid the contact . Risky move ? Sure. Done on purpose ? No. As Pirro rightly said “there is nothing to see here folks! Move on!”

      1. Gary Naylor says:

        Nico trying to avoid contact? I don’t know how you can make that statement. What is clear from the footage, Rosberg is losing the corner, he turns to the right and hits Hamilton. Now, is the turn to the right fighting a snap from the car and correcting the trajectory, or was it intentional to slot in behind Hamilton – misjudged – or was it intentional to hit Hamilton?

        Only Rosberg can answer that.

        As a counter, Vettal in a similar position on track decided to turn left and run wide. Rosberg didn’t – he was making a point.

        What that point was, he now refuses to elaborate / clarify.

        For me, he has ruled out “loss of car control” and accidentally hitting Hamilton.

      2. Terry says:

        Zombie
        Take a wee look at this comparison then come back to us
        http://fiftybuckss.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/analysis-of-hamilton-and-rosbergs-incident/
        Whatever way you spin it,this Rosberg chap is looking like another F1 rep killing WDC.
        He’s good with the verbal spin,but you can clearly see he’s a stranger to sportsmanship.
        They breed great cars from Rosbergs neck of the woods,but etiquette ? hmmmm.
        Altogether shabby.

      3. Steven M says:

        Are you blind? He had nothing to loose and everything to gain. If both cars were damaged, he would still keep his WDC lead, or we had what happened, and he extended his lead. Nico is desperate, he knows the only way he can beat Lewis is if Lewis doesn’t finish. He was embarrassed in Hungary, beat by his own teammate who started from the pit lane.

      4. Aey says:

        Alonso and Vettel try to avoid by go to the run off, but Nico try to avoid by turning right to the target car in front.

        If that was just only his mistake or hit someone else by accident, normally he should at least say ‘apologize’ for what he did . . . but he said he won’t apologize = he intend not to avoid.

      5. Spinodontosaurus says:

        @Gary
        I think the intention was clearly for Rosberg to slot in just behind Hamilton.
        He steers left to avoid contact, then flicks back to the right to both tuck in behind Hamilton and make sure he actually makes the first part of the chicane (he made it clear he wasn’t going to bullied into the run off area).
        That’s all it was, and highly similar to Bahrain.

      6. WarNet says:

        Agreed with Gary Naylor. At the point of contact Rosberg had much more than a car’s width, more like 1.5 or 2 cars. He didn’t need to collide, he chose to.

      7. PB says:

        There is a simple answer to your question why would Nico risk it. It is because, there are three possible outcomes when 2 drivers come in contact – both loose out, or either one of them looses out. And in 2 out of these 3 possible situations, the driver ahead in the championship battle is better off.

        In other words, someone would ONLY do it on purpose (i.e. take this calculated risk) with the only close challenger if they’re actually leading the championship!

      8. Erik says:

        I think it’s very clear what point Nico was trying ti make. There were other races this year when Nico was coming up fast behind Lewis. Hungary (last lap) and in the night race at the beginning of the season – Malaysia I think it was, to give two examples.. On both of those occasions when Nico tried to pass, Lewis had chopped him, coming out of a corner. In Hungary Nico takes to the kerb, in Malaysia he opens his steering and gesticulates at Hamilton in front of him. The point Nico is making is that Lewis is arrogant in his moves on Nico, he doesn’t leave room for the other car. Lewis says he is taking the racing line but if there is a car there some would argue you have to leave room or risk an accident.

        Just look at the tight battle between Alonso and Vettel a few races back – they left room for each other, the leader not always taking the racing line out of a corner because they were aware that there is a car somewhere in their vicinity. Button is also very good at this too so I’m a bit surprised at his comments, but then he can’t exactly side with Nico, being a Brit n all, the tabloids would have him.

        Anyway, Lewis is a lot like Massa when positioning his car. It’s my corner, I’m slightly ahead, deal with it. Arrogant. In both of those incidents I raised above, if Nico does not avoid Lewis, there is an accident. Think about it, at Spa, 300 metres back they were side by side, Nico on the left, Lewis on the right. Lewis takes the apex on the right, yet by the exit of the corner Lewis intends to take the racing line – left side of the track where Nico was 300 meters ago, not knowing whatsoever where Nico is. This is arrogance, he’s saying stuff you I don’t know where your car is because your not beside me any more, but if you’re on my tail I’ll run you wide. If Nico does not move or brake, there is an accident. And there you go, there was an accident. That’s his point, you have to consider the cars around you, Lewis just says, no, its my line I’ll run him wide, he can brake. Well in Belgium Nico didn’t brake and good on him.

        Anyway, clearly an internal matter, the FIA is right to leave it be.

      9. Doug says:

        Whether the accident was deliberate or not, I think it’s fair to say that Nico did not make enough effort to avoid Lewis..Vettel showed how to avoid contact at that corner the previous lap..and this broke the Golden rule, don’t hit your team-mate. The fact that it happened on the second lap obviously outraged Toto & Niki.
        I think suggesting that the public now vote on whether Mercedes should run team orders or not is a cop out. Toto & Niki need to rule with an iron fist & ban Nico for Monza..they would also need to apply the same rule if Lewis crashes into Nico in a similarly ‘avoidable’ way.
        This is managing the drivers by reminding them that they drive for the team and that the team always comes first!

      10. Steve says:

        Zombie have you actually followed F1 over the years?
        Prost v Senna. Sennett crash on purpose!
        The cheat Rosberg is in the points lead. Chances are, In an incident like that, either Lewis is out or both are out. If they are both out, Rosberg is still in the points lead. Lewis out, Rosberg still in the lead.
        Rosberg had the chance to show he was a real Champion and either beat Lewis or try and get a good second. But he chose to cheat again!
        Monaco, Spa, what’s next? Romberg is showing his true colours, that of a cheat!
        But then he did manage to convert a pole position into a fourth. Lewis started from the pits and beat him. Now that has to be hard for Rosberg to take?

    2. SkyWilk says:

      Well well, I am sure a lot of people, especially Lewis fans weren’t expecting Rosberg to step it up like this. Not only he seems faster lately, he also seems a lot more aggressive and ruthless. It’s also funny to note that the media keeps painting this as if Hamilton is in the same situation that Alonso was back in 2007 when they were both in Mclaren. I suppose he can do no wrong, and is always the victim…

      1. Dan says:

        If you think this is anything new, check out the move Rosberg put on your beloved Alonso at Bahrain in 2012. The idea that he’s suddenly found a ruthless streak is laughable.

      2. JF says:

        Hamilton seems to always want to milk the whole underdog / overcoming tremendous adversity thing (despite his ties to top teams only), or at least his press agent does. Hard to know who scripts the drivers TV persona– Kimi excepted!

      3. PB says:

        Rosberg ‘stepping up’ and ‘being faster lately’ – what a joke.

        He’s only leading the championship because of far fewer retirements from mechanical breakdowns and calculated tactics like Spa and Monaco. The fact that HAM is only 29 points behind despite all that tells the true story.

      4. LB says:

        Recent development? Check out Rosberg shunting Schumie off the track at the same corner in Spa a few years back;
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxRG0j5LFVY
        Much more aggressive driving than Hamilton last weekend.

      5. Nick says:

        @Dan

        “…If you think this is anything new, check out the move Rosberg put on your beloved Alonso at Bahrain in 2012. The idea that he’s suddenly found a ruthless streak is laughable…”

        I really wish people would get educated before bringing up rubbish! Especially when there is CLEAR on board footage to show exactly what happened. Search YouTube for Alonso’s on board of the incident.

        At Bahrain 2012 Nico DID NOT run Alonso or Hamilton wide – they both chose to go there AFTER the door was already closed.

        In both instances Rosberg saw the move coming and moved to the line BEFORE either Alonso or Hamilton had ANY part of their car alongside. The fact that they had decided to carry on the move after the door was already closed was their problem.

        In fact, Charlie Whiting issued a statement after the race confirming the above. After which, there were calls for Hamilton to receive a penalty for making a pass off the track.

    3. Micke says:

      “when you were child”?

      1. Doobs says:

        Grammar optional..

    4. Bernard says:

      “[Nico] needed to make a point…. What we saw there was that Nico was not prepared to take the exit, and that caused the collision… We had a collision that could have been avoided, a second-lap collision, it was Nico who attacked and he shouldn’t have done it.” – Toto Wolff

      “My opinion has not changed, it was Nico’s fault. Nico’s opinion was he was right, I don’t think he was.” – Niki Lauda

      It’s pretty clear cut, Rosberg ’caused’ an ‘avoidable collision’ and the stewards should have intervened. The fact they confess to spending ‘less than 10 seconds’ on such a defining moment in the season is utterly shameful.

      1. zombie says:

        Every contact on the track is “avoidable” if one driver decides to ease off, but thats not how pro-sports works. Hence the FIA rightly decided not to investigate because there is nothing to investigate. Hamilton being Hamilton came out and said something stupid as usual..just the way he said “everything happens for a reason” when asked about Schumi’s injury earlier this year.

      2. aveli says:

        ecclestone said at the beginning of the season that rosberg will win the championship, and we know how he’s good at getting his way.

      3. DanzoJ says:

        Causing an avoidable collision is different to hitting someone on purpose. Rosberg is definitely at fault, but there is nothing to suggest that it was a malicious act, which is what Hamilton seems to be suggesting.

      4. Spinodontosaurus says:

        The Stewards made it clear earlier in the season that would cease investing every single incident and be far more lenient in the rulings that they actually undertake.
        They didn’t investigate Raikkonen being hit (twice) in Germany, nor Hamilton hitting Button. In Silverstone, Alonso and Vettel forgot the meaning of track limits and went completely unpunished.

        This change was in response to fans voicing concerns over how many meaningless incidents were being investigated. It is a good thing.

        Why have people suddenly U-Turned and are now demanding that the Stewards investigate THIS particular little incident? What about when Alonso whacked Vettel on the last lap?

        The only reason this incident is causing such an uproar is because Hamilton, perhaps deliberately, miss-represented something Rosberg said in a private team meeting. The media readily lapped this story up, and now everyone is loosing their flippin’ minds.

      5. PB says:

        That’s actually a great point – penalties are given to drivers all the time for causing an avoidable collision. With the team boss sharing that view for his own driver but the driver steward (of all of them) admitting only 10 seconds were spent on taking a view on the matter is a great shame.

        I can understand why there aren’t enough grounds to reopen the case now that the official results have been published, but it is inexcusable that more thought wasn’t given to it or more time wasn’t allowed for a post race investigation.

      6. PB says:

        Sorry for the flurry of comments, James, but it would be great if you could shed some light on why stewards would judge a collision to be a racing incident when the two senior management figures of the drivers involved admit themselves that it was an avoidable collision and one of the drivers was at fault?

    5. Bob Carter says:

      The rules of F1 seem to change every race. Can someone please explain to me how something, which every expert opinion has declared roseberg’s fault (including his own team) can result in a race ruining contact, be dismissed as a racing incident. If it is 100% Rosebegr’s fault how can he not be responsible for causing a collision. The steward say there is no sudden movements but you can see Roseberg turning into the corner when there is no possibility to do so. There is no way the pass was possible which means Roseberg’s move was over aggressive and dangerous. ‘Causing a collision’ rule is intended to stop bad driving from negatively effecting other drivers races. Roseberg has just proved he lacks the talent for wheel to wheel racing and has benefited for the second time this season from his own mistakes.

    6. Anonym says:

      Like one can calculate how to puncture someone’s tyres with a front wing?

      http://www.newsonf1.com/2002/races/brazil/rrep.htm

      Was JPM also trying that on purpose?

      1. Giles HIndle says:

        Yes, agree. But, there could be a branding issue if Mercedes are associated with favouring one of the drivers. Especially a black one with American friends.

    7. Dutch johhny says:

      I think you also forgot Senna in that one.

    8. Alastair Isherwood says:

      Wow Leone, quite the conspiracy theorist aren’t we!?! I am just relived that the Mercedes management have now come up with plan to manage their drivers……what round are we up to again?

    9. D1M0NST3R says:

      Ive looked at the frame by frame footage, Lewis didnt aimed for the second curve… he didnt even hit the apex of turn 1 (when Rosberg was almost side by side), then he went wide and the rule says when a “significant” part of the car (any part of the frong wing) is next to your rear tyres, you have to give him a car widht, now, if you cant see that, man, you have to grow up and learn when your favorite driver (was my favorite too), needs to be more mature, he did the same on Rosberg at Hungaroring, that time, Rosberg took care of the car, now he proved that point, Lewis is like a little girl who wants to get things done his way or crys about it.

    10. Dee Gee says:

      Watch Peter Windsor’s video blog. A very different perspective

  2. Gaz Boy says:

    Shades of Turkey 2010…………….no action was taken then either because, as an “internal” matter it was only one team that was compromised.
    I still hold Rosberg Junior guilty of poor spatial awareness, but in the words of Oasis perhaps its best for Lewis to “Don’t Look Back In Anger.”
    Still, I suppose the cynic amongst myself would say if you’re going to employ two very equally matched drivers in the same team, a la Nige and Nelson, a la Prost and Senna, a la Mika and DC (Austria 19999 remember) and so on you’re bound to get some “unneccessary and compromising” situations……………….ah well, onwards and upwards – not sideways though eh Nico?

    1. jorn Jens says:

      Shame to see Nico being shafted as he has driven and behaved well this year, but Mercedes don’t deserve a championship win, I hope Dan wins it just to stick it right up them. I’ll be honest I hope anyone but Hamilton wins it, this boy would cause an argument in an empty house!

      1. Sebee says:

        That would be hilarious.

      2. kenneth chapman says:

        @ jorn jens.. i fully concur. hamilton is milking this dry. he is always playing the victim but isn’t this the way of the world?

      3. PB says:

        Amongst other random opinions in this post, one stands out – “Mercedes don’t deserve a championship win”.

        Would you mind providing some explanation for that bearing in mind:

        1. They worked hard to get a package that’s dominant (not their fault that no other team could come anywhere close).
        2. They have consistently allowed their drivers to actually “race” on the track (picture Red Bull over the last few years and Ferrari in the early 2000′s)
        3. They have been speaking their mind every time there has been a controversy between their drivers (contrast this with the “rally my troops”, “great men and women”, “our performance is unacceptable” and “we exist to win” PR BS delivered by LdM (Red Bull were pretty good in this area too, although too often they were biased towards Vettel until last year).
        4. They are actually unbiased to either driver (opposed HAM’s view the ROS stopped on purpose in Monaco yet agree that ROS was at fault at Spa).

      4. deano says:

        Many excellent comments here but this is exactly what I thought as well, all the Hammites are having kittens over this but were quite happy to watch him cut Nico up at two previous races this year and lets not forget his antics at Silverstone, barging through like a fat bully in the dinner queue.

        I actually respect Rosberg more than ever after the last few races; at the start of the season I did not think he had the balls to challenge Lewis for the title, so fair play to him in that respect, it’s turned a previously “boring” year into a cracker. Hamilton needs to get the chest stuck out and crack on with it, moaning in front of the cameras every weekend is pathetic.

      5. Elie says:

        Sorry ladies to interrupt your tea party. Im not at all sorry that Nico is copping a bagging by everyone not least his own bosses..which given hes their undoubted fav german son should make you appreciate the gravity of this.

        Say what you like about Hamilton because I understand & dislike his melodrama pre/post race too ,, but can any single one of you argue that he has has never and would never do such a callous or careless act with his team mate AND I would add most of his passes on Nico this season have been clean as you like and even Nico has stated this time & again ( incl Hungary where the fire started)

        Please lose your obnoxious prejudices for one second and judge him on his racing- I know I always do. Now let me ask you what you can say about Nico on track after several years…..? Yeah exactly I thought so..

    2. Sebee says:

      Fiction!

      Some will say. Not me.

      They cheer Lewis on when he is aggressive. Yet everyone around him should be soft and yielding like a pillow? I don’t think so.

      1. JF says:

        Very true. Boys will be boys. Let them race.

      2. KRB says:

        So will you cheer Lewis if and when he takes out Nico, to take a stand? Will he be manly then? Lewis’ moves on Nico in prior races are/were normal stuff, normal wedge-outs. Just as Nico edging Lewis out at the start in Canada was normal stuff.

        I would never want Lewis to play dirty like Nico. First, he’s not very good at it, and most important to remember is, when you’re trying to take down a monster, be careful that you don’t become a monster yourself.

      3. KRB says:

        @Sebee, this was meant for your #48.

      4. JF says:

        I am with you in a way. I am a big fan of of Hamilton’s driving style (I have a very low opinion of him as a person based on his media presence, I don’t know him obviously. Comes across as the Justin Beiber of F1racing trying to manufacture a Gangsta-rep out of a solid middle class upbringing). Schumacher was in the same vein driving wise, aggressive to the extreme, arrogant, but he never blamed everything and everyone else as Hamilton does, he admitted screw ups routinely. I think the rest of field has to grow a set of ((genitalia invoking bravery which may include testosterone or estrogen) hows that for PC)) and drive the freakin’ cars. Race, be rude, cut off the opponent, make mistakes–RACE.

      5. Dan says:

        [mod], Lewis has accepted blame every time he has made an error or bad call.

        He has rightfully moaned when he has been cheated , like Monaco, like when Nico cut the chicane to stay ahead, resulting in Hamiltons brakes failing due to still following Nico and last weekend when Nico ‘proved his point’

        It’s like people [mod] Hamilton because he has a life style people don’t want him too. Get over it, he is his own person and is a very fast entertaining racer.

    3. Alex says:

      I think what has irked people so much in this case, particularly in the Hamilton camp but some neutrals as well, is that there was a coming together of the two title contenders, and it was clearly 1 drivers fault, but he is the one who came off better.

      Rosberg effectively benefitted from his own mistake and not for the first time this season. When your name is P Maldonado and you are fighting for 18th place and this sort of thing happens then its a minor incident, but when the two are fighting for a WDC at such a critical stage of the season, of course people are going to discuss contact between the two. Particularly because the driver who, in my opinion has been the better of the two over the course of the season lost 18 points on sunday rather then pulling back a potential 7.

      As to your comments about the Meredes handling of the situation i agree it hasnt been perfect in terms of statements to the media but we have yet to see what they actually do to “punish” Rosberg if anything.

      1. JF says:

        Racing incident.

      2. aveli says:

        the enormous resentment for hamilton fuels the desire to criticise any of his on track or off track action. i wonder when it will stop.

    4. Gudien says:

      Right you are. Great post!

    5. JF says:

      Turkey 2010 was also unintentional.

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        Both are remarkably similar incidents. In both cases it wasn’t a malicious, pre-meditated move, but it was very clumsy, badly executed and cack handed move that lacked good spatial awareness. And cost the respective teams a Grand Slam 1-2 finish.
        Who said history doesn’t repeat itself?

      2. kenneth chapman says:

        @ JF…i’m not sure from which aspect you are commenting. turkey was not in any way identical apart from the fact that the two drivers were from the same team. vettel had one complete cars width alongside webber but knowing he would have to back out and miss the corner he turned into webber. that image is available on you tube. that was a deliberate provocation and vettel paid the price.

      3. JF says:

        To “kenneth chapman”:
        I don’t think that Vettels move that you refer to, or Rosbergs move last weekend were malicious. Misjudged for sure, but not malicious. Neither were a “damn the torpedoes and floor it” moment. I think that Gaz Boy shares the same sentiment but I cannot speak for him/her.

      4. Gaz Boy says:

        RE JF: Yes, I have the same sentiment – Rosberg Junior wasn’t malevolent but he was cack handed which at a grand prix level is misplaced.

    6. Racehound says:

      Hungaroring 2007 ring a bell? Totally internal affair going on in the McTwits garage yet the FIA penalise Alonso 5 places!!!! #:)

      1. SkyWilk says:

        Cost him the title in the end that 5 grid slot.

      2. Gaz Boy says:

        I’d forgot about that!
        You’re spot on – the FIA getting all nanny state when they are not required, and then turning a blind eye when firm discipline is required!
        Talk about inconsistent………………and baffling. Ah well, twas ever thus…………….
        FIA – Fumbling Idiotic Actions?

      3. Steven M says:

        What cost him the title was his inability to beat a rookie…

      4. kenneth chapman says:

        @ JF….. i really can’t agree with your opinion. vettels move on webber was deliberate insofar as he thought that webber would weaken and shift but webber did not move. he was not obliged to and he was entitled to stay right where he was. webber did not move left as there was no corner right at that moment.

        this is where the difference lies. hamilton turned in sharply thereby inviting contact. i am not too certain but i somehow recall in the R & R there is mention that if the front wing of car A is alongside the rear wheel of car B then that is considered to be substantial for a pass to be undertaken and that the lead car must give width to the overtaking car. now if this is correct then hamilton contributed greatly to the subsequent bingle. that would, at the very least, be classed as ‘contributorty negligence’ hence pirro’s and the others ruling that it was a racing incident. once again i may be wrong.

      5. NickH says:

        @ Kenneth Chap

        ‘hamilton turned in sharply thereby inviting contact’

        You obviously don’t understand racing/racing lines, when a driver is obliged to give room etc.. at all. No point arguing with Kenneth guys, he just isn’t a fan of British people.

        Ps Don’t get too excited about ‘your man Dan’ winning the championship as it really isn’t going to happen, its just press talk. Mercedes are still miles ahead on pure pace

      6. Elie says:

        @Kenneth C ” hamilton contributed greatly to the subsequent bingle”

        You cannot be serious… Thats one of the worst comments I ever seen from you..

    7. Alexis says:

      The issue is that Rosberg didn’t say “I’m sorry, it was a silly accident and I didn’t mean it” and instead wouldn’t take responsibility.

      Part two was then that we were led to believe not only wasn’t he sorry, he went into the race still fuming about Hungary and that he consciously thought “I’m not backing down whatever happens.”

      Hamilton went into the race in Monaco with this mindset, but thought better of it when underway. Rosberg didn’t this time. What actually happened ended up a silly tag.

      That may be just luck. Would Rosberg has punted him off if if the battle had continued
      for the next few corners?

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “The issue is that Rosberg didn’t say “I’m sorry, it was a silly accident and I didn’t mean it” and instead wouldn’t take responsibility.”

        Why would he?

    8. LDNomad says:

      Best post yet! +1

    9. Sebee says:

      Alexis? Why should he be sorry? Sorry has no place in a battle. He used the proper word. He said he regrets the collision. Good enough.

      1. Russ from Oz says:

        I agree “regret” is the only word Sebee.

        These guys have micro seconds to make or change a play on the track. Not a lot of thinking time, more instinctive reaction time methinks.

        Being P1 and P2 with all of the field behind them, lap 2, adrenaline going bonkers, etc is not the time to hatch an evil plan. The was a regrettable racing incident caused by a split second mix of two wrong plays, correctly reviewed and handled by the stewards.

        Re- comments earlier – Never forget WDC’s are made by “cunning’ tactics and strategy. In fact this is the same for any top level professional sport you can name.

    10. Random 79 says:

      You seem to have gotten a bit trigger happy with the old 9 key there Gaz ;)

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        19999 – is that when Caterham will finally score a point?

      2. Random 79 says:

        And I see you’re an optimist as well :)

    11. **Paul** says:

      Shades of Singapore 2011 more like. Back then the stewards did punish people who puncture others tyres, but then again they were recently told not to keep handing out penalties for contact, hence no investigation into multi contacts in Germany etc.

      Given how often Lewis has over the years clipped other cars rear tyres (there’s plenty of instances), and it’s damn evident Alonso (widely regarded at the best in F1) can’t judge where his front wing is (see how many times he’s accidentally damaged it!), and then we add to this that Rosberg took evasive action to avoid Hamiltons back wheel before turning back in to slot behind Lewis? Was it on purpose? I seriously doubt it, especially given he clipped his rear tyre with perhaps 2″ of his front wing. If he’d wanted to take Lewis out ROS wouldn’t have swerved to avoid Hamiltons rear left wheel as it neared contact with ROSs front right. The logic used to hang Rosberg isn’t great. Neither is the complete disregard of the Hamilton comment that he didn’t know Nico was there – in which case why was he defending off the racing line into the corner?

      I expect the ‘point’ NR was making was that he won’t always back off because Lewis has thus far this season being the more aggressive of the two when battling. We then get the Hamilton version events fed to the media, whilst Rosberg doesn’t comment on internal matters. The British media love a good anti German story – see the difference in reporting between Hamilton ignoring team orders and costing Merc extra points vs Vettel ignoring them and costing the team zero points.

      We’ve seen Lewis do this to people before and there has been no booing. Ergo I think we can deduce that Rosberg has less fans than Hamilton. Lauda? Well he’s the one who took Hamilton to Merc, and evidently backs him. Wolff I have more respect for because he tends to be far fairer about both drivers IMO, he back both drivers, so his comments are interesting.

      I’m not for a moment saying what Nico did was fair, it’s not, I think a drive through should be handed out if you do that, but equally the media treatment of Rosberg is frankly disgraceful given how anyone who’s watched F1 long term knows that if the roles were reversed they’d be calling it a racing incident and criticising Nico for telling the media about internal meetings. There is quite simply far too much evidence to suggest that the current portrayal of things is unbiased, it’s not.

      1. ApexPredator says:

        Gah, the whole “anti-german” crap is utter nonsense. You guys are griping about who’s over-sensationalizing this story in one breath and then in the next throwing a whole other handful of BS in it the next.
        In example, your point of Vettel ignoring team orders and costing the team points etc Etc. The single largest difference there was that Webber was not in shouting distance of the WDC. NO CHANCE. Again, I’m not a Hamilton fan persay, but if I was asked to step aside and let my direct competition for the WDC, let alone the one who was currently leading it, through I’d have told them to stuff a sock in it too. Let’s not forget the street is paved both ways here guys. Yeah, Lewis and Nico are paid by the team to achieve results for the team, but those teams went after those drivers because they are THOSE drivers. The WDC means as much and likely more to them than the WCC does and it should. You can say “Well they’re PAID by the team for WCC results,” but the truth is those drivers went to AMG less for the money and more for the prospect of winning the WDC. Hamilton FOR SURE did. Cause he could have stayed at McMerc and likely made the same money if not more considering Buttons age and Honda would be wanting a sure fire championship calibre driver in the car they’re devoting their entire development team and money to.

        And if you polled the drivers, with maybe the exception of Ferrari, I think nearly if not all of them would say they’d drive for whomever gave them the best shot at a WDC vs a big paycheque. And Ferrari only because they’re Ferrari and nearly every F1 driver wants to drive for the scuderia in their career.

      2. **Paul** says:

        Unfortunately ApexPredator you’re wrong on most… if not all of those points.

        1.) The British press does indeed love a good anti-German story, you only need look at what our papers report during World Cup years to see that. It sells papers, that’s why they persist with it. You only need look at the way Hamilton/Button contact was portrayed vs anything the likes of Vettel did. Heck the British press hooked onto Whitmarsh calling him the crash kid for the 2010 season when in reality the guy had what, 2 incidents? One with Webber one with JB. Did you see that levelled at Massa and Lewis in 2011? Nope, nothing like the same level of sustained criticism.

        2.) Vettel & Webber incident, race 2 of the season, it was quite possible given the RBR car advantage that they knew the fight was between them at that point. At the start of the season in 2011 they had something like 0.75s on other cars which was a massive advantage.

        3.) Hamilton got a nice pay rise going to Mercedes, not in terms of basic pay, which was largely the same as Mclaren apparently offered (McLaren £12m, Merc ~£15m) , but because he got control of his image rights, which are worth a huge amount to him. The McLaren pay he was previously on was £15m but due to the economic downturn his new contract was offered at £10m, then another £2m… so £12m. Merc beat it and gave him image rights. No brainer for someone who is fairly financially motivated like Lewis.

  3. wdf2 says:

    Anticipating the reactions of those who will say this proves Rosberg was right, i.e., that it was “just a racing incident,” it’s a relief that Pirro stressed that “the main problem is what happened within the team.” In short, *of course* there was no need to penalize Rosberg. But at the same time, *of course* Lauda and Wolff were entirely right to be incensed that Rosberg had “caused a collision” *between the teammates.*
    Also, please note again that the key word in Hamilton’s remarks after the briefing is “basically.” In Hamilton’s view, Rosberg “basically said that he did it on purpose.” That’s not the same as reporting that “he said he did it on purpose.” Basically here means “effectively” or “essentially.” Since no one denies that Rosberg said he could have avoided the contact but chose not to do so in order to “make a point,” then Hamilton (or any other witness to the exchange) is entirely justified in stating that he *basically* said he did it on purpose.
    The sick irony of this is that Rosberg’s actions will result in Mercedes applying more stringent rules to keep the two cars apart on the track, which will make it much harder for Hamilton to fight back in the remaining races. (Unless one assumes unrealistically that he gets pole every time and drives off into the distance.) That outcome is very likely the one Rosberg aimed to provoke.

    1. Bobdredds says:

      Lewis has been doing all the provoking up to now and it’s about time Nico stood up to him. Anyone who thinks that Nico took Lewis out on purpose doesn’t understand F1 racing. It was a slight touch that Lewis could have avoided. I like Lewis as a racer but offtrack he come accross as clumsy and devious in a childish way. He takes liberties with our abilities to see silly games and thinks he is getting away with it. Sorry Lewis but this situation was of your making so live with it. I was surprised how quiet Nico had been up to now. “Basically” Lewis read the situation wrongly and “basically” underestimated Nico and then “basically” [mod] to the press, fans and everone else. “Basically” that is how I see it.

      1. BoogWar says:

        Yeah. He shouldn’t have overtaken Nico going into turn one. He should have stayed behind like he is paid to do and toe the company line. He shouldn’t be running off to the press either to complain on backra. He has no right. He should just be a good house nigga and be grateful for the position he’s in. Right?

      2. Doobs says:

        @Boogs, Lewis has been trying to wind up Rosberg all year by playing the media. Nico hasn’t fallen for it and is stepping up instead. We now have a far more aggressive German than at the start of the year, and from my point of view, it’s good to see Nico giving Lewis some of his own medicine, rather than be bullied into No.2 driver status. The heat is definitely in the Merc kitchen and if Lewis thought Nico was a push-over, I guess he’s learned something now.

    2. George Zaidan says:

      I see a completely different view to what you’re saying I think you’re WRONG. The way I see it is that Nico held his ground for a change and Hamilton along with his ‘fans’ can’t handle it.
      Time to turn the screws Nico, Lewis is feeling the heat and sees it all slipping away. No number 1. A team mate that is leading 8-4 in qualifying in an equal machine, doesn’t go crying to the public or his fans, doesn’t look for special treatment, doesn’t play silly mind games, doesn’t complain about something every single race, yes it’s all slowly slipping away for the one hit wonder greatest driver that ever lived and he knows it. Roll on Monza Nico play it smart stay behind Lewis for 2 races and that’s what hurts Hamilton more than anything else, the thought of ‘unable to shake off nico’ makes Lewis implode, just look at his behaviour after the race at Barcelona, one would think you’d be over the moon at winning 4 races in a row but Lewis showed a face that was full of pressure and someone that’s out of ideas, so Nico turn the PU down for these 2 races that are hard on cars and even if you lose 14 points to Lewis its not the end of the world.

      1. TimW says:

        sorry George but you are wrong, Nico shouldn’t have held his line, he wasn’t far enough alongside for Lewis to be compelled to give him room. It is a basic principle of motor racing that if you have a go at overtaking someone the responsibility lies with you to keep it clean.

      2. Alexis says:

        I don’t think “holding your ground” means losing part of your front wing. On any other day Hamilton would have been fine and Rosberg might have broken his suspension.

        This is moot though. Hamilton is not saying “Rosberg tagged me and is sorry, but these things happen.” Why is that? Maybe because Rosberg didn’t actually hold his hands up and apologise.

        And why is that?

      3. Mark Wesseling says:

        +1
        You hit it on the nail

      4. Jorn Jens says:

        Did Hamilton apologise to Vettel and Massa for doing exactly the same thing at silverstone 2010 and Monza 2010 respectively? NO he didn’t and was there any booing for the silverstone crowd? How double standard can the fanboys be? To make things worse Hamilton tried the same trick again at Valencia 2012 on Vettel but thankfully ot didn’t pay off.

      5. ApexPredator says:

        Holding his ground would be all fine and dandy except it wasn’t his ground to hold. Any of you who think that Rosberg (or any driver in any similar circumstance) should have been given room at the point that they held their car need to brush up on your FIA F1 regs. Unless half or more of his car was along side the leading car HEADING INTO the corner, it is the job of only the trailing car to avoid contact/collision. 1-Rosberg was NEVER half a car or more along side Hamilton, at any point, let alone 2- HEADING INTO the corner. In fact he was behind heading into, and tried to shove the car into the space above the apex of the previous corner (off traditional racing line) Furthermore, once Hamilton shut the door on him (and I say that a bit tounge in cheek because in reality, all Hamilton was doing was continuing his line for the next part of the complex) and Rosberg saw that he was squeezed and had three options. (THREE!!) 1 brake and give up the attempt. 2 continue at present throttle opening and run off track, or 3 continue at present throttle opening and contact the leading car.
        Looking at it, he seems to be of two minds for a moment, where he looks to maybe go off track, but then second guesses, and by then it was too late and his wing was in Hamiltons tyre. From that point he seems to act like a temper tantrum throwing child and actually saws the wheel into Hamiltons car further. He might as well thrown himself in the floor kicking and screaming “he didn’t let me have that corner!!”

        The thing is, the brief moment of indecisiveness that Rosberg shows there is symptomatic of his entire problem right now and why he can’t and won’t beat Hamilton in a straight up fight. Hamilton would have made the decision BEFORE it happened that he was simply going to hit whomever it was.
        As you can see, I’m not a Hamilton fan, nor a Rosberg pan. I simply am stating the obvious and unbiased by fanboy-dom truth. Rosberg, by not making a decision, made a humongous boneheaded error that was never NOT going to work in his favor. He had zero to lose by hitting Hamilton, and everything to lose by running off track and losing ground to him, or by breaking and giving up the move. Hamilton would have continued on and Rosberg would have not had another shot at passing him the rest of the race, DRS or not. He wouldn’t have been able to jump him in the pits because of MercAMG pit policy, and he would have surely lost at bare minimum another 7 pts in the WDC. By hitting Hamilton, he would have either wrecked them both, in which case he loses no points to him, wrecked Lewis, in which case he loses no points to him, or nothing happens and he has to try something else.
        And for those citing Vettel and Alonso giving each other room in Hungary, you must be watching cut down race excerpts cause the only time they did is when they HAD TO. When one of the two had more than half a car along side. The rest of the time, Alonso was chopping Sebs nose off at every chance, and Vettel was daring him to do it.

        At any rate, while I tend to think Hamilton is a bit of a whining, prima donna, I fully see why he is going to the media. He will get zero satisfaction from Merc as there is none to be had. They cannot award him any points, and they cannot take any away from Rosberg short of parking him for a race, which would be asinine.
        As for Rosberg, he is in full panic mode internally. He knows he cannot beat Hamilton wheel to wheel. He is also carrying a massive chip on his shoulder at this point against Merc. This was supposed to be HIS team after Schui left, and then they bring in another WDC winner and bigger personality. He’s saltier than the Dead Sea and now it’s boiling over.

      6. Doobs says:

        Lewis once again showed his mental fragility; he over reacted at the flat, raced back to the pits and the tyre destroyed his floor and his race, which he then spent most of asking his engineer if he could quit.

        If Nico can keep the pressure up for another few races it will be all over for Lewis

    3. JW says:

      Finally someone else noticed the “basically….”.

      Storm in a teacup as always with stuff around Lewis. He seems to feed off sympathy, so good luck to him because he seems to be generating a lot of it.

      Hopefully Nico will continue to drive the way he has been of late – like someone determined to win the championship.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Storm in a teacup as always with stuff around Lewis”

        True – but which Lewis are you referring to ? as he seems to change personalities quite often.

      2. kenneth chapman says:

        @ JW… this is a point i brought up in another thread. the use of ‘basically’. he, hamilton is trying to spin his ‘ interpretation’ of rosberg’s comments to support his own agenda, once more playing the victim. i am supportive of the stewards decision. it makes far more sense that the clamourings of the outraged hamilton acolytes.

    4. Peter says:

      The problem is that LH decided to air the team’s dirty laundry in public. He has no right to blab to the press about what happened in a private meeting and looses all credibility by doing so. Shows that he is not trustworthy and is not a team player.

      If there is any punishment to be handed down it should be to LH for not knowing how to keep his mouth shut when it matters.

      1. Quercus says:

        What right has anyone outside Mercedes to say whether Lewis should talk to the press? If the team don’t want him to talk to the press then I’ll sure they’ll tell him. The rest of us should be glad drivers tell us exactly what they’re thinking, without team spin being applied. It’s drivers who stay quiet and won’t saying anything — and you know who’s in my mind — of whom we should be critical.

      2. aveli says:

        that is hamilton’s only weapon. out of all the drivers who have had cars capable of wining championships how many of them have suffered as many car failures as hamilton has?
        how many have suffered such injustice without the stewards getting involved? button and vettel had great runs to championships. but hamilton seem to have obstacles in his path. as far as I am concerned hamilton doesn’t need to win any more races or championships to prove that he is the best driver to have stepped foot in the sport and there we will not witness another like him in our lifetimes.
        he has already demonstrated his driving flair.
        I am not convinced the mercedes bosses meant what they said about rosberg. they were only pretending to be upset with him because hamilton said they said the drivers can now race each other, during a meeting before the race. hamilton also said he didn’t understand what they meant because he thought they were already racing each other from the start of the season. if this was really said then the mercedes bosses are in it with rosberg.if they don’t want hamilton in their team, they should simply tell him so and allow him to find another team or go into another racing series after all none of it matters.

      3. Doobs says:

        Lewis is trying to play the media for sympathy but it makes him look very clumsy and a whiny little brat. Alternatively it shows he can’t take the pressure and needs someone to cry to. The next race will be interesting…

    5. deancassady says:

      Wow, the over-analysis of this (totally predictable) episode, is getting a little thick and cheesy.
      Blame:
      Blame is irrelevant.
      Reason:
      Reason is irrelevant (now), but since seminal, it may be the best perspective to evaluate the initial outcome.
      Factors: Nico’s perception that Hamilton refused to comply with ‘team orders’ to let him past in Hungary. This was the stated reason, but even if an actual reason, it seems a lower magnitude of disobeyance than taking out a leading team mate (regardless of lack of ACTIVE ‘intent’).
      Some other (comparatively) objective entranced observers will likely agree with me: on-track, especially in-race, I call it a Hamilton 55:45 advantage. Both have made mistakes, both have sufferred from sub-optimal team decisions (beyond their control), i.e. Nico still should have won this past weekend, but pit stop decisions were poor. But in race, Nico has had more difficulty getting the tough work done effectively, and on time to be advantageous. It’s not been by too much, but it seems Lewis ‘gets it done’ definitely better than Rosberg.
      So, if you are Rosberg, the opposite of ‘in-your-face’ (Hamilton), clearly, his personal style is less aggressive, and less demonstrative; perhaps he feels that his lack of assertiveness is giving the on-track advantage to Hamilton? I think this to be the case; look at the races where Rosberg challenges and can’t get by Hamilton, if you care to review the evidence.
      It’s great to get poll, but it really, REALLY sucks to have your team mate blow by you, and nullify your poll, by taking the lead at the start. Let us not forget, Vettel got by Rosberg, too! If Vettel doesn’t sink it deep intothe corner, Rosberg never even gets a shot at Hamilton, he’d have to fight laps, bruning up more resources, and who knows, could he have got by Vettel? So it was a relief when Vettel sank it into the corner, giving Rosberg a place, up to second.
      So, early in the race, what are Nico’s prospects?
      Reviewing the season so far, you’d have to say the probability was that it was going to end up as a 7 point reduction in his championship lead.
      This approach, the approach prior to, ‘the incident’, was not on a good trajectory to win the WDC 2014.
      So what did he need to do?
      Basically, Nico needed to show that he was NOT going to back down!

      Many people are detailing what he intended to do, whether he intended to take out Lewis or not; while not inconceivable, and, it must be noted, that in retrospect, i.e. Monaco, it looks like Nico is getting low on ‘the benefit of the doubt’; but regardless, i don’t think he ‘tried’ to take Lewis out.
      But, and this is all the potatoes, right here: was he willing to ‘allow’ his team mate to be taken out?
      To what extent was he ‘trying’ to avoid contact?

      So what was ‘the point’ he was trying to make?

      I think his point was, give me respect, or I may take you out.

      This is now all about head-games and psychological warfare, at this extreme end of the best drivers in the world, the comparative on track capability is becoming less and less of a determinant factor (whether you like it or not, that is the way it is).
      While, whether you agree or not, Lewis may be better on track, you, my trusted (at least somewhat) objective observer, may also agree with my assessment, that in this factor, I give the clear upperhand to Nico!
      (I’m not saying I like it. I’m just saying, ‘it is, what it is’.)

      Feeling, as I do, that this is a long established standard in Formula One racing, and Nico’s best approach for winning the championship, even though I don’t appreciate it, I can’t help but grudgingly respect Nico for finally coming out and start doing the things that I think he HAS TO DO to win the driver’s championship.
      I still want Lewy to beat him, but Nico has made the move that has finally started to make this season interesting, which I greatly appreciate.

      So, what do you (all) think?

      1. JF says:

        Agree: fans want ballsy racing, this is it and Nico has thrown down the gauntlet demonstrating he has a pair.

      2. TimW says:

        Lol! For someone who thinks the over analysis of this episode is “thick and cheesy” that’s a lot of over analysis!

      3. OldOzzie says:

        Bloody perfectly put

        ” I can’t help but grudgingly respect Nico for finally coming out and start doing the things that I think he HAS TO DO to win the driver’s championship.”

        Again repeating, “From my perspective, Hamilton acts aggressively towards other drivers when overtaking and when it is tried on him, goes a Wimpy, Whining Crybaby

        Rosberg was faster, and Hamilton tried to shut him out on the pass and Hamilton lost with a puncture.”

        Hamilton needs to grow a set and stop constantly CryBabying and Whinging

        Peeing into the Team Tent from outside, is not what Hamilton should be doing.

      4. Thompson says:

        I think you are way off deancassidy.

        You try to make a case were there is none. He lost the lead, he was behind. He’s seen is team mate coming at him twice recovering from the back of the grid.

        He’s been schooled in one on one combat on the track.

        He is an F1 driver he knows the dimensions of his car he operates at 200mph every other week.

        Wing to tyre side wall has only one outcome.

        These guy’s hit breaking points and aim for an apex in a car they cannot see the nose of – they drive in rain with visors that have no wipers at over 100mph

        Could not hit a tyre side wall with his wing knowing the car in front will attempt to take the same racing line at the same speed on a corner you’ve been taking all weekend?

        Let that marinate for a moment…

        Put yourself in both drivers place.

        Hamilton had him he knew it.

        Nico panicked – he knew it too the rest can be seen all over the net. The video footage is the smoking gun.

        But it all boils down to what Merc decide moving forward.

      5. Rachael says:

        I really like your comments Dean. I agree with you. The fallout has totally been blown out of proportion for such an innocuous racing incident.

        To put this into perspective, I quote the great man: “If you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver”.

        It is irrelevant who was at fault. Blame is futile. I just want to see them race. If occasional contact is made, who cares, as long as no one is hurt.

        Irony is, all the fallout was precipitated by Merecedes’ team management. (ie. Lauda and Wolff couldn’t control their comments post race).

        Who gives a toss, whether Mercedes missed out on a 1-2 result, if their desire is to steamroll the entire competition and dominate the season in a Ferrari-like fashion as in the early 2000′s.

        Ha. Isn’t it ironic. The Germans need to learn a lesson in ruthless, clinical, efficiency from the Italian team.

    6. Grabyrdy says:

      “Unless one assumes unrealistically that he gets pole every time and drives off into the distance”

      Lewis has been telling the world all year that this is exactly what he can and will do. Been a long time since he has tho’.

      1. James Clayton says:

        Source?

  4. Ashutosh says:

    Yes, but just a few seconds to punish Magnussen. Clearly biased.

    1. James Allen says:

      He explained that the Magnussen penalty at Spa was clear cut as the 2014 Sporting Regs say you have to leave a car width between your car and the edge of the track.

      What is unfortunate is that MAG got points on his licence for cutting Raikkonen’s tyre in Malaysia, whereas the same was not applied to ROS here. Since then the stewards have had a directive to apply less penalties and let the drivers race

      1. Sebee says:

        At some point they absolutely have to turn a blind eye.

        Every single detail and telemetry input is constantly watched. Onboard video is captured. How can we expect anything “fun and exciting” to happen when everyone is watched like a hawk?

        Imagine you had to drive each and every day with your very own dedicated police cruiser on your tail and the insurance company capturing all your telemitry input to determine the rate you pay. How long before you would have a monthly bus pass?

        Let the boys cause some $#!T. It’s it’s controlled race track situation for purpose of battle. Those of us who want to know who’s fastests – that answer comes on Saturdays. Sundays we battle!

      2. Jeff says:

        May the gods/God/mothernature/etc. look favorably on whoever gave that directive.

      3. Thanks, James – appreciate the clarification in your first paragraph above. Don’t believe that this part of the Sporting Regs has been out there before or at least hasn’t been noticed.

        Curiosity question: how does this apply, then to a situation where one driver’s demonstrated style is to chop across the bow of another driver contesting a corner or, alternatively, to go so wide as to force another off the track in order to avoid contact?

      4. Andrew says:

        It’s fine to let them race and be lenient on the penalties but if one driver is clearly at fault and ruins another drivers race he should have a 10 second stop gp penalty. Had they done this then Rosberg would have probably only got back to about 7th or 8th. As it is it’s farcical that Rosberg has benefited as much as he has.

      5. Gaz Boy says:

        Double standards?

      6. Karl says:

        Unfortunate that MAG got the penalty or that ROS didn’t get one? I think the former but it can be confusing depending on who’s reading… :p

      7. Martin Whitehouse says:

        Why hasn’t Hamilton been penalized, as his actions were in clear breach of the 2014 F1 Sporting Regulations article 20.4, which states:
        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’. ”

        Seems quite clear to me, or am I missing something?

      8. KRB says:

        Martin, read the regulation over again. The car’s width rule is only applicable on the straights.

        “Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, …”

        Hamilton had the corner quite clearly. Rosberg had room to back out, but didn’t, to “prove a point”. I hope the press “press” him on elaborating on what point he was trying to prove there.

      9. Brent says:

        James, The way I read 20.4 ….”For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is along side of the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a significant portion” Hamilton should have left Rosberg space. 20.3 …”Any driver moving back toward the racing line, having earlier defended his position off line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner”. Hamilton was off line defending the first corner.

        Having read the rules I don’t see any reason Rosberg should have backed out. His wing was well forward of Hamilton’s rear tire. By the letter of the rules it was Hamilton who didn’t play fair. What do you think?

      10. Ashutosh says:

        Nico clearly was more than naughty, definately more than a mere racing incident, 2nd time in a seaso he has been borderline, yet gets away, while young MAG, who was in an incident much more like a pure racing incident gets punished in 10s. Either the stewards were asleep, or treat different drivers with different yardstciks.
        Remember how harsh the stewards have been of Lewis in the past, even for borderline incidents ?

  5. KRB says:

    Hmm, I don’t get Pirro’s explanation. There was no sudden movement?!? Did he even bother to look at Nico’s onboards? He was turning fully right! That was possibly a defining moment in the championship, and they give it such short shrift? Get out of the stewards’ box then!! My respect for Pirro just went way, way down.

    Does Pirro even know what the definition of “cunning” is?!?!

    Cunning: having or showing skill in achieving one’s ends by deceit or evasion; skill in achieving one’s ends by deceit

    The key word in those definitions is DECEIT!!!

    Also his comment about this coming about “within the same team” is also concerning, as I’ve said before. The stewards’ directive is to ensure the integrity of both championships, and in regards to the Drivers’ Championship, they must look at each driver as an individual competitor, and forget their team associations.

    Belgium GP stewards = #FAIL

    1. James Allen says:

      His exact word was “furbo”, which means cunning, crafty

      1. Doug SA says:

        I wish he had said clumsy, incompetent……that more accurately describes that move. Just like the similar one rosberg tried on Vettel and totalled his tires. Another real pigs breakfast of a move

      2. Steve Mc says:

        Cool word, sounds like something you don’t want to get wet or feed after midnight!

      3. Russ says:

        Then he is obviously part of the problem.It was NOT cunning or crafty.It was amateur hour at nicos.

      4. David says:

        So why did he say Rosberg was being cunning? Why did he say he could have avoided the accident but wanted to make the point? Just to wind Hamilton up? Or more likely: he was driving in a deliberately risky fashion to make ‘some point’ that had nothing to do with the Spa race, but Hamilton’s defending in earlier races. Deliberately risky means basically causing the incident on purpose? I think so.

        I really don’t get this need or desire to defend Rosberg. Monaco qualifying was certainly marginal, with at least 50% of the pit lane thinking he span off on purpose. Then we have the flouting of the engine power agreements. This indicates Rosberg is certainly trying to maximize his chances any way possible.

    2. forestial says:

      Yes, exactly.

      The sporting regs concerned here are those about ‘causing a collision’, right?

      Is there an exception there which makes it allowable to cause a collision as long as it is “within the same team”? Surely not…

      1. Sebee says:

        Oh boy…little bit of carbon flew. A tire transferred it’s pressure to Lewis’ head. No big deal.

        Rubbin’ is racing! Wisest words spoken in a Tom Cruise movie.

      2. Michael Powell says:

        It’s always tricky to translate a word without understanding the underlying context and cultural background. We cannot be sure what was the exact meaning. But the decision was unambiguous and with zero delay, there was no case for concern.

        In any case, why would a clever racer like Nico risk his own race? No reason at all.

        I’m hoping that in future Lewis will also be more circumspect in his manoeuvring, after all, he is miles behind and can only go backwards, and into Daniels arms. To be beater by Nico is one thing, but to be clobbered by Ricciardo in a slower car would, or should be, the final nail in his coffin.

    3. Craig D says:

      Cunning is exactly what Rosberg was. Well actually the word in terms of his execution is “stupid”! Rosberg basically told himself “I’m not being a pushover anymore, I’m going for this overtake; Hamilton you’re going to have move aside this time and [in where the cunning sense comes in] if things come off bad then it will effect you more than me as I have the points gap”. That doesn’t mean he expected the result would be Hamilton all but out of the race with him merely hindered.

      The stupid bit from Nico was the move was never on and he’s not as good a battling as Lewis is so misjudged the whole thing. But all of this doesn’t make him a cheat or an intentional collider (i.e. the new Crash Kid)! It was simply an ill-thought out move that lead to a race incident with far worse consequences than anyone would have expected. As they say, the majority of the time someone in Nico’s position would have come off worse. But like with most things this season Rosberg’s had the rub of the green.

      1. Sebee says:

        Stupid? Now I have to laugh.

        Stupid because:
        He is 29 points up.
        He proved that he won’t yield.
        He ensured that team orders will be followed on both sides of the garage, not only on his.
        He made Lewis look a fool when Lewis brought internal meetings out.
        Niki and Toto have to go clean up a PR mess Lewis created – I’m sure they are pleased.

        Right. You say stupid, I’m going to have to say Super Genius.

        But as DC said, since it’s maybe 2 inches error that causes the impact and Lewis was coming across quite fast I doubt it that it was on purpose by Nico very much. I think it’s just a second case of a coin toss landing on the edge of the coin in Nico’s favour. Which as I stated previously, I’d be more worried about if I was Lewis. It’s as if Nico can basically do no wrong – and that makes him untouchable. I’m sure this point has crossed Lewis’ mind – that it is simply meant to be for Nico.

        Watch that video once gain, and keep saying to yourself – not on purpose, not on puropse. And let your brain process what you’re seeing more neutrally and you will see that if he really wanted to not yield and crash it’s not what he was doing. And at that speed, watching a driver on your right and going into a chicane – 2inches – anyone could make that mistake. Even Schumi in his prime made a 2 inch mistake.

        Now that I walked myself and you through it, I conceed that it may be dumb luck, but not stupid. But any way you slice it, Nico looks like a genius to me.

      2. Chet says:

        It worked – a couple of days ago Ham said he couldn’t trust Rosberg when overtaking now.

        So Lewis knows Nico won’t just get out of the way every time Lewis tries a risky move and he’ll have to be a lot more cautious.

        Mission accomplished…

      3. Craig D says:

        Sebee, you’ve misread what I said. Nico’s manoeuvre was clearly stupid in that the overtake was not on. The outcome has been “super genius” as you put it, for Nico, absolutely. But what you’ve implied by saying it was all super genius by Rosberg is that he intentionally cheated to crash into and do-over Hamilton. I don’t believe this. It was a racing incident (but still Nico’s fault) and the cards fell in Rosberg’s favour.

        My post was actually more in support for Rosberg if anything (and more so than you if you’re suggesting Nico crashed into Lewis on purpose). Teh move wasn’t intentional in terms of being some master plan to wreck Lewis’s race whilst leaving himself comparatively unscathed. But there was nothing super genius in the overtaking attempt Nico did as it could easily have left him out of the race and Lewis on for an easy win.

        The whole outcome has clearly been great for Nico, but again that’s down to luck again for him.

        So, again, I said the overtaking attempt was a poor/stupid one but not with the intention of the consequences that happened (Nico was just in a defiant “prove his point” rage mindset). I didn’t say the events to follow are stupid (for Nico). Rosberg might have taken a fan hit but championship wise (and PR wise in terms of seeing Hamilton do the dirty on voicing private matters, again), things have come off great for him!

    4. Gaz Boy says:

      I wonder if this idea of having ex drivers as stewards is a good idea in so far as a lot of them haven’t raced for a long time? Pirro, if my memory serves me correct last raced in grand prix racing in the late 80s – my goodness, hasn’t Formula 1 changed since in the 25 odd years since then!
      Perhaps it should be mandated that ex F1 driver stewards should have fairly recent F1 experience – a la somebody like Rubens, Heinz-Beans Frentzen, Panis, Ralfie, Trulli Train et al

      1. Random 79 says:

        Thank goodness you chose not to find a nick-name for Panis…

      2. Steven says:

        Yawn, didn’t Hamilton and his fans use to whine when the stewards who weren’t racing drivers were penalizing him. Why don’t we just let Lauda and Lewis’s mum and dad be the stewards given that seems to be all that would make them happy.

      3. kenneth chapman says:

        @ gaz boy… pray tell, what would’ve changed vis-a-vis racing incidents that would invalidate pirro’s seat at the stewards table?

      4. Gaz Boy says:

        RE Random: Regarding Panis, if you get one vowel wrong…………………….
        RE Kenneth: If I was stewarding, I would have given Rosberg Junior a 10 place grid drop at Monza. Pirro could have given a retrospective penalty……………….but he chose not to use that discretion.
        You have to admit stewarding decisions are inconsistent…………..

    5. Brian says:

      KRB, It may appear that Nico was “fully turning right”, but in fact that is not the case. I know what the video shows,but what is really happening is that Nico is making micro steering adjustments. It happens alot when you are racing on the edge at those speeds. If you have ever driven a racing car or a kart, then you what I am talking about. It is very very common. There is no way Nico is going to risk life, limb and the team’s championship by deliberately crashing Lewis. He was guilty of being overly ambitious in his overtaking maneuver. That’s not a punishable offense.

      Lewis was also guilty.Guilty of trying to protect his lead and his line by not giving Nico any room. Again, not ideal for the team, but not a punishable offense. Both drivers are surely regretting their actions as neither won and one was a dnf. They were heavily favored and should have finished 1-2.

      After the incident is another story. That’s where Lewis is definitely guilty of not thinking before speaking. He shot his mouth off and in the end, only succeeded in making himself look bad and airing Merecedes dirty laundry in public. Nico chose a higher road and kept his public arguments to a mininum. Score Nico-1, Lewis-0

      1. Richard says:

        Hamilton is blameless! He had the corner from the racing line, and it was incumbent on Rosberg to avoid contact, instead he kept his foot deliberately. He should be suspended by the team for putting himself first and deliberately spoiling theirs and Hamilton’s chances.

      2. PWRocketS says:

        Lewis was definitely prepared before he spoke. I would bet that it was actually a statement prepared by his management. This is just psychological warfare!

        It was quite interesting how Lewis & the media & some fans mentioned that they don’t know what point Nico was trying to make. Just read what Lewis felt during the Hungarian GP:

        “Hamilton was told to let Rosberg through, but the Brit refused as he felt his team-mate wasn’t close enough.”

        Nico therefore made Lewis pay for his comment by following close enough.

        BTW note that Bottas passed Vettel on the same corner later in the race and Vettel left Bottas enough room to complete the pass. That overtaking move was hailed by other websites as the overtaking move of the race… So it’s not like Hamilton was totally innocent.

        Not fair, but fair.

      3. Mark Wesseling says:

        +1

      4. mark says:

        Agree 100% with this assessment and that’s why the stewards didn’t take action IMO.

      5. Aey says:

        @ PWRocketS

        Bottas tyre is Better than Vettel, and also Bottas is fully ahead of Vettel before the corner, so that Bottas can make the corner from Outside.

        Nico never be along side Lewis before corner, so Nico will never make the move success from the outside.

        Nico is not in any situation to challenge Lewis, so Lewis just take his line normally, no need to yield the space cause Nico never be alongside.

        For what ever reason, this is totally Nico fault, just the matter of this is the accident by mistake or intention, that it.

      6. Nickh says:

        Agree with Richard 100%

    6. Sebee says:

      KRB…you have to let it go.

      As more time passes I think more and more it was absolutely not intentional and Nico just used it to play mind games on weak Lewis.

      He tried to back out of it and slow down. He had no where to move to and was at risk of a spin. DC noted that the inch or two miscalculation was minimal considering you can’t see your wing as a driver. There was no way this was calculated. And passing was show possible there, so it wasn’t some bonsai move.

      You need to refocus. Worry that Lewis will go to Monza, drive hard to get P1…so hard that Nico will get to inherit P1 as Lewis retires with mechanical again.

      1. aveli says:

        keep saying that to yourself and you may just believe it one day.

      2. kenneth chapman says:

        @ seebee, i do agree with all of that.

      3. Sasidharan says:

        That explains the number of failures Lewis had. Not merely bad luck. You need to take care of your car too.

    7. Z says:

      He would be turning right, as the corner goes right. Wow, revelation!?

    8. Samir says:

      Fia is a sham. F1 constantly trying to outdo itself in becoming more dysfuctional. Then asking us for feedback on how to improve the show. Well, first don’t insult the intelligence of your customers. Second, KISS. An ecosystem of questionable integrity starting from the top and percolating to the media that lives off it cannot be expected to produce morally satisfying outcomes. Global sport simply epitomizes the pervasive win at all costs mindset rather than transcends it. No point getting mad for too long…vote with your dollars or pounds of euros.

    9. Robert says:

      Of course Nico turned right…because he can plainly, obviously, PAINFULLY be seen to be turning left 1.5 seconds before that, away from Lewis. Then he ran out of track and had to get back to the racing line for turn 2 of the chicane…and that meant moving BACK OVER TO THE RIGHT.

      It is all very simple, and VERY clear from the outboard cameras, following the pair of them through the entire chicane. Nico HAD OVERLAP when he entered that turn. He lost it during the turn…but not all of it, else they would not have hit. When did he lose the right to have space?

      And as for my horse in this race – hey, I’m a JB and DR fan. Don’t really find much to choose between the Merc boys. But the outboard replay clearly shows that Nico turned away, and then rejoined the racing line…just 0.25 second too early.

      1. Sebee says:

        HE TURNED RIGHT BECAUSE IT WAS A RIGHT HANDER!

        Also, he had no track left on the left…not sure you noticed.

      2. aveli says:

        we all saw it. you didn’t invent it. hamilton spoke about it and so did button, wolf and lauda. you can say all you want but we all saw it. how many times has rosberg passed hamilton on the outside?

      3. kenneth chapman says:

        @ robert… an astute observation. how very true.

      4. Nickh says:

        He could have taken to the escape road and avoided all this mess, like Vettel did.

        He just boiled over after hungary and because he is Keke’s spoilt son who knows he can’t beat Lewis in a straight fight

  6. MK_Chris says:

    Totally agree. I listened to a recent analysis by John Watson on the radio. The best summary so far in my opinion. A good analysis – and comparison with various other past incidents. I would like the opportunity to hear it (or read it) again.

    Rubbing an expensive front wing against a rear tyre at speed is a very good way of wrecking your own race. Extremely optimistic in my view if you hope to come out of this scenario with a still intact and working race car.

    1. s. says:

      Side contact is almost always a punture and a broken wing, rear contact is always a broken wing and never a punture. You have to make that distincton or you are being disingenuous.

      1. Craig D says:

        But in the situation itself (and we’re talking split seconds here) no one can predict how it’s going to plan out and aim at which bit of someone’s tyre is going to be hit.

        It’s very easy in the aftermath with slow-mo replays and the like to dissect every tenth of a second and draw long guessing accounts of what a driver’s thinking and their intentions, etc. But in the real time event very little of that will have gone on.

        Unless you genuinely believe Rosberg went into that corner specifically targetting the only true vulnerable point of a tyre while knowing he’ll wreck his own wing, then the details and consequences of these incidents are unpredictable. That’s why they’re called racing incidents!

        But too much is being made of this is specific event is being now. It’s more interesting about the future. I think Lewis could have a psychological advantage and support from within the team now. They already feel bad from letting him down reliability wise, so he could got more internal support. This could rankle Rosberg in the same way it did with Alonso in 2007 and he could start to crack up and make more errors. Nico has been quite mentally tough and defiant this your though…

      2. JF says:

        The words “never” and “always” always never apply to F1!

    2. devilsadvocate says:

      Well the case can be made that if they both crash/retire then Rosberg still leads WDC and Hamilton still got 0 points with fewer races left to make up for it. So only upside, but yeah I agree, people are really stretching this one. Comparisons to Piquet Jr are kind of funny. Sideswiping the wall at a slow section in a street circuit is not at all the same as initiating contact with another car at a high speed circuit like Spa. First of all the wall will behave more or less predictably, and you have no idea how the other car will react or what kind of accident you might cause. Second sideswiping a wall at medium/low speed is never going to be as serious as a potential accident at high speed between two cars.

      People wont see that. Hamilton fans and people who arent fond of Rosberg will believe what they want to, Rosberg fans and Hamilton haters will believe something else. Thats human nature. I bet Hamilton will give him room next time, so whatever goal Ros was trying to prove appears to have worked.

  7. zombie says:

    There’s a good reason spokesperson are used by companies. Maybe its a lesson for Mercedes team to let press officers talk instead of allowing drivers or motormouths like Niki Lauda make statements.

    Mercedes has a car which is clear 2 sec/lap quicker than the rest. Put any driver on the grid in that car and they’ll have a shot at the title. It isnt the first time Hamilton has put his foot in mouth. Hire Hulkenberg or Bianchi who can get along with their job with no drama.

    1. Gaz Boy says:

      Bianchi would have to pay back all those millions of Euro’s to Ferrari that they have invested in him if he joined Mercedes!

      1. Sasidharan says:

        Did Perez pay?

    2. PM says:

      But you have to admit that it’s much more fun hearing controversial statements made by drivers and team bosses than hear boring PR people saying politically correct statements all the time. I don’t really care if it makes Mercedes look bad. I’m having fun discussing the statements made by Lauda, Toto and hami.

  8. Mike W says:

    If it only took 10 seconds thats an admission that you did not look properly – he turned in on Hamilton.

    Maybe this race stewart should look at the Sky F1 analysis

    1. They have all the data and virtually every camera angle. Was it cheeky? Maybe. Was it a dangerous move? Nope.

    2. Tealeaf says:

      Sky analysis? We all know which side Sky are on.
      Nico once again showing he is here to race, not to be a a media wonder boy, or to win popularity contests. I like how he step up, and is giving the “already champion” lewis a real run for his money. Funny also how Hamilton was saying he “had it harder” than Nico, and was “hungrier”, when that’s not what is showing, with him running to the big bully press whenever he can, while Nico is showing ruthlessness and resolve on the track.

      1. Mark Wesseling says:

        +1

      2. JF says:

        Hamilton must have been hungrier than Rosberg on Sunday– must have missed his lunch cause he sure couldn’t wait to get off the racetrack!

      3. H.Guderian (ALO fan) says:

        Hi tealeaf. Long time no see!!!!

        What about the “Wonder Boy” being *crushed* by Ric???
        Funny, huh???

        P.S.: Told you (and Sebee) he would be “exposed”.

      4. Sebee says:

        Yes, Vettel is exposed as the only quadruple champion to get there in a row after winning his first by what magic method again?

        Get a grip H. Worry about Alonso being WDC less 5th year in a row at Ferrari and not even winning a race this year. Wonder if he’s feeling like the good old days starting out in F1.

        Oh…and not sure if you noticed but I like Dan and cheer for RBR. In fact, it would be good for Vettel to play a supportive role this year considering his points, luck, reliability and PU count position.

      5. Tealeaf says:

        As a ALONSO and Button fan myself its refreshing to see Ricciardo doing so well, just shows how ordinary the Merc pair are really considering Nico was ‘crushed’ by Webber and Hamilton beaten by Button and also getting beat by Rosberg now, as for Vettel? he needs to either get his act together or just accept he is not a all time great, still 7-5 in quali is not as bad as 8-4 and I can confidently say Dan would also ‘crush’ Rosberg quite easily so where does that put Hamilton I wonder? lol

      6. George Zaidan says:

        To be fair Vettel’s car and luck this year all through winter testing till now has been rotten and to be 7-5 in quali after all his trouble is hardly being ‘exposed’, what Rosberg is doing to Hamilton is a better example of Hamilton being EXPOSED, lucked into a winning car? well Hamilton really has lucked into the most dominant car we’ve seen for over 20 years and yet just like in 2007 and 2008 he is struggling to make the most of a best car, I for one would love Dan or Nico to permanently wipe that fake smile off Hamilton’s face but hell even if he wins the championship its in a car over 2secs quicker than than the rest so not really an achievement even Chilton can win in it.

      7. OldOzzie says:

        +2

        And JF,

        Hamilton definitely was hungrier and wanted to get to the Kidde Tuckshop quickly

        Hamilton didn’t stop moaning all afternnon

      8. KRB says:

        TL, I guess you considered it ‘safe’ to make a reappearance?

        What about Anthony Davidson’s analysis would you disagree with?

        On the contrary, Nico is showing clumsiness and rushed-thinking on the track … the move on Vettel where he locked up was simply ridiculous … GP2 stuff at best. Then he screwed up his first pass on Button (ran wide down Eau Rouge), when Button wasn’t even going to defend. He might’ve lost the win just in that period of having to give the place back, and having to do it all over again. Shoddy.

        The thing is, he’s often benefitted from his mistakes this year (Monaco, Canada, Spa), while others have been hurt by them. He likely lost the win in Hungary b/c of some mistakes and just not being able to get passes done when needed. Those are key mistakes in my eyes, but the loss in points has been fairly minor for him. He hasn’t been majorly hurt by any of his mistakes. Yet.

    3. JF says:

      I assume you have access to all the camera footage and telemetry to make that evaluation.

      1. KRB says:

        Well, they would have it, wouldn’t they? Do you think they really got through it all in 10 seconds?! If they did, they just couldn’t be bothered. Nice to know that’s the standard of stewarding these days.

        http://thejudge13.com/2014/08/25/voice-of-the-f1-fans-an-alternative-analysis-of-rosham/#comment-82405
        (warning: it could take longer than 10 seconds to view that)

  9. PaulL says:

    The incident appears similar to the Alonso “brake test” in Bahrain 2008. Some partisans were up in arms; the stewards and others barely gave it a second look.

    1. GT-Racer says:

      There was no brake test at Bahrain 2008.

      After the race when there was all the talk of Alonso brake testing Lewis Renault printed out the telemetry data for the FIA 7 the media & it showed no sign of a brake test.

      http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/66448
      “Autosport.com has seen the telemetry data of Alonso’s exit from the first corner, and it shows that the Spaniard was flat on the throttle from the exit, did not touch the brake and gained speed in a totally predictable manner.”

      1. Doobs says:

        Not Lewis telling fibs again? Oh dear that’ll get him in trouble one of these days.!!

        Oh wait..

  10. Timi Olson says:

    At least the stewards can see sense but there’s always someone in F1 trying to ruin their team.
    Apparently Hamilton has said he will ‘always put the team first’.

    This [mod] with a pedigree ignored team request/order, right after the race at Hungary he said that Nico wasn’t close enough, a few days later he said that it was his engineer and not Lowe who gave the request/order, and that if it was Lowe he would have let him passed.
    He said he wants to beat Nico when at his best so that he will inflict maximum pain.
    He said there was no discussion about the team order after Hungary.
    He said that Nico admitted to hitting him intentionally.
    [mod] Does he not realise everyone in the world can see straight through his [mod]

    1. James Allen says:

      Well out of order on some of your points here. No insults please or we will simply Trash comments in future

      1. Timi Olson says:

        James there was no swear words involved just hard cold facts. Was Hamilton not implicated in lie gate? If he was then I am entitled to use facts as part of my opinion, if its the tone of the post that seem to have offended you then I would like to ask you why you allow the constant Vettel bashing that happens on this site?
        To be honest Nico has the right to ask for a investigation into false accusation from Hamilton and if found guilty Hamilton should get a penalty. As for Mercedes it won’t take long before Wolff and Lauda run the team into the ground and Merc in their next board meeting pull out of F1 when success is harder to come by, I give this ‘domination’ 2-3 years max I just hope for Hamilton’s fans he doesn’t blow this chance yet again or maybe that lucky 2008 championship he took from Massa might just be the highlight of his career, in the remaining 7 races he needs to out qualify Nico in all 7 races just to be 11-8 ahead, better not snatch a brake at Monza, pressure’s on Lewis.

    2. Anop says:

      Yep I do. What’s interesting is that why what Lewis says differs from what Merc and Nico say. Such as Lewis said in Spa on Thursday that after Hungary there was no discussion whereas Merc and Nico said we discussed the matter.

      Someone is lying. I don’t know who. By the way does anyone know why Lewis is the one always disclosing critical and confidential team information to media?

      1. Terry says:

        @ Timi
        Appears there is still the odd one out there harping on that lie gate non event.
        And once again,its the FIA’s lack of action the cause of it.
        Take a hard look back,if the FIA had instructured Trulli to relinquish the position he had lost through his own incompetence then this situation would have never eventuated.
        We should be remembering Trulli’s attempt to cheat a position instead.
        Also,I’ve always thought Lewis was under team orders to say what he did.They should have protested.

    3. Doobs says:

      @Timi It’s hard to know whether these sound bites from Lewis are his genuine feelings or some clumsy attempt at mind-games. Certainly were Ross Brawn still in the team I think he would have been told to just drive the car, or whatever the Merc version of an “ear tweaking” is.

  11. Doug SA says:

    Whats happen to good clean sportmanship????? Are people in F1, A STEWARD for that matter, who is entrusted with upholding the rules of the sport saying its OK to have “a little sports cunning” you can read underhanded or cheating into that! Is this what the sport wants to be known as to the millions of youngsters who follow the sport. Imagine in Golf, Tiger Woods partook in some “sports cunning” or Federer in tennis, did a little “sports cunning”….???? Have we seriously forgotten about the virtues of sportmanship that we want to almost hero worship this embarrasing incident for the sport? Would you teach your son ” some sports cunning”? Maybe the stewards were being cunning themselves when they say nothing wrong in this incident and yet Raikkonnen was penalised for exactly the same thing in Malaysia.

    You leave fans too options…..to either not take F1 seriously at all, in which case cunning and conniving devious actions by the drivers are of no consequence if its a WWF type show, or to simply walk away as seriously how can a judge in a serious sport say its okay to have “sports cunning” (underhanded) tactics. Slowly but surely F1 erodes its credibility.

    1. Dr T says:

      I wonder if there are any more cunning stunts to been seen in the coming racers, or what Dr Spooner would have to say about it all

    2. Antonio says:

      maybe you could understand he spoke in italian and translations are difficult to make; there are literal ones, and then there are words and meanings which don’t have direct, similar significance between languages (a language is cultural and behaviour also)…

    3. JF says:

      We can’t all be saints.

      1. Gaz Boy says:

        We can all be sinners though! Especially racing drivers with names beginning with N…….
        Nelson Piquet Junior?

    4. Richard says:

      Exactly the point I made. Such behavior would not be tolerated in other sports so why in F1. The sport should be run on afair and level playing field, and certain individuals should not be allowed to get away with cheating.

      1. JF says:

        I see some racing but no cheating in this instance.

      2. PWRocketS says:

        Are you talking football?

        What if Nico hit Lewis in Hungary? Any difference?

        Lewis said he was surprised that Nico’s still mad about what happened in Hungary during team meeting in Spa. We shall see if he gets over Spa-gate by Monza.

        I hope we don’t see Monza-gate.

    5. kenneth chapman says:

      @ doug…if you are going to go down this path then the usage of the word ‘cunning’ has many and varied connotations. it can be ‘deceitful’ but it can also be ‘wily/artful’. as it was used by pirro in his explanation we would have ask him what was the context in which he used this word.

  12. Dave C says:

    Toto Wolff and Lauda are not fit to run a winning F1 team. Toto bought his way into this team Ross Brawn built up and forced Ross to retire without having the glory of watching his years of hard work paying off. Wolff acts as if all this success is down to HIM! Who is he trying to kid? As for Lauda, well all know this ‘old fan’ is just there to kiss Hamilton and gain his own popularity. What’s next to come out of either of their mouth? ‘basically we were racing Nico’? God I wish Ricciardo sneaks in and take the title, hope Redbull can find 1.5sec and I’m sure another win or 2 for Dan the Merc drivers will be shaken to their core.

    1. fox says:

      True comment. I also wish Ricciardo to sneak the title in last race! Merc management is chaotic from the outer look. If there was Ross, those kids ROS and HAM would obey him…

      1. Wade Parmino says:

        I don’t think so. If Lauda can’t keep them in line then Brawn wouldn’t be able to. Lauda would command more respect from the drivers as he is himself is a driver of great accomplishment. Plus, when Lauda is angry he seems like he would be a pretty intimidating character.

      2. Gaz Boy says:

        RE Wade: Have to disagree, Ross the Boss is a big, imposing bloke who you wouldn’t want to knock his beer and spill his drink down his shirt! The “Manic Mancunian” was generally pretty good at disciplining his drivers. Ask Rubens and Jenson…….
        I’m not sure Niki the Rat is that intimidating – I think if Ross the Boss and the Rat came to blows I’m put my money of the Manic Mancunian!

      3. kenneth chapman says:

        @ gaz boy….what level of disgust did ross brawn publicly level at shumacher when he parked his car at rascasse? by memory there was a profound silence…but then again i may be wrong and you will no doubt remind me.

      4. Gaz Boy says:

        RE Kenneth: Rascasse-gate was a squalid affair, totally agree, but it was a different issue in the sense it wasn’t two team-mates hitting each other. I’m talking about Ross being able to keep the peace between two team-mates!

      5. kenneth chapman says:

        @ gaz boy, thanks for the note. my point re brawn was, in part, in response to another post promoting the concept of ‘british fair play’. a grandiose ideology based on a higher level of morals/ethics. sounds great but in reality a total myth or better still, self deluded puffery.

        basically, i am of the opinion that the episode was nothing more than a ‘racing incident’ as a result of ‘contributary negligence’. that is all it was and the stewards were right in judging it to be so.

        all i can say is that hopefully the antagonism will continue unabated, with luck, at an elevated level. if this happens and it is a distinct possibility, the my man Dan may just get up. wouldn’t that be an interesting finale? i am already chuckling at the thought of the rage emanating from all the’ hooray henrys’ were it to actually happen. by the way, did you read the telegraphs comments re hamilton?

      6. Gaz Boy says:

        RE Kenneth: Who would want to be a modern day Team Principal!

  13. Bobdredds says:

    This was inevitable and the only way it could have been avoided was if Nico had rolled over and let Lewis continue to take liberties ontrack and off track. If they are going to sanction Nico then they also need to sanction Lewis for “bending” the truth in public. Lewis relies on his skill ontrack to do his talking but offtrack he is sneaky and his comments are designed to throw Nico. Now that situation has changed because he has gone too far and that will benefit Nico.
    However the biggest problem for Merc is they have no one onboard tcapable of controlling the situation. Toto and Paddy may be able to talk tough but they don’t seem to have the authority/capability to control this situation. Niki Lauda is the much loved hero who calls it as he sees it but he is a wild card who does as much damage as he does good and he has absolutely no sense of timing or occasion. This is where Ross Brawn would have come into his own.
    IMHO as the season progresses Nico will have a bigger advantage because of the way he drives and will have more engine milage left as a result. Nico need 3 wins and 4 second places to be WDC if he and Lewis finish 1-2 in the remaining 7 races. One more DNF for Lewis and it is all over for him and that is already playing on his mind.

    1. John Cook says:

      If anybody seriously thinks Rosburg did it on purpose they are deluded, it was a racing accident and the stewards confirmed that. I’m also sure that Rosburg has a point to prove, why would’nt he? he wants to be World Champion as well. To suggest he did it on purpose when it ultimately cost him a win is just daft, no one can be sure of the results of a collision accidental or otherwise and no one should know that better than Hamilton who has a long history of dubious collisions which are never his fault and talking rubbish on a regular basis. Hamilton has been unlucky and the pendulum is just as likely to swing his way as stay how it is. The fact that the Mercedes management appear to differ is not surprising as I believe there are different loyalties within the team, my guess if that team orders are used they will favour Hamilton but thats just my take on things.

      1. kenneth chapman says:

        @ john cook….beware…you are treading on sensitive toes here. i know all about that as i have received much admonishment for taking a middle line and supporting the stewards decision as well as cracking the hamilton code of victimisation haha

    2. Doobs says:

      After Red Bull’s Multi 21 disaster, Webber more or less quit.

      Good to see Nico stand up and take the fight to Lewis. The year suddenly got a lot more interesting.

  14. Andrew S says:

    Brings up an interesting question (for me anyway). Were there to be an accident/coming together between team mates which resulted in one car not being able tocontinue the race and the other score points – would the Stewards leave well alone given its team mates or would (could?) they step in and give out a penalty? If they did give a penalty then isnt it a double punishment for the team given one car is out?

  15. Twist says:

    Great emotions on Hamilton vs Rosberg, F1 wouldn’t be F1 without these stories and people getting passionate about them ;-)

    Looking forward to the last 7 races, fireworks!

    1. Twist says:

      PS James, can you shed more light on the Nando – McLaren link?

      1. Anne says:

        Well this is what I heard on the matter ( Of course James might have more update and accurate information) The issue seems to be that Honda wants a big name driver in McLaren. So McLaren have been flirting with Alonso And also Vettel. What bothers me is that Honda is an engine provider. I don´t think they have the right to run the team. Ron Dennis, Sam Michaels and Boulier should decide about drivers.

      2. Gaz Boy says:

        If Fernando still holds a grudge against Ronspeak after 7 odd years – and apparently, he still does – do we all really think he’s going to hook up again with his “old mate” Ron?
        I think Ron seizing back control of Macca has put the kaboosh on any chance of Nando going back to Woking. If Martin Whitmarsh was still running the show and Ron was (far away) in the background that perhaps Mr Alonso would ink his signature on a McLaren International contract.
        Old habits die hard……………and so does a grudge.
        If I’m wrong……………well, pigs will fly and Mr E will “abdicate” his role in FOM!

      3. kenneth chapman says:

        @anne….. i believe that honda are providing the team with engines free of cost and if so then consider just how many ten of millions they will be investing. in any business transaction of this magnitude i would say that they have every right to seek some representation when drivers are being chosen. i would also doubt that you are right in your inference that they shouldn’t ‘have the right to run the team’.

        do you really think that ron dennis would for one millisecond accept that as a fact? they will be given due input into the choice of drivers i would think as well they should be.

  16. s. says:

    So his reasoning was what I thought, this is a team sport and Mercedes only hurt themselves so there’s no reason to penalize them further unless a protest comes from the team. Which clearly Toto wouldn’t do. If Nico would have carelessly cut a tire on anyone elses car but his teammates there probaly would have been a drive through. To the fans there is only the drivers championship but in the sport its only the constructors that’s important.

    1. JF says:

      I typically follow the constructors, team guy, not a driver fan. Could be the only one but I doubt it. The driver champ in most years is determined primarily by the car. This year is a somewhat of a rarity in recent times where the teammates with the best car are still both realistic contenders.

      1. s. says:

        Well that’s because most of the time the team is supporting one driver to increase their chances of winning. Mercedes has the luxury of being so far ahead they don’t have to, or had…they’ve indicated they might have team orders from here on out

  17. I’m mindblown by the reaction this incident has generated from the fans and the amount of anti-nico comments that I’ve seen through social media. There is clearly some things we are not privy too and Merc need to do a much better job of controlling their drivers.

    If Ross was there, I couldn’t imagine Lewis coming out with the ‘it was on purpose’ line and neither would I expect Lauda to publically back his favourite driver and completely dismiss the other one.

    Let’s just hope this doesn’t lead to a ‘whoever leads into T1 wins’ scenario.

  18. Super Si says:

    All well and good. But saying there were no sudden movement is insufficient evidence to state that it was innocent. For example, if I were to aim my car straight at someone with malcontent and the aim to do harm, there wouldn’t necessarily be any jerky behaviour before the impact. And yet would that deem me innocent?
    Being a clumsy driver isn’t a valid get out of jail free card. If your a clumsy driver then you shouldn’t have a racing license. You should have a learner plate on the car and an experienced driver in the car with you at all times. Buckle up Keke! I think someone needs some more driving lessons.

  19. goober says:

    Good decision. I just watched the incident again, and it was simply clumsy on Rosberg’s behalf, with unfortunate consequences for Hamilton. Stii, great for JA click-bait, so let’s spin it out. I’ll help :)

    1. Mark Wesseling says:

      You only forget the not giving room by Lewis. This would never happened to a Alonso, Button, Kubica. Those guys would just give a little bit of room in this situation and not wreck their own race/championship. That’s called being clever instead of just doing what I think is right and expect the other to give way.
      Finally someone did not give way and now what?
      Sometimes you just have to give in a little ALTHOUGH you are right. It will get you a lot further in live / championship.

  20. ukf1fan says:

    Tappity tap. Happens all the time when cars get in proximity to each other. I do love the passion with which people argue their point or for their favorite drives. However, champions tend to be aggressive in nature and take what they want. I don’t think I have ever heard so much whining and running to mamma as I have heard this year from Vettel, Alonzo, and Hamilton. That is not a good sign for the manliness of future racers. Guys like Shumi, Mansell, Senna, Prost, Lauda all had points in their careers when they tapped a competitor to achieve a goal. I expect to see such in a championship hunt. I would be disappointed if I didn’t. The strong survive, the weak run to mamma crying about cheaters, being hit and being taken advantage of. Man up or park your car.

  21. JF says:

    Sure is entertaining to see the conspiracy theorists and armchair “experts” going at this one.

    1. Jock Ulah says:

      You ain’t seen nothing yet . . .
      First Curve, Suzuka, 5th October.

      Keep that date free.

  22. bmw1806 says:

    That’s a stupid thing for a steward to say, that it took only 10 seconds to make a decision of that magnitude! Only by watching what happened for longer than 10 seconds with; what we, the fans, are told; all the technology that the stewards have at their disposal would they be able to make a properly informed decision. We, the fans, are often told how many televisions they have showing all the angles and the technical data so once Lewis had gone off they should have surmised that it was worthy of a proper investigation! I will never have faith in them again!
    Once I saw what had happened and that Lewis was finished I switched my television off! I have been a big fan of Formula 1 since 1974 when I went to Brands Hatch to see the British Grands Prix and I have watched every race, every year ever since so to switch the television off just shows how much I was disappointed!
    This is a disgraceful thing to have said by Pirro!

    1. kenneth chapman says:

      @ bmw 1806…your decision was your loss. it was great race that you missed. real drivers out there having a go and in some cases ‘cojones’out.

  23. Upcod says:

    How could Pirro be so proud to demonstrate how incompetent they have been? Taking 10 sec not to investigate a collision between two contenders for the world championship causing one of them to later retire in the race, and loosing a minute to the front runner after incident is pure incompetence. How can he say that so airily? Knowing magnussen have been penalized for that this very season!

    1. Andrew says:

      Indeed, I’d very much like to hear the stewards explain why Magnusson’s contact with Raikkonen in China was worthy of a penalty, where as the Rosberg Hamilton incident wasn’t even worthy of an investigation.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvSb0TSjfnE

      As far as I’m concerned everybody with any knowledge of the sport is rightfully blaming Rosberg (mistake or otherwise) so therefore it is not ‘a racing incident’ – a racing incident is when both parties are equally responsible. However minor the collision, it was unecessary and had serious consequences it should have been a drive through penalty for causing an avoidable collision, very simple.

  24. Ray C Boy says:

    I still can’t figure out why Nico didn’t wait until DRS was enabled. It just seems so obvious.
    If he’s worth his salt he should have been able to stick with Lewis.

    Bottas’ overtakes were beautiful to watch through there.

    Next year it would be fun to see these “men” beaten by a kid and a girl.

  25. Richard says:

    If it took them ten seconds to decide they did not look into it deeply enough. I don’t buy it. what they should have looked was Rosberg’s steering inputs which clearly demonstrated he turned into Hamilton at the critical moment. It has been quite clearby other racing drivers that the move was not on, and by not backing out of it Rosberg clearly demonstrated what his intentions were. The red mist had descended and he quite clearly was set on a calculated collision course with Hamilton. The probability is exactly as it turned out. A wing change for Rosberg and a puncture for Hamilton. How anyone can say that was not deliberate is beyond me as any other well balance driver would have backed out. All this splitting hairs about intent is rubbish and he should be judge by his highly dangerous actions.

    1. Pkara says:

      Well said Richard.
      Your post says it all.
      Complete sham from Pirro.
      Incoherent judgements & a major deficit in points for Lewis.
      Then the audacious communication with race control about his passing & giving back positions all in a ‘smoke screen’ to show how sporting he was. Rosberg showed cunning deceit & intent…what more does the race stewards need a lie dectector test ? Water boarding ?
      I’m sure they were looking at the podium girls & not on the race
      Sack Pirro asap.

    2. kenneth chapman says:

      @ richard…i am amazed at your insight. have you sent the FIA your CV for the stewards panel?

      1. Richard says:

        It’s a job I might enjoy doing, but could not commit the time necessary to do it. While on that note I will say we still need greater consistency in the way races are stewarded and it would be better if the FIA had a permanent team with a few reserves to travel around the world just in the way the teams do. Cost more yes, but would be a big improvement. As it is stewarding standards go up and down like a yo-yo.

      2. Pkara says:

        I think Richards viewpoint is correct . He’ll make a great steward.
        Unlike the comments made by K.Capman :-D which our pro Rosberg all the way.

    3. goober says:

      It took me 20 seconds and two looks, several days apart, to come to the same conclusion – clumsy racing incident. Rosberg was all over Lewis from Blanchimont, half a lap back. Got a good run up Kemmel into Les Combes, couldn’t get out in time, and got tagged.

      I just listened to the BBC podcast and got the giggles hearing Lewis talking about “team” and a “lost 1/2 finish”. Where was this when he blocked Rosberg in Hungary, when they were on split strategies?

      Anyhooooo, roll on Dan. Keep picking up the pieces. Just be within 50 before the last race…

  26. goonerf1 says:

    In the interests of fairness, and considering Nico’s apparent attitude, I would ban him for the Monza race.

    In all likelihood Ham wins, bringing him 4 pts behind Nico.

    From this point, Merc can then impose firm team orders, from a fairer base point.

    Yes Merc don’t have a recognised 3rd driver, but, I am sure they can source a more than good enough driver from within their driver pool. Di Resta has been mentioned. I’d give the seat to him.

    All things considered, I think that would be fair.

    If Nico then went on to win the drivers championship, I think that would certainly give it more merit.

    1. Stephen Taylor says:

      I would ban stewards from talking to the press and ban Pirro from stewarding again.

      1. goonerf1 says:

        I would like the stewards to come out and at least explain why they made a decision. Granted they have much more information than we do, therefore SHOULD be able to reach the correct decision.

        With all this data to hand, surely their decision should be beyond question?

        The fact they don’t come out and talk suggests to me they are not all that confident.

    2. Gaz Boy says:

      I don’t think I would ban Rosberg Junior at Monza, but I would give him a 10 place grid penalty if I was stewarding. But I’m not………….so it’s business as usual come Saturday 6th September 2014, Monza Park, Northern Italy.

      1. goonerf1 says:

        I would, simply because all other penalties don’t really fit the crime.

        1. You could fine him – big deal, he’s on a multi-million pound contract – So that’s out.

        2. 10 place grid penalty – worst that happens is he finishes second. What kind of disincentive is that? He can repeat Spa to the end of the season, knowing full well he’ll compromise Lewis’ race, whilst the worst that will happen to him is he’ll get a 10 place drop – So that’s out.

        3. The only punishment that fits the crime, and more to the point says, we are not going to accept any vendetta’s being settled out the race track, or driving by your own code of conduct, is to ban him for a race.

        Why? Rosberg loses out on a whole rounds worth of points in the championship. And hopefully, Hamilton wins, to bring the points difference back down to 4.

        We are then set for an exciting last few races of the season. So the fans win out aswell :).

      2. Pkara says:

        Gazboy I reckon back of the grid followed by a 20 second pit stop every time Rosberg comes in. Toto Wolf should give him a 20 sminute verbal earbashing pre race & Lauda should give him a serious left ear pulling !! That should zorthim out. :-D

      3. kenneth chapman says:

        @ gooner….paul di resta? why would anybody even consider him for another drive? he was a miserable whinging whining non event. he may be a gun DTM driver but he certainly couldn’t cut the mustard in F1.

        if he was so good then why isn’t he on the grid now? a bit of reality needed here.

    3. PWRocketS says:

      Any comment that includes Di Resta is silly. Maybe when Lewis feel like quitting he should pit and hand the steering wheel to Di Resta?

      1. goonerf1 says:

        Why is it silly? He’s proven himself a more than capable F1 driver. He’s already on Mercedes driver roster. He beat Vettel to the DTM championship. From a driving ability standpoint, I think I’m entitled to disagree with you there.

        From a likelihood of it happening standpoint, I completely agree with you.

        But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen. The only way drivers are going to learn, is if you start taking them out of the car for a race, in this case, to affect their championship.

        It worked wonders for Grosjean.

        If you want silly, look at the back of grid with what happened in Marussia between Chilton and Rossi over the weekend.

    4. DH says:

      “From this point, Merc can then impose firm team orders, from a fairer base point”
      Firstly “firm team orders” is a joke – an order should be an order – there is no “firm” or “not firm”
      Secindly “fair” is a concept not a hard and fast action.
      Finally there is no point in Merc trying to enforce team rules as Ham does not obey them anyway.

      1. Bill says:

        Good point. Maybe Mercedes should draft Colonel Nathan Jessup into the team.

        We follow orders, son. We follow orders or people die. It’s that simple. Are we clear?
        Yes sir.
        Are we clear?
        Crystal.

      2. goonerf1 says:

        I agree with you – there should be no such thing as a “firm team order,” an order is an order and that’s it.

        But team bosses have got soft. And I’m not just aiming this at Mercedes Toto/Paddy/Niki, I’m thinking back to Malaysia and Horner saying in the Seb/Webber battle, “this is getting is silly now Seb.”

        That is not an order, it’s a statement.

        I think it’s to do with the brand image/marketing they are trying to put across.

        Could you imagine Brawn/Todt/Dennis etc 15-20 years ago giving anything other than a direct order? I certainly can’t. But then they were a lot less interested in selling road cars, slippers, keyrings, smoking pipes etc back then.

        But anyway, that’s for another discussion;

        How Mercedes handled the situation in Bahrain was perfect. During the safety car, Paddy came on and said to both of them, “I want to bring both of these cars home.”

        You could argue that’s not an order, but it’s a pretty clear statement of intent as to how the ground lays.

        I can sort of sympathise with Mercedes to a point. They quite clearly didn’t expect a collision on lap 2 and therefore didn’t feel that THAT conversation needed to be had. And this is their mistake! They ASSUMED! And you should never assume anything.

        I have a saying, “assume” makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me”.

        And that’s what’s come to pass for Mercedes.

        Generally speaking yes “fair” is a concept, open to interpretation etc etc. However, in this circumstance, I disagree with you. Both drivers go into each and every weekend with equal opportunity, equal machinery, tyres etc etc. The only time it becomes unfair is on strategy, as Merc only employ one strategist. I think they should have one per driver.

        Or; when one driver decides to drive by their own code of conduct rather than the generally accepted one.

        What team order has Hamilton disobeyed? I’m going to assume you’re referring to Hungary.

        1. Nico was never close enough to him to affect a pass; so
        2. Why should Lewis slow down to let Nico overtake?

        Or let me put it in a more everyday scenario. And I would like to stress I am speaking generally here, this is not aimed directly at yourself :), so please don’t come back firing loads of four-letter expletives at me :).

        Say it was between you and a colleague at work, for an instant promotion, which lead to a fast track up the ladder to a top position, + all of the associated perks etc – and your boss came over to you and asked you to purposefully perform at a level below your best, to allow your colleague to get ahead.

        Would you do it? – “For the good of the team.”

        You’d be pretty peeved and upset I think.

        The instant promotion = the race win.
        fast track to a top position + perks = the world championship.
        performing below your best = Lewis slowing down.

        Lewis chose not to lay down.

        You have to fight your own corner in life.

        If Mercedes think a racing driver is just going to roll over and be a puppet, well quite honestly, they’re in the wrong sport.

  27. Freeman says:

    How on God’s Green Earth can the FIA not read anything into the comments that rosberg said in the team meeting after the race? All concerned agree that in that crash, Rosberg said that he was “proving a point”. So what point did he prove and to whom and by doing what? If he did nothing and this was just a racing incident then how was he proving a point? It can not be anything other than deliberate action or he was not proving any point, which all concerned at that meeting report that he said he was “proving a point”.

    10 seconds is proof that the incident was not looked at properly, thats all. The comments made by Rosberg afterwards make this 100% clear. Deliberate action took place on track, then result was contact. How is this not utterly apparent?

  28. D Vega says:

    Rossberg’s move was something regularly seen in Indycar, but it has no place in F1. Was it’ outcome deliberate? Probably not. Was it negligent and clumsy? For sure.

    Hamilton’s only recourse is to revert to his pristine form of earlier this year. Perhaps he can call ‘Nando and ask for some tips on ruthlessness.

  29. John Marshall says:

    I guess I can agree it was a racing incident, but that doesn’t give Nico a free pass in my book. The move he attempted was clearly not going to work. Lewis had the line the whole way. Nico boxed himself into a position where he wasn’t going to be able to overtake unless Lewis just stopped racing. Contact was pretty inevitable. Nico should be more skilled than that by now in his career. Especially since it was only the second lap. To twist the saying a little, you can’t win a race on the second lap, but you sure can lose one.

    I’m okay with no penalty. Let the races be decided on th track. But, Nico is hardly innocent here.

  30. james says:

    It’s pretty shocking for them to admit it only took 10 seconds. The more you look the more you can see rosberg turns back. I don’t know how they can decide in ten seconds if that was a correction or intentional.

    The turn-in looks very suspicious, but the thing that annoys me is that you can ruin someones race – your main championship contender even, and it’s just a “racing incident”. Maybe F1 isn’t for me any longer and I should switch off rather than complain all the time.

    1. goonerf1 says:

      This is exactly the point I’ve raised elsewhere, asking what kind of precedent this now sets.

      Rosberg or anyone else can now drive in exactly the same manner, cause exactly the same damage, ruin a competitors race, and no penalty can be applied, because of this precedent.

      What’s to stop teams now completing races “under protest,” should the FIA even attempt to apply a penalty for similar reasons in future.

      In the long run, the teams probably won’t win, but it makes a mockery of the whole sport/process, which is the key thing here.

      The sport needs to show INTEGRITY. That’s the word I’m after. Integrity needs to win out.

      If additional information comes to light, I do not see why action cannot be taken retrospectively.

      Is it really that much of a hardship to get 4 people and some data together?

      I think it’s more a case of they can’t be bothered. Great message to send out.

      1. Rachael says:

        I think that Nico made a mistake, but far too much has been made out of his “trying to prove a point” comments.

        There is a vast difference between holding your ground and deliberately taking out another competitor.

        Every driver understands the risk involved in initiating contact, but in the long game no one wants to be seen as a pushover.

        In Singapore 2010, Hamilton’s move on Webber, Lewis tried to turn in on Mark and squeeze him off the track. Mark was having none of it and contact resulted in Lewis losing out.

        All drivers no the risk.

    2. Robert says:

      Because the turn in was preceded by a turn-away 1.5 seconds (or less) before. Nico clearly turns away from Lewis to let him avoid him, but has to turn back to the right to stay near the line for the next corner. He just cut back too soon, a fraction of a second too soon. If you see the camera view from the outside of the first turn of the chicane, it is all very apparent…and 10 seconds IS all it would take to reach that conclusion with that camera view.

      1. kenneth chapman says:

        @ rachael…thanks for bringing up the singapore issue with mark webber. i had forgotten it completely.

    3. KRB says:

      Agreed. It’s beyond stupid for them to say they only spent 10 seconds on it. What else did they have to do at the time? Get back to schmoozing with people, or something?! They had the incident between Maldonado and Bianchi coming out of La Source on the first lap, then the two Red Bulls taking to the run-off at Les Combes (again Lap 1), and then the Hamilton-Rosberg contact on lap 2.

      They should’ve been studying each and every one of those to death, to make sure nothing was missed. How much do they get paid for each stewarding gig? I’m sure it’s not chump change. This is total garage league stuff … again, the FIA not helping itself in any way, shape or form.

      I also agree about the laissez-faire attitude towards “racing incidents” … it is one thing when it’s Bianchi and Maldonado touching, and something different when it’s the two title challengers. If anyone disagrees with that, consider yourself a fool. It’s not like there’s the safety net of the “Best X of Y results” scoring system either (Best 8/12 or 9/12 results and HAM would be leading) … all results count, and no one can afford to finish two-plus races less than their competitors and hope to win.

      What kind of system would effectively stop or lessen these suspicious “racing incidents” from occurring? In NHL hockey, they have big penalties/suspensions for anyone that headhunts another team’s star player, b/c the NHL finally woke up and realized that people actually want to see the skilled players on the ice (not the IR) doing their thing. The excuse of “he had his head down and just ran into my perfectly-placed elbow” doesn’t fly anymore with league officials.

      Again, I think that “best X of Y results” system is the best to really determine who’s been the best driver over the course of a season. We’re on the brink of a barge-meister of a driver being crowned as the best driver. I bet any money that if Rosberg wins, he becomes the first DWC to finish 3rd or lower in the Team Principals’ polling. At least Schumi had a special talent to go along with his less noble driving behaviours.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “I also agree about the laissez-faire attitude towards “racing incidents” … it is one thing when it’s Bianchi and Maldonado touching, and something different when it’s the two title challengers.”

        No it’s not.

  31. jayteeniftb says:

    Just wanted to bring attention to boo-ing in F1.
    A driver (or a journalist or a team) does not deserve to be boo-ed for doing the best job they can with what they have, especially in public.
    Do F1 fans have a brain or a rock for logical thinking? Do these people go home and boo themselves in the mirror regarding their own job?
    Schumacher parking at rascasse, Senna crashing into Prost, etc. deserves that kind of gesture.
    Not this Spa incident. You don’t have to applaud Rosberg, just neglect him during trophy presentation if necessary. Go home and do it in private if it irks you so much. Paying to watch does not give you the right to bully them.
    This has recently happened in British GP and Signapore GP regarding Vettel. What an utterly despicable and pathetic act. Japanese crowd must be rare and welcome exception.
    Will something be done to address this James?

    1. Andrew says:

      Nonsense. The people have paid a fortune to watch the race and you expect them to stand there with their mouths closed and not express their feelings. What do you think happens at football matches or any other spectator sport?

      God help us if you were ever in charge of a country, it would be like North Korea.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “What do you think happens at football matches or any other spectator sport? ”

        Formula 1 isn’t football, although listening to half the comments these days it’s not far off.

    2. Gazza says:

      Not my own personal preference I admit, but your not seriously suggesting that people should be banned from expressing there opinion vocally are you.?

    3. Rockman says:

      F1 is a sport just like any other sport around the world.

      You constantly hear booing yet no one says anything. So what makes F1 the exception? I’m not saying that Rosberg or Vettel deserved it.

      But to be honest, people who attend races live pay a whole load of money to watch the best drivers race around and be entertained with a spectacular race. Spa was shaping up to be a thrilling 44 lap race only for the other championship contender to be taken out. Accidental or deliberate will depend on each person. But you can’t take away a persons right to express dissatisfaction if he/she wants to.

      I agree though that Japan is a rare exception. Japanese people overall are the nicest people I’ve ever met so far.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        “You constantly hear booing yet no one says anything. So what makes F1 the exception?”

        The non-loutish fans that watch it, or used to.

    4. Drgraham lewis says:

      With respect, if you pay today’s huge prices to sit in the rain and have the race curtailed by a spectacularly stupid at best or plain malicious at worst, move by a driver then anger is likely to be the only vent you have.

      Given the complete lack of interest Bernie or the FIA show in those that pay their salaries then there has to be some method of showing distaste…

      You should expect booing and far far worse frankly…

      They exist because at our paying pleasure. They are not gods or self funding entities and if someone ruins your entire hard earned and paid for weekend then a bit of booing is frankly an easy time compared to what your next door neighbour could expect if he did similar!

  32. Dan says:

    Ten seconds? The F1 authorities are an absolute joke. Other sports bodies must look on in amazement at the amateur hour stuff that goes on in the running of a multi-billion pound global sport. Decisions seem to be made on a whim, with no accountability or consistency. A title contender had his championship ambitions materially affected by a rival, who went on to profit enormously from his infraction. How can this be just, let alone called sport?

  33. jmv says:

    I think the point Nico wanted to prove is that he wont move out of the way for Hamilton…
    in Bahrain, Lewis shut the door on him, Barcelona Lewis defended hard, Hungary Lewis pushed him wide…this time Nico went in the corner without compromise, leaving for Lewis to decide how badly this would end.

    NOT professional, but i think i understand where this comes from.

  34. Richard Bernecker says:

    I find it ironic that Nico spends all season long trying to avoid contact with Lewis while Lewis does his level best to push Nico off the road, and the one time that Nico holds his ground (however ill chosen) it results in contact that has Nico cast as the villain. I suspect that had Merc sat their drivers down prior to the break and replayed the moments of almost-contact in which Nico was forced to back out because Lewis was willing to punt him off the road instead of give way, the post-break emotions might not be what they are today.

    I’ve never been a Nico fan, per se, but in my opinion he’s been wronged by Lewis (and the team, complicity) all season long and this is a trend that is just not getting better.

    1. KRB says:

      I’m sorry, but the stuff that went on before is stuff that any racing driver should expect in the same position. Lewis against Nico in Bahrain was all normal expected stuff. Nico even said afterwards that Hamilton’s defending was fine (save for the one cut across going into Turn 2). The same thing for Nico against Lewis at the start in Canada, or Lewis against Nico on the last lap in Hungary. Wedging out a driver behind is expected stuff. Nico again said in his post-Hungary vid that Hamilton’s defending was ok by him.

      Wouldn’t Nico have been better served by passing Lewis on lap 3 with DRS, then proceeding to blow him away on track, and finish 20-30 seconds up the road? Imagine the kudo’s he’d get for a performance like that? Of course, one must have confidence in their own abilities to be able to pull off such a performance. Failing that, pretenders can take the easy route and just run into their opponents.

    2. LB says:

      So you closed your eyes when Nico pushed Lewis off the track at the start in Canada then? The car infront always claims the racing line….it’s up to the car behind to take evasive action.

      1. kenneth chapman says:

        @ LB not necessarily so. read the rule book.

      2. Richard says:

        Generally that’s the case unless the attacking driver is more than halfway forward of the lead car, and in that instance the lead driver must give enough room to avoid the attacking getting all four wheel. over the demarcation line. In this instance Nico was not that advanced and should have backed out.

  35. Ed says:

    The need to defend Nico Rosberg is one of the most ludicrous things i have ever saw. It’s a clear cut thing, he hitted the guy in front, took the guy of the race, therefore should have been punished. It doesn’t matter if he made on purpose or not. HE TOOK OTHER DRIVER FROM THE RACE and nothing happened to him. This absurd explanation by an FIA steward only shows that Nico is being protected, and is not the first time.

    1. goober says:

      The other guy raced for another 35 or so laps, didn’t he?

      1. KRB says:

        @goober, don’t be silly. Anyone could see that HAM’s car was totally compromised by the incident. He couldn’t even catch and pass Grosjean’s Lotus afterwards. A car that had 0.75s/lap on any other car in race pace was now struggling to pass the cars that qualified 15th and 17th.

        So while HAM was driving around still, he was effectively taken out of the race by the lap 2 incident. Of course if you were honest with yourself, you’d realize that too. You can never go wrong by being totally honest with yourself, and then convey the opinions you have when you’re in that mindset.

  36. ChrisS says:

    There has been far too much made of the incident, but as someone else has pointed out as it was Hamilton that came of worse, it is a tragedy. There was very little in it and to believe that Rosberg did it intentionally would be foolish, he wouldn’t deliberately damage his own car and risk his race considering the championship is so finely balanced.

    Nico was trying to be robust and ensure that he was viewed as asserting himself; after all for most part of the season he hasn’t looked like the battling wheel-to-wheel racer his team mate has so frequently demonstrated. That being said though for all Hamilton’s abilities in the thick of it he does have this annoying habit of believing it is his ‘god given right’ to hold the track and make every passing move stick, a la Senna.

    The incident on Sunday was a nothing affair and it was, as the stewards rightly concluded, a racing incident. I don’t believe they reached the decision within 10 seconds though, they will have waited to ensure that Nico’s race was compromised by any damage suffered before sanctioning him with a penalty, and as it was clear he was losing time to the other cars and a front wing assembly was required, they chose not to do so.

    Nico was at fault but could you blame him for thinking in that manner as they charged at 200 mph+ towards Les Combes? He had just lost the lead to his main championship rival off the start line and it once again appeared to make him look weak in the wake of his teammate, at the point where it matters. There have been times where Nico has had to yield to an aggressive Hamilton, and I’m sure this time Nico’s intentions were to appear not such a push over as previously he might have looked. He ended up getting it wrong and as a result it didn’t quite work out for both of them, with Hamilton unfortunately coming off worse.

    The furore surrounding the incident though is purely circumstantial and only so apparent due to the media hype whipped up over Hamilton’s misfortune in previous races. If this happened in Bahrain for example it would have been seen as silly and unnecessary, which is what it was, but nothing more than that.

    1. goober says:

      Excellent post. Not sure about it being a “tragedy” though – but certainly unfortunate. Still plenty of time for Hamilton to pull it back.

  37. duffy says:

    “the more things change, the more they stay the same” all this reminds me of Prost and Senna. looks to me like it’s Hamilton’s turn to take out Rosberg. who wants to bet Toto Wolff is seeing a few grey hairs by the end of the season. bet Ron Dennis is having a good chuckle.

    1. Ray C Boy says:

      I bet Dennis wishes he had this problem….constructors championship is in the bag.

  38. Kev says:

    Did anyone actually see Hamilton’s onboard in this incident? All I saw was Rosberg’s onboard and various other camera angles.

    If someone has it, do share.

    I am sure all of them siding with Hamilton will have seen it and have come to their decision.

  39. Methusalem says:

    Has Rosberg apologized to Lewis yet? No, he hasn’t! We’re waiting in vain, but I don’t think this guy knows the phrase, “I AM SORRY!”

    1. DH says:

      Most likely because he did nothing wrong!

    2. Voodoopunk says:

      Who in their right mind would apologise to him?

  40. Richard D says:

    Hamilton said that Rosberg drove into the back of him, yet in relative movement, is was Hamilton that was moving the faster and ever so slightly misjudged when to turn in.

    1. Richard says:

      Hamilton had the line and the corner it was encumbent on Rosberg to avoid him not the other way around.

    2. Elie says:

      Thats funny everyone including both team bosses said Nico ran into Lewis tyre- yet you come up with this dribble..

  41. Gazza says:

    Having thought about it some more I think Nico just made a pigs ear of backing out of the pass unintentionally clipping Lewis rear tyre.
    I doubt very much he meant to “prove a point”,
    Only a complete idiot would leave his nose there on purpose with absolutely no way of knowing the outcome.
    He had the whole race left to think up an excuse to give the Mercedes bosses who he knew would be livid with him, and it is just his attempt to put a positive spin on it.
    Nikki Lauda will obviously know far more about this than the likes of us, I can just hear him coming out with his trade mark Bulls**t comment as Nico tries to explain it.

  42. Thread the Needle says:

    Did he even look at the video? lol

    Think its time to move on from spa as I suspect theirs plenty more twists and turns in this title race yet

  43. Waz says:

    Very poor decision by the stewards. It was at least worthy of an investigation judging by similar incidents throughuout the season. Think most racing fans with a sensible mentality will agree rosbergs driving was clumsy and should have merited a penalty given the concerquences

  44. JF says:

    I doubt 10 seconds was literal. The point he was making was that it was an easy an quick decision to leave it without investigation based on the evidence (of which they have much more compared to viewers), and that makes sense considering it was a simple racing incident. Up until recently the stewards have been handing out too many minor penalties, this is a refreshing change. I hope they keep it up and be consistent about it, let them push each other, let them race, mistakes will happen. Could have done without Alonsos penalty as well, but they don’t usually give much leeway on procedural infractions.

  45. Jock Ulah says:

    No . . . James . . . No!

    Surely you already have enough material for your PhD thesis?

  46. Rider says:

    According to a new report from the German version of Autosport , Totto Wolff has said Nico also used this higher engine setting in Monaco as well and refused team orders to change it.

    1. RogerA says:

      And as Niki Lauda said on Sky during the Monaco Gp coverage, Lewis did the same at the Spanish Gp.

      1. Rider says:

        It was Rosberg who used the unauthorised engine setting in Bahrain first then Hamilton used the forbidden engine mode in Spain and now apparently Nico has done it again in Monaco by using it in the race and refusing his team to change it.

  47. Thompson says:

    It’s llike spa 2008 all over again, last time a 20sec penalty from the FIA – this time turning a blind eye.

    Well let’s see what Merc do.

    Race ban for Rosberg or non sharing of telemetry plus team orders.

    1. Brian Bell says:

      non sharing of telemetry would be plenty. I hope they have the nuts to do it

  48. Anop says:

    James, why should we believe what Lewis is saying about Nico, telling that he did it on purpose, is true? You have seen more F1 than anyone here. Do you think a driver would ever do such a thing purposely knowing he will lose his front wing?

    I think Lewis said what he wanted to hear in the “confidential” team meeting and nothing else.

    By the way I’m wondering why is it only Lewis Hamilton, who always have trouble with his teammates? Be it Fernando, Jenson or Nico now.

    The sad part is that Lewis “thinks” he is an all time great driver ever to sit in an F1 car but I think as of today he is just a very good driver who has won one world championship and nothing else.

  49. Jake says:

    James, has anyone actually asked Rosberg what the point was he was trying to make? It seems to have been overlooked.

  50. jon says:

    It is obvious that ROS made an erratic move on HAM. But to insinuate ROS tried to end HAM’s race and chance ruining his own is very silly. These things happen especially when there is so much on the line between heated rivals.

    In my opinion there are a lot of frustrated HAM fans who overlook HAM’s tactics against ROS in Bahrain and Hungary. I’d be a frustrated fan also as HAM has had terrible luck but that’s not ROS fault. HAM’s verbal attacks towards ROS show a lack of maturity which apparently will never change. If anything, it has made ROS more driven to beat him. Too bad HAM can’t get control of his emotions – such a wasted talent!

    It was a racing incident and no more. ROS didn’t nothing wrong and owes no one anexplanation. To punish someone for such a trivial (yes trivial) incident would put the another nail in the coffin of a sport that is dying.

  51. Dufus says:

    Lewis just needs to be further in front than Rosberg.
    There, problem solved.

  52. LagunaSeca says:

    Wolff and Lauda are obviously cunning media players. This is all just a PR stunt. Look at all this publicity for Mercedes at a circuit Red Bull and Renault beat them defying all predictions. Dan, Red Bull, and Renault should have been all we were talking about.

  53. Distant Knight says:

    Is this WDC going to be decided by the drivers on the track, or by whose dad has more mates that are ex drivers and just happen to spend time in the stewards box at the race weekends? Legitimate question, yeah?

  54. Bello says:

    Pirro said ‘Rosberg did not have the chance to pass’, if he tried anyway and caused a collision how come they didn’t investigate? Or am i missing something in that sentence (genuine question, i may be interpreting it wrong)

    Also what point did Nico want to prove? Didn’t he make his point in Canada when he ran Lewis off the track and he lost his track position? I don’t see why Hungary was an issue, Nico himself said he was annoyed with himself for not making the move stick, not at Hamilton. Lewis did not defy team orders, he said he wasn’t going to slow down. Seems as though Nico is getting irritated by the fact that he can’t seem to overtake Lewis. They have both messed with engine settings, both ran eachother off the track, both seem annoyed by eachothers attitude.

  55. luqa says:

    The people that come out looking less than favourable include the whole Mercedes Management for spouting offing public about something that should have been settled internally.

    EP was not the only race steward, and the fact they agreed amongst themselves quickly there was nothing to investigate makes NL and TW look even more like amateurs for dumping on one of their own not only in public, but possibly privately as well. The fact LH then decides to blab to the press of an internal closed door meeting spinning his own version with some vicious accusations with no censure from MB management has just added oil to the fire.

    It shouldn’t be surprising if at any closed door meeting in future NR shows up with a lawyer advising him on what to say and not say, considering the confidential conversation will be spun in public by one of the participants. In my books that is a worse sin than a simple racing incident. Until that moment LH had my sympathy, but not any more.

    If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword, and LH has been living very robustly by the sword against his so called team mate, and he has a history to that effect, as well as lying to the Stewards.

    TW and NL have to do some very serious navel gazing. Which well established driver wants to drive for an outfit that crucifies you in public before the defendant has a chance to present and voice his evidence? This is Human Resources 101. It makes Petronas AMG-Mercedes look like a bunch of amateurs if they can’t deal fairly and consistently with their staff.

    It seems LH knew what he was doing when blabbing to the press- he learnt from his bosses who did EXACTLY the same thing. H also knew that he could get away with it. On track though, where it matters, he’ll also knows he can’t push NR around at hearts content anymore either as he has done all season.

  56. IP says:

    It’s all well and good for Lewis to charge thru the field and break bits off his wing and get lucky, but he didn’t leave enough room for his team mate and got a puncture, then destroyed his floor rushing back to the pits… boo hoo.

    On another point… should the mercedes drivers keep tripping over and a certain RBR keep accumulating points, how much are the RBR team going to regret the disqualification in Aus?

    Personally I’d like to see Lewis have a massive blowout in the last race that takes him out, while Rosberg has to retire with similar tyre problems, allowing Ricciardo to win and take it in the last round.. would have a nice symmetry about it to 1986

  57. Ed Bone says:

    The fact is Rosberg was furious with Lewis after Hungary, and he expressed his anger in that move.

    Simples.

    What galls me is the poor quality of stewarding in F1, and the opinionated and subjective comments by the steward in this article do absolutely nothing to counter that impression.

  58. JF says:

    James or Webmaster: why is it that others can reply to my comments before I can see my own comment posted. At the same time, I cannot reply to others comments in real time. I will receive an email notification of a comment but cannot reply for a day or two.

    1. James Allen says:

      May be due to a backlog of comments awaiting moderation at certin moments, but they shou lent be able to do that if comment has not cleared , not had that raised by anyone else.

      1. Chanquetas says:

        I’ve had emails containing reply posts to my own, but the replies were never published/approved.

      2. James Allen says:

        They probably didn’t pass moderation. The email gets generated when a response comes in, not when it clears moderation and appears on the site

        We know because we are signed up as readers to replicate any and all scenarios – Mod

  59. Richard Piers says:

    Perhaps we can all shut up now, especially the drivers. Mercedes management should know better.

  60. Brian says:

    Pretty simple in my view – Rosberg simply misjudged slotting in behind Hamilton and made contact. Everyone knows that he is not at Hamilton’s level, and when he is pushed to the limit mistakes will happen.

    Rosberg’s method of trying to win the WDC is to constantly pick up points, and deliberately taking out another car with a risk that yours will also be taken out is just not consistent with that approach.

  61. Bru72 says:

    Brilliant! A steward with sense and experience, finally!

  62. ACx says:

    And so we see why it should take longer than 10 seconds to evaluate an incident. This IMHO shows the stewards to be negligent in their duties. IMHO, none of them should steward F1 again. Just the fact that this incident alters the WDC race make it worth of proper consideration. 10 secs is not proper consideration.

    For me, that is the worst part of it all. If the stewards cant take their job seriously, how can we blame drivers?

  63. abashrawi says:

    I can’t believe we are still arguing over this. It was a clumsy move by Rosberg, but a racing incident: Nico refused to back off, and Lewis refused to give up his racing line. The stewards saw it this way and I agree. If this has been between between two back-marker teammates nobody would have bothered.

    If this incident had been on the public roads, they will share responsibility, perhaps 40% Lewis 60% Nico.

    The point, in my opinion,that Nico was trying to proof is that he respected the team orders through out his career with Mercedes, including instructions to back-off from any risky overtakes on your teammate loosing a chance to finish ahead for the greater benefit of the team. But after Hungary, when Lewis refused a clear and repeated instruction to let Nico through, he felt that it’s time to break his instructions too. This is why management is normally very tough on whoever breaks their instructions. Obey now and discuss later.

    Lewis has no right to discuss internal meeting data with the public, and I thinks that’s why Nico is reluctant to discuss.

  64. Jay Bopara says:

    Hi James,

    Thanks again for your excellent website and analysis. The problem with team orders is that they allow less erratic results, and will mean that the driver who is faster may not have the opportunity to win the race. On balance Lewis has been the faster man, and he is also behind in the championship, hence if Mercedes says they will be using team orders now it would likely disadvantage Lewis, despite him being the one who lost out by 18 points to Nico, due to Nico’s aggressive driving.

    It’s also interesting to note that Daniel Ricciardo, if not for his disqualification in Melbourne (Red Bull cutting the rules too fine on fuel flow), and his disasterous pitstop in Sepang (he was coming net 4th position behind his team-mate and the Mercedes’) which resulted in his front wing getting damaged and then having to retire. And, this unsafe pitstop release also gave him a 10-grid penalty for the next race (in addition to having his race in Sepang completely ruined) – then it is fair to say Dan has lost approximately 30 points (if not more), due to completely avoidable incidents.

    However, the pace of Red Bull indicates that they would require Mercedes tripping over itself to have any realistic chance of victory in the drivers championship. The constructors is as good as Mercedes, even if Mercedes trips over itself.

    One would hope Mercedes would allow Lewis the opportunity to continue to race, because he needs that in order to be able to plug the gap to Nico. Lewis will have to get within 14 points going into the final round, to give himself a realistic chance for the championship.

  65. Kieran Donnelly says:

    Isn’t this “story” getting a bit tired? We must have all had our say at this stage. The FIA have spoken and, rather like the idiocy that we see each week in soccer, there’s no point in arguing with the referee once the decision has been taken. Regardless of what side of the fence you’re on (or even if you’re sitting on the fence), this has been officially classed as a racing incident. There’ll be no further changes. Rosberg and Hamilton will go head to head again in Monza and we’ll see what happens. Now, can we all move on and perhaps tomorrow’s story of the day might have a different theme or direction .. please?

  66. Sebee says:

    Did you guys see Lewis in damage control mode talking about how he puts Mercedes first, always! Like that time in Hungary for example.

    1. Elie says:

      Did you see where he came from in Hungary. Oh & did you happen to notice he was put on medium rubber when he still had a brand new set of softs.( Nico no surprise on the softs)..

      Up till Hungary Mercedes made Lewis the sacrificial lamb till 000′s of tweets saying wtf are you doing.. Just like Bahrain all over.. I keep telling you people Mercedes want/ed Nico to win..Everyone was disgusted by them at Hungary so they did an about face.. Thats what got up Nicos nostrils.. The ride was over..! But now looks like they have to revisit because the ride is coming to its last few turns and Nicos margin is growing again.. Sorry but Im not a fan of engineered winners..

  67. RogerA says:

    I find it funny how fans have spent the last few years moaning about all the investigations/penaltys & how the drivers should just be left to race.
    This leads to the FIA relaxing the regulations to investigate & hand out less penalty & allow for racing incidents to be just that & now a lot of those same fans are whining because a racing incident didn’t result in a penalty.

    I also find it funny how some of the same people calling for a penalty here were talking about how there should have been no penalty back at Singapore 2011 when Lewis made a similar misjudgement, Clipped Massa’s rear tyre & gave him a puncture.

    So which is it?
    Should there be room for racing incidents or should we go back to everything resulting in a penalty?

    I’d rather there be room for racing incidents which is was, Yes its unfortunate Lewis got a puncture but thats just a part of racing, Sometimes contact happens & damage is suffered. Not as if Lewis hasn’t hit people & damaged there cars in the past.

  68. UncleZen says:

    Didnt Bernie say, on the grid in Australia that he thought Rosberg would win the championship.
    This statement has a lot to do with the Spa decision not to investigate and the Monaco outcome that Rosberg didnt cause the yellow flag deliberately (and probably a few more decisions yet to be made).
    Basically Lewis has a slim chance of winning the WDC as the powers-that-be have conspired against him, it Rosbergs to loose. If you think that’s outrageous. remember what happened at Interlagos in 2007, the mysterious Mclaren that stopped then re-started, this cost Lewis a WDC in his Rookie year.
    There’s more behind these conspiricy theory suggestions than you think.

  69. Paul Jones says:

    This has been blown out of all proportion.. its something and nothing, a racing incident.

    of course Nico didn’t hit Lewis’s wheel on purpose, that would be idiotic as 8 times out of 10 that would result in a ruined front wing and a perfectly fine tyre.

    I’ve been an F1 fan since the Jim Clark days and I’ll happily say that I’m not a fan of Lewis or Nico but I have to say this has been blown up by Lewis’s fanbase. I mean no offence to Lewis, he is a very talented and special driver but a large portion of his fanbase are very immature indeed, maybe because a lot of them are youngsters? I don’t know but I do believe a large percentage of his fans are very immature and see F1 with a very blinkered and incredibly emotional viewpoint.

  70. Will says:

    From the way it look in the race (without an knowledge of anything else), I see that as a racing incident thus I think the steward was right not the interfere. BUT now that all this thing as exploded afterward. Should there be evidences that NR deliberately do that, I would say it is FIA’s duty to look into it. We will never know as it will be handled internally by Mercedes. I suppose they don’t want any more fires to put out at the moment.

    SUPPOSE ( a big suppose) NR actually do it deliberately, he definitely has benefit out of it. Histories validate that.

  71. Sebee says:

    FYI commenters.

    I’ve noticed that those of you referring to Lewis as a two syllable Canadian yoga wear brand that’s followed by citrus is a no no. Don’t do it please.

    1. James Allen says:

      No insulting nicknames are allowed, not just re Hamilton – Mod

    2. Sebee says:

      Absolutely! That comment used it, and it was the first time I’ve seen it used. Not sure it was insulting but unnecessary. Comment was quite good content wise, so shame it couldn’t be modded instead of deleted.

      Let that be a lesson to all. Standards are high.

  72. ajay says:

    Come back to Mclaren LH:-)

  73. Messala says:

    Rosberg move both adroit and sinister, cleverly disguised by sawing at the wheel. Clinical tyre slasher with intent. Worked out nicely.

  74. Chuck Lantz says:

    After watching and hearing Nico since he began racing F1, my opinion is that he’s simply a very immature, childish driver. He is certainly skilled, but at the same time, very spoiled. With any luck, he’ll grow out of it, though there is the possibility that he’ll never fully learn how to play the game without being a prat.

    We all mature at different rates, if at all. And we’ve all watched great drivers such as Schummie and Alonso go through these “growing pains.” Eventually, they wised-up and learned how to be more clever and less blatant, as I hope Nico will do at some point. But for right now, he’s more than a bit of a punk kid, in need of some stern direction from team management.

  75. Peter Dawson says:

    The guy is clearly an incompetent who should never have been given a position of responsibility in stewarding this race.

    I firmly believe Rosberg didn’t do this on purpose. BUT he was the sole culprit in an accident that ruined another driver’s race. He SHOULD have been given a penalty on that basis but wasn’t.

  76. Nathan says:

    Since the constructor’s points determine the way the TV earnings are divided up between the teams at the end of the season, does anyone know how much this little tangle (and loss of a possible 25 extra points if they had of finished 1-2) will cost Mercedes?

  77. aveli says:

    hamilton says still i rise

  78. JohnBt says:

    Now it’s getting even better with all the bickering going on with Nico and Lewis including their fans who’s been pointing all sorts of finger. I’m enjoying the comments, all over the web it’s been plastered with accusation more towards Nico with Hamilton too.

    BRING ON MONZA!!! please…..

  79. Robert says:

    To all the Nico fans or anti-Lewis supportors:

    I would say, it’s not even about supporting Lewis or supporting Nico, but I think everyone should just weigh up all the obvious evidence!
    The obvious ones are that both Toto Wolff and Niki Lauda blamed Nico and were extremely anger! And most fair top drivers including Jenson Button put the blame on Nico! So we know these kind of biased so called ‘journalists’ will write any rubbish just cause a stirl!
    Anyhow, I have been watching the video of the Belgium collision over and over, and clearly Nico never had even half a car length next to Lewis’s car at any point, and not only should Nico had aborted the move, he also didn’t need to cut back so quickly and so hard behind Lewis to make that corner! I don’t know what everyone else is watching, but to me, Nico’s second turn-in of his steering was deliberately more harder, earlier, and ‘more deliberate’ than necessary! In my opinion, Nico did it on purpose knowing that it was likely Lewis would have a puncture, which is obviously worst than losing a piece of end-plate on his own front wing!
    The truth of the matter is, and Lewis heard it from the horse’s mouth which was ‘confirmed’ by a Mercedes ‘spokesman’, Nico ‘did on purpose’ ‘to prove a point’! Nico gambled because he was already 11 points in front of Lewis, and he won his gamble! As one steward said, it’s was a ‘cunning’ drive/move (you would expect from a ruthless driver, or what I would call unsporting or ‘cheating’)!
    And honestly, I don’t know how the steward can even call a 10 second review of the Belgium collision to be a fair review because we’re talking about title contenders, not Alonso and Magnussen or someone else down the field, and also it’s very high stakes now, as we are closing nearer to the conclusion of the Championship!!!
    I hope the stewards at all future races will take this more seriously, I really do, because in my opinion, if the ones at Belgium did their jobs ‘more thoroughly’, then none of us now would feel the results there were as ‘unfair’ as it was!?

  80. moxlox says:

    For me Rosberg should have been given a penalty (drive through) purely on the basis that he disadvantaged another drivers race quite severely. That became obvious within half a lap as Hamilton crawled back to the pits.

    Whether it was deliberate or not (I doubt it was) doesn’t matter for a decsion at the time. He compromised someone else’s race with an avoidable incident that he caused. We hear it in qualifying all the time, a driver has held another up, disadvantaging him, and is then penalised with a grid penalty. Why not in this case?

  81. ApexPredator says:

    So, Rosberg apologizes to Hamilton/team, and now things are business as usual. Rosberg keeps his gained points, Lewis, as expected gets nothing but the apology. As Lewis said, a slap on the wrist and off he goes. Like I said, no satisfaction to be had. And it will only serve to cause Hamilton to continue to goto the media because he feels that is his only weapon should Rosberg slight him again. I can’t say I’m at all surprised. But this just shows how weak toto and co are at actual personnel management. Don’t be shocked if this type of situation crops up again, especially if Lewis is once again able to close the gap some.

  82. Dan says:

    It’s game over now in the title, because of dirty tactics.

    Every time Nico and Lewis meet on track now, Lewis knows Nico will just drive up the inside and then ‘lock his brakes’ to take them both out.

    He can do this for the next few races, then he can just worry about finishing ahead of Riccardo as Lewis won’t have enough races to make up the deficit.

    Nico has not beat Lewis on track once this season when they have battled.

    Nico is going to win because of sheer luck, Lewis’ 3 retirements and numerous reliability issues. Also the fact he was able to finish second when Lewis destroyed him for the first 5 races.

    When Lewis has no problems with his car, Nico cannot beat him.
    This year has been a real learning curve to the dirty side of the sport to Lewis, Just like Senna had all those years ago.

    Let’s hope Nico has a breakdown, so we can have a good fair fight till the end.

  83. Edvaldo says:

    We had so many tyres punctured for much less in the past that i don’t understand why is so difficult to imagine that he did that on purpose.

    Alonso with Vettel later is another case. That kind of contact hardly damages the tyre. That of Rosberg, however, punctured Vettel’s tyre on Britain 2010 and Malaysia 2012, Hamilton’s on Germany 2009 and Japan 2013, Alonso’s on Japan 2012, Massa’s on Singapore 2011…

    He did hit Hamilton’s tyre HARD. It would be a tremendous luck if Hamilton managed to walk away from that unscathed. And Rosberg lost some 6s on a longer pit stop and maybe another 6s driving slowly for the next 6 laps until he went for new tyres and a new wing.

LEAVE A COMMENT

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Top Tags
SEARCH News
JA ON F1 In association with...
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer