Home boost for Ferrari?
Monza 2015
Italian Grand Prix
Did Rosberg admit to crashing into Hamilton “on purpose”?
Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton
Posted By: James Allen  |  24 Aug 2014   |  9:56 pm GMT  |  1,014 comments

Sometimes a story comes out which is so sensational it calls for time to carefully study and reflect on the details . And the apparent confession by Nico Rosberg that he crashed into Lewis Hamilton “on purpose”, as it has been reported, is one such story.

If true it would totally undermine Rosberg’s integrity as an F1 driver and as a championship contender. It would devalue his world title if he were to go on and win it – and any future world titles – and would invite some awkward questions from the FIA about his conduct. They have the right to reconvene the stewards if fresh evidence – such as a confession – comes to light after a race, so they will no doubt be keen to find out more about what Rosberg actually said in the meeting.

And given Keke Rosberg’s outspoken attack on Michael Schumacher in Monaco in 2006, where he called him a “cheap cheat” for deliberately crashing his car in qualifying to take pole (although Schumacher never admitted to it, the stewards decided it was deliberate), it would also set him on a collision course with his own father.

So did Rosberg admit to hitting Hamilton “on purpose”, or not?

Hamilton puncture

After the race and following a heated team meeting, Lewis Hamilton told the written press that Rosberg had admitted he did it “on purpose” as he had wanted to ‘make a point” when they crashed on the second lap of the race.

“We just had a meeting about it and he basically said he did it on purpose,” said Hamilton. “He said he could have avoided it, but he didn’t want to. He basically said, ‘I did it to prove a point.’ “

The initial press reports said that a Mercedes spokesman had confirmed that Hamilton’s comments were an accurate reflection of what had been said.

Here lies the confusion. Rosberg did apparently say that he had not backed down “to prove a point”. But this is a very different thing from admitting that he had deliberately crashed into Hamilton; done it “on purpose”, which is a huge and terrible thing to admit and which would invite heavy sanctions.

The only comparable precendent would be the Nelson Piquet Jr admission in 2009 that he had deliberately crashed his car in Singapore on orders from his team management to help his Renault team mate to win a race. This led to temporary bans on Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds.

So did Hamilton interpret Rosberg saying that he kept going to make a point, as an admission that he did it in purpose, or was Rosberg explicit in admitting it was deliberate? If the latter, it was not only out of character for a man who is careful with his words, it was an extremely foolish thing to say as it could only lead to extreme sanctions.

At about the same time as Hamilton’s quotes were circulating, Rosberg – who had declined to comment straight after the race until he had reviewed the incident on video – posted on social media that it was a “racing incident” as far as he was concerned and that the stewards had clearly seen it the same way, by taking no action.

When the media reports claiming Rosberg’s sensational confession began to emerge Toto Wolff clarified the situation, by saying, “Nico felt he needed to hold his line. He needed to make a point and for Lewis it was clearly not him who needed to be aware of Nico. They agreed to disagree in a very heated discussion among ourselves.

“But it wasn’t deliberate crashing. This is nonsense.”

Hamilton and Rosberg

When quizzed further by this website, the Mercedes spokesman who had originally been credited with confirming Rosberg’s words, said that all he had confirmed was that Rosberg had said he wanted to prove a point by continuing with the attempted pass.

He said that he had never confirmed that Rosberg had admitted to crashing into Hamilton “on purpose”.

At a briefing attended by this website, Wolff had earlier spelled out his anger that this accident had happened, calling it an “unacceptable level of risk” and saying that he felt “let down” by Rosberg initiating an incident, which had led to the team losing another win – the second win thrown away in the last three races – and implied that he would be sanctioning Rosberg for this breach of their agreement. “It cannot and will not happen again, “ he said.


He said he would now have to apply firm rules with strict punishments should one of his drivers break those rules. Agreements had been in place between the team and both drivers that they would not get into a situation where one car hit another and Rosberg had violated that by triggering this incident.

But again, this is not to say that Rosberg deliberately crashed into Hamilton. Some pundits have described it as “clumsy” driving by Rosberg and it certainly looked to this observer like he insisted too much in a position where he was unlikely to succeed. Team chairman Niki Lauda told this website that he was especially angry with Rosberg for doing this on lap two of a long race.

The decision by Lauda and Wolff in the immediate aftermath of the race to criticize Rosberg, as well as the boos from some sections of the fans under the podium put Rosberg in a bad light. Hamilton’s comments inflamed this.

The only course of action now is for the team to take control of the situation and issue a clear statement of exactly what Rosberg said in that meeting with regard to “making a point”, clarifying beyond any doubt whether Rosberg admitted to “doing it on purpose”, as Hamilton contends.

This would need to be a statement to which Hamilton and Rosberg also put their names, so that there can be no doubt as to what was said.

Anything less than that will create a vacuum, a space for interpretation, which would be hugely damaging to the team and which could cause more damage to its title charge and its image than any number of collisions between drivers.

There is no doubt that Mercedes are now spooked. The rejuvenated form of Red Bull, particularly its now extremely efficient energy recovery system, the third win for Ricciardo, which brings him to 35 points behind Hamilton in the drivers standings, with seven races to go and with the spectre of double points for the last race have scared the team into thinking they could throw the championship away if they allow any more stupid things to happen.

The idea that this astonishing Mercedes car, which has dominated the first six months of the season, could end up not carrying one of its drivers to the title is unthinkable to Wolff, Lauda and the Daimler board member who got the full blast of Hamilton’s anger as he stepped from the car.

The essence of the matter is this: having lost the start to Hamilton, Rosberg felt he was faster and was determined to repass his team mate. With Hamilton covering the inside line, Rosberg was forced to look outside. He was not far enough alongside to pass into the second part of the chicane as Hamilton took his normal line. Rosberg clearly insisted on the attempt and for that reason they touched with Rosberg’s wing endplate cutting Hamilton’s tyre.

Hamilton now lies 29 points behind Rosberg with seven races to go and double points at the last race. If this is classed as a mistake by Rosberg, rather than a deliberate act, this will be the second time this season he has lost out to a mistake by his team mate, after incident in qualifying at Monaco.

Featured News
Editor's Picks
Share This:
Posted by:
  1. Bernard says:

    Not backing out “to prove a point” is effectively causing pre-meditated collision. That’s the issue, he could have backed out but chose not to.

    Schumacher vs. Rosberg – Spa 2010:


    1. Lindsay says:

      Everyone praises Senna for not yielding and/or forcing his way through.

      1. ALi Kaiser says:

        But Senna was always punished. and it would be fair if Nico’s result was disqualified from SPA. Magnussen didnt cause a chrash and he got penalized so Nico should be punished also

      2. Bryce says:

        Racing incident for mine, and similar to others jostling for position late in the race.

        Like HAM the driver, but not so much when he speaks.

      3. Mike from Medellin says:

        Senna was skilfull. Rosberg is not a good overtaker.

      4. Justabloke says:

        I was and still am an ardent Senna fan, but you need to acknowledge that the world moves on. What really annoyed me about Senna and Schumacher was that neither of them needed to do what they did on their darker days. Schumacher / Hill Australia for example.

      5. Steve Rogers says:

        I don’t praise Senna for his “let me through or crash” policy. It was unsporting and whenever he got away with it, it flattered his skill and gave him undeserved points. Rosberg yesterday tried something reminiscent but Hamilton had no time to react. It was clumsy and reckless. Basically Rosberg was too tight to Hamilton and didn’t leave enough space.

      6. Andrew says:

        Senna was one of the dirtiest drivers F1 has seen so please don’t use him as an example.

      7. Monza 71 says:

        Not everyone praises Senna’s behaviour on track.

        I and many other true enthusiasts for the sport think that the “win at all costs” attitude displayed by Senna and on occasions by Michael Schumacher detracted from their reputation as a driver.

        You would never have seen this kind of behaviour from Fangio and Moss, in my view the two greatest drivers we have ever seen behind the wheel of a racing car.

      8. aveli says:

        why don’t you site one example of senna being dirty on track. senna crashed once with prost because the fia stitched him up with the pole position and prost crashed into him the previous year to win the championship, returning the favour.
        apart from the above, there isn’t another example of senna being dirty on track that I know of so please educate me.

      9. Bill says:

        If either of these two is to be compared to Senna in terms of his aggressiveness on track, it is Hamilton, not Rosberg. In the two races previous to Spa Hamilton had numerous instances of contact with other cars as he forced his way through as he came from the back. Hamilton has always driven with the attitude that it is other drivers duty to get out of his way. Had Rosberg attempted this pass on Alonso there would not have been a collision…. Alonso would merely have given Rosberg room, tracked around the outside of the corner and still been ahead at the exit. Hamilton is a very fast driver but still an incomplete talent when it comes to racing fairly against other cars. Rosberg rightly let him know that his aggressive driving will not work against him.

      10. David Ryan says:

        ALi Kaiser: Senna was very rarely punished for his on-track conflicts with other drivers – indeed, he escaped punishment for his 1990 coming-together with Alain Prost at Suzuka, possibly one of the most dangerous deliberate acts of its day. Compared with modern standards, he got away with quite a lot.

        aveli: Look up Senna’s F3 battles in 1983 with Martin Brundle on YouTube, if they’re still available. There’s quite a lot to pick from there. As Brundle himself said, Senna often put drivers in a position where they were going to have a crash and let them decide whether they wanted to crash or not.

      11. David Young says:

        aside from Prost, did he ever take anyone out?

      12. Mal says:

        Only when Sena’s car had a significant part along side the other car AND ALSO when it is a conner for an overtake.

        what rosberg did was not right.

      13. Mark Wesseling says:

        This is the best analysis of the incident i have seen so far. Thank you for that, i could not. have said it better.

        In my opinion you are spot on. I just cannot understand how all these so called F1 journalists did not come to the same or similar analysis of the incident. Looks like they are just media spokesmen of the pr-guys trying to spread the most convenient message for their clients, instead of being the independent self thinking people they claim to be.
        They are just too scared to say the obvious truth for losing the chance on future interviews with anyone of the players in this saga…

        On the incident itself: it was going to happen sometime considering Lewis’ track attitude. I think we can all remember incidents with Massa and one i clearly remember on a wet Monza (the year Vettel won in the Toro Rosso):
        Lewis passing Timo Glock in the Toyota and forcing him off the track. I remember myself thinking: if i were Timo, i would never have gone into the grass, then just the inevitable crash with the title contender.

        Seeing it from that perspective just makes it obvious that Lewis would sometime find another driver that has the same balls he has and is up front in the championship and not backing of because it doesn’t hurt him to crash.
        If Lewis just had left a meter of room extra for Nico at the start of the corner squeezing it slowly to the apex, nothing would have happened: they clipped the rear wheel with the front wing in a situation where Lewis had more speed than Nico and the situation had resolved itself.
        Ever seen something similar happen to Schumacher? He always left just enough room without a millimeter more than necessary, only times it gone wrong was with his intention (Adelaide comes to mind) or with less skillful drivers…

    2. Vinola says:

      Precisely, especially when Lewis could not have known Nico wasn’t backing down.
      I’ve lost quite a bit of respect for Nico because of this incident, especially when taken with the Monaco fiasco

      1. JackL says:

        Nico made a stupid move, but the team put the drivers in that position. At the start of the race they said they would let their drivers race, but they would have to follow the same strategy and couldnt undercut, so how is that racing? It couldve left Nico feeling that he had to attack at the start or the race was over from there (he couldnt try an alternate strategy, couldnt undercut, and lost the position at the start).
        If Mercedes are going to let them race, then let them race, different strategies and all.

      2. PeterF says:

        @Vinola this is THE issue. ROS was not making a point to HAM at all, who as you say could not have known ROS was there. No ROS is making a point to Mercedes about the team orders at the last race. They way he sees it, HAM did not listen, so why should he? So what if the team lost out, he ROS is racing for himself just like HAM was in the last race.

        @ James Allen you are right in saying ROS would not admit to deliberately crashing of course not, but as HAM said he clearly communicated his ‘point’ to the team (see above) in the inferred meaning in his words. Was this deliberate? Absolutely.

      3. Bobdredds says:

        Senna was the dirtiest/most dangerous driver ontrack but this incident is not like that and there is no need to reference Senna.
        Lewis has taken ontrack liberties with nico on several occasions relying on Nico to back off otherwise they would have crashed. Up to this point it has always been Nico coming off worst against Lewis and I understand why this time Nico decided not to back off. Lewis shut the door and assumed Nico would back off and this time he paid the price. He had track position but he could have easily left a couple of more centimetres to Nico. However he wanted to make sure Nico got the message and Nico in return decided that he was not going to give away this time. Those are the ingredients that made up the incident and both drivers knew exactly what they were doing. The accident was not anybodies fault and was not intentional but in the greater scheme of things it was not avoidable either. It was going to happen at some stage because of the way both approach racing. Nico has been bothered for some time by the “lack of respect” Lewis shows ontrack while Lewis always had the look of innocence claiming “I am here to race” and saying things like “Nico is not my friend”. Lewis was quite happy to create this distance to allow himself space to get away with these incidents while Nico always refrenced their friendship. Nico is more inttelligent than Lewis in this respect and realises he has to make a point on track and now he has done exactly that. The childish booing just shows how immature some fans are and it leaves a sour taste in my mouth to hear it.
        However one other aspect of the weekend bothers me more and that was Lewis claiming that Nico hit him on purpose. Now Lewis understands full well what Nico meant but he has decided to take the childish route and exaggerate what was said. That to me is the worst part of the whole incident because it is a lie and he had no problem in telling a lie. I hope Nico wins the battle and becomes WDC because in my book he deserves it more.

      4. Gaz Boy says:


      5. cartwheel says:

        Bobdredds- perfect analysis. It is clear neither driver respects sportsmanship or each other. The next 7 races will be interesting!

      6. jay says:

        Bobdredd – 110% agree with your comments!

      7. Bradley says:

        Bobdredds +1

      8. jk says:

        Well put. Extremely well explained. 100% on the mark.

        I don’t pretend to be wiser than anyone else, but honestly nothing about the weekend came to me as a surprise, except for one factor.

        I already know what a portion (not all) of Lewis fans are like, especially on English language sites. It is neither productive or constructive to argue with them. They will rally and support their star with different sets of values and priorities. I will not disrespect them by going into a discussion with them.

        Mercedes better hire someone with an ounce of intelligence when it comes to driver management. HOW NAIVE are they? REALLY? They are acting like young /first-time parents!

        Toto… Your comment hurt the team more. Don’t put petrol on fire already out of control. If I get the opportunity ever, please explain to us what your objective and intention was.

        Niki… I still don’t know what you are doing there, but how are your points valid? If you are going to let them race, would you rather see an incident at the beginning and have the chance to rectify it, or do it with 2 laps remaining? Think before you speak. Don’t let emotions control the outcome. You as a team had my utmost respect for allowing 2 talented drivers race against each other.
        Many good things in life comes at a price. The way you as a team are acting now make me believe you were not aware of the risks or consequences.

        Back to the point… What I was shocked about was the fans at spa. If it was Silverstone, I get it. There was a considerable bunch of them booing, and if that was an accurate representation (which I hope not) of what the important (to the sport) paying F1 fans are like, all I can say is that my days are numbered.

      9. +100 for Bodredds and JK’s comments. Absolutely on the mark in all respects! As long as the FIA remain accepting of the behaviors, then we have what we have. Posturing and blaming will continue.

        Anyone wonder about the “logic” of the post-race press pit “comment” from one of the drivers involved that if he had not been hit the team could have had a 1 – 2 finish? Why is that the important issue at this event when that logic seemingly didn’t apply to his performance in Hungary?

    3. Matthew Cheshire says:

      Only pre-meditated for a fraction of a second – unless his race plan was to pass Hamilton at all costs.

      Hard to believe Nico would plan this given that it makes his Monaco excuse look like a total fabrication.

      Was he proving a point to Hamilton or the team? Given the quick reaction from Lauda and Wolff, was Nico failing to “feel the love” before the race?

      He hasn’t proven anything to Hamilton, just reinforced his belief that Nico will ignore the rules and safety if it suits his campaign.

      So was it a sharp message to Lauda and Wolff?

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Lewis was at fault for not giving room. He has sharply cut across Nico several times this season to force him wide or to slow. Nico has taken evasive action every time and Lewis has got away with it. This time he didn’t. Hard luck, but it’s cheap to complain.

        It’s seeming that Lewis believes he has a Devine right to win. His earthly skills need to improve vastly first.

        Speaking in a non-native language Nico is likely to have given the wrong impression to a heated Lewis. He would clearly have deliberately gone in hard, but he would not have said he was deliberate in causing the damage. But here we have words in a meeting, what does that matter when we have the video evidence?

        Nico was carved up yet again. This is what hot-hatch drivers do on the North Circular. What next? Brake testing? Lewis should be banned for Monza over this, and thrown out completely if he does it again. Who needs hot-heads in F1?

      2. Frank says:

        “Nico was carved up yet again.”

        Really? You are aware that 2 of his teams management are on record blaming him for the collision? And you have seen the TV pictures of Rosberg turning in to Hamilton before the collision?

      3. John says:

        @Michael Powell
        It is clear u are a fan of Rosberg as clearly Hamilton had the right the the racing line since Nico was at no point fully alongside him or ahead, he does not need to leave space and didn’t, its Nico’s job as the guy behind to avoid an accident since hes trying to complete the pass not Lewis which he didn’t do, in fact he felt the need to turn in a second time to make sure he hit hamilton rather than escaping to the run-off area like Vettel on lap 1, Vettel was even further alongside Hamilton at that point but still backed out. In my opinion Vettel is now clearly the better racer than Rosberg considering he can actually make a pass without crashing. Hamilton is the better racing driver and theres nothing Nico can do about it

      4. Monza 71 says:

        Michael Powell : How you could possibly write this after all that we know about this incident beggars belief.

        Anyone who follows F1 could see that the overtake was never going to succeed and Hamilton was driving flat out on the racing line so could not have changed course.

        It was clearly Rosberg’s duty to give way to avoid a collision. I don’t believe it was his intention at the time to cause a crash but when he looked at it on TV he must have recognised there was only ever going to be one outcome.

        This was stupidity brought about by frustration at his failure to go into the lead but the consequences for his championship rival were extreme.

        |n my view he should be given a one race ban which would at least restore fairness. Perhaps this is the kind of consequences Wolff has in mind if the FIA fail to reopen the case and take some action.

      5. Marc says:

        [mod] I havent always stood up for Hamilton but I did yesterday, it was clear to me there was some malice in what unfolded yesterday. Rosberg is one bitter person whonfor me over the course of this season has gone from a competent, useful driver to an absolute cheat who has no respect for the rules or sportsmanship for that matter. The guy needs some severe punishment, for me I think only a ban of some sort is suitable. If he won the title now nobody would respect it, best thing for all involved is if he sits out a couple of races and has a straight and fair fight with hamilton for the rest of the season.

      6. Quade says:

        @Matthew Cheshire
        You are right that Nico went into the race unhappy and the race events are better viewed through that prism.

        The race weekend was not one of the usual ones, on Saturday, the team had held a meeting which was of such gravity that a Daimler board member attended. Lewis seemed quite satisfied with the outcome, but Nico quite the opposite.
        The presence of a Daimler board member points to growing alarm within the Worldwide Mercedes corporation at the adverse publicity they were beginning to get in a year that should be about thumping their chests over their engineering prowess at motorsports technological pinnacle, F1.

        Also, the unprecedented fact that the Daimler board member (alongside 3 of the Merc teams most senior staff) was on hand in the garage to welcome Lewis’s retiring car, gives credence to the significance of Saturdays meeting. Things would have been said with a finality that gave Rosberg goose bumps and a seething rage, it has since come out that he expressed deep anger toward the team (source is Lewis), particularly at Paddy Lowe and Toto Wolfe.

        To make matters worse, Lewis easily beat him into the first corner. He might have beaten himself over it and in a haze of red mists, decided to “make a point,” or with Saturdays meeting in mind, he might have imagined that the team had somehow conspired to cause his slow getaway off the line and again, decided to “make a point” about it.

        The likely conclusions that can be drawn is that the crash was a result of deep seated anger, maybe even a dangerous rage, or a sense of being cheated (or entitlement).

      7. jk says:

        Life is like a game of chess. Those who can only think 1 move ahead are always reacting to scenarios unfolding.

        I will not fully understand Mercedes’ thinking or priorities until I see the transcript to the Saturday morning meeting (which is never)

        But Rosberg has made his mind up. It is totally zugzwang time.
        Damage done, due to naive management is now beyond repair. People should brace for hard landing. Rosberg is reading this ahead of everyone else at the team.

        Simply put, in poker terms, he is ”all in ”. Nico is aware a chance like this will likely not come again. He wins the championship his way, the team would be forced to love, support and praise him, despite their inner feelings. Doesn’t matter how tainted it may seem to the public, Mercedes have no choice but to parade nico.
        Nico made his mind up, knowing that becoming a ‘webber’ at Merc is nothing to value.

    4. Ryan says:

      In Rosbergs mind he was pushed off the road by aggressive defending by Hamilton in Hungary and Bahrain… Today he decided “nah mate, I’m here, not moving, deal with it”

      It was a clumsy move nothing more. 9 from 10 it would not have caused a puncture and Hamilton would be the bad guy.

      As a non-partisan fan I love it. The tension between the two is the only thing keeping the title hunt interesting. That Mercedes should be re-writing all the record books, but its not!

      1. clyde says:


      2. Bryce says:

        Pretty well on the mark.

      3. harv says:

        Totally agree with your point about Lewis’ defending – another thing to add is that since Nico is ahead in the standings, if they crash, it will more than likely be more detrimental to Lewis. So now Lewis will think twice before defending so aggressively, since he now cannot afford to crash even if it takes them both out. In no way am I defending Rosberg, I think Merc should suspend him for one race (if that’s possible), but if they don’t sanction him appropriately, it was definitely worth the gamble for him.

      4. Neil Mitchell says:

        9 from 10 eh? That’s why out of the 3 similar incidents that race 2 ended up as punctures! That’s 66.6* % for that race alone not 10% – Do you know what you are talking about?

        The sidewall is the weakest part – Rosberg knew what he was doing just like he did in Monaco – [mod] I have no respect.

        What’s more concerning is that the stewards didn’t pass on a penalty to Rosberg – very curious that when it was so blatantly his fault. The FIA no longer has any teeth.

      5. cartwheel says:

        Absolutely spot on. I have normally been non-partisan as well but seem to be feeling on the side of Nico this year. Lewis has been quite agressive in forcing Nico off the track quite a few times in the past- I am sure behind closed doors that Nico warned Lewis he wasn’t going to let him do that again. It is clear that Lewis tried to make Nico back off and he didn’t this time.

        Nico was a little silly for trying such a thing on lap 2, but that’s a racer- always looking for the opportunity.

        Lewis was silly for not leaving space- they were alongside in the corner and he wasn’t past Nico. He left nowhere for Nico to go and there is no way Nico could have intentionally took out his tire- that is just nonsense.

        When 2 drivers are silly it would seem this is a racing incident.

      6. Quercus says:

        Didn’t you see the video posted by Bernard at the top of this thread? It was Rosberg at the same corner in a previous year “aggressively defending” (your words) ‘his’ corner against Schumacher. ‘Aggressively defending’ is par for the course today. Look how many times Magnussen did it in yesterday’s race and was applauded for it.

        A lot of people seem to have selective memories and/or apply double standards depending on which driver they support.

      7. unF1nnished business says:

        100% agree.

      8. 500 says:

        Sensible take on the situation and I agree

      9. David Young says:

        I’m sure that’s what he was thinking. But Lewis was on the racing line and clearly ahead of Rosberg. By Rosberg’s own admission if he kept his (Rosberg) line there would be a collision. He knew it. It was avoidable. That why Wolfe and Lauda publicly dressed him down.

        For sure he wanted to teach his teammate a lesson and not take him out of the race. Wrong move, wrong time. Stupid move.

      10. aveli says:

        those who are intelligent enough to earn enough money to pay their way to watch the race at spa weren’t happy with what they saw and booed. like it or not those are the people who matter most. they are neither childish nor stupid. rosberg asked them to read the rules before booing. shame he couldn’t elaborate on that.

      11. Freeman says:

        @Ryan: You could not be more off the “point” if you tried.

        Rosberg was making a “point” to Lowe and Wolff, because he was furious that they had failed to make Hamilton follow team orders in Hungary. What did Wolff say had upset him? A lap 2 collision, racing too hard too soon and costing the team a 1-2, something that had been expressly forbidden. So Rosberg went out and expressly disobeyed, just like in his view, Hamilton had disobeyed in Hungary and not let him(ROS) through when the team told him(HAM) to. Rosberg’s “point” was to Lowe and Wolff: “If Hamilton does not have to listen then neither do I. Look, a crash on lap 2. What you going to do about it now? Unless you want more of the same make Hamilton low the line!”

      12. Michael Powell says:

        Yes, it was great entertainment, far better than the last four years of tedium that the Austrian fizzy-drink managed.

        All this is like the Senna-Prost days. We can remember the glow, but I’m not able to recall who one.

        In the end does anyone care, except the drivers and their dads, as long as it amuses for a few hours on Sunday. Actually, I fall asleep between laps 20 and 40 most races so it’s still not as good as a decent opera.

    5. Tickety-boo says:

      100% correct.

      1. darima says:

        Are you for real? Nico didn’t have the move to try, it was clearly lewis ‘s corner, what Nico did was beyond foolish, potentially life threatening in my book, thus proving monico was no mistake, another no holds bared German, using his old team mates tactics

      2. Tickety-boo says:

        Darima, I’m in total agreement with Bernard, if you look above…. And no, based on this, I don’t believe Monaco was an error either, or his Bahrain antics of previous years. His despicable driving (he can’t go wheel-to-wheel with anyone on a skills basis) has slipped under the radar compared to a Pastor M, for example.

    6. Gudien says:

      Drivers ‘prove a point’ all the time with their competitors. Nothing new. That doesn’t make it a crime or conspiracy as Lewis Hamilton would have us believe in his public pronouncements.

      A couple questions;

      Do Mercerces really want to sign a contract extension with a driver (Hamilton) so inclined to malign his team and teammate from one weekend to the next?

      Did Wolff and Lauda really think they could ‘manage’ the aspirations of 2 top drivers by allowing one after the other to take turns pushing the limits of rules within the team?

      If things at Merc really are as diabolical as Lewis Hamilton infers why would he stay?

      With much talk this year of the public losing interest in Formula One is this all a sorry ploy to increase viewers?

      Note: I always thought Nigel Mansell was the ultimate ‘Drama Queen’ when it came to F-1 drivers. Move over Nige.

      1. FastGuy says:

        I’ll second that Mansell comment…”lion-hearted” my ass.

      2. Nimrod424 says:

        I agree. This has been simmering for a while now. I think Nico was annoyed at certain actions Lewis has been taking on track such as Bahrain and Hungary, along with the comments about his nationality and the insinuations that it is only his car that breaks down, the hints that Nico cheated in Monaco and the “We’re friends .. No we’re not friends” see saw that Lewis swings on. In Canada they were both being interviewed and Lewis playfully stuck his left arm on Nico’s right shoulder. The look he gave Lewis would have ignited paper. So I think Nico was out to prove a point and it ended in an over optimistic move and a clumsy collision. Nico was wrong yesterday through poor driving, but a cheat ??, no.

        Lewis is a great driver but there seems to be a gap in his headwork. He has more than a touch of Mansell about him in that if he doesn’t win its someone else’s fault and the whole world is against him. Tweeting team data a prime example. As a Brit I would love to see him win the title but I don’t think he will. I find the use of the word “basically” in his quote interesting. He doesn’t outright say Nico hit him on purpose, he covers himself by saying he “basically” said that. Lewis often likes to portray himself as a full out balls on attacker, well Nico is entitled to do the same. Yes, he screwed up yesterday but the writing is on the wall. Only the Merc bosses can stop it, though you cannot help but feel that Ross Brawn would have managed it better.

      3. ALi Kaiser says:

        Senna was always punished for causing a crash . and it would be fair if Nico’s result was disqualified from SPA. Magnussen didnt cause a chrash and he got penalized so Nico should be punished also

      4. Luis G says:

        Everybody seems to forget what happened at the start of the Canadian GP, where Nico has thrown Ham away the same way everybody does when they are entitled the racing line.

      5. Quercus says:


        How can you accuse Hamilton of “insinuations that it is only his car that breaks down”? How can it be an ‘insinuation’ when it’s an unequivocal fact that ROS’s car has only broken down once this year to HAM’s three?

        If you’re insinuating HAM is accusing Mercedes of sabotaging his car then you’re wrong: HAM is only referring to his bad luck.

      6. Until the FIA acknowledge that there is an obligation to provide “racing room” amoung competitors and remove their support for drivers attempting to run others into walls on straights or off the road in corners, there will be these types of controversies. Nimrod424′s observation just above and Michael Powell’s earlier observation:

        “Lewis was at fault for not giving room. He has sharply cut across Nico several times this season to force him wide or to slow. Nico has taken evasive action every time and Lewis has got away with it. This time he didn’t . . .” reflect the current climate supported by the existing rules.

        Further, when a “fan view” from supporters of one driver compared with another come into the picture, it introduces an emotional component of the individual conclusions. One who supports will say that it is evidence of “necessary ruthlessness” or the “killer instinct” of someone who is or is deserving of a championship while another will say that one or the other is a “dirty” driver – an observation not a criticism in any way.

        FWIW, there is an alternative perspective which may be helpful for viewing veiled forms of ‘blocking’ under the guise of ‘defending’ one’s position (Hungary and Bahrain ? as well as many others not involving these particular drivers) which might prove positive for the FIA to consider:

        “Drivers are responsible to avoid physical contact between cars . . . Each competitor has a right to racing room, which is generally defined as the right to racing room which is defined as sufficient space on the marked racing surface that under racing conditions, a driver can maintain control of his car in close quarters. . .” (while) “The overtaking driver is responsible for the decision to pass another car and to accomplish it safely. . .The overtaken driver is responsible to be aware that he is being passed and not impede or block the overtaking car.”

        Otherwise, in a close racing situation, both drivers involved should know they share the “risk” for the outcome of any particular situation and/or the resulting incident. The alternative is the current “. . .boys have at it. . .” situation wherein emotions color the analysis.

      7. jon says:

        +1 perfect

      8. jk says:

        @GUDIEN you are wondering the same thing as me. Check out my other post if you have the time.

        @Nimrod424 you are also bang on. You are anything but a nimrod :-)

      9. Sasidharan says:

        “Did Wolff and Lauda really think they could ‘manage’ the aspirations of 2 top drivers by allowing one after the other to take turns pushing the limits of rules within the team?”

        They were taken by surprise. They signed a superstar driver and had a good support driver.They didn’t expect Rosberg to be so competitive. They thought Schumi was aging, hence he managed to beat him.

    7. Andrew M says:

      To be honest, I pretty much don’t care whether it was deliberate or not. The point of the matter is this has given Nico a huge title boost, there will almost certainly be no repercussions (apart from a large media circus) and he will go on to win the title. Whether it was deliberate or not, Lewis has been robbed by something through no fault of his own yet again.

      1. Ross Dixon says:

        Great Point!!

      2. Andrew M says:

        There’s also someone else posting in this thread as “Andrew M”, which is odd because I agree with virtually everything they say. It’s very confusing :)

      3. Mike says:

        C’mon… Poor poor Lewis. Lewis being robbed once again… You can’t be serious. Lewis has to deliver and do what he is paid for. He’s got a huge salary and Mercedes thought he would blow Nico off the track. but he doesn’t deliver and he’s cracking under the pressure from Nico. If he’s so bloody good just drive instead. He was so good the first five races, then his head is his largest enemy – not Nico. He was so sure he was going to be champion again and blew Nico off and now he’s frustrated that he has to fight for it. I agree that Nico was clumsy but Lewis could avoided the situation if he wanted, but he did as he had done before this season against Nico – chop him off. This time he didn’t got away with it. Lewis is probably the fastest out there, but there is so much more to it and Lewis can’t handle that.

      4. Tim W says:

        While the floor indeed may have been severely damaged limiting downforce the cause we can agree was the puncture but also Lewis’s brain fart in trying to set a lap record coming back to the pits which contributed massively to the final outcome. Also I found it unfortunate that Lewis was then almost immediately on the radio asking to be pulled, you would think with the number of sensors and data engineers Andy would be able to inform Lewis the car was still drivable …oh yea he did…Lewis please don’t give up, you did not in the last couple races and even if this time you knew there was no podium giving up was not what your fans wanted to see….I’m sure your side of the garage and team bosses were also unimpressed.

      5. Grabyrdy says:

        No fault of his own ? Not quite. A real pro like Alonso or Button would have found a way of giving Nico enough room not to crash with him instead of pretending he wasn’t there. Sometimes you have to be smart, and Lewis is not sufficiently sure of himself to know when not to insist. Strange in a man with his talent, but there it is.

      6. Bobdredds says:

        To Ali Kaiser, Senna was not punished and he should have been disqualified and banned after Suzuka 90. Prost should be a 5 times WDC.

      7. Rodrigo Luiz Martins says:

        Stop crying! Double points in the final race! Even Ricciardo has a chance. So STOP CRYING

      8. jon says:

        HAM has always caused turmoil both on the track and his teams McLaren and now Merc – send him packing with Lauda and Toto.

      9. Mark C says:

        No, Lewis’s own errors in qualifying at Austria, Canada, Silverstone and Spa are an equal part of his problems this year. I am a fan of his, but when it matters most he makes mistakes under pressure borne out of trying too hard. He needs to take a more mature approach to competition and give more respect to Rosberg who has shown he is as fast as Lewis in the same car. Hamilton needs to change his approach for this very tight battle to one where he forces the errors from Rosberg as a result of sustained pressure. instead, every weekend he resorts to merely trying to blow Rosberg away on pure speed and the result of that pressure on him in qualifying produces his error. It was his error going wide at Eau Rouge that put him on the back foot going into that corner when the incident happened.

        Rosberg’s tougher mental approach to this battle is prevailing over the boy who thinks he has God’s gift.

      10. Michael Powell says:

        You make your own luck often enough. Two cars collide when both are in the same place, and that is controlled by two steering wheels, one in each car.

        There is no pre-booking of “racing-lines” defined in F1, so just share sensibly, children.

        Anyone who needs to see this just needs to look at the first lap of any race where the cars travel two abreast.

        NOBODY follows a racing line. Except Maldonado, obviously.

      11. TimW says:

        Tim W, hi I have been boring people on here for years as TimW, could you come up with another screen name please to avoid confusion, Thanks.
        BTW, a slower lap back to the pits would have guaranteed no points for Lewis as he would have been a lap down, and parking the car when it became apparent that no points were possible was the sensible thing to do as they only have 6 engines for the season, and lewis lost one in the Hockenheim qualifying fire. Enjoy Monza!

      12. TimW says:

        Andrew M (the confused one) unfortunately I have the opposite problem……

    8. Arnie S says:

      I’m not supporting a Merc driver in particular, but:
      If HAM would have given ROS space, and it would have been wheel to wheel through the chicane, then everyone would have screamed “That’s F1 racing – wheel to wheel” (most likely Ham would have taken first position again, since next turn is a right hander)
      If ROS would have gone straight in the chicane (maybe overtaking HAM “illegaly” and let the position back), then it would have been “Nice try Ros”
      Now, ROS was optimistic, HAM defended his line. I think ROS was a bit too optimistic, but after all, its just a “racing incident”

      1. Bogdan says:

        If Rosberg would’ve been alongside Lewis I would agree with you, but he wasn’t. His wing parely clipped Lewis’s rear tyre, so Rosberg had no chance at that corner. So why would Lewis give Rosberg room when he isn’t even alongside him, or half car alongside him.

      2. Neil Mitchell says:

        You don’t understand the rules of F1. That was a rookies mistake at best and pre-meditated at worst (what I believe) because if you don’t have any sizeable part of your car alongside then you have to come out of the move – Hamilton wouldn’t have even seen Rosberg and did not have to give him any space. However, if say Rosberg’s front wheel was alongside Hamilton’s air intake then Hamilton would have had to give him some space for the pass to be completed – as per drivers code of conduct. Hope this is now clear to you.

      3. Alec Tronix says:

        Best summary so far… We need to keep in mind that Nico ‘just’ tagged Lewis’ tyre… with his wing that he can’t see. Another couple of centimetres and we’d all be saying “what great wheel to wheel racing”.

      4. Arnie S says:

        Didn’t I just say that ROS were too optimistic?
        If you look at this, sec 0.11 you’ll see that ROS front wheel is at his side-pod. If HAM wouldnt have ever seen the front wheel of ROS, then I don’t know what to say.

        If you bleieve the worst (as you say) than it’s not much I can do to persuade you.


      5. Bobdredds says:

        100% racing incident.

      6. LasseB says:

        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’.

      7. Nickh says:

        100% not a racing incident.

        He was fed up of Ham closing the door on him at previous races, hungary and Bahrain. Hamilton is entitled to do this (any driver is) if they are ahead in the corner. Thats the rules. Because he is a spoilt brat from Monaco he had a moment of rage inside his helmet and CLEARLY TURNS BACK INTO HAMS TYRE when he knew there would be contact, with no regard for Hams tyre. It is very obvious from the onboard cameras.

    9. I’m with you on that.

      “Some pundits have described it as “clumsy” driving by Rosberg and it certainly looked to this observer like he insisted too much in a position where he was unlikely to succeed.” – +1 from me. I definitely think it was avoidable, stupid and unnecessary. That being said, I certainly lost some respect to Rosberg.

      1. Adrian says:

        From the onboard in Nicos car it shows clearly he turned into Lewis on purpose. How many people turn right to go around a left hander. The FIA need to sort this out quickly. What is it with cheating and German drivers?

    10. Andrew says:

      That video is brilliant, I’d love to see Rosberg be sat down to watch this and the first corner at Canada this year.

      I wonder if he would still think he has the right to ‘make a point’?

      1. Thompson says:


      2. Don says:

        Thank you Andrew. It is astonishing some of the comments here. Both were going for turn 1 in Canada and Lewis realized he wouldn’t make it and took evasive action and lost p2 in the process! At the same race in 2010, MS had to take evasive action b’cos Rosberg was there on the inside. In the same corner, Vettel couldn’t make and backed out on lap 1, given Rosberg the chance to retake p2.
        Rosberg was no where near being alongside Lewis and as with the other drivers, he could have chosen to back out of it and try again on the next lap with DRS plus the fact he said he was faster. So someone tell me this; if you have a chance to avoid something but you choose not to, what’s that called?

      3. JB64 says:

        @Don – Spot on recall and assessment. This issue is black and white, and the people on here turning themselves inside out to twist the facts are just crazy, no other word for it.

      4. cartwheel says:

        To me it is one of the things that annoys me about F1- this belief that it is ok to block/weave/impede/force off the track a driver. We saw it again with Mag this weekend. Nico did block Lewis out in Canada- and Lewis blocked Nico out in Hungary and Bahrain (quite a few times). This sort of activity needs to be handled better.

        Nico still has a point to make- but he made a clumsy move. Lewis also made a clumsy move as he knew Nico was beside him. The driver in front has right to choose his line. Both drivers have a right to race within the limits of the race track. To me the second right trumps the first.

      5. Quercus says:

        Well said, Andrew.

        I am amazed by the double standards being applied by ROS and also by some of his supporters commenting here.

      6. BogRacer says:

        Both drivers have been very aggressive with each other all year. HAM on RPS in b Bahrain was on the limit with his defense, whereas ROS’s blatant chop on HAM in Montreal wasn’t only dangerous, but also gifted 2nd place to Vettel for the opening laps of the race.
        In my opinion, the incident at Les Combes yesterday was nothing more than a clumsy (and silly) attempt at intimidating HAM into leaving space for the switch-back. I doubt ROS actually wanted to touch…then again, he did park it during Quali at Mirabeau this year;).

    11. alex says:

      Oh Come ON!
      it is clear from the incident that it was a genuine, if bad, overtaking manoeuvre. Most of the time the result of that move is that the attacker loses part of the wing (or the entire wing) and is pretty heavily penalised in terms of lap time, whilst the defender stays in front and gains an advantage.

      It is practically impossible to plan an attack where you are guaranteed to break a little bit of your wing and puncture the other car’s tyre. Impossible to do. Therefore impossible to plan.
      How can anyone be silly enough to even think that.

      1. Don says:

        @alex: you seem to be ignoring something Toto said, and I quote “he (Rosberg) deliberately chose not to back out to prove a point”. whether somebody will lose their nose or bottom, Rosberg simply chose not to back out. And I hear you say ‘why has he got to back out’? He had to back out because when they reached the corner, Rosberg wasn’t anywhere near with one third of his car alongside Lewis; Lewis had the racing line. And since he had the racing line and with way more than two thirds of his car in front, he was (rightly) committed to the corner. So the key issue here is since he (Rosberg) was the one behind and NOT on the racing line, he was the one with the option; keep going and cause a collision or back out of a move that was never ever on (as other drivers have done in the same corner) and we know the option he took! so mate, go figure why he made that choice…(my view; at best, it was very clumsy and totally unnecessary on lap 2 of a very long race and at worst very foolish and stupid to do something like that with the potential to take both cars out!)

      2. alex says:

        As I sai, it was a bad overtaking. I did not say Rosberg did it well (if he had done so, he would have been P1 after). However the collision is not the sort of collision that indicates a deliberate crash. look at other incidents of the past: Senna-Prost, Schumaker when he won his first WC, Schumaker against Villeneuve. In all those you see the guy deliberately crash into the SIDE of the opponent, to make SURE he takes him out.

        Rosberg did no such thing. He executed a badly timed and rushed manoeuvre which did not work out and was trying to get back in line, with the result that he broke his wing. Again, please look at the statistics, when this collision happens 90% of the time the attacker loses part of the wing and is penalised.
        So was it silly to do? yes Rushed and unnecessary on lap 2? yes Deliberate cheating (like Senna, Prost, Schumaker, the “greats” of F1 History…) NO!

    12. anarack says:

      I have been an F1 fan for years. This is the first time in those 30 years that I feel I need to do something. How can I (we) complain to the FIA about what happened at SPA yesterday?

      Do we, the fans, followers or whatever you want to call us have any real voice?

      I would like to complain to the FIA for not having a steward’s enquiry over the clash between Rosberg and Hamilton and Petition them to have one now?

      How can I do this? ( and/or any anyone else who may wish to see justice on the race track)..no obvious path I can see…

      1. Pedro says:

        Free on line poll, post it here and tweet the fia?

      2. Rick A says:

        Hard to believe that you have been watching F1 for all these years and this is the first time you have had a complaint. I usually have multiple complaints after almost every race. True that most of them are with the FIA but I have often been disappointed with the lack of sportsmanship in a sport that is often referred to as the sport of gentlemen.
        I don’t think Lewis is perfect in any way but in this particular instance I am of the opinion Nico was furious that Lewis beat him cleanly off the line and was not thinking when he attempted the pass. Whether he did it. Intentionally to wreck Lewis is debatable in some circles.
        The problem as I see it is that because of his poor sportsmanship, should he go on to win the championship he will have to live with the knowledge that his behaviour unfairly hampered Lewis’s championship hopes.
        If we continue to watch F1 we can only expect more of the same. There is hope however. Bernie Ecclestone is 83 how long can he keep his grip on a sport he has been controlling, and badly for decades.
        Cheers from a long time delusions follower of F1.

      3. alan says:

        Totally agree in light of what Ros apparently said privately.
        I think he was angry at been overtaken at the start, he was also festering over Hamilton’s refusal to let him pass in the previous race
        I am a Hamilton fan, but wish I could shake him in losing the head war with Ros.
        I think he should shut up about class, stop slagging Ros in the press and just be cold in the races and qualification, as he is just a better driver than Ros.
        I think the point everyone seem to miss, is, it was a no brainer for Ros to just aim his car at this corner, knowing Hamilton would never back down. But would prove a nice point as well as if they both go out, he will be better off in the championship, another race ticked off, less points for Hamilton.
        So for me a logical sequence of events, if not now, it would have happened soon. The minute hamilton overtook Ros at the start, I knew Ros would get his own back
        In light of this, Ros should be disqualified, also fined and banned.
        He is a thoroughly nasty piece of work and for me also confirmed a previous incident in qualification was also done on purpose
        You cannot have a driver intentionally drive into another driver, he could have killed Hamilton.
        Hamilton also darkly made an oblique comment a while ago about him doing the same in the race, but this was just bluster, but also should have been dealt with and a warning issued
        So for me Get cold Hamilton and keep yer gob shut or get an agent

    13. Anil Parmar says:

      If Nico didn’t back out of Lewis’s move into T1 at Bahrain, would that also have been Nico’s fault and not Hamilton’s for putting the car across him like that? Since Bahrain 2012, the stewards have always put the blame on the lead driver, whether that’s on a corner or straight, as we saw in Monza 2012 or even this year at Germany where they said Massa was to blame.

      1. JB64 says:

        But Massa was to blame?

      2. Quercus says:

        It’s only the fault of the lead driver if the overtaking driver has at least half a length alongside. A following driver can’t expect to be given room if he only sticks his front wheels and wing into the gap. Apart from anything else the lead driver can’t see an overtaking car until it draws at least half a car length alongside.

      3. Jose says:

        Nico has done something way dirtier to Alonso in that same Bahrain track. I can’t recall if it was 2012 or 2013.

    14. Richard says:

      Someone should tell Hamilton to shut up. Every time he goes out to the press to cry about Rosberg it makes him look more and more like the prima Donna he turned out to be. His management company should tell him to keep quiet. I can understand Nico point. Every time they have gone wheel to wheel Hamilton has run him out of the track while Rosberg is overtaking on the outside. Remember Bahrain, Hungary and now spa. This time he said no more and didn’t move out of the way. Well done Rosberg

      1. Sabrina says:

        Lewis and Nico drive for the same team, the team will not instigate an investigation into one of their own drivers, how else is Lewis going to get the attention of the authorities.

    15. martin says:

      If this is racing then I expect some contact on occasion particularly as the margins between avoiding a minor touch or not at those speeds come down to milliseconds, as well as the limited view of the cars extremes from the drivers perspective. I think we wouldn’t be debating any of this minor contact had not Hamiltons tyre punctured. This to me is where the fault lies we need to bring in new front wing edges that do not cut into the tyre sidewalls. I’m sure we have the ability to do so its F1 after all, money no object, this would then allow some occasional contact without penalising either driver or vilifying them for racing as in this case. Recent years have seen so many minor touches result in unnecessary punctures ruining the outcome of the race. Also perhaps to move to one driver teams ( with a background/back-up test driver ) would perhaps put an end to the conflict of interests between two ego inflated drivers. It would be genuinely one against one and perhaps reduce costs as well as open up the field to alternative teams. I think unless you have a mature driver mid career+ mentoring an understudy and working harmoniously ( i.e. respecting their place 1st driver or 2nd as designated ) then playground spats will continue due to their blinkered egotism. Me sir, me sir I’m the best…… F1 seems to be becoming more X-Factor than the respected motorsport it was.

      1. AuraF1 says:

        On Sky, Martin talked to Pirelli about the tyre punctures – essentially hitting the small hashed area just on the hot running upper part of the sidewall has a puncture possibility of something like 90%, whereas any other part of the tyre would be less than 10% – given those odds it’s pretty hard to aim at the tyre and hit a very small cross section on purpose – especially when there’s 100% chance you’ll lose some or all of your front wing – as a crash strategy – the odds are not in your favour.

        If Rosberg had wanted to crash he could have careered straight into Lewis side pod and guaranteed to put his rival out and done equivalent damage to himself.

        I do think its a rather stupid attitude to ‘make a point’ that he won’t move for his teammate but it’s likely to have been a spur of the moment fit of bravado rather than a calculated ‘attack’ – if Rosberg really is that calculating he could have looked at the odds of losing his front wing versus the odds of bursting a tyre and found it was a bad bet.

    16. Rossco says:

      Um, not a good example Bernard. Rosberg clearly had the line then and was RIGHT up along side Schumi… Rosberg had the inside line.

    17. Bernard says:

      Rosberg after Hungary:

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

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

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

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


      I think it’s telling that he says one thing on camera and then completely the opposite behind closed doors. He allegedly blamed Hamilton for not leaving enough space (according to Hamilton and confirmed by Lauda), yet referring to the Hungary attempt in the video above, he admits Hamilton was not required to leave space as he was not sufficiently along side to claim position.

      Hamiltons defending was perfectly within the accepted bounds as set out by the any racing code of conduct, ALL drivers have done it and ALL will continue to do it – including Rosberg as seen against Schumacher in the video above.

      The difference however is clear, 4 times world champion Vettel bailed out during the same manoeuvre on the previous lap, 7 times world champion Schumacher bailed out to avoid a collision as Rosberg closed the door on him in 2010 – as did the following world champions in 2012.

      Rosberg vs Hamilton Bahrain 2012:


      Rosberg vs Alonso Bahrain 2012:


      If you CAN avoid a collision then you must try to avoid it, simple as that. Anything else demented.

      Rosbergs (growing) frustration is born out of his apparent inability to gain the upper hand against Hamilton in a straight fight and he hates that fact with a passion. So much so he his willing to do take increasingly unsporting, almost rash decisions whilst at the wheel and that’s a dangerous combination in anyones book.

      1. Jose says:


        Nico must cool down. Seems to me he panicks every time he finds Lewis in front of him and it’s getting worse.

      2. Quercus says:

        Very well said, Bernard; backed up with very good evidence. That’s my reading of the situation exactly.

        Rosberg was showing his frustration at losing his lead at the start. It was a hot-headed moment which belies the great intelligence he’s said to possess. Let’s hope his dad has a quiet word with him. If Mercedes or the FIA don’t penalise him in some meaningful way it will be a bad day for the sport. Rosberg and all other drivers in his position need to know that this is not an acceptable tactic in order to win a championship.

      3. Richard Mee says:

        Completely agree… We can all accept that Lewis is mentally less robust than Nico… But at this time I hope he takes comfort that he’s also just fundamentally quicker than Nico. Even Nico’s most ardent supporters (who mainly like him out of dislike for Lewis if seems) will not deny this. I really hope Lewis keeps it together and looks at the next 5 seasons because cream will always rise to the top.

      4. Msta says:

        To cite the example of Vettel bailing out on lap 1 is an inaccurate comparison. Vettel had to take to the runoff area because he outbraked himself and couldn’t actually turn in to make the corner.

        Nico had made ground on Lewis, braked sufficiently, took the corner and earned his piece of track. He had every right to be where he was even if the actual pass couldn’t be completed at that point in time.

    18. Tony says:

      I agree 100% with you and what seems to be all of the ex-F1 drivers, including Nicky Lauda, that Nico was responsible for the collision. Nico has shown his true colours: 1) he wanted to make the point that, as he can’t pass Lewis fairly on the track, when he next gets close enough to ‘have a go’ he would not avoid contact even if Lewis has the corner, is ahead and on the racing line; 2) he is prepared to do anything to win the 2014 WDC, including cheating in Monaco Q3; cutting the corner to stay ahead of Lewis in Montreal and now Spa; 3) we can’t believe anything he says as he lies to the media and F1 fans all over the world before telling the truth behind the team’s closed doors; and 4) he unecessarily insults the British F1 fans – who happen to come from the team’s home country and one of the best markets for new Mercs in the world. Not something Daimler’s top management and PR would have appreciated and they also can’t be too happy given that they don’t spend a fortune on F1 to have a driver deliberately not avoiding hitting his team-mate’s car. They also won’t want the Mercedes brand to be tarnished by allegations that they hire drivers who behave as Nico has done this year without meting out suitable punishment. The only way that Mercedes F1 can salvage this year in terms of honourably securing the WCC and WDC is by forcing Nico to watch the next race at Monza from his humble abode in Monaco and telling both drivers that if there are any further crashes, the responsible party will be punished in exactly the same way. Failure to do that will also generate a lot of questions about the competence of Mercedes’ F1 management and, by association, those back at HQ in Germany.

      1. PeterF says:

        Rosberg was making a point to Wolff and Lowe, that if Hamilton does not have to follow team orders (Hungary) then neither does he. Wolff said not to takes each other out, so he did just the opposite, THIS was his point. In effect it’s a low level blackmail, the team must get Hamilton out his way or everyone will lose. I think he would rather see Red Bull win again than lose to Hamilton. Mercedes has a big problem, bigger than it looks, this is not over.

    19. Robert Daniel says:

      Hamilton was as skillful with his “Rosberg admitted he crashed into me” allegation as he was in diving across the track towards the second, left-hand part of the chicane – in other words, not very! After all, Toto Wolf said it was “nonsense” to say Rosberg made that admission and a close look at the replay shows Rosberg didn’t deviate from his line – it was Hamilton who crossed towards the left-hander and, in the process, ran into Rosberg. Hamilton admitted that he kept to his normal racing line through the corner and he claimed that even Alonso would agree that Rosberg should’ve slowed to make way for him. If that was true, the stewards would surely have penalized Rosberg after the race. No, Hamilton says it was not his job to make room for Rosberg nor, indeed, to actually know where Rosberg was. By inference, it was his right to stay on his normal line and everything would be ok because Rosberg would let him through. But Rosberg did not because if Hamilton had not cut across the front of Rosberg, the latter may have succeeded with his overtaking attempt by then having the inside line into the left-hander and Hamilton may have been forced to slow or be forced wide, off the track. Hamilton knew this so he kept to his racing line. When two racers go at it, especially from the same team, the rule should be that they not hit each other and, as such, with each doing his part to comply with that rule, Hamilton wouldn’t have crossed because he didn’t have the room to do so (not arguable – when he did cross, he made contact with Rosberg). Should Rosberg have attempted this move so early in the race? No, because it was risky, no matter who should have done what in getting through the chicane. But this Hamilton nonsense of “he was less than half a car length beside me so he should’ve backed off” is nonsense – what next? Have the drivers go out with measuring tapes so they can get accurate readings of who is exactly where in a corner at over 100 mph? I knew something was coming when I read Hamilton’s ridiculous statement about how it was better for him to have been 2nd on the grid instead of on pole…and don’t say he was right because he got away first – Rosberg got away slowly. I remember many of these things happening in 2007 during Hamilton’s inaugural season as he ruined Alonso’s chances of securing a third, successive world championship. In Hungary alone, with Hamilton not following team orders before the race even took place, Alonso retaliated by delaying Hamilton in the pits and, as a result, Alonson was docked five places on the starting grid…and Alonso lost the championship by one point at the end of the season – a point he could’ve easily earned, and more, at that race in Hungary. Hamilton then seemed young, brash and foolish. Today, he’s no longer young but he still brach and foolish sometimes. And now, he’s added a tendency now to come out with untrue statements like “it’s better for me to be 2nd on the grid and not on pole” and “Rosberg admitted he hit me on purpose.” Hamilton also has to learn that teams are not spending millions so he can win a world championship – they’re spending that money so that he’ll drive in the best interests of the team.

    20. will says:

      Of course the spectators booed Rosberg. the fans paid good money to see a fight between these two for the whole race not for it to be over on the second lap,Rosberg was only thinking of himself not the team or the fans. I guess when you have a new contract under your belt you think you can do anything.

    21. Nickh says:

      clearly not a racing incident.

      how can it be when he turned away from Ham and then had a daddys boy spoilt brat tantrum and turned back into him. Not a racing incident. A racing incident is when 2 drivers collide without intention to do so. Rosberg clearly intended to do so by turning back in when ham was still in the corner and next to him

  2. Martin Fent says:

    Rosberg should be banned. [Mod]If thats the way he wants to win it then so be it. You reap what you sow.

    1. Anop says:

      Clearly Nico is saying all this to get under Lewis’s skin, who we all know gets distracted a lot by stuff that goes on in the paddock.

      Don’t see how FIA can punish Nico. Saying something is not a crime, specially when it’s clear that he just wants to get into Lewis’s head and guess what he succeeded.

      Lewis has a habit of not following team orders which irks his teammates as he breaches a pre set contract. Anyone remember who started not following orders at Hungary 2007?

    2. Alastair Purves says:

      Utter Nonsense. Hamilton’s hysteria further reduces his already low credibility to zero.As Gudien says above, a drama queen of Mansell-like proportions.

    3. Andrew says:

      We shouldn’t forget Rosberg’s. Monaco incident just a little too much of a coincident that his teammate and biggest rival suffered the consequences.
      Perhaps Rosberg spent a little to much time in the company of M Schumacher.

  3. Doug SA says:

    Simply desperate from Rosberg. Embarrassing.

    1. KRB says:

      It is embarrassing. To prove a point?!? So he’s just decided that his ambitions are that much greater than the entire Mercedes team, that he was willing (or at least, not averse to) to suffer some contact, to presumably show he’s not a soft touch? It boggles the mind. Seeing as this season, most front wing vs. rear tire contact has led predominantly to only broken front wings, one would have to think that he deliberatly scythed in on Hamilton at the precise moment where he knew that it would puncture his tire. You can see that Rosberg again saws the wheel, turns right, goes left (he would’ve been fine just correcting from that), and then throws it back right again, right when Hamilton’s left rear is in line with his front wing endplate.

      The thing is, he benefitted hugely from it, and is now 29 pts ahead of Lewis. So in ordinary circumstances, he would be the driver for Mercedes to back. Perhaps they still will, but I must say I was surprised by the level of booing Rosberg copped. Sure, there is likely a big British contingent attending Spa, but it’s silly to believe that it was only the British F1 fans that were booing Rosberg. I would imagine that this booing is going to follow him around, even in Italy next time out. No doubt Mercedes want to feel good about their eventual drivers champion (I’m not even contemplating the total calamity – for Mercedes – of a Ricciardo win), and I think there has to be some questions now about whether Rosberg – if he won – would be that moral and unquestioned champion that Mercedes no doubt want.

      1. C63 says:

        I think there has to be some questions now about whether Rosberg – if he won – would be that moral and unquestioned champion that Mercedes no doubt want…..

        That’s an interesting point. Of the two Mercedes drivers, there is simply no argument as to which of them is the more marketable. Even the Germans don’t care about Rosberg – confirmed by the empty seats at Hockenheim and also by Michael Schmidt a German journalist who writes for Auto Motor Und Sport. On the other hand, Nico is 29 points in front and is the obvious choice to back. Tough decisions for the management team in the coming weeks.

      2. Gaz Boy says:

        Rosberg Junior is a liability. Simple as.
        Still, what goes around comes around in this world……………..

      3. Bryce says:

        Come off it. Drivers cannot even see their front wing, let alone trying to line it up in the middle of a corner. Silly, one-eyed comment.

      4. Brent says:

        It looked to me like the left/right movements were meant to keep Rosberg on the track without hitting Hamilton. He just ran out of room when Hamilton slammed the door.

      5. KRB says:

        @Bryce, try this: grab a ball, look up at the sky, and throw the ball straight up. Now with your arms down and out of sight, catch the ball. Pretty easy, right? Same thing with the front wing … while they might not be able to physically see it, they will have a sense of where it is in relation to their car at all times.

        Looks to me like Rosberg pulled left to avoid a rear tire vs. front tire kiss (usually front tires lose there), then turned full right when it was FW vs. left rear. It was either deliberate, or a totally rookie move. Rookie moves from 9-yr vets will raise some eyebrows.

    2. Alastair I says:

      Embarrassing……I have to agree. It is staggering that an organisation such as Mercedes F1 can be so well funded, resourced and get so many things right yet be so reactionary in their management. Whilst they have done a fantastic job with the car they are clearly completely out of their comfort zone in managing two competitive personalities – they are professional sports people for crying out loud, they have massive egos that are also extremely sensitive. Whilst describing Rosberg as desperate is going too far I think embarrassing is fair. There is fairly strong competition from HAM as to who was more embarrassing on the day given his reaction to the situation. Neither driver is responding positively to the pressure and that is the biggest concern for Mercedes as neither is worthy of being world champion at this time. Thank God RIC isn’t in a Mercedes or else it would be 2004 again!!!

      1. Andrew says:

        I notice that a survey on Auto Motor Und Sport as to whether or not the move by ROS was either stupid or a racing incident has the voting at 52% in favour of it being stupid. I think ROS is even losing the popularity stakes at home too, not just with British fans.

        I notice also that ROS had developed some sort of facial tic when being interviewed in the press area after the press conference. I tend to think he is not going to have a very comfortable two weeks in the run up to Monza.

    3. Peter says:

      Embarrassing – Great word – sums up how us Brits should feel about Lewis’s lack of finesse when dealing with the press – actually every time he opens his mouth.

      1. Bryce says:


      2. Anil Parmar says:

        It’s very bad, isn’t it? Whenever Rosberg is interviewed, he absolutely nails it. He never gives anything away and he respects the team enough to keep his mouth shut. Maybe it’s Lewis’s underdog mentality but I’ve had enough.

      3. Tara says:

        Exactly it’s all “heart on the sleeve” stuff. Excuse me while roll my eyes and switch channels.
        If there’s a phrase that beats “for sure” that it.

      4. Doug SA says:

        I watch F1 for the skill and racecraft of drivers, i.e. racing entertainment. If you want eloquent skilled orators and sublime communicators then I think you better turn your attention to the politicians in the House of Commons mate.

      5. Doug SA says:

        Basically, Rosberg’s racecraft was embarrassing, as further exemplified by his…..uuummmh, lets just call it failed attempt on Vettel, where he horribly flatspotted his front left. Thats not the sign of a master at the pinnacle of his craft???? Thats why, EMBARRASSING!!!!!

      6. Bearforce1 says:

        Same for me. Awkward to watch and hear from Lewis.

        @ Tara, If this is “heart on the slave”, the real Lewis Hamilton it just shows him to be a fragile and weak young man.

      7. Pedro says:

        I’ll second that Doug SA

        Doug SA says:
        August 25, 2014 at 10:51 am
        I watch F1 for the skill and racecraft of drivers, i.e. racing entertainment. If you want eloquent skilled orators and sublime communicators then I think you better turn your attention to the politicians in the House of Commons mate.

      8. alan says:

        True, lewis is not the best in dealing with the press, but fortunately he was chosen as a driver.
        I am not sure good word smith’s make great drivers.
        I know who I would rather have in my racing team

      9. Carol says:

        [mod]. I am a Brit and his interview at Spa was both well thought out and with a great deal of finesse. Instead of making a stupid personal comment why don’t you make a constructive one about the way Rosberg deliberately tried to run into him on the race track when Lewis Hamilton had the racing line.He should of backed off but we all know why he didn’t don’t we.

  4. Pkara says:

    Have a look on slow motion on Sky F1 (I hate the channel but they did a break down of Rosbergs steering turn he does a second turn into rear tyre of Lewis ! Blatant & unsporting Rosberg shows his sqeaky clean character is a fake disguise! He should get a race ban from Mercedes to even the score).
    Though as Lewis said they’ll gi s him a telling off & thats that.
    Rosberg cannot race Lewis in a Dogfight. ..Lewis has race craft & Rosberg has none.
    Shamble podium interview with Jordan having his lips firmly lodged in the rear of Rosberg.
    Can Lewis get a fair crack at the whip with this duffer in the team… I guess that is not going to happen unless Lewis takes matters I his own hands & does exactly the same to Falseberg.

    1. Bruno Menilli says:

      Roseberg turned slightly to the right to stay on the tarmac – not to hit Hamilton, and as a result of a misjudgment they made contact.

      Of course there can, and will be many many different views on this but I believe that at the end of the day it will be seen as a racing incident – just as the Steward’s decided.

      1. Andrew says:

        Not sure you can call it a “misjudgment” when Rosberg has said that he placed his car intentionally to make a point.

    2. I don’t believe the team can ban a driver for one race as they are contracted to the series. What they can do is give him a dodgy set of tyres or turn down the engine for qualifying or a slow pit stop during a race to make sure they keep their drivers separated on the track (tactics Red Bull seemed to resort to during the Vettel/Webber conflict). At the start of the year I was actually hoping Rosberg would win the title. Now I am hoping anyone BUT Rosberg wins. Wouldn’t it be sweet if Ricciardo jumped both Mercedes (for both Daniel and Ross Brawn).

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Rosberg’s misjudgment was his turning right slightly, without being able to see exactly where his end plate was in relation to Hamilton’s wheel.

    3. DH says:

      Is this the same Lewis that crashes his way through the field whe he messes up quali and has to start near the back?

      1. Alex Mullins says:

        Oh you mean the time when his engine caught fire. Or the one where his brakes disintegrated?

      2. Andy says:

        “messing up quali”: Are you refering to when his brakes went sending him into the barrier or when the car set on fire????

      3. Paul says:

        [mod] Perhaps you should re-watch the races in question. In one (Germany), Hamilton started from the back because a brake disc failed, and in the other (Hungary), because his car caught fire. He came through the field on both occasions, and had remarkably little contact, given the sheer volume of overtakes the circumstances necessitated. The closest to a ‘controversial’ pass was that on Button, which resulted in contact. Jenson was displeased at first, but upon having viewed the incident again, he publicly apologized. I am not sure which races you were watching?

    4. KRB says:

      Mercedes taking Rosberg out of the seat for one race will never happen, unless he does similar again. If they did it now, it would be seen as the team tampering with the drivers’ championship.

      I’ve mentioned before that I had googled an article (it was a NY Times piece) from around the time of Rascasse-gate (Spring 2006), and in it they cited Rosberg who said that Michael’s error was in making it so obvious, and that all the drivers by that time knew how to make deliberate acts look like mistakes, etc. I found it once, but I didn’t bookmark it, and since I’ve been unable to dig it up again. If anyone wants to take a crack at it, I’d appreciate it … then please post it here. A thousand monkeys, and all that …

      1. KRB says:

        You are the man (or woman), Wildwood!!! :-)

        I guess I had focussed my subsequent searches around the time of Monaco 2006 that I never was able to get it again.

        Peter Windsor has claimed that various Merc engineers have told him that they know Nico deliberately spun in Monaco this year, but that they can’t prove it beyond doubt, etc.

        If the reason why the stewards yesterday didn’t decide to intervene was b/c it was a clash between teammates, that would be totally wrong. Their role is to protect the integrity of both championships, and as far as the Drivers’ Championship is concerned, they have to treat each driver as an individual competitor.

      2. Quercus says:

        Just for reference, the quote in the article linked by ‘Wildwood’ is…

        “The ugliest trick came at Monaco this year when Schumacher parked his car in a corner on the last lap of qualifying to prevent anyone from taking his provisional pole position.

        .Nico Rosberg, a driver at Williams, agreed, saying that all drivers had done something similar in their careers. Schumacher’s error, he said, was in doing it so obviously that he got caught – and was penalized – and in not admitting that he did it on purpose.”

        Yet more evidence that a clever bloke like Rosberg knows exactly what he’s doing. Don’t let him fool you.

    5. TGS says:

      Falseberg, lol. F1′s nice guys are falling by the way side. What scandal will envelop Ricciardo??

    6. Tickety-boo says:

      Jordan was truly sickening.

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Not at all, he handled it very well. There was a baying rabble in the crowd who needed to be put in their place, and Eddie did that politely and firmly, it’s the best I’ve seen him perform with a microphone.

        We should be here to see a race, not shout for our favourites. It’s not a football game, for goodness sake. There was much to enjoy in this race, and lots of intrigue in the way that the win was achieved, and the improved Kimi, the dices down the field, and the Williams resurgence.

        So what if one guy got himself a puncture, then damaged his car during the run back to the pits? This happens quite often, ask Massa how many races he’s been taken out this year on the first lap.

        Calm down. This is just a another racing formula where multi-millionaires pleasure themselves on Sundays, and we, the riff-raff look on. Try not to take it seriously, it’s not real life, it’s the entertainment industry.

      2. C63 says:

        @Michael Powell
        If that’s the best you have seen Jordan perform with a microphone then it doesn’t say much for his other performances.
        Jordan is a [mod]. The only reason he gets to do the podium interviews (which are invariably rubbish and cringe worthy) is because he kisses Bernies [mod] 3 times a day, every day – including Christmas and bank holidays.

      3. JakeS says:

        I wouldn’t laugh so publicly, James – you’ve built a career around *watching and commentating upon* a few multi-millionaires pleasuring themselves.

      4. Sebee says:

        Last I checked C63, EJ has done quite well in F1. I liked his team and him ad a principal quite a bit. He contributes, quite a bit.

    7. Come now Pkara, dont sit on the fence, tell us how you *really* feel…

      Im guessing youre a Hamilton fan. Would you have booed? I actually think EJ handled the situation very well (to my surprise). The booing was unfair.

      1. C63 says:

        The booing was unfair…

        How so? The spectators have paid for their tickets and are entitled to express their opinion as they see fit (obviously they must remain within the law).

    8. Alastair Isherwood says:

      Pkara, or should I say Nicole ;) or should I say lewis? Welcome to jamesalleninf1 lewis, good to have you with us……

      1. Pkara says:

        I’m a Leicester lad born & bred !
        Rugby Union Playing front row prop, dont ever call me Nicole!!
        Lewis fan unlike your one eyed half faced slurr.
        Proud to wear my heart on my sleeve as a Lewis fan.
        Support my fellow Brit anyday unlike the insane comments regarding the premeditated attack from Golden Balls…then the Toupee wearing Jordans slime inducing love in with his neighbour Rosberg!!
        Jordan should be sacked James should be in the driving seat with Coultard & Suzie & Lee.

      2. Pkara says:

        Jes = James Allen :-)

    9. John Burlington says:

      What would be achieved by banning Rosberg for a race? It might give Hamilton the championship, but would Hamilton want to win it under those circumstances? His existing championship is regarded by some as ‘hollow’ and that he was gifted it by Glock. Does he want a second championship with a the doubt he wouldn’t have won it if Rosberg had competed all races.

      There’s no doubt he’s got the talent, but he hasn’t got the consistency, look at the number of mistakes he’s made this season.

      To get the respect his talent deserves he needs to move on and concentrate on using his skills to win the championship on the track without politics involved.

      1. Brent says:

        And this type of clash has been fairly common in Hamilton’s career. Scrapes with Button, as a teammate, and Massa. fairly regularly a couple years ago, come to mind.

      2. Pedro says:

        @ John Burlington

        Are you seriously suggesting that Lewis’ mistakes this season have outweighed his misfortune? Yeah he’s made mistakes: Silverstone, Austria, could have got a banker lap in earlier in Monaco.

        Lewis misfortune:
        Austrailia = Mechanical issue, DNF
        Canada = Mechanical issue, DNF
        Germany = Mechanical failure in quali, start 20th
        Hungary = Engine fire, start race from pit lane
        Spa = Hit from behind, DNF

        Nico misfortune:
        Silverstone = Mechanical failure, DNF
        Canada = Mechanical issue, came second

        When Lewis has had the chance to complete a race, he’s more often than not looked the stronger of the two drivers, he just doesn’t get the chance. The guy has had an up hill battle all season and he still comes back fighting.

        Is without doubt going to be an interesting end to the season. If he gets the chance to complete races, the best man will win, if he doesn’t Nico will.

      3. John Burlington says:

        @ Pedro I didn’t suggest anything about misfortunes????

        Not sure what you meant about a banker lap at Monaco? He’d already set a time to good enough to get second on the grid.

        In Canada both he and Rosberg suffered the same failure on the car. Rosberg managed it and got 2nd. Hamilton didn’t and and got a dnf. Hamilton was ahead of Rosberg when he retired. If he had managed the problem rather than hoping he could get to the end he would have got 2nd & Rosberg 3rd.

        Fortune was with him at Silverstone. With Rosberg’s retirement his mistake in qualifying didn’t hurt him.

        In Austria his mistake in qualifying possibly cost him pole and the win.

        At Spa he went too fast on the way back to the pits and the flailing tyre damaged the bodywork. If he’d have taken it slower got back to the pits without damage he could have unleashed the full potential of the Merc. Even if he was 2 minutes off the lead when he came out of the pits he could have still scored points. He was 3 sec quicker than Kvyat in qualy. Kvyat finished 1.05 min behind the leaders in 8th. At 3 sec a lap he would have overhauled Kvyat easily for 8th.

        (On a side note I’m not sure his car was as damaged as it was made out. On lap 4 or 5 he set the then fastest lap. His fastest lap was faster than that of Alonso, Vettel and Kvyat’s fastest laps).

        Looking at the possible effect of the above:

        Canada Hamilton +18 points, Rosberg -3 points
        Austria: Hamiton +7 points, Rosberg – 7 points
        Belgium: Hamilton + 4 points.

        Adjusting the current standings (220/191 points) we get;

        Hamilton: 220 points
        Rosberg: 210 points

        So Hamilton should be leading the championship if he hadn’t made mistakes and had managed situations better.

        On a different subject, much has been written about Hamiltons final run in Monaco being ruined by the yellow flags caused by Rosberg going off. I can’t remember anything being written about Rosberg’s final run being ruined in Austria by Hamilton going off.

  5. Ben G says:

    Look at the footage – he takes a rightwards swipe towards Hamilton just as the Englishman’s car turns left.

    Rosberg saying he did it to ‘prove a point’, when that far back on that corner, can only mean that he knew contact was very likely. Therefore, he knowingly risked causing an accident, which is effectively the same, in that situation, as causing the accident.

    If that’s not cheating, I don’t know what is.

    1. Spinodontosaurus says:

      ^Onboard clip.

      Rosberg tries to brave it out around the outside, realizes it isn’t going to work out and steers left to avoid hitting Hamilton. He then quickly steers back to the right so that he still has a chance of making the corner. He marginally misjudges how close he is to Hamilton and just clips his front wing on Hamilton’s tyre.

      That’s all it is – a simply misjudgment. It is hard to attribute such a small and easy mistake to outright malice, when equally small mistakes are made on a somewhat frequent basis.
      If we cast our minds back to Bahrain and that one instance where Hamilton gave Rosberg the chop between Turns 1 & 2, Rosberg went through the same entirely logical movements; he steered away from Hamilton to avoid contact, then steered back towards him when he felt he had enough room to do so.
      Hell even Alonso took his front wing end plate off at the start of the last lap by hitting Vettel into the La Source hairpin:

    2. Sanjog says:

      When an overtake is attempted, especially in tight corners, there is always the possibility of contact. I don’t think it can be claissified as ‘knowingly risking an accident’.

    3. Formula Zero says:

      It was terrible for Mercs no doubt. So here is my reply to you,

      Your logic: Goats have beard, so does every man. That means every man is a goat.
      My observation: Hamilton had the inside line, Rosberg had parts of outside tyres almost out of the track, Hamilton defended, Rosberg was bit too aggressive, his nose was already ahead of Hamilton’s rear tyre, he should’ve backed out a bit earlier & have a go later again, that means racing incident due to bad judgement.

      Rosberg made lot of mistakes like every other drivers. I remember him getting drive through in Singapore for crossing the white line on his way out of the pit stop in 08; he spun in the last corner in china (not 100% sure which track) even though he was on a lap to beat Hamilton’s pole time, Hamilton also spun out, several times during crucial moments in qualifying & races throughout this season & his career (running into the back of Kimi in Canada in the pitlane!) The issue is that Rosberg & Hamilton both are racing for the same team & same wdc in a same car. The effect seems more negative because of that. This was Rosberg’s fault no doubt, but not deliberate for sure. Hamilton’s emotion comes out in public a lot more than other drivers. This time it’s justified because how the championship stands. I almost forgive him for telling his engineers “don’t talk to me” or telling media “we are not friends” or “he is not German” etc. because he has the right to be upset 100% this time. But the emotion can make him listen to one when something different was told. I am loving this season because we have so much drama. I’m an Australian & would like too see Ricciardo win big. So, the result works for me. But I can’t help to feel sorry for Lewis to be affected badly the incident & Nico to cop so much criticism for which is a racing incident because of misjudgment in my view.

    4. Anil Parmar says:

      Rosberg did what he did in Bahrain T1; he made movement away from Lewis and another to make the corner. I don’t think Lewis will be able to give Nico the chop from now on, which may be difficult for him because he naturally does it against a lot of other drivers. With the post-Bahrain 2012 rule change, Lewis needs to be a bit more careful.

    5. Rockman says:

      Imagine if a kid is contantly bullied in a playground.

      One day he decides to stand up for himself and hold his ground, the bully slips, fall and hurt his knee.

      Bully then goes to his parents to cry about his hurt knee all afternoon

      Who’s to blame in this situation?

      *I dont support either Rosberg or Hamilton in this situation, Rosberg held his ground but I don’t think he deliberately wanted to crash into Lewis. Lewis makes himself look foolish every single time with his attention seeking personality.

  6. Andy says:

    Rosberg made a mistake, an error of judgement, it happens. What has been lost here is the speed at which Hamilton returned to the pits. He could have returned slower, caused less damage and maybe have got some points.

    As a team, Mercedes seem to be taking the PR line at every opportunity in their explanation for their decisions, as if they will provide the best answers to best quell the media.
    One thing they have done is to show that they don’t seem able to control their drivers.

    1. Tom in Adelaide says:

      I don’t think you are factoring in just how far he had to drive to return to the pits…. His race was done and dusted that very moment. They should have retired him.

    2. Quade says:

      Really? At that “speed,” he still rejoined dead last, almost 2 minutes behind the leader and something like 20 seconds behind the next car up. You are asking for the incredible.

    3. Sorry – disagree. To me, Rosberg didn’t turn the wheel in an attempt to avoid a collision, he turned it the opposite way to cause one. Sure, Hamilton could have driven slower but his job wasn’t to bring the car home intact in 14th place. He needed to beat Rosberg.

      1. Sanjog says:

        And Rosberg needed to beat Hamilton. So he decided to attempt a pass at a particular part of the track where he felt he was faster and could pull it off.

      2. John Burlington says:

        but his job wasn’t to bring the car home intact in 14th place. He needed to beat Rosberg.

        His constant calls to retire the cat seemed very short sighted. I’m sure say Alonso would have been pushing as hard as he could in that situation in the hope of picking up some points. Anything can happen, especially at Spa. Rain, safety car, retirements by others etc could have brought him into the points. If he were to lose the championship by a single point would his retirement be seen as a bad decision?

    4. Matt says:

      Maybe he spends an extra 20 seconds getting back to the pits and goes half a second a lap quicker? Well that’s only made up the 20 seconds extra he spent getting back to the pits.The only way he was getting back into the race was with a Safety Car, which funnily enough his own shreds of tyre (although it could also have been from Bianchi’s) came closest to causing.

    5. sarcosuchus says:

      Basic comprehension skills, Andy. Rosberg himself said he did it deliberately (to prove a point). Therefore it is NOT a mistake. Mistake = opposite of deliberate.

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Not necessarily. See how even native English speakers can misunderstand their own language? Somebody can easily do something deliberately but still make a mistake.

        When people have recovered their composure and looked at all these similar duels between Lewis and Nico through the season they will see a pattern emerge. Lewis has done this one too many times, I’m afraid, and Nico seems to have a longer memory than the causal, albeit heated, armchair observers.

        Look back through all the season’s races, and then apportion blame, but fairly.

      2. Bruno Menilli says:

        Roseberg’s ‘point’ was to deliberately stay on his racing line and not be barged over as has happened too often by Hamilton giving him the basic ‘ North Circular’ chop.

        Both drivers were involved, and are equally responsible for the safety aspect. Hamilton doesn’t have a divine right to do what he wants just because he’s in front , especially as he had an option which would have meant he stayed on track, whereas Roseberg, at the end, had no option but to move right – and he misjudged it – big deal – just a racing incident !

        For me, of more concern was Mercedes Team bosses willingness to air Mercedes ‘dirty washing’ in public before they had even had the chance to speak to Rosberg, Same goes for blabber mouth Hamilton – who needs to man up, and stop acting like he believes he’s a ‘Gangsta Rapper’ which he isn’t.

        Storm in a teacup fuelled by the ever present Press and its need to have banner headlines over everything that occurs.

    6. forestial says:

      The speed of HAM’s return to the pits has nothing at all to do with the question of who caused the contact and why.

    7. Kris says:

      “He could have returned slower, caused less damage and maybe have got some points.”

      Sorry, but that’s among the sillier things I’ve seen posted here. Having to get back to the pits on a punctured tyre on such a long lap meant the race was essentially finished for him. Had he taken much longer, he’d have been at risk of being lapped.

      1. RememberRonnie says:

        Not a silly comment at all. From the moment Hamilton had a puncture his race was finished in the normal scheme of things (no safety car, no rain) due to time lost in returning to the pits for a new tyre. His priority therefore should have been to get back to the pits causing minimum further damage to the car, and then back into the race with the car in the best possible condition – even if he were lapped – so that he could take advantage of any subsequent safety car. During safety car periods lapped cars are allowed to unlap themselves prior to a restart. He might then have been in the race at a restart unlapped with the best car in the field, albeit in last place as was, for example, Button in Canada 2012. Then, anything would have been possible. In the event there was no safety car so it did not matter, and in the heat of the post-incident moment this thinking was probably beyond Hamilton – but there are drivers in the field who would have been able to think the situation properly through in such circumstances. By his actions in returning to the pits at high speed with a flailing tyre Hamilton turned a car that is the class of the field into a bit of a wreck, removing any hope of a points finish even if there had been a later safety car or rain.

    8. Steven M says:

      so you’re saying that everything was Lewis’s fault? LOL

      1. Michael Powell says:

        I am, certainly!!

      2. simonb says:

        @ Michael Powell
        “Lewis has done this one too many times” What’s that…..defended his racing line too many times. Correct my please if I’m wrong but as I understand it if you are more that half a cars length in front at the corner then you have the right to take the racing line, the fact that Rosberg hit the BACK of Hamiltons car would suggest to me that he had that right.

      3. simonb says:

        @ Michael Powell
        “Lewis has done this one too many times” What’s that…..defended his racing line too many times. Correct me please if I’m wrong but as I understand it if you are more than half a cars length in front at the corner then you have the right to take the racing line, the fact that Rosberg hit the BACK of Hamiltons car would suggest to me that he had that right.

  7. JC says:

    Great, well rounded and unbiased article. Mercedes need to come up with the press release to end all press releases to put this one to bed.

    1. AndyC22 says:

      Mercedes are a highly respectable German manufacturer, and it’s hard to see how any press release can credibly paper-over this one. This is the equivalent of biting Hamilton’s shoulder.
      If Monaco hadn’t happened, this wouldn’t matter so much, but it did happen. At the time we were all assured that all was well, it was just a mistake, the correct decision had been made, and so on, but then a few weeks later it more-or-less transpired that we’d all been fooled… and not just by the driver.

      1. Larkin says:

        oh something i missed enlighten me please

    2. Random 79 says:

      Put this one to bed? Slim chance – this one’s likely to be up late partying for years to come.

      1. C63 says:

        this one’s likely to be up late partying for years to come….

        +1 you made me laugh out loud with that line :-)

  8. Ladekoya says:

    Simply put, no. Even as a Lewis fan I believe that he is being paranoid and assuming the worst of Rosberg. He has a right to be angry, as he has been severely disadvantaged through no fault of his own, but rather than screaming “he’s a cheat”, just keep it under wraps and move on to the next race. I can only imagine however why Nico would want to prove anything about being a wheel to wheel racer. It never concerned him before earlier in the year, and it shouldn’t now, especially as he is leading the world championship. To me this incident has actually had the opposite effect, as it gives ammunition to those who claim that he lacks close quarters prowess.

    My main quibble isn’t even this incident, but it’s that it seems that every time Lewis makes a bold claim before the race something disastrous happens involving him. He should just keep his mouth shut and focus on the driving or he’s gonna throw this title away.

    1. Racewala says:

      Spot-on Ladekoya. Lewis needs a personal spokesperson!

    2. Mac says:

      +1 Well said.

    3. Aderac says:


      Think most a not viewing the incident objectively, maybe me as well as I’m not a huge fan of Hamilton, I see the second turn in as trying to slip in behind Hamilton a.s.a.p and mis judginging it.

      Also those calling it dangerous and for Rosberg to be banned, come on…really? Not anywhere near the most dangerous incident seen in F1 and you seemed to have forgot the incidents between Hamilton and Massa always occurring a few years ago., Hamilton also makes mistakes, Button canada is one against a team mate I remember.

      1. simonb says:

        I hear what your saying, I don’t think for one minute Rosberg did that intentionally to cause a collision, more of an over optimistic attempt to pass Hamilton, I’m a huge Hamilton fan, but sometimes I cringe about some of his comments, the difference with this incident though is that there were two losers and one winner, Rosberg came away from Spa increasing his championship lead, Mercedes lost a load of constructors points, and Hamilton’s championship hopes took a real beating. Pointing out Hamiltons previous transgressions do not help your argument, because in all most all of them he held his hands up and got punished by the stewards, sometimes severely, If we go down that route should we also include what happened at Monaco this year.

    4. Hear hear. I thought Hamilton was getting better at being circumspect after a bad race, but accusing your team mate of saying he crashed deliberately when thats clearly not what he actually said, is likely to ultimately backfire.

      Hamilton already came unstuck when his attempts to outpsych Rosberg earlier in the season – eg being ‘hungrier’, and Rosberg not really being German – failed to rattle his cage and probably made Rosberg more determined to prove he IS hungry (dare I suggest) by pushing harder with risky overtake attempts…

    5. Sanjog says:

      I think the reason Rosbeg felt he had to ‘prove a point’ was becuase Hamiltion had ignored team orders at Hungary to let Rosberg through even though they were on different race strategies.
      I don’t care what Mercedes say, this is going to get a lot worse. I can see someting disastrous happening in the Abu Dhabi double pointer if these ROS and HAM stay close in the points table in the next 6 races

      1. simonb says:

        I don’t get this Hungary argument, Rosberg and Hamilton drive for the same team that’s it, They are still racing each other, It’s not Hamilton’s fault that Rosberg was on a different strategy that compromised him, Blaming Hamilton for not letting him past when we clearly heard Hamilton state “if he gets close enough i’ll let him past, but I’m not slowing down for him” that’s a bit different to ignoring team orders. Would you rather have a driver who is competing for the WDC slow down and let his main rival take the podium instead…………..get real.

    6. Bryce says:

      The last paragraph sums it up. A good driver that should just shut up.

    7. Mike says:

      Exactly my point. Just drive and don’t open the mouth. Lewis should be careful what he says about Nico calling him “he’s a cheat”. Lewis himself is a cheater, remember 2008 or if it was 2009 when he lied when questioned by the stewards. It takes a cheater to know a cheater :)
      Please Lewis, just drive as fast as the lightning instead…

    8. Kurik says:

      I say it every time: Hamilton should drive and shut the hell up to the press! Fan of his but seriously regardless of what happens you are supposed to be a professional in your sport – make your skills prove your point not your darn mouth. I am so annoyed with both him and rosberg now i almost don’t want either of them to win but then mercedes has out in the effort and deserve the reward. Do these guys have a PR rep? They need to fired.

  9. Mitche says:

    It may be that Nico’s point was that if Hamilton moves right to block on the straight, then he cannot move left to block again approaching the turn. Nico may think he within his right to hold his line. Fun stuff, I say.

    1. LT says:

      Hamilton never moved back left on the straight. He clearly was ahead into the chicane and just took his line as he’s entitled to. 100% no doubt Rosbergs fault.

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Look again. Lewis cut across. This nonsense about taking his racing line needs to be kicked out. When do you walk straight into somebody in the supermarket and then claim you were just taking your normal line and had every right so to do?

        Most people adjust their normal trajectory to avoid objects, animals and people. Seems Lewis needs to learn this trick. Other drivers are able to give space, so why not Hamilton?

        Time for Mercedes to send Lewis back to Ron Dennis, and have a friendly cup of tea in the motorhome with Fernando Alonso. Oh, my yes, he has the hunger, and the skills.

    2. Oliver says:

      That doesn’t make sense as you are allowed to block once and return to the racing line, before even taking a corner.

  10. Regis says:

    Hamilton: “he basically said he did it on purpose”

    That is just Hamilton trying to get the media on his side and create a big story, that quote does not mean anything.
    It is just an unfortunate racing incident and that’s it.

    1. Doug says:

      Precisely. Lewis has deliberately let a carefully worded genie out of the bottle.

      Racing indicident, happens all the time. Roseberg could have unded up with his wing under his front and into the barriers, while Lewis sailed off to +25 points. Too much to lose for it to be a deliberate act.

      Now, can Daniel please have his 18 points from Australia back, please.

    2. Bruno Menilli says:

      Spot on !

    3. LT says:

      Well he didn’t need the media on his side, the footage should be more than clear cut that Rosberg was in the wrong

    4. Matt Shea says:


      And in trying to get people on his side he makes himself look at least foolish, if not disingenuous.

      What’s going to happen now? A clarification will come out contradicting what Hamilton said and his own integrity will take a hit. All he needed to do was say absolutely nothing and let the brouhaha swallow Rosberg – by stirring the pot he gets some of the muck on himself.

      As for the incident: what Rosberg said more or less jibes with what happened. He hung in there just a bit too long. And I’d think the “proving a point” quote was an admission of guilt not an admission of malice.

      The best way to think about it is if Hamilton’s tyre hadn’t been cut by Rosberg’s damaged wing: everyone would be saying, “Slightly ambitious move by Rosberg. Shame for him he ruined his own race.” Not, “He’s a cheat! He should be banned!”

    5. Messrine says:

      Totally agree! If this had occurred between any other two drivers then it would be classified as a ‘racing incident’ and case closed. However the British media and British pundits are blowing it out of proportion because golden boy Hamilton is involved. It was a clumsy move but no malice intended.

      1. simonb says:

        Totally disagree, British media, British pundits. if you don’t like it watch it on another channel or turn the volume down. Do you think if the reverse had happened Hamilton wouldn’t have received the interest of the stewards, I think there would be a good chance he would have received some sort of punishment as should Rosberg, Accident or deliberate, makes no difference, Rosberg caused the collision fact, Hamilton suffered because of it fact, Rosberg came away from Spa increasing his championship lead fact. Hamilton’s championship hopes have taken a serious blow through no fault of his own, how can that be “blowing it out of proportion”

      2. OffCourse says:

        I think Bianchi got a penalty earlier in the season for a similar incident. I always dislike it when the interpretation of the rules seem to change part way through the season. But then I’ve had issue with the steward system (& Charlie Whiting) for a few years now.

    6. Mack says:

      You have the correct interpretation. I was disappointed in Hamiltons response. I said earlier -look at the “court reporting” not the views of an aggrieved party. Hamilton should not have put that interpretation into the media.
      James gave us the detsils.
      Proving a point is whst all drivers do when they bang wheels.
      Racing incident and clumsy driving as Martim Brundall said. He has experience and is impartisl.


    7. Daniel says:

      Toto and Paddy confirmed what Lewis said…

  11. Guillermo says:

    I think it’s very simple, Nico has nothing to lose by trying a risky pass. If they both go out, he wins. If Lewis goes out, he also wins. He just has to make sure Lewis goes out…

    I’m sure it wasn’t deliberate, but it was no accident.

    I would say the nearest precedent is Jerez 1997, but would the FIA really take action now?!

    1. No – actually Ricciardo wins and both Mercedes drivers and the team lose out. Mercedes would be hugely embarrased by the situation as their corporate image is a valuable commodity to them. They won’t want one of their drivers winning but being labelled a cheat and they certainly won’t want the war to go on and have Red Bull beat them to the title.

    2. Doobs says:

      What rubbish..

      Try..Nico loses his wing and Lewis continues undamaged… if he’s good enough to puncture a tyre while taking minimal damage to his own front wing, Nico really deserves to be WDC

      1. Steven M says:


  12. Mitchw says:


    It may be that Nico’s point was that if Hamilton moves right to block on the straight, then he cannot move left to block again approaching the turn. Nico may think he within his right to hold his line. Fun stuff, I say.

  13. anthony lane says:

    If true rosberg should lose his points and put another driver in for 2 races it would be a pity that the team gets penalised but so be itn The FIA could come down harder if proved..

  14. Larry Parker says:

    Hmmm, you brought up Monaco as another “mistake” by Nico. I don’t think either was accidental.

    I’ve compared Nico’s carrying himself like Prost and Hamilton carrying himself like Senna before. Senna was egregiously wrong with Prost in 1990 – just as Schumi was with Damon in 1994 and Jacques in 1997 – to cause a crash to clinch the title, or at least try to. (Just as Schumi’s stunt at Monaco in 2006 was rightly compared to Nico’s this year.) But Prost was the only one to ever deliberately crash into a TEAMMATE (Senna in ’89), and he would have been doomed at McLaren anyway after that if he hadn’t already signed for Ferrari.

    This may have cost Hamilton the title, but Mercedes is in the most invidious position. They have a long term contract with a guy who’s shown he will take a teammate out, whether “on purpose” or at best through incredible recklessness. Yikes.

    1. KRB says:

      Any team who’s in possession of evidence that one of their drivers took their teammate out of a race, would face zero problems in terminating the offending drivers’ contract.

      JA, do we know if Nico said his quote in German, or English? Maybe there would be something lost in translation with one language over the other. Surely it doesn’t sound like Rosberg, but the whining about Lewis using the illegal engine mode in Spain didn’t sound like him, and that’s for sure been confirmed.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:

        He was the one who turned the engine up the week before!!!

        Seems like he’s always starting the dodgy stuff!

    2. Ron W says:

      You mean like Senna and Prost?

    3. Random 79 says:

      Surely they would have a “you were driving like a tool” exit clause in there somewhere.

      1. glennb says:

        Correct as usual Random. (b) Driving like a tool is immediately below (a) whining like a tool in Section 88.1 – Reasons to terminate a contract – Tools.
        Interestingly, Section 88.2 deals with matters arising from Speaking to the press after a closed door meeting. 88.7, unauthorised sharing of proprietry data to the world via social media.
        Rarely are these clauses evoked.

      2. Random 79 says:

        Thank you for that Glenn – I was sure the clause was there but I wasn’t sure exactly where.

        Now if you can help a little more I’m very interested to find out what clauses 88.3-88.6 state :)

      3. glennb says:

        Ummm, sorry mate. I’ve got nothing :(

  15. jts says:

    History shows that had the boot been on the other foot, i,e Hamilton causing the incident, then the stewards woud have acted, possibly quite serverly.

    1. Lola Bido says:

      Yup. Wonder what Nico has to do to get a penalty…

  16. Vincent says:

    Hamilton is fast but he should slow down and think before talking to the press.
    He will not win the WDC with words and Rosberg is one smart cookie who got schooled by the best of the best.
    One 16 year old kid could teach him a few lessons on handling the media.
    Go Lewis Go!

    1. Andrew says:

      Yes I do wish that all the drivers would just calm down, stop showing any signs of emotion and become the media trained drones that we all want.

  17. Andrew says:

    Was it a racing incident? Yes. Could it been avoided? Yes? Whilst Rosberg has to take the major portion of the blame, Hamilton could have given him more room. With the pace advantage that the Mercedes has (Rosberg’s last 9 laps showed this) there was no need for Hamilton to squeeze him so hard. He would have had the inside for the next two corners and would have been ahead in run back down the hill. He would have had an idea that Rosberg was there and by leaving a little more room, the collision doesn’t occur.
    I think it was a case of Rosberg trying to prove he, like Hamilton, can hang on around the outside (off the ideal line). Maybe Hamilton needs to start being more like Rosberg and be a little more calculating on track. Another half a cars width and Hamilton races Rosberg for the win instead of ultimately retiring

    1. LT says:

      He gave Rosberg plenty of room. He had to move left to take his line for the upcoming left turn. Rosber should know his racecraft if he had any in the 1st place!

      1. Anil Parmar says:

        Andrew’s point is that instead of trying to take the normal racing line and effectively ‘chop’ Rosberg, he could have left more room by taking a wider racing line (Lewis had loads of space left). This would have avoided the chop and he still would have had the lead.

    2. Mark says:

      I totally agree with this….initially I thought racing incident with Rosberg 100% at fault but I have come to see it like you. Others made passes here and were given the room to hang in on the outside by “lesser” (than Hamilton) drivers…especially to a team mate…..

      Rosberg has nothing to lose with his point lead, Hamilton does, he needs to learn to be more circumspect and longer term thinking in his race strategy…

      A good, aware driver would not have turned in regardless of the consequences…but blinding pace aside, this does appear to be a Hamilton weakness….I suspect one that has now come close to costing him a chance at the championship.

    3. Quade says:

      I’m just laughing! Did you see the race or watch the video?
      Shot of Lewis shrinking his car or hopping right off the road or employing magic, there is no way he could have given Nico more room.

      There’s a handy lil’ video here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/28920554

      1. Richard says:

        Nor did he need to. Lewis had the corner by some margin, and it was encumbent on Nico to avoid contact, but he did the opposite. How much proof does anyone need to know that was deliberate. The actual intent is splitting hairs because the result is the same. Nico put his car in a dangerous position deliberately no other way to interpret that. It strike me that some on this sight need to learn a bit more about racing ettiqette.

    4. KRB says:

      He did not squeeze him hard at all. He could’ve run him wide, and basically forced him to the run-off area, just as Rosberg did to Lewis at the start in Canada. Vettel wasn’t silly enough to try the pass on lap 1, even though he was further alongside Lewis than Rosberg ever was.

      Can Mercedes trust Rosberg not to cause more incidents in the future, either when he’s ahead and Lewis is attempting a pass, or when he’s behind but trying to pass Lewis? I think the answer is a clear no. So what can Mercedes do? They could threaten Nico with expulsion, but Nico seems to be operating from the principle that it’s easier to ask for forgiveness instead of permission. I guess they could compromise Nico on strategy, on fuel, and on setup. That’s not likely though. Perhaps they could say that Nico will not get to benefit from any data sharing, while Lewis will still get to see Nico’s data. If he’s shown up like he was in Malaysia and China, it would be a sobering experience for him, and would lay bare who’s benefitting the most from the open data agreement.

      It is a very volatile situation for Mercedes at the moment.

    5. ieuan says:

      u can not say that because undoubtably lewis has been the fastest all season but problems have cost him hugely but its only the 2nd lap of a 44 lap race and rosberg tries to storm up the outside of hamilton because he knows that nico can`t pass lewis fairly and in an interview he did nico said he regretted the incident because HE wanted to win the race!! clearly he did not think that 42 laps would be enough to get passed lewis and that is not the mentality you should have if your going for a title so he tried to help himself by destroying his rivals race because after this race they are no longer team mates. Monaco was no different lewis had the speed all weekend and then in Q3 rosberg clearly intentionally took himself off the track but the thing that is more telling is he then reversed back up the run off area so that the yellow flags would stay out until after lewis passed them.

      it all goes back to Bahrain after some really great wheel to wheel action between the two drivers nico rosberg has 11 laps on fresher better tyres to pass lewis who is less than 1 second in front of him and he cant do it. Nico can not race lewis hamilton because he loses everytime and therefore he has got to take hamilton out.

      42 laps was not enough in nico`s mind for him to pass lewis which is incredible considering lewis hamilton has come from the back of the grid on 2 occasions and scored big points in the exact same car !!!!! that is a fact so no matter what anyone says about the incident nico rosberg knows that he can not beat hamilton in a clean race so be ready for a lot more incidents from nico in the next 7 races because its the only way he can win the championship.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Once the lights turn green its race time, not let’s follow the leader around for a couple of laps !

        How many time have we seen drivers gain so many places on the first lap – so all this nonsense about ” on lap 2″ is just that – nonsense.

    6. Peter W says:

      Totally agree!
      Lewis had only to take a line 6 inches to the right of the apex and we would not be having this discussion. Watch any form of motorsport, and you see the smart drivers are the ones who understand where their competitors are (or might be) and drive to avoid collision. Sometimes you just have to give a little space to allow someone to back out of a move they have started, but you both realise isn’t going to work out.

    7. Andrew M says:

      Hamilton gave him plenty of room, it was poor racecraft from Nico, when you’re behind that much you have to give it up, there was no space for him as Hamilton had the racing line. End of.

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Clearly, because there was a collision, Lewis failed to give enough room. Very clearly he did not. End of.

      2. KRB says:

        @Michael Powell, total garbage. Lewis gave him more than enough room. See here:


        Rosberg wanted the contact. The car behind has the great responsibility to avoid contact, when the lead driver is not moving (as Lewis didn’t once he was on the racing line), as their field of vision is far greater than the lead driver’s.

      3. Robert says:

        I saw the race live, and re-watched this video clip. Thanks for posting it.

        1) Nico is clearly half-way up Hamiton’s car as they enter the chicane complex. So when you talk about “who had position?” there is no clear answer, because Nico was easily halfway up entering the chicane, but as Lewis had the inside line on the first corner their relationship changed – and depending upon your point of view (literally – where you are looking from!) Nico had varying angles of overlap. But clearly he was halfway up Hamilton at the start of his move, and lost much if not all of that overlap by the time they exited the first turn – but if you consider it as “one passing move through the chicane”…then did he still have rights to space???

        2) The clip CLEARLY shows Nico make two moves – the first one AWAY from Hamilton, to give Ham room. Then Nico clearly turns towards Hamilton – which Nico would have to do to keep his speed up in the apex of the next (left hand) corner, and to keep on the tarmac and respect track boundaries. It is clear to me at least that had Nico done this 0.25 of a second later Hamilton clears him, and there is no incident.

        3) All in all, I think Nico made clumsy and hasty move to get back in line for the second apex, having thought he had “ducked” Hamilton’s move across the track successfully, but thinking he should have had rights to more room he was too aggressive about it and made it 0.25 seconds to early. Remember, drivers CANNOT see their front wings at all in the car…as we constantly get reminded by how often they lose them.

        If it was deliberate, then Nico would not have compromised his racing line for the next corner by moving left first – he could have held his line and simply let Hamilton hit him, which would have been much less ambiguous as to guilt. Instead he tried to duck Hamilton, and cut back too aggressively – due to lack of skill, due to red rage at not getting room (again he probably felt), or both…we don’t know.

        But having watched the overlap come and go, and then to two moves by Nico…it is IMPOSSIBLE to think that he meant to hit Hamilton in my mind.

    8. forestial says:

      It is well established among drivers, stewards and all concerned that the driver in front, which HAM clearly was, has the right to hold his line.

      1. Antonio says:

        you are clearly confusing “having the right to…” with this being the best option.

        given the potential damage of a collision, and that if he widened the corner he would still be in the lead, hamilton would’ve been more careful/thoughful to give a bit more room.

        its the same like, when a driver fighting for the WDC is sharing a piece of track with someone not fighting for the title… guess what… one fighting for the title should (and usually) does avoid risk…

        anyway this is more racing incident than anything and just as easily rosberg could have broken front wing and hamilton gone on undamaged… we would be calling rosberg a duffer… and most certainly the most ferverous hamilton fans would already be giving him the laurels ;)

      2. Robert says:

        Not if there is overlap…and when they entered the chicane Nico had overlap of half a car length. Watch the clips. That changed DURING the chicane, due to different turn radiuses and this is where it gets tricky. At what point exactly does Nico lose the right to space? He certainly had it entering the chicane – he had the overlap. And he progressively lost that overlap during the 1st corner…but where, legally, does he lose the rights to space? Is it where he has exactly 0 cm. of overlap? Or when he only had 0.5 meters of overlap (as that is “insignificant”)? Clearly, he didn’t lose all of his overlap, as Hamilton would not have hit him! So at what point in the 1st corner can you say Nico lost rights to space?

        And that’s the OP’s point – it is highly ambiguous. So Hamilton SHOULD have been smart enough to know that anything could happen, and simply taken a slightly slower, larger line around the 2nd corner to give everyone room – which meant he would not have cut across the track as he did.

        How on earth did a slower driver like Jenson Button keep pace in points with a faster racer such as Lewis Hamilton in their three years together? JB always would have given the space…and as a result he finished consistently, if down the order slightly. How does Alonso get such consistent performances in a slow car? He gives space when needed and doesn’t crash. In my mind, Alonso is the best driver in F1, and JB is the consummate professional behind the wheel. I think Hamilton’s early success in F1 taught him that he only needed to drive fast and aggressively….but to a certain extent he got lucky. Over the long run, attitudes like Alonso’s will win more championships, IMHO.

    9. Doobs says:

      Lewis is too hot-headed and this has been his downfall in the past. Speeding back to the pits is what killed his race or he may have salvaged some useful points.

    10. buzzzzzzzz says:

      Knowing that they had both been told to avoid a collision, Hamilton would not have thought Nico would leave his nose hanging in!!!

    11. OffCourse says:

      Was it a racing incident? No. Could it been avoided? Yes? Whilst Rosberg has to take the major portion of the blame, Rosberg could have given him more room. With the pace advantage that the Mercedes has (Rosberg’s last 9 laps showed this) there was no need for Rosberg to squeeze him so hard. Hamilton would have had the inside for the next two corners and would have been ahead in run back down the hill. He would have known that he was to far back and by leaving a little more room, the collision doesn’t occur.
      I think it was a case of Rosberg trying to prove he, like Hamilton, can hang on around the outside (off the ideal line). Maybe Hamilton needs to start being more like Rosberg and be a little more calculating on track. Another half a cars width and Hamilton stops raceing Rosberg and opens a gap that he is in no way obliged to.

  18. Epsteig says:

    I kind of get what Rosberg’s “point” is which is that he seems to have been on the receiving end of some fairly sharp driving by Hamilton in Bahrain in also the final lap in Hungary where Hamilton clearly moved over and would have caused contact with Rosberg’s had he not got out of it. He presumably feels the team have done nothing to support him avoiding these collisions and on this occasion he decided he would leave it up to Hamilton to decide whether they made contact. It does also seem like Hamilton thought he was the most ruthless guy in the team and he doesn’t like the fact that, in fact, that assumption looks pretty flawed and he doesn’t like that one bit!

    1. Darren D says:

      This seems like a pretty good take on what happened in the race. Rosberg “deliberately” wasn’t going to be the one always backing down in a tight situation. If Lewis continued to know that Rosberg would always give way then Bahrain would keep repeating itself. If this incident makes Lewis think twice when the two are close together from now on then Rosberg has done his job well.

      Watching Rosberg adapt his driving this season has been fascinating. This is another example of Nico understanding where his weaknesses are and taking steps to try and improve.

      In the first races Rosberg had been getting beat in qualifying and off the line at the start. For the most part (outside of today’s poor start) he has been doing a better job in those areas as the season has progressed.

      Rosberg has seemed less aggressive on track and less decisive in overtake attempts and in tight quarters than Hamilton. Some of his inelegant attempts today (the flat spotting of his tires trying to overtake Vettel was another example) show he is trying to expand his comfort zone and rise to the challenge of this season and the opportunity it presents.

      1. Gazza says:

        Rosberg hasn’t got a clue where he is on the racetrack. In his post race interview he obviously thought in his head he was alongside Lewis when he was proving a point……he wasn’t, …..far from Nico getting inside Lewis head…..it’s the other way round……Nico is still smarting from Bahrain……but amazingly as James says all of Nico,s mistakes seem to cost Lewis dearly. Very lucky boy!!

      2. Goks says:

        Would Lewis take the same racing line if the other driver was either Kobacrshi (Kobayashi ) or Maldonado so?

        How many collisions has Lewis been involved in this season Alone? You don’t rush out of a team meeting to say your team mate has “admitted” guilt. Clearly he is not a team player. He is ready to play dirty just to win the WEB.

        It would be interesting to find out at this point what both Alone and Button both think of this incident a

      3. Sebee says:

        Goks, best of all he created a BIG PR mess for Toto and Niki to clean up. Like a baby. I can’t believe people here don’t see it.

        Imagine a kid with hand in the air anxiously…teacher teacher pick me…pick me! “Miss Williams, Timmy didn’t finish his homework today!” “Thank you Lewis, sit down please.” And he sits down all proud of himself. That’s your Lewis today. You can lend him that “Rat” nickname Niki, then go and clean up the PR mess. Enjoy.

      4. KRB says:

        @Goks, I’m sure by now you will have seen what Button said about Rosberg’s move:

        “There was nothing there,” Button said of Rosberg’s attempted move. “All he could do was go off the circuit. There was no move. I think any driver would look at it now, and I am sure Nico would look at it and say ‘What was I thinking?’”

        “I feel for Lewis, he was leading the race. It is unbelievable.”

        “I’ve always said the person who wins the World Championship is the person who does the best job on the circuit, but that does not seem the way it is at the moment.”

    2. Sebee says:

      Very well summed up, I think. A WDC is getting schooled here.

      1. Steven M says:

        You mean Vettel?

      2. Truth says:

        Yes but Vettel is also having some bad luck though, I’m not sure he expected Ricciardo to be so strong but he is certainly having the upper hand at the moment, or being schooled as you called it.

      3. C63 says:

        As Vettel is a 4x WDC does that mean he is getting 4x the schooling from Ricciardo ? Mind you, having said that, Ricky isn’t having to crash into Vettel to beat him – he’s just plain quicker. You seemed really excited after qualifying [if we are to judge by the amount of comments you posted]. Then, when Vettel was running second in the race I bet you thought ‘this is it, this is the race when finally Vettel shows us why he is a worthy 4 x WDC, I’ll show all those other posters on JA how wrong they are – did you even have a comment ready? Then……. Well you know what happened – once again, Ricky stuffed Vettel :-)

      4. Sebee says:

        C63…how many times must I tell you? I just saw my boy bring home 4 WDC in a row. As far as I’m concerned he doesn’t even have to drive this year. He’s earned it. He’s phoning it in and that’s OK with me.

      5. C63 says:

        Much like Vettel , you will have to try a bit harder if you hope to convince me that you really aren’t bothered about your boys lacklustre performance this season. It doesn’t really wash when you say that after yet another poor showing against Ricky – but before the race, when there was a glimmer of light after quali, you post dozens of comments crowing about it! Put a brave face on if you like, but I can see through the facade :-)
        On a different note, something I’ve been meaning to ask – you wrote a post a while back along the lines of never having laughed so hard and so long as when Hamilton was beached in the gravel trap on the pit lane in China ( remember ?) . What on earth could Hamilton have done to cause you to take such a dislike to him in his first season in F1?

      6. Sebee says:

        C63, show me one post where I was glad Vettel out qualified Dan? I don’t care. Honestly. He just won 4 straight first time ever from first to fourth in a row! Seriously, what else do you want me to say? No one has done that. Ever. Vettel is the man. And I’m super happy for Dan. I really like that guy. I can’t lose…how else can I say it to you?

        Plus, now my fallback German is leading the WDC…it’s Erdinger time tonight again!

        As for that beaching…it was ridiculous and unnecessary. It was folding under pressure. It was just plain silly looking. And the spot where he beached it…you tell me that’s not funny? Don’t get me wrong…I have capacity to recognize humor anywhere. Like when Vettel rear ended Webber, well, I laughed at Vettel until SC came in.

      7. John S says:

        I lost my voice screaming and celebrating for Vettel over the boos at Canada 2013. Seb is still my favorite and I support him all the way. But this season looks like Alonso vs Massa between the Red Bull guys. Its really tough. He will bounce back next year hopefully.

      8. C63 says:

        show me one post…..

        Sebee says:

        August 23, 2014 at 3:03 pm

        Come again C63 and buzzzzzzz? :-)

        Ask and yee shall receive ;-)

      9. Sebee says:

        C63, that’s a fail. It was in reference to the exchange about how Lewis is hard on his hardware. And here he was, glazing his brake perhaps because he took it beyond operating temp by braking hard. That is an easy one to attribute to being hard on the brakes. Note how it was posted to a Quali results article too, and one day after we covered it in a prior post. Gazza and buzzzzz got it. Now I’m sure your biturbo needs recalibration! ;-)

      10. Marcus says:

        Vettel has had a cauldron of bad luck and Ricciardo a ton of good luck – the only Renault powered car of all 6 to have suffered no material power issues in qually/race. So you have to cop him a bit of a break there. But it is only to say he is being schooled in terms of overall outcome – as is Lewis. There are reasons, sure, but points are points in the end. Let’s see if the two young guns can turn it around on their come along slower teammates.

    3. Arnie S says:

      +1, it seems that HAM cries to the cameras

    4. David says:

      Spot on

  19. Matt W says:

    An astonishingly poor effort by the stewards. A drive through or stop go for Rosberg and I feel the backlash wouldn’t be so high. Rosberg clearly caused an avoidable accident, deliberate or not, which in this case heavily influences the championship. Another own goal for F1 which seems to be completely incapable of being run like a sport.

    I don’t profess to know whether Rosberg did this deliberately or not, but the stewards in general have been historically poor in dealing with his poor driving. Bahrain a few years ago he ran drivers completely off the track (ironically one of which was Hamilton), the Monaco pole seriously tarnished the jewel in the F1 crown this year. If they continue to treat him lightly, he will continue to drive poorly.

    Vettel and Alonso were both sanctioned for poor driving early in their careers, and it did them the world of good. Rosberg needs a similar slap on the wrist.

    1. KRB says:

      It does seem that if he said he could’ve avoided it, but didn’t, that that’s textbook “causing an avoidable collision”, n’est pas?

    2. Ron W says:

      I don’t think there was anyone Hamilton didn’t hit in Germany…

      1. C63 says:

        I’ve told you a million times not to exaggerate everything ;-)

      2. buzzzzzzzz says:


        Because you don’t take out your teamate,rule one.

      3. Tom says:

        So true, he even gave the barriers a touch up for good measure!

  20. Andrew S says:

    Irrespective of what Rosberg did or didn’t say or whether it was deliberate or not or even if Mercedes issue a statement or not – the season just became interesting.

    1. Sebee says:

      Finally, someone recognizes that this story line always was going to arrive at this point. We all wondered how each would handle it.
      One is sipping a beer. One is crying to the media.

      Hey, Pussycat Doll, how is your boy today? All of Lewis’ entourage today is saying…you handled that like our boy. Lewis is the boy who cried to Wolff. OK, that’s all I’ve got. Last one is good.

      1. alexander supertramp says:

        I think they should block your comments from this site, all your posts are either cynical or sarcastical.

      2. Sebee says:

        Alexander Supertramp

        You treat this like a Crime of the Century. Some Things Never Change, I speak truth and you want me under the bus? :-)

      3. Andrew says:

        Very objective zebedee. Back on your magic roundabout

      4. glennb says:

        Yeah, cried Wolff works mate but some other areas need polish. Sit back and let it come to you Sebee, dont force it. You’re much better than this.

      5. Basil says:

        lool Nice one mate.

  21. Martin T says:

    Not sure how big a distinction there is between Rosberg holding his line and continuing to attack, undoubtedly knowing contact was likely, and deliberately crashing into Hamilton. They both end up with the same result after all.

    1. Random 79 says:

      The question is intent: Will he do it again?

  22. navrac says:

    What is not in question is that Nico made a move that he knew could cause a crash and admitted he was not going to back out knowing that unless Lewis took action (which he did not have to do as he had track position and Nico was not ‘substantially alongside’ and also was unlikely to be able to see him) there would be a collision.

    What Nico has said is not an admission of deliberately causing an accident , however by admitting he made the move having decided in advanced he would not yield it is an admission of deliberate recklessness and knowingly endangering someone else safety.

    For that reason alone the FIA should act. No it wasn’t in the same league as Piquet Jr , a lifetime ban would not be fair or warranted, however failure of the FIA to act sets a dangerous precedent where safety is sacrificed.

    No I don’t want racing sanitised, I can accept mistakes – all drivers make them and they should be treated as racing incidents or a slap on the wrist, but this was ‘proving a point’ and should not be tolerated in any sport.

    1. Mark says:

      Sorry, I disagree with you. I tend to be more Hamilton favoured than Rosberg BUT Hamilton should equally have left room for a car up the inside. His actions also reek of a pre made decision to not make way for a driver on the inside where many examples of other drivers did in this and many other races….

      Although I sometimes DO wonder if Hamilton’s situational awareness is lacking (this and many other incidences) I cant see that he wouldn’t have known Rosberg was there or likely to still be there after the run on the straight and braking zone he had…cutting in hard and fast as if he was alone on the track is not what an aware driver would do…

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:

        He would not have been expecting a teamate to try a ridiculous overtake on lap two after they have both been warned.

      2. Heather says:

        Ah, thank heavens. The voice of reason. As to Hamilton’s situational awareness: remember when he crashed into the back of a stationary Raikkonen at a red light?

  23. amiel says:

    So what will Mercedes do after Rosberg breach the rule the team impose to no to crash to your team? A slap on the wrist.they will surely happen again.

    1. phishbone says:

      Let’s be realistic – Merc can’t take away his points, so anything short of sitting him out for 2 races to equalize the damage means he’ll just do it again next time.

      Financial punishments, a stern talking, siding with HAM in the media, team orders, etc. – the damage is done. Ricciardo is more than good enough to sneak by while Merc implodes.

      Go Daniel!

    2. Doobs says:

      They will be offering Ross a job…

    3. Oliver says:

      Rosberg waited until he had his contract renewed.

    4. Tom says:

      Amiel, probably just the same thing they did to Lewis when he disobeyed the team order to let Nico through

  24. Dante says:

    Nonsense. Lewis should grow up and shut up.

    Look at the film. 50-50 racing incident.

    1. Tom in Adelaide says:

      So then this is a legitimate move that can be made in all G.P’s going forward? We won’t see many cars finishing if that’s the case!

    2. Thomas says:

      A trip to Specsavers I think is required on this occasion.

    3. Andrew M says:

      You must have been watching a different race, that was Nico’s fault all day long, the fact that everyone, including Merc agrees kind of proves that.

    4. Richard says:

      Certainly was not! Given their reletive positions on the race track Hamilton had the line and it was ENCUMBENT of Rosberg to avoid contact which he deliberately chose not to. Rosberg was 100% at fault, and should be given a race ban.

      1. Bearforce1 says:

        A race ban. Hahahaha. Ridonculous. In fact I think you suggested above race bans for 2 races above. Lol.

        You are suggesting special treatment for Hamilton and special punishment for people that dare have an incident with Lewis.

      2. glennb says:

        A race ban? For what? Did you see what Grosjean had to do to get a race ban? A race ban for a racing incident that lead to a puncture and a broken bit of wing?
        Fair dinkum, Lewis’ hardcore fans make Lewis himself seem like a genius. Normal fans excepted.

    5. Tickety-boo says:

      Should’ve gone to SpecSavers.

    6. YouWho says:

      No Dante – I think you should. If even Nico is saying it-doesnt make you look particularly bright..

  25. sd says:

    The guy never mans up. Telemetry at previous team, now these “revelations”. Such a gifted racing talent with arguably the fastest raw speed but still childish demeanour.

    1. LT says:

      I would say deliberately causing a collision to “make a point” is childish…not to mention dangerous.

    2. Bruno Menilli says:

      It is almost like he is parnoid with 2 opposing sides to his character – wish he would decide what he wants to be and just get on with it.

      I remember many times when Schumacher was on the receiving end of incidents, he would never discuss it at the track and just left it up to the team to do the talking.

  26. Richard D says:

    Sounds like a load of nonsense to me! No driver would deliberately engineer a crash like that as the outcome would be so unpredictable. The way I saw it Hamilton turned in a bit too early and caught Rosberg’s wing.

    1. kenneth chapman says:

      yes richard, i am in agreement. a pity that some of the fanboys couldn’t take a more pragmatic approach and see this for what it was. a racing incident.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:


        You are not wanting to listen to the facts.

        Drivers told not to crash into each other.

        Rosberg I could have avoided the crash if I wanted to.

        Giving the situation on the championship and they are team mates this is not merely a racing incident!

      2. Andrew says:

        I don’t think it’s just fans that think Rosberg was to blame for the collision, every professional analyst I’ve heard says that Hamilton was entitled to take the racing line and Rosberg caused the collision by placing his car in an area he had no right to be in. Rosbergs defence was not that he misjudged the space, or was naive about the amount of space Hamilton was entitled to use but that he was “making a point”.

        Racing incident or causing an avoidable collision?

      3. deancassady says:

        Ken: as is very frequently the case, you have a ober, well-considered appraisal of the situation. Good on yah.

      4. Thompson says:

        Oh, Ken Chapman – 500+ and counting. 2 or 3 threads is it?

        Lol….. I tell you the sport might hate the man and quite a few vocal types on the internet.

        But boy does generate column inches.

    2. Gazza says:

      Anybody who knows anything about F1 would have to say it was Rosbergs fault…..why else do you think Toto and Lauda are so angry with him……..are they biased like you?…..I doubt it.
      The question here is was it deliberate or not

      1. Truth says:

        You raised the obvious problem, the truth is not everyone who posts knows about F1 and some who do cannot seem to take their own prejudice out of their opinion, some drivers bring out the worst in certain posters, usually the most talented drivers being targeted.Those with an open mind see the incident clearly and know who is to blame on this one.

    3. YouWho says:

      You people seriously need a reality check!!. A driver is clipped at the rear wheel by his own team mate. Both bosses have claimed it was Nicos fault. Nico himself has claimed he could have avoided it….
      For heavens sake whens the penny goin to drop for you guys.. You cant be born the full quid honestly…..

      1. Thompson says:


        Every time I scroll through this thread to see what’s New and get to this post, I have to laugh……

        It bewildering.

        Ref Monaco there was this talk of the smoking gun, but you know what it would not have mattered – these people would still have found away to spin it to be Hamilton’s fault.amazing.

        +1 anyway.

  27. Daddy Apl says:

    We have got to a point where Mercedes management need to impose a sanction on their drivers if they are to re-establish their control. I would like to see tough action such as withdrawing ROS from the next GP, but maybe just sitting him out of FP1 will be all we get. Whichever way you look at it though, HAM has been massively unlucky this year and ROS seems to have had it the other way round. ROS is doing all he can to win the WDC but I feel things will change and HAM will take it in the end. We can only hope for his luck to turn eventually.

  28. Simmo says:

    Did he do it deliberately? Who knows, but I think it is highly unlikely that Nico did. I would find that difficult to believe. Nevertheless, if it were true I would be saying something completely different, for sure.

  29. Manos says:

    This is getting out of context. It looks more and more like the Hamilton – Alonso days in McLaren. But it was a racing incident. Rosberg just didn’t want to back off until the last moment just to prove a “point”. On the other hand Hamilton is just a cry baby which suits fine the British media, but to make a statement that Rosberg admited that he hit Hamilton on purpose? Too much!

    1. FW14B says:

      Well said, my feeling exactly. Hamilton, unless beating them comfortably (Kovalienen) always has a ‘problem’ with his team mate. Cudos to Jenson.

      1. Steve Mc says:

        Love your username – my all time favourite Grand Prix car. Closely followed by the MP4/6. Now she was a beauty!

    2. Correctomundo says:

      Yes, I take it you were in the the meeting – could you tell us what else happened there??

      1. Manos says:

        For more information you can see the statements from Mercedes.
        It’s obvious that nobody in the place of Rosberg would admit (especially in front of Hamilton, even in a close meeting) that the collision was intended. First of all it couldn’t be because in these situations you never know which car will be hurt more. Furthermore, if we assume that he did it on purpose, it would be the dampest of all things to admit it (possible contractual issue, FIA penalty, popularity, next employer etc.).
        That’s why I am certain that he never send that and that Hamilton intentional misinterpret something that Rosberg said just to satisfy his ego.

  30. jayteeniftb says:

    As Martin Brundle keeps reminding fans (who pay attention) regarding Senna and in recent times Kobayashi about the racing mentality (spoiled childish attitude) of “I am coming through, now you decide whether we are going to have an accident or not”. These drivers believe in fighting tough. Hamilton is one such racer which is evident when he fights (not just comes) through the field.
    Mature drivers back out to avoid an accident. They believe in fighting tough AND fair. Nico is one such racer as has been evident with his past racing especially in Bahrain this season.
    This time he decided he has had enough and proved a point that “if you want an accident, I am done backing out, you are going to get an accident”.
    Clearly Lewis doesn’t understand this complicated thought process and instead plays the victim like some spoiled child (which is very consistent and tragically so for such a gifted driver).
    It is also understandable why they used to be friends but not are anymore, to my knowledge. One of them grew up.

    1. Vinola says:

      Apparently you get this “complicated” thought process more than the Mercedes Benz bosses. Waste of money, right?

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        The fact that they are ‘Mercedes Bosses’ doesn’tautomatically make them great thought processors – which their talking about the incident to the press before speaking to the drivers, confirms.

    2. roberto marquez says:

      Rosberg was certain that he was going to loose the race if Lewis kept the front position and drove into that corner the way you are accusing Hamilton. In the end I think the people at the race track ,who had enough time to talk to other people ,and to see films on smart phones were passing a veredict on Rosberg actions when they booed him.I hope the stewarts do not ignore them.

    3. jose arellano says:


    4. kenneth chapman says:

      that summary is good. the age of ‘entitlement’ [hamilton's] is over. hopefully.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:


        I thought you were more balanced.

    5. Aderac says:

      Spot on

    6. Rishi says:

      To be fair, you’ve probably captured Nico’s thought process pretty accurately here. However, his actions might have carried more weight had he actually been reasonably alongside Lewis when it happened. By the time they were at the second part of the chicane Lewis was almost a fully back ahead and it would have been absolutely stupid of him to give up the whole corner for a guy who wasn’t properly alongside. Better for Nico to have backed out, realised it was only lap 2 of 44 (hence Mercedes team management’s ire), and tried again when a better opportunity arose. Bottom line is, for all his attempts to ‘prove a point’, Nico actually ended up looking pretty clumsy for a driver of his experience and calibre. Luckily for him, it was Lewis who came off worse…much worse.

      I do wonder if Lewis was a bit hasty by going to the written press with something so incendiary afterwards. He does wear his heart on his sleeve but I do feel that what he does on the track is mostly firm-but-fair.

      1. OffCourse says:

        @ Rishi

        Totally agree. Very reasoned comment.

  31. Ruthie says:

    The BBC has some more quotes from Wolff which implies to me that Rosberg’s move was deliberate and dangerous. Here’s the qoute:

    “Wolff said: “Nico felt he needed to hold his line. He needed to make a point and for Lewis it was clearly not him who needed to be aware of Nico.

    “(Rosberg) didn’t give in. He thought it was for Lewis to leave him space and that Lewis didn’t leave him space.

    “So they agreed to disagree in a very heated discussion among ourselves, but it wasn’t deliberately crashing. That is nonsense.

    “It was deliberately taking into account that if Lewis moves or would open then it could end up in a crash.”

    To me, Wolf’s attempt at damage control has confirmed Hamilton’s statements.

    1. Doobs says:

      Toto has comprehensively failed to manage his drivers especially after the Mercedes “Multi 21″ fiasco last time out which left Nico feeling very aggrieved. It is more than obvious there would be a blue-on-blue sooner or later and it’s about time Merc management got shaken out of their smug complacency and start doing a better job. This was the accident they needed to have.

    2. Michael Powell says:

      Not sure you are reading the quotations you have printed.

      Toto says it wasn’t a deliberate collision. That refutes Lewis’s interpretation.

      Toto says Nico stood his ground while Lewis swung into him.

      If I were Nico I might have stood my ground too in the circumstances. Lewis has tried this trick one too many times, and paid the penalty. Will he learn the lesson? I doubt it.

      Good for you Nico, but don’t take the risk too often.

  32. Brandon says:

    Rosberg has been taking notes from Michael Schumacher. First Monaco, then Canada, and now at Spa he has been in a grey area where he has made “accidents” that resulted in Lewis suffering dearly. Of course, since they were “accidents”, it is impossible to punish Rosberg for any wrongdoing. He’s obviously a very smart driver, whereas Lewis is obviously the faster one.

    1. Doobs says:

      “Lewis, Nico is faster than you”

      1. Peter says:

        “Lewis, Nico is smarter than you”

    2. Bradley says:

      If Lewis was the faster one, Rosberg wouldn’t have been about to overtake him.

      1. Brandon says:

        But he didn’t overtake him without an incident. Should have at least been a drive through

      2. furstyferret says:

        He didn’t, you did watch the race right?

    3. Antonio says:

      the outcome of this type of incident is not certain…

      it just as likely rosberg would loose his wing and hamilton gone on undamaged…

      why would he go into an accident which he had no control of the outcome?

      if you think Nico is good enough to be certain he puctures the other guys tyre and not do great damage to his wing (example, it could have broken and gone under the car), then he’s probably better driver than many give him credit :P (would be more malicious too, but i don’t think ANY, i mean ANY driver on the grid would be able to pull this off with all certainty).

      to me rosberg gambled, to show he wasn’t going to back off… he didn’t really think much of the consequences… luckily for him, he came out best (or least bad) out of the 2…

      for those that cry not fair, etc (different from unsporting, given its impossible to know for sure outcome of accident, i don’t believe he did it – it being crash to puncture tire – on purpose)… got news for you… sport and life is not fair!

      We try (sometimes worse or better), in sport and in society (well, some societies, mostly northern europe) to make more fair and equitable, but we don’t always get it (heck, our great technological rich western world is proof enough that more often than not, we absolutely don’t achieve that!).

  33. Laurence H says:

    If it wasn’t deliberate, it was very clumsy. I think in the last two races we’ve seen the quality of Rosberg’s racecraft, and it’s nothing special. Hamilton needs to really get his head down and better Rosberg in every session from now on, because I don’t think Mercedes will allow them to race any more.

    The intrigue is brilliant though!! Really poor management allowing this all to happen publicly makes it better for us!

  34. Harvey Kovert says:

    Surely “not backing down to prove a point” knowing that your actions are likely to cause contact is pretty much the same as “deliberate crashing.”

    1. Tickety-boo says:

      Correct, he knew his front wing was at risk but that the rear of LH’s car more vulnerable, it wasn’t a corner but a chicane and as such would need to be at least 50% alongside to make it stick. He could have backed out and continued to race him, just as Vettel did the lap before, but elected to stick it ‘to prove a point’. That was calculated and pre-meditated. Mercedes is in a mess of their own making, I doubt the FIA will do anything but Mercedes need to be seen to sanction Rosberg. KM was punished by the same stewards after the race for his action on Alonso which put him from 6th back down to 12th and out of the points….. The lack of consistency is bad for the ‘sport’.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:

        100% it was a chicane!!!!

      2. Michael Powell says:

        Lewis barged across, Nico decided this time to let him. More fool Lewis!

    2. GWD says:

      To quote Homer Simpson: “All right pie, I’m just going to do this. [chomp, chomp] And if you get eaten, it’s your own fault.[chomp, chomp, chomp, bang] Ow! Owww, my … Oh, the hell with it.”

    3. Aj says:

      Sound like Nico is just being more honest/man enough to state the truth.
      Reality is that Lewis equally chose not I back off and make his point – ie. I’m taking the line I am entitled to, up to you to back off…
      Reality is he could have equally chosen to avoid an accident.

      We frequently see this for Alonso for example. Tough and skilled as he is, he plays the long/mature game when he needs to, even when this sometime men’s he yields when might technically have the right to hold his ground.

      Still, just a racing incident at the end of the day. That’s what happens when you send racing drivers out on the track to , um, race.

  35. Joshua says:

    I do have to disagree with you James. I believe they are one and the same.

    Roseberg proving a point by refusing to move from the racing line where he had no right to be (to prove a point to Hamilton) is saying I know your ahead but I’m not moving, if you hit me…..you hit me.

    If step in front of a moving train and the train hits me, it’s deliberate. I can’t say. …well the train could have stopped!

    Commentators saying it is clumsy would assume Roseberg had either unintentionally over shot the corner or wasn’t quick enough to react. Ask those same commentators to describe the incident with the knowledge that Roseberg had intentionally not backed out as he wanted to prove a point. …im sure the words stupid, reckless and dangerous would be used!

    I’m disappointed for mecedes and more so for F1. Action must be taken to send a message to all drivers this is completely unacceptable!

    1. Michael Powell says:

      You must be the sort who can see a car in your path, but ploughs on regardless of the consequences yelling “it’s my line, you fool.”

      Lewis cut across once too often. Nico stood his ground, as he has very right to do.

      Forcing a car off the road is a racing offence, and the Stewards would have examined the incident and might well have penalised Lewis. It seems he got off lightly.

      At some stage he will have to admit that this is another season where he has been bought a top car, and has still managed to lose the championship. Kimi outclassed him, now Nico. Sadly, most F1 hopefuls don’t do as well as they hope and expect.

      1. C63 says:

        Nico stood his ground, as he has very right to do…..(sic).

        If he was in the right, why are Toto, Niki and every other expert blaming Nico for the incident? There is an accepted etiquette in motor racing and Lewis had every right, as the car in front, to take the racing line. Nico as the car trying to overtake has the obligation to do so without causing an incident. They analysed the whole thing frame by frame as well as using cg virtual imagery on SKY (not sure if you saw it) and there is no doubt whatsoever that Nico was in the wrong. None.

      2. deancassady says:

        I agree with your sober analysis of the ‘incident’, except for a few minor points, many surrounding the analogies to every day life.
        Lewis was, under the rules, entitled to hold his racing line, regardless of what a pursuing driver does.
        But besides that, this boils down to a racing incident.
        And that is just the way the sport is.
        Regardless of peoples likes and dislikes of the personalities, that’s the sport.
        Lewis had yet another golden opportunity to shut upand let the video footage, for what it is worth, and team management support say everything he would want to say, but much more effectively.
        Oh well.
        Rosberg: … gained 18 points over his rival, and seems to have psychologically injured him.
        That’s the sport.
        In a way Rosberg gained my respect for doing the things (that can be gotten away with) to win the championship.
        I write that, despite believing that in the same machinery, with the same support, Hamilton would win over 50% of the points between them.
        But those aren’t the only critical factors in winning a championship.

        The driver of the year is ricciardo, looking similar to kimi the year he won the championship.

    2. Tom says:

      Joshua, so am I right in understanding what you are saying, when “Roseberg proving a point by refusing to move from the racing line where he had no right to be” SIC, had absolutely no similarity with the times Nico made the choice to be run off the track or crash, as in Bahrain or Hungary?

  36. pking007 says:

    James, a well thought out and put together summation of the situation much better than the version I have read on other websites. It is my view that Mercedes would be reluctant to admit it even if Rosberg had actually said it because. One it carries the potential of Rosberg being stripped of the point haul for Mercedes today and two, it gives Mercedes the worst publicity ever as an F1 racing team. However, I agree, they should provide the transcript of the meeting and the FIA must step in to see what was said in my view.

  37. Graham Robertson says:

    The disgraceful way Romberg behaved in the helge on Grand Prix should be dealt with at once by thr F2 racing committee.
    He should have taken away from him any points he gets from the next grand prix’ s until he has had deducted from his present points score the18 pointshe illigallywas awarded today
    Also he should be demoted in qualifying ten places in all Grand Prix till thee dog this season
    At the endofwhichheshouldbe banned from any further F1 participation fortune exit two seasons.
    Also the mercadies team should have 100 points from the construction championship for not clamping down on rosberg’ s arrogant attitude.
    Had the rolls been in reverse I am sure penalties on Hamilton wouldhavebeen far more sever than this
    You also on mercadies investigate the abnormal amount of problems that hamiltons car seems to have,is sabotage being carried out.?
    The whole f1 has been tarnished by this latest fiasco and lead by mr ecclestone it needs to be seen to putti sown house in order, otherwise you will bring down on yourselves more than the boo’s aimed at Romberg who is a nasty little person not fit to drive amilkfloat !!!!MrG .Robertson.

    1. Paddyism says:

      This is great why do we want them to stop this?????

    2. Aderac says:

      Talk about OTT!

    3. Michael Powell says:

      Nonsense, Mr G Robertson, and most appallingly typed. Do we really trust your ability to identify facts and interpret them wisely? I think not, sir!

      1. Thompson says:

        Sorry but I have to say Michael Powell & narshe you are being [mod]!

        Apologise James if this is against house rules but there is no need for responses such as these .

    4. Narshe says:

      ^ I see Lewis himself has joined the discussion.

  38. Hudson says:

    I must say well done James for unpacking this “Nico did it on purpose” story. I must say when I read it from other sites it didn’t quite make sense to me. Even assuming that he clipped Hamilton on purpose, why would he admit it knowing that the FIA would possibly investigate him and he could potentially lose his points. Also the fact that it came from Hamilton didn’t help; not that Hamilton would deliberately lie about that, but that he would put his own intepretation to it. I think if Nico said anything along those lines, it would be more like “I didn’t back off just to prove a point abouut what could potentially happen if you don’t yield/give me enough space or if we don’t have clear rules about who should be in the lead.” Something like that makes more sense.
    As for the incident itself, I am no expert but it looked rather clumsy to me, no different from the Massa clash with Perez in Canada. It sure did spoil the race for us, but for me that’s the thrill of racing. I could have been watching football at that time, but I chose F1.
    Thanks again James for the indepth analysis. For sure the site doesn’t have as many stories as some others, but the ones you have you put a lot of thought and effort into them.

    1. PaulL says:

      “Hamilton would deliberately lie …”

      Well, he’s done it before.

      1. Marcus says:

        Actually that was Lewis – to the stewards no less…

  39. Regis says:

    It’s crazy how criticized Rosberg was by his own team, especially Lauda. I had no idea Lauda favored Lewis so much, i though he would be neutral to either drivers.

    You have to see it in Rosbergs view, it was in the heat of the action, he wanted to get past and they touched slightly, just a racing accident and that’s it, it happens all the time. The reason it’s so inflated is because it’s Lewis & Nico and Lewis is not helping of course with his absurd statements, just the word “basically” tells you he is deliberately blowing things out of proportion.

    1. Steven says:

      Lauda was the guy who pursued Hamilton and got the board to authorise bringing Hamilton in.

      Rosberg winning the title would him look like a total clown for wasting the money on Hamilton when Rosberg was already there. Also Lauda, great driver, useless team manager how he got anywhere near a senior management position in Mercedes is beyond me.

    2. Thomas says:

      Look at the slow motion again, if you cannot see, go to Specsavers .

    3. Darren D says:

      Lauda’s comments about this happening so early in the race are a bit poorly considered. For Rosberg, finding a way past Hamilton had to happen early in the race. With Mercedes’ lead driver getting pit-stop priority, Rosberg knew that his best shot at winning was having that privilege going into the first round of stops.

  40. Bogdan says:

    Unacceptable…everything and to think that they did not learn from Monaco is mad.

  41. Gord says:

    Didn’t Senna and Prost admit to purposely crashing into each other ? Their reputations don’t seem harmed by it. Schumi crashed into Villeneuve (and Hill) on purpose, and his reputation was unharmed.

    1. James Allen says:

      No, Senna admitted it in 1991 in a manner of speaking.

      Prost never admitted the 1989 one, as far as I know

      1. Andrew M says:

        Prost did admit it, eventually.

    2. Thomas says:

      They were harmed.

    3. Valentino - Schumacher # 1 says:

      Schumacher never drove into Hill at Adelaide .. He was in front of the Williams and had the racing line …. Hence , Schumacher was never punished ( because ) he did nothing wrong … Racing incident !

      1. Oliver says:

        Schumacher had earlier made a mistake and perhaps had a damaged car, and he deliberately ran into Hill. Saying that, I didn’t believe Hill deserved the title as he was only helped by the FIA to be a contender, but then again, Bennetton were accused of running illegal traction control software hence they were also cheating, so I don’t think Schumacher deserved to be a title contender. In the end the FIA allowed both of them to fight for the championship and Schumacher deliberately brought Hills race to an end.

      2. Andrew says:

        “Racing incident !”


      3. Thompson says:

        Taking the racing line?

      4. Andrew M says:

        I can always rely on you to give me a laugh in a difficult time, thanks.

      5. Cliff says:

        Always admired Michael Schumacher, but I couldn’t disagree more!

    4. KRB says:

      Schumi’s reputation was unharmed b/c of those crashes? In which universe?

    5. Andrew M says:

      “Schumi crashed into Villeneuve (and Hill) on purpose, and his reputation was unharmed.”

      I think you’ll find that’s not true…

      1. Andrew W M says:

        MB has a few interesting comments on Schumacher as a teammate at Benneton in his autobiography.
        Senna’s and Schumacher’s reputations have toalarge extent faded from public adulation surprisingly quickly but the true fans remember the Fangio, Clark, Lauda and not those like Schumacher, Senna and Farina who would pull and dirty trick to win.

      2. Andrew M says:

        I think trying to claim people don’t adore Senna (and after his accident the same for Schumacher) is kind of wrong – didn’t you see the outpouring of adulation during the 20th Anniversary of Senna’s death?

      3. Thompson says:


        Early death and serious injury have away of turning some into legends.

    6. Aj says:

      not true.
      Some of those events are front of mind for me when I think about the true character of these guys.

  42. Urko says:

    Well, as i can see from the footage, Nico turned right while his front wing was still alongside Lewis’ rear tyre. And i have to say, that more that i watch it, the more I’m convinced that he did it on purpose. It’s not that he didn’t prevent the accident. He actually turned right into the tyre.

    1. Thomas says:

      He did do it on purpose and everyone in the F1 paddock knows it.

    2. Doobs says:

      D’uh..He had to make the turn…

      But notice how he swerved left when Lewis drifted across him. Anyone would think he was trying to avoid a collision or something.

      1. Carl says:

        No he didn’t have to make the turn, the move was not on and should have backed out and taken the escape route if needed like seb did one lap before. Look at the evidence – he turns away then immediately turns right again clipping the rear of the sister car.
        If he was making a point all that came across was that he hasn’t the race craft of his team mate, FA, DR, SV,
        Watching nico being interviewed after was quite telling struggling to make eye contact, looking uncomfortable being asked the questions ……

      2. Narshe says:

        @Carl https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi-86Uptjco

        You mentioned the race-craft of Sebastian Vettel? :P

  43. Anne says:

    The only thing I´m concerned is public statements about a private meeting. I fear this could turn into a new trend among drivers and teams. We know all teams have meetings and it´s none of our business what is said there. So I don´t want any new statement from Mercedes explaning in detail about what has been discussed.

    What I do want is for FIA to do their job during the race. Something they didn´t do when this incident took place.

    1. Flawless says:


      Kmag gets a penalty for squeezing alonso.

      Rosberg isn’t even investigated for causing a collision tht affected the race outcome as well as the championship.

      Rosberg has won the 2014 WDC this weekend with this move, hope he’s proud of it…. Its gonna stick

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        “Kmag gets a penalty for squeezing alonso” – and Hamilton got a penalty [ a puncture ] for squeezing Rosberg !

    2. Aj says:

      A worrying trend indeed.
      What’s next? Tweeting you team mates set up data?
      Na. no one would take it that far.

      1. Narshe says:



  44. Gazza says:

    Looking at the replays Ive changed my my mind in the context of Rosberg,s statement….. the thing I don’t understand is this…..Nico was already going backwards losing ground as they left the apex of the first part of the chicane…..therefore all he had to say was I made an error of judgement pulling in behind Lewis clipping his rear tyre…..that I can understand.

    If he says he was trying prove a point……then he intended deliberate contact……probably not in the way it happened because he risked ruining his own race……perhaps just wheel banging……either way it was a stupid thing to say when all he had to do was apologise…no big deal…..he has the points.

    Refusing to yield and unavoidable contact when alongside is “proving a point” trying to clip the rear wheels of car moving away from you is “on purpose”

  45. Lele says:

    This is a direct link to the Sky-F1 article’s image showing Nico’s on-board just before contact with Lewis’ car:

    It shows clearly Nico’s got PLENTY of room to make the corner, and his steering is nearly at full lock to the right.
    Was he correcting the back stepping out to the right?
    Was his car out of balance and control?
    Whatever Nico, Lewis or Merc say in a possible clarifying statement, either by vocation or contract, it will be to minimise the impact on either himself (Nico) or the team (Lewis and Merc), and so it will most definitely NOT be the reflection of a true picture.
    Only the FIA can act as an impartial referee, and should take a very close look at telemetry data, which will answer those questions I (and anyone of the people that watched the race, included the savvy, paying, booing fans) posed.
    In MY mind, I have no doubt since Monaco that Nico is unsportive, but thankfully for F1 I, and the million fans, count for zero where difficult, insightful decisions have to be taken.
    Would you not too, James, call upon the FIA to arbiter this seriously bad (for F1 as a sport!) incident, and in case of guilt, hand out quite the exemplary punishment, given what is at play?

    1. James Allen says:

      Bit surprised stewards didn’t look at it, yes. Given the outcome

      1. Thomas says:

        Is it because they drive Mercedes cars?

      2. Satish says:

        HI James, sometimes I struggle to understand why F1 is even run under FIA rules, when the FIA is utterly missing in action all the time (at least since Todt took over)?

        They are unable to enforce cost controls and in general are powerless. They are unable to keep the rule book fixed over the course of a season and keep making rule changes like FRIC ban out of the blue. Their stewarding by far is inconsistent, making it appear that the penalties (if any) vary based on the driver involved, giving an appearance of bias. They seem to pussy foot around when penalties for championship contenders are involved. They freeeze engine development from day 1 of the Turbo V6 era (over the course of a season).

        Why can’t F1 just run itself without FIA “labelling”?

      3. James Allen says:

        FIA owns F1 World Championship

      4. Michael Powell says:

        Very good article, putting the known facts and opinions out without muddying the water. I’m glad you wrote it rather than I. My take would be less impartial.

        Good race, though, despite all this cat-calling which is beginning to seem like a storm in a tea-cup, and certainly didn’t obscure the great spectacle. I didn’t move from my sofa all afternoon, sadly.

        My, how quickly we have forgotten the spats at Red-Bull. Was it really only last season?

    2. LT says:

      Exactly! Funny how Hamilton haters always ignore clear facts like footage when it doesn’t suit thier anti Hamilton stance!

    3. Neil Ford says:

      More to the point of Nico having enough room to make the corner, it’s how this shot clearly demonstrates it is not even remotely a genuine overtaking option. Hamilton’s car is almost a full cars length ahead on its way to the apex (if not slightly to the right of it) Any driver can just stick a car on the inside of a corner with no hope of making it to prove a point. That’s not skill. I don’t have any footage but I recall one of the Ferrari’s trying the same manoeuvre and how easy it was to take last minute avoiding action and still tuck in behind to set up another go. (not where alonso lost his wing tip)

    4. Basil says:

      This shot is taken at the exact moment where Nico lost traction and had to counter steer. Your comment is falsifying the truth of the situation.

    5. Lele says:

      Basil, i got the email of your reply, but you are missing two points:
      A) it’s not MY picture, it’s Sky F1′s own.
      B) i ASK two questions, which you glossed over, and the WHOLE post is about taking it out of OUR (the fans’) hands, and into the FIA’s own, where telemetry traces WILL reveal the truth, invisible to the naked eye (as MY conviction is that he never lost traction, from either onboard or standard cameras. Not to mention Nico’s post-race

      I want to understand.

  46. Sebee says:

    Who looks a fool?

    1. Sebee says:

      All I know is that Lewis was asked to do something by the team and he chose to disregard it. So Nico showed disregard also. Wolff came out and clearly said that Lewis not letting Nico by cost a win, so this isn’t much different. And they did say that Lewis should have moved in Hungary as well and that the orders were right just needed to be in different language.

      It’s strange that they talk out of one side of the mouth but mean something else. What I do know is Lewis bringing internal meetings into public would be a huge no no to me. He’s trying to get sympathy by trying to trash Nico. He looks like a baby taking internal stuff and crying like a baby instead of getting advantage.

      And let’s be honest, a collision was always going to happen.

      1. pargo says:

        That’s pretty obvious to me as well. I’m sure Nico wouldn’t be feeling too bad about the incident given Lewis did him no favours in the previous race.

        I also don’t buy that Nico ‘did this on purpose’. A move like that could’ve taken himself out of the picture completely.

        Simple racing incident that we see almost every race. Time to move on…

      2. LT says:

        Wouldn’t be making too many grand statements Sebee, your Vettel continues to be schooled by Richiardo. Focus on that

      3. Thomas says:

        Only thing was, Nico’s action were Dangerous.

      4. Sebee says:

        Wonder how much Niki and Toto will appreciate Lewis sharing internal talks and creating a PR mess for Niki and Toto to clean up.

        Hey, tell me what Niki would have done in the 70s in Nico’s place when race prior his team mate is told to yield and doesn’t? Niki would have done EXACTLY what Nico did – not yield either.

      5. KRB says:

        So Nico not doing anything to avoid a collision between teammates is ok by you? The situations in Hungary and Spa are totally different. If you can’t see that, then geez. Stop trying to equivocate, and see the situations for what they are/were. In Hungary, Lewis was prepared to let Rosberg pass, but wasn’t prepared to slow down to let that happen. He wouldn’t have pushed Nico towards the wall if he was coming past, but he wasn’t going to act like a lapped car when the final result was still very much fluid. At Spa, Rosberg has admitted to deliberately leaving his nose in, and not pulling out of an avoidable collision. The onboards are quite damning, with Nico shown fully turning in towards Hamilton’s left rear tire. Nico it appears was fully willing to risk a double-DNF for Mercedes, to aid his own championship hopes. I’m not sure how that can possibly endear him to the team.

        It should’ve been a cakewalk 1-2 for Mercedes. They need to start opening up that gap in the WCC and the WDC again. Over the last 6 races, Ricciardo has outscored both Rosberg and Hamilton. That’s pathetic! And all b/c of unreliability, some bad strategy calls, and now Rosberg’s petulance.

      6. Sebee says:

        KRB, stop being dramatic. It was a right hander and Nico was running out of track. Think in your head how much Lewis has been unyielding at request of the team. From previous race examples noted by others up to last race.

        Niki is a bit too faced too, because you know 100% he would do exactly same thing as Lewis in Hungary and as Nico at Spa. As a driver, he should know what position these two are in. And as a man among men, he should know that Nico is much more of a gladiator than Lewis right now. Lewis is seriously the kid who keeps crying and snitching right now. Right or not, he’s that kid. Nico is a man who waits for the bell to ring to get back into the ring and fight. As I said, he handles his business like a man. Like Senna, Schumi, Prost, Lauda…good company to be in, yes?

        As for your point about RBR being let into it. As a fan, I hope these two keep clashing. It’s good for the show and the championship. I was sick of the runaway MB train.

      7. Rachsepp says:

        Wolff came out and said Lewis not moving for Nico cost him the win AFTER he and Paddy Lowe said neither drivers could have won. Mercedes then later said that Lewis was right not to move and they had made a mistake in asking him to jeopardize his own championship. They then said they needed an internal meeting to review how they use team orders when they are in the unique position of having the constructors pretty much secured. They had that meeting on Thursday before Spa where Nico was apparently unhappy with the teams approach…. Then Spa happened….

      8. Sebee says:

        LT, did you happen to know that my team…RBR have 2 drivers I absolutely enjoy? A 4 time WDC who for sake of the show and stopping the torture you have suffered since start if this decade and has taken a back seat for a season or two, and Daniel – who is just an awesome dude. He’s going to have to build a list of enemies somehow…not sure how, but he will have to if he hopes to be WDC one day. If RBR do well, I can’t lose!

      9. Sebee says:

        You guys…let this go. You’re just mad because there is no way in hell Lewis can pull this type of firm move now.

        Nice guys finish last. Ever hear that one before? It was two guys not yielding an inch. Lewis could also have driven with reality in mind that this could be an outcome and he has more to lose thus should avoid the possibility.

        I say again…Niki would have done exactly the same thing.

      10. Cliff says:

        You’ve identified what I see as flaw in the character of Lewis Hamilton. Think back to SPA 2012, tweeting data of his team mates data, now making private conversations public, sometimes I just feel that he needs someone big enough to tell him to keep his thoughts to himself.

      11. KRB says:

        @Sebee, Rosberg had plenty of track to take to, to avoid contact. Anyone who considers Lewis’ move a cut across or a chop, simply has no idea what those mean in racing terms. He took the racing line, as he was ahead in the corner, as is his right to do. Nico as the trailing car has the best vantage point to know what’s required to make sure that there is no contact. If you want to see how it’s done, watch how Alonso beautifully bailed out of various passing attempts on Magnussen in corners, when it was clear that there was no further potential to pass. Rosberg, in the wheel-to-wheel stuff, is too clumsy.

        Nico betrays his sense of inferiority vis-a-vis Lewis, when he drives like that. If he was truly confident in his abilities to beat Lewis on track, then he would have no need for the dodgy stuff. So, in terms of your boxing analogy, Nico is the fighter who needs loaded gloves to stand any chance.

        Lewis, by contrast, just wants it to be about them two, on the track and nowhere else. He knows that, barring any dirty pool, he’ll beat Nico. Lewis is the racer, Nico is the plotter. Which one’s more deserving of admiration?

      12. Sebee says:

        KRB, it’s never just about track. Lewis is perhaps one dimensional like that – or at least many of you see him like that. It’s a mind game too, especially with no #1. And I put to you that Lewis feels threatened too. He is not winning straight quali battles. Nico is rocking his cage. Now MB are easy to implement team orders, and what…put the championship leader on the back burner for Lewis? Who’s ripe for Ron’s picking! Come Lewis, you’ll be #1 on McLaren Honda.

        Well, whatever. Not long for the next round. It’s going to be fun.

      1. Andrew M says:

        Damn, beat me to it…

    2. Andrew M says:


      1. Sebee says:

        I take my lumps, if deserved.

        Thank you sir. May I have another? :-)

    3. Andrew says:

      Yeah it’s you

  47. Nickh says:

    He should get banned for at least one race… To prove a point.

    Of course Toto is trying to cool it all down, he’s only thinking of Merc brand and his superior Merc bosses.

    1. James Clayton says:

      It may actually be wise for Merc to voulenteer Rosberg out of a race before the FIA make any decisions on their behalf (which they may or may not do). If Merc choose to sit Rosberg out, they can put their reserve driver in his place, if the FIA impose such a sanction then they lose that car for the race.

      Of course Mercedes implementing their own sanctions doesn’t prevent the FIA getting involved if they feel they have to, but it might just be enough to prevent them taking such actions.

      1. Oliver says:

        What can Mercedes do? Not give him sausages for breakfast?
        Rosberg already has a long term contract. He has Wolff who will constantly take his side.
        Rosberg even has the added advantage that he will get team orders in his favour especially now that he is 29 points ahead.
        Rosberg has the confidence of someone with the full backing of key team members even before the first race.

      2. James Clayton says:

        Olive I’m slightly confused by your question. I’ve already suggested what Mercedes *can* do, though they clearly aren’t going to.

        I’m also confused as to why you think Wolff will constantly take Nicos side, when he’s clearly laid the blame for this event squarely on Nico.

        I’m surprised the FIA haven’t got involved, to be honest. Hamilton has accused Rosberg of deliberately causing a collision, surely they have a responsibility to investigate such a claim, regardless of an official complaint being made or not. I would have thought that they would have demanded a complete transcript of the meeting to evaluate. But… silence.

  48. Brian Bell says:

    I think the slow mo tells more than statements made behind closed doors and being ‘spun’ for self gain or PR reasons. Rosberg turned hard right just before the collision. He did it on purpose.

      1. DB says:

        Rosberg could be sliding, he could be thinking Hamilton was faster and would clear his front wing, he might just not be a perfect driver…

        He could be turning in on Hamilton too. ¦¬)

        Finally a good controversy. This took longer than I expected to happen.

      2. Regis says:

        All this shows is that they are turning right from the previous corner, doesnt it?

      3. Vinola says:

        Yup. No question about it. Can stewards still investigate this? Who were they anyway??.. I bet old friends of Keke’s. Small world, F1.

      4. Mark says:

        I looked at that photo ready for the “proof” but sorry if he didn’t CONTINUE to turn right at that point he goes over the kerb!!!

        Of course he is turning right, he is still trying to complete the corner he is in!!!

        I wonder if people here drive let alone know how to race.

      5. T says:

        And if you look a split second before that his steering wheel was hard left. He was simply trying to control the car.

      6. Oliver says:

        But it shows how far behind Rosberg was, front wing vs rear wheel.
        If that was Maldonado everyone would be screaming for him to be banned, but its Rosberg vs Hamilton, and now its all Hamilton’s fault for showing up at Spa.

      7. Narshe says:

        SHOCK HORROR! A racing driver going around a RIGHT-hand corner is turning his steering wheel RIGHT. Ban him for life, the reckless hooligan!

  49. Doug SA says:

    Doing it “On purpose” and deliberately refusing to yield in such a way that you know an accident is inevitable is surely the same think is it not? Either way whether you do so because you want to make a point or not, you are willfuly causing an accident and hence endangering another person’s life.

    1. Bruno Menilli says:

      Same as keeping your racing line when you know there is a driver on your inside can cause an accident, and just because you feel you have the preceived right to do so , and hence endangering another person’s life ?

      1. OffCourse says:

        Absolute misinterpretation of the rules and race craft

      2. Doug SA says:

        The rules state explicitly that for a car to be deemed “on the side of another” it must HAVE a substantial part of its length next to the leading car. The little cretin had ONLY his wing alongside Hamilton’s car but still expected to be given space……No my friend if you are BEHIND you yield, those are the rule. Even if you are the blue eyed cretin from whereever….the car in front had the corner, had the racing line, and the muppet simply had no business being there!!!!

      3. Narshe says:

        @Doug SA

        You mad bro?

  50. Daniel says:

    Monaco, then there was cutting the chicane and going 6 tenths faster and now this.

    It’s getting silly now. Rosberg doesn’t deserve the title he is going to win by default using dirty tactics.

  51. Andreas says:

    I think Toto Wolff’s description of what was said makes the most sense. Nico persisted, trying to prove the point that he shouldn’t have to back down (wrong, in my book, but still). So of course he kept his nose in on purpose – he meant to be on that particular piece of track, after all. In Lewis’ heated (and obviously disappointed) state of mind, that translates as “deliberately crashing into” him. I’m sure that when his temp has cooled a little, he too can see the difference between deliberately not backing down and deliberately crashing. To me, any blame will still be clearly at Nico’s door – that move was never going to end in anything but tears (something Vettel realised the lap before, and backed out of it). But it sure wasn’t a deliberate premeditated act. It was more the result of a poor choice of which fights to pick, and which to skip, to fight another day.

    1. Quade says:

      Deliberate does not have to be premeditated. Deliberate is knowing a move would surely cause an accident and still go through with it “to prove a point.” Nasty and not clever.

    2. Gustav says:

      I agree!
      Its a payback relating back to Shanghai firts corner.

    3. Oliver says:

      The fact is Rosberg miscalculated massively. I also don’t think it was deliberate because he was not even forced off track, there was a ton of space for him to slow down for the exit of the chicane.
      Rosberg’s mistake was not accepting he was the one in the wrong and trying to claim it was 50 – 50.
      50 – 50 is when you are alongside like Vettel was yet Vettel decided to yield very late into the corner, but Rosberg who was so far behind, seemed to be accelerating into an accident.
      By picking an argument when your opponent is sleeping to prove a point is the most stupid excuse to come up with. Very wrong moment to prove a point

  52. Pat says:

    Clearly as the driver behind, attempting an overtake in the middle of a chicane it was Rosberg’s choice to either back out of the attempt or have a collision. I’m sure he was trying to prove a point that he wasn’t always going to back out, as he had in similar circumstances previously. Deliberate yes, but hardly Schumacher in Monaco or Piquet in Singapore. He simply chose not to yield, but in a circumstance when it was absolutely his responsibility to yield – bear in mind this was mid-corner not on a straight or in a breaking zone. As the wronged party Hamilton well within his rights to spin this his way with the press.

    Rosberg has admitted that to prove his point he was willing to gamble the teams entire race away. It’ll be interesting to see what repercussions there are for that.

    1. LT says:

      Exactly! Since when has racing etiquette changed just because it was Hamilton being disadvantaged?

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Since when has racing etiquette changed ? Since it was announced that drivers in front must not squeeze others off the road – which Hamilton was doing, and in an attempt to stay on track Roseberg was forced to turn slightly right and misjudged his timing.

        This is just a racing incident as no-one would do this on purpose. Rosberg could just as easily have been taken out whilst causing no real damage to Hamilton.

  53. you must always leave the space says:

    Damaging german drivers reputation through the media is the only answer the Brits have whenever they lose a championship. LOL
    Racing incident blown out of all proportions by the very driver who can only defend a position by pushing the other guy off the track.

    Last year you wrote an article after Vettel ignored team order and overtook Webber for the lead, advising him to go to Ferrari. This year Hamilton ignores a team order which did cost Mercedes a victory for his team (unless Vettel last year). We are still waiting for that article advising Hamilton to leave Mercedes ????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  54. DB says:

    “If true it would totally undermine Rosberg’s integrity as an F1 driver and as a championship contender.”

    If what is true? The (supposed) confession or the (supposed) act?

    Similar, unconfessed, acts in Japan 1991 and Australia 1994 don’t seem to have seriously undermined Ayrton Senna and Michael Schumacher.

    And the confession cannot be worst than the act, can it? Or is it a crime only if you get caught?

  55. If Hamilton’s interpretation is incorrect, then clearly Rosberg has got him rattled on the psychology front.

    Nico sounds like the bully at school that gets found out but always has a good explanation for everything.

    Horner must be laughing right now… “Multi 446 Nico, what don’t you understand?” LOL

    As a neutral fan, I’m loving this off track battle of the title race.

    1. Steven says:

      No Hamilton is the school bully who isn’t liking having the bigger kid giving him a taste of his own medicine.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Spot on !

      2. Narshe says:


    2. BigHaydo says:

      Hamilton has been losing the psychological battle since before the Monaco GP weekend had even started. He’ll blame Nico, but Lewis needs some significant introspection to understand that he is making things much more difficult for himself. He has likened himself to Senna, but Senna was a bit more astute when it came to picking his battles.

      For mine, I’m hoping that Mercedes struggles to manage their current implosion and that Ricciardo snatches the title from under their noses!

      1. Thompson says:


        Up until Monaco Hamilton was trouncing rosberg fair ans square – ligament victories on track racing – may the fastest man win qualifying.

        Monaco was the beginning things got unpleasant.

      2. BigHaydo says:

        @Thompson: Lewis was getting the job done well enough on track, but up until the Monaco weekend the pairing was still relatively amicable. Lewis prefaced the weekend with his rich dad/poor dad commentary, which was the first shot across the garage – and entirely unnecessary. Then in qualifying, Lewis and the bipartisan media made a lot of noise over a speculative incident when Nico ran wide. Despite the results that followed, Lewis has been in a negative victim/underdog headspace, which regardless of his results is likely preventing him from extracting the best from himself. Car damage aside, there was no burn from the stern in Belgium, which would be a true hallmark of a motivated champion. Instead, we copped the moaning down the radio and the political nonsense in the aftermath.

      3. Thompson says:

        When you say ‘speculative incident’ you’re not talking about the off that guaranteed pole for him are you?

        Question – who committed the speculative incident.

        Rosberg appears to not recognise that being part of those 4 races guaranteed his legacy they will be referred to for years

        Who came 1st Will be a side story.

        The ‘speculative incident’ tarnished that.

        Regardless, incidents,accidents, mistakes and failures have gone on to create a season desperately needed by F1 – a competitive show.

        At no point in all this has Hamilton acted shady on track – some say he cut him off – he was behind!!!…. And both were still within track limits, he had space.

        Consider the racing this year outside of these two – two champions racing wheel to wheel inches from eachother at 200mph cursing down the radio about each other.

        In years to come when they are old men they will sit around a table saying ‘yeah that was one hell of a race, man I nearly soiled myself a couple of times…..’

        Honestly what Rosberg did again has tarnished what could have been a legendary end to a season.

        Its not Hamilton that needs to grow up or has his head in the wrong place. If anyone you know did something that you considered unfair or unsporting to you, then turned round to you and with a flip of the shoulder said ‘I did it to prove a point……’

        I cannot understand your view.

      4. BigHaydo says:

        Yes, the ‘speculative incident’ I’m referring to is the off that guaranteed a Rosberg pole, and I’m calling it speculative because we can’t be certain it was deliberate. The stewards had access to the telemetry and didn’t make an adverse finding, plus just about every car locks up at Mirabeau anyway. The only person that knows for sure is Nico. Monaco has to be the worst place in the world to secure pole in the dying minutes: any form of yellow flag or track blockage will ruin the lap. Senna in 88 ditched his quali tyres for the durable race compound to give him some insurance against traffic or yellows.

        The Spa incident has been blown out of proportion too: sure it’s a cardinal sin to make contact with your teammate, but there were similar contacts in the very same race that nobody has raised their eyebrows about.

        I’m not saying Nico is a saint in all of this, but it’d be good if there was some balance. Lewis should just be greatful it wasn’t the last round and that there are still plenty of points to play for.

      5. Thompson says:

        Wow……. Ok.

        But just to make sure. You’ve seen the onboard of both ‘speculative incidents’

        You’ve heard the responses from his boss, a 3xWDC and the BELGIUM crowd ref this revent ‘incident’?

        I don’t think Hamilton does have much of a choice but to drive on – it’s just a shame imo.

      6. Thompson says:

        Sorry, to add

        The whole problem is the standings in the WDC and the now 29points.

        I have yet yo see s race were an end plate makes contact with the side wall of a tyre that does not end in a puncture.

        Anywhere else on the track is bad enough but at the sharp end…., against your only real rival…..

        This is not out of proportion and should not be viewed as such.

  56. Troy says:

    Well Hamilton continues to be an emotional beast. Not sure it serves his desire to become WDC.

    Right or wrong it seems Nico needed to tell Hamilton on track that he wont run off onto the grass anymore to avoid contact (Hungary final lap)

    1. Oliver says:

      By giving Rosberg lots of tarmac to play with, Rosberg wants to prove a point?

  57. Albert Park says:

    James, do you think Lewis may talk to another team now?

    1. James Allen says:

      He should stay in a winning car and try to beat ROS

      1. Zaros says:

        How can he trust Rosberg though, he clearly thinks Rosberg is a cheat in Monaco and now here in Spa. He is in a position in the championship where he has to go all out to win every race, which means inevitable on track battles, if Rosberg does the same thing again the championship is probably over.

      2. David says:

        Seriously? If Mercedes effectively allow Rosberg to deliberately collide with Hamilton?

      3. Cliff says:


        In my opinion, the one thing that has been missing from this Hamilton/Rosberg episode is Ross Brawn. You can’t guarantee that we would not have had the same scenarios, but do you not think that he would have handled it differently from the start? Put simply, Ross Brawn has the stature to command the respect and compliance of his drivers.

        I’ve grown to like the Toto Wolff and always been impressed by Paddy Lowe, but can that ascert their authority over their drivers, something that is very much needed?

        On the plus side, I predict F1 viewing figures to start increasing again.

      4. James Allen says:

        Agree with your last point!

        Ross didn’t have the same kind of relationship with Daimler bosses I think, but had a lot of experience of managing drivers, albeit not always when the objective is to let them race

    2. Ian H says:

      would it not be the opposite, that it could be Rosberg forced into looking for another seat next year?

      Rosberg may now feel uncomfortable in the team or mercedes may be unimpressed by his actions/attitude yesterday and end his contract (though i imagine this would be unlikely and prob expensive for merc to end his contract)

    3. Michael Powell says:

      Mercedes should be talking to Alonso, and send Lewis back to Ron Dennis.

  58. TMax says:

    I feel it was a Cheap Shot by Hamilton to twist the comment made by Rosberg and feed the hungry media. He knows they are waiting to pounce on Rosberg especially after the booing .

    Lot a lots of respect for Lewis today !!!!

    1. Michael says:

      Agreed. And it’s a big Cheap Shot too. Previous ones have only been about Nico’s nationality. We all weren’t in that post race team debriefing, but either Nico was badly misunderstood or people in there only wanted to hear what they wanted to hear. And, hey, even if he is from Monaco or Germany for that matter, his English is certainly of sufficient standard to be understood by all.

      Given Herr Lauda already declared Nico guilty, it may well have set the tone of things to come.

      It seems to me that Mercedes, as a team, is not firing on all of its cylinders and is in need of some change. Infighting like this may be entertaining for some, but in my view, this has now reached thepoint that itis actually very destabilising and is damaging their brand.

      1. Oliver says:

        I thought that Nationality argument had been shown to be something that was really being brought up by the interviewer and not Hamilton.
        And What did Hamilton say that was a lie.
        If Rosberg admitted that he left his nose there to prove a point, then isn’t that a conscious action?

      2. Michael in Sydney says:

        @Oliver, it’s a journalists job to bring up issues and to create stories. Sometimes they bring up some dirt and sometimes they report on events.

        I think many people don’t see his nationality as an issue at all. It seems to me and many that Lewis’ remarks were absolutely inflammatory and were designed to destabilise. They were nothing short of a cheap shot – no matter who introduced the subject. Lewis obviously saw some potential for his own gain in what he did say.

        That Rosberg stuck his nose up the inside of Hamilton is just part of racing. Name one driver who hasn’t done exactly the same thing – to prove a point – to the driver in front of him to tell that driver that they are there!!! It’s an integral part of motor racing, no matter what’s being driven. It’s a matter of ones interpretation. I don not have a problem with ROS proving a point to HAM that he is there. I expect him to.

        That ROS actually hit HAM is the issue and the subject of much divisive debate and opinion – often decided by the good old “who’s your more favourite driver test”.

  59. Jock Ulah says:

    No . . . he’s an F1 Driver . . .
    They’re not that dumb.

    But, hey, this is Internet City . . .
    Which never sleeps – and where
    hearsay is more entertaining than truth.

  60. Sergio says:

    Definitely HAM is a Prima donna. A paradox that just the Bristish have “Mr. Complaint” as a Star driver. To be a whiner is the worst for a Bristish Media except for the British drivers.

    1. Truth says:


      1. Sergio says:

        Possibly, but this is one commentary in a Website, imagine if HAM was not British. (for sure against a British Star driver) For certain you should know the meaning of “offensive”, and maybe you can add “impotence” in front of one media lobby saying who are the good and who the bad guy, or even being accused in a press conference by “journalists”. HAM can continue complaining and making outbursts and the rest we can see him doing naturally. He can. “He is right”

  61. peter says:

    According to Toto, “But it wasn’t deliberate crashing. This is nonsense.” If indeed Nico was “making a point”, then I would view this as a premeditated action, regardless if it was deliberate or not. From that perspective alone, given that racing is inherently dangerous, some form of consequence should be addressed.

  62. Dean says:

    The most interesting element of the incident was that Rosberg, despite leading the championship and increasingly being seen as the favourite for the title, felt the need to prove himself and “do a Hamilton”. It suggests that, although Hamilton as been the one making more mistakes seemingly under pressure, Lewis has still got under Nico’s skin. So the run in isn’t a head to head between the emotional Lewis and the clinical Nico. And, while Lewis is further behind in the points battle, I’d say he’s possibly in a stronger position now: Nico can’t risk anything in a head to head, his position in the team has been weakened and a vocal section of the public have started to turn against him.
    The only thing that can weaken Lewis’ position now is if he has overegged the pudding in terms of what Nico actually said- while the inference that it was deliberate will reduce public support for Nico, if he didn’t specifically say it, the team won’t thank Lewis for his spin. And we’ve seen before that Lewis can be clumsy on the mind games front (he’s not German,he’s a poshboy etc…)

    1. stewart says:

      Very true, the backlash against ros on twitter was pretty comprehensive. What ever happens next, the damage has been done to rosbergs credibility

      1. Michael Powell says:

        Twitter isn’t easily measured. You only hear comments from people you follow, and they tend to be people you like the views of, and who comment in your language and from your perspective. So, inevitably the comments are highly skewed. It’s not remotely a true test of opinion in the general population.

  63. Jeb Hoge says:

    So at best, it was Rosberg trying and failing to make a poorly placed pass, which is how it looked from the start.

  64. DaWorstPlaya says:

    Underhanded move by Rosberg. Some may argue it was a racing incident. I disagree, he was well aware of what he was doing. There was no way he was going to make it stick, any sane driver would’ve slowed down a bit and tried again in the remaining 42 laps! After the move at Monaco to bring out the yellow flags during qualifying to impede his faster teammate and now this, if he goes on to win the championship it won’t mean much.

    The move hurt is teammate, his team and his integrity.

  65. Sebee says:

    Mercedes have no choice. They have to back the lucky driver from here on.

    1. Thompson says:

      At sebee

      If Merc decide to drop Nico for a couple of races which Hamilton then wins and ends up 21 points ahead of him with 5 races left.

      What would you say then?

      1. Sebee says:

        Right…drop the championship leader. And you guys think my conspiracy theories are off.

        Lewis should have gone quietly into his corner and came up with a man’s way to handle this. Not cry about internal meetings and putting false words into someone mouth.

      2. Thompson says:

        The WCC is won.

        So yes drop the WDC leader – make it clear who pays the wages.

        Not familiar with your conspiracy theories I take it you prefer the PR talk from drivers?

        but anyway …….

      3. Sebee says:

        So you also don’t see the difference between not yielding and crashing on purpose? There is a difference, and for definition watch Spa incident.

      4. Thompson says:

        Not yielding is deliberately crashing -it’s actually a conscious choice to crash into someone or something.

        if you are behind, to plough on and cause an accident IS your fault.

        Ask an insurance broker if you don’t believe me.

        Anyhoo to my original hypothetical question…..

    2. Random 79 says:


    3. KRB says:

      As RBR did in 2010 after Spa? Time for Mercedes to draft in Bottas for 2015, and say adios to Rosberg.

      1. Sebee says:

        OK, what’s happening here? Are you guys saying Lewis isn’t strong enough to prevail on track? Isn’t strong enough to beat Nico on track? Wow…talk about backing away from a fight. KRB…come on, battle is good. Don’t worry, Lewis will have his moments.

      2. Thompson says:

        @severe again……lol

        I think what’s being suggested is reset – and let’s go racing.

        That’s what was supposed to happen – but no.

        Dah pressure….appears to not be on Hamilton

      3. KRB says:

        Huh, how’d you get that from what I wrote? Lewis is of course strong enough to prevail on track, provided there’s no dirty pool from Rosberg. Nico knows it, Lewis knows it. Hence, the dirty pool.

      4. Sebee says:

        You want Rosberg out because he’s too…?

      5. Thompson says:

        @sebee again (spell correction newsd up my last reply intended for you)

        No one wants Rosberg out – I don’t think. For me I want to see him race Hamilton beat him fair and square or lose to him.

        Do the banter – talk up the show, but race.

        Schumacher, Alonso, Vettel had rubbish championships because their team mates were handcuffed or had their legs tied….or blindfolded.

        The no.1 thing is rubbish.

        The opportunity is there to set a standard for all teams to follow. Don’t make it so in future teams return to the no.1 foolishness.

      6. KRB says:

        @Sebee, Merc should drop him after this season b/c he’s too:

        (take your pick)
        - reckless with any sort of 50/50 pass (even 70/30!)
        - dodgy in any sort of traffic
        - liable to carry grudges into races even weeks later (did Lewis carry his grudge from Monaco into Canada?)
        - willing to optimize his result to the total detriment of the team result (he was willing to not avoid the potential for a double-DNF!)

        With the cars presumably closing up in performance next year (compared to this year), his weaknesses as a driver will only become more apparent.

        Bottas very well could be better than Rosberg … he certainly schooled him on how to properly effect a pass around the outside of Les Combes when he passed Vettel there on Sunday. Bottas knows how to pass cleanly, he fights firmly but fairly, and he’s fast.

        I don’t get why you equate driving dirty (or intentionally recklessly) with some sort of masculine quality? It’s nothing of the sort … it’s the reserve of scoundrels, or those with low confidence in their own abilities.

        If Merc dropped Rosberg, where do you think he’d end up?

  66. Thompson says:

    How else can you interpret what Rosberg reportearly said?

    ‘to prove a point’

    If someone did something then said they were proving a point how would you see that James?

    1. Thompson says:

      To add

      Just saw Anthony Davidson’s analysis on the incident……wow

      I have to admit I watched the race on the BBC – who did not analyse the incident too deeply.

      But Rosbergs on board….. It was deliberate

      Hamiltons rear was in line with Rosbergs wing, he had enough space to back out of the situation all he had to do was lift. The lock on his steering was more than required to stay on track at the point of impact. And he did indeed pull away before turning in.

      He was not even half a car length alongside Hamilton.

      I am really disappointed with Rosberg.

      Why some of you are slating Hamilton I do not know – but in your world if someone did something to you that on the surface seemed unfair then when justifying their actions ended their statement with ‘to prove a point’ (this is without video evidence) you would not be so diplomatic or understanding.

      Curious to see what Merc do.

  67. Bart says:

    I don’t think he crashed into Hamilton on purpose. That would be risky and quite silly at this point. Hey, after all, we’re halfway through the season. He saw an opportunity, tried hard, got oversteer. Against team’s interest but perfectly in line with his own.

    1. s says:

      Overrsteer would mean he would turn left to correct since it was a right turn. where is his wheel pointed?

    2. Quade says:

      Whatever he did was “to prove a point.” Rosberg never complained of oversteer, just the need to “prove a point.”.

    3. Thomas says:

      Specsavers trip!

    4. James Clayton says:

      He mentions nothing about oversteer. In fact he says “i could have pulled out of the move but i didnt”

  68. justin says:

    “i could have pulled out of the move but i didnt”

    surely the only person who could say “i didnt realise what woudl happen by not pulling out of the move”is max verstappen? if the deliberately didnt pull out of the move then it is,ergo, a deliberate collision?

  69. Shoki Kaneda says:

    Rosberg is very careful, both speaking and driving. Monaco and Spa were deliberate acts with full consequential knowledge.

  70. Hal says:

    James, if Rosberg could have avoided is he not expected to try to avoid it. A racing incident is one where it is 50/50 and according to Wolff “Rosberg acknowledged ‘he could have avoided crashing but didn’t [in order to ] make a point.’”. Therefore is it still a racing incident irrespective of whether it was on ‘purpose’ or not?

  71. Cliff says:

    Not sure where this one will end, but I’m struggling to see how Mercedes can retain both drivers. Can T Wolff & N Lauda recreate the harmony that once existed? I’m not sure!

  72. Zaros says:

    James did the FIA disqualify Schumi from the championship when he deliberately hit Jacques Villeneuve? What punishments could the FIA lay at Rosberg’s door if he is deemed to have done it on purpose?

    1. James Allen says:

      Yes Schu was disqualified from 1997 championship

      1. DB says:

        But not from the 1994 championship.

      2. Lola Bido says:

        Given the onboard footage, how is this accident any different than Schumi trying to take out Villeneuve?

        The lack of even an investigation by the stewards shames themself and the sport.

    2. deancassady says:

      This situation with Rosberg is not equal to the 1997 Jerez.
      I’ll admit it here, based on everything I’ve seen, I think Lewis is a better driver, but the worst likely scenario for Rosberg’s intent was to not care if he took both of them out; that is still a long way from trying to take the other driver out, and not caring if you take yourself out, too.
      For me, it’s a big divide, and whether or not you are a Rosberg fan, I think he was still on the not as bad side of that divide.

      For me, the season is just now, finally, getting interesting; there are three drivers in contention now, for the first time this season! And, the person who has been driving the best this year, is now in third, and had a second place tken from him, for what would reasonably be expected to be less damning than even the most benign interpretation of Rosberg’s intent and the outcomes from that intent.
      Put that nugget in your pipe and see how you like it.

  73. Richard says:

    Well while Rosbergs comments may well be interpreted in different ways and the Mercedes management can dress this up how they like, but he admitted the manoeuvre was deliberate, he admitted he could have avoided it knowing full well what the potential consequences may well be, but he wanted to prove a point. No doubt the Mercedes management will close ranks in the attempt to avoid more serious repercussions, but the plain simple fact is that Rosberg ran into Hamilton deliberately. – Rosberg admitted he could have avoided it but chose not to, therefore it was deliberate. Hamilton was fully within his rights to take his normal racing line as Rosberg was too far back for the need to give space, and should have avoided contact by slowing or moving over. Rosberg deserves disciplinary action by Mercedes management, say a two race ban, but if the FIA decide he acted in a deliberately dangerous manner they could exclude him for the rest of the season.

    1. David says:

      Exactly. You can play with the semantics all you want, but Hamilton boiled the comments down to their essence: Rosberg says he decided not to avoid a collision to make a point. Since he was the one trying to overtake someone on the racing line, and hadn’t drawn level or anywhere near so, that translates as causing the incident on purpose. All the more so since in this case ‘not avoiding’ the collision meant actively steering the car to the right (immediately causing the collision with Hamilton’s tyre) rather than failing to take action and allowing a collision to occur.

      And this after the nonsense of Monaco qualifying where Rosberg was suddenly unable to drive around a corner.

    2. Bruno Menilli says:

      The plain simple fact is that Hamilton ran into Roseberg’s car by continuing on and turning in on his racing line , which of course he had the right to do , but as Roseberg’s car was in a position that could cause what happened to happen if Hamilton stayed on his legitimate line, maybe Hamilton should have thought of the team as well and not cut in so much ?

      Roseberg was laying down a marker, regarding who would blink first, which happens in sport all the time.

      Hamilton is also a very aggresive driver.

      Roseberg could have avoided the incident if he hadn’t tried to ‘ race with and overtake’ Hamilton, but as that is the largest part of Motor Racing why would he do that, especially as the team had not given instructions about that type of situation ?

      Hamilton could have avoided the incident by altering his racing line somewhat, and there was no guarantee that if he had done that, Roseberg would have, for sure, been able to have overtake Hamilton.

      Just a racinh incident that Hamilton is milking because it didn’t go his way.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:

        It was an impossible place to make an overtake. Basically a chicane.

        Rosberg had been told by the team not to cause a colliosion.

        Hardly a racing incident when Rosberg went into the race with a pre meditated plan of not backing down.

      2. Oly says:


      3. Richard says:

        I sugges you learn about racing before you comment. Hamilton was leading by sufficient margin to have the racing line and the corner, Rosberg should have been compliant as the attacking driver. At best it was a clumsy manoeuvre at worst deliberate. – I believe the latter!

      4. Truth says:

        “The plain simple fact is that Hamilton ran into Roseberg’s car by continuing on and turning in on his racing line”

        None of the former f1 driver pundits agree with your take on this.
        Watch again and notice on board from Rosberg that the room available is more than enough and Rosberg actually steers back into Hamilton more than needed as he was not going to run off track. Plenty of still pics and video links from other posters showing this if you would like to see for yourself.

    3. Narshe says:

      Both drivers are trying to assert their dominance within the team, and the one who fails will end up as the number 2 driver in all but name. Just ask Mark Webber / David Coulthard / Rubens Barrichello etc etc.

      Once an F1 driver shows that he will always be the one to back down, he can forget about any WDC’s. Hamilton would have done (and has done before) EXACTLY the same thing (refuse to back out even though he was technically behind – just ask Filipe Massa).

      And as for Lauda, he should maybe look back at his own driving career, and then shut his face.

  74. Docjkm says:

    The whole issue of Brytni’s position in the corner(s), vis-a-vis ‘challenge’, is moot.

    His in car video clearly shows a decisive (90degree) steering input to the right, into Hammy’s rear. This IS the moment of contact, Nico’s fault, WITH INTENT.

    The evidence is clear, and unmitigated. Please LOOK!

    The entire “if” is meaningless. There simply is no “if”.

    Regardless of official outcome, either from FIA or Merc, the issue is clear to me, and clear that it should be so to others. I was a fan, of Nico and of his father. No longer, at least of junior. Brytni indeed.

    1. Narshe says:

      The question isn’t ‘did he turn right?’ He clearly did. The question is ‘Did he intend to turn right at exactly that moment in order to hit Hamilton, or did he turn right to get into his slipstream and misjudged it by a fraction of a second?’

      The second option seems far more likely to me, but I’m not a Hamilton fanboy :P

  75. My Dad's Harder Than Yours says:

    The only comment I have is thus:


  76. Spenny says:

    At best, the point Rosberg has proven is that he has not got the car control skills of the top F1 drivers. He not only threw away his own race with this move, but his other ill-considered move that damaged his tyres and lost time and tyre life was the other critical mistake when the race was still winnable. Add in his failure to pass effectively, and indeed getting passed by Bottas, he does not look like anything but someone who has been gifted a championship.

    Magnussen was being pretty brutal with the other drivers, but none of them got hit because they all recognised that you have to finish to score.

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “He not only threw away his own race with this move, but his other ill-considered move that damaged his tyres and lost time and tyre life was the other critical mistake when the race was still winnable.”

      He finsihed second and increased his championship lead.

  77. Karen Isaac says:

    It was completely obvious that Rosberg could not handle Hamilton beating him at the start of the race today. The better driver (Hamilton) being forced to retire early. Not Right. Rosberg should be heavily fined.

    1. phishbone says:

      A fine means nothing at this level; he’s still keeping the points. The damage is done.

  78. Ezio Auditore says:

    Thanks for this article James. This does clarify some things. Rosberg has only stated that this was a racing incident and after seeing the replay countless times I have decided to buy his version. Unlike some Hamilton fans who in their blind rage, have lost their grip on reality.

    1. Quade says:

      This photo offers a lesson in how to turn into the leading cars left rear “to prove a point.” The steering wheel looks to have been yanked into a hard right turn. No?



      1. rkkallur89 says:

        He was taking a normal right hand corner and adjusting. That is all. Take a look below, look at seconds 0:09 to 0:15.


      2. James Walton says:

        Rosberg was turning hard right at that point

      3. Voodoopunk says:

        Why do you all try so hard to get people to accept your point of view, you know they won’t change your mind, so what are you expecting to happen?

  79. Daniel4wdc says:

    If and it is unconfirmed as yet, Rosberg did admit that he deliberately ran into Lewis on purpose he should be excluded from the race result and sit out the next race as a penalty. I would not keep him as a driver if I were Mercedes either. How good is Dan the man

  80. Mike from Medellin says:

    Here is the evidence…Rosberg is the most honest driver in F1. Derek Warwick said so.
    He has never done anything even resembling unfair play. He is a driver of integrity with first class racecraft. Hamilton must have deliberately slashed his tyre against Rosberg’s wing.

    And those dreadful British fans….when will they learn?

    Making the drivers sign a statement would be a PR disaster and sound contrived. While this might please the corporate world, the fans will not buy it. Thank goodness that teams do not take PR advice from this website.

    Rosberg is a disaster. He has lucked out by not having to go head-to-head with Hamilton in any race so far this year, with the exception of Bahrain. And we all know how his lack of racecraft was on the point of embarrassing

    If Rosberg said that he did it to prove a point then there is absolutely no ambiguity. He did it on purpose and with intention. Unfortunately he does not have the skills to pull of an aggressive overtaking move…he should just stick to being gifted wins.

    1. JM says:

      Totally agree – was Derek Warwick the Steward at Monaco ? was once told Rosberg’s dad’s mates are drivers stewards.

      1. Narshe says:

        LOL! Fans cry out for ex-F1 drivers as stewards, then complain when it turns out that they may be in some way associated with the people they’re stewarding.

        Some people are beyond belief….

  81. Paul Ricciard says:

    Firstly, there is no way Rosberg crashed into him on purpose, as any contact could have hurt himself more.Secondly, nobody would make such a confession after something that even stewards called a “racing incident”.

    Thirdly and most importantly, Hamilton is the last driver who should make noises in that kind of situations. He regretted liegate only after it turned very sour for him. On track, in the past, many times he used force instead of brain and later had no problems about it. Personally, I would prefer both Lewis and Nico to shut up for the rest of the season and do the driving part only.

    1. pargo says:

      Don’t forget Lewis banged into then team mate J Button in recent history.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        …and somehow failed to see Raikkonen at the end of the pit lane in Canada.

    2. OffCourse says:

      you don’t have to listen.

  82. Andrewinwork says:

    Hi James, what in your opinion are the FIA likely to do about it, is it at all likely Nico will have his points docked?

    1. JB64 says:

      After the lack of FIA action at Monaco, Canada, Germany and now Spa, I think we can safely assume Rosberg has immunity from Paris.

  83. TGS says:

    Poor driving from Rosberg but it is difficult to understand what he meant by saying he was proving a point. He was directly behind Hamilton at the time of the incident so what is the point exactly? Maybe he was thinking back to Bahrain and didn’t want to get pushed around again.

    1. Narshe says:

      My interpretation is he wanted to make a point to Hamilton, but badly misjudged when and where to make that point, which resulted in an accident. That is all. But that wouldn’t be dramatic enough, now would it?

  84. TN says:

    LH just heard what he wanted to hear in that meeting. Simple as that. It happens all the time, ask anyone who has studied communication and they’ll tell you the same.

    1. TGS says:

      My brother studied communication. I’ll run it by him when he gets back from the unemployment office.

  85. Plamen says:

    Well, Lewis is get used to push others out with his aggressive moves… Nico stayed on his line… He proved his point, good for him…

    1. Hal says:

      Nico didn’t have a line. He only proved that he is willing to risk crashing into his team mate by making clumsy overtakes.

    2. DH says:

      Agree. How many times do cars pit to replace a broken front wing after a racing incident, Don’t her booing then! Hamilton needs to develop some EQ and stop blaming everyone else all the time. If its not another driver, its his car…….. Always isses with him.
      Go Niko Rosberg!!

  86. Stephen says:

    The fact that he was prepared to keep driving towards a gap that didnt exist (or that he knew wouldnt exist) as he began the move shows that there was implicit intent at least. If you dont brake knowing that there is no space left then what does that say? Nobody else came together at that corner through the race. If Mercedes were serious about getting this sorted, perhaps they should give Rosberg a one race ban and allow Lewis the opportunuity to regain the lost ground. The integrity of this championship is at stake.

    1. Hudson says:

      Why would they do that? Red Bull will just catch up with them, and they might lose both championships. Teams make money from Constructors Championship remember, so Merc want both cars to finish. I have a feeling that probably at this time they don’t really care which car comes first, as long as they both finish as high as possible.

  87. Sath says:

    The only kind of point that could be a legitimate point to prove would have been Rosberg repassing Hamilton in a clean and fair move to win the race. Sticking himself up the inside of a corner where he did not have track position, the result of his own poor start, and slicing Hamilton’s tyre is a pretty stupid point to try and make.

  88. Jake says:

    Sure looked like a racing incident between two aggressive Mercedes drivers. It could just as easily have gone the other way and hurt Nico.

    Anyway, there is no great glory this year for whoever of the Mercedes drivers winning the championship. The car is 2 seconds per lap faster than the competition. Any of the drivers on the grid could put this years Mercedes on the front row and win races. Well maybe except Maldonardo.

    All the glory this year belongs to the engineers.

  89. Benn Berrigan says:

    James, nice to read a more considered take on the incident and the ensuing fall out. I think you will be proved right, that Mercedes PR machine will quickly move to squash the Hamilton allegations. I can see Ricciardo edging closer towards the Mercedes pair also, it’ll be like 2007 all over again. Rosberg and Hamilton will take points off each other whilst Daniel will keep picking up results. Other than Hamilton, I would say Ricciardo would richly deserve the title this year, making a 4 time champion appear ordinary and being clinical in achieving results whenever the opportunity has risen for him. It’s an interesting season.

  90. Random 79 says:

    If it’s found that Rosberg did do it on purpose and the FIA do impose sanctions as you say, what could he be looking at?

    I assume a one race race ban would be possible and is probably the most likely penalty, but in the worst case could he be excluded from the championship altogether?

    Whatever the reason and whatever the result he’s clearly done a huge amount of harm to his reputation, not to mention his entire team.

    1. James Clayton says:

      He could be excluded from the championship, but that would be unlikely I guess.

      Do the rules differentiate between “deliberately causing” and “deliberately failing to avoid” a collision?

    2. Sebee says:

      He didn’t do not do it on purpose. He simply didn’t yield.

      1. Random 79 says:

        That’s what I want to believe and until someone proves conclusively that he did take out Hamilton on purpose I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but in any case he certainly hasn’t done himself any favours.

      2. Truth says:

        Let’s hope all the drivers in the next race decide not to yield on purpose, they should all attack a closing gap on purpose to prove a point so after a couple of laps it will all be over, then I can go out for an early lunch, much quicker result.

  91. Quercus says:

    I’m not sure how ROS could ‘make a point’ without “doing it on purpose”. And there was no way that HAM could have known ROS was ‘making a point’ without ROS putting his car in a position where HAM would collide with him, because HAM couldn’t see ROS in his mirrors at the point of contact.

    So it was deliberate because, by ROS’s own admission, it was no accident.

  92. David James says:

    For drivers at this level, you can only interpret Rosbergs actions as a deliberate attempt to cause contact. LH had the racing line and NR chose to put his car in a place he knew LH would be mooving to. Its really that simple

  93. Keith says:

    Sad day for me.

    Clearly Nico knows he isn’t faster than Lewis and as in Monaco he needed to break Lewis’s momentum. Lewis’s last two races he comes through the pack and in the last race humiliated Nico as a grade B driver.

    With a 90% chance of a puncture on Lewis’s tyre if he hit the right area – Nico took his chance today.

    The only natural deduction being he knows he can’t beat Lewis on track racing.

    F1 lost today, the spoilt rich kid is trying to take what is his.

    Give me the racer and true champion (whoever he is) any time.

    Nico has lost the respect of the public and his own self respect.

    1. T says:


  94. Ben says:

    Great story James. Its seems very unlikely that Rosberg deliberately crashed into Hamilton: such a move could have ruined Rosberg’s race as much as Hamilton’s. The interesting thing here is that I think the only thing keeping both driver in the tent (sort of) is the prospect of winning the WDC. Will the loser really want to stay at Mercedes next year?

    Also, it seems that with this new ERS system Red Bull may be well and truly on the way back. It goes a long way to neutralising their great racing disadvantage – namely that they could be lame ducks or could not overtake on the straights. But I wonder whether this is a story better characterised as Red Bul closing but not yet challenging. Rosbery only lost by three seconds. He would have lost a reasonable amount of time in the first stint due to his end plate; he lost 7 seconds in the pit stop and his strategy was compromised, but even if you say that all up that cost him 15-20 seconds (which seems on the low side), the Mercedes still had a 10-15 s lead on its nearest rival. That is a lot less than they had at the beginning of the season, especially as this was an engine teach, but not enough to really threaten their WDC, unless there are a couple of retirements in Abu Dhabi.

    1. TGS says:

      Do you know the details of this new ERS system? I thought they couldn’t change anything.

  95. Robert says:

    My opinion is that, from his own ‘admission’, it’s now so obviously clear to everybody and the world that nico rosberg is extremely unsporting ‘in causing a collision’ in today’s belgium race that the fia should immediately investigate and sanction nico as necessary for the good of the sport, and personally speaking, i would go as far as calling nico ‘something of a cheat’ as it’s now also obviously clear to everybody and the world that nico did delibrately ‘faked’ his qualifying ‘error’ in monaco in Q3 so that lewis hamilton could not do his final qualifying lap for pole!
    Finally, in my opinion, i truly believe that lewis should really watch that his equipment isn’t tampered with by nico’s ‘personnel’ and also that the fia should appoint an independent observer into the mercedes team to ensure that lewis gets equal equipment and fair treatment in the team (like fernando alonso had in mclaren in 2007)!
    This is my personal opinion as a formula 1 fan for the last 30 years, and to me, the fia has not been completely fair to lewis from day one, however, it’s never too late for the fia to start being fair starting right now!

    1. Narshe says:

      LOL! Mercedes aren’t obliged to provide them with equal equipment! Team orders are allowed. Please at least learn the rules of the sport before starting to troll message boards.

  96. Gillian Pollock says:

    Interesting article which clears up some of the hysterics being portrayed in other media outlets. No one as yet picked up on the damage to Lewis’s car which ultimately led to his poor result. I don’t believe this was caused by the racing incident but instead by Lewis’s attempt to get to the pits quickly. I remember Murray Walker stating that damage to the car from a tyre carcass can make these situations worse and I feel by driving at too fast a speed Lewis caused damage to not only the underfloor of his own car but the debris then damaged Massa’s suspension resulting in his poor finish. The teams reaction to Rosberg is harsh, how can you expect to get the best out of a driver if you then criticise him for a slight mistake, would be interesting to compare the line into the corner taken by both drivers on previous laps.

    1. Robert says:

      It wasn’t a little mistake! Nico deliberately collided with Lewis ‘to prove a point’!

    2. buzzzzzzzz says:

      He was told not to have a collision with his teamate.

      Has a collision with his teamate on lap two which he said he chose not to avoid.

      Why the hell wouldn’t they be blazing mad at him!

    3. Oliver says:

      WIth an F1 car if you have a puncture especially while moving at speed the tyre is already gone. Spa is a very long circuit, and the accident was at virtually a quarter of the way, driving back would have still shredded the tyres, the only luck you have is how quickly the carcass of the tyre shreds off and it if remains on the inner or outer part of the wheel rim.
      Driving too slow and he may aswell have packed the car.
      What lines are you talking about. Rosberg was behind and also not on the racing line so there is nothing to compare.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        There is more than 1 racing line, as we see quite often with drivers overtaking on the outside of a bend etc. against all expectations.

  97. Craig Sock says:

    We have all now seen this from many angles, both video and stills, and we have all probably come to our conclusions based on those images, and preconceived notions about Lewis and Nico. Personally I am trying to set aside the personal, and focus on the few frames of video that describe the incident. It is easy for me, since I hold neither driver in particular favor.

    Nico, in my opinion, too far back, got his nose bitten off trying for a gap that didn’t exist, and, in the process, damaged Hamiltons race, and precipitated the controversy that has followed.

    Lewis, however, going to the press with his ‘take’ on Rosbergs phrasing during the team debrief is, without doubt, irresponsible and infantile.

    Lewis has now essentially pulled back the curtain on what should be an internal matter within Mercedes F1. There has to be a safe zone in which adults can meet in good faith, express themselves, however frankly and forcefully, and meet the discipline of their employers.

    Who within Mercedes will ever trust Lewis Hamilton again with a private communication? Does an F1 team really need to issue an explicit gag order to keep an already boiling kettle from exploding?

    Nico has some explaining to do about his move on Lewis, but Lewis needs to grasp that throwing his team into deeper chaos by shooting his mouth off, possibly wildly out of context, is just plain wrong.

    Are the press or race fans really entitled to know everything about everything? Among men, some things need to be held in confidence. This is one of those things, and there were too few men in the room.

    1. deancassady says:

      Good post!
      Strengthening my estinmation of the probability Bottas to Mercedes in 2015, Lewy… who knows? probably anywhere else he wants.

    2. Justabrit says:

      Exactly! both drivers are paid by the team to drive. Meetings behind closed doors are nobody’s business but the team itself. But for some there is no such thing as bad publicity, so yeah it seems Lewis is far to ready to blab to the media

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        “Lewis is far to ready to blab to the media” as was Woolf and Lauda before they had spoken to the drivers.

    3. phishbone says:

      Look at it from HAM’s side – The team can’t take away the results; the points damage is done. He may feel Merc is unable or unwilling to penalize an admittedly dirty move.

      The only recourse he felt he had left is air out some dirty laundry.

      1. Narshe says:

        Which benefited who exactly?

        Also, I disagree that “the only recourse he felt he had left is air out some dirty laundry”. He also had the option of keeping his mouth shut……

    4. Quade says:

      How discrete would you be if you had Lewis stream of “bad luck?” You’ve got to consider that trust might already be broken to Lewis and he is acting (wisely or not) to get a fairer arbiter.

      1. Craig Sock says:

        phishbone, Quade, I hear you about the points and the bad fortune.

        Prior to the debrief, while giving interviews to the English press, he had the boil on very low – he was nearly pragmatic, noted the huge number of Brits present that he felt he disappointed, and didn’t claw away at Nico. I was startled at, and a little proud of, his calm demeanor.

        But after the debrief, he apparently pitched a fit, exposing the team to a much graver recovery period, and leaving in flaming tatters whatever relationship remained with his teammate. The question goes from ‘Will Nico apologize?’ to ‘Will the FIA investigate Nico Rosberg for intentionally crashing his teammate?’.
        And for what? Because Lewis may have just heard what he wanted to hear in that debrief, and ran screaming to the press? Really?

        He has now publicly described the proceedings of what should have been a singularly private deliberation, and quite possibly misconstrued, however unintentionally, the context and content of those discussions. Now he has the unenviable task of regaining the trust of every member of Mercedes F1 hierarchy, including Niki Lauda, who backed Lewis up completely (to make an schmuck of Niki Lauda is unpardonable). The team bosses will think twice before they speak frankly with Lewis, and that is not a place you want to be.

        No matter how unfairly Lewis feels about his treatment, his string of mechanical failures, and even a possible (I think imaginary) bias in favor of Rosberg, his job is not at the microphone. His job is to man up and drive that car with his enormous skill, and man up with the people who pay him a startling sum to do it.

    5. Oliver says:

      Great of you to bring up the debrief.
      Lewis has been fighting to catch up since the very first race of the season, past 3 races he has been struggling to come back from behind. Now he had a decent possibility and Rosberg made a very stupid move and admitted he did it to prove a point. What is there to be happy about.
      And wasn’t it Rosberg who went blabbing about the Mercedes secret tyre test? Wasn’t that a private affair?
      Recently Rosberg has been talking to the press about events at team meetings that Hamilton isn’t even aware of.

    6. David James says:

      Great points Craig. When is a whistleblower doing good or just telling tales?

      I think there is much more at play here.

      The issue for me is whether you interpret NR actions as legal/illegal within the sport. I think NR is just playing with words. At his level of driving, putting the nose of his car in a place he knew LH would cross was a deliberate act on his part. The only result would be contact of some kind. It was easily avoidable and he chose not to avoid it.

      NR could have gone into the team briefing, apologised, smiled and said it wont happen again. However, he chose to make the statement he did, for reasons only NR knows.

      My guess is that looking at the events and what was said, LH felt he had no choice but to out NR. In LH’s mind, if he does and says nothing it will just fester within him and NR just walks of with a smug smile.

      Did NR bait LH knowing he would speak out?

      What is clear is that the Mercedes management are under even more scrutiny than before. Having been accused of being weak in the rercent races, how they respond to this could have clear ramifications for both drivers.

      This could get even more fiesty if the FIA call NR and Mercedes to count and how Mercedes chose to defend NR will have a significant effect on LH’s relationship with the team.

      Lets see how this plays out!

  98. Superfast says:

    Wishy washy, sleazy R’berg. Neither this or that and always smooth talking. Then cowardly makes his ambiguous moves. Yuk!

  99. Goldy Jassar says:

    Racing incident, nothing else

    1. docjkm says:

      Sure, If You Don’t Look At The Evidence

  100. richard cummins says:

    please James just for once put your hands up and go with LH on this one please!!
    Anyone and everyone one knows about F1 says you do not take your team mate out. Nico did this today. Wheather he did it or not he put his car into a position he should not have.
    Couple of things to mention. 1. What if both cars had been unable to finish?? What would Merc be saying now?
    2. What if LH,s tyre blew up slightly later on a flat out bend leaving LH in acoma?? What then?
    Nico stepped over the mark and appears to have lost what htis is all about. It is a WDC not life and death.

  101. Adam Taylor says:

    How can K-Mag get a 20sec penalty and Rosberg not get a look into a penalty, where’s the consistency?

    I saw think that Lewis has created a massive of a storm by reading possibly interpreting what Rosberg has apparently said, maybe wants people to be on his side, maybe was feeling a bit sorry for himself, or maybe even was still seeing the red mist from the team meeting, but one is almost for certain, there will only be one of them at Mercedes next season.

    I will also say that I now don’t care who wins the championship, as long as it’s not a Mercedes!!!!

    1. Aderac says:

      K-Mag pushed alongside off track down the straight, different type of incident surely, now that was dangerous IMO

    2. AdamJ says:

      Yeah me too… These 2 children squandering the biggest car advantage maybe in F1 history is painful to watch.

      Go Danny Ric – we are with you!

  102. Quade says:

    My comment on another thread was removed, because I talked about [mod], but Mercedes has confirmed that Rosberg admitted to deliberately slashing Lewis tyre. It no very good!

    Anyway, it will be interesting to see how Merc react now, perhaps a 3 to 5 race suspension for Nico? Or a straight sacking?

    1. James Allen says:

      Did you read this piece?

      Mercedes has not said that, read the piece

      1. Quade says:

        Yes I did. Toto Wolfe said in so many words that Nico put his car in a place it shouldn’t have been and refused to remove it, just to prove a point. That clearly says deliberate.

      2. Mike from Medellin says:

        James, why do you automatically always side with Rosberg? You did the same after his antics in Monaco.

      3. James Allen says:

        How is this siding with ROS?

        It says it was his fault

        In Monaco I said that the stewards looked closely at I and found nothing. That was a fact

      4. Narshe says:

        James, you’re dealing with [mod] at this point, there really is no benefit to trying to reason with them. From reading your piece, I certainly did not get the impression that you were siding with Rosberg. In fact, it was one of the more impartial articles I’ve seen on the incident. Please keep up the good work.

    2. Bruno Menilli says:

      “Mercedes has confirmed that Rosberg admitted to deliberately slashing Lewis tyre ” – Really ? were you there ? – thought not – you are misinterpreting someone else’s incorrect opinion – nearly as far from the truth as you can get.

    3. Mike A says:

      I’m not surpeised that your comment was removed if it made as much sense as this piece!

      Only LH has said that it was deliberate (playing the sympathy card and for the benifit of the press).

      Read the article again and tell everyone where it says “Rosberg admitted to deliberately slashing Lewis tyre”

      1. aveli says:

        point out from hamilton’s quote where he used the word crashed and deliberately together, or cut or slash.
        hamilton never said rosberg crashed into him deliberately. look again at what he said and stop being insulting.

  103. Vivek says:

    It was a racing incident and Rosberg should’ve received a drive-through penalty.

  104. Johnny Canuck says:

    James, a clear and level-headed article on what is certainly a strongly emotional incident. Well written.

  105. Bobby Kubika says:

    James – Nico’s Monaco “incident” was not a mistake, as Peter Windsor has revealed more than once that he has spoken privately with Mercedes personnel who have said to him “we know that Nico did that deliberately at Monaco, we can’t prove it, so end of story”
    10:00 minute mark
    00:26 second mark

  106. A Nigerian f1fan says:

    This is ROS still seething from what he may have perceived as a stolen win back in Hungary, compounded by HAM out dragging him to turn 1, the red mist came down, and he did a GRO/MAL on Lewis…..clumsy, ill thought out and unworthy…deliberate sabotage? Nah, should he penalised even in the light of ROS comments? – marginal, his misjudgement could easily have caused him terminal damage instead of HAM. I’m a die hard Lewis fan, and feel really frustrated for him, but frothing and fuming at ROS for penalties is wrong, the stewards should reexamine the facts and decide whether to penalise ROS. @jamesallen, I like to see him exercise some editorial authority, you are a veteran Motorsport journalist, this was a clear cut case of bad driving by ROs

    1. James Allen says:

      Not a veteran – I’m only 47!

      1. build says:

        Take a seat ol fella ‘n I’ll bring ya slippers an a brandy. LOL.

      2. Michael says:

        1967 hey? A great year.

      3. Peter says:

        1966 actually – he still has a birthday to come this year
        And 1966 was a good year :)

      4. Bruno Menilli says:

        Lol ! but you are if ‘A Nigerian f1fan’ is 15 !

    2. deancassady says:

      you got it pretty well right on the way I see it.

    3. Ron W says:

      You mean like when Hamilton misjudged the situation with Button in Germany losing part of his front wing and coming close to giving Jenson a puncture? No penalty there, or for bashing into Kimi and breaking his car.

      1. buzzzzzzzz says:

        Button drove wide and Hamilton thought Button was letting him through as he has often done this season.

        Button withdrew his criticism of Lewis after watching a replay.

      2. Oliver says:

        Kimi got squeezed also by Vettel and actually turned into Hamilton.
        Button turned into Hamilton, Button later admitted that his racing line could have given Hamilton the impression he was going to let him past.

  107. Wade says:

    This. Is. Massive. Makes the Webber / Vettel fued look like a playground fight of equipment. Clearly Hamilton is on the wrong end and imflaming the situation is what he is running with rather than discussing it internally – without public comment.

    I dont like Rosberg, (never have), im in Hamiltons corner at the moment. Going to be very interesting to see where this ends up…..

  108. Robbie says:

    James, Rosberg admitted to not backing out of the move “to prove a point”, that he could’ve avoided the collision but chose not to… Did he say “I hit Lewis on purpose”? No, even Lewis didn’t say that, but by default if you decide not to back out, and instead actually turn in – Lewis’ rear view clearly shows a double move back in on the line, and Nico’s onboard shows pretty much full right lock – then clearly he did the move on purpose. As the move resulted in a collision, then yes, he did it on purpose. Add to that the fact that he wasn’t anywhere near being off the road, not even on the rumble strips, it’s at least really really poor driving, and at worst, hotheaded reacting, ala one Maldonado. Personally I think Lewis’ move on him in Bahrain – that he deemed a cut across – flashed through his mind and he thought, “not again”. So, hot-headed, reactionary driving… Which equals dangerous in my book.
    I used to like Rosberg, but his recent comments, moaning about Lewis not letting him past in the last race, when he wasn’t even in 1 sec, AND the team said it was an error, plus failure to accept responsibility for his own actions this weekend, he’s starting to come across as one Seb Vettel.
    I just want to see a straight fight for the run in, so we can actually see some good races. I can’t remember the last one.

    1. docjkm says:

      Well Said

    2. aveli says:

      well done robbie, a good break from all the nonsense posted above.

  109. Steve says:

    I can understand why Lewis interpreted it as ‘on purpose’. In a way he did – he clung onto a unlikely pass ‘to prove a point’…what point? That they will collide if Lewis closes the door? I can understand that Nico does not want to be pushed around – but this seems a little foolish. The previous race – he was barely a second behind him and not close enough to pass…does Nico expect to be handed the championship on a plate by Lewis? I think Nico generally is a decent guy but his racing can be a bit dull – does he have the balls to fight with the big guns without getting a easy pass? I guess he meant to show he had some balls with that move but it was stupid and its backfired on him badly…

  110. Witan says:

    The two versions both boil down to Rosberg admitting he decided not to slow or take avoiding action. So it was a deliberate act whether the intention was to damage Hamilton or a lack of intention to avoid a collision.

    1. Bruno Menilli says:

      “So it was a deliberate act” – As was Hamilton’s continuing on his racing line when he knew Roseberg was there !

      Just a racing incident, milked by Hamilton and the headline seeking tabloid Press.

      1. Truth says:

        Enough room left to avoid contact but decided to make sure there was contact, if that is not a deliberate action then what is. By that train of thought then Schumacher parking at Monaco and Piquet crashing in Singapore and Senna ramming Prost or Schumacher ramming Villeneuve or Hill were all just racing incidents, after all Hill should have moved over or Prost should have known to leave more space, get real! Once a driver has red mist and decides to initiate contact for whatever reason then the lead driver has little or no choice in the matter.
        There is none so blind as them that cannot see.

  111. Craig D says:

    Solid, proper journalism. What we’ve got in the general media now is sensationalist headlines condemning Rosberg already as a cheat. To the causal observer that is what they’ll take away from it.

    For me, it’s pretty clear that’s what’s likely happened is Rosberg has stated the “prove a point” bit was his intention on the attempt to pass (which was ill judged) and to be tough against Hamilton. He’d been humbled in confrontations like Bahrain and was now in a defiant mood. But it back fired. He was lucky in truth for him that Hamilton got the puncture and he didnt just ruin his own wing.

    But this isn’t like some Senna Prost thing where Rosberg thought, “You’re not taking points out of my lead, I’m taking you out of this race!” Even if that was the truth, Nico isn’t stupid to admit that and risk being banned!

    Hamilton has fanned the flames in their psychological warfare and James is right, the team need to control this fast. Some fans will already have fixed their views, however.

  112. aveli says:

    in my mind, rosberg parked his car in monaco and cut hamilton’s rear tyres with intent. how many times has rosberg passed hamilton on the outside? rosberg locked up in attempts to pass other cars and didn’t cut their tyres but only cut hamilton’s. he said he wanted to prove a point and this was verified by a mercedes official. what other evidence do we need to conclude that rosberg cut hamilton’s tyre on purpose. he should face the same punishment as piquet jnr if the fia is a fair organisation.
    the mercedes team should learn to listen to hamilton more during their strategic decisions. hamilton was in the car and knew what the car was capable of and not capable of. he informed them that even if the safety car was diploid he could pass the cars in front of him so why did hey not listen to him until 2 laps to the end of the race?
    i strongly recommend that the fia should prescribe a standard punishment of 3 race bans for any driver who cuts another drivers rear tyre with their front wing, deliberate or not deliberate. this will stop all this nonsense. i can recall 3 other drivers who have done the same to hamilton in the past. why on earth do the stewards turn a blind eye?
    hamilton told the truth about rosberg admitting it otherwise why would rosberg have make references to the hungarian? that was his motive. guilty guilty guilty…..

    1. Silent Bob says:

      Do you work for Mercedes? Were you in the meeting? If not you dont know what happened and what was said so you cant post this tripe as fact. Racing incident. Hamilton is fast losing respect with his constant moaning and toy throwing and his fans are even worse with their constant sabotage theories.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Well said !

    2. Hudson says:

      Probably it’s none of my business, but this comment would benefit from proper punctuation and good spelling. It’s obvious you are a Hamilton supporter, which is fine, but when you make such passionate and often controversial statements (without proof), it’s better to make sure that you don’t draw attention to yourself by displaying ignorance of basic punctuation. Because a knowledgeable F1 fan will think, if this guy can’t spell “deploy” and can’t start a sentence with a capital letter, how on earth is he expected to know a lot about F1 to suggest such drastic measures?

    3. Ron W says:

      And Hamilton has done it too. Lest not forget Hamilton lying in the Trulligate scandal and not getting any race bans!!

      1. Oliver says:

        If I recall it was the team that got it wrong and tried desperately to correct the situation and tried to lie about it Hamilton didn’t choose the team line, it was Withmarsh and Dave Ryan’s responsibility for the team line because they protested and not Hamilton so don’t accuse a driver for what he has no control over.

    4. Craig D says:

      It’s fan comments like this that turn some people off Hamilton, not Hamilton himself. Never any balance and proper thought. You want bans for incidents? Should Hamilton have been banned for his collisions a few years back with Massa, Grosjean, etc? Oh, of course for you, I imagine he was always the innocent party.

    5. Mike A says:

      So are you saying that everything Hamilton says is the truth, because he does have previous with this.

      Apart from that your comment is as Silent Bob says “tripe”.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        Lol ! but true !

    6. Truth says:

      The world knows what happened in Monaco. Can’t agree that drivers should be banned for 3 races for cutting an opponents tyre though,we don’t want to stop drivers trying to overtake, maybe a stop go or drive through for spoiling another drivers race but a ban is too much, contact without race altering damage should be tolerated however so the drivers are not frightened to have a go at passing.
      I understand your passion as it must be a very frustrating season for fans of Hamilton with some of the bad luck he has endured, especially as his rival Rosberg has had more good fortune thus far, engineered or otherwise.

      1. aveli says:

        accepted truth, may be the tyre walls should just be toughened.

  113. Andrew C says:

    Exceptionally well said James. It surely seems impossible for Hamilton to win the championship now. I can’t help but wonder if McLaren will lure him back given the strife might develop inside Mercedes going forwards.

  114. Steve Zodiac says:

    Whether or not Nico actually did it deliberately, which i don’t believe for one second, he was certainly well enough behind Lewis that he should have backed out. I’m not sure what point he was trying to make but if it goes back to the previous race where Lewis said it was up to him to overtake the it doesn’t hold water as he was miles back then and I’m sure Lewis wouldn’t have held him up if he had been clearly faster. Nico is blotting his copybook as it still isn’t accepted by everyone that the Monaco incident was as innocent as he would like us to believe. One thing is “for sure” Lewis is not having a lot of good fortune this year but I guess that is part of the game.

    1. Bruno Menilli says:

      “he was certainly well enough behind Lewis”

      If that was the case how, upon turning right slightly to stay on track, did he contact Hamilton’s wheel ?

      He wasn’t behind Hamilton but level with the rear section of Hamilton’s car, which Hamilton would have been aware of, but he still to chose to turn in to force Rosberg off track, or to cause an accident, which is against the rules.

      1. steve zodiac says:

        Nico did indeed have his wing alongside Hamiltons rear wheel. This does not constitute “a significant portion of the car” therefore Rosberg should have backed out of it. There is absolutely noreason for Lewis to think he wouls would still be there as he was committed to his line and Rosberg would, or should, have known this.

  115. Craig in Manila says:

    Certainly doesn’t sound like ROS admitted to crashing on purpose.

    Merc is to blame for any such incidents as they were the ones who chose to put two fast drivers into their cars and then play the “We will let them race” line.

    Well, if you let them race, then stuff is gonna happen.

    They should’ve opted for a driver who was happy to play Number 2 instead of two drivers who want desperately to be seen as Number 1.

    Don’t blame the drivers when Merc is asking for unreasonable behaviours from them.

    1. Thomas says:

      He doesn’t need to say anything, just look at the slow motion – and as long as your eyesight is working, you can see that this was very deliberate – and everyone in theF1 paddock knows it.

    2. Craig in Manila says:

      And another thing :

      Surely their is some obligation on the attendees to keep their respective mouths shut after attending the post-race meetings ? The meetings are in private for a reason yeah ?

      HAM really should get a serious whack from Merc for mouthing-off and, by doing so, further inflaming the issue.

    3. warley says:

      Interesting point and something which will be all too apparent to all teams ie having a ‘number two’ (unfortunate term) driver should avoid a lot of nonsense! Rosberg and Chilton or Hamilton and Chiiton would have caused much less grief for Mercedes than Hamilton and Rosberg. Mercedes have made their bed and for now have to lie on it but they may not want to lie on it next season!

  116. Dave Keller says:

    Perhaps someone with open wheel driving would enlighten me but from Nico’s onboard shot you can clearly see him steer away from Lewis just before impact. This leaves me asking:
    a) Did Nico steer away in an attempt to avoid contact and thought he was clear and it was a genuine mistake? or
    b) Could he have enough cunning, skill and time to feign steering away and then hit Lewis in the right spot to cut Lewis’ tyre but not damage his own wing too much.

    Full disclosure I’ll admit to being a Daniel Ricciardo fan foremost but a Nico fan over Lewis, but I find Lewis Hamiton’s attitude over the whole matter to be a bit lacking. Does he expect Nico just to roll over?

    1. Bruno Menilli says:

      I think you are right – with [a] describing what I saw.

      Hamilton has this irritaing habit of making statements and then walking away from them, leaving a too eager Press to bleed the point to death, and to make Nico seem like the ‘bad guy’, which he isn’t

      Hamilton should judt move on, just like he expects everyone else to do when he is accused of wrong doing.

    2. LT says:

      No, but Nico at that point was already clearly beaten into the chicane, but stupidly continued to push the point.

    3. KRB says:

      Uh, he steers away, and then quickly back at him again, and is driving towards Lewis’ left rear when contact is made.

      Of course Lewis doesn’t expect Nico to just roll over … what he should expect is that he’ll race him cleanly. I am 100% certain that Lewis would have no problem with being beaten fair and square. It’s when underhanded means are used, that Lewis gets agitated, and who can blame him? It’s up to the officials of the sport to come down hard on any underhanded stuff, but it’s a fine line to call in this sport. I doubt anything will come of Rosberg’s “admission” (unless someone has it on tape), but Todt might initiate an investigation, and if that happens, it can’t be good for Rosberg.

  117. Paddyism says:

    This was always going to happen. Each race both drivers are pushing the boundaries. Last race Hamilton this race Rosberg. At the end of the day Rosberg is just as fast as Hamilton and we all know who is smarter under pressure. Rosberg is just adding more pressure why because he will be the world champion

  118. DC says:

    Rosberg would be quite a driver to precisely, at 100mph, have the confidence to wreck his front wing in the certainty that Hamilton would suffer a puncture…

    Sounds like he has simply said that he isn’t going to be pushed out of a move any longer, and he kept his nose in this time to show his intent.

    Wonder how pleased Merc will be with Hamilton at a private team briefing being misquoted to the media?

    Also, its always fun to hear everyone praise and bang on about how Senna would stick his nose into any gap and let the other driver decide if he wanted a crash or not (or something similar I believe Brundle is quoted as saying) and all that ‘if you don’t go for a gap you’re not a racing driver’ stuff, but as soon as Rosberg shows some balls in his fight with Hamilton (who in this case I think misjudged things when taking his racing line, entitled though he was to it) its so terrible etc.

    I think we all saw today just who wants this WDC most, privileged upbringing in Monaco or not!

    1. ciao says:

      a throttle map will reveal Lewis held back picking up the throttle as part of his now patterned escort Rosberg off the track routine. Passive-aggressive is for those who don’t have it.

      1. Oliver says:

        But Rosberg had so much space to his left so there was no attempt to drive anyone off track.
        The onboard from Rosberg shows he was definitely not under any pressure he had the car under control at all times.

    2. Dutch johhny says:

      Spot on about the senna stuff. I drive in a onlline racing league and you wont believe how many drivers have that: if dont go for a gap etc, as their motto. Its just bullshit by in my opinion a mentally fragile brazilian.

      I thought his movie, wich was advertised here alot, was very one sided,unbalanced and just disrespectfull and insulting to the great Alain Prost. I read a great piece by Nigel Roebuck about there rivalry wich certainly gives their fued a different perspective.

  119. luqa says:

    From what is written here and from other sites and comments outside the English press domain, it would appear LH has difficulty in comprehending the difference between “holding ones line to make a point”, and admitting to “deliberately crashing into someone”.

    That’s a very serious accusation to make of a team mate and needs backing up with facts and evidence, not just hearsay and one person’s interpretation.

    I’m not sure what LH is playing at here. Either he is being deliberately inflammatory and obnoxious, or as I suggested above, his comprehension skills leave something to be desired.

    What a Prima Donna. First Mclaren, now AMG-Mercedes. Talk about high maintenance! It was a racing incident in which LH lost out this time. For all we know LH was also “just making a point” by holding his line, and it wouldn’t be the first time either- think Bahrain and Hungary just this year.

    1. Mr Ed says:

      Can you cite a quote where Hamilton says that Rosberg deliberately crashed in to him? All the reports I’ve seen attribute Hamilton as saying “he did it deliberately”. Did what? It’s your interpretation he meant crashing which makes it rather ironic that you are criticising Hamilton’s comprehension skills.

      Semantics aside though, if you deliberately do something which is likely to result in a collision then, to me at least, you deliberately caused a collision. Rather stupid thing to do given he could easily have taken himself out of the race also. Shows he clearly puts himself before the team.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        As could be said of Hamilton keeping his racing line when he knows there’s another driver partially alongside his nearside ?

    2. Steven says:

      No Hamilton had no difficulty at all, he is to use a phrase “at it”. He knows what he was doing when talking to the press. The guy’s relationship with the truth has always been sketchy.

    3. Andrew Ferry says:

      Hi Luqa, clearly your english is very good. So please can you define what making a point means? The point is Mercedes were aiming for a 1 and 2 and Rosberg compromised this by making a point. On a track such as Spa where there are numerous overtaking places, this move was far to risky. Not even Vettel looked to make such a move on Hamilton.

  120. chrracer says:

    No matter what Nico’s intention was, if he really did say that he did it to “make a point”, I feel this was the dumbest thing he could have ever said. Call it a “racing incident” for crying out loud and move on. I can understand Hamilton’s frustration with the incident, in and of itself, but then to have your team mate say something like this must be intolerable. Is Rosberg’s ego getting the best of him? I feel like this attitude he has about this situation has already tarnished what should be his breakout year. Anytime a sportsman feels it necessary to resort to this kind of conduct to win at all cost, their respective sport suffers and it is no different here. Not the least of which, we fans possibly being cheated out of a barnstorm of a finish to the championship. I feel for Mercedes as a team, after all the hard work to build the best car and the spectacular season they have had thus far, they are having to deal with this PR nightmare. Quite a shame actually….

  121. Felix Taggert says:

    Seems to me that Rosberg really was trying to prove a point and judging what happened to brakes on Lewis’s car during qualy plus the past I am not sure that lot at mercedes wants lewis to win the championship. Why else will there continued issues with the car lewis is driving. Why else will the team not sanction Rosberg as he has violated an internal agreement? Lewis should jau consider going to Ferrari or back to Mclearen. Red bull are catching them fast anyways.

    1. Thomas says:

      I agree.

    2. Ron W says:

      There have been weighted sides of failures since the dawn of F1. Mostly, it’s the fault of the driver. Merc will never ever say this because they know how emotionally fragile Hamilton is. I remember back in 2004 when Sato’s Honda engines were blowing up left right and centre, whilst Button’s weren’t. The team did everything, but it was Sato’s driving style.

  122. kenneth chapman says:

    the jury is still out on this one and as james has said it would be prudent to wait until we see [if ever] a full and truthful record of exactly what was said.

    1. Richard says:

      The truth is that Rosberg had the opportunity to avoid the contact, but deliberately chose not to.

      1. Craig D says:

        That’s not the same as deliberately hitting someone though. He won’t have wanted to lose his wing or puncture Hamilton; you can’t really plan that and it’s too risky anyway not to come off. The deliberateness was in the overtaking attempt. I was one of those: “I’m coming here and it’s up to you to decide if you’re going to give me space.” It was pretty ruthless thinking and almost Senna-esque in the idea but was stupid in execution, and Rosberg never had a chance of pulling it off.

        But what I’m getting at is the consequence was more a racing incident through trying to force a risky situation than an intentional crashing into another driver. There is a difference. It seems Hamilton is taking what was said to allow the media to reinterpret the story. I very much doubt Rosberg admitted to wanting to crash on purpose.

      2. Bruno Menilli says:

        As did Hamilton when he kept to his racing line.

  123. Bruno Menilli says:

    It was a racing incident, and Hamilton is just milking it by deliberately by re-arranging words and misinterpreting Rosberg’s statement.

    This is just another of Hamilton’s juvenile streak – in that he thinks everyone is intently waiting for, and listening to every single words he says.

    Roseberg was leading the world championship before the race began and therefore had more to lose ashe would havehad no idea what the outcome would be.

    Maybe Hamilton’s over running his grid box is a sign of his not too clear thinking at the beginning of the race ?

    Mercedes are more culpable than either driver because of its weak management style.

    1. Antny Cook says:

      If you watched Anthony Davidson’s post race report you could see Hamilton’s view of the the incident.
      He couldn’t see Nickos car, just a slight glimpse of a wheel. Nico should have. Let the corner go and had a go later, as by his admission he was quicker than Lewis.

      Sorry but Nico should be replaced at the next race by the MB test driver to show that deliberately putting your car in a position to have a crash is not acceptable, how else will he learn.
      Every previous incedent where Lewis has been ahead and cut across Nico is because Nico had not passed him, so why should Lewis give up the bend.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        “where Lewis has been ahead and cut across Nico is because Nico had not passed him”

        Of course the section between being behind and having passed him is ignored, but you have to go through that stage to pass someone.

        Hamilton turns in whilst they are overtaking him or are in a postion were contact will be made.

  124. Kim sharp says:

    This is probably the only article that is interpreting the (sketchy) facts correctly. As per, all stories seem to jump on lewis’ comment and publish sensational, probably intentionally one sided interpretations of his statement. Good work!

  125. Erik says:

    James, a somewhat disappointing take on these matters by your site for mine.

    While eventually you got there, the balanced assessment of the matter is clearly lacking in your first half of this article. The way this article is worded is heavily biased against Nico, and while he may indeed be at fault, when it all boils down to it this article is skewed towards the British side of the fan-base. You may not flatly blame Nico in the article, but your choice or references gives your game away. You use a lot of heavy words in there that subliminally attacks Nico (sanctions appears 3 times in this article, deliberate appears 9 times..) are you trying to sway opinion in a supposed balanced article? Where are the clear references to Lewis’ arrogant moves on track, or the fact that this whole thing has erupted because of Lewis’ outburst after the team meeting? You finally get to Wolf’s balanced comments on the whole matter, but buried way down in the article and only briefly.

    It was a delicate matter, hardly done on purpose if you consider Nico’s intellect. Why would he jeopardise his own car, and life for that matter (we are at Spa after all)? Or the wrath of his own team? Simply a silly point of view.. This article is a reaction to Lewis’ emotional comments after the team meeting which were said with anger, not a balanced head – and we all know how level-headed Lewis can be in high emotion situations. Everyone remember the McLaren telemetry Twitter post? And I think you know this fact about Lewis, James, as well as the fact that Nico wouldn’t collide with his team-mate on purpose. You only have to look at Nico’s track record, and his sheepish body language afterwards to see that. A pure racing incident and misjudgement by Nico yes, but not deliberate. Wolf, clearly stated so, a shame really that you only mention it towards the end of your article once, and only after you had finished sensationalising the story in Lewis’ favour.

    I understand that you’re looking for reactions from your readers (and you definitely got one from me) and that the blog business model works on clicks, but then leave the whole notion of a balanced view out of the equation – it only serves to discredit your site.

    Nico’s fault clearly, but hardly deliberate. I think his point was that Lewis tends to ignore Nico when they are racing, often being quite arrogant with his moves on Nico. And that on occasion this season, it was Nico who has avoided a collision with Lewis – take a look at the move Nico tries to pull on Lewis at Hungary at the end – if Nico does not run wide there is an accident. Same at Malaysia earlier in the year – I think through turn one from memory – Nico even raises his hand in disgust as seen in the on-board, his point being that if he does not relent, there is an accident. Perhaps at Spa he wanted to show what happens if he isn’t the one that backs out. You do not see these problems racing Alonso, Vettel, or Button who are aware that there is a car around them somewhere and always leave room. But Lewis is a lot like Massa in that he thinks he is entitled to a corner and the other car can just deal with it – well if a car is in your vicinity you have to leave some room. He would have had Nico in the next right hander anyway.

    I think that while this was a racing incident, yes, brought on by a move Nico pulled, we will all find that Lewis will retract his comments soon, much like after the Twitter saga, because they are emotional and brash. But that is Lewis for you, as we have found out over the years – a very flawed genius.

    1. James Allen says:

      You clearly understand little of this site, how it works and its ethos.

      Sorry if the story doesn’t agree with your world view, but it is balanced

      1. Erik says:

        On the contrary, James, I know and respect your work. In fact I’ve been a big advocate of yours since your pit lane reporter days.

        That’s precisely why I don’t think much of this sensationalist journalism approach. I simply expect more from your team.

      2. James Allen says:

        I’m sorry, if you call this sensationalist you have no grasp of journalism

        It’s the opposite of the sensationalist approach! It’s about bringing balance and insight. I was there speaking to these people remember and I’ve known them for years

    2. Paul says:

      I dont think this is a deliberate attempt by James Allen to be biased (you should see the bbc f1 site if you want that) but I think the article does, Im sure unintentially, give the impression that Rosberg is guilty for the reasons you describe so well.

      I dont know whether he is guilty, but my feeling is that its not so black and white. All the great drivers have refused to yield at some point with the aim of making a point\building a reputation for not yielding. I dont believe Lewis is any angel and he is done questionable things in the past (weaving etc.).

      Also to note, Lewis would less likely be in this position if he had managed to qualify on pole.

      1. Paul says:

        one thing I didnt understand, was Rosberg supposedly making a point to Lewis or to the team?

      2. James Allen says:

        Guilty of what? The question is Did Rosberg say he hit Hamilton on purpose and our conclusion is that this needs to be clarified

      3. Paul says:

        guilty of hitting him on purpose.

      4. Paul says:

        Im really just enjoying the championship and dont mind which driver wins. But what I dont like is the implication of many parts of the media (im not including this site) that “Lewis is the better driver” and Nico is leading because some he is some how cheating and getting lucky.

        What I observe is that Nico has outqualified Lewis a number of times and beaten him in races fairly. His consistency has been remarkable. We also dont know what goes on inside the team and what agreements either driver may have broken in previous weekends- so potentially both could be guilty on that respect.

        Lewis’ weakness is that despite his remarkable speed he does have bad weekends and sometimes doesnt see the big picture in the way that a Michael Schumacher etc. would.. To note, other dominant multiple world champions in their peak like Vettel and Schumacher never got regularly beaten by the team mate. Which makes me think that Hamilton is not yet at their level (for me Michael Schumacher is one of the greatest sports people of all time).

      5. Paul says:

        in fact I do have a preference for WDC which is Ricciardo;) (and goes against my point about Vettel above).

      6. Erik says:

        Here you go, James, a balanced example, and how you used to word articles 3 years ago:


    3. Craig Sock says:

      This is an unfair and deeply flawed interpretation of James’ fine work in this piece.

      Quoting James from the 10th graf:
      “So did Hamilton interpret Rosberg saying that he kept going to make a point, as an admission that he did it in purpose, or was Rosberg explicit in admitting it was deliberate? If the latter, it was not only out of character for a man who is careful with his words…”

      Again: “…not only out of character for a man who is careful with his words…”.

      James, very balanced piece. Thank you.

    4. Lady F1 says:

      Your rant at James seems to not include the first turn in Canada where Nico run Hamilton clean off the track and hit him in the process. Deliberate or not? He made contact to prove a point, despite having enough room, no point would have been made without contact therefore it was deliberate obviously. Just for arguments sake, you say Button Alonso and Vettel are not involved in these incidents, without bringing up all the ones I remember just take Germany this year with Button opening the door at the hairpin then cutting back across when Hamilton was on the inside, it happens to them all, Was Hamilton not entitled to room? Even so Hamilton said sorry, and so did Button after watching the replay. Nico wouldn’t collide with his teammate on purpose! Or park on track in Monaco…..of course not. Intellect yes, integrity not so sure.

    5. Sergio says:

      Excelent post. Possibly some people think they are balanced. No, the fact is, if they say that, they think they are right for sure, but there is another truth in & outside the ocean, lots of evidence of a special character, a lots of privileges, and one driver with a powerful defense machinery.

  126. Glen says:

    I find it hard to beleive Nico would ADMIT to crashing into Hamilton on purpose.

    Yes, he shoud have yeilded, in my opinion. Wrecked another 1-2 for the team.

    But, Im quite ok for the mercedes to run into each other, with Dan first in line to pick up the pieces, coming from a fellow Aussie, must say, Im a bit biased.

    Ricciardo for WDC!

    1. Quercus says:

      At last, someone honest enough to admit to bias!

      To answer your first point. Unless ROS told HAM that he wanted to make a point, HAM might have assumed it was just a clumsy mistake. ROS needed HAM to know it was deliberate (with the suggestion that he was prepared to do it again, so watch out; no more Mr nice guy)!

  127. Anthony says:

    There must be a stewards enquiry at this point. If he did this deliberately, even if he was trying to ‘prove a point’, then he must face serious sanctions by the team and the stewards.

  128. deancassady says:

    Rosberg is 29 points ahead, and doing perhaps what he has to, to win this year.
    While recognizing the back stabbing, dysfunctional nature of (what I think sounds about right) ‘making his point’, I’m somewhat surprised to find I’ve gained a bit of respect for him.
    Everyone body who has been following this story, basically all year, must realize that this was the trajectory of the situation at Mercedes.
    I came on the radar early on, such childish reactivity from both drivers, blah, blah, blah, and the media feeding frenzy, seemingly stoking it on!
    Now there are probably people who think Lewis not ‘(slowing down and) moving over, in the last race, was inexcuseable, and others who don’t think so.
    But Rosberg is now 29 points ahead!
    Ultimately, whether you believe Rosberg is bad sportsman, or not, the things that he has done have lead to a 29 point lead in the championship; these jockeys have been BRED to seek this kind of blood, and go for it! That is exactly what they are doing; what is the big deal? They were created to do this!

    And the season is finally getting interesting, in no small measure because of the undoubted star of the season (and rather pleasant surprise for one particularly skeptical self), Ricciardo, earning every point.
    Ricciardo comes onto the team with the four time in a row world champion, even as he is having a horrendous bad fortune, Ricciardo hasn’t missed an opportunity that he didn’t like and capitalize on; another great drive to win.

    To close on the topic at hand, in paraphrase of an unusually straight-talker, ‘it is, what it is’.
    We best get over it, and for one thing, Lewis could learn from Nico, who, following what he said was a wrong, that he would learn from it, and change how he did stuff; well, he did that and reaped 18 points up on his rival.
    Like Bogey says, “so that’s the way it is.”
    Nico knows it.
    Maybe Lewy is still in denial.

  129. Tim says:

    What’s being lost in this is how poor Rosberg was today, the win was there for the taking and getting stuck behind Vettel and then being overtaken by Bottas show the calibre of his talent, the crash shows the calibre of the man.

  130. Mark V says:

    No matter how angry the team may be with Rosberg, I find it hard to believe they would ever give Lewis permission to make this kind of damaging public statement.

  131. jon says:

    So Rosberg told Hamilton he purposely tried to wreck him by using his wing as a weapon? HAM should really keep his lips zipped more often lest he be thought a complete idiot.

    I think ROS was sending a message to HAM – ROS should have been more upfront and said, “you came to Mercedes thinking it would be your team much like when Alonso came to McLaren and I would be your lackey. You have slammed me to the press whenever possible and called me a cheater, a rich softy, lucky, questioned my national allegiance and more. So you see I have this pent up frustration and anger but today was an accident and nothing more. I don’t need to wreck you to beat you, I can do it fair and square and will – you may be faster, but I’m better.”

    Racing incident and nothing more!

  132. Eric says:

    It’s all very sad, neither Nico nor Lewis nor Mercedes came out of this looking like they have the class required of real F1 champions each for their own reasons.

  133. Msta says:

    The actual racing incident was a 50/50.
    Mistake 1: Lewis makes an error up the hill and is slow along the straight which opens the door to Rosberg.
    Mistake 2: Rosberg believes he has enough opportunity to make the pass.
    Mistake 3: Nico maintains his positioning and line through the chicane achieved by his pace advantage.
    Mistake 4: Lewis fails to adapt his line into the corner in consideration of Nico’s gain.

    Contact is made and both drivers suffer from the damage, Lewis more so. Fact is that at the critical point either driver could have given the other 6 more inches and they live to fight another lap.

    Mercedes need to stick to the facts of the incident, keep the emotion out of it and reign in Lewis for airing his dirty laundry in public and embellishing (and therefore intentionally misleading) what may or may not have been said in a private meeting.

    1. anuj says:

      Well written… thats exactly what happened….. lewis tought nico will back off or forced off as always … nico thought “not any more” ..

      1. James Walton says:

        here here

    2. Quercus says:

      A rather biased reading of the incident, Msta. Look at the videos others have posted of ROS closing the door on MSC at the very same corner in 2010 (MSC takes to the grass on the inside of the corner).

      I write this with confidence because I know now that Coulthard, Massa and Button have all come out saying that HAM was in the clear and it was all ROS’s fault. Have any other F1 drivers come out on ROS’s side?

      1. Msta says:

        I have honestly attempted to unpack the facts of the event and attributed two notable errors to each driver which contributed to the contact. I too have written with confidence because it would seem that the stewards have seen it that way as well.

        And it also wasn’t right for Nico to push Schumi off track like that in 2010. No argument here. I’m sure someone with a better memory than me could just as well dig up similar moments from Hamiltons career where he fails to yield unobstructed access of the racing line to the leading driver, resulting in contact. Surely back in 2011 there must be one from his many run ins with Felipe that year!

  134. bronwyn says:

    Hamilton seems to have conveniently forgotten about all the wing endplates he has lost over the years, most recently when he tried to overtake Button a few races ago! Nico was just unlucky that it caused a puncture (for getting him into hot water) as if that hadn’t happened it would have been him that came off 2nd best with a damaged front wing. I wish Ricciardo could have those 18 points from Melbourne back :(

  135. Steve C says:

    I don’t believe for one minute that NR did this deliberately. How could he know for sure that LH would get a puncture at the same time as wrecking his own front wing. It could have easily turned out much differently where LH never got a puncture and NR would have to stop for a new front wing, as he did, leaving the field completely open for LH to win the race. Very unfortunate but not NR fault. It was a racing incident but for reasons of good publicity (why not) its good for F1for this to run for a while.

    FA hit SV and lost a major chuck of front wing but SV never got a puncture.

    The only area being British I disliked was NR claiming it was only British fans booing him. I doubt very much that there was that many British fans there that could make that amount noise. Anyone who had spent their money to be at the track probable felt robbed of what was billed as good shoot out by the two drivers only to have it wrecked within two laps. Same as those of us who watched on TV. Booing is still not the done thing at F1 races in my view.

    MB can’t win over this. If they let the drivers race without any team orders (as they should) they are now getting criticised and if they decide to implement some sort of rules on the drivers that will be condemned as well. Most people just want to watch a good race without a bucket load of rules and penalties. Keep it as is Toto & Paddy.

    1. Stephen Taylor says:

      You say booing is not the done thing in F1 but if no Ferrari drivers are on the podium at Monza then all
      the podium will probably get booed unless the Ferrari powered Marussia and Sauber teams have cars in the Top 3 but that has almost no chance of happening unless we have a crazy wet race in Italy.

    2. Hello says:

      Martin Brundle did a piece on Sky about how tyres get punctures. If you hit them straight on, like Alonso did it’s ok. If you hit the top 30mm of the side wall you have a 90 percent chance of puncher. The rest of the lower part of the side wall has the same percentage as straight on contact.

  136. Mael says:

    Mercedes AMG are making the Red Bull management look like geniuses for managing the Vettel / Webber situation for so many years.

    Has Lewis confirmed a contract extension yet?

    It would seem debatable that Merc will have the fastest car next year, so perhaps with all this ill will he may be better to wait.

  137. Oldshoe says:

    Following the driver’s meeting on the Friday of the Canadian Grand Prix 2012, the race director stated, “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.” He continued by stating, “Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.”

    The ambiguity that surrounded ‘significant proportion’ was cleared up when Whiting asserted that this is defined by a car attempting to pass getting any part of its front wing alongside the rear wheels of the car in front.

    According to this it was Lewis’s fault. Now Merc has the egg of blaming Nico on their face as he was not obliged to yield and Lewis chopping across Nico is not giving room.
    Lewis crashed into Nico according to the rules of engagement.
    From here out Lewis has been served notice Nico isn’t yielding any longer.

    1. OldIron says:

      It wasn’t a straight.

      1. Bruno Menilli says:

        “It wasn’t a straight.” I believe that this ruling does not just apply to straights [?]

  138. Simon says:

    As a fan of both Nico and Lewis I suspect this incident was a simple mistake by Nico, but he’s just not admitting to it… we all know about F1 driver’s egos.

    Every driver in F1 has at some point made the mistake of getting too close to the guy in front and losing their front wing end plate. If it happens mid field it is not a big deal, but when it happens to the two F1 title contenders who are both in the same team and both leading a race it is a big story.

  139. CaringForApathy says:

    All of Rosberg’s problems are a result of his poor racecraft and inability to pass other cars, whether they’re his opponents or his own teammate, which ultimately ends up being blamed on Hamilton most of the time. Or something/somebody else. Never Rosberg though.

    It first showed in Bahrain when he caught up to Lewis hand over fist and then couldn’t make it by with much much fresher tires. Then Hungary he spends way too many laps behind a Torro Rosso and expects the team orders to help him out. I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt for Monaco, but after what he’s been quoted as saying today I’m not sure anymore. In the back of his mind did he know he can’t pass, and so in Monaco with provisional pole did he play dirty? I still think that was way too much to think through and pull off spur of the moment like that, but who knows.

    And then today at Spa, which again was clumsy at best. I know people are wondering why there wasn’t an investigation, which I’m OK with there not being one since they announced a few races back that they were going to try to let such incidences go without a penalty. If it was the beginning of the year then I think it would have been looked at, but not after that announcement from the FIA/stewards a while back.

    I have no idea how people can say Lewis “shut the door” or “chopped” Nico thought. There is only one line through the second part of the chicane, and how many chicanes are there with more than one line? Maybe the Bus Stop at the end of the lap on the same track, but there are very few on the season where two can go side by side. He has been to Spa enough times to know that you need to get out of a move if you don’t have it by then but he didn’t. Sky’s post-race coverage had Anthony Davidson with some in-car computer simulations, and if they’re accurate then Lewis had no clue where Nico was because he couldn’t see him in the mirrors due to where Nico placed his car. I think he had every right to think his teammate wasn’t being an idiot and had dropped in behind and so had no reason to give him room. Either way, Nico shouldn’t have put him in that position – he had 42 more DRS zones to make a pass.

    It all just rubs me the wrong way, and I just cringed at all of Rosberg’s clinical non-answers after the race. For the most part, when other racers make silly mistakes like that they raise their hand and say “oops, my bad”. If these comments from him are true, I’ve gone from thinking he’s been lucking into the championship lead to thinking he definitely doesn’t deserve it. There’s a big difference between not letting your teammate through so they can finish one place ahead of you and crashing into your teammate and essentially knocking them out of the race. Not sure what point he was trying to make, but he didn’t make it, and now his team is a mess.

    1. JB64 says:

      Fully agree with your last two paragraphs. No element of that contact can be attributed to anything Hamilton could or did do at that point of the chicane, as obvious from watching it live as it has been from watching the replays.

  140. EA says:

    Racing incident. Similar to when Kimi cost Alonso the title in Suzuka.
    Nico’s point is exactly what many others have said above: He is done backing out. Kimi is a “racer”, he didn’t back out and it was Alonso who paid with a title. That was also a racing incident.

    This time the “I’m a racer and if I see a gap I will for it” argument backfired on Lewis and it hurts him. I was very surprised he made so many public statements of want went on in their meeting…. he tried it on Jenson, but Jenson owned him with the Twitter thing….

    I was kinda rooting for Lewis simply because Nico had been a softie…. but it seems no more.

    Letting the teammates race doesn’t work. Period.

  141. wnyskier says:

    Lots of opinion. Lots of emotion in the posts. I’m sure I will now be pilloried by some, but I haven’t seen a single reference to the rules though….
    As I understand the rules for overtaking as defined and then clarified by Mr. Whiting in 2012 it is the responsibility of the leading driver to provide sufficient room and not cause an accident when the overtaking car has the front wing level with the leading driver’s rear wheel.
    Rosberg’s front wing was level with Hamilton’s rear wheel. Hamilton did not provide sufficient room to prevent an accident.
    Case closed.
    That is why the steward’s took no action against Rosberg.
    The point Rosbeg was making, if not clearly evident, is that Hamilton would cause an accident rather than be overtaken in a clean fight.
    I have no dog in this fight, just stating the obvious.

    1. navrac says:

      Sadly you should read the clarification from 2012 word for word – and then notice that the alongside specifically refers to overtaking on the straight only and was about the weaving in front of other drivers. Not about going round corner.

      It does not apply here. Also the clarification was removed once the 2013 rules were published which dealt with the issue.

      1. My Dad's Harder Than Yours says:


  142. Lola Bido says:

    This accident was no accident. As I commented way back in April on JA’s “Why the Bahrain Grand Prix turned out as it did” post:

    “Make no mistake, Nico Rosberg is under TREMENDOUS pressure from the motherland and diaspora to put the very “uppity” Hamilton back in his place, and Mercedes F1 is under tremendous pressure to engineer the best possible solutions for both championships while making every effort to appear as scrupulously fair and transparent as possible.”

    Seems to me like everything is going almost perfectly according to plan for both Rosberg and Mercedes. It doesn’t take a genius to see how this season would unfold. Just a little knowledge of history and who we’re dealing with.

    Sometimes the apple DOES fall far from the tree. As far as I can recall, Keke always drove with honor and integrity, even when he was getting “destroyed” by Prost.

    IMO, as long as Frank is alive, Williams is the only top team that Hamilton can fully trust to not just pay lip service to “fairness and transparency” (anyone who’s followed F1 or MotoGP/500cc closely since the 80s knows that Honda plays politics and favorites almost as bad as Ferrari).

    Lewis might do well to hold off on that Mercedes contract extension so he can see if Williams continues their upward trend next year.

  143. W Head says:

    I am no Rosberg or Hamilton fan but seems to be a storm in a tea cup, these incidents happen all the time in racing especially when people run out of talent on the track. Interesting to see that if this situation was reversed Rosberg still would have got the blame, seems from looking on the outside that Hamilton is allowed to defy team orders but Rosberg is not and I know this is not the same situation, just looks that way from the comfy couch. Hamilton does seem to be the chosen one, can do no wrong even when he does, just like Vettel the last 4 years. If you look at the Malaysia team orders the other year asking Rosberg to stay behind Hamilton so Hamilton could get 3rd place gives credence that Hamilton is their favourite.

  144. olderguysrule says:

    James, I’ve read on the web that the stewards were going to give Lewis a penalty but didn’t because he basically penalized himself. It goes back to the rules for defensive driving that Charlie clarified after the Canada race in 2012. Could you get us the real info on this? As for my take, well, Nico could have backed off a few inches, or Lewis could have gave a couple of inches. Neither gave a inch so they lost a mile.

  145. A says:

    Maldonado has gotten several drive through for similar contacts.

  146. Jolgas says:

    Rosberg is not mature like say Alonso. He lost his position at the start and was determined to get it back at all costs. After only two laps he was an idiot to do that. Also sounds that he was an idiot at their meeting afterwards. On the podium Rosbergs body language showed it all guilt.
    So what now? Hamilton has lost out twice by incidents deliberate or not.
    And Mercedes lost a win. This can’t continue.

    James how does this affect next season? Can both stay at the same team?

    1. James Allen says:

      Both have contracts, who walks away from a winning car?

      1. Stephen Taylor says:

        Alonso leaving Mclaren and rejoining Renault in 2008 is one example James. Yes I know Alonso won two races in 2008 but the 2008 Renault was not a championship contender. The 2008 Mclaren was a championship contender.

  147. wolf says:

    I’m really unsure what point Rosberg was trying to prove, unless it’s that as current championship leader Hamilton has more to lose from any collision than he does.

    At this point I’m reminded of one of my favorite Simpsons quotes:
    “I’m going to be swinging my arms like this, and if any part of you should happen to get in the way, that’s YOUR problem!” – Bart Simpson

  148. NLB says:

    I’m old enough to remember when F1 cars actually had pram handles on the back of them. No they weren’t sponsored by ToysRUs but maybe now they should be. If Nico did hold his line just to make a point, then I have to question his maturity on making that decision. If it came out of selfish reasons (which it would seem it did) then I have to ask Mercedes why they employ a driver who makes dangerous maneuvers with no forward thinking as to the outcome. Toto please give both drivers a smacked bottom and a new dummy and tell them to keep their toys firmly in the pram!

  149. Alex W says:

    It really doesn’t matter what is said in private between the drivers, “confessions” are often false, and if I were Nico, I would privately hint to Lewis that it was intentional, just to scare him into fearing me. Nico is going to need to use every tool if he want to beat the superior pace of Lewis, and he is smart enough to know it.

  150. Jay says:

    Racing incident this one. Lewis should grow up – he makes more mistakes both in and out of the car than Nico. Lewis may be immensely talented and has won a championship but these does not justify being such a diva on the track expecting people to move over for him as he has done so many times. There are multiple title winners who are far more grounded than he is. In my mind Lewis will not win another championship because of his attitude. Speed and talent alone is not gonna win a championship. Out of the car he has a polarising effect. Just look at vettel, the driver that Lewis seems to always have a dig at, he has made better use of his opportunities, and also acted a lot more maturely and stayed focused and grounded – and he has 4 titles to his name. Plus he’s remained circumspect about being beaten (so far) by Ricciardo. Lewis may be one of the fastest if not the fastest driver, but I wouldn’t class him as one of the best…. He is too flawed and that is a great shame.

  151. Tom in Adelaide says:

    All this needs now is for the FIA to come out and give HAM a grid penalty for causing an avoidable incident. :P KABOOM!

    Poor race from Rosberg. His woeful attempt on Bottas cost him the win for sure.

  152. Rachael says:

    This latest incident has caused a storm. If the driver’s rivalry wasn’t intense enough already, it’s turning potentially volatile.

    With respect to the Prost/Senna comparisons, if it continues on its current course, it could become even nastier. (Nobody mention 1982).

    The latest news is that the FIA are now looking at investigating in light of this “new evidence”. Because the results already been declared official, they can’t change the Belgian result. However, they could still impose some punishment on Rosberg in forthcoming races.

    Interesting implications for the championship, if something comes about. Does this mean that Red Bull should look at throwing all their resources behind their lead driver?

  153. Shrish says:

    I have a feeling that if Ross Brawn was still in charge, this wouldn’t have happened.

  154. Thomas says:

    Rosberg is a disgrace.

    1. Uchiha says:

      No Hamilton is..look what chaos he has caused in media..always whining, giving excuses..spoiled brat..looks like taking some lesson from his GF.

  155. colin says:

    “as ham took his normal line”

    the real essence is that rosberg would have had to drive off track to avoid being hit by hamilton you cant blame rosberg. rosberg is under no obligation to lift just because hamilton wants the faster line. its hamilton’s job to make sure he has cleared the car before he turns in. hamilton should have held the line he was already on instead of assuming rosberg would back off.

    1. Steven M says:

      doesn’t make sense lol

    2. Peter says:

      So are suggesting that Hamilton was under an obligation to lift or allow Rosberg to pass simply because the car behind put its nose just to the side of Hamiltons rear wheels? Is that all that’s required in todays F1 to constitute a pass and force a lead driver to yield? Cmon!!

  156. Rob Blasdel says:

    Messala in the chariot race (Ben Hur) is one thing, but how could Rosberg guarantee that, A. He would cause a puncture on Hamilton’s tire and B. Not cause himself an extra 10 seconds added to his pit stop to change a wing? Or even C. getting taken out of the race altogether?

    The real story is he stayed on the line and then made a slight miscalculation in trying to avoid Hamilton’s left rear tire.

  157. David says:

    To me a racing incident – but NR 100% fault…
    LH lying… no well may be! LH is a real honest guy like in 2009 Australian GP…

    Why is LH always ready to give up every time things don’t go his way??? This is incomprehensible from a highly paid professional… I just don’t get… this why I am not fan..
    If I was a team engineer I would be pissed at this sort of surrender….

    Fast hes but also very childish…

    1. jake says:

      I regularly read comments from the LH detractors that he is impatient and does not look at the big picture. Seems that LH was the only Merc employee with a clear head during the race. It was clear to LH that there was no way he was going to score points with the extent of the damage to the car and the best long term option was to save the engine. This makes perfect sense when you consider that he must be a PU down on NR due to fire at the previous race. A 10 spot grid penalty later in the season would prove more costly than the lost chance for a few points that were extremely unlikely in the first place.

      1. warley says:

        I was thinking about this today. Suppose Lewis gets to Abu Double with his best remaining engine having done say three races while Nico has one with only one race on it. Would Lewis willingly take a 10 place penalty for a new engine? He might fancy his chances of (a) putting it on pole and thus starting tenth and (b) having a stronger car for overtaking. He wouldn’t be the only one with a penalty either as others will be on penalties before getting to the last race! Might depend on points position going into the last race but it might be a good strategy.

      2. Peter says:

        Well said.

  158. Rockman says:

    A bit off topic but it was mentioned regardless.

    But it’s quite interesting how KERS let Redbull down a lot of times in previous years. Yet this year their ERS system is the one defending them from being vulnerable.

  159. ficklesteak says:

    Rosberg was merely rolling the dice, which on lap 2 was unwarranted. The outcome could easily have been greater damage to his front wing, with his teammate ending up leading WDC by 14 points. Mediocre drivers resort to this sort of thing. Let’s face it; guy’s just not that good. RIC > VET > WEB > ROS.

    On the other side of the garage, Lewis lacks guile. It appears he’s still eager to run to the press to generate support, forgetting how many times he’s been burned by these same media in the past. Telling on his teammate to the teacher never looks good, especially to fans who aren’t privileged enough to get a whiff of sitting in a single-seater. In the next few days, we’ll all read the requisite “this will make me stronger” stories, but c’mon .. please.

    The squabbling between these two kids is comical compared to, say, oh, Lauda vs. Hunt in 1976. This is the F1 we have now inherited. I suppose F1 nowadays is more interesting to old men that like young boys, but for most of us, F1 is trading on its reputation.

    A sad story, but F1 died a long time ago, and this old zombie is all that’s left.

  160. jpinx says:

    Rosberg is cold and calculating – he knew exactly what he was doing when he hit Lewis. The hit was perfectly judged to take off an easily replaceable front wing and to put a hole in the rear tyre early in the lap, ensuring maximum damage. He took advantage of the positioning of the cars in that turn to make it happen. Nico is as ruthless as his dad, but he also has the clarity of mind and the skill to pull this off.

    Mercedes management have been shown time and again to be really ineffectual. The shambles over LH’s retirement has saved no miles and caused a lot more ill-feeling.

    1. Eric says:

      I have to agree with you there, a calculated risk , taking out a tyre against the time to replace a
      Front wing so early in a race especially with the speed advantage that Mercs had over the other teams. A quicker recovery for the reckless ( win at any cost ) Rosberg, he should get a race ban.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        You should get a race ban.

  161. ieuan says:

    nothing is gonna happen from this because its LEWIS HAMILTON at Spa .

    he gets robbed of a win in 2008 by the stewards unfairly

    in 2009 he retires the car after Jaime Alguesuari crashed into him

    in 2011 Kamui Kobayashi hits him and he retires

    in 2012 Romain Grosjean takes out about 6 cars including Hamilton right at the start

    in 2014 Nico Rosberg turns his wing right into Hamilton`s tyre because he knows Lewis is faster than him and Lewis would have won the race so instead he takes him out

    nothing will happen because its Nico Rosberg and the stewards let him get away with way too much

    Nico had another 42 laps to pass Lewis but he didnt think he would catch him so he tried a stupid move which was only gonna end 1 way on lap 2 !!!! he can spin this as much as he wants but that is a clear sign that he does not believe he can beat Hamilton in a clean race so there will probably be more incidents still to come from Nico.

  162. _Nick_ says:

    Hi James, are teams allowed to develop their ERS or is it frozen like the rest of the engine?

    Also, did Red Bull setup their car for race pace and not qualifying pace? They looked much faster in race trim than in qualifying, even permitting Mercedes shooting themselves in the foot.

    Ricciardo’s tyre management and ability to go longer than the Mercs must have them seriously worried.

    1. James Allen says:

      Only the turbo motor generator part

  163. Mikeboy0001 says:

    I can’t believe I was a Hamilton supporter for so many years
    What a shame, he could have been one of the all time greats, now he’s just great at whining

    1. Peter says:

      Cmon buddy he’s always been what others called a whiner – I prefer to call it wearing your heart on your sleeve and telling it how it is and how he feels – I much prefer to actually know and understand what these drivers are thinking and feeling rather than the cold calculated and politically correct replies and responses from drivers like Rosberg. Hamilton might certainly have misinterpreted what was discussed in the de-brief but you surely as a supporter can understand his frustrations and why he thought what he did – he is after all human.

  164. German Samurai says:

    Hamilton gets too emotional and takes comments out of context.

    Time and time again this season Hamilton has driven aggressively while battling for position with Nico. This time Nico decided it was time to make a stand and not feebly back out when Hamilton cut across him.

    It’s ridiculous to suggest Rosberg planned to shred Hamilton’s tyre. 9/10 times Rosberg comes off second best when someone clips their wing.

  165. Rafael says:

    Although I blame Nico for the collision and for botching Mercedes’ race, it did not look at all deliberate nor did it look malicious. I think, Lewis claiming that Nico admitted to colliding with him “on purpose just to prove a point”, was just Hamilton’s temper getting the better of him. If anything, the whole thing was a racing incident that could have been avoided had Rosberg exercised better judgement and not let his insecurities (“to prove a point) get the better of him.

    I’m on Team Hamilton, and am rooting for Lewis to win this year’s Driver’s Championship. And although I wasn’t a Hamilton supporter at the start of his career, I have come to respect the Brit and become a big fan of his through the years. Regardless, I can’t help but get this feeling of irony that all the bad luck and intra-team bullsh*t Lewis is going through now is bad karma from 2007, when he was a constant thorn in Alonso’s arse (at the time the established champion in the team) and just wouldn’t go away — similar to what Rosberg is to him now! How funny would it be if somehow Daniel Ricciardo ended up stealing the title from right under the Mercedes’ drivers’ noses at the final race, a la Kimi Raikkonen in ’07? Gotta love the irony of F1, and life in general!!

    PS: Not really the proper article to mention this, but too lazy to comment on the prior one….. what sort of incompetence was that from Ferrari (re Alonso grid incident)? If I were Alonso, I wouldn’t stick another year with that team. Not only can they not produce a competitive car, but the competency of their personnel is slipping as well.

  166. German Samurai says:

    Why is it Hamilton always involved in similar incidents with other drivers and not Rosberg?

    Also, since when are drivers entitled to cut across the racing line without regard to cars around them? Sure, Rosberg couldn’t complete a pass in Les Combes, but by positioning the car so that Hamilton can’t take the ‘racing line’ it causes Hamilton to exit the corner with less speed and makes him more vulnerable in subsequent corners.

    1. buzzzzzzzz says:

      Hamilton was on the racing line!!!!!

      1. German Samurai says:

        Rosberg was there to.

        It’s not a qualifying lap or time trial. It’s a race. Hamilton could have left a little more space and he would have lived to fight the next corner.

        Hamilton was well aware that Rosberg was to his left because when entering Les Combes he left about a car and half of space to his left.

  167. David Pullen says:

    So Lewis you want to inflict pain on Rosberg… Ouch that hurt!

  168. TGS says:

    Hamilton to Red Bull and Vettel to Mercedes? You heard it here first!

  169. Dado says:

    Simple facts:

    01. Rosberg helped in building this team; Lowe and Hamilton came when Brawn put all pieces together
    02. After being told to hold station in Malaysia, Rosberg said: “remember this one…” and never get a returned favor
    03. Hamilton pushed Rosberg of the track couple of times in Bahrain – no public complaining from Rosberg

    I think he had enough…

  170. AlexD says:

    I am no a fan of Mercedes, not a fan of either Rosberg or Hamilton. I am neither German nor British. I support Ferrari. This is my view. I do not think that Rosberg crashed into Hamilton deliberately…say the same way as Piquette crashed in Singapore, but Rosberg knew that this could have happened. He went for a pass that could never be successful. He wanted to prove a point that he is tough, but went one step too far. Alonso or Vettel are smarter and would not have done it. Rosberg cannot say he was faster, it was just lap 2 and none of them had any rhythm established. I think Rosberg should be banned for 1 race for taking title contender out of the race in an accident that was totally avoidable and not needed. No integrity.

  171. Mark Shueard says:

    If they were not teammates – if they were not battling for the championship it would be seen as a clumsy effort to pass, that is all. Personally I think that is all it was a mistake of judgement.
    HAVE we all forgotten how many times Lewis Hamilton lost his front wing in the last couple of years doing similar things? Hey?

    1. Rohind says:

      well put!!

    2. Peter says:

      Sure, the last I remember was even this year at the German GP with Button but at least Hamilton admitted to making the mistake . Rosberg claims he could have avoided it but chose not too? Sorry but that’s just stupid. I understand these things can happen and do and sure Rosberg doesn’t have to apologise but be man enough and admit that you stuffed up at least. Would go a long way to repairing that already damaged reputation.

  172. Aey says:

    Racing Wheel to Wheel is OK, but Wing to Wheel is not OK

    Monaco and Spa, whether it is ‘on purpose’ or ‘avoidable mistake’, Rosberg take fully benefit from his main rival.

    both times, he never felt any guilty for his mistake, he always smile and look proud for his mistake. Look like he can do anything for the win and don’t care for his mistake that directly effect his main rival.

    If he win this championship, it quite clear that he is not win from the straight fight. The point difference for WDC is less than the gift point he got.

    I used to think very positive about Rosberg that he is gentleman enough not doing any dirty game, but now I am not sure.

  173. Archie says:

    Tit for tat.

    Go on, Nico!

  174. Arya says:


    Please enlighten me regarding one thing. In Hungaroring, 2007, FIA stewards decided to take a matter which was not reported to them and was within a team into their own hands. They, rightfully so, went ahead and penalized a driver for robbing his team-mate of a fair shot at pole. Here a team-mate chose to ruin the race of another, almost deliberately. Why would FIA choose to keep mum in this case? Fair treatment !!!!

    1. Alex W says:

      It was reported to them by Hamiltons dad. incredible that that ccounts i know, he was one hell of a driver manager….. if lewis still had him, Nico would have been back of the grid in monaco….

  175. www says:

    fun stuff. how many times have we seen lewis trying to run rosberg off the track and so forth. he’s always relied on the other guy to back off and protect the team’s interest and never reciprocated. and bad mouthing his team mate. that would be the point, one would imagine. you don’t keep screwing your team mate and expect him to just bend over.

    don’t think rosberg is looking to cause an accident, but i’d imagine he’s not looking to avoid one if his team mate is playing dirty. again.

  176. Philip Iszatt says:

    I blame:
    1 The Mercedes management for not reporting to the stewards that another driver deliberately collided with theirs
    2 The FIA stewards for needing someone to complain before they investigate
    3 Rosberg, who entered a space that was not there, to coerce Lewis to move out of the way
    1 Stewards take 10 of Rosberg’s points and give them to Lewis
    2 Stewards change policy to INITIATE investigations

  177. Dufus says:

    Nice guys finish last.
    Hamilton needs to toughen up.

  178. senninhos says:

    Irrespective of who did what, and to me this was and remains a racing incident, one thing must be clear to all, bar the powers that be at Mercedes it seems:
    Hamilton, whilst extremely talented, is a loose canon and totally out of control.

    His sense of entitlement on the track is one thing . . . this is often being (mis)interpreted as what makes him a “racer”.
    But coming out of a team meeting and spouting out to the press what was said, in fact, worse, what he interpreted as being said, thus hugely inflaming a situation, smearing his team mate’s name and completely disrespecting the team (by comparing them to useless school headmasters). . . how “totally unacceptable” is that then ?

    Shades of 2007 all over again and the team will do only too well to remind itself what inevitably happens when a driver forgets that they are, after all, a paid employee.

  179. Mike Schriber says:

    I think this is all just bluster and hype. It was a racing incident. If you look at the video, Lewis actually is the one who hit Nico. Lewis moved over to the left towards the apex before fully clearing Nico. Nico tried to back out of it but it was too late. It’s not like Nico dove up the inside of Lewis at the last moment. He was alongside him the whole time.

    1. LagunaSeca says:

      Totally agree. Minor racing incident. No way to predict who would come off worst. Case in point Alonso/Button at the end. All Rosberg did was stay on the track. Hamilton came from Rosbergs right and had the whole track to his right. Rosberg was on the left most extremity of the track.

    2. ACx says:

      No, Lewis stayed on the racing line. Even Vettel understood that and correctly bailed, rather than causing an avoidable collision.

      1. Mr wilks says:


  180. Roberto says:

    Nico and Lewis have raced each other hard in the past. In plenty of instances Lewis has made very aggressive moves both when coming from behind and when defending a lead over Nico. On more than one occasion Lewis acted as if he had a special right to his track position and Nico must be the one to yield no matter the circumstances. Couple this with his refusal to comply with team orders to let Nico through so that the team could make the best of their strategic plan, and it’s no wonder that Nico might be feeling that Lewis has been taking advantage of him. In other words, it’s quite understandable for Nico’s mind-set to be “enough is enough”.
    And while you could certainly argue that Nico should have backed out of a bad position earlier, demanding track space without a clear right to that space is certainly nothing Lewis hasn’t done in the past. His reckless dives down the inside forcing Nico to yield have happened more than once. If Nico is expected to yield for the good of the team and to avoid violating rule #1 of racing which is “Don’t crash into your team mate”, then why shouldn’t Lewis be held to the same standard? One might say Nico didn’t back down to prove a point (and apparently Nico said exactly that), but when Lewis chopped him wasn’t he doing the exact thing; i.e. “proving a point”? That point being “I won’t give you room when you don’t deserve it and if you don’t back out I’m going to hit you anyway even if it ruins my chances at another WDC”.
    Bottom line: What goes around, comes around.

    1. Twist says:

      100% agreed!

    2. ACx says:

      No, Lewis drives as though he has the right to the racing line when the driver behind is no where near along side. Which is correct. Especially when a driver can only see the car behinds if 50% ish of it is beside him.

    3. clyde says:

      good one

  181. Sergey says:

    Risky move by Rosberg, but not a stupid move. He had enough pace to try this overtake and clearly when you leading in the championship and trying to overtake your main rival it is OK to take a risk. Selfish – yes, intentional – unlikely, and here is why. This quoted steering wheel move to the right is nothing than a correction move after hi initially took left a bit – YES he could go further outside to be safe initially – but again he is in a position to accept the risk. And also I hardly believe he could be so sure that his move would make a puncture and that he would damage his car going into pitlane. In fact he could just break his wing without Hamilton suffering from the puncture – and that would actually damage his own race and likely make Hamilton championship leader.
    As usual Hamilton did stupid things off the track – which yet again shows his mental weakness – and his statement which is likely incorrect citation shows that he is simply not wise enough and brings further damage to his team. He always does something stupid – like sharing telemetry on twitter, saying that his childhood was much more tough in UK compared to Rosberg’s luxury childhood in Monaco, his personal relationships affecting his driving, his ups and downs. Simply put he is not intelligent enough and not a strong kind of person. And now he cries and puts more pressure on his team instead of using this situation in his own favor making team to lean towards to him, not Rosberg. Yes he knows in raw qualifying pace, when he is totally comfortable with his car, he is slightly faster than Rosberg and also he sometimes has an edge over him in the race – like in Malaysia GP or less fuel consumption in the first races – but overall Rosberg is simply a stronger person and more intelligent driver. So better he should shut up and work harder instead of saying things he says.

    1. Peter says:

      @Sergey-So better he should shut up and work harder instead of saying things he says.

      I hope that the team end up penalising Hamilton for this comment as he is damaging the Mercedes brand with his outbursts – if its true and Rosberg did admit to a premeditated crash then he should go but I doubt very much that he said that.

      More likely as has been said above he decided to hold on to his patch of road and let Lewis avoid the crash for once.

      Lewis has got to the stage where he needs a nanny to look after him when he’s out of the motor home and its time to see Mercedes publicly reprimand him for what could be seen as telling blatant lies to distort the public image of a Mercedes driver.

      1. Sergey says:

        @Peter – indeed, post-race comments are much worse for the team compared to what happened in the race – and I agree that is something that drivers should be punished for, not the racing incidents

      2. warley says:

        He’s got a nanny – Nanny Niiki – but nanny is obviously not telling him the right things and is a bit of a loose cannon herself!

    2. Mr wilks says:

      Yes I agree that Lewis lets himself down with his silly comments , but to say nico is mentally stronger and a more intelligent driver , on the evidence from spa with his clumsy attempts at passing (ham, vettel) ,I would say there goes a driver who’s lost his cool , and has little or no race craft .

  182. Ian says:

    Worse case for rosberg was a damaged front wing, which would mean a fairly slow in lap and slow pit stop. With Hamilton coming from the back the previous two races, it looks to me like a risk worth taking the pace they have. The double turn in also adds to to my suspicion.

    However, if he has said he didnt move to prove a point, then he should at least lose the 18 points and Mercedes fine him. They are 100% going to win the constructors as vettel is not delivering, I think lauda will be honest to what was said. Hope so anyway, if it’s swept under the rug and rosberg wins the wdc it will look bad for f1

  183. Come now Pkara, dont sit on the fence, tell us how you *really* feel…

    Im guessing youre a Hamilton fan. Would you have booed? I actually think EJ handled the situation very well (to my surprise). The booing was unfair.

  184. Warren G says:

    Honestly, I think Rosberg has grown tired of Hamilton’s attitude on track. There have been a couple races this year where the team have put Nico on to an alternate strategy that would require him to pass Hamilton at the end if he wanted the win. He’s usually been fast enough (recall Bahrain, Hungary) but thanks to Hamilton’s, shall we say, “robust” defending, Rosberg has often had to yield to avoid an incident.

    Add in Hamilton not letting Rosberg through after being asked, then running him off track later in the race, I can fully understand why Rosberg felt he needed to prove a point. He’s obviously discussed the incidents he wasnt happy about before with little result and had decided that the next time he’s in that situation he’d hold his ground and was prepared to risk his own race for it.

    1. jake says:

      Agree, I have never seen Rosberg defend his position by running cars off the track. including Hamilton several times. He has never blocked Hamilton in a race for several laps even tho’ Hamilton was on a different strategy. He never asked his team mate to slow down and ruin his own race in order to make a pass easy for him, even tho’ said teammate clearly stated he would not block the pass. He never cuts corners and takes advantage. He never exaggerated a minor lock up in order to ruin his teammates final quali. run. He did not take his teammate out in an avoidable accident. He is just an all round great guy and team player.

      1. 69bhp says:

        Rosberg ran Alonso off the road a couple of years back.

  185. FastGuy says:

    I find it very telling, incriminating, even, that Rosberg said he had to see the video before commenting. Why? To think up a good story to fit the pictures? To see how he could explain away what actually happened? You were THERE, Nico…tell us the plain truth about it. Without the bull**** “damage control.”

  186. RG says:

    LH needs to grow up

  187. Olivier says:

    1. Toto’s new rules didn’t stand for long.

    2. Hamilton didn’t act in the team’s interest by speaking out to the media. Rosberg could be disqualified and possibly banned for one race for using his car as a weapon.

    3. Red Bull and Renault are back!

    4. If Rosberg doesn’t get disqualified then he is Mercedes safest bet for the driver’s championship. He is consistent and he hasn’t got to worry about running out of powerunits. However, I do not see Hamilton helping Rosberg to win the Driver’s Championship.

    5. Hamilton will probably be re-united with Button to spearhead the new iconic McLaren Honda resurgence. This will give McLaren driver continuity. Hulkenberg to Mercedes? And Magnussen to Force India?

    1. Mike A says:

      Renault back? The only back they know at the moment is “back of the grid”

      1. Mike A says:

        Lotus Renault that is

  188. jmv says:

    This is getting a bit tiring:

    - Lewis is the guy who loves to race and beat the other guy on track. Politics and PR is not Lewis’ juice.

    - Nico looks more like the guy who thinks he is entitled to have things his way… due to his privileged upbringing… he was taught he can have everything as long as he asks nicely and politely. And he is doing exaftly this, trying to get favours during team management meetings. Having been bood certainly was a first for him…having forever been popular Nico, son of F1 champ. and the way he handled it: “those were the uneducated british fans…. they better educate themselves about rules and regulations…”. a very snobbish way of looking at fans. He clearly forgot that his team is UK based.

    Anyway: i am now rooting for DAN THE MAN! Please do a Kimi Dan!

    And Lewis: sign that Mclaren Honda contract!

    1. Peter says:

      he was taught he can have everything as long as he asks nicely and politely.

      by this you must be refering to – - Please Mr Dentis can I have a sponsorship and an easy ride from here on.

  189. Vlugt says:

    “If you don’t go for a gap, you are no longer a racing driver – Senna
    No comparison meant between senna and rosberg, just an observation. Add to that the number of times that Alonso and others have gone wheel to wheel and they all leave each other a car’s width around corners. At least three times this season Hamilton has simply taken the normal racing line and run Rosberg off the track. I’m not a Hamilton-hater, I’m rather pleased with some of his driving this year, but I think his defending is over the top and dangerous at times.
    Also, concerning the sky footage, many are seeing Rosberg steering into Hamilton; to it’s clear Rosberg is trying to correct the rear end which slips a bit in the corner. And here again I find that Hamilton is sweeping to the corner apex despite the fact that Rosberg is still partially there. He is in fact falling back or has lifted. Sloppy driving on both sides, frankly. Rosberg’s ‘proving a point’ line sounds like post rationalisation.

  190. Twist says:

    Hamilton has been very aggressive in defending his position when Rosberg was chasing him this season. After losing those battles a few times and the Hungary dispute, Rosberg clearly has had enough off that and is determined to fight back with the same aggressiveness.

    It was indeed an optimistic overtake, but Hamilton should have left *some* room. He just did what he has been doing the whole season and paid the price for it.

    Is it fair to Hamilton? I’m of the opinion he brings it on himself. What’s worse is that he speaks out to the press every single race weekend in a unprofessional way. He’s always talking about all the bad luck he has and that Rosberg doesn’t deserve to be ahead, being lucky etc. etc. It just gets very tiresome. Do the talking on the track and qualify ahead for a change, which shouldn’t be so hard if you’re really faster (which is increasingly doubtful after watching the last 5 weekends…)

  191. IJ says:

    “implied that he would be sanctioning Rosberg for this breach of their agreement.” “It cannot and will not happen again, “

    But what will the team bosses do to ensure there is a sufficiently severe punishment that neither driver will take out the other again? If it’s just a “slap on the wrist” for Rosberg, what is there stopping Lewis driving Rosberg off, knowing he will just get a “slap on the wrist”?

    As the team boss, something has to happen to send a message that no one person is bigger than than the team.

    I know banning Rosberg for one race is not going to happen – but they’ve got the constructors in the bag….and if they did ban him it would be sending a VERY tough message to their drivers of the repercussions if this happens again! It would certainly show these superstar drivers….the team is bigger than them, and they have to respect that! I bet you it they won’t crash into each other anymore…!

    It’s fascinating to see how Mercedes are struggling to manage their drivers and their dominate position. They have thrown away 1-2 galore’s…….and for me; I just cannot believe how us, the viewers, have lost the opportunity of watching these guys battling it out like Bahrain!! Such a shame for the FANS!

  192. oddball says:

    Nico placed his car in an attempt to spook Lewis. If you watch the slow mototion you can see that Nico tried to force Lewis into a wider line. Lewis tried to hold this normal line and with the gap closing the cars touched. To myself its just hard racing, two drivers fighting to the end and neither one wanting to yield. The messy part is the aftermath, Lewis gunning his car back to the pits and destroying his chances. Ask any driver…to finish first,first you must finish..then coming on the radio wanting to retire? Is this the words of a world champion who never quits?..the guy needs to act like a champion rather than a diva, he has the talent and speed,he just needs to stop with this spoiled child mentality. Redbull are not that far behind and all this in fighting is going to hand it to them. Merc have everything in the palm of their hands but the actions of one mouthy diva will blow their chances.
    My words to Lewis..talk less and show us what you are made of,drive the wheels off that car and win your second title. The same goes to Nico…we know you are no pushover,you dont need to prove this by fighting a bully, keep it clean and your first title will be yours,either way i think this half of the season will be eventful for all the wrong reasons..fireworks are going to be lit
    The one thing i didnt like…i am British but i would never boo the drivers..this was not on, as fans we have a responsibility to behave like adults..not kindergarden kids..but Nico needs to respect us too..how did he know its was british fans in the crowd? But enough of my ramblings..in all..i think it was just hard racing

    1. ACx says:

      And if you watched the virtual presentation, you’ll see that Hamilton could not have seen what Rosberg was doing. As talented as they are, rivers aren’t psychic.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        River Tam was.

  193. German Samurai says:

    Let me get this straight.

    Hamilton accused Rosberg of cheating in no uncertain terms at Monaco.

    Hamilton willfully and petulantly ignored a team order in Hungary and cost his team an almost certain win.

    Hamilton at Spa accuses Rosberg of cheating, claiming that admitted to hitting him on purpose. Should this accusation against Rosberg turn out to be false it seriously calls into question the character and integrity of Hamilton.

    Do Mercedes really want a world drivers champion who has multiple times unfairly accused his teammate of ‘cheating’ and who willfully ignores team orders.

  194. Reuben says:

    I think it’s all being blown out of proportion. Sure, Hamilton lost out but how many times do we see wing to wheel contact without a puncture? Plenty! It was a racing incident and in my mind, Rosberg didn’t do anything wrong. Avoidable, yes but I doubt the intention to make contact was there at all.

    Hamilton twisted the words to suit and then went crying to the media…as he does everytime something doesn’t go his way. I was a massive ham fan before this season but he’s just turned into the biggest sore loser ever.

  195. JAWA hs-f1 says:

    Respect for James to at least make an effort to reason and present the complete story rather that other British media sensationalists who are more than happy to latch onto Hamilton’s statement, report their own biases and paint Rosberg the villian.

    In my own view, it was a racing incident. I do believe Rosberg was being too ambitious to attempt the move around outside as he was never quite infront. And the success of move only depended on Lewis giving him space, which Rosberg should have learnt from Hungry was never going to happen.

    The racing between the two Merc drivers was no different to what it was in Bahrain or in last race in Hungry. In Bahrain, Lewis was on borderline in his defence often giving no space to Rosberg, in Hungry he pushed him wide. Everyone was happy and billed it as hard racing. The consequences there could have been much different as well had Rosberg not yielded.

    The difference in this race was Rosberg’s refusal to back off, and hence different outcome. IMO, he should have backed off and on next lap with DRS enabled he would have got a better opportunity.

    I think its cheap of Lewis to make team meeting public. And then he puts his own spin to depict Rosberg has confessed. It only shows Hamilton is rattled and one thing which this season has shown, mentally he’s no match to Rosberg.

    Rosberg on the other hand, needs to seriously learn to pick up his battles more wisely. Had he not flat spotted his tyres while battling Vettel, he might have won the race. I hope he reflects on his race starts and his race craft.

  196. Howardhughes says:

    Id have to compromise my source if I revealed how I know this, but a certain Mercedes executive has been in contact since yesterday with a certain retired fishing enthusiast with a view to some kind of short-term non-exec management input to help quell this situation.

  197. Nick says:

    My two cents/pennies.

    I dislike any driver potentially placing someone in a dangerous position to prove a point, imo it was lucky it wasn’t a slow puncture which blew when he was heading towards the bus stop, a blow out than would be mighty scary.

    As for the issue between the drivers? The key deciding factor for me is that it was done from behind which negates Rosbergs ‘prove a point’ mentality which i can only assume was due to Hamiltons somewhat harsh defending at times. (I reject it was for not letting him past in Hungary because again, he should not be driving if this is how he throws his toys out of the proverbial pran.) If Rosberg was in front and aggressively shut the door on Hamilton it would be an entirely different story and a point off ‘I can be just as aggressive’ was proven.

    Being from behind the only message sent was ‘Try to defend and I will force you to make a decision to either give me priority on the race track or i will run into the back of your car till you do, doesnt matter if we both don’t finish.’

    The bottom line is it is up to the driver trailing to avoid an accident, if the boot was on the other foot Rosberg would be revered for his defensive skills and Hamilton seen as over zealous. His admission of leaving his nose there to prove a point whilst not direct is admission that he intended to cause an accident.

    Whatever the result from this ordeal i hope Rosberg learns that this behaviour is dangerous and unnacceptable, regardless the pilot of the other car and that if brushed over does not set a precident in this talented drivers mentality.

  198. Mal S says:

    At some point Mercedes is going to have to back one of their drivers, either Nico or Lewis for the championship?
    I’ll be interested to see how the non-favoured driver take’s it!!!!

  199. Peter says:

    Nonsense, Hamilton is trying to play games again to make Rosberg look even worst. Whilst I would blame Rosberg for the crash, it had rooted back to Bahrain this year, when Nico got out of the way of Hamilton to avoid an incident. This time he decided to be more firm, but was clumsy. The fact is that Rosberg is much closer to Hamilton than people tought and that makes Hamilton uncomfortable and trying to do his talks off track as usual. Rosberg is not good enough at overtaking, but very balanced in terms of overall performance. He is now the second driver after Button who is proving to be hard to beat for Hamilton and that shows just how much Hamilton is overrated.

  200. Ebi Bozimo says:

    When this thread started, we had neither heard about Rosberg’s statement about deciding to ‘prove a point’ (corroborated by Mr. Woolf) nor seen the pictures of him turning FULL LOCK RIGHT into Hamilton’s rear tyre. That was yesterday. Now we know there was intent. This is now bigger than either driver. It is now about the nature of the sport and what is accepted and acceptable.

    In Malaysia this year Magnussen cut Kimi’s tyre in an identical manner and was PUNISHED during the race with a drive through. Why the difference yesterday? Second question: has Rosberg EVER successfully overtaken Hamilton in full race / battle mode? Is it possible to surmise that Rosberg panicked under the pressure of knowing that on an ordinary level playing field, he could not hope to overtake his teammate? Whatever the case, we await the remainder of the season.

    1. James Allen says:

      Good points in your second para

    2. Tara says:

      Wasn’t the difference that it was a intra team battle? I don’t recall the stewards stepping in for team mates in the last 5-10years. I don’t know just putting it out there

  201. Monktonnik says:

    I think it was clumsy and he shouldn’t have put his nose there, but hardly deliberately causing a collision. I think if Rosberg hadn’t picked up that slight oversteer he would have been further to the left and slotted in behind Hamilton.

    No one has come out of this well.

    Lewis continually asking the team to retire the car was a bit odd, and revealing comments made in private meetings (and it seems misquoting them) is poor form. It reminds me of when he tweeted Mclaren telemetry after JB out qualified him.

    I think Rosberg is winning the physocological battle.

    Oh, and are they still friends?

  202. VJ says:

    Wouldn’t hitting another driver’s rear wheel with your front wing be a very stupid thing to do? For sure your own front wing will suffer severe damage, thus compromising laps and/or requiring a nose change (and this was the case). And I doubt it even guarantees a puncture for the other car.

    Just for that reason, my interpretation of “making a point” would really be “trying to make the move stick”.

    My take on it: clumsy driving (stubborness, too eager, …), combined with luck (just a nose change needed vs. puncturing the other tire). So some work to be done by Mercedes to prevent this in the future.

  203. Paul Mc says:

    Ricciardo for the championship anyone? If these two keep at it he could well have a chance.

  204. PlainCharlie says:

    Great article. I love the racer in Hamilton, I respect Rosberg’s skill, especially the skill he has shown this season to avoid contact with Hamilton. I really don’t care for both of their personalities, in fact there are few F1 drivers who impress me beyond their obvious fantastic driving skill. There is no way that Rosberg could have been sure to take out Hamilton with light contact, and he was sure to damage his own car, end of story as far as I’m concerned. Rosberg was out of character and Hamilton very much in character.

  205. Ravi says:

    I suspect that the bigger issue that the Mercedes management – the car company, not the racing team – have to deal with is the presence of so many loose cannons amongst its ranks. Almost as soon as the race got over Lauda and Wolff went to town spluttering with rage to any camera crew which was willing to shove a camera in their faces. In doing so, they managed to do an excellent job of selling Nico Rosberg down the river, irrespective of the error of his ways or otherwise. Contrast this with how Christian Horner ran Red Bull when Vettel and Webber did almost the same thing. Rarely did Horner feel the need to publicly castigate one or other driver, and if the team did so in private, then the other driver did not seem to consider it necessary to run to the nearest press camera and offer an unflattering perspective on his team mate.

    Ironically, presumably due to their inexperience in running F1 teams, Wolff and Lauda are struggling to deal with a situation where their team has a car that is head and shoulders above the rest of the field, driven by two almost evenly matched drivers both of whom realize there is a world title for the taking.

    It is this inability of the top men at Mercedes racing that should worry the parent company who got rid of the calm and authoritative presence of Ross Brawn and handed over the reins to this duo.

    As for the drivers, they are being racing drivers – quick, self-centered and willing to be petulant at the drop of a hat. And their reactions are a measure of how their team principals are struggling to maintain the calm at the team – and in the process allowing Daniel Ricciardo to sneak up on them in the title standings, in a season where double points at the last race could well settle the title. Not surprisingly, Ricciardo drives for the team led by Horner, and one which is punching way above its weight.

  206. goonerf1 says:

    After having a quick scroll through the comments, I didn’t see the phrase “racing etiquette” written anywhere, which I feel are an important 2 words to throw in here.

    At NO POINT, did Rosberg have that corner. At NO POINT! Therefore, racing etiquette dictates that it is Hamiltons corner, and therefore the onus is on Rosberg to drive accordingly.

    Therefore, at the very least, Rosberg should have been given a punishment in line with Mag’s as mentioned in post 201 above.

    At all times, racing etiquette must be obeyed. It is not a rule. It is not a law. You will not find in any sporting or technical regulations, but it is a code of conduct that all drivers know how to abide by.

    As soon as it is not, you are putting machinery and lives and risk, and under no circumstances whatsoever, is that unacceptable.

    You can do a lot of damage with a few hundred kg’s of car moving at any speed, let alone the speed these guys do.

    Rosberg needs to be banned for a race, and go away and think about how he wants to engage Lewis in future.

  207. Ian H says:


    would you be able to shed more light on what happens behind closed doors within a team in situations like this – when a driver crashes into their team mate (regardless if deliberate or racing incident)….

    what actions do teams tend to take in these situations? sit both drivers down and give them a ‘hair dryer’ treatment talk and warn them not to do it again; wages/bonus bans etc?

  208. Aman says:

    I don’t think there is much in the actual incident itself. Just looks like Rosberg had a look, tried to back out and tuck back in behind Hamilton, and just clipped him in the process. Racing incident. It was clumsy (just like Alonso damaged his front wing against Vettel at the end of the same race! – it happens to the best!).

    My view is this has been blown out of proportion (the incident itself is innocuous), people are just upset about the consequences to the title battle.

    As for Rosberg “confessing”, I would be very surprised if Rosberg even used the words “on purpose” during that meeting. Sounds more like Hamilton interpreting it that way (as you would expect from him, he is sensitive to what he sees as an injustice).

    What I don’t like is the apparent character assassination we are seeing happening before our eyes (Rosberg). I cannot believe the Mercedes management were that open after the race, and Hamiltons (most likely inaccurate) comments have further inflamed the matter. I agree with the article that Mercedes need to issue a statement to put into context the meeting “quotes”.

    Whatever the case I think Rosberg will deflect most of this nonsense (this season he has shown me that mentally he is rock solid and will continue to go about giving Hamilton a hard time). I have been very impressed though I think Hamilton is ultimately faster and will win the title in the end anyway….

    Also wanted to add I thought Rosberg drove a great race (keeping the field behind with the badly damaged wing, dealing with the debris attached to his car, getting put back in traffic because of the 10s wing change, recovering to 2nd etc.) – for all the controversy he actually drove a good race after lap 2…shame there is no focus on that.

  209. EC says:

    “By being a racing driver you are under risk all the time. By being a racing driver means you are racing with other people. And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver because we are competing, we are competing to win. And the main motivation to all of us is to compete for victory, it’s not to come 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th. I race to win as long as I feel it’s possible. Sometimes you get it wrong? Sure, it’s impossible to get it right all the time. But I race designed to win, as long as I feel I’m doing it right” – Ayrton Senna. I think you can say there probably was no gap for Nico, or if there was, it was going to close very quickly. But if that move came off, we would be saying what a mark of a potential world champion. If Lewis was second and he saw a chance, I don’t for a second believe he would say, no it’s only lap 2, I won’t try now, I’ll wait till later in the race.

  210. goonerf1 says:

    * Para 5 – unacceptable, meant to write acceptable :).

    Let it also be known that Rosberg knew full well what he was doing.

    I am not saying on the exit of La Source, through Eau Rouge, or at any point down the Kemmel Straight was he thinking, “I’m going to puncture Lewis’ tyre on the entrance to Les Combes.”

    What I am saying, is that he knew full well by sticking his front wing where he did, the likelihood of that having a more detrimental effect for Lewis than himself, was substantial. And yes, as a racing driver, in split seconds, that DOES go through your head.

    Let’s face it, we all know, as fans, front wing + rear tyre = puncture, more often than not. So I’m sorry, Rosberg knows that too.

    Was it pre-meditated? No. But that doesn’t automatically make it a racing incident either. A term that I hate because it excuses a whole lot of poor & dangerous driving on all too frequent a basis.

  211. Neil says:

    Most of us are unhappy with what happened to Lewis at Spa, however we have to accept that Nico is not as good a driver in the melee of overtaking as Lewis. The lap before, Seb had been in a similar situation to Nico, but realised he there was not enough room and took to the run off area. Nico says that he wanted to hold his line, but cannot have known what was going to happen to either Lewis or himself. He could have lost his wing and Lewis not been harmed, or Lewis could have been nudged and ended up in the wall with unknown consequences.
    Time and again this season we have seen him making mistakes when overtaking. It is not one of his strong points. Not as bad as some but not able to dice it with the best..

    1. Voodoopunk says:

      “Most of us are unhappy with what happened to Lewis at Spa”

      Speak for yourself.

  212. ALi Kaiser says:

    its understandable he wanted to challenge Lewis for the win. but he didnt have the racing line and he should have left lewis the room as he was never along side him. Rosberg should be disqualified from SPA to make things fair for every one. He was behaving arrogantly in the race and he behaved arrogantly afterwards by not apologizing to his teammate for causing a crash F1 fans booed him on the podium. He ruined his teams race by hurting both cars and costing them a win.

  213. clyde says:

    The incident cannot be viewed in isolation but has to be judged over the entire season so far.
    Lewis has given Nico the chop several times this season to force him wide and even off track. Nico has taken evasive action every time and Lewis has got away with the British press standing and applauding the hard racing.
    He has played mind games throught the season with comments about Nicos ability, priviliged upbringing,their closeness/lack of friendship and the latest one at Spa about inflicting maximum pain on Rosberg.
    He has also run to the press at every half opportunity trying to paint Rosberg as some sort of villain or trying to claim some sort of German conspiracy whenever he has a mechanical problem.
    All this came to a head at Hungary when he refused to let Rosberg who was on a different strategy past arguably depriving him and Mercedes of the win.
    All the while Rosberg with a dignity belying his age has exhibited remarkable restraint has never once said a word against Hamilton.
    Maybe just Maybe Rosberg felt he had to prove a point that he would not be bullied any more and didn’t back off. …..Good for him

    1. OffCourse says:

      I disagree. I don’t see why this incident has to be judged over the entire season. It is what it is at that point in time and should be judged upon the facts that are available now.

      Also the comment “Lewis has given Nico the chop several times this season to force him wide” (made by several others as well). I have seen this differently to most.

      It’s one thing to close the door when someone has got a wheel next to you and give them the chop. It is another to close the door just as they reach you, and I think that in review this is what Hamilton has usually done.

      Just because you may be arriving faster to a gap that is being closed doe’s not qualify as being chopped. It frustrating as all hell, but it means that your not fast enough / close enough yet.

      And there lies Nico’s issue, frustration. He just wasn’t quite there yet again, and in frustration poked the nose in too far.

  214. Super Si says:

    It’s no good just saying rosberg is wrong. He needs to lose points through penalty. He has every insentive to keep doing this because every time he does it he gains points on Hamilton and gets closer to the championship. I see in rosberg that he is not the kind of person who would only want to win the title fairly, but instead I see that he is the type who will bend all ways as long as he gets the championship.
    It is an insult to the championship and everyone in it if he wins the championship with acts like this.
    Obviously the team will not want points deductions for rosberg, but that is the only way to stop rosberg’s insentive and stop him doing it. The FIA need to step in and penalise rosberg before his rash behaviour, dirty behaviour gets someone hurt. It is not a good personality to be advertising on a world stage, and it is showing small children that it is ok to do cheap acts and it is deemed acceptable.

    Rosberg needs penalties!

  215. Mr wilks says:

    A clumsy attempt by a driver who was already wound up about Lewis not letting him pass in the last race, then losing position to him before the first corner. Nico has to take most of the blame for this , Lewis had the racing line, later on he spotted his tyres trying to pass vettel. Poor driving.

  216. liz says:

    As a Brit it was disgusting to hear the boos supposedly from the British fans, Lewis needs to grow up and also learn to keep his own counsel, all of us Brits do not support him and as for his earlier comments on how hard he had it to make it into F1 compared to Nico well that sums him up !!!!!!! He could learn a lesson on how to behave from Jenson Button, I will be at the Singapore GP in four weeks could be an interesting race

  217. Kieran Donnelly says:

    Do we want cars to race or not? I, for one, do not accept that a driver may merely “take his line” and shut the door on a car this is alongside him/her. I truly believe that if drivers were made to leave room for cars that are in anyway alongside them then it would allow is see more wheel-to-wheel, corner-to-corner action. As it stands, a chasing car can push and push just to get a bit alongside and the leader just shuts the door on the attempted pass because he’s a little bit ahead. This, to me, is not how races should be. I felt Magnussen’s defence at times was a little bit beyond robust too. Personally, I see this behaviour of Hamilton/Magnussen as attempting to force another car off the track. Nico was well alongside Hamilton (as we could see from on-board) going into the corner. Hamilton chose to aggressively shut the door and Nico chose to remain on the track rather than breach its limits – racing incident where, in my opinion, Hamilton is at least as much, if not more, to blame. Not the first time he’s stuck his rears too close to Rosberg’s front wing!

    1. TheGoat says:

      I don’t agree. F1 is not stock-car racing. You are not supposed to barge past. It is incumbent on the overtaker to do it cleanly and not rely on the other driver saying ‘after you, Sir’. And let us not forget that this is Spa, where there are abundant overtaking opportunities and two long DRS straights. Rosberg should have waited for a better opportunity. There is a reason DRS is not activated for the first few laps – it is to allow some time for the adrenaline from the start to calm down and for drivers to get into a rhythm. Rosberg was over-ambitious. What is galling is that his mistake cost Hamilton his entire race while costing Rosberg almost nothing.

      1. Kieran Donnelly says:

        Potentially though, it could have cost Rosberg his race. I’m not talking about physical contact and barging being part of Formula 1 racing (though Hamilton did a bit of this in Germany too) but I don’t really think that it’s 100% up to the overtaker to keep things clean – Hamilton must have known that Rosberg was there and there was enough space to the right to leave a little more margin. Chopping straight over like that was certainly inviting a roll of the dice by lady luck – Rosberg can’t make his car instantaneously disappear and, in a way, had less to lose. Of course, one might also say that, had he not gone and taken the overtaking opportunity that presented itself then and there, he might not have gotten another one as Lewis may have danced off into the distance as he is so capable of doing when at his best.

      2. Kieran Donnelly says:

        Oh, also, while it is currently the case that the car in front can pull in or push out to the racing line when the car alongside is not fully X% alongside, I would LIKE to see that arrangement change so that a car that is in any way alongside can maintain position on the track and not be crowded off by the leading car. Perhaps everyone is happy with the current arrangement and it’ll never come to be but I think we’d see better racing.

  218. Richard says:

    These Rosberg fans or maybe they are just anti-Hamilton make me ache as they should learn about what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in F1. The simple fact is that Hamilton had the corner, no question, and it was ENCUMBENT on Rosberg to avoid contact seeing as he was substantially behind, but no he deliberately tried to force his way into an ever decreasing gap as Hamilton followed his NORMAL racing line through the corner. As Mercedes said it is totally unacceptable what ROSBERG did and he should have waited for a better opportunity perhaps under DRS where the overtake,assuming he could accomplish it, could be done in a safe non-destructive manner. I mean Rosberg will not even admit his own mistakes. He went into the meeting on the attack because he knew he was in error as his best line of defence, but I’m quite sure the management will have none of it. He needs to be punished maybe a two race ban would be sufficient. If the FIA take a closer look at it and decide his steering wheel inputs show he deliberately turned into Hamilton’s tyre, which I believe he did, then he could get a season ban. Rosberg wants to win the championship anyway he can, but if he does win it he will have done by highly dubious means. He knows he can’t beat Hamilton fair and square and has to resort to dubious methods to disadvantage Hamilton, and it will happen again when Hamilton gets within striking distance. Rosberg needs to be reined in now and given a sharp lesson in racing ettiquette because such a person does not make a worthy champion.

  219. Oly says:

    I’m sick of Hamilton and his whining. Every time something goes wrong someone else has to be blamed and has to apologize for not avoiding every possible bad outcome scenario that he (Hamilton) could encounter..
    What about him and his “bad race decisions” ? How many times had he ruined someone’s race, and everybody just moved on ?
    So it’s basically “stay out of my way” of face a drama in a race (over the radio and on the track) and later in the media. Just disgusting.
    He is a fast driver, but he has no class and no sportsmanship.. Next time when he makes a show like this I’ll throw up.

  220. Tara says:

    I know this comment is too far down for anyone to care but everyone seems to have forgotten when Hamilton was pushing massa off the track or into walls every week!
    Was that just the sign of a hungry driver? How is that OK but this is an outrage?
    The one thing I hate most is hypocrites.

    1. Kieran Donnelly says:

      Yup. Hamilton pretty much barged his way through in Germany with no concerns over contact or who had what line and what did we call that? A great piece of racing? Now the shoe is on the other foot and he’s whining like a child, hiding behind sunglasses and pretending to cry to the BBC. Sad – just sad! He is an amazing racer with great speed and daring-do but he has to accept that others can and will take the same actions that he has and that it won’t always work out the better for him. As someone above had said, if Hamilton had just left a few more inches of space, just in case Rosberg had misjudged or nowhere to go then this would probably just be a column about another Mercedes 1-2 and how Hamiton had once again taken victory and closed the gap. Some have lost respect for Rosberg but he has grown in my estimation. He’s had the balls to show that he won’t be bullied. In the same way as he wouldn’t compromise himself to let Rosberg by in Hungary, why should Rosberg come to a halt on a corner and fall back when there was room for both with just a bit of common sense? Hamilton must have known he was there or thereabouts and even if the full overtake was over (as I’m sure Rosberg would concede), Rosberg can’t make his car disappear. He made an effort to avoid Lewis’ rear as much as he could without leaving the track and without compromising his own speed too much and thus falling backwards to Vettel (or whomever was behind him at that point). We’re talking inches or fractions thereof here, not a deliberate clout like Schumi/Villeneuve.

  221. Richard cummins says:

    As I have said many times on this site instead of emotionally looking at things . Look at the facts.
    Nico had lost his lead. Then lost second place. He was , understandably , keen to get back into position. Having got past Vettel he then let the red mist drop. In order,as some have suggested, LH should have given him room . To do this LH would have had to position his car differantly on the previous bend. Please do not believe this was ever going to happen. Nico as a F1 driver should also know this. I believe he did. He held his line then caught the front wing with his REAR tyre. How this can be seen as being along side is physically impossible.
    Nico has overstepped the mark this time and Todt should act. Mercedes cannot gain anything from this. Red Bull have. The FIA will be seen as weak and uninterested in the sport if no action is taken.
    I have mothered Brundell or James stand up and condem Nico but he should be named and shamed. these guys have to have a certain amount of trust in each a others abillity and following this there is none. I actually believe like Eddie J the management are to blame. Their naievety is unbelievable and Nico has exposed them.

    1. Andy says:

      Completey agree Richard.

      And I also believe that if Hamilton had been behind and the one to puncture Rosbergs tyre, he would have been penalised…

  222. plumbpipe says:

    I agree with Mal S, the incident will be sorted within the team, and that Mercedes will have to have a No1 and No2 driver to stop any repeats of Spa. (after all it was an almost certain 45 points) Do they go with Hamilton who always seems to have the pace on race day, or go with Rosberg to satisfy the German owners and backers. should be interesting.

  223. anuj says:

    I find the team to be biased towards lewis…. when nico is pushed off, its called fair racing….. when lewis doen’t obey the team, lauda and wolff dont have have the balls to deal with it…………. however, nico has been made a villian for a pure racing incidient…. i my opinion the fault is 30; 70. Hamilton should have left more room and not cut across so sharp……… nicos attempt was over ambitious

  224. James says:

    So did Rosberg admit to having caused an avoidable incident?

  225. Methusalem says:

    Sometime in the past weeks I read somewhere in the German press that Rosberg would apply a special trick to challenge Lewis Hamilton. Could this be one of his tricks? Did he slow down at start so that he could place himself behind Lewis for wanting “to prove a point”?

    Anyways, Mercedes will now introduce team orders — and Hamilton will be forced to assist Rosberg. As in today’s world, Victims remain victims, while Perpetrators get the reward.

  226. Eamonn says:

    Thank goodness for the comments on this article, they have restored my faith that intelligent people still watch this sport.

    A racing incident caused by two drivers determined to give the other no margin. As the driver behind, yes Nico carries more of the blame but not all of it.

    Despite this, the response of Mercedes top brass and Hamilton’s reaction in the media have been appalling.

    1. FW14B says:

      My sentiments exactly, even the comment sections in publications one would normally assume to be more pragmatic are teeming with ‘fanboy’ comments.

      F1 it would seem is going the way of football and I for one am ashamed to be British if it was British fans that were booing Rosberg yesterday.

      No one can deny that Hamilton is an exceptional talent, but in such situations it cannot be denied that he is a liablitly to his team.

  227. You know why I feel it’s unlikely that this was anything more than a frustrated Rosberg making a badly executed maneuver?
    If you hit a wheel with your front wing, the result is often the other way around. The car in the front keeps going while you have to spend the next 6 km trying to reach the pit with a wing under your car. Look at Alonso and Vettel towards the end.

  228. Brenda T says:

    Hamilton is an emotional midget and crybaby. He continually whines if everything doesn’t go his way and acts like a petulant 2 year old.

    Remember a year or so back when his girlfriend broke up with him and he cried his way through 3-4 bad races saying he was having distractions off the field.

    Can anyone believe a Formula 1 driver gets “sad” over a girl? They can date anyone they want….

    What a cry baby.

    1. phillip burke says:

      hello, we all grown ups with good mental facilities, then i shall continue. what does , making a point actually mean. it means delibratley doing something to gain your objectives with pre meditated thought. it might be aggresive or passive but you are still taking a course of action that you ve already agreed with yourself. so if you agree what course of action should be taken. and im actually a fan of both merc drivers. its also a shame this is detracting from riccardos win, what can i say , im not a red bull fan but hey three wins , nice guy.

      1. Brent says:

        Like Hamilton making his point loudly in the press.

      2. Bearforce1 says:

        Totally agree.

        Lewis started in F1 in a top team and has never raced in a lower tier team but claims to have done it tough.

        I remember the Lewis melt down over his girlfriend very well. It was also during the problems with Lewis’ dad. I also remember Lewis moaning about how it wasn’t fair that Jenson had a stable girlfriend and family support. Lewis could have learnt something from his association with Jenson on how to be gentleman racer, a thinking racer.

        I though Lewis had changed after that year but he hasn’t matured or progressed as a person.

        Fact is as soon as things aren’t going well for Lewis he goes back into craze ways. His voice cracks in interviews, he blames everyone, his team mates, the team, the stewards, the media even his family (Jeeze his dad did everything to get Lewis into racing). He will publish team telemetry, he will lie to the stewards. This has been in MO since day one.

        Fast but slow. Fast racer but mentally slow.

    2. Antny Cook says:

      So Brenda, race drivers are not human?
      What a stupid comment.
      If you cannot bring anything but personal attacks to the arguement I suggest that you keep your thoughts to yourself.

    3. Richard says:

      Entirely irrelevant to the subject matter, and I think the comment says more about you than it does Hamilton!

    4. Andrew Ferry says:

      calm down dear

  229. mansellsMoustache says:

    This is such a non story in terms of if it was an intentional collision. If it was intended, how could NR be sure that the impact would ONLY lead to damage on LH’s car. It could have easily crippled NR’s car with no damage to LH’s car at all. This is all just muck raking media drivel as usual.

    The real story is actually finally addressing the issue of drivers doing whatever they want whilst disregarding all the hard work the other members of the team put in. I know people always say that you can’t control the ‘natural racing instinct’ of a driver but come on..it’s ridiculous.

    I do feel the whole Monaco thing was very shifty to say the least, and I can’t say that NR doesn’t set off my spider sense in terms if shiftyness, but this was just one of those things. Frustration? Desperation? Maybe – but that’s racing.

  230. Christian Davis says:

    Personally I think Lewis has trust issues with both his team and his teammate. They struggle to build him a reliable car. Rosberg screws up Hamilton qualifying in Monaco. Now Rosberg who is ahead of Hamilton in the WC seemingly feels he can afford to risk taking Lewis racing line.

    In this context I totally understand Hamiltons feelings. It’s up to Mercedes to diffuse this I’d suggest they start by handing a transcript of the meeting to the FIA. Lewis then needs to consider whether he wants to drive for Mercedes or if he’d be happier leading a team like Mclaren. Where I’d absolutely back him to succeed with Ron Dennis at the helm.

  231. Mike from Medellin says:

    Let’s get Derek Warwick’s take on this…..

  232. Noel C. says:

    Nico didn’t hit Hamilton on purpose? Why would he? 9 times out of 10 in that situation he would have ripped his own front wing off and ruined his race.

    It was a clumsy mistake but as it happened luck was on his side and now, as he has been all season, Nico is now going to exploit the advantage – playing on Hamilton’s fragile mental state.

    Lewis is throwing the championship away though over-emotion and short sightedness.

    1. Andrew Ferry says:

      what if you said you were making a point. How would you interpret that? Why would you take such a risk on your team mate. For me let them race, but this manoeurve was one of naivety.

    2. furstyferret says:

      More wins than his team mate,3 dnfs not his fault,2 major qually dnfs not his fault, and you think lewis is throwing this away,

      1. Noel C. says:

        Lewis Hamilton is the fastest F1 driver since Senna but he will never be a true great unless he can show the mental steel of a Prost or a Lauda.

        As Mike B. says below”
        “Just drive the car Lewis, not the media.”

    3. phillip burke says:

      you still can t get away from the fact that nico has said he did it to prove a point, refrence my previous post, i like both merc drivers but,

    4. Richard says:

      On the contrary it was encumbent on Rosberg to avoid contact in a situation when Hamilton had the corner on the racing line. As it happened Rosberg did remove a sizeable chunk from his front wing whilst puncturing Hamilton’s tyre. It was a calculated desperate move on Rosberg’s part, one which unfairly sees him taking a sizeable chunk of points whilst reducing Hamilton’s to zero. He should have a least a two race ban for using dangerous and unsportsman like tactics aganst his team mate.

      1. goober says:

        What garbage. It was a racing incident and Rosberg had too much to lose – it wasn’t calculated at all. Rosberg could have easily ended in a wall with his wing under his front suspension, and Lewis leading the championship by 14 points.

        I can’t deny the Monday morning “Lewis” histrionics are very entertaining. This forum is almost as good as watching the race. More clickbait, please, James!

  233. Greg says:

    He did the move deliberately no doubt and was pushing his luck, but lewis didn’t give up and neither did nico. Nico put his car there on purpose hoping to push lewis over and it didn’t work. yes it was nicos fault, but his intention was more a stamp of authority rather than I’m going to take you out. It was a bad call, it was a racing incident and we are just scrutinising nicos thoughts more than we would any other incident. I don’t think lewis’s wording of the meeting is in perspective of what happened. Yes he did put his car there on purpose, but not in a malice way. If he wanted to take him out he could of gone deeper and made sure of it.
    Anyway, Lewis doesn’t follow team orders so what should he expect, in nicos mind he trashed his last race even if you thought the team order was wrong, nico wasn’t racing lewis at that point and the team could of changed strategy if they was doing so , some say its karma? what goes around comes around and I say its was a mistake and time to move on.

  234. jpinx says:

    Following lots of other conversations with fellow-ex-racers — take a look at the replay from NR’s onboard cam — he gets his nose up beside LH, realises it’s not going to work and backs off, but look at his steering inputs. He has his steering wheel turned to the right during the first part and then turns it to the left as he backs off and they enter the left turn, but he deliberately gives it s tweak to the right well before his front wheel is clear of LH’s back wheel. “We” have decided that he’s trying to punt LH’s backend out and make him slide out of the turn – thereby giving himself a clear run again. Wheel-banging is a common enough tactic — but it goes badly wrong when the bang is on a wing endplate and not a wheel. We’ve all done this trick in closed bodywork car racing — let’s see if the professionals amongst the management at Mercedes will spot this….

  235. Mike B says:

    Just Drive the car Lewis , not the Media.

  236. Dawson18 says:

    One of your best pieces James. Well balanced and considered.

    I am not surprised that an incident occurred, but I am a bit underwhelmed, in that the incident was clumsy, at best, and not after a number of intense laps battling for position. I guess we are all a little disappointed that we missed out on what could have been a gripping battle at the best F1 track.

    Bring on Monza

  237. John Burlington says:

    I think this has been blown out of all proportion.

    Sometimes cars can touch quite hard and no damage is done, other times a light tap causes damage. The damage caused in a coming together is totally unpredictable.

    If they had touched without damage then we would all be saying how close the racing is and how good it is.

    If Rosberg had lost the end of his wing and no damage to Hamilton (which is probably the most common result in these circumstances) they we would have said Rosberg had pushed a little too hard/should have waited etc. – end of story.

    Because Hamilton suffered damage too we have the situation we have now.

    Seems very inconsistent to me. Surely the ‘crime’ is the intent or lack of judgement, the outcome doesn’t effect that? Rosberg would have been as equally guilty (or not) whether damage was sustained or not.

    I can understand where Rosberg is coming from with the ‘prove a point’. Mercedes policy is clear, race but don’t collide. Up until now it’s been Rosberg who has been complying with that and avoiding contact not Hamilton.

    Whilst you can say Hamilton had every right to stick to the racing line, and under normal circumstances that is true, that does nothing towards Mercedes orders not to collide. Although he may not have know exactly where Rosberg was, he knew he was close by so could/should have given his team mate more room in compliance with Mercedes team orders.

    I don’t blame either of them for this. Mercedes should have been more positive and explicit in their defining what is or isn’t expected or acceptable. Did they really expect two drivers fighting for the championship not to take advantage of any little thing they could.

    The rest of the world could see this coming at some stage of the season, why couldn’t Lauda or Wolfe?

  238. Bruno says:

    Monaco was intentional. Belgium was accidental. But indeed, Monaco was intentional. Next race, now

  239. Rob says:

    This just goes to prove that Mercedes are missing 1 vital component , they do not need , Wolf, Lauda and Lowe having to check the script every time something like this happens , what they need is Ross Brawn in charge one person to call the shots and one person to kick the drivers arses when they mess up.

  240. kn says:

    So Hamilton didn’t know Rosberg had come up right next to him on the outside? He didn’t think at that point I’m going to chop across and keep my race line no matter what? Send a message to Nico? He’s done this all season. He just thought Rosberg would be intimidated into backing off. How many times have we seen this type of move, end in an incident? Either Hamilton could have given Rosberg a little room (he knew he was there) or Rosberg could have driven off the track. Both choose not to back off or give room. Boohooo. Hamilton seems to have gotten the wrong message from this. The message was, if you want to drive like you are the only one on the track others will do the same. Wahhhhhhh, he said he did it!! Wahhhhhhhhh!!!! Stop being such a petulant child, Hamilton and move on!! (If I was Toto, I would fire Hamilton and hire Riccardo.) How about we ask Massa about Hamilton! haha https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8eYGbSALYY

  241. devilsadvocate says:

    This reminds me a lot of 2011 when Lewis went all bumper cars for a few races. More than once he pulled alongside another car and got his nose chopped off only to bemoan “he just turned in on me!!!!” Singapore 2011 vs webber is one, or Monaco 2011 vs Maldonado (the only crash in his career I would say isn’t his fault).

    Removing our predispositions from this it’s a racing incident, just like Lewis forcing Nico onto the grass last week. Going into the corner Nico was 1/2-3/4 of the way alongside. Hamilton chose to drive the racing line (completely within his right I will admit, he was leading) but nico chose to hold his line as well which while foolish was also within his right. I will not believe a single word saying Hamilton didn’t know he was there anymore than I will believe vettel in turkey 2010 didn’t know he was still overlapping webber. The result… A crash. Two people who had decided not togive each other a single inch went into the same corner at the same time and the result is what we see here. If Lewis had smashed nico’s wing and not gotten a puncture nico would be causing Lewis of the same thing. That life kids.

    1. devilsadvocate says:

      One thing to add… Anyone here trying to justify Lewis or Nico is wrong, this was clumsy racing all around.

      To see how it should have been done just look at Alonso vs Webber Spa 2012. Alonso could have done the same thing Hamilton did, and hoped webber would be the gentleman and back off but that would have potentially ruined his race, instead they both have each other millimeters to work with and as a result both finished the race. That’s how this should have been.

    2. TheGoat says:

      I don’t think it is that simple. In racing, the overtaker has the responsibility to do so safely and cleanly. You can’t just put your car alongside someone else’s and say its a 50-50 situation. The overtaker must have a strong case that he will be able to make the move stick regardless of whether or not his opponent gives him room. Otherwise you are using strong-arm tactics and assuming your opponent will blink first. Given Hamilton’s reputation and Championship situation, that would be a very foolish assumption from Rosberg. F1 has always had its share of reckless drivers, of which club Hamilton has at times been a member (following in the tyre tracks of his hero, the saintly Senna). Up until yesterday, I had not put Rosberg in that camp…but it seems pressure can do funny things to even the cleanest driver.

    3. Richard says:

      Your summation is incorrect as the racing line into the corner was Lewis’ by a country mile, and it was therefore incumbent on Nico to avoid contact. Lewis did nothing wrong at all! It is pure racing ettiquete which is well established that both drivers are well aware of, it’s just that Nico chose to ignore it, and is therefore at fault.

      1. Voodoopunk says:

        You’re at fault!

        Stop saying incumbent, once was enough.

  242. Dai Dactic says:

    Congrats to James and the team . . .
    You’re onto a winner here.
    This one’s going to run ‘till end-of-season.

    Your site is virtually troll-free as the genuine fans are far more ludicrously entertaining than any of the interlopers could hope to be.

  243. ivan says:

    Rosberg is certainly experienced enough to know how to judge the moment to put Hamilton out of contention without having a major effect on his potential for points. This was deliberate and unless FIA deal with it the whole of F1 will be called into question. The British public will turn off. Our family have made that decision. Until and unless FIA (and Mercedes management) make a significant statement they are contaminated with doubt. The question is – is the management of Mercedes from top down colluding to have a German 2014 F1 GP winner. I think the answer is before us – Rosberg carries on with the tacit blessing of the management who are carefully managing the face of it as if it was out of their control – I don’t think so. This indecent at Spa follows a list of peculiar and unexplained events this season.

  244. Stephen Taylor says:

    James do you think if Mercedes started using team orders they would only impose them after the final
    pit stops like Ferrari sometimes did when Kimi and Felipe were teammates or would they have to say whoever gets into the first corner first wins the race barring driver errors or mechanical failures? Your views James.