Car failure caused Massa’s second crash

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Ferrari confirm Felipe Massa’s second crash at Sainte Devote was, unlike the first one, caused by a car failure.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Pat Fry: “A race of containment” (Ferrari)

“Today’s accident looked very similar to what happened in the third free practice session, but in fact the two incidents are very different. Unlike yesterday, it seems that today’s incident can be attributed to a problem on the left front corner of the car.”

Punch Perez in the face – Raikkonen (BBC)

“Asked if the drivers would talk to Perez, Raikkonen said: ‘That won’t help. Maybe someone should punch him in the face.'”

Mercedes and Pirelli face F1 penalties for unauthorised tyre testing (The Guardian)

Helmut Marko: “We are very unhappy. When we test for three days, we go a second faster – that’s what Adrian Newey says. It definitely helped them – you can see that they had no tyre problems today. That’s no accident.”

Ferrari wants test ban clarification (Autoport)

Stefano Domenicali: “When there is something in the sporting regulations, you expect a penalty. It is not really obvious what would be the effect on the race weekend, it is bigger than that. I do not know what the solution is because there is no precedent.”

Mackenzie: We are not the bad guys (Sporting Life)

Force India deputy team principal Bob Fenley: “I apologise for being a bit hard on [CVC]. But the sentiment, the problems we have are still in position and that we need to address.”

Lotus F1’s 56m loss is motorsport’s biggest (The Telegraph)

“In the year ending December 31 2012, the Oxfordshire-based team made a 56.8m after-tax loss due to reversing sponsorship revenues. Its net loss widened by 35.9m as revenue fell 19.8pc to 92.7m.”

2013 Monaco Grand Prix – Post Race Press Conference (FIA)

Sebastian Vettel: “I was a bit surprised by the slow pace in the opening laps. Usually you expect two Silver Arrows in front of you and there were two buses today going for a cruise – at least in the first couple of laps.”

Tight turnaround – Monaco heroics from the Lotus F1 Team crew (Lotus)

“The power steering rack for example requires the pedals to be removed for it to be worked on, so when Romain was first sat in the car ready to go out he didn’t have a throttle pedal as the crew were still working on it; that’s how tight the timescale was.”


Comment of the day

It could have been worse for Romain Grosjean, says @Maimai:

Fortunately Ricciardo isn’t a championship contender, otherwise it would’ve been a one race ban for Grosjean.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Graigchq!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Pierre-Henri Raphanel, who turns 52 today, entered 17 races but only started one of them. That was in a Coloni at Monaco in 1989. He failed to make it through pre-qualifying on his nine other appearances for the team that year. He then switched to Rial where he at least made it as far as qualifying but no further.

After racing sports cars and touring cars Raphanel he went to work for Bugatti as a test driver. Raphanel set the record for the fastest speed achieved in a production car, the 1,200bhp Bugatti Veyron Super Sport, hitting 415kph (257.87 mph), though the record was later annulled on a technicality.

Image © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

141 comments on “Car failure caused Massa’s second crash”

  1. That was a bit of deja vu. I feel relaxed it’s not same driving error again though.

    1. Well. This is the guy who produces the exact same suspension failure twice in a weekend (in India); who produces the exact same tyre delaminations because of debris twice in a weekend (in Bahraing); and now produces the exact same crash twice in a weekend.

      It’s hard to believe alll this has nothing to do with his driving technique, some problem with his approach, an error stubbornly committed again and again. Ferrari truly does stand by Massa.

      1. on this occasion i didnt see him skimming the barrier every corner so dont really fully get your point.

        Good observation but i dont think he was at fault.

        But yes india was silly.

  2. Nice spin from Marko. It’s a shame he contradicts everything that we have seen this year. Mercedes were strong in Monaco because the circuit did not have any long, sweeping corners to put strain on the tyres – and they’ve been quick in sectors just like it (the final sector in Barcelona springs to mind) all season.

    1. Yeah really? A full second? When with stable regulations all the cars are coming to the end of their development curves?

    2. Doesn’t change the fact that RB and Ferrari and all other teams are in the right to be upset. Merc are essentially 3 GPs ahead of them in the development race.

      1. Are they? As far as we know, merc gained no data from the test as it was supposed to be run by Pirelli. What matters is whether that’s true or not

      2. surely you have proof of this brny666

    3. It sure is a nice spin on things, but Horner is talking complete nonsense when he mentions

      “We have presented why we feel that testing in Barcelona in the current car with the current tyres is in breach of the regulations. It is now with the stewards, so we will have to see what the outcome is. I will expect it will be referred to the world motor sport council. The regulations are black and white.
      “I can understand why Pirelli would want to test and why the FIA might want that but there is a process which has not been followed. It was not in order for a team to conduct tyre testing in a current car, with current drivers on a current circuit with tyres that are going to be used at the next grand prix.”

      because they were clearly not testing this years soft and supersofts but probably the tyre Pirelli had wanted to bring to Canada this year (but the teams have so far not agreed to use it, maybe now its more clear why not) and development tyres for next year.

      1. I still find it intriguing why Mercedes did not tell Pirelli to invite everybody else. Being an invite, some would deny at their own cost but being excluded from moment one, sounds unfair. Pirelli is to blame but silver stars should not accept those terms, they exposed themselves because they were greedy.

        1. why would Mercedes do that when Pirelli was doing the organising @jcost?

          As for why Pirelli wanted to do the test in “secret” and talk it out later, have a look at this interesting piece on the backgrounds by James Allen, I quote:

          The transparency issue was answered by Pirelli. They say that in the current climate, if they openly discussed such a test beforehand it would be engulfed in politics and discussion and would never take place. So they preferred, along with the FIA and willing teams, to do the test to get the data they need and then do the talking afterwards.

      2. @bascb – I think a big part of Red Bull’s protestations is the way they have been the one to make an issue of the tyres all season. They’ve been the ones raising the objections in spite of their race wins, so on a certain level, they probably see the issue as being their baby. With that in mind, they’re probably feeling a little upset that Pirelli decided to approach Mercedes instead of them. You can understand Pirelli’s logic, since Mercedes have had the most pronounced tyre issues of the season, but Red Bull are no doubt jilted that they weren’t asked first.

        1. jimscreechy (@)
          28th May 2013, 14:39

          I think this is a very good point.

    4. If im not mistaken, talking about tyres and ‘irrelevent data’, Christrain Horner said something in the Monaco pre-race press conference that ‘when Lotus wernt competitive teams were happy for them to do the testing, now that they are compeititve, probably not so happy that they’re doing the testing’……..

      Why should that be the case if they are using an old car? is it because they know they can glean useful data from the testing still? If that is the case, why isnt there uproar about Ferrari testing in Bahrain with an old car, then turn up at the next race in Spain to dominate?

    5. @prisoner-monkeys

      Love that avatar. I’m really waiting for that album ! getting it on first day !

    6. jimscreechy (@)
      28th May 2013, 14:45

      There are seasoned, high-level politicians in awe of Marko’s abiliy to put spin on issues.

  3. How much of the Lotus after-tax loss can be accounted to Grosjean’s 2012 repair bill?

    1. +1

      Let’s play a guessing game. What was Grosjeans damage bill for the weekend??

      1. I would say £1.5m per crash since they all damaged a fair bit of custom carbon fibre and must have caused some internal damage. Given that the to cars cost upwards of £10m each I think that’s a fair guess. I believe there were four crashes so £6m?

        That’s probably more than his annual salary. It will be interesting to see if he’s in Canada since his contract is updated on a three race basis and that was race 6. Probably explains why he was pushing so hard but definitely not the race to cause that much damage unless you’re able to bring out a convenient safety car for your team mate ;)

  4. Of course Marko is not happy, it’s not 2011.
    1 second in three days, sure…

    1. Maybe he meant 1 second a lap after a 10 lap stint…………..

    2. I fear he will regret when he sees Nico and Lewis tumbling from locked front row to obscurity in two weeks time :)

      *I hope I’m proved wrong* because I’m rooting to see Merc boys frighting for wins.

  5. “When there is something in the sporting regulations, you expect a penalty. It is not really obvious what would be the effect on the race weekend, it is bigger than that. I do not know what the solution is because there is no precedent.”

    It seem like Domenicali is talking maybe about a bigger punishement than a race ban.

    I don´t remember correctly but wasn´t Mclaren exclude from WCC after spygate? Maybe that´s what he is asking for…

    1. I read his comments as more of a plea for cooler heads to prevail. On the one hand, you’ve got the likes of Marko making ludicrous claims about the advantage they would get, but here Domenicalli seems to be asking for more information on what happened before he passes judgement.

    2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      27th May 2013, 5:16

      @celeste an exclusion from the championship would end up in a storm FIA is not ready to handle. What is different from the spygate is that, while in that ocasion there was full blame on the spies and the stolen information, this time FIA gave some sort of “misunderstood permission” to act this way to Pirelli and Mercedes. A championship ban could make a real debacle for F1, at least for this year and next. Imagine they decide to leave F1 and not to bring engines (childish reaction? signed contracts? I know contracts have been broken before in business in general). That could cause some teams to look for engines desperately and at the eleventh hour. Or less “tragic” but possible, could end up with Jean Todt or whoever gave this permission on a trial.

      1. Mercedes were told they could use their current car as long as it was “run” by Pirelli. By the sounds of it as long as they didn’t gain any data then it’s legitimate (they could even use their own drivers, which would minimise risk to the cars with them being used to the cars). Even if Mercedes didn’t directly receive data from the test, there’s a potential advantage to mercedes in the long run (assuming that Pirelli do have their contract renewed beyond this season) in that with it being the first time they’ve been able to test with a current car, Pirelli are likely to value the data from this test more than that of others they’ve had recently. As a result, any changes/improvements they make to the tyres would be directly be suited to Mercedes’ current car (and that may apply to next year as well as this).

        With previous speculation that lotus have benefitted due to Pirelli using a 2 year old version of their car with which to test, it certainly seems worth the risk of the car being run. If indeed this test turns out to all be legal then surely this is a master stroke by Mercedes, and any other teams that were offered this test and declined (regardless of whether this year or last winter, and even regardless of current car or 2 year old) must be kicking themselves right now.

    3. @celeste Yes they were excluded from the 2007 season.

      You are asking the wrong question though, what would the punishment be for Pirelli if they’re deemed responsible??

      1. @mantresx @omarr-pepper I don´t think Pirelli will be punished, maybe it will ruin the chances of them to renew contract, and maybe economical punishement?

        Don´t know what can they do with Mercedes… banned for races?, discount of points? I really have no idea…

        1. Would be interesting, banning the current sole tyre supplier from taking part in the season. Not sure what tyres they would then be using though :-o

          1. The ban is for Mercedes. Pirelli will get a fine and order to cost a test for all the other teams with marked tires…probably… I think

      2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        27th May 2013, 5:30

        @mantresx a “punishment” could be to organize a test for all the other teams, covering not 1, but 2 thousand km, and of course, not letting Mercedes participate. All the costs this “megatest” generates covered by Pirelli. It would be fair and would shut up Ferrari and Red Bull. And of course, it would bring Pirelli enough data to make really good tyres.

        1. That’s not even a little bit fair.

    4. Well if the penalty is light, then every team is just going to go and test when ever they like.

  6. Fernleys comments are the first time I’ve seen a team rep of any kind having a go at CVC, very interesting.

    There was news on twitter that most of F1s TV contracts are up for renewal in the next 2 years and that streaming provided directly by FOM is on the way.

  7. Traverse (@)
    27th May 2013, 1:17

    Someone should punch Kimi in the face, maybe then he’d actually have a reason to walk around with a morose look on his face.

    1. All the ice cream would pour out his nose.

    2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      27th May 2013, 5:24

      Even as a Kimi fan, this time I agree with you , because as a sportsman, he should know being a brat is not “cool” all the time. I’ve read many comments pulverizing Perez, but I think that the blame should, at least, be shared by both of them.

      1. Liam McShane (@)
        27th May 2013, 9:54

        I thought it was funny.

        1. Dolph Lundgrenade
          27th May 2013, 14:35

          I thought it was funny too.

          Perez was out of his element like Steve Busciemi in The Big Lebowski. He had no business trying to make that pass from that far back. Button was pretty unhappy about the move on him and it was much more reasonable. Perez should apologize and punch himself in the face as a sign of humility and the recognition of his own hubris.

      2. I never comment on these but had to jump in. Does everyone realize how far back Perez was? They were not, you know, nearly even as they approached the apex. Perez’s front wing was alongside Raikkonen’s rear wheel. Why would the leading car have any obligation to yield to someone who so clearly is not even close to ‘having’ the corner? I don’t think Raikkonen moved, he stayed on the racing line (at Monaco, the fastest line is means moving across track and getting as close to the barrier as possible at the apex). Kimi was driving the line, and a car that was behind him saw a rapidly-shrinking opening. I’m not insisting there should be a penalty but both drivers weren’t at fault. No leading driver should have to move over to a driver behind him. If Perez had made a stronger run on the straight and gotten alongside Raikkonen, things would be entirely different.

    3. They share the blame on this one: maybe Perez was abmitious, but Räikkönen turned in on him, not Perez ramming the back of Räikkönen! As I’ve said before, he should’ve just ran wide at the chicane.

  8. Love the Kimi quote. Perez cost him a lot of points today. That kid belongs back in GP2 if he thinks his driving today was acceptable.

    1. @n0b0dy100
      Agreed, I cant understand why he has so many supporters. He’s been doing these same moves every so often since he joined F1. I find his whining annoying as anyone, but Button is actually right on this point, he needs to calm down.

    2. @n0b0dy100 I think Perez is getting a hard time from Raikkonen and some of the other drivers because he’s the new kid at a top team.

      In Monaco as in China Perez did nothing wrong, the stewards didn’t punish him, yet we get this rather shrill complaining from Raikkonen. And now this comment about hitting Perez, which is just infantile.

      1. Some cracking overtakes takes from Perez this weekend, just risked one too many in the end. He can’t have said that being serious though? Tone of voice and/or sarcasm doesn’t always translate to written word very well.

        I like Perez at Mclaren, I was dubious after the first two races, but he’s has been aggressive and got the big guns rattled with his maneuvers, but they haven’t yet been punishable so it’s all good! Just a shame his car is 5th fastest at best.

      2. @keithcollantine actually Alonso also complained about Perez to spanish media.

        The article said that Alonso wasn´t happy with Perez drive, and that Perez should learn that nothing will come from an agressive drive like that. Alonso said that when he was in a slow car he din´t care about fighting because he didn´t have nothing to lose.

        He said that after Perez broke Kimi´s frong wing the part from Kimi´s car got under his car and slowed the Ferrari.

        1. @celeste, didn’t Alonso also say though that Perez reminded him of how he raced in 2008,2009, when he wasn’t in the WDC fight at all, so he could take risks that would be unthinkable now?

          1. @bosyber Yes I paraphrase it here :

            Alonso said that when he was in a slow car he din´t care about fighting because he didn´t have nothing to lose.

            Speaking off, while the media is defending Alonso allowing drivers (Sutil, Perez) to pass, bloggers are mad saying that Vettel and Hamilton would have fight to hold position

      3. Aditya (@adityafakhri)
        27th May 2013, 2:41

        I think it’s more unhappiness expression that somebody rammed him rather than just giving him a hard time.

      4. @keithcollantine

        Totally agree. Kimi as become to F1 what boy bands are to their fans, what they say, they’re praised.

        I remember a time when a certain young Kimi was an issue to a certain Montoya in a Williams. But that’s okay for Kimi. ;)

      5. Can hardly notice he is up there though. Points nor his drive.

        And since when, while trying to overtake driving off the track and forcing other cars to do the same is not wrong? Mind you when he did that he was actually with in the distance of making the move stick as to the collision move when he was totally out of reach.

        I understand you trying to play devil advocate here, but as many mentioned, you would not expect a GP2 driver spearheading through top ranks, hence the lack of overtaking because people actually know when to take the opportunity instead of rolling dice.

        Perez’s driving reminded me of his Suzuka performance last year, where he went full banzai through out his race and ending up in a gravel, luckily not collecting Hamilton with him.

        1. I understand you trying to play devil advocate here

          I’m not. Just because Raikkonen’s got the hump doesn’t mean Perez did something wrong.

          1. the first one on kimi where they both went off was clearly and 100% Perez fault. Had kimi not taken avoiding action he would of been out on the spot.

            The second kimi shut the door and result was obvious. It was too Perez had no where to go as he was already committed and pretty much out of control. The second one was 50/50

          2. For the discussion sake I hoped that would be the case, but as per “hump” argument presented by you, I see it’s the mater of taste. Case is closed.

          3. Just because kimi giving perez a hard time, doesnt mean kimi was to blame either @keith.

            Your reasoning is rubbish

          4. I never said the incident was Raikkonen’s fault.

      6. Traverse (@)
        27th May 2013, 3:21

        @keithcollantine +1
        I doubt Kimi would’ve had the balls to make such an immature statement had it been Ham, Vet or Web that had made contact with him.

        1. @hellotraverse That’s the whole point, Ham, Vet and Web wouldn’t have made such a reckless aggressive move which ruined both the drivers’ race. You don;t have to go too far, just take a look at Lewis’ move on Webber, perfectly within range, yet had the good sense to know when there was no way he could pull it off.

      7. And now@keithcollantine is back in militant anti-Kimi fans mode.

        1. They are bringing GP2 driving standards to F1. When Maldonado, Perez and Crasjean are the future of F1, I wont see Im watching F1 when current generation retires (Alonso, Kimi, Button). I want to see racing, not wrecking..

          Perez should have got drive through penalty long before he managed to hit Kimi. He cut chicane something like 50 times during the race and he forced others out of the track. Thats ridiculous… And then Alonso got penalty when Perez pushed him out.. Perez was going to cut chicane again when he hit to Kimi.. He had no way to stay on the track from his line.

        2. True-collantine doesn’t like Raikkonen or his fans and even so much as said so around three years ago regarding the usual hate comment re Raikkonen from prisoner monkeys.

          Alonso was right regarding Perez: he ended the race by not finishing. That helps no one and the championship suffers as well. Vettel has his rear gunner in the form of Perez as it were.

          1. Alonso’s race wasn’t hugely compromised by Perez though, and he was passed by Button and Sutil as well.

        3. @wsrgo Calling for a fellow competitor to be punched is immature and unprofessional – I don’t care who’s said it or who their fans are.

          1. Dolph Lundgrenade
            27th May 2013, 14:34

            He said “maybe” someone should. He did not directly say someone please go punch that train wreck. And, maybe they should.

      8. @keithcollantine

        Totally agree. These days Kimi is seen as a movie star or boy band, and whatever he says, his fans scream praise.

        1. Kimi doesn’t care who is new and who isn’t. Kimi isn’t exactly one who ever complains and he never really says anything about the other drivers.

          But in any case if you look at the video of the interview, then you will see that Kimi actually said it with a grin, so he wasn’t exactly being serious:

          So just because the FIA didn’t give Perez a penalty he was in the right? Because the FIA always such a beacon for righteous decisions. Last year they just let Grosjean keep on crashing until he made a big pile up, and they suddenly decided to ban him. I suspect it will be the same situation with Perez, they will let him keep on pushing drivers off the track until there is big accident.

          Perez has made some good moves and he must be under pressure to perform at Mclaren, but if you look back starting from last year’s Monaco GP, he has costed Kimi a few points in a few races already. He is not a rookie anymore, he was continuously diving into the chicane and expecting other driver to drive off the race track. If he only did it once then one could say it was a mistake but he did it time after time and it only got worse. If you expect the driver in front of you to go off the track to make an overtaking move, then there was never a move to begin with.

        2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
          27th May 2013, 5:34

          @ivano I’m his fan but today he just said nonsense.
          What is bad is that some people around here started pointing fingers at Perez and it has grown as a snowball.

          1. @omarr-pepper Did you say the same about DC after Melbourne ’08, Webber after Fuji ’07, or even Hamilton after Monaco ’11?

      9. In Monaco he did a lot wrong. After spearheading across various chicanes a few times, he should have got his act together. If either Alonso or Kimi tried to make the corner, which they were perfectly entitled to, he would have hit them. He forced both Kimi and himself across the chicane and should have been reprimanded for forcing a competitor off the road. I don’t say punishment, but reprimand, just to cool him down. But apparently stewards thought it’s perfectly fine to drive like an accident waiting to happen. And sure enough, it did.

        Both times Alonso and Kimi were forced over the chican, if either of them tried to make the corner, Perez would hit them and he would get the penalty, but Alonso’s and Kimi’s race would be ruined. So why wasn’t he reprimanded, in order to prevent the exact thing that happened in the end with Kimi?

      10. I think Perez is getting a hard time from Raikkonen and some of the other drivers because he’s the new kid at a top team

        @keithcollantine It’s hard to imagine any of Alonso, Vettel, Raikkonen, Webber, Rosberg, Hamilton or Button banging wheels so consistently with so many other drivers in one race. And if they did, they would rightly be criticised for it, not because of their seniority but because objectively viewed driving like that is simply too aggressive.

        Perez did nothing wrong, the stewards didn’t punish him

        The stewards accepted his contact with Raikkonen as a racing incident, and even though I had a different view, normally I’d just say move on. However, his coming together with Kimi wasn’t an isolated incident. Stewards should view each attempted pass on its own merits, but that doesn’t mean we have to ignore the totality of Sergio’s driving at Monaco and in particular the repeated incidents at Nouvelle Chicane.

        He straightlined the chicane to avoid losing out to Button, a place he had to hand back. That was folowed by an aggressive but fair overtake on Alonso. However, he then tried the move again on Kimi and failed to make the corner, which would have caused an avoidable collision except that Raikkonen went straight on.

        The next attempted move, which ultimately resulted in the contact which punctured Kimi’s tyre, saw Kimi take the racing line and Perez’s front wing hit Kimi’s rear tyre. Ok, the stewards said no penalty but in light of his earlier near misses a sensible driver would have been much more circumspect at that point.

        Sergio’s incidents at Nouvelle Chicane reminded me a bit of his off at Suzuka when he twice tried to pass Hamilton at the hairpin, once successfully and once not. He pulls off the miracle move the first time, but rinses and repeats until the inevitable contact or off.

        One of the things that really stood out for me last year was how frequently the truly elite drivers could fight hard but fairly, knowing how to drive aggressively to a point, but without making contact. Sergio is, at the moment, on the wrong side of the line.

        Perez is a very talented driver and I’m not trying to beat up on him. He’s still got a lot to learn, and while Kimi’s (figurative) language about a punch on the nose was a bit silly, it doesn’t alter the fact that Perez has to alter his driving style if he wants to join the top echelon of drivers.

        1. Agreed. By the time Perez and Kimi made contact, Perez already demonstrated a clear pattern of hit-or-miss overtaking attempts.

          Previous attempts were either successful or lucky escapes, which possibly created the impression in his mind that the other guy will ultimately move out of the way if the kamikaze lunge doesn’t work out, so no reason for him to be more careful.

        2. Yes. And Kimi was fully ahead of Perez (Perez’s front wing aligned with Kimi’s rear tire) when Kimi “shut the door” (AKA took the proper racing line) — I’m not understanding why people expect Raikkonen to leave an opening for a car that is behind him.

        3. I disagree about the raikonen incident. Raikonen clearly moved over far too aggressively. Perez clearly was a little over ambitious but kimi was never going to make the corner even if they had not collided. He was going too quick and too shallow into the corner. I think it was correctly regarded as a racing incident. I do however think perez needs to calm down a bit but then again I love to see overtaking so it is nice to see someone that wants to give it a go.

      11. I think Alonso recognized it for what it was, and found time to also compliment Perez when he mentioned it reminds him of himself in 2008-2009 racing in a car that was not quite there, not being able to go for the championship and pushing a lot because he knew others had more to lose @keithcollantine

    3. Agreed, that’s why I like Kimi, no BS, speaks out without fear when something needs saying. As for Perez, like Grosjean he has to find a style that’s faster than a midfield cruise but without the Kamikaze moves.

      1. Traverse (@)
        27th May 2013, 3:05

        Funny how everyone loves Kimi for speaking his mind, yet deride Vettel, Hamilton and even Di Resta for doing the same thing.

        1. Actually there is a different in speaking you mind and putting your foot in your mouth…

          1. Traverse (@)
            27th May 2013, 3:12

            What about threatening another driver with violence? Is that ok?

          2. Threatening: “Next time I see CHECO I´m gonna punching him in the face”

            What Kimi said: Maybe someone should punch him in the face…

            So technically not a threat… Kimi is in the line between right and wrong ;) … however something like this would have being entertaining to watch

          3. So you complain because you feel people are being critical when drivers like Vettel, Hamilton and Di Resta speak their mind? Yet right now you are doing exactly the same thing with Kimi, that is a bit ironic.

            But atleast your own example should show you that there is always people who complain when a driver says something.

          4. Traverse (@)
            27th May 2013, 4:26

            I’m not complaining about people being critical of Vet, Ham and di Resta, I’m simply pointing out that to some people Kimi can seemingly do no wrong.
            He’s made a statement calling for another driver to be punched and yet a great many people seem to be perfectly content with his conduct. Had Vettel/Hamilton made a similar statement there would be calls for them to receive life bans and castrations…under local anaesthetic…whilst being forced to watch it happen through a magnifying glass…with Joe Rogan doing the commentary!

          5. @hellotraverse Oh, stop overexaggerating already. “..I’m simply pointing out that to some people Kimi can seemingly do no wrong.” This line could be said about anyone else out there. There’s always *some* people thinking like that. Also the comment Kimi made about punching isn’t good ofc and could be left out but I guess he was still wound up about the situation and press were there to hunt some juicy comments from him. He is just uncapable os saying anything else but what he thinks, without filteration. That’s him and I understand you don’t like Kimi at all as Hamilton fan.

        2. Couldn’t have put it better myself, except for the di Resta bit (can’t stand him). @Lari Kimi’s comment isn’t good, full stop. There are no excuses for that. Can you imagine Hamilton calling for someone to be punched? You can be both honest and professional.

          1. @deej92 I can imagine Senna saying that if he was in the shoes of Raikkonen and asked right after he got into the pit area. Sportsmen are different, some cool down faster and some slower. It’s not an uncommon to get a “blooper” like that from the field of soccer, ice hockey, basketball, etc etc. I could imagine any driver saying that if the microphone was at the right place at the right time :)

          2. @Lari Senna may well have said it but it’s still wrong. Raikkonen is usually one of the more cooler and calmer drivers so his reaction was a bit surprising. Drivers who have been taken out or had their race disrupted get interviewed during or after the race regularly and I haven’t heard anything like what he said, to my knowledge anyway, but as you say I bet they say all sorts to their teams!

    4. This time I would give the blame to Kimi. He didn’t leave enough space and moved under braking. Perez was probably a bit too optimistic so it’s a 50/50 at the most.

      1. @tmf42

        They are allowed to block though. Kimi had done similar kind of move to the left every single lap showing Perez that his not going to be given any room there but still for some reason the guy decided to go for a gap that didn’t exist.

        Kimi has his line and is turning into the corner and there’s really nothing he could do other than take chicane straight. That’s exactly like something you’d see in an online F1 game, people braking from two car-lenghts away and ramming you off in the corner. Now, in the real F1 as well it seems.

        1. *showing Perez that he’s

        2. @tmekt all true but both were off the racing line and Kimi moved under braking taking the chicane with an earlier appex than necessary, which was the whole reason they crashed. Guessing the speed and possible lines Kimi could have taken I would still rate this a racing incident with 50/50 – however I’m with you that it was a stupid move from Perez in hindsight but he pulled it off twice before so I understand why he went for it.

          1. @tmf42

            Yeah the only line he could’ve taken to avoid Perez would’ve been to drive through the chicane.

            I have no idea what Perez was thinking there. Kimi was being perfectly clear with his line that there’s no way anyone would fit through there and he did this same thing for all the times he and Perez entered the chicane. The move always requires cooperation from the other driver (unless he’s caught off gouard) and that didn’t exist this time because Kimi chose not to let him through.

            Perez just got overly excited after the other more or less succesful attempts in the same chicane.

    5. I think there was room to exploit, Kimi paid the price because he overreacted, he could survive Perez attack without shuting the door so agressively.

    6. All I can say is that had it been Webber that was turned in on and not Perez, Kimi would not be saying that. I reckon AussieGrit’s got a better punch than Räikkönen!


      Yeah the only line he could’ve taken to avoid Perez would’ve been to drive through the chicane.

      That’s exactly what he should’ve done, not crashed into him! There was a gap that existed and he took it, Kimi then shut the door on him when he was already full committed in the braking zone. Whether Perez was ambitious on the brakes or not is another discussion entirely, but as it were Kimi undeniably moved across the front of Perez and so took off his front wing. That was a stupid move.

      If he’d ran wide and Perez hadn’t made the chicane, then no harm done – he’d have to give the place back anyway. So really it’s almost entirely Räikkönen’s fault he gave himself a puncture, so if anything it’s him that needs punched in the face for his comments!

      1. @vettel1

        It would’ve gone just like with Alonso. Perez would’ve just made the corner and Kimi having to move over and cut the chicane and then, like Alonso, he would have been made to give the place to Perez. Perez would’ve gotten the place by bumping into him and forcing him wide, not exactly the way it’s supposed to go, is it?

        1. @tmekt then I don’t see what your problem is. It then would’ve been a perfectly legitimate overtake if Perez made the corner – you are actually allowed to force drivers to back out!

          Essentially then, you support someone crashing over a perfectly legal overtake? Please, enlighten me.

          1. @vettel1

            You aren’t allowed to BUMP into other cars and crash them out of the track which is was what happened here.

            Perez had to know that there wouldn’t be any room there as Kimi had been using the same line to block the attempts consistently throughout the time Perez was behind him. And you ARE allowed to block and and turn into corners regardless of what the guy behind wants you to do. In that corner you need cooperation from the other driver when overtaking and it was clear all the time that Kimi wasn’t gonna move over from the diving nutcase, rightfully so.

          2. @tmekt he wouldn’t have made contact had Kimi not turned in on him, so that’s a bit of a non-argument.

            Despite that, you are actually allowed to tap wheels with someone provided you don’t damage the car and they meet face-to-face.

            You aren’t allowed to turn in on someone when they have part of the car alongside yours, that is a clearly defined rule. Kimi broke that one. Also, you can’t turn in on a driver under braking anyway as the driver then can’t back out of it – you’ve caused an unavoidable collision.

          3. @vettel1

            Kimi turned into the corner not in on Perez and was committed into the line way before Perez was anywhere near him.

            You’re probably mixing this up with the rule clarification from last year which was about forcing drivers off the track on straights. It only applies to straights and not corners of which braking areas are parts of. You’re allowed to change the line once to block as Kimi did before Perez was alongside him (you can clearly see it right after they exit the tunnel), the same move he had done with Perez on all the laps before the incident.

          4. @tmekt nope, you aren’t allowed to turn in on someone when they have nowhere to go – I’ll have a look through the 2013 sporting regulations on that one!

            If you re-watch the video footage though, you can clearly see Räikkönen changes his line hence closing the gap that previously existed past “the point of no return”: Perez couldn’t back out of it, so it was a silly error by Räikkönen. A racing incident but one which was easily avoidable had he not turned in when he did!

          5. @vettel1

            nope, you aren’t allowed to turn in on someone when they have nowhere to go

            Räikkönen was blocking the overtaking attempt and he did NOT turn in on Perez. If you go for the inside line with too much speed, locking your brakes, and there’s someone turning into the corner, it’s kind of clear what happens next. Perez might’ve been able to still make the corner IF there hadn’t been any other cars but as it is with F1 race, there are 20 of them racing, and you have to take that into account when diving into non-existent gaps with both front wheels locking.

            I have rewatched the whole situation (and not only the last half-a-second) on every possible angle and to me it’s pretty clear who was to blame. I’ve covered this on my previous comments. If you still don’t understand what I’m talking about then there’s really nothing I can do to change that.

          6. I couldn’t fine much else on the FIA websites beside the big standard…

            Chapter IV of Appendix L to the international sporting code, Article 2.b): manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited.

            Räikkönen crowded Perez into the barrier and he couldn’t back out of it. That differs from Perez’s technique though because Räikkönen could just brake more and concede the position, or chose to cut the corner like Alonso did and have to give up the place later.

            It was a racing incident; both were equally at fault.

      2. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        27th May 2013, 14:06

        +1… Rosberg DOTW and 2nd Perez… with crash included

  9. So two identical accidents, in exactly the same place, with the same car and driver, were caused by different things? The first one always looked fishy to me, maybe Ferrari were trying to cover up a weak component and hope it didn’t happen in the race?

    1. Maybe. The left front corner of the Ferrari failed during testing at Barcelona if I remember correctly. While Massa was driving.

    2. @george I got the same feeling. His story of the bump never got backed up by any other driver who hit the same bump and you can’t tell me that in all the years that drivers have raced at Monaco, that there is a bump no one else has ever hit with the same consequences…

      Funny how the Marrussia (I think it was) had a similar accident in Turn 1 and it looked like a brake failure, or some kind of component failure.

      1. Yep, i said on this website yesterday i was amazed no one suggested ferrari should of one pulled alonso out as it was clearly a car failure (and likely the to be 2nd of the weekend).

        Perhaps its no surprise Alonso from then on seemed super careful under breaking for the rest of the race.

  10. dragon_271212
    27th May 2013, 1:47

    Only the big fans on Sergio would disagree with the other drivers’ views. He drove a race akin to bumper cars, and heavy contact with someone was inevitable. Not sure what Brundle was on about regarding space, he put his car in no man’s land at the chicane; Kimi had to turn in to make the corner…

    1. @dragon_271212 I think you missed Martin Brundle’s point, it wasn’t a matter of leaving enough room out of curteousy, but in Monaco, if a driver commits to an overtake out of the tunnel, he already is committed to that move before the tunnel. That is, he’s coming and theres no stopping it. If it was any other track, this would be frowned upon, but its the only way to pass anyone at Monaco. This time however, Kimi did everything right, got the traction, but never thought that Perez had the gumption to try the manouvre.

      1. and as such, Kimi protected his line as normal, and thus squeezing Perez into a gap that disappeared.

        As I said, if it was any other track this would be frowned upon, but I think drivers have to be level headed with these sort of moves, Kimi had the opportunity to leave a cars width and if he couldn’t turn in, had the option of going straight on at the chicane and hold his position, nothing more would have come from it.

        1. “Kimi had the opportunity to leave a cars width and if he couldn’t turn in, had the option of going straight on at the chicane and hold his position, nothing more would have come from it.”

          Except that we saw that same situation with Alonso cutting the chicane to avoid contact, and the Ferrari driver had to concede the place. Harsh punishment for avoiding a collision.

  11. I like Perez, he has balls, and he’s keeping motorsport to what’s it about. Dangerous risks. From guys like him came out Senna, Lewis, Schumacher, Gilles, Alesi, Vettel. These are drivers. The rest, the safety whiners, go back to GP2. :) You too, Kimi, once you were a risk taker yourself, now you’re a Jensen copy… Yawn…

    1. Traverse (@)
      27th May 2013, 3:08


    2. Kimi had some of the best overtaking moves last season, and some of the ballsiest, and managed it without taking others out.

    3. @ivano That’s about the silliest thing I’ve heard all weekend. I understand you need to take risks. But Perez took one risk too many.
      And Kimi a Jenson copy? Raikkonen is faster than Button ever will be, and also a braver overtaker. You probably didn’t see all of last season, Kimi made the best non-DRS passes all season. And his pass on Hamilton at Barcelona was a risk. If he was a Jenson copy, he wouldn’t have been able to pass 6 cars in 5 laps here in Monaco too.

    4. I agree, I admit that Perez pushed his luck a bit too far with the Raikkonen attempt but for me he lightened up what was becoming an increasingly boring race.

  12. stup1d kimi, if you saw the line kimi taking, he’s not in a regular line, he’s trying to close the door but too late. i dont like perez, but kimi’s comment is stup1d, he lied to us….

    1. Kimi took a defensive line, as he had done for many laps before, since Perez had already tried his little trick a few times before. As the driver in front you are allowed to use a defensive line. There was never a gap there to begin with Perez knew Kimi was always about to turn left to make the chicane. He wasn’t even next to Kimi.

      But from his own words he was expecting Kimi to skip the chicane, why do launch yourself into a gap, and then expect the driver in front to drive off the race track? Surely that cant be right.
      He would never have been to able to make the chicane, even if Kimi wasn’t there.

      1. Correct. Raikkonen started to move over before Perez was alongside him = not raikkonen’s fault.

        You don’t have to commit from the start of the tunnel like some have said but the braking zone is long so you do have to commit early. Perez thought he had chance to get alongside before Raikkonen could defend, and misjudged it. Small margins, difficult to judge = racing incident (don’t want to discourage the other moves, his move on button was class)

  13. Perez taking Raikkonnen too much for granted.

  14. They reveal that in the year ending December 31 2012, the Oxfordshire-based team made a £56.8m after-tax loss due to reversing sponsorship revenues. Its net loss widened by £35.9m as revenue fell 19.8pc to £92.7m.

    The Lotus accounts state that the drop in income was “mainly due to lower sponsorship revenues”.

    Between Mercedes-Pirelli and Kimi- Peres I totally miss this one… that´s lots of money. I will guess that with Kimi on Lotus sposorship money will flow.

    Well I guess now that they have pick up some new sposor everything will be ok

  15. Race ban for Chilton?

    1. Why? It’s the first accident he has caused, it seemed like a genuine mistake – he simply misjudged the closing speeds – and the only reason why the race was red-flagged was because of the narrow circuit.

      Some people are far too quick to suggest race bans as punishment for first-time offences.

  16. Perhaps the FIA should fine itself for a change, or give its president a one-race ban for mismanaging the siutation.

  17. Throughout the season we see drivers running others off the track onto the runoff area and commentators saying, ‘yes ok but if they do that kind of stupid move in Monaco the other guy will end up in the barriers’. And yesterday we saw that; Perez and Maldonado both had lucky escapes, Maldonado in particular. Chilton’s lack of spacial awareness was worrying.

  18. *spatial (really need glasses)!

  19. Get well soon Murray!

  20. I’m a massive Kimi fan, always have been, but what he has said here is not how a world champion should act. I personally thought Kimi turned in on Perez, and though aggressive, Perez is just trying to show what he is capable of, and since Bahrain, it’s been impressive.

  21. @keithcollantine
    I have to disagree with you here. Yes, Kimi could have been more circumspect in hindsight, but this is just his emotion and depth of feeling regarding the incident coming through. Is that wrong? He had just finished a grueling 162 mile race, with 100% physical/mental concentration on every single corner. He had lost a decent 5th position for 10th due to what he rightly perceives as reckless driving from Perez. Is he expected to deliver Shakespearean prose about the incident when asked? Perez does deserve to be punched on the nose!

    Boxers regularly beat themselves up before the match; no one calls them “immature” and “unprofessional”, footballers spit, punch and assault themselves regularly. They are simply sent off and not derided as unprofessional. Rugby players, ice hockey players also assault themselves regularly; It is seen as part of the game.

    James Hunt assaulted a marshal at the Canadian GP 1977, Schumacher almost hit Coutharld at Spa 1998 and swore at him in full view of camera, Senna actually assaulted Irvine, and unleashed a so far unparalled tirade of swear words at Suzuka 1993 and Piquet Snr and Eliseo Salazer gave fans more than their money’s worth at Hockenheim 1998. And recently, Massa actually pushedHamilton during a television interview at Singapore 2011

    F1 drivers are human beings, not robots, and I think we sometimes expect too much of our sportsmen in general. We put them on pedestals and expect them to be infallible. Most humans being would be far more irate in Kimi’s shoes. Being an F1 driver does NOT make him less human than any of us. I think he behaved impeccably given how he was feeling at the time.

  22. According to Mika Salo’s race commentary, Mark Webber has made a similar remark to him about Vettel and their relationship, off the record obviously but still. Not even mentioning the drivers who have taken these kind of statements to the practical level and actually hit other drivers.

    I still think that a guy who really says what he thinks is a fresh exception among all the PR machines that they call drivers these days. …Obviously not trying to encourage violence though.

    1. Totally agree. How many people have at some point in their life, wanted to punch someone for something stupid they did? Saying so is neither immature or unprofessional – especially if you are in a high adrenaline sport and you are intervied directly after the incident.
      Incidentaly, Kimi did not even say he wanted to punch him, he said maybe “someone should punch him”. Nothing wrong with the statement at all IMO.
      Kimi speaks his mind, which is simply a breath of fresh air in this era of robotic, PR notebook controlled drivers.

  23. I’m not sure Raikkonen should be that aggrieved about the Perez incident – I think if anyone was to blame, it was Kimi for closing the door way too late.

    If you watch Perez’s onboard you can see the Mercedes ahead of Kimi taking the usual racing line – which is by staying to the far right of the track until the last minute and then turning in. Kimi moved to the far left in the braking zone – when he should’ve stayed to the right. If Kimi wanted to place his car there – he should’ve moved far earlier, not once Perez was alongside his rear wheels.

    1. absolutely BS.

      KImi had every right to defend as he was far ahead and commit to normal braking point while perez just dive in with 4 wheels locking.

      Perez has no right to ask for 1 car width there. And he would nvr make it into the corner with that dive.

  24. Ferrari has no right to complain about a team that goes directly against regulation.
    Regardless of the outcome, they clearly went against the rules when they told Massa to let Alonso through. And what happened then? the rules were bent and now team orders are legal. It does not matter if one agrees or not with team orders, at that time they were illegal.

    Now, to complain about Merc just looks pathetic. I think the others can say whatever they want, but not Ferrari.

    p.s. I do not agree in any way with the fact Mercedes was given 1000 kms of testing. But it just made me so angry to read Ferrari doesn’t like when someone breaches the rules.

  25. “When we test for three days, we go a second faster – that’s what Adrian Newey says”

    Haha! I love this guy!!

  26. Seeing how nervous Kimi is being so far this season, and remembering Lotus’ words about “now Kimi got everything he needed and nothing unwanted and he’s happy in the team”, I think they forgot to provide him with one little but significant thing – enough ice cream.

  27. Gotta admit, I don’t believe Ferrari. I think they’re either protecting Massa or the team.

Comments are closed.