Mercedes punishment “doesn’t fit the crime” – Horner

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Christian Horner, Red Bull, Shanghai, 2013In the round-up: Red Bull team principal Christian Horner says the FIA’s punishment for Mercedes is “inadequate”.


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

Horner unhappy at Mercedes sanction (Sporting Life)

“The most important thing is to achieve clarity from the FIA because they’ve deemed it illegal to test, but the sanction for doing that test doesn’t, in our opinion, fit the crime.”

Hamilton: Mercedes gains remarkable (Autosport)

“The car is great this year. The guys have done a remarkable job with what they have done here. To turn a car that was that bad, to now being a very competitive car, is just remarkable.”

Lewis Hamilton has all this talent but it’s been squandered and lost, says Damon Hill (The Evening Standard)

“I don?t want to say Lewis is naive but he has a lot to learn. He genuinely wants to pursue his career in his own way. But the sport that he?s in is a very Machiavellian place.”

Mansell defends Hamilton record (BBC)

“I won my world championship when I was 39, so because of the longevity of a race car driver, with all the safety they have, coupled with the commitment and the desire he has, Hamilton can win it again.”

Kimi Raikkonen on Red Bull radar while clouds gather over Mark Webber (The Guardian)

Christian Horner: “Kimi would have to be an option, if he were to be available. We’re in the fortunate position that there are an awful lot of people who would like to drive a Red Bull racing car.”

Team won’t block Di Resta move (Sky)

Deputy team principal Bob Fernley: “Paul is contracted to us anyway for next season, so the question is whether somebody else comes in, so it won’t be our decision.”

F1 to power ahead in 2014, says Whiting (FIA)

“Efficiency is the key thing. You won?t see cars run out of fuel ?ǣ there?s no limit to the amount of fuel a team can put in a car but there is a limit to how much they can use in a race. It is a significant change to the efficiency of the car.”

British Grand Prix Betting: Back a British winner this weekend (Unibet)

My British Grand Prix preview for Unibet.


Comment of the day

Are there too many articles and too much discussion about the shortage of women in Formula One?

I doubt very much [Claire Williams and Susie Wolff] are ringing up the press saying “please come and interview me about being a woman in F1”.

Whether you like it or not, there are so few women in F1 that they are role models and pathfinders, it wont change until there are so many women that it is the norm rather than the exception.

Of course you could always take the approach of not reading the article, after all you do have a choice.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Dan N, Gdog and Melody!

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

Happy 28th birthday to Nico Rosberg!

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty

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.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 87 comments on “Mercedes punishment “doesn’t fit the crime” – Horner”

    1. I actually agree with Horner and I understand he wants clarity but the phrase ‘flogging a dead horse’ comes to mind every time I hear him go on about the punishment.

      I think we all know nothings going to change in regards to Mercs punishment.

      1. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        27th June 2013, 1:00

        right…. it’s like the time Hamilton went past the safety car in Valencia and the penalty (drive through) didn’t make any real sense (for the circumstances of the race I mean) so when Alonso got furious about it, everybody knew nothing else was lft to do at that race, just to keep with your own work.

      2. Blame the journalists for asking the question then, not Horner for answering it. I’ve noticed this happens a lot – somebody is asked about topic X, answers the question, and get’s flamed by people for talking about topic X. Or would you prefer if everyone in F1 just said “No comment” all the time?

        1. Blame the journalists for asking the question.

          I think we see that quite often. Someone asks the question, a public figure answers and it becomes controversy, because he/she speaks his/her mind. But more often then not these are “heat of the moment” kind of situations. It’s not the case with Horner. He really is repeating the same thing over and over again.

          In this case Horner could say “I stated my opinion more than once and I think I was clear. I can’t change the FIA’s decision. Now, let’s move to the current issues”.

          Would it be that hard? It’s not the same as just saying “no comment”. It’s saying “you’ve already got my comments and there’s nothing to add”. Beating a dead horse is never a good idea and he should be aware of that.

          1. It happens all over the place. Nico Rosberg last week said “retirements have hurt my position in the Championship” and everyone said he was stating the obvious. He probably got asked “What do Mercedes need to improve on to enable you to fight at the top of the standings?” and the obvious answer is to point out that early retirements have cost him because he’d be a lot higher if it wasn’t for them.

        2. Blame the journalists for asking the question then

          Yes but Horner can say, i’m sorry but i expressed my opinion and don’t want to talk anymore about that…

      3. @davef1 – “Clarity” is Christian Horner’s favourite word when dealing with the FIA. When he was lobbying against Mercedes’ double-DRS device last year, he kept asking for “clarity” from the stewards when they rejected his appeals. When Horner asks for “clarity”, he isn’t asking the FIA to give more details on a particular decision. He is asking them to change the decision to something he prefers.

      4. I agree with you on the flogging thing @davef1. It gets even better when Horner continues with the more serious part where he discusses the need for more clarity. And in doing so pretty much explains why heavily punishing Mercedes while not even investigating Ferrari further would be as much unfair to the competition as not punishing Mercedes at all.

        I am not sure why RBR keep the focus on that first part of their views, when most neutrals will only feel annoyed at them harking about the same point by now. It makes it harder to take their very valid, and to the point concern about unclear rules over testing serious, which is sad.

      5. @jonsan @maroonjack @hipn0tic Journalists aren’t one enormous hive mind. If Bob Journalist asks Horner a question at four o’clock it would be a bit unreasonable for Horner to say “sorry I answered a slightly similar question from Dave Journalist at three o’clock”.

        Horner’s got a point to put across and he’s doing it. Granted there is a bit of “echo chamber” when it comes to modern news coverage, and I think we need to be a bit more understanding of that fact.

        When it comes to how Red Bull and Ferrari have expressed their reservations about the Mercedes verdict I have far more respect for Horner doing so in public in a frank and reasonable manner, than for Ferrari who choose to post anonymous whinges on their website. I don’t think it befits one of the grandest names in motor racing to behave like a cowardly internet troll.

        1. Well said @keithcollantine I must admit one of the first thoughts I had upon reading Ferrari’s anonymous post after the Tribunal verdict is here they are bemoaning ‘secret’ tests, and yet did some themselves, and then go ahead and in a way post a ‘secret’ comment, or at least one that they theoretically could distance themselves from, even though laughably it is on their own site and I’m sure Mr/Mrs Anonymous didn’t hold a gun to their head to publish their comment on their site. I think you’ve nailed it on the head with your opinion about them posting anonymous whinges and what that makes them look like.

    2. Horner is right, but no point on draging this issue anymore. It’s done it’s done RBR and Horner just have to work to be the best.
      As for Raikonnen it could be an option, but i’m not seeing it happen, honnestly, i think Raikonnen is happy with Lotus, and i’m not seeing him go to RedBull to be #2.

      1. @hipn0tic Who’s been saying Raikkonen will go to Red Bull and become a #2 driver? I’ve always believed that Red Bull start the season by giving their drivers equal billing and then shifting their focus onto the driver who is performing better in the championship. It’s interesting to note that whenever Red Bull make a decision to prefer Vettel over Webber, Webber is never in front of Vettel.
        Vettel is a great driver, putting arrogance aside (Although both Michael and Ayrton have been known to be arrogant in the past, and are also considered 2 of the all-time greats)
        Getting back to the point, if Raikkonen went to Red Bull to replace Webber (An even more likely scenario now) there’s no reason to believe that Kimi would be automatically disadvantaged.. Kimi would have to prove his worth, but what’s the difference between that and any other team-mate?

        1. @keeleyobsessed Any driver going to RBR will be #2 at the start of the season, note that Vettel is 3 time world champion (could be 4 or not). So ANY driver going to the RBR in the start of the season will be #2. If Seb won’t work that’s another thing…

          In Malasyia this year Webber was in front, they took a decision, Vettel didn’t…

        2. Webber was very good in 2011.

    3. That’s pretty much exactly as I said once the verdict was given – maybe Horner just reads my mind?

      1. It’s not really a surprise that a massive Redbull fan agrees with the Redbull team principal is it ?

        1. @f190 no, not really! I wasn’t proclaiming surprise at the matter! I think he does race a semi-valid point though. I agree with this;

          Team principal Ross Brawn has insisted the penalty is “severe” given the far greater benefit gained from a young driver test in which new parts would be tested, as opposed to simply driving around for 1,000 kilometres on prototype tyres

          but also Horner raises one of my primary points with this;

          “But it pales into insignificance compared to the benefit you would see from running race drivers around a track for 1,000 kilometres on a circuit rubbered in two days after a grand prix weekend.

          I think at best this was a like-for-like penalty, which kind of defeats the purpose in giving the penalty! Essentially, I feel they haven’t lost anything despite breaking the rules which isn’t correct IMO.

          1. @vettel1

            Who knows, maybe you are actually Christian Horner ? haha.

            My problem is I just don’t believe they could ever learn more in a Pirelli test than in a YDT. If they had used a 2011 car ( as Ferrari did ) there would be no problem here. The test is so borderline its almost impossible to gauge what is fair and unfair.

            I agree and really dislike the fact that some teams get these additional tests but feel people are over playing how much they could learn from them. Sure, some information will be learnt but I have no doubt that a team can learn much more about upgrades and other issues in a YDT.

            1. @f190 No no, I wouldn’t pose semi-naked!

              Really this whole problem could’ve been solved had there been communication between Mercedes and the FIA, which was apparently lacking as they were obviously under the impression they were allowed to test with the 2013 car.

            2. @vettel1

              Ha, yeah I knew the picture you were talking about !

              I completely agree ! For that reason I see their punishment as quite harsh. I can see why they have that punishment and many will think it will even things out but I believe it will actually punish Mercedes rather than even everything out and that means that Mercedes have then lost ground for trying to help improve the safety in F1. I don’t think as much can be gained while locked into a Pirelli test as most people are trying to make out. I’m not saying they learnt nothing but I believe some people see this as a Mercedes test where they were trying new parts and setups which isn’t correct.

              The whole situation is a mess but I seriously believe Mercedes thought they had the green light to test.

            3. I see it the other way though; I think it should have been Mercedes that were requesting clarification from the FIA as it obviously contravenes the regulations on face value @f190, not the other way round. That’s where we differ!

            4. The reason they can learn more from a pirelli test than a young drivers test is totally down to the drivers. Hamilton and rosberg would have been giving mercedes accurate and very experienced information while a young driver will not be able to report the issues as accurately etc. Also hamilton and rosberg have intricate knowledge of any issues they have with the car in a race situation. A young driver has no such experience. Then there is the fact that hamilton and rosberg can not unlearn what they learned in the test and that knowledge can be directly applied to future races. Hamilton was having issues getting used to the mercedes compared to the maclaren, do you not think a 3 day test under zero pressure on a circuit he has just raced on would not have been invaluable in ironing out those issues?

    4. Horner just please shut up !

      1. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        27th June 2013, 1:08

        why? Team principals always make a big fuss about the way other teams go (Domenicalli, Withsmarh, Briatore, Head, etc)

        1. Because to be honest it’s nothing to do with him. Nothing he can say will change the situation so why go on and on about it ? Last week he was quoted as saying something like ” it’s not for us to comment on what the punishment should be” so when he then comes out and says what the punishment should be then he’s contradicting himself . By going on and on about it he just looks like a cry baby, which is a stigma Redbull already have. Mercedes have been punished and rather harshly so please just move on.

          1. What makes you think he is “going on about it”?

          2. Rather Harshly! really? The young driver has been punished rather harshly, but Mercedes have got away with gaining an unfair advantage with virtually no penalty at all! Granted it was also Pirelli and the FIAs fault too, but that does not help the other teams that are now competing on unfair terms.

            1. @lee1

              You have kind of answered your own question there.

            2. @dan,

              What on earth are you talking about? Clearly Mercedes got a lenient punishment even given the fact that they were not the only ones to blame. They were found guilty of gaining unfair advantage and they could easily have done much more before the test to cover their backs (if there was indeed nothing to hide). They should have notified the other teams, end of.

              However if they had been banned from the championship then I would think it harsh. There were mitigating circumstances but they were still not fully innocent. (In fact they may well have been more guilty than we think, but only mercedes will know for sure). My last sentence was regarding the other teams not Mercedes. Even if Mercedes had a stricter punishment it would still not put the whole situation right. The other teams are still not competing on level terms with Mercedes regardless of who was to blame. Something needed to be done in order to redress the balance.

              I believe Mercedes were not punished properly due to their threats to leave F1 and also due to the fact that if they had been punished then it would have opened up a can of worms in terms of then having to punish Ferrari too. This in my mind is disrespectful to the other Teams in F1. If it had been Maclaren, Williams or Force India etc in Mercedes position I think the punishment would have been far greater and that stinks

        2. To be honest I don’t really think I’ve heard either Domenicalli or Withmarsh moaning too much in the last few years.

        3. I think their first approach, right after the verdict (with humour in it) stating that it was disappointing was perfectly accurate @omarr-pepper. But by now repeating over and over again how Mercedes must have gained a huge advantage, and the at the same time that the YDT is almost without value, just takes away from the valid point of unclarity about testing rules when Ferrari can run a 2011 car but tested tyres for the current season and no one really knows what parts they might have been using on that car.

          1. Hence why Horner should simply shut-it.

    5. Horner might do well to shut up and understand the context in which all of this played out (with the FIA and Pirelli being as much to blame as Mercedes). Also, he could stop using the ‘all we want is clarity’ line to resurge closed topics and have a go at another team which outsmarted his team.
      Last but not least, as the saying goes, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t be throwing stones.

      1. +4

        What? I’m an English teacher, not a maths teacher.

        1. @prisoner-monkeys ha ha, +1 (day in the life of Ivan Denisovich).

      2. These “people in glass houses” you are referring to have never been guilty of a rule infrigment @andrewf1 – Mercedes have.

        I’d hardly call it “outsmarting”, since they were found guilty of breaking the rules. Would you say it was clever if a robber was caught by the police, but only given a small jail sentence because of a screw-up in their investigation?

      3. +1 Can we please move on? Red Bull should just concentrate on racing since I doubt the decision would be overturned.

    6. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      27th June 2013, 1:12

      there’s no limit to the amount of fuel a team can put in a car but there is a limit to how much they can use in a race. It is a significant change to the efficiency of the car.”

      Somebody please help me understand where the difference is…
      I don’t think teams would put 200kg of fuel in the cars if they can only use 100kg… maybe he refers to the minimum… but that’s what teams currently do, try to run with the lightest weight possible

      1. @omarr-pepper, he’s talking about the maximun fuel flow rate, but you are right the teams will still have to work out the right amount to carry, but if they run out of fuel it will not be because of the new regs.

        1. Its both fuel flow limited AND total amount of fuel they are allowed for the whole race though @hohum.

          I guess teams might put in a couple of kg extra to be on the safe side and avoid the car from running dry (even if that would mean they could not be classified because they used more than max. fuel?).

        2. Yes, I think its likely that having a bit of extra fuel to be on the safe side would be pretty likely, especially at the start of the season when they are still learning a lot about the engines on track @hohum

      2. I think they’ll probably just try and use the entirety of their allowable fuel loads, purely because that would allow them to run closer to the maximum power for the duration of the race.

      3. I’m confused by this (quote) as well (although I’ve read the rules). So, you can fill the car with more fuel (>100kg), but if you use it, you’ll be disqualified (as you are not allowed to use more than that) – unless you’re Mercedes.

        It will be interesting to see if some teams manage to build a smaller fuel cell, i.e. 90kg or so, which would enable them to have a weight advantage in most races (but force them to run in fuel saving mode for the few fast, fuel-hungry races).

    7. Red Bull’s whining is so loud and high-pitched that just reading the blurb made every dog in the neighborhood come a-runnin’.

      Which is amusing, since the “crime” had nothing to do with them in the first place.

    8. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      27th June 2013, 2:24

      I’m so sick of hearing teams moaning.

      I never thought it would get to this, but, in the words of Rhianna;
      “Shut up and drive”.

      Oh dear. I just said that.

    9. Pretty cool gift for Nico. It would probably have been even more special without the smaller “tainted victory” headline.

    10. Kimi is too old to be a realistic choice for Red Bull, I think. He’ll be 35 next year.

      1. 35 late next year hardly makes him a grandpa… Regardless of age the results speak for themselves.

        1. @ming-mong by 35 you have usually peaked though and from there can only go downhill. I don’t think Räikkönen is a good choice for a number of factors: he’ll want number one status, which he certainly won’t be granted; he’ll be made to do press events, which he clearly hates; he’s not got too many good years left in him (I’d say 6 at best); Red Bull will not want to admit their driver academy is money not well spent; Räikkönen will place demands on the team a younger driver wouldn’t.

          So yes, I don’t see it happening to be frank.

          1. @Max Jacobson – Those are all separate and valid arguments however keeping inline with the discussion I do not buy into the downhill age argument. May I remind you that Mansell won the 92 championship at age 39 then backed it up in his debut cart season at age 40. Many quality drivers have failed to transition to the US & Ovals but not oldboy Nige ;) Oh and another one that springs to mind is Prost also won the 93 championship at age 38…

    11. Being a massive MW fan IMHO Mark should have left RBR after 2010 and pushed for the Renault/Lotus seat. I believe that then and still believe it today. No point playing second fiddle to SV and having your team advisor continuously ear bashing you in the press. With RK on the radar now its only going to make it more difficult for him to secure a top drive unless Massa really comes unstuck however he is doing better this year even though he is lmost 50 points behind FL and Ferrari have shown great loyalty towards him. I think it all depends on Kimi. I get the feeling that RK will be in the Lotus & I hope MW does the swap with Kimi. They would make a great pair at Lotus as I believe RG is on the way out again. All teams would love to have MW as he brings a wealth of RBR knowledge and secrets. And he can turn a lap or two ;)

      I really do hope he proves all his critics wrong.

      1. I Love the Pope
        27th June 2013, 5:06

        Forgive me, but who is “RK”?

        1. Yes,apologies @omarr-pepper,@bascb, I should have read the full article before commenting.
          And,@bascb they would want to avoid a penalty for no fuel sample

          1. Oh dear! that was supposed to be about running out of fuel.

            RK, hmm, maybe Rimi Kaikkonen ?

            1. Lol Rimi Kaikonen :-)

            2. @hohum I…I can’t! :’)

      2. @ming-mong Is RK Robert Kubica? If so, I don’t see him coming back to F1. It’s much more likely he’d drive in the WRC, WTCC, or even DTM. His hand injury is still there (and still plays a factor in how he drives a much more spacious WRC car).

        As for Lotus, I don’t think Webber will go there. It’s down to Red Bull or Porsche for MW now (I think he’ll choose the latter). I do think there is some credence to the Maldonado-Lotus rumors (Enstone badly needs the cash). But don’t be surprised if JEV gets a Lotus seat too (especially if Raikkonen indeed goes to Red Bull).

        1. @Journeyer – There you go seems you were right regarding MW. Didn’t Rober Kubica recently have a run in the Merc simulator and said afterwards his ready to go?

    12. Whoa! almost fell over with that one! Mansell supporting Hamilton. Give me a second.

    13. Damon Hills’ analasys seems spot-on to me.

      1. Pretty much yeah, @hohum. I was wondering about the second approach he mentioned though.

    14. I believe that Damon Hill’s “analysis” proves that F1 journalists should pay less attention to what former world champions say and publish their opinions only if they make sense. I wonder how many F1 races Hill has watched this year if he claims that Alonso and Raikkonen have ‘managed to stay out of trouble’ and that Vettel doesn’t ‘cope well with losing, or very well with being in the pack’. In my opinion, it has been the other way round in 2013. While Vettel has calmly used every opportunity to score as many points as possible, Raikkonen and Alonso have lost a few points in incidents that could have been avoided.

      I also don’t really see how Hamilton’s talent is ‘squandered and lost’. Yes, nothing suggests that, since 2009, he has ever been in a car that’s good enough to win world championships. So you could theoretically blame him or his management for not getting a Red Bull seat but I really doubt if RBR have ever seriously considered hiring Hamilton. Moreover, no one could know for sure in 2009 that Red Bull would be the car to beat in the following years. And mentioning that Hamilton’s ‘girlfriend is a famous singer’ in the context is just silly, does he really believe that Hamilton is together with Nicole just because it makes him look ‘hipper’?

      1. I read the squandered and lost part as how much of Hamiltons talent was squandered by bad cars (2009), throwing it away on track (to an extent the championship in 2007, and certainly in 2011), and technical car issues (2012 a lot) @girts, not as meaning that the talent is now gone, just that in most of those years he did not get to maximize its potential.

        The famous girlfriend as a singer is because of the analogy to Beckham, whose GF/wife also was a famous singer (spice girls), its not about Hamilton being with her, but about the management company wanting to make a “brand” out of Lewis, like the same company did with Beckham.

        1. @BasCB You are right about the lost chances and I think I got Hill’s point but then one could say the same thing about umpteen former and current drivers and I doubt if it makes any sense to focus just on Hamilton.

          For instance, Kimi would be a 5-time world champion by now if he had been a little luckier in 2003, if his McLaren hadn’t been so unreliable in 2005, if he had made a full use of his potential in 2008 and if Lotus was as quick as it was reliable last year. Alonso has lost 3 world championships at the final rounds! Button had a fantastic season in 2004 but could do nothing about Ferrari’s supremacy. As the saying goes, F1 is ‘If’ spelled backwards.

          After all, only two guys can drive the best car on the grid and the last time when the two best drivers on the grid both had the quickest car was in 2007 (in my opinion) and we all know how it ended.

          As for Nicole, I just think Hill shouldn’t have mentioned it. In my opinion, the fact that Hamilton loves Scherzinger has nothing to do with any models or brands so he should have just compared Hamilton with Beckham without mentioning the personal life.

          It’s good that people have different opinions and that they share them, I just believe that too much attention is paid to everything that former star drivers say, even though they are often unable to back up their opinions with facts and half-decent analysis.

          1. As for Nicole, I just think Hill shouldn’t have mentioned it. In my opinion, the fact that Hamilton loves Scherzinger has nothing to do with any models or brands so he should have just compared Hamilton with Beckham without mentioning the personal life.

            I don’t think that would work here @girts:
            1. making an advert-champion out of Beckham (and Victoria Beckham, and their kids, etc) was a big success for this sports management company
            2. All the parallels are there to be exploited – if Hamilton and the company decide to do so
            3. We can all see how Hamilton is clearly interested in the “star quality” part of being a VIP.

      2. @girts, I agree with your comment, though I think Hamilton himself would partially agree with Hill, in the sense that he is disappointed that he hasn’t won any title since 2008. From time to time Hamilton makes a comment lamenting how long ago it was since he won a title, although I’m not sure Hill is implying he has himself to blame for that.

        I agree with Mansell, when he says it all has to come together for him (or any driver) to win the world championship. Unless you’re simply half a second faster than everyone else, you cannot count on the titles to keep rolling your way. All the more reason for Hamilton’s and Alonso’s seeming annoyance at seeing Sebastian Vettel do just that: bagging wins and titles at an incredible rate, while they have to be content with the occasional race victory.

      3. There’s also a great deal of irony in a man who won the World Championship with Williams only to be dropped by the team and ending up in an Arrows talking about another driver squandering their talent.

        Add in the gross hypocrisy of him complaining about Bernie not investing in SIlverstone “for the fans” when under his leadership the BRDC decided to spend a load of money on the BRDC club house and other facilities for BRDC members instead of spending it on the grandstands and other facilities for the general fans and that interview sounds like a load of **** to me.

        1. @beneboy

          under his leadership the BRDC decided to spend a load of money on the BRDC club house

          No they didn’t. The BRDC clubhouse was opened in 1999. Hill became BRDC president seven years later.

          1. @keithcollantine
            Didn’t it get a multi-million pound upgrade while they were building the new pits and paddock or have I confused it with the corporate hospitality suites ?

    15. Oh shut up Horner! This is tedious in the extreme! Is he really that worried about the Mercedes being a threat to their 4th title on the trot?

      Sure, the merc seems to be good on single lap pace but I doubt they have sorted their tyre wear in race conditions by testing on experimental compounds for 2014. Both Canada and Monaco were unrepresentative tracks.

      This guy is starting to develop the image of a whining spoilt brat to me. He’s got all the toys he could possibly wish for but he still wants to break or take other people’s. Reminds me of my Narcissistic Brother.

      He knows Red Bull are a shoe in for the title already as they have a huge points advantage, it would be far more honorable to let the team do the talking on the track rather than attempting to enhance their points advantage by getting a team thrown out of the running. The judgment has been laid, suck it up and let the rest of the world forget about yet another event that has made the rest of the motorsport/sporting world laugh up their sleeves at F1.

      1. This guy is starting to develop the image of a whining spoilt brat to me.

        @coefficient starting? starting?! lol…

        1. Yes his been like that since ever. He always seems like a really bad slimmy character.

    16. Deputy team principal Bob Fernley: “Paul is contracted to us anyway for next season, so the question is whether somebody else comes in, so it won’t be our decision.”

      I can’t help but wonder if Force India are trying to offload di Resta by talking him up. He’s made the mistakes of seriously under-performing, believing his own hype, and trying way too hard to avoid treading on any toes because he’s afraid it will rob him of the chance at the drive with a top team that he feels he deserves despite having shown nothing to suggest he is worthy of it.

    17. Force India are hopefully doing their utmost to get a backup plan in, because the top teams are all champing at the bit to employ an average-ish driver with few sponsors, a wooden personality, and a tendency to spend all his free time making derogatory remarks about his employer.

      Sorry bbc/sky, I fell “off message” there for a bit on this massively over pr’d driver. Must have fallen asleep… listening to Paul’s tedious droning cliche’d voice.

      1. hehe x2!!!

    18. I fully agree with Christian Horner but I think it is time they (red bull) start accepting the rulling of the tribunal. Lobying for new tyres that they must certainly won’t get for instance.

    19. Quesiton for Lewis Hamilton:

      Hip Hop or Pit Stop, which is it to be?

    20. I am fed up of fans whining about a Team Principal who they think is whining about a lenient punishment given to a rival for having an unfair sporting advantage in a high profile event!! Now I am fed up of myself whining about fans whining about a Team Principal who they think is whining about a lenient punishment …..

    21. Just for this one time, I will agree with Horner completely.

    22. It’s a bit silly that Hamilton is being perceived as something of a failure, but then, maybe it’s inevitable given the hysteria which surrounded his first two years in F1.

      LH is currently one of the all time best drivers in F1 in terms of qualifying, podiums, and wins. He’s just unlucky to be active in the same period as Vettel and Alonso, two other very exceptional drivers. But by the time he retires I expect Lewis will be in the top half-dozen of all time in terms of wins, podiums, and poles. That’s nothing to be ashamed of.

    23. Horner should shut-up.

      I can’t wait for the next time RBR are caught doing something illegal or unsporting! Payback is a biiiiaaaatch!

    24. Anele (@anele-mbethe)
      28th June 2013, 0:54

      Horner can’t win here if he said I’ve already answered the question he’ll be called robotic , he answers truthfully he’s whining. There’s no denying the punishment is weak but like all F1 scandal we’ll move on when the next one comes

    Comments are closed.