Mercedes takes “disciplinary measures” as Rosberg accepts blame

2014 Belgian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Nico Rosberg has apologised for colliding with Lewis Hamilton during Sunday’s Belgian Grand Prix, Mercedes have confirmed.

The team said “suitable disciplinary measures” have been taken, but did not specify what these involved, and said the pair “remain free to race” for the world championship.

A statement released on Friday said: “Toto Wolff, Paddy Lowe, Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton met today in the boardroom of Mercedes AMG Petronas headquarters in Brackley to discuss the events of the Belgian Grand Prix.

“During this meeting, Nico acknowledged his responsibility for the contact that occurred on lap two of the Belgian Grand Prix and apologised for this error of judgement.

“Suitable disciplinary measures have been taken for the incident.

“Mercedes-Benz remains committed to hard, fair racing because this is the right way to win world championships. It is good for the team, for the fans and for Formula One.

“Lewis and Nico understand and accept the team’s number one rule: there must be no contact between the team’s cars on track.

“It has been made clear that another such incident will not be tolerated. But Nico and Lewis are our drivers and we believe in them.

“They remain free to race for the 2014 FIA Formula One world championship.”

Rosberg also issued a statement accepting responsibility for the collision.

“In the days since the Belgian Grand Prix in Spa, I have spent a lot of time thinking about what happened during the race and discussing it with the team,” he said.

“I have already expressed my regret about the incident but, after meeting with Toto, Paddy and Lewis today, I wish to go a step further and describe it as an error of judgement on my part.

“The number one rule for us as team-mates is that we must not collide but that is exactly what happened.
For that error of judgement, I apologise to Lewis and the team. I also want to say sorry to the fans who were deprived of our battle for the lead in Belgium.

“Lewis and I have been given clear instructions about how we race each other. As drivers, we have a clear responsibility to the team, the fans of the sport, our partners and Mercedes-Benz to deliver clean racing. We take that responsibility very seriously.

“I look forward to concluding the season with hard, fair competition on and off track right up to the final lap of the season in Abu Dhabi.”

2014 Belgian Grand Prix

    Browse all2014 Belgian Grand Prix articles

    Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

    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.

    210 comments on “Mercedes takes “disciplinary measures” as Rosberg accepts blame”

    1. I Nico wins the WDC championship by less than 18 points… well I’ll do nothing, but I’ll be upset!

      1. I’m just hoping these idiots trip over each other for the rest of the season. This whole affair is pathetic and is almost as bad as watching highly paid footballers roll around on a pitch when someone has taken the ball away from them.

        Go Ricciardo – mop up after both these infantile fools as they throw it all away.

        1. Nothing against Dan but odds don’t look good.

          1. We can only hope :P

        2. +1 The way Hamilton has gone on about the incident he doesn’t derserve to win

          1. Should Lewis just roll over and let Nico the cheat rub his belly?

      2. That will be hard to swallow for many people, including myself.

    2. Well done Mercedes

    3. there must be no contact between the team’s cars on track.

      Beyond the track limits, anything goes.

      1. I think if both cars are already in a state of being next to each other off the track, something more fundamental has gone wrong anyway.

        Well, that or they’re A) in the pits or B) have just finished the race and are next to each other under the podium! ^_^

        1. Watch back Bahrain in 2012. We can only hope

        2. Nico means “mind games”
          In reference to off track competition i think

    4. petebaldwin (@)
      29th August 2014, 13:25

      I’m amazed that the team are publicly stating that they are punishing Nico because of his driving and yet the FIA feel that he did nothing wrong…. Seems very odd.

      1. The teams are allowed to do what they want to their drivers regarding penalties.

        The FIA/Stewards wouldn’t, for example, act on the Hungary TO situation, but Mercedes were in their rights to sanction their own drivers if they wanted to.

        1. petebaldwin (@)
          29th August 2014, 14:15

          @optimaximal – Yeah of course they wouldn’t because not following team orders isn’t against the FIA’s rules.

          Causing an avoidable incident is however and by punishing Nico, Mercedes are saying that they feel it was avoidable.

          It seems odd for the FIA to be saying everything is fine and for Nico’s own team to be saying the oposite. Surely they wouldn’t punish Nico for something they deem a racing incident?

          1. @petebaldwin It was, in the end, a racing incident – two cars touched on track with no deliberate intent from either driver. Sloppy on behalf of Rosberg, who should really have pulled out and bailed across the run-off, but the actual contact wasn’t enough for a penalty, even though the circumstances for Lewis and the championship were pretty significant.

            Mercedes, however, have always said that the drivers are free to race providing they don’t hit each other, even if its a minor kiss – thus, the incident, in their eyes, broke the only rule they’ve consistently talked about all year. They also clearly view the situation that Nico was in the wrong given the relative track position.

            1. Mark in Florida
              30th August 2014, 0:09

              Mercedes had to do something to soothe Hamilton’s fragile ego, though the stewards thought otherwise. Where’s a real team principle when you need one to make the boys get along.

            2. Nicole admitted he caused the incident to prove a point. He deliberately caused a collision and ruined Lewis’s race, again.

          2. “Avoidable contact” rule is from Indycar, not F1. In F1 “racing incidents” are normally not punished. These are normally avoidable but understandable collisions. (Any contact can ofcause be avoided by not racing at all (Chilton/ my grandfather etc)).

        2. ColdFly F1 (@)
          29th August 2014, 14:24

          @optimaximal +1
          It seems that many people create rules for the FIA that does not exist.

          1. ColdFly F1 (@)
            29th August 2014, 14:24

            does = do

        3. I personally do see it as a racing incident. However, I believe the outcome of Lewis retiring and the aftermath of team losing potential 1-2 forced someone to take the blame and Nico took it. We may have had a different situation if Nico had crashed with no issue to Lewis whatsoever, by the same kind of contact. No matter what, it is a racing incident. So no point whining about any further intervention of FIA on this already overly spiced up matter. Period.

          1. Rosberg said he wanted to “prove a point”. So, it’s not a racing incident as far as Mercedes is concerned.

      2. Well someone just told me here yesterday that FIA is now more lenient and not imposing penalties on all racing incidents after the teams and drivers had asked this earlier in the year. So based on that information I do understand that his team will “punish” him because it was his careless driving and it hurt the team. But when it comes to FIA for them it was just another racing incident.

        Will be interesting to see in the future races how close wheel to wheel racing these two will take and what if one of them does another mistake what happens then.

        1. petebaldwin (@)
          29th August 2014, 14:13

          @mattf1f – I get what you mean but surely if it was Nico’s careless driving that cause the incident, he could have been careful and not had an incident.

          On that basis, it was an avoidable incident and as such, the FIA should take action…

          1. Going by that logic every collision is avoidable and therefore FIA should award penalties for every collision if there was even the smallest possibility to avoid it.

            1. That would depend on how clear it was that one person was to blame and whether the collision actually did much damage to the innocent party’s race. So not every collision would be penalised using that logic.

          2. It was a misjudgement but it wasn’t a truly idiotic misjudgement, By which I mean he didn’t brake way too late & throw his car into the side of Lewis’, He just made a very small error by 1-2cm.

            This is the sort of thing the FIA will no longer be looking at as I said yesterday at the request of Teams & drivers who pushed for this due to the negative reaction of fans to penalty’s & stuff such as this handed out over the past few years.

            The FIA want to encourage close racing, They want to encourage drivers to have a go without feeling the need to hold back through fear of the slightest bit of contact resulting in a penalty.
            There were several drivers who felt the regulations as they were up until recently were discouraging racing because drivers were holding back through fear of receiving a penalty.

            The FIA have basically just taken things back to where they used to be 12-13+ years ago, We never used to see penalty’s for racing incidents or small misjudgements & the racing was arguably better for it.
            The penalty’s started coming in from 2002 (The Montoya/Schumacher Malaysia collision was the 1st I remember) & its been getting more & more strict over time, I think its great they have scaled things back to leave the drivers to race.

            1. No misjudgement Nico deliberately punctured Lewis tyre with his front wing to prove a point. Nico has taken responsibility for this.
              Lots if Nico deniers about.

      3. it puzzles me why YOU are amazed,
        The FIA doesn’t pump millions into advertising like Mercedes does for their cars.
        The FIA doesn’t care how Mercedes do,
        The FIA dont care about losing the opportunity to take marketing advantage in Belgium, which Merc cant do now.
        The FIA doesnt care that Merc worked so hard to have a super dominant car (+2 sec per lap) and still didnt win the race.
        Should I keep going?
        are you STILL surprised?

        1. Well, FIA shouldnt care about any of those things.

      4. No-one has said they are punishing Rosberg, Mercedes say he has been disciplined which is different.

      5. It’s perfectly logical for the FIA to accept small incidents between team cars that the team themselves will not tolerate. For example, one team car very closely following another would be perfectly OK under the rules, but far from OK if the team car doing the following was slowly melting his engine. As we all understand, F1 is a team sport that isn’t a team sport, until those times that it IS a team sport. And vice versa. ;)

    5. Watch Hamilton cause the next crash…..

      1. @addimaf1

        I hope not, for two reasons:

        1) It’s childish, if he wants to win the championship with my respect… Win it as legitimately as he can.
        2) So much risk involved… It could easily go balls up where Lewis’ car is damaged, but Nico’s is still drivable.

        1. 3. Most important one suppose Both collided again and both got a DNF that would allow DAN to gain more points on both drivers and Lewis will have one race less to gain points.

          1. Are you saying if Rosberg and Hamilton collide at Abu Dabhi, Ricciardo could get 50 points?

            1. @austus
              I said that with Generic situation in mind , If that happen in Yas unless the Leader of WDC(Who it can be at that point) was less than 50 points to Ric the Championship will be go to leader

        2. Good point, but I meant by mistake, and then while Rosberg gets away with a slap on the wrist for doing it first Hamilton gets kicked out for a race. Its just Hamilton’s luck.

      2. Well it wouldn’t surprise me, maybe now more drivers will stand up to Chopper Hamilton’s dirty moves

        1. All of Hamilton’s “chops” are fair racing etiquette. Hard, but 100% fair.

          1. Whilst I don’t disagree, if he does it, he and hisnfans can’t then complain when someone leaves their front nose in there!

        2. Go back to Bahrain 2012 to see why the FIA came down hard on overly harsh defending. Who was the cause of their ire?

          If anything Rosberg is the overly aggressive driver. He even pulls those moves when he really isn’t entitled to them on the basis of “owning the racing line”. in Bahrain 2012 he pushed Hamilton and Alonso off on the straight. In Hungary he pushed Bottas off track while coming from behind.

    6. Bit better than the BBC, who reported literally only these words…

      “Mercedes have taken disciplinary action against Nico Rosberg following his collision with team-mate Lewis Hamilton in the Belgian Grand Prix.”

      They may as well have said just said “Thing happens in F1… more to follow.”

      1. Haha, I just read that

      2. I read ‘naughty German punished for colliding with Lew’

      3. WilliamB (@william-brierty)
        29th August 2014, 17:29

        @matt90 – That’s what happens when you give a press release to BBC’s Andrew “Assertion” Benson…

        Still a shame that it’s taken a week and presumably a lot of video and PR analysis for Nico to accept responsibility for an incident that I would have imagined Hamilton, Button, Vettel and certainly Ricciardo would’ve apologized then and there for. His handling of the entire situation has been profoundly unclassy and the obvious question must be why, when it must have been immediately apparent to Rosberg that he’d just ruined Mercedes’ Belgian Grand Prix, did he so stoically refuse to apologize? Stoic to such an extent that he felt it necessary to insult the intelligence of the booing crowd of European fans (sorry Nico, but the German guy I sat next to was booing too), as mere patriotism on the part of the British; patriotism that is somehow misplaced due to the fact that most fans haven’t read the FIA’s Sporting Regulations cover to cover. There is no more guaranteed method of being greeted on the podium at Monza to sound of a booing Tifosi than to insult that acumen of the sport’s faithful; those on which the sport rely.

        1. +1
          Either Rosberg is extremely unselfaware, which may be possible (see under: Maldonado) or he really didn’t want to cede any ground because (1) he thought he was in the right whatever, or (2) he wanted to place further psychological pressure on Hamilton by denying responsibility and threatening more of the same, albeit in coded form. Bit of all three I guess.

          I think psychologically Rosberg comes out of this on top. He got away with an incident again, like Monaco (personally I think both were deliberate insofar as they were deliberately careless moments of driving at opportune moments: another example of the same Rosberg mindset was cutting the chicane at Canada that allowed him to pull away from Hamilton as he was closing in fast). On the other hand, this is a definite black mark and I don’t think Mercedes will allow him another incident like this without a much more serious repercussion. And that could well count against him over the remaining races.

          1. I think you missed Rosberg’s nervous tick during the interview with Pinkham, the guy was a mess after that race, he couldn’t even pretend to be happy during the podium ceremony.

            Rosberg’s problems are that he knows he can’t beat his teammate under fair circumstances. But he will continue to act like all is good as long as he finishes on top at the end of the season, might makes right. The guys been driving dreadfully this year, I liked him last year, but this year hes been kind of shameful.

            A shame Lewis has had more problems from his own team, than his own teammate, otherwise he would have about 40 points over Rosberg by now.

    7. He’ll only have only type of food in Italy, and his hotel room will be smaller than the other driver. But whatever, 29 points…

      1. I heard that some of his privilegies in the motor home, like free tea, was removed straight away.

        1. He has a new clause in his contract that states that he needs to change undewear after qually.

          1. OmarR-Pepper (@)
            29th August 2014, 15:10

            Now he has to change underwear and have tea BY HIMSELF.

      2. His company car has been downgraded to a Smart!

        1. Now he has to wear ” I love Lewis” Union Jack boxer shorts ,

          1. I laughed out loud at this, still chucklingf away now :)

    8. I’d laugh if Hamilton or Rosberg crash into one another at Rettifilo on Lap 1.

      1. Rettifilo is the first chicane on Monza, correct? If both start from the front row, I think thats difficult to happen, they brake to crawling speeds there. Maldonado starting from 20th on the other hand….

    9. Bottled it. Now the lesser and less honest driver is odds on for the championship. My road car is staying BMW!

      1. How is Nico less honest? He’s apologised for the situation, which is the most that should be reasonably expected of a racing driver.

        There’s an open debate about how poorly he conducted himself post-race, but the racing incident was just that, a racing incident.

        1. Yeah, a week and a team-meeting later. It’s clear that he knows it was his fault (otherwise I don’t think he would have appologized at all) but doesn’t really show any remorse, considering the time and the guidance it took for him to do it.

        2. tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
          30th August 2014, 7:59

          A racing incident normally involves two cars making errors of judgement. Nico is 100% at fault here (as he now acknowledges). It was an act of petulance which netted him 18 points. The FIA should have acted.

    10. Nico acknowledged his responsibility for the contact that occurred on lap two of the Belgian Grand Prix and apologised for this error of judgement. “Suitable disciplinary measures have been taken for the incident”.

      Fair do’s Mercedes. However, now that Rosberg accepted the responsibility officically, doesn’t that count as ‘New Element’ as far as FIA is concerned. Wait to see what they come up with.

      1. Derek Warwick is driver steward in Monza, as he was in Monaco. He’s already as good as said there’ll be no further investigation.

        1. Derek Warwick does not like British F1 drivers that are better than him. That will be all other British F1 drivers then!

        2. This is FIA said recently

          FIA spokesman Pierre Regent told The Daily Mail: “The FIA will not intervene in this issue. Only a ‘new element’ that would have appeared after the results became final could justify us opening an investigation. A comment alleged to have been made in an internal briefing and later denied by the team itself does not constitute such a ‘new element’.”

          Well, this not an internal briefing, Mercedes has now made a public statement.

          1. But FIA to take any further action would only happen if Rosberg had said he did it on purpose. But today he only apologised and admitted it was his fault like most of us already knew. Well we don’t know what was said behind the closed doors but we don’t have any better source than that of Mercedes public statement.

            1. IMO ‘acknowledged his responsibility for the contact’ no longer a ‘racing incident’ and therefore FIA must now decide whether this was deliberate or not.

            2. @shoponf What is your definition of a racing incident if it’s not one if ‘someone acknowledges responsibility’?

              Surely in every incident, someone is responsible – two cars don’t just ‘collide’ with no outside influence.

              The key factors are intent and malice – Rosberg clearly didn’t mean to tag Hamilton’s tyre. He did, ruined his team-mates race, massively compromised his own and conducted himself incredibly badly after the fact, but it’s highly doubtful that he went into that corner saying ‘I’m going to have Lewis off here’.

            3. @optimaximal: so you are saying that Kevin Magnussen got penalty because it was proven that ‘Kevin thought to himself I’m going to force Alonso off the track’.
              As far as your interpretation of ‘massively compromised his own’ means that he now has 29 point lead whereas he had only 4 points lead before the race , there is nothing to comment.

            4. @optimaximal: sorry ‘only 4 points’ is an unintentional mistake, it should be ‘only 11 points’.

      2. Its not a new element, he accepted an error of judgement, not that he did it on purpose. Anyway congratulations to Mercedes they are the ones keeping the season interesting.

      3. He took responsibility for crashing, not for doing it intentionally.

        1. I don’t know the exact definition of ‘racing incident’. IMHO racing incident must be an incident when neither party is more responsible for causing a collision. In this case, Rosberg ‘acknowledged his responsibility for the contact’, which makes Lewis as the innocent party. Therefore, it cannot be termed as a racing incident.

          1. tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
            30th August 2014, 8:04

            Well said. When one driver ruins another’s race and is 100% at fault for doing so, we should expect him to receive a penalty. There’s no need to psychoanalyse him, we have sufficient facts already.

    11. Well Mercedes have only said “Suitable disciplinary measures have been taken” without giving any details of what exactly. Personally I can’t see what measures could be taken, especially in private, which would make any difference.

      They may have given him a strong warning or maybe even fined him, but any fine isn’t going to hurt a multi-millionaire.

      The drivers only really care about the drivers championship and unless a punishment directly impacted on their chances of winning the title they probably won’t be that bothered.

      I would not be surprised if most drivers would happily take a massive fine, being sacked from the team or damage to their reputation if it meant they became world champion.

      The incident in Spa effectively benefitted Rosberg by 25 points. The actual result meant Rosberg increased his championship lead by 18 points but if Hamilton had won and Rosberg came second Hamilton would have narrowed the lead by 7 points.

      It was plain for everyone to see that Rosberg was responsible for the contact so for him to publicly acknowledge this and apologise isn’t much of a trade-off given the advantage he received.

      1. The incident in Spa effectively benefitted Rosberg by 25 points. The actual result meant Rosberg increased his championship lead by 18 points but if Hamilton had won and Rosberg came second Hamilton would have narrowed the lead by 7 points.

        That math doesn’t work mate. It’s either;
        case 1: ROS P2, HAM DNF / Rosberg gains 18 points
        case 2: HAM P1, ROS P2 / Rosberg loses 7 points

        Not both at the same time…

        1. There was a (potential) 25 point swing in championship points as a result of the incident…

          HAM 1st, ROS 2nd = 4 point lead
          ROS 2nd, HAM dnf = 29 point lead

          1. You could look at it as more. Rosberg caused his own damage, so you could say his wing trouble and later locking up was fully justified, meaning that had Hamilton’s tyre held together it would have been HAM-RIC-ROS, so the puncture meant Hamilton losing 25 points but Rosberg gaining 3 by coming 2nd instead of 3rd. A 28 point swing.

        2. ColdFly F1 (@)
          29th August 2014, 15:11

          Actually I think it is more like 107pts!
          – LH lost 25pts for not winning in Spa
          – NR gained 18pts by coming second in Spa (normally his wing would get stuck under his car and cause a major accident with engine failure and DNF)
          – NR gains 50pts by winning ABU, but he should have been demoted on the grid because of an extra engine change (due to failure in Spa), and being in the mid-field MAL would have crashed into him.
          – LW loses 14pts by coming second in ABU where he would have won had NR taken an extra engine grid penalty.

          I am not sure how much this is in apples or dog-years.


        1. No,

          If Hamilton won he would close the 11 point gap by 7 points making the difference just 4 points.

          The gap now is 29 points. 29-4 = 25 meaning the result cost Hamilton 25 points…

        2. @xtwl

          Okay some may not agree with me but my reasoning was this

          Before the Belgium GP Rosberg had a lead of 11 points.

          Case 1 – the actual result – his lead increases to 29 points.

          Case 2 – Hamilton wins with Rosberg second – his lead is reduced to 4 points.

          So 29 minus 4 = 25 points, the benefit Rosberg gained from causing an avoidable collision which ultimately lead to his championship rival retiring.

          1. Case 1 – the actual result – his lead increases to 29 points.

            Case 2 – Hamilton wins with Rosberg second – his lead is reduced to 4 points.

            Correct. But then you take the points ROS gains from case 1, and you add to that the possible points he would’ve lost to HAM from case 2 which is you 25. It is either case 1 OR case 2, not a mix of both. So either ROS gained 18 points on HAM, or ROS lost 7 points to HAM.

            Let me try it this way: I eat one apple, so you can’t eat that apple.
            Case 1: I eat the apple, no apple for you.
            Case 2: I eat half the apple, you get half the apple.
            Result: I had an entire apple more than you although you had 0,5 apple. Meanwhile there was only 1 apple to begin with… That just doesn’t add up. It’s either A or B, not a mix of both.


            1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              29th August 2014, 14:43

              Are we seriously debating that the incident did not cost Lewis 25 points? It’s 25 points and it could have been 32 if it weren’t for Daniel…

            2. @xtwl

              I am not mixing both scenarios, I agree it is either case 1 or case 2

              In case 1 Rosberg’s championship lead increased to 29 points.

              In case 2 Rosberg’s championship lead decreased to 4 points.

              We are working on the assumption that only one of these two scenarios could happen and not any number of possible alternate outcomes such as both drivers retiring or the finishing order being different.

              The difference in the two proposed cases is 25 points which is the amount I am saying Rosberg benefitted by.

              I do not believe that the example you used is suited to this situation as there is only one apple in total in your example.

              However to relate this back to the championship points on offer in a race, firstly there are more than 18 points on offer, there are 25 points for the win and secondly but more importantly if a driver wins and scores 25 points it does not stop other drivers scoring any points in the race, the driver in second place still scores 18 points and so on down to tenth place and one point.

            3. @pja I typed this really long comment but I decided to just give up.

            4. @xtwl

              Sometimes I am not very good at explaining things, even when they seem perfectly clear to me.

              To try to put it another way, in each of the two cases Rosberg finishes second so he has 18 points in either scenario and that does not change.

              However what does change in the two situations is Hamilton’s result, in case 1 Hamilton retires and scores 0 points but in case 2 he wins and score 25 points, and so the difference between the two outcomes is 25 points.

            5. Sometimes I am not very good at explaining things, even when they seem perfectly clear to me.

              @pja, me too.

              However what does change in the two situations is Hamilton’s result, in case 1 Hamilton retires and scores 0 points but in case 2 he wins and score 25 points, and so the difference between the two outcomes is 25 points.

              Ah, but this is something different. Now you say Hamilton lost 25 points. That is something else than saying Nico gained 25 points on Lewis. The difference is 25 points for Lewis his points tally. But by finishing P2, scoring 18 points, Rosberg can never gain more than 18 points on another driver.

            6. @xtwl

              Yeah the point I was trying to make was that the gain (or benefit, the term I used earlier, I am not sure how best to phrase it) for Rosberg’s championship challenge was not just the 18 points he scored but also the points that the collision stopped Hamilton from scoring.

              The difference may only be 7 points but we have seen titles decided by less than that, and Hamilton has been involved in two of them winning and losing a championship by small margins.

            7. Obviously 25 points, as that’s the prize for coming 1st… This debate is not really being thought about insimple terms. Also it’s purely hypothetical, who is to sat HAM was guaranteed of 1st, ROS of 2nd anyway? You’re forgetting chaos theory. ;)

            8. @pja I’m going to try one last time. Not even going to respond to @freelittlebirds as he is completely wrong. To begin with, the thing I want to explain is that what you did in your first post mathematically is wrong. To explain that I’ve tried several things but only now found perhaps the most clear way of explaining it. We’ll go back to those two cases:

              Case 1 – the actual result – ROS lead increased by 18 points
              Case 2 – Hamilton wins with Rosberg second – ROS lead decreased by 7 points

              Now, let us imagin the crash happend and HAM somehow finished 10th, scoring 1 points. So that would be case 3.

              Case 3 – ROS P2, HAM P10 – ROS lead is increased by 17 points

              We can make up several other possibilities;

              Case 4 – ROS P2, HAM P9 – ROS lead is increased by 16 points

              Case 4 – ROS P2, HAM P8 – ROS lead is increased by 14 points

              By the math some here use it would not matter whether Hamilton was on the losing side both times. So in fact using your math on case 3 and 4 and 5, Hamilton lost 37 points. And we can add to that the possibility he would’ve won, so he lost 30 points, but then add the case where HAM retires, so he lost 48 points.

              See how you can’t calculate with the two situations together.

              It is always;
              A: HAM ret, ROS P2 – ROS increases his lead by 18 points
              B: HAM 1st, ROS P2 – ROS his lead is being decreased by 7 points.

              So the following statements are true:

              HAM lost a possible 25 points in the race for the victory.
              ROS increased his lead by 18 points.
              Because of the crash HAM lost a possible points finish.

              So the following statement are false:

              HAM lost 25 points in the championship to ROS.
              ROS gained 25 points in Spa towards HAM.
              ROS finished P2 and gained 25 points on HAM.

            9. @xtwl

              The gain is calculated as the difference between the possible finishes. So given the different cases you proposed:

              Case 1 & Case 2: 18 – (-7) = 25 (Difference to ROS points lead between HAM DNF and HAM winning)
              Case 1 & Case 3: 18 – 17 = 1 (Difference to ROS points lead between HAM DNF and HAM 10th)
              Case 1 & Case 4: 18 – 16 = 2 (Difference to ROS points lead between HAM DNF and HAM 9th)
              Case 1 & Case 5: 18 – 14 = 4 (Difference to ROS points lead between HAM DNF and HAM 8th)

              So these statements are in fact true:

              HAM lost 25 points in the championship to ROS.
              ROS gained 25 points in Spa towards HAM.
              ROS finished P2 and gained 25 points on HAM.

              When considered against a HAM ROS 1 2 finish.

              This is known as Economic Profit in finance where your profit is calculated between your actual outcome and a potential one:


              So yes this is mathematically correct and a sound way of calculating Rosberg’s benefit.

            10. @jimbo From a my point of view the calculation has no point whatsoever as there is always only one scenario happening. For me it has no use taking the possible gains from case 1 and add to that the loss of case 2 as they would never both happen at the same time. I agree that if we compare the two cases HAM would be up by 25 points. But for me (maybe it’s a language issue) that doesn’t make the sentence ‘HAM lost 25 points on ROS’ correct. The only way that sentence would be used is when ROS won and HAM did not finish.

            11. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              30th August 2014, 15:46

              @xtwl What about Nico retiring for the mistake he made? How do you know that the collision would not have taken Nico out? You have to take that scenario into account since obviously that happened to Lewis. In any race, there are 50 points max differential for 2 drivers who are capable of fighting for P1.

              1. Lewis P1 Nico 0 points (25 point gain for Lewis)
              2. Nico P1 and Lewis 0 points (25 point gain for Nico)

              25+25 = 50

              Nico deserved to DNF in this case, not Lewis. In that case Lewis would have gained 25 points from the race. Instead Nico gained 18 points. Your analysis is assuming that Nico’s car would have survived a collision for which there’s no guarantee.

            12. @freelittlebirds This whole comment has nothing to do with the accident, the riders, the cars or F1. Just math. So although I don’t agree with your last sentence that Nico deserved to DNF is is indeed a case.

          2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            29th August 2014, 20:26

            @xtwl As @pja has explained the net benefit to Nico at the time of the incident was 25 points. However since Nico was at fault he deserved to lose his points while Lewis remained at P1.

            Nico ended up 29 points ahead of Lewis when he should have been 14 points behind if Lewis had won and Nico retired. The net differential of Nico’s mistake was a whopping 43 points in this case!

            The pendulum swung the wrong way and effectively cost Lewis a 2 race advantage over Nico (29 pts behind versus 14 pts ahead).

            Sorry you’ve beating this to death so I thought I would chime in to explain to you the net loss to Lewis…

      2. I don’t think you can realistically say that if they hadn’t collided, the result would definitely be a 1-2 for Mercedes headed by Hamilton. The race was only 2 laps old, anything could have happened. Hamilton’s car may have had trouble, retired, had a problematic pit stop, collided with a different car, or hell, maybe even Rosberg would have just recovered and beaten him. To say that there are two potential outcomes, one with him winning, the other with him not finishing, is a pretty narrow interpretation of events. We have no way of knowing how that race might have panned out.

        1. @mazdachris

          I agree if the collision on lap 2 had not happened there are any number of possible scenarios and a Mercedes 1-2 with Hamilton winning was by no means guaranteed.

          But even though it was very early in the race Hamilton was leading a Mercedes 1-2 at the time of the incident so that was what I was basing the alternate result on.

          My main point was that although Rosberg’s championship lead increased by 18 points after the race, the actual impact on the title race was not the same.

          If he wins the title by say 20 points people will say that this collision had no bearing on the final standings as Rosberg only scored 18 points at Spa, however I do not believe this to be case. (This is ignoring all the other ways the collision can affect the final outcome of the championship such as the psychological battle between the two drivers).

          If someone wanted to debate it further in favour of that final result they could say that with the performance advantage Mercedes had at the weekend, with a dry race, given that Hamilton has come out on top overall in on-track battles between the two teammates and that Hamilton eventually only retired due to problems arising from the puncture. I think a finishing order of Hamilton first and Rosberg second was probably the most likely given the order at the start of lap 2 and assuming there would be no contact between the two.

          1. HAM did not come out on top in Canada. ROS managed the problem and finished 2nd but HAM did not and retired. It is debatable if there was no braking issue that Lewis would have been able to make the overtake stick (despite ROS cutting the chicane).

            1. If there was no braking issue but still an MGU issue, then Hamilton had almost certainly made the move stick after emerging from the pits ahead.

    12. 29 ahead, so cost him nothing to apologise and would still have been worth it for Rosberg unfortunately

      1. Agree, but he was defensive because he was feeling guilty and had been publicly shamed on the podium (deserved the boos, EJ was wrong, fans have every right to voice their displeasure.)

    13. I was getting excited when I read the BBC headline, but it has turned out as Lewis said “A slap on the wrist”. Lewis can fight close without touching cars in such a fight for the WDC. His little altercation with Button was a misunderstanding between the 2 Brits. Lewis will know not to touch Nico, but can Nico race at that level and pressure without losing it? Or does Nico suffer from the ‘red mist’ when under pressure. I still have some doubts for Monaco qualifying he knew he was on a slower lap and Lewis could yet get pole, so ‘red mist’ pull into run off area and reverse back onto track. That should have got him a five place penalty. Same here a Spa, he knew Lewis would start pulling away so had to act quickly ‘red mist’ clip his left rear tyre, to hell with consequences worst case we are both out of the race I’ll maintain my 11 point lead.

      1. I love how the conspiracy theorists usually dont have accounts.

    14. I love how they act like they are the first team to have this ‘no contact’-rule.

      1. Exactly. This statement is just stating the obvious… alternative would be to have the rule that they should “contact” every time.
        Actually I am bit of tired of all the story about the incident. It was going to happen sooner or later. In my view it was just a racing incident that could go wrong either way.
        Let them fight and stop all this complaining which will change nothing. They will still fight hard and it can go wrong again even at the next race… and Mercedes have absolutely no control over it no matter what they think.

    15. “If Lewis has said that it’s going to be a slap on the wrist, and that there’s going to be no consequence, then he’s not aware of what consequences we can implement.”

      Hmmm. So none then ?

    16. Formula Indonesia (@)
      29th August 2014, 13:56

      I dont think cold-headed Lewis will forgive him

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        29th August 2014, 14:56

        but the question is what will hot-headed Lewis do? ;-)

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          29th August 2014, 15:01

          He’s probably going to be wondering what his team and his teammate are up to as he has since Bahrain :-) It’s gotta be very tough for him to race knowing that most of the opposition is internal. No wonder his car can’t even go straight in qualifying… If you look through the season it’s hard to say that Mercedes has been behind Lewis starting from pit stops to car reliability to team orders to strategy. They’ve screwed Lewis as much as Nico has and that’s the bottomline. Alonso would have come out of his car and strangled Paddy Lowe and Toto Wollf by now:-)

      2. Cold-headed Lewis will get on with the job. Hot-headed Lewis will have a lot to say in press interviews after any incident.

    17. It’s absolutely what I suggested in the ‘How can Mercedes defuse the Hamilton-Rosberg row?’ article. I’m kind of… proud. :P

      1. …Well, under that article, as a matter of fact.

    18. I dont like the way public reacts to news like these. First, when Nico said his views about the meeting were different, but did not really go into the details, people assumed he did not have any good points and said that the only reason he is not telling us his point of view is because he does not have any points to defend himself. Now that Mercedes has this news out, people assume nothing has been done except for a slap on the wrist. How do we know nothing has been done? Its quite possible that mercedes has asked Nico to give up a lead in the next race and let Lewis by. We just dont have enough information to reach a conclusion on our own. This is exactly what is wrong with today’s media and we should refrain from doing this.

      1. petebaldwin (@)
        29th August 2014, 14:22

        @sd – I bet you £500 that Nico will not pull over from the lead in the next race to let Lewis win. Seriously! :D

        In reality, Nico has probably been given a suspended fine stating that if he does the same thing again, he’s in trouble. That’ll be it.

        What else could they do that wouldn’t hurt their own championship bid but would even things up?

        1. add another £500 from me!

        2. I know he wont do it, and I am not saying thats what he has been asked to do. I was just making a point that we dont know.

    19. There you go. Free to race, because there is no way anyone can control these guys. They are 2 purest race drivers, the constructor championship is already in Merc pocket, they will race for themselves, as expected. I am only worried that, in case of another race accident, it will be judged the wrong way. The chance that it will happen again is still big, from my point of view. This is all good for the show in its bigger picture. The more drama, the better. Obviously the advantage is with NIco’s now, because 2 DNFs in the same race will only be good news for him. This is a golden chance for Lewis to display some maturity, if he has any. Noone doubts is a splendid driver, a one of a kind, but he’s still behaving with his ego only. Excited to see them braking at T1 in Monza from 340 km/h next race.

      1. 340? Only that? I suppose people were peaking at 330 with DRS going down Kemmel.

        So much for the hopes and dreams of 400 km/h, they seemed as absurd as anyone winning a race besides Mercedes.

    20. Nico has now posted a statement on Facebook, reposted by Mercedes AMG Racing.

      In the days since the Belgian Grand Prix in Spa, I have spent a lot of time thinking about what happened during the race and discussing it with the team.
      I have already expressed my regret about the incident but, after meeting with Toto, Paddy and Lewis today, I wish to go a step further and describe it as an error of judgement on my part.
      The number one rule for us as team-mates is that we must not collide but that is exactly what happened.
      For that error of judgement, I apologise to Lewis and the team. I also want to say sorry to the fans who were deprived of our battle for the lead in Belgium.
      Lewis and I have been given clear instructions about how we race each other.
      As drivers, we have a clear responsibility to the team, the fans of the sport, our partners and Mercedes-Benz to deliver clean racing. We take that responsibility very seriously.
      I look forward to concluding the season with hard, fair competition on and off track right up to the final lap of the season in Abu Dhabi.

      1. P/s It doesn’t hurt to be contrite with an extra 18 points in the bank big grin

        This portion was omitted.

    21. Suitable disciplinary measures…. hmm, my guess is they’ve taken away his hair products. But seriously, what can a team really do to a millionaire star driver leading the championship that might plausibly be described as ‘disciplinary’?

      1. petebaldwin (@)
        29th August 2014, 14:24

        @maciek – The only thing that they could do that would hurt Nico would be to ban him for a race but that would effectively be punishing themselves so why would they?

        He’s got more money than anyone could ever need, is the clear leader in the WDC and will earn more money by winning the championship than Mercedes could get away with fining him.

        1. @petebaldwin, @maciek: The only thing I can think of to punish Nico but not the team would be to order him to let Lewis past the next time he’s in the lead. What if he didn’t do it? How about this for a nuclear option: I’ve seen a few mentions of Nico having a contract for next year, but would disobeying such an order break that contract? Bear in mind that this would not be a tactical team order during a race, sprung on a driver in the heat of battle, but a premeditated order given and agreed to before the race.

          1. Stop sharing dat between the two sides of the garage, that would hurt nico.

            1. That would hurt both*

      2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        29th August 2014, 14:36

        +1 – If the measures don’t involve points, they are irrelevant.

    22. They should suspend him for one race and tell him, “It’s to prove a point”. I’ll bet he never repeats that maneuver again.

      1. No they should not have suspended him, That would amount to a team manipulating the championship.

        Had they suspended Nico for a race & had Lewis won the championship by a few points it would have been a tainted win & it would have basically been gifted to him by the team.
        It would need a * by it in the record books for sure.

        1. Surely that is ignoring that Nico has manipulated the championship by either incompetend driving or taking a rival out of a race.

          1. Mistakes happen, You can’t go around suspending every driver who makes an error & happens to have contact with another driver.

            A driver making a small error & clipping another car is also completely different to a team actively stepping in & taking a championship contender out of the car for a race.

            Drivers makes mistakes & sometimes in close racing there will be some contact between cars & its possible in that situation that one car will suffer more damage. Its unfortunate but it happens & that will always have some affect on the championship standings be it the main title fight or lower down.

            Hamilton himself locked up coming trhough the field at Hockenheim & clipped Kimi Raikkonen which damaged Kimi’s front wing, Later on Vettel also clipped Kimi which further damaged the wing.
            That damage hurt Kimi’s race & could end up dropping him a spot or 2 down the final championship standings so should Lewis & Vettel be parked for a race for affecting someones championship position? Of course not,
            It was a racing deal, Its unfortunate Kimi got damage that harmed his performance & that it may cost him in the standings but its how it is.

            Should Lewis have been parked back in 2010 when he cut Vettel’s tyre at Silverstone due to a small error of judgement? That may have cost Vettel the championship had the safety car not come out later which gave him a shot at points.

            Hamilton & his fans need to get over it, What happened was unfortunate but it was still a pure racing incident caused by a very tiny error of judgement. No punishment should be handed down, Just leave them to race it out on track right down to the end.

            I’d say the same had things been reversed & if it were Lewis who made the small error. As I say these things happen, Lets move on to Monza.

            1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              29th August 2014, 20:12

              That is a good point – if clipping wings is so normal why then is everyone so upset about this and blaming Nico for doing it deliberately? Why? Obviously if Nico was such a great guy then the thought would never cross our minds, right? Or is it because we feel that Nico is the kind of guy that would do something like that on purpose?

              Look at the big collision between Maldonado and Gutierrez – even though Maldonado has been involved in many accidents, no one suggested that he did that intentionally.

        2. Isn’t deliberately causing an ‘accident’ manipulating the results. If the result was Hamilton in hospital or out for the rest of the season, people won’t be so quick to back Nico. He is a professional driver and therefore should face harsh penalties for willfully crashing his car. A suspension is light. Fining him cash makes no difference to a Millionaire.

          1. Have proof it was deliberate?

            No didn’t think so.

            Just another pathetic hamilton fan going along with there hero playing the victim, its so sad.

            1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              29th August 2014, 20:14

              You do realize that you just called Hamilton a hero, right? I’m just saying that you might be in denial:-)

      2. Meanwhile, back in the days Briatore just fired drivers when he was unhappy.

    23. That is very very convenient for Nico isn’t it? He had a chance to apologize on the podium he didn’t. He had a chance to apologize afterwards, he didn’t, he had a chance to do so even at the meeting of 16.45 he didn’t insisting he did it to prove a point. Now, the whole world is descending on Mercedes and its sponsors and voila, all of a sudden he takes responsibility almost a week after the event at a new meeting after tweeting just a day ago that Lewis was lying about what he said in the first meeting and we are supposed to believe him? Also conveniently, he is laughing all the way to the WDC with a 29 points lead illegally accumulated in Monaco and Spa. What exactly is the disciplinary action against him? we would like to know Toto.

    24. Now, I wish it was still like the old days when you can visit physical violence on your opponents and Lewis knock that smirk off his face.

      1. I think Lewis would be one eating the dirt. He’s a drama queen and guy who hits you and then runs off to tell on you when you hit him back. Guy’s a ¢µnt.

        1. Lewis has a black belt in Karate , has tatoos and his favourite song is Smack My Bįţčh up. Britney wouldn’t stand a chance.

          1. Right. Because belts and tattoos make you stronger.

        2. Why can we not report Lawrence, I’m sorry but that is totally unacceptable attitude. They guy should be banned.

          1. @f1-neil
            Are you for real??? “Unacceptable attitude”??? Banned?
            Thank you for your kind words, but I will not be dragged into argument with you.

            1. @Lawrence i think you sounded like a cu!nt yourself lol. Bad upbringing by your whore mom i presume

    25. To all those thinking that the chances of Lewis and Nico hitting each other again is high, I wouldn’t whink so. They both now know that the consequences of a second crash can be huge and I am sure they will be extra carefull when they are close at the track.

    26. I guess the team more worried about PR than about the genuine atmosphere within the team, will be pressured into this kind of nonsense by Hamilton’s media dramas. He is basically using media to deal with his own team and get his own way.
      Toto is a sad joke, not a team principal.

    27. I’d imagine that the conversation went something like: “The next time you crash into your team mate, we shall make sure that your car has a problem qualifying for Abu Double”.

    28. Lewis has also now issued a statement.

      Today we came together as a team and discussed our differences. Nico and I accept that we have both made mistakes and I feel it would be wrong to point fingers and say which one is worse than the other. What’s important is how we rise as a team from these situations. We win and we lose together and, as a team, we will emerge stronger.

      There is a deep foundation that still exists for me and Nico to work from, in spite of our difficult times and differences. We have the greatest team, the strongest group of individuals who have worked their hands to the bone to give us the best car you see us racing today. It’s important that we never forget that and give them the results they deserve. Today, Toto and Paddy told us clearly how we must race against each other from now on in a fair and respectful manner.

      The fans want to see a clean fight until the end of the season and that’s what we want to give them. It’s going to be a tough road from here but Championships have been won from much further back than I am now. And I promise you that I will be giving everything and more to win this for my team, for my family and for my fans.

      1. Today we came together as a team…

        Paddy, Toto and I were walking ahead into the meeting room when Nico, who was following us in, clipped Toto’s ankle causing him to fall. Nico stumbled, but still was first in the room.

        1. very good )

      2. Formula Indonesia (@)
        29th August 2014, 15:17

        Of course it was racing incidents, Both fans just over-hyped the result.

    29. Regarding the disciplinary action or punishment for Rosberg, I believe the best thing to do would be to give Lewis a slightly more advantageous strategy, such as pitting him before Nico for one race when he is not ahead.

    30. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      29th August 2014, 14:54

      I guess we’ll have to wait until Monza to find out what the disciplinary measures are and whether Lewis was right.

      If the measures don’t affect Nico’s races and his points directly then Lewis was right and Nico will not even receive the proverbial “slap on the wrist”. I think it will be safe to assume at that point that Mercedes has become Team Rosberg.

    31. Holy Hell, why are we still going on about this! It’s nauseating.
      Who cares now, it’s over.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        29th August 2014, 17:55

        Are you implying that the championship is over and we should focus on football instead?

        Nico deserved to ruin his own race and he would have been 14 points behind now… 14 points behind versus 29 points ahead (a 43 point swing the wrong way in the championship) by an idiotic amateurish move. And apparently it was done to prove a point while lends huge insult to injury. If Nico accidentally wins the WDC, it’ll be a disaster.

      2. Because it’s news, and because like it or not it’s attracted far more attention than any other story over the last few weeks.

        1. Silly season this year was slow, wasnt it?

    32. Ayrtonfan (@)
      29th August 2014, 15:12

      Lewis speaks his true words right after an incident- I don’t always agree with him, but they are better than a team prepared statement 10 days later.

      Deep down I don’t think he thinks Nico hit him on purpose (I may be wrong) but he speaks with roar emotion- not unlike Senna V Prost. If this one has not boiled over, it will very soon.

    33. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      29th August 2014, 15:17

      The best parallel situation that comes to my mind is Hulk vs PereZ in Hungary. hulk admitted after the race it was his fault. What I dont remember is if he was penalized during ( or after) the race for that.

      1. OmarR-Pepper (@)
        29th August 2014, 15:24

        No penalties for Spa
        Fans not making such a fuss for it

        Lets move on

    34. I was up in Northern Ontario picking blueberries and catching pickerel last weekend. I wasn’t able to see the race live, and managed to go all the way until Wednesday night without knowing what happened, and watched my recording of it as if it was live, very late Wednesday night into Thursday morning. So of course I was a thousand comments behind by the time I came here to the site.

      Bottom line for me…I am thrilled to read both of the latest comments from NR and LH as they have expressed exactly what I hoped to hear and expect for the rest of the season. This is a great rivalry and the team continues to prove that even though it would have been much easier to hire one rooster and one other to lick his boots, that’s not how they play, and they get that the bumpy ride that this is is far more thrilling and is what the fans pay to see, and is worth the ‘headaches’ that can come with managing two roosters. As I have said before, Mercedes gets it and I cannot thank them enough.

      1. Good that someone has said this, it must be such a ballache for Toto and Nicki to keep their word, it must be so hard to watch the close racing. But it seems that they have the same underlying view as the fans, and that’s great for the sport.

    35. Slightly worrying that we have Derek Warwick as the driver steward, wonder if he still thinks you’ll not find a more honest driver than Nico Rosberg, whose early career opinions are aired in the article below on bending the rules.

      Yes, it’s been posted before, but a personal quote is worth repeating.

      This week Warwick was quoted in the Daily Telegraph as saying.

      “I think what Nico was trying to say is he’s had enough of the forceful driving of Hamilton at Bahrain and again at Budapest, and he wasn’t going to give in. I think it’s an internal problem, not really a problem for the FIA or the stewards. They [Mercedes] have to somehow reprimand Rosberg and make sure these two guys don’t touch each other.”

      So, the stewards in Monza are going to look the other way again… unless there’s a possibility Lewis can be penalised, Derek Warwick was also steward for the incident in the link below

      Oh dear…

      1. Warwick again? Poor Hamilton.

      2. Apparently Derek Warwick has been a steward in some of the most controversial steward decisions concerning Lewis Hamilton over the years.
        It suffices to say that Derek Warwick is at war with Lewis Hamilton.

        1. Please tell me he’s not the one behind the 2008 Belgian grand prix decision.

          1. They didn’t have driver stewards in 2008. They had 3 stewards selected at random & a permanent steward (Who’s name I forget) who would attend every race.

            And I think the hatred been aimed at Derek Warwick is a bit pathetic to be honest.

            Nobody seemed to have an issue with him until he took a decision that went against Lewis & he’s been acting as a driver steward since 2010 & by all accounts is one of the most respected of the driver stewards amongst teams/driver because of how seriously he takes the role, Hence why he’s been invited to do it more than others.

            People can keep going on about Monaco, BUt have you seen all the data that the stewards did?
            Its easy to look at a bit of video & say whatever you want, But when you have all of the data, All of the angles & a knowledge of whats its like to drive one of these cars & how they react to certain situations, You are going to have a far better insight to make the decisions these stewards do, Thats why they brought in driver stewards to begin with.

            1. People who want to question Derek should watch this-

            2. By the data they could not understand if he made intentionally or not. So Derrick said that what convinced him was a chat with Rosberg. Maybe he has something special on his eyes.

    36. I hope we gain some insight on what these ‘disciplinary measures’ could be. If you were Toto Wolff et al., what would you do? The only thing I can think of that would impact only on Nico is a pay cut, and when becoming F1 World Champion for the first time is at stake, I’m willing to bet Nico would sacrifice his entire year’s salary for the chance.

      No, these sanctions will do little to prevent ‘heat of the moment’ acts unless of course the FIA stepped in and deducted his points. This is basically Merc’s way of saying they won’t tolerate it but the driver’s way of saying nothing will change (which is great for us fans!)

    37. The thing is, all that really can be done is a slap on the wrist since anything to hinder the driver can hinder the team’s outlook as well (i.e. constructor points).

      I’d do something like remove FP1 & FP2 time in favor of a young driver so that offending drivers lose out on practice/setup time at the track, but ultimately still have the equipment to get a high qualifying spot and race finish.

      It doesn’t seem like all this matters when the drivers are ultimately left free to race anyway; hopefully they both learn from this experience and are a bit more careful around each other.

    38. Now that Hamilton knows that he can do whatever he wants and Rosberg will get blamed, watch out!

    39. This is just showing how weak the leadership of this team is. That they had to hang Nico out this way in order to appease media that was sent into frenzy by their own driver (Lewis) in the first place.
      Team can’t distinguish between good PR and good deeds.
      I’ve never really expected more from Toto, the guy who is too concerned by his own PR, since he pretty much lucked into being the principal of the top team.
      I really don’t see him having any kind of a clue how to build on from where Ross left.

      In my opinion, firstly Toto and Lauda should have kept their mouths shut during the GP. Then they should have reminded Lewis that you don’t wash dirty laundry in the public, and finally, should have kept everything inside after this internal discussion.

      I can’t see no other point in announcing all this to the media, besides pleasing the media and getting some good PR. But the real team shouldn’t prioritize that over the integrity and that mantra that you win like a team and you lose like a team.

      1. Nico admits he crashed on purpose, but in your mind it’s Lewis’ fault.


        So if someone attacks you and steals your wallet, it’s your fault. Ok, I get it now.

        1. Nico never admitted he crashed on purpose.

          The only person that ever said that was Lewis & we all know he will say anything to get people to feel bad for him because he likes playing the victim.

          1. Exactly.

            1. “I did it to prove a point.”, ~ Nico Rosberg 2014.

          2. “The only person that ever said that was Lewis”

            Goto Autosport and read Toto’s interview, he said the same as Lewis, that Rosberg did it to prove a point. That’s besides the fact that the Merc spokesperson came out immediatly after the meeting and said Lewis statement was broadly accurate. If you dont take that to mean that Nico, at very least implied that he was at fault, then i feel sorry for you.

            But whatever, don’t let these little facts destroy the image you’re trying to create about Lewis.

    40. What I find most sad about this affair has been Rosberg’s handling of it. He must have known as soon as he saw Hamilton snaking off the track with a puncture that (a) he’d cocked up, and (b) he’d gained a substantial championship benefit from it.

      And yet, after the race, his words were “I regret the contact because it meant I didn’t win” – a brazenly self-centred view of the accident. His more appropriate public apology has only now appeared, 5 days after the race, having been ordered to make it by the Mercedes bosses. I have been a Rosberg fan since he broke into F1 with Williams, but my opinion of him has been shattered by this. Not by the contact itself – we all make mistakes, and it’s inevitably going to happen sooner or later when two drivers are going wheel-to-wheel. No, it’s the pathetic refusal to apologize for a clear error until told to do so. I know racing drivers are supposed to be selfish, blinkered, ruthless operators, but it would have taken only an ounce of sportsmanship, and no loss of face, to put his hands up after the race and make a proper apology.

      Compare Nico Hülkenberg’s statements after hitting Perez in Hungary, and you will see a much more humble and honourable driver.

      Some will argue that there will have been many more things said in private than have been said to the media, and this is of course true – we can’t know the full dialogue that has occurred between Lewis, Nico and the Mercedes management. But I think Nico owes that apology to the fans and followers of the sport, not just to Lewis. A mistake made with the world watching deserves a prompt apology under the same spotlight.

      1. @casanova

        after the race, his words were “I regret the contact because it meant I didn’t win”

        I don’t think that’s a direct quote, and I’m not sure which quote of his you might be paraphrasing?

        1. I paraphrased from memory a quote appears in Lee MacKenzie’s post-race interview with Rosberg. I’ve dug it out – it can be seen at ~52:50 of the BBC’s highlights program. Rosberg’ answer begins: “For sure, I regret that we touched, yes definitely, because it cost me the win”.

          1. @casanova I must admit I amongst many was quite curious to hear if NR would apologize while on the podium, and was intrigued that he didn’t. But after hearing more about his intention, which was basically to stand his ground and show LH that he was not going to so easily just allow the door to be shut on him, I understand more why he didn’t apologize.

            Hulk vs. Perez is not the same as NR vs. LH. The world knows NR vs LH is for the WDC this year. I think in NR’s mind, immediately apologizing would have removed the impact of the point he was trying to make to LH…he’s not just going to roll over….he’s not going to back down…he’s going to fight for every inch. NR was not going to apologize for giving us what he want…a hard fought rivalry. If he seemed bull-headed about this, well, that should be welcomed and expected of a WDC level driver, given scenarios like SV getting WDC level hero worship for disobeying a team order in race one of a season against a teammate whose car was cranked down and a sitting duck.

    41. Just wanted to post this with regards to the stewards & Hamilton since many are going on the past week about how Lewis seems to always be on the end of bad call’s-

      The stewards have actually not treated Lewis any differently. He gets penalty’s for the same things other do yet when Lewis gets the penalty there’s uproar & when its someone else its seen as fair?

      Take Monaco 2011, Lewis hist Massa via a dumb move at the hairpin & gets a penalty & Hamilton fans are outraged about it. Yet Di Resta did the same thing & got the same penalty is an identical incident & the same fans felt it was fair?

      Just proves that Hamilton fans think there golden boy can do no wrong & that any decision that goes against him is unfair. There as bad as there hero.

      1. @RogerA actually the conclusion to the article you linked doesn’t really match the data, notably because of Spa 2008. I’d be more convinced if other drivers records were also examined in detail.

        It’s not just the penalties that Lewis gets himself, it’s also the lack of penalising others who compromise his races blatently eg

        A post race reprimand was given to Webber, and the stewards only gave that because Mark apologised for his error and in doing so exposed their bias/incompetence. It’s not the only example but trawling through them all won’t change things.

        Your Monaco 2011 example is typical of Massa trying to close the door with the horse halfway bolted, much like he did to Magnussen in Austria this year. Contrast with the incident in the same race where Schumi put his car inside Hamilton on the same corner in the same manner, guess what, Lewis accepted it and gave him racing room. Fortunately Massa is now considerably slower than Lewis and they don’t rub wheels so often.

        1. The Spa 2008 penalty was fully justified.

          He cut the corner & clearly gained an advantage by coming off the runoff much closer than he would have done had he gone round the corner behind Kimi. And as I proved with a video yesterday Lewis was fully back on the throttle before Kimi was fully past him which shows he did not fully give the advantage he gained back.

          The video/screenshots I posted yesterday proved this & every other driver on the grid apart from Sutil & Kovalainen agreed with the decision when asked about it by the media at the next race.

          The thing with Massa at Monaco was 100% Lewis fault. Di Resta did the same & got the same penalty so stewards were totally consistent.
          There was no opportunity for lewis to pass there, he threw it up the inside over the kurb & into the side of massa.
          then he put massa in the wall in the tunnel by using kers & going up the inside again round the bend which is something you never do through there as the car on the outside will also end up in the wall due to the dirt & debris that collects.

          If Lewis was so innocent then why dod not other driver disagree with these, Why did the TV pundits which include ex drivers also agree with them? Its because Lewis was to blame & got the penalty he deserves in those incidents.

          1. Sigh! RogerA, Spa 2008, Lewis and Kimi were side-by-side going into the chicane, your ‘proof screenshots’ were way back up the track, you are not only wrong but clearly desperate to prove something…

            As for the commentators etc ageeing, you’ll have to find references for that, oh heck no, on second thoughts don’t bother, most of us have made our mind up about that incident anyway, and I’m thinking they don’t agree with you.

            Massa, well we can discuss that Monaco race til the cows come home, but the big accidents just keep coming for Felipe, and Lewis isn’t part of them is he?

          2. “The Spa 2008 penalty was fully justified. He cut the corner & clearly gained an advantage by coming off the runoff much closer than he would have done had he gone round the corner behind Kimi.”

            Please do inform us all of your opinion of Canada 2014 and Rosbergs cheating, then.

    42. It’ll all explode again in Monza or whenever else they inevitably collide.

    43. Derek Warwick is a lovely guy but he was a disgrace in Monaco. He was quite obviously determined to find Rosberg innocent, protect Keke and avoid a scandal. He even said: “Nico gave me the answers I needed,” as well as making out the interview was a big part of the evidence (like someone would cheat but not lie) and claiming they’d had ‘all the data’ when they didn’t look at tyre loading data which were damning. It was a shameful, timid whitewash, with the blatant prejudgment as @frasier reminds us.

      Now he’s claiming whatever happens next between Rosberg and Hamilton is nothing to do with the stewarding? It’s supposed to be the governing body enforcing the rules Derek, not the teams or the drivers! You’re not brave enough to be a steward.

      This whole situation could have been avoided with proper stewarding. Pirro was no better, spending 10 seconds deciding the definitive ‘causing an accident’ was a racing incident. Where’s Mansell when you need him? Someone with balls.

      1. Since you seem so sure the tyre data will find guilt im sure you have seen it then?

        Stop whining about it already, It was a simple mistake nothing intentional & it just shows how desperate hamilton fans are to make there hero out to be a victim & make it out like the world is out to get him.

        next you will be saying how warwick & nico are racist or something right?

        love how all the armchair experts who have not driven a f1 car & never been round monaco & who have seen none of the data love to claim they know the facts.

        1. “I was told they looked at the standard brake, throttle and steering traces, but not the tyre load data. Had they done, I’m pretty sure they’d have found an inconsistency between what the tyres could take (as seen on previous run) and how much steering input was made. As DC said, he appeared to be sawing at the wheel even when the car was clearly planted to the road. That is very much what it looked like from front-on – with the car simply following his steering inputs. It’s was as if he’d expected that sawing to create a twitch and when it didn’t and he found himself arriving at the turn-in point with the car slowed and stable, he then locked up, ensuring he couldn’t make the turn. It’s the locking up of the wheels at a point where the car is easily slow enough to make the turn that gives it away.”

          “Even inside the team, there are those who will tell you off the record that they suspect that it was indeed deliberate. To not reflect that general feeling – as well as how I personally judged the front-on shot of the incident (which was not shown on tv) in which Rosberg’s car appears to be easily slowed enough to make the turn at the turn-in point – and only then locks its brakes – would do the report a disservice.”

          Mark Hughes, Motor Sport

        2. RogerA, yet again I’ll post this link, read it and then tell me that Rosberg didn’t cheat at Monaco 2014.

    44. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      29th August 2014, 19:58

      Rosberg made the following statement that I’ve picked up on:
      “Lewis and I have been given clear instructions about how we race each other. As drivers, we have a clear responsibility to the team, the fans of the sport, our partners and Mercedes-Benz to deliver clean racing.”

      Could these be the so-called “disciplinary measures”? What kind of instructions could they give about racing each other? If memory serves me right, “clear instructions and agreements” between drivers have resulted in the biggest feuds in F1.

      Clear is not good for the teammate who abides by the rules – it always suits the one that likes to bend the rules.

      1. Does this now mean that Lewis will obey team orders. I doubt it.

    45. I dont unerstand why people have such an idealistic image of F1. This sport unlike any other sport in the world is ONLY about winning, it is everything. In battles like these and in the past, its not about an sportsman, or as a good a race driver or an athlete. Its just about as a man how far are you willing to go, how desperate are you to win. If I was a 5 time champion but booed by everybody I wouldn’t care. I have no issue whether it was deliberate or not because I understand it might be his ONE chance at a world title, 2nd is nowhere in this sport. Wouldn’t blame Hamilton if he did something underhand to win. Think its time some fans of F1 understood that as a sport AND a business all that matters is winning. Nothing else, not how, or why just that you won.

      1. @Tayyib Abu This is a confused view IMO. If it’s not a sporting achievement it doesn’t represent an achievement. The essence of cheating is claiming excellence – that you don’t have.

        People are always saying things like this, ‘winning is everything’, but it’s not true. Being seen to be the best is everything. This is why Schumi’s bad moments so diminished him. Same with Nico, the way he’s going. Why do you think he got booed?

        Obviously it’s up to the governance to make sure that winning represents excellence not mere desire, and it’s frustrating for fans when they wimp out of that and are even deceitful themselves.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          31st August 2014, 16:00

          A huge +1

          How you win is sometimes a lot more important than winning in my book. If Lewis wins this WDC against all odds, it’ll be truly be one of the biggest achievements in F1

          It will probably be another movie about a driver overcoming all odds to win the WDC against his own teammate (I can already see Will Smith and DiCaprio in it).

    46. Am really curious how much did Merc fined Rosberg. Guess it’s means nothing to Rosberg as he’s more than just a millionaire. And he’s leading by 29 points.

      1. Have they fined him?

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          31st August 2014, 15:48

          Well, if they are racing fair and square and there are supposedlyno favorites, the only disciplinary measure they could have imposed is a financial penalty unless Nico had to write on a blackboard 100 times “I won’t hit Lewis again”:-)

    47. So, what are these disciplinary measures? BBC say ‘Mercedes punish Rosberg’ but what’s the punishment? A slap on the wrist isn’t a punishment. “Don’t do it again you naughty, naughty boy!”

    48. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      31st August 2014, 15:45

      I read this comment on another site and I thought I would share it as it’s really funny.

      With 29pts and forseeable failures in one of our cars during the last 7 races, we at Mercedes are committed to straight and fair racing and may the best “german” man win.


      Toto & Co

    49. “I have already expressed my regret about the incident but, after meeting with Toto, Paddy and Lewis today, I wish to go a step further and describe it as an error of judgement on my part.
      Surely an error of judgement that leads to a collision was avoidable? No penalty absolutely bemused

      1. Accidents are caused, albeit by a mistake(s) and are deemed ‘racing incidents’.
        For these, blame can arguably be proportioned 50/50 spread evenly between both drivers.

        In regards to Lewis and Nico’s collision (not taking into account Nico’s apology) this was not a 50/50 incident and Nico’s was the culpable driver.
        Granted it was a mistake and being that it was NOT a 50/50 incident, shouldn’t Nico have been penalised during the race?
        If not, when is a collision deemed not a racing incident.
        Does anybody know the answer to this question?

    Comments are closed.