Stewards rule Hamilton-Rosberg crash was racing incident

2016 Spanish Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

The Spanish Grand Prix stewards have ruled the first-lap collision between Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg was a racing incident.

The two Mercedes drivers crashed while fighting for the lead at turn four on the opening lap of the race.

Hamilton has revealed he was around 17kph quicker than Rosberg prior to the collision as Rosberg’s power unit was 180bhp down due to being in the wrong engine mode.

The stewards issued the following ruling:

“The incident concerned started when car 6 [Rosberg] dropped into an incorrect power mode, as set by the driver prior to the start. This created a significant power differential between car 6 and car 44 at the exit of turn three coming onto the straight, resulting in as much as a 17kph speed difference between the two cars on the straight.”

“Car 6 moved to the right to defend his position, as is his right under [Article] 27.7 of the sporting regulations. Simultaneously car 44 as the significantly faster car with, at that time, apparent space on the inside, moved to make the pass. [Article] 27.7 requires the leading driver to leave room, if there is a “significant portion” of the car attempting to pass alongside.”

“Car 44 had a portion of his front wing inside car 6 small fractions of a second prior to car 44 having to leave the right side of the track to avoid an initial collision, which may have led him to believe he had the right to space on the right. Once on the grass on the side of the track car 44 was no longer in control of the situation.”

“Having heard extensively from both drivers and from the team, the stewards determined that car 6 had the right to make the manoeuvre that he did and that car 44’s attempt to overtake was reasonable, and that the convergence of events led neither driver to be wholly or predominantly at fault, and therefore take no further action.”

2016 Spanish Grand Prix

    Browse all Spanish Grand Prix articles

    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.

    217 comments on “Stewards rule Hamilton-Rosberg crash was racing incident”

    1. Aggressive attacking, Aggressive defending. Ended in a collision, racing incident. + the incident gave us a great race today!

      1. +1. Best summary.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          16th May 2016, 1:20

          @sravan-pe Wrong. Car in front is down 170bhp, you pass that car. If the driver in front pushes you into a wall, the driver gets suspended for 6 months – Senna…

          1. racing fan = racing incident, both had the right and unfortunately collided

            ham fan = how dare anyone be in the same space as Hamilton, they should move over and bow immediately in his presence!

            to me its Karma for Hamilton and Austin 2015

            1. You forgot the view of the Rosberg fans. They are as fanatical as the bad Hamilton’s fans.

            2. I’m a Ham fan. It was clearly a racing incident.

              There are pretty vociferous folk in both the pro-Ham and anti-Ham camps, but also plenty of sane folk too. Try to be one of the sane ones next time hey, instead of trying to create extra drama where there is none?

            3. @x303 I’m a Rosberg fan who thinks that Hamilton is primarily responsible for the collision, but for a reason that I believe to be reasonable: while Hamilton’s leaving the track was a racing incident, he should’ve backed off once he was on the grass. The stewards made that plenty clear last year with Raikkonen at Silverstone– once you’re off track, it’s your responsibility to rejoin safely. I realize that Hamilton didn’t exactly have a lot of time to make that decision (grass is pretty slick), but I think he should’ve backed off once he was on the grass and rejoined the track in a safe manner.

            4. @zjakobs I disagree but that’s a fair point. I think that Rosberg triggered the whole mess so he’s more to blame but that’s debatable.
              Sure, if you leave the track, you have to rejoin safely.

              The stewards ruled it as a racing incident, so the fight can go on. :)

            5. You cannot block while traveling at blue flag speeds. EVERY F1 driver will tell you that. That Rosberg did not receive a one-race suspension – at least – is beyond the pale.

              @Zane Jacobs – Hamilton choosing to “back off” – meaning apply brakes – while fully on the grass might have spun him into the wall five meters away at a ridiculously fast speed. So, Hamilton, in essence, chose life instead of severe injury or possible death.

      2. Couldn’t agree more. Maybe Hamilton could have eased and tried on the outside but I don’t blame him. It was unfortunate that he spun and happened to collect Nico.

        1. Lewis tried to avoid collision, too bad he lost control on the grass. Racing incident is fine too me despite Nico’s late change of direction.

          1. What late change of direction? It was the only and predictable move Rosberg could do, started quite a while back.
            Hamilton saw the massive speed differential and thought he could cleanly get alongside before the space was closed. Didn’t go that way and wasn’t prepared to back off in time.

            1. Have you actually watched Anthony davidsons breakdown of the incident, it doesn’t seem so. Let’s try to be objective here! Hamilton saw a space, there was a space, Nico was distracted and reacted too late and in an aggressive manner, not saying he was wrong to be aggressive but definitely wrong to do it as late as he did.

          2. From telemetry is was clear to the stewards that Hamilton did not lift. Another reason why at best, its judged as a racing incident. It takes two to tango! ;o)

        2. I believe the reason Hamilton chose to go inside is because the natural line for the upcoming right hand corner was on the left, which is where the leading driver would be pointing in normal circumstances…the bottom line is Nico would have juked left if Hamilton chose the outside, but Nico was already toast because Lewis had the run. From my perspective, this one is primarily on Nico…he was slow and ran his teammate off the racing surface. Not good.

          1. Looking at Davidson’s analysis and replays a few times, I tend to agree with you. It seemed that Nico knew/felt/saw (not sure which) Hamilton would be going for the inside line. It was evident in the trajectory of Nico’s angle in closing the gap. On balance he was entitled to go for that but the key question, I think, for Mercedes is whether in future they allow one of their drivers to go for that move (legal but not ideal to score constructor points).

      3. -1 aggressive attacking is the only way to attack, if you were in hamiltons car what whould you have done? Flabbergasted that people think nicos actions where fine!

        1. You know more that the stewards now, do you?

          1. If you have watched F1 for any length of time you would know the stewards are inconsistant


            1. And you’re consistent? And you know more?

            2. @lari, @sravan-pe you realize that is rhetorical nonsense right? Be strong in the force, deny the impulse to throw ad hominem attacks. The world is a better place when people don’t lie (see definition) as much…

            3. The stewards are VERY inconsistent, see 2013 Brazilian GP


              Not only was Hamilton’s move across the track very gradual and controlled, there was still plenty of room for Bottas who misjudged the braking and hit Hamilton.

              Guess what? Lewis got a drive-through penalty… no consistency whatsoever

        2. Mehmet Ersen
          15th May 2016, 17:02

          Honest answer. It looks like Rosberg starts to move right as soon as he exits the corner. I think i would have lifted slightly and flicked left to try the outside once Rosbergs move to the right became obvious. Then i probably would have waited for another opportunity. These drivers should be able to think fast or instinctively know by the feeling in the gut if nothing else that something is not going to plan, and yes all of that does happen in a split second but they are capable of fast adjustments. Hamilton especially is capable of that but he was too impatient today.

          1. Unfortunately the track is so badly designed that there would not be another opportunity for Hamilton to overtake Rosberg.

          2. The crucial point is that Rosberg was too slow (due to him setting the wrong engine mode) not Hamilton too fast. Hamilton explains the situation fairly convincingly:

            “I was coming through turn three and then he had a D-rate, basically made a mistake and started in the wrong engine settings. Before the start we have to decide what engine setting we’re going to start in and there’s only one that’s maximum power. He hadn’t gone to that, he was in a Safety Car mode or something. He D-rated at that point so it meant he lost like 180bhp.”

            Basically Hamilton was being inadvertently brake tested by Rosberg due to the latter’s error. A racing incident seems fair from a stewarding viewpoint, no penalties, but the error ausing the incident (as far as Mercedes are concerned) should lie with Rosberg not Hamilton. But over and done, on to the next race. At least we saw a good race and Verstappen win, which was something.

            1. Rosberg was in the right! If you look at turn one Rosberg went to go down the inside of Hamilton and was closed off! So Rosberg went to the outside out braked Hamilton and passed him. Thats how it is done. Clean overtaking and no throwing of the steering wheel!

          3. Nonsense. The racing line for the upcoming right hander is on the left. Nico moved to the right only to block Lewis, because that side of the track certainly is not the fastest way through that section of the track. That much is fairly obvious.


              People should watch this angle, and how Rosberg going slowly to right had a secondary very aggressive move to right, see how his car wiggles as he wanted to toss Hamilton midway before even going crazy at the edge! Almost someone trying to headbutt another person!!! If stewards did see this and still call it a racing incident, they are nothing but full of shiiitee…

              He hesitated for a split sec and made a very aggresive sharp right turn… you can clearly see his car wiggle!!!!

        3. Mehmet Ersen
          15th May 2016, 17:08

          Not blaming Hamilton btw, but im just surprised that he was blinded by impatience and didn’t change lift and or change direction

          1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            15th May 2016, 17:27

            He was too quick and he was already inside – he would have had to lift the car using the force and moved it to the outside. You can question Lewis’ judgment for trying early but would it have made a difference if that happened 2 laps later? Would Nico’s defending be viewed as acceptable on lap 66 versus lap 1?

            1. Mehmet Ersen
              15th May 2016, 17:54

              Rosberg move to the right actually starts very early after exiting, when rosberg starts his move hamilton is still to the left, then hamilton jinks right. Hamilton could see he is moving right but tries to beat him to the gap before it closes. Hamilton could have changed his mind as Rosbergs move is telegraphed quite early. Bit desperate from lewis. He was determined to get to the inside no matter what because he was so desperate to regain the lead. Desperate and impatient. I want Lewis to win the Championship btw, no bias hear. Just saying what i see.

            2. Mehmet Ersen
              15th May 2016, 17:56


          2. Hamilton said Rosberg’s late trajectory towards the apex meant that the space on the left side would have closed up on corner exit, that is why Lewis went for the gap on the right but little did he know that Rosberg would have chopped him off like that.

          3. BJ (@beejis60)
            16th May 2016, 1:54

            “The moment you stop going for a gap that exists, you’re no longer a racing driver”

            1. Well.. In the end both of them weren’t racing. Thanks boys. The race turned out to be great.

            2. @beejis60 – That quote was used by Senna to defend crashing Prost out of the Suzuka Gp at the 1st corner to win his championship. Very controversial at the time, and Senna later apologized for the incident saying it was wrong of him to do what he did. I know its a cool looking/sounding quote but by using it you are basically sayng Hamilton ‘did a dirty Senna’…. Is that what you are saying? Because I don’t think that’s what you are trying to say, but yeah, context.

            3. Heh, there’s an article on that very quote on this very site:
              To me, Hamilton did a Senna.. went for a gap that WASN’T there.. The real gap was on the left. Racing line was free, and acres of run-off room before turn 4.

              Was it an innocent mistake (or misjudgement), or was he trying to get Rosberg penalised by shoving his nose into the closing door before going onto the grass? :P

        4. Laura, where did I say that Nico’s actions were fine? Aggressive defending is not fine, it’s too aggressive.

        5. I would’ve gone for the gap Nico left open on the racing line, blown past him before turn 4 and went on the win the race.. If it was me :P

          Alternatively, as soon as I saw Nico moving right, in front of me, I would have jinked left and overtaken him as above. All it takes is a tiny movement of the steering wheel. If Nico had then turned left as well, then he would have been totally in the wrong.

          1. Nico had more room to the right. So Lewis went for that site and the moment he turn the steering wheel Rosberg went the same direction but Hamilton had too much speed compared to Rosberg to change lines and not hit Rosberg at the back so his only hope was that Rosberg will leave some room.

      4. I agree, but it shouldn’t be unpenalized. If both are wrong, then it doesn’t make it right. Other drivers have gotten lots of points on their license for the same behavior. Again it’s another example of class justice. Both Hamilton and Rosberg deserve at least points on their license or perhaps even grid penalty’s.

      5. It wasnt aggressive attacking. Rosberg was very slow at that point. Rosberg should have got a reprimand because he went off the racing line to defend aggressively.

      6. For me the blame was more with Rosberg. If Hamilton was able to get at all alongside on the straight then it was overly aggressive defending that put him off track. It reminded me of Rosberg putting a couple of people off track in Bahrain a few years ago. Having said that, although more blame might be with Rosberg, I am happy to see this go down as a racing incident. The whole thing was took place in such a short amount of time. Hamilton committed to the right before being able to appreciate that Rosberg was even moving over that way, and Hamilton must have only really appeared in Rosberg’s mirrors when he had him half off the track.

      7. Neither one used a turn signal?

    2. Good. But, if I were Nico, he isn’t Lewis…

    3. I’m glad that this has been reviewed and that the stewards have determined that it was a racing incident.

      Unfortunately, this collision is going to be milked for all its worth by some F1 broadcasters as they look to try and stoke a new conflict between the two purely for sensationalism.

      It’s a real shame as this is just one of those things that can happen when Mercedes – to their great credit – actually allow their two very competitive and very talented drivers to race.

      1. Maybe Lauda should be more cautious with his words next time… most pundits have a different opinion but he clearly blamed Lewis…

        1. I think Lauda was spot on myself @jcost, and other drivers will know it too. But that doesn’t make it any less of a racing incident – just one of those things that happen.

          It would have been bad for the sport had they handed a penalty and upset the fight for the championship for this, already it has hurt Hamilton because he now has one less race to try and catch Rosberg and it might also slightly spring to mind the next time they are fighting on track.

          As the team mentioned, they let their drivers fight and we must all be very glad that they do too.

          1. @bascb other drivers? Karun Chandhok, Martin Brundle, Damon Hill, Anthony Davidson… all said Lewis legitimately went for an existing gap and managed to get his front wing in place to get a lit bit more space…

            I think Nico was distracted getting his engine mode right and was surprised Lewis was initiating a move to overtake him and tried to close the door when Lewis nose was already in… I think he made a genuine mistake, I don’t see any evil on that.

            1. @jcost The “objective” Sky crew said it was Rosberg his fault, now there’s a shocker…

            2. @xtwl DC is not Sky and had a similar opinion…

            3. sorry if you hadn’t noticed @jcost, but especially Sky are far too often on the wrong side of national pride getting in the way of presenting any Rosberg vs. Hamilton issue objectively.

              Again, this is pretty clearly a racing incident where Hamilton’s move was ill advised on the one side, and he should have probably backed off out of it. And on the other side Rosberg made a mistake with the engine settings and reacted fast to close the gap clearly not anticipating that Hamilton was so much faster and already going for that gap.

              Neither had bad intentions as such. But I think what Lauda mentions – that Hamilton might have been upset with himself for letting Rosberg by a bit earlier – probably helped make him be too unpatient and jumping into a chance that never really was there to execute safely.

          2. When Lauda was racing, they didn’t have engine modes. Now harvesting and deployment are a recent innovation to F1. There is now way Hamilton should have been going faster than Rosberg, except Rosberg had some issue with his car, and the driver behind is forced to pass or risk being overtaken by cars behind.

            1. When Lauda was racing, drivers knew to lift and think twice before having an accident.

            2. When Lauda was racing they wouldn’t push an opponent of the track. Especially not when they were dealing with a (self inflicted) technical issue.

          3. How can Lauda be “spot on” when the natural racing line for the upcoming right had corner is clearly to the left side of the tarmac….Nico obviously moved right to block Lewis, as that is the only reason for a driver to be juking right at that point on the circuit, but Nico at that point was clearly too slow and Lewis had an incredible run on him. Nico caused the incident, though I don’t believe a penalty is warranted for it….but this one is on Nico.

            1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              16th May 2016, 13:58

              @medman Lauda is acting really strange – his natural instinct is to publicly attack Lewis within 10-20 seconds of anything happening. I’m sure Lewis is aware of it.

      2. Some broadcasters = Sky.

        1. You clearly have not had to suffer through Leigh Diffy’s histrionics on NBC Sports.

      3. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        15th May 2016, 17:29

        @willwood well in my opinion one of the drivers on the Mercedes team is a world class weasel and I won’t name him other than to say that his name rhymes with Spielberg… We’ve seen it time and time and time again with Nico…

          1. Don’t agree

          2. Agree

    4. Mercedes mobbing..anyone?

      1. *lobbying

      2. On a second thought, can Keith now take down the pole or update the pole based on the new info coning out regarding what happened since it has been confirmed that Nico was on the wrong engine mode?
        Although people will still vote according to who they like but let them have all the information.
        With the info that Nico was very much slower than Lewis, question is should he have tried to defend an undefendable position?
        Keith said he blames Lewis for the crash so I am wondering what he thinks now.
        This ruling shows that Mercedes chose to deal with the matter internally.

        1. Really? Kieth blames Lewis? Oh dear thats embarrasing

          1. “Embarrassing”? I don’t think Keith sees it that way.
            Having been visiting this website for years, Keith has drivers he goes soft on, Ham is not one of them hence this pole was put up immediately after the incident occurred without all the necessary info needed for proper judgement. Neither comments from those involved nor decisions from stewards had been presented before the article went up. Not even a video or images of the incident were published with the article for a more objective voting.
            Seeding the article with his own judgement prior to the voting proper, also influences the vote he proposes given that he runs the website and his opinion like it or not carries some weight.

        2. Yep I thought @keithcollantine was a bit quick off the mark with the poll thread. It was always likely there was more to learn, with the harvesting light flashing and the strange difference in speed.

          1. I think it did wonders to calm down the abusive talk about both drivers on the live blog myself @lockup, to me it was a great move that helped us all move on and enjoy the great race that we got on track instead of harking back to the incident

            1. Okay I can imagine @bascb. I wasn’t following that myself. In a way that demonstrates how the voting isn’t necessarily too meaningful now tho.

            2. looks like most people agree with the stewards that both drivers were partly to blame @lockup. Seems pretty accurate to me :-)

            3. Well there’s partly and there’s partly @bascb. Why wouldn’t the many fair and reasonable fans shift their proportions armed with new information? Most of us would aspire to an informed opinion, after all :)

        3. Yes, I too was surprised at just how quickly the poll appeared. Especially considering it was right at the start of the race and clearly more information and camera angles would appear with time. With all the new data available, I wonder if the outcome of the poll would now be different.

      3. You’re right on. Mobbing is the right way to describe it.

    5. Good. Correct “stewards” decision. We don’t need partisanship and controversy in F1 (although I predict that this thread will end up with hundreds of replies.)

      1. @paul-a While I agree with the stewards decision, I have to disagree with not needing partisanship in F1.

        Partisanship is absolutely fundamental to competition. It’s what makes it exciting. Controversy also has its place, for the right reasons. It’s the banter about these reasons which gives it some ‘meat’ and human interest.

        1. On track competitiveness, desire to win, even a little bit of aggressiveness, I totally agree; for fans to have their favourites, I totally agree. What I was referring to was the stewards’ “partisanship and controversy.” Today, unacceptable partisanship was exacerbated by TV pundits — with the British commentary trying to absolve Hamilton (maybe they tried to be “fair”, but didn’t succeed in my opinion) and German TV making noise about “Hamilton has already apologized.”

    6. The correct decision. We want hard racing, sometimes this is the result.

      1. What about fair racing? otherwise give them all cortinas and let them banger race

        1. What about subjective opinions, now please reply more.

    7. Not satisfied at all. Should’ve given ROS a penalty. It was ROS’s fault right? he’s in the wrong engine mode and caused the crash. How did he get away with this?

      1. Rosberg ‘got away with it’ (as you put it) because he was wiped out at the same time – both drivers effectively lost a win in this race, as it would likely have gone either way. Nico created the incident with his engine mode screw-up, but Lewis pushed too hard at the same time.

        If either driver had survived (and taken the other out), then a penalty would likely have been awarded.

      2. And I guess there is no rule that says ‘being in the wrong engine mode is not allowed’…

        1. But there is rule saying he should leave space, and he didn’t

        2. Simultaneously slowing down because of your own error (engine mode) and swerving right over the track to block a pass, trying to compensate for your error, seems a recipe for collision.

          Still a long way to go, but Rosberg has shown that his Spa-Monaco 2014 mentality is still there. And I don’t think that’s a good sign in terms of his chances.

    8. Good decision.

    9. On reflection and thanks to Ant Davidson’s excellent analysis that’s what it was. Two drivers independently making decisions that could have had different and acceptable outcomes but for their combination.

      1. is that not apply to every crash ever involving two cars?

        1. Exactly, this is somehow 60/40, 50/50 because it involves Hamilton being the attacking car.

          If Hamilton was the car in front, putting his car in wrong engine modes and looking down at his steering wheel mid-corner and making adjustments, then forcing his teammate off the road after realising he was down on power and about to lose the lead, then this would have been 100% at the blame of Hamilton.

          1. You’re seeing ghosts, again….

          2. Spot on.

      2. Indeed. Nico got lost trying to fix his engine mode and made a clumsy defense move.

      3. Let’s be thankful that they were together on the track, and not being kept apart by “strategy”.

    10. Not satisfied at all. Should’ve given ROS a penalty. It was ROS’s fault right? he’s in the wrong engine mode and caused the crash. How did he get away with this?

    11. John Rymie (@)
      15th May 2016, 16:36

      The inconsistency of the stewarding is still an issue for me. Yes it is marginally better than it was, but still not consistent enough.

      Russian GP: Carlos Sainz Jr. gets a penalty and a reprimand + points for forcing Jolyan Palmer off track, but ther is ZERO contact or damage.

      Spanish GP: Nico Rosberg leaves no room for Hamilton and both cars are damaged and out of the race after crashing into one another = racing incident?

      My point isn’t to apportion blame in either incident , my point is to highlight the inconsistency between the two decisions. I tend to fall on the “racing incident” side of most crashes, but how penalty points or reprimands can be handed out when there is no contact between cars (or for backing up in the pitlane!?) is beyond me.

      1. Ah. The stewards in Sochi were more strict than those here. Hamilton said that one of the stewards in Russia was “really harsh”

      2. Exactly, this is a clear case of “crowding” the other driver off track from Rosberg. So indeed some inconsistency there. Especially since it was Rosberg’s behavior that instigated the further restrictions placed on this rule a few years ago.

        On the other hand, they rarely penalise team members for taking each other off. Probably because the team already suffered enough and the team will deal with the drivers’ transgressions internally anyway.

        1. This is why I am saying they might have deferred to allowing Mercedes to handle the matter internally since it was an in-house matter.
          My worry with this ruling is that Nico is responsible for these rules in the first place having carried out these kinds of maneuvers before with Alonso screaming ‘he has to leave space’ severally in one of those occasions.
          Allowing him to go Scott free means he has not learnt his lessons.
          On the bright side, I am happy Lewis refused to be pulled into the blame game by the media.

          1. The Alonos/Rosberg incident at Bahrain 2012 was under different race circumstances… It was more mid straight leading into a corner (after Alonso was pushed off track)…

            In my opinion, Rosberg was heading across the track from his corner exit (and could almost be argued that he was attempting to clear the racing line) as shown in Ant Davidsons footage. Definitely a racing incident, both drivers could have taken action to have avoided the outcome and failed to do so..

      3. This has nothing to do with “harsh” stewards but everything with “arrived drivers” seldomly being punished for a crash. In my opinion this is another perfect example.

    12. What about the crash between Palmer and K-Mag?? Any news on that??

    13. Im sorry its just dangerous! Nico messed up his settings and should have accepted he was getting overtaken. Insted he forced hamilton onto the grass and caused a collision.
      Schumacher did this move to barrechello and got a penalty.
      Nico has done this before and got a penalty.
      Anyone who has ever raced knows that you commit to defending way before the person behind is shooting up alongside you.
      In the lower formulas this has been talked about many times as being against the rules and dangerous, remeber gp2 at monaco a few years back?
      No cosistancy in F1 and this is lowering the tone of the driving across the board and im again since his antics in monaco, spa, canada and now here ive lost all respect for the guy and also losing respect for the sport ive loved since 1987!

        1. Perfect example of crowing on a straight. Again, people have different opinions of this because Hamilton is the attacking car, somehow it has be his fault in some shape or form.

      1. Quite the wrong decision by the stewards.
        Can we then say Lewis should no longer receive any more penalties this year no matter what he does based on the record the stewards are setting with this decision?

      2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        15th May 2016, 17:12

        Not the first time Nico has pushed Lewis onto the grass or made him get hit or taken him out…

        That’s all Nico is good at. I’m really trying to like him too but I just can’t. I think there’s a better I’d like Saddam Hussein before I like Nico…

        1. Uhm….

      3. In the future, If you are trying to get your point across, try to type a message without this many errors. My eyes hurt from reading it, Christ almighty.

    14. remember bahrain? nico is clearly using a diff strat for the start. Some blamed only bottas and lewis. Nico was extremely slow

    15. I think that if you’re 180bhp down on power and you aggressively fling your vehicle in front of a clearly faster car, then maybe that’s more than a racing incident, but that’s just me I guess.

      1. @leejo Maybe he didn’t realize he was in the wrong engine mode, but even still Rosberg was within his rights to do so. He was able to in 2012 Bahrain, why not now?

        1. Because the stewards got fed up with what Rosberg was doing in Bahrain and specifically based on those incidents, made it very clear that such behavior would not be tolerated in future races. But of course the stewards seem to forget whatever was said before and just decide whatever they want.

          Or they decided to let Mercedes deal with this instead. Which I personally think is the most likely scenario.

      2. Not just you.

      3. @leejo any car, independent of onboard power is allowed to defend track position.

        I don’t put the blame on Ham, I think it’s a real racing incident. It was obvious that Rosberg was gonna close that door, Hamilton was driving into a window that was always going to disappear. But Hamilton has shown before that he is skilled and aggresive enough to force such windows open, it just didn’t today.

        That’s also a thing every driver has to consider, when you’re driving aggresively against another driver, who stands to lose the most by having an incident? it will decide how aggresice the defender will be

        1. I think that Rosberg intentionally placed a crippled car in the way of the entire field at the start of the race. It was just coincidence that HAM was in the vehicle that slammed into him given the huge speed difference that existed. Only Rosberg would have been aware of the sudden huge drop in power, and it doesn’t matter that he was able to repair it quickly – for a couple of seconds he was a moving wall in the middle of the track going a lot slower than anyone behind him. If Rosberg had pulled right AND lifted, one might ask how else he might have tried to cause a wreck from the front? Brake for no reason? Functionally, if you suddenly lose 180bhp and pull right aren’t you creating the same basic situation? It just seems to me that drivers of crippled cars have a duty to take themselves out of the way, and most of them do.

    16. Nico at fault for spa now this a crazy closing speed. All because one was in wrong mode

    17. 180bhp down due to engine setting but he passed Hamilton on the outside of turn one? I think Romberg just used up all his battery power at the start with Hamilton having saved some to attack a couple corners later.

      1. He used up all his power because he was in the wrong mode @bnkracing. Then when his battery unexpectedly ran out and he suddenly lost 180bhp in the middle of turn 3 he looked down at the steering wheel and changed it.

      2. When starting a race theres a button they press “Race Start Mode” that gives you max power for the start, but it doesn’t last long, it defaults back to your regular engine mode after a few seconds. Its the same as the Overtake button.

    18. I’m somewhat surprised no additional penalties have been given out. I’m guessing they figured as both drivers involved ended up retiring then they’d served a punishment of some sort.

      Still, Lewis was extremely diplomatic in interview after while Nico seemed to try and dodge as many questions as she could. It was rather odd to listen to them but I guess the higher ups told them not to point fingers after ‘the last time’.

      For what it’s worth, I think it was ultimately Nico’s fault. Whatever he was doing out of Turn 3 meant Lewis had far more momentum on him and he only had one option on which side to go to overtake. Nico immediately moved when he realized but kept moving, even when Lewis got an overlap. Lewis couldn’t get out once he’d committed as he was too close to go to the other side without hitting Nico while slamming on the brakes wouldn’t have made much differences. It makes me think Nico still hasn’t quite outgrown his panic reactions which has seen him make a few heat of the moment mistakes and run into people. It’s a shame as he’s proven he can be consistently quick but he’s still at risk of very suddenly fracturing under extreme pressure and I think he knew he wouldn’t get back at Lewis if he got back past.

    19. Mercedes just open their secret engine mode button, which produce extra 180bhp

    20. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      15th May 2016, 17:10

      When will Nico accept responsibility? 3 1/2 years of incidents like this one. Have we ever seen Lewis pull crap like that to take out a driver? Go! Go! Nico “the weasel” Rosberg!!!

      1. @freelittlebirds “Have we ever seen Lewis pull crap like that”
        Yes actually, He spent most of 2011 pulling dumb moves & driving into people.

        for example-

        i also saw on the tv that lewis accepted responsibility for this accident & apologized to the team. so if lewis thinks it was his fault i guess it is.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          15th May 2016, 17:37

          You mean Massa:-) Massa left an opening that even I would take than crash into Lewis. Sure, if you want to trap a driver and are willing to go out, it’s really easy

        2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          15th May 2016, 17:39

          @RogerAyles I watched the video – Lewis gave him a full car’s width – Massa couldn’t see well from his accident in 2011.

        3. @freelittlebirds – Um Lewis crashing into Nico 1st turn at Austin running him wide, and running him right off the track turn 2 at Suzuka not ring a bell?

      2. There’s nothing, not even race judges decision, that can turn a blind mans eye because there’s nothing to be turned….

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          15th May 2016, 18:32

          @lari – it’s good to be aware of one’s faults like you seem to be! Thanks for sharing them!

          1. My pleasure. I’ll let you know more of your faults when I spot them. I have a soft spot guiding blind people 😄

            1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              15th May 2016, 20:15

              @lari you might want to run some logic diagnostics of your own because this is one of the most blatant and deliberate incidents as Nico has told us. He knew he was underpowered and decided to take Lewis out. Imagine if anyone with a clipped wing or tire puncture decided to push other drivers off the track – that’s what Nico did. There was only 1 outcome for Lewis and luckily Nico got clipped as he braked for the corner, otherwise he would have gotten away with it.

            2. Well, you’re alone with that one mate. See stewards rule on subject? You can fight that rule all your like, I don’t care, but I will let you know about your faults in the future. Cya luv, xxx.

    21. If you’re leading a race you defend, Nico was leading, he defended. It doesn’t matter if you’re slower or have less power or whatever reasons will come up, you have track position, you defend.
      These cars come with brake pedals and if you see a gap closing and you don’t think you’re going to make it you use the brakes. Lewis didn’t want to take that option and thought he would make it through. A simple misjudgement that cost both of them but fair to say it was a racing incident.

      1. Well said. Rosberg has every right to defend. His harvesting mode was a corrected issue long before the incident. LH should be happy it’s a racing incident.

      2. If you’re leading a race you defend, Nico was leading, he defended. It doesn’t matter if you’re slower or have less power or whatever reasons will come up, you have track position, you defend.</blockquote.

        They don't race with a limited rule like this taken to an extreme. You defend when you can and give it up when you can't, as Lewis had just demonstrated at T1.

        For me it was entirely reasonable for Lewis to be expecting Nico to be using his mirrors. It's rather like Canada 2011, when it turned out Jenson was looking in his right-side mirror while moving left.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          15th May 2016, 17:36

          @lockup EXACTLY Lewis gave up the lead on T1 to avoid a collision… He could have easily closed the door on Nico and taken him out or left him to crash into the Red Bulls ala Nico…

      3. Absolutely agree. I’m a huge Lewis fan. But at the end of the day, nico started moving across, ( and this is the important bit ) before Lewis got a wheel alongside. The over speed just meant Lewis was committed and didn’t have time to react. The right decision from the stewards. It’s not the same as forcing someone off the track while they are alongside.

      4. The rule is that you need to give a car enough space to stay on track if they are an inch alongside. Rosberg did not do that.

        1. So then explain to me how it was fine for LH to move NR off the track at the start of last year’s US GP?

          1. As the rules are stated the part about leaving a car’s width is specifically for straights, not for corners @robbie.

            1. @bascb Good one. You’re right. Doesn’t change my opinion about today, or the US thing, as I doubt what you have correctly pointed out exonerates all behaviour on curves.

            2. Fully get you there @robbie. While the rule was made to make it super clear where the limit is on straights, that just means that for corners its more left to the stewards to decide what is allowed and what goes over the limit of fair racing.

              For the stewards both incidents were regarded as racing incidents (did they even investigate the US GP?). That does not mean they are perfectly fine, nor that neither were to blame. Rather that its just one of those things where drivers should just talk it out between themselves and say sorry. Especially during the first lap the stewards have generally been somewhat more tolerant of moves going wrong.

          2. Because it was a corner where he had the racing line that naturally leads to an open line at the edge of the track.

    22. To me this is the stewards being cowards.

      Nico violated this rule.
      “Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.”

      1. Nico made one move to defend. Not abnormal. And he started making that move right after he exited the corner, long before Lewis got alongside him.

        1. There is nothing about this “he started the move earlier” story in the regulations. Where do these completely made up rules keep coming from?

          When they are not on the racing line, drivers need to leave enough space for other drivers to be able to remain on track when they are alongside.

          Clearly Rosberg was at fault here, but the stewards decided to “excuse” him because … well … they actually don’t give an explanation for that.

          “Art 27.7 requires the leading driver to leave room, if there is a
          “significant portion” of the car attempting to pass alongside. Car 44 had a
          portion of his front wing inside Car 6 small fractions of a second prior to Car 44
          having to leave the right side of the track to avoid an initial collision”

          Technically Hamilton is still on-track when two wheels are on the tarmac, so why they stop counting at the moment his right side goes beyond the line?

        2. He didn’t move earlier he moved exactly the moment Lewis moved. If it was normal slipstreaming maybe Lewis could have changed the line but in this case he couldn’t because he had to much speed over Rosberg due to Rosberg’s problem. If he tried to change line he would simply have hit Rosberg in the back so he could only hope that Rosberg would have left a little space.

    23. Steward decission is spot on.

      They went hard at it. Nico with defending Lewis with going for the gap.

      If Nico yielded I would be here criticizing what a whim he is, and does not deserve to be a champion.

      If Lewis didnt go for the gap, we saw the race, we know Nico would then win. So Lewis did the best for his title hopes aswell.

      It is a clash, at the end of the season there will be a winner, last two seasons we saw the guy yielding didnt win the Championship.

      So all good, we have a great fight on our hands, and more they crash, more Verstapen wins we will see. Good thing stewards awarded no penalty.

      1. Exactly. But there’s always a few dozen blind LH fans here that just don’t get it, not even from stewards.

        1. I’ve seen Lewis push plenty of his opponents off so he can get by and been applauded as a great racer. For Nico to do so – different story.

          I agree with the stewards. Vettel and Kimi bashed into each other – another incident.

          To Lewis ‘s credit, he kept his dignity and wouldn’t be drawn into a blame game on microphone.

          1. I guess it’s difficult to understand for some, but sticking to the race line (which you have the right to) is something completely different from pushing a driver off on the oppositie side of the track.

            1. Again, then explain to me LH’s move on NR at the start of last year’s US GP.

    24. They seemed to have missed this bit stated at the end of sporting regulation 27.7:

      “For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.”

      I know we’re talking fractions, but isn’t this bit kind of important if we’re going to have consistency?

      1. Well then, go educate the stewards. I’m sure you can get this message forward and make them understand they made a mistake…

        1. You mean the people who clarified this rule after Rosberg, no less, was pushing cars (Hamilton, Alonso, no less) off the track in Bahrain 2012?

        2. Ok, will do.

      2. Michael Brown (@)
        15th May 2016, 21:28

        @john-h Hamilton was alongside for 0.2 seconds until he touched the grass going by that rule. That’s too slim of a margin to reasonably react.

      3. They didn’t miss that. It’s mentioned in the verdict.

        I agree with Michael Brown that they probably though the time was too short, but then why did they stop counting when Hamilton is still technically on-track when two wheels are on the tarmac? The car is only considered off-track when all 4 tyres are outside of the track markers.

        So in fact Hamilton was alongside Nico for much longer than 0.2s.

    25. Lewis do you know what the flashing red lights on the back of your team mates car indicate?

      1. Lewis commented in the post race interview that Nico was in the wrong engine mode for that stage of the race. The flashing red light indicates Nico was harvesting energy, which was part of Lewis’s decision to go for the gap because Nico was going slower as he was some 160-180bhp down on power.

    26. Simple. Nico decided a while ago to prove that he can be aggressive after being accused by the media too many times of being too soft with Hamilton. Nico will never cede to Hamilton, correct engine mode or not. The guy needs to become a world champion when Lewis is looking for his 4th!

    27. The only person I’m truly disappointed in is NL,he quickly make A statement that was totally wrong, this is the boss of MB f1 and he was quick to judge, racing incident??? doesn’t look like that from where I’m sitting, yes to everything the steward said but they left out the part that you have to leave room for the car that’s faster

      1. There is no part of the rules that says if a car behind is faster you need to leave a door open for him…..

    28. Re ran incident in slow motion. By the time Lewis’s front end was level with the rear of Nicos’s his right hand wheels were over the white line and on the grass. Nico therefore had no obligation to yield. Reckless by Lewis even he cannot drive an F1 car along the grass at 200 mph.

    29. When I first saw it I was raging at Nico. But now knowing more detail I think Nico went to cover the inside line (very) aggressively, Hamilton saw he (Nico) was slow out the corner and went for the bigger gap. I think they just both had the same idea at the same time. Cover the inside line/go for the bigger gap.. Lewis just had much more speed which let him get his nose and wheel along side Nico.

      However. I do think Nico should’ve left more room especially knowing he was down on so much power at that moment in time.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        15th May 2016, 19:24

        @nemo87 Nico knowing he’s slower makes the block deliberate and the outcome premeditated – there was no other way this could have ended. Race ban? I think that’s the least he should have gotten for forcing a collision and putting Lewis’ lif in danger cause he could have spun into the wall….

        1. @freelittlebirds I’ve just seen nico’s post race interview. He admits himself he’s down on power.. (In excess of 180bhp) what possessed him into thinking he could ‘defend’ his position with such deficit.. This has totally put me back into blaming Nico for being careless.

          1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            15th May 2016, 19:45

            @nemo87 exactly, he could not have defended so he literally “pushed” Hamilton out. I have no clue how the race stewards can uphold their decision based on the information that has surfaced.

            1. What’s done is done I guess.. Monaco next. There’s gonna be some tension there following last years events..

            2. There is no rule against defending with a slower car? He pushed the overtake button immediately. He knows if he defends in one corner, he can hold on. Race ban? Are you kidding me?

            3. Agreed there isn’t but common sense must prevail especially when it’s your team mate who is the one overtaking.. He should still have left more room in my opinion, imagine I there was a wall there and no grass..

          2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            17th May 2016, 14:09

            @Nik of course, Nico intentionally caused the crash and endangered Lewis’s life – this was massive. I have no clue how he got away with it. If he had taken responsibility and said I made a mistake then maybe 1 race ban but saying he knew he was faster and it was his race to win and Lewis was going to have to die to pass him, well, that’s a 6 month suspension.

    30. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      15th May 2016, 19:25

      Seriously can I have a daddy who’s a F1 champion? Sebastian, can you please adopt me?:-)

    31. Ludicrous. Rosberg should have been given a penalty.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          16th May 2016, 1:15

          @edmarques @aveenr I think he intentionally forced Lewis into an accident that potentially threatened both their lives and he should receive a 6 month suspension just as Senna did in 1989.

    32. Michael Brown (@)
      15th May 2016, 21:25

      It’s easy to look at still images and draw the conclusion that Rosberg made an intentional move to crowd Hamilton off the track. What they don’t show is how quickly this incident developed. Going by the significant portion rule, in which the front wing has to be alongside a rear wheel, Hamilton was alongside Rosberg for about 0.2 seconds until he touched the grass. Do you expect Rosberg to realize that in that span of time? By the time any driver could have reacted to that, Hamilton was on the grass.

    33. Typical blocking fail. Lets close the door,after its too late.

      1. Last I checked a F1 car has a wheel that lets you choose left or right direction, also long with the accelerator there is something called a ‘brake pedal’ which can be used to avoid potentially race ending situations on lap 1, especially with your teammate.

    34. tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
      15th May 2016, 21:34

      Lewis left room at T1, Nico just pushed Lewis off at T3. Bad decision from the stewards. Crap racing from Rosberg.

    35. I’m a wee bit confused over the amount of noise re: engine settings. Nico -did- pass Lewis, right? It’s not like LH hasn’t stuck his nose up in a dare before. He wasnt along side- he could have backed out. I think the stewards got it right- Mom and Dad at Mercedes will take care of this behind closed doors.

      1. The point is that Rosberg was in start mode and that ran out. At which point he was in the wrong engine mode and lost power.

    36. MG421982 (@)
      15th May 2016, 21:38

      I agree with the decision, but hey, the decision was quite obvious. It’s not like the stewards had the “guts” to penalise any of the 2 drivers anyway. It’s obvious if ROS would have been penalised his fans would have said HAM’s favoured (in order to catch up)… and viceversa. Maybe a penalty for both?! It’s an idea. But why do it anymore since the they and the team lost so many points?! Decision: racing incindent.

    37. I love this website. The opinions and the passion. Reading the comments here is just as entertaining as listening to either Sky or C4 in their post race analyses. And I love F1. This GP had so much.
      It always takes two to tango and whilst the vote currently is slightly in Rosberg’s favour on Keith’s poll, even as a Rosberg fan I can’t bring myself to side with one or the other. We have to remember that the margins at this level are massively small. It’s a tough call to draw a line on this one. I think it was a perfect storm, a sequence of events that goes beyond apportioning blame. One thing is for sure it was a magnificent move by NR around the outside of the first corner, pity he didn’t apply the same amount of tenacity when selecting his engine mode!
      As for Max stepping in to RB and winning his first GP for them, well it’s school boys own stuff. Massive respect for the talent he needed to pull that off and massive respect to Helmut Marko for being instrumental in bringing him through, to be in that position at the 2016 Spanish GP. Top drawer.

    38. I have to say Hamilton messed up but really it was the end result of Rosberg making a mistake and compounding it with an extremely aggressive blocking maneuver, that, considering the loss of power, was only going to work if the other car ran off the road, which is what the move conveniently accomplished.

      1. Super convenient and all, but I can only wonder if Mercedes management is going to consider the second crash that Rosberg caused so lightheartedly.

        1. Lol Nico could not know what LH was going to do nor his pace. Mercedes have heard their sides of the story, and it has also been ruled a racing incident. I predict Mercedes will leave it at that, to your dismay obviously.

      2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        16th May 2016, 1:18

        @dmw how is Hamilton screwing up when the car in front of him is 170bhp down on power? He did the right thing!

        1. Choose the left as Nico was already moving to the right, or use the brake pedal. Simple really. Hence racing incident.

          1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            16th May 2016, 13:44

            @EF1 you do realize that Nico covered the outside coming out of the corner? Are you suggesting that Lewis should have gone onto the grass to overtake? Nico moved in reaction to Lewis moving… Seriously, I will start talking like Vettel here:-) We are hearing crazy stuff like he should moved the car to the outside over Nico’s car – even the best Jedis could not do that…

    39. It’s alright.

      Lewis seems to be the faster driver anyway.

      1. Yeah, and that was why he was neatly overtaken on the outside by the guy lower on power!

    40. ReallyGrumpy
      15th May 2016, 22:57

      Ok ,i know, its ‘Article’ but my point is its racing,and racing is about driving and winning,not money and politics

    41. Rosberg playing with the buttons on his steering wheel, driving without due care and attention by the looks of it.

    42. Congrats stewards! Sensible decision and not a decision just to create headlines. Racing incident, move on

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        16th May 2016, 1:17


        How on earth is that a racing incident? He sent Lewis into a wall on purpose…

        It’s not even the first time we’ve seen him do it but this time he knew his car was slower and Lewis would have had to go off course to avoid him. If he had steering issues or a puncture he could have justified it but he didn’t have steering issues… He just didn’t want Lewis to beat him and he has said “it’s my race to win”.

    43. Of all sites devoted to F1, this site usually has the best informed comments. It saddens me to see the low level fans of Hamilton sink to in order to defend their idol. Take a look at this video; Valencia 2012:

      Hamilton (like Rosberg today) was the one defending and did so far more aggressively and with less justification as Maldonado was clearly well alongside without Hamilton giving him any room as he closed the door (In the video, Sir Jackie Stewart incorrectly states that Maldonado drove into Hamilton when it’s clear that Hamilton is the one who turned in.

      Now, who was blamed and castigated for the Valencia crash? Not Lulu! Maldonado was given a 20-second penalty so Hamilton should really count himself lucky that the stewards today did not impose that standard on today’s racing incident.

      1. I didn’t really want to get into a game of whataboutery which was so very inevitable in this incident. All previous incidents can’t really directly be compared, circumstances are so different in each occasion. To be honest, if you are throwing video links of drivers showing the same behaviour, as if thats got anything to do with this incident, this is probably closer to a Hamilton misdemeanour (Hamilton vs Massa, Suzuka 2011)

        But your link has one important difference and that is that its a corner. Hamilton took the racing line through the corner (I agree quite agressively) and left Maldonado stranded on the outside. He has a right to feel aggrieved he was bullied off the track and if he didnt barge his way back on, maybe Hamilton would have faced some questions. But he did barge his way back on.

        “…when it’s clear that Hamilton is the one who turned in”

        Come on… its the apex of the corner. Thats not turning in on someone, thats taking the corner :)

        So whats that got to do with a straight line overtake attempt from Sunday? Nothing. Why did I comment, I cant even remember now. Your link does have a hilariously shrieking Ben Edwards though :)

    44. BLAME!

      I blame Lewis
      I blame Nico
      I blame Mercedes
      I Blame Max

      For The Best Race In A Long Time

    45. I bet the bosses aren’t thinking “oh well one of those things.” They must choose to blame the guy who got run off the road while passing at 17kmph or blame the guy who ran a much faster car off the road while he was fiddling with his steering wheel because the engine was in the wrong mode. If Rosberg had been in the correct mode maybe Hamilton wouldn’t have been closing at such a high rate and we’d have had a 1-2 finish. I guess the Stewards can’t see it the same way as the Merc bosses (and the rest of the world who is really thinking about this) but the simple fact is that a Rosberg screwup caused the power loss that put the two cars in close proximity in the first place, and then he responded by running his teammate completely off the road with hilarious results. But it probably could have been anyone and he’d have run them off the road too. Or maybe not. Who knows, but it seems to me that any of those guys who finished in the top 5 would have stuck their snoot in that gap too. And if Rosberg hadn’t run Hamilton off the road we’d all be talking about how professional they both are.

      Anyway, I’d much rather be Hamilton than Rosberg at the office for the next few weeks.

      Racing incident sayeth the Stewards but

    46. I cannot blame Lewis for attempting the overtake. Equally I cannot blame Nico for trying to cover him off. That’s racing. Stewards are correct as far as I am concerned, a racing incident pure and simple.

      1. My thoughts exactly!

    47. I think when a driver has a problem with his engine he pulls off to a side and let’s the following car go. Isn’t how it is done? By staying in the wrong engine mode and defending agressively is plain dumb and stupid. Rosberg should have let ham go as he was down on power. The first rule of a team is do not endanger you team mate. But nico just kept on moving to the right and he knew he was down on power and still put his car in front of the faster Lewis. That’s not right.

    48. Hamilton forgot there will be 65 more laps to overtake Rosberg. It was ‘red mist’.
      Rosberg had every right to defend the move and he didn’t weave or make another move.
      Hamilton fans will be fuming but Lewis screwed it up big time on this occasion.
      Feels like Lewis will not be on a good footing for this year I suspect
      and does not anyone remember he drives like he’s the only one on track.

      1. The thing I am seeing people say a lot is that there was no need to risk everything on lap 1 when its a 66 lap race. I am not quite sure what people saw the last few years, but Barcelona isn’t exactly a festival of overtaking. Once you are stuck in second, faster than the car in front or not, you are staying there. And Mercedes’ strategy doesn’t allow for one driver rolling the dice and trying something different.

        Forget that it was lap 1. What Hamilton had was an opportunity which he tried to take. Should he have held back and thought “I am sure that will happen again in a few laps, and I’ll do it when we have all calmed down”? Unlikely. It was now or never for Hamilton. Maybe he could have backed out but I suspect that was his one chance to take the lead. Right there and right then. That’s not to say he was right and Rosberg was wrong, but I think you are ignoring what kind of opportunity racing drivers will and should take. That’s why this was a racing incident.

    49. I wonder if Flavio Briatore is a consultant for Merc.

    50. This is so strange. There are people saying that “Rosberg should have let go of the position knowing that he is down by 180 hp” and there are people saying “if you don’t go for the smallest gap, then you are not a racing driver”.
      Aren’t these contradictory. You expect one driver to yield and other to be ruthless and use this rhetoric to blame Rosberg for the incident?

      I think racing incident is a fair judgement. Nico was within his rights to go on the defensive and Lewis was alongside him only after his two wheels were already on the grass, so technically, he was never alongside as long as both cars and all 8 wheels were on the racing track.

      Hamilton had the option to back out of the move but he didn’t do it. But then, that’s what a racing driver does. Nothing wrong in his driving either.

    51. Very sensible verdict in my opinion. Hile man could blame both, no one is to blame: by the time Hamilton’s wing was next to Rosberg’s wheel, only a fraction of a second was required for the gap to close. Hamilton did well to avoid losing his wing and rupturing Rosberg’s tyre but then lost the car on the grass. Considering that all these happened in a second, racing incident is the right verdict indeed.

    52. This probably the best incident to argue over since Schumacher stopped driving!
      Nico sets wrong position of power button, does a great overtake then suffers for his pre-start mistake … knows he’s slow so goes totally defensive but is too late by a fraction of a second as other car is ‘significantly’ alongside when they get to the edge of the track. From there on is the fun part.
      He is the one closing the door and he misjudged it by only the tiniest bit … In absolute terms he broke the rule about leaving room on a straight, and he was the one in control of how much room was there (let’s not forget he has the honour of having the wording of the relevant rules written because of him ;)
      Then, once the car behind was effectively out of control, he decided to brake and turn at the next corner, putting his car straight in the path of the other one … The one that couldn’t turn or slow down.
      So, in the end, it was his deliberate actions that caused the crash. If he’d slowed down and let the other car fly past he would have been fine ;)

    53. So many people who have never been in anything faster than a Nissan Micra feel able to micro-analyse something they saw happen at 150+mph from their armchair.

      He should a done this. They shouldn’t a done that.

      The stewards seems to have made an entirely fitting judgement here – racing incident. No-one’s fault. Move on.

    54. If he’d slowed down and let the other car fly past he would have been fine ;)

      That is such a weird thing to say. Hamilton’s action of going into a disappearing act is defended with the logic of “if you don’t go for a gap, you are not a racing driver”. And for Rosberg, the rules are “He should have slowed down and let other car go”. Double standards?

      1. I’d take it as good advice for anyone that, when able to make a choice, it’s preferable to avoid driving straight into the path of an out-of-control car …
        (Once fully on the grass the other car was a projectile)

    55. I agree with the ruling but revealing how Hamilton covered his face after the incident, and then there’s this from Lauda:
      “Lewis looked us in the eye and took the blame,” the famous Austrian said. He apologised. He took everything on himself. That’s fine with me,” Lauda told the Austrian broadcaster ORF.” Sad part is now the Hamilton hooligan fans will likely come out and boo Rosberg like they’ve done before and that could as last time shock him enough to drop the ball for the rest of the year.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        17th May 2016, 14:23

        @balue just because Lewis said I’m sorry to the team doesn’t mean it’s his fault – he’s just the kind of guy that feels bad for the 1,300 folks who work for the team. I’m sure Lewis wishes he hadn’t tried the pass but like everyone has stated a million times he had no choice but to make the pass given the circumstances. That does not let Nico off the hook. If there was another team they would have gone to the stewards with photos of the incident and if Nico had told them that he was slower and it was his race to win, Nico would have been suspended for 6 months. He’s just enormously lucky that it happened to Mercedes and they did not ask for his head because that would hurt them.

        1. Where on earth are you keep getting this suspended for 6 months verdict? Stewards called it a racing incident, it was one. Former opening lap crash king Grosjean only received a race ban for a culmination of multiple incidents in that season but you somehow have it out for Rosberg to be suspended for half a year. To loosely quote an Australian champ, Lewis’s ambition outweighed his talent, in That particular instance.

        2. ‘Lewis feels bad for the folk that work for the team’. This is a man who walked out on all the folk at Mclaren, the people that worked hard helping to him to achieve his success. A rich man who doesn’t like paying tax. Let’s try not too lose sight of the facts here, Hamilton was outdriven to the first corner by his team mate who started behind him. A couple of corners later and Hamilton is trying to challenge for the lead again but there is nothing in the rules to say Rosberg can’t defend his position when someone is trying to get past. Hamilton’s car crashed into the back of Rosberg, let’s not forget that. Why are Hamilton fans so blinded with there love for him that they refuse to see the facts? I am neither a Hamilton or Rosberg fan, too be honest I think all these f1 drivers are very lucky. I mean how many people in the world even get the chance to have a go in an f1 car and see if they have any talent for it? There’s probably a guy out there sat on his sofa watching f1 who could whoop the lot of them.

    Comments are closed.