Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari, Paul Ricard, 2018

FIA defends Vettel’s penalty following Hamilton criticism

2018 French Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by and

FIA race director Charlie Whiting says the penalty Sebastian Vettel received in the French Grand Prix was consistent with past penalties handed down for similar incidents.

Lewis Hamilton criticised the decision to give Vettel a five-second penalty for colliding with Valtteri Bottas. Vettel was still able to finish ahead of Bottas despite the penalty, Hamilton noted.

“Ultimately when someone destroys your race through an error and it’s only kind-of a tap on the hand really. [He’s] just allowed to come back and still finish ahead of the person that they took out, it doesn’t weigh up.

“He shouldn’t really be able to finish ahead of him, because he took him out of the race.”

Whiting said the stewards do not take the consequences of an incident into consideration and Vettel’s penalty was consistent with others which had been handed down before.

“[The stewards] had four options open to them,” he said. “A five-second penalty, 10-second, drive-through or stop-go. They chose the five-second penalty which is consistent with other incidents of that sort.

“If you look at the consequences of an incident then maybe one could think differently. But stewards attempt not to do that.”

Vettel served his five-second time penalty during his second pit stop and finished 18 seconds ahead of Bottas. He was also given two penalty points on his licence which brings him up to a total of five for the current 12-month period.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2018 F1 season

Browse all 2018 F1 season articles

163 comments on “FIA defends Vettel’s penalty following Hamilton criticism”

  1. Being consistent with previous penalties doesn’t make it right. It just continues the award of the wrong penalties in the past, just like the Bottas/Räikkönen incident a few years ago.

    1. I’d question if it was even consistent. I saw plenty of people comparing the incident to Verstappen’s penalty in China after hitting Vettel (which also did not prevent Verstappen from finishing ahead of Vettel). Which is funny because Verstappen actually got a 10-second penalty, unlike Vettel.

      I suppose it being the first corner of the first lap mitigates some of the blame. Hamilton actually acknowledged this later:

      1. And thinking back to 2016, I just checked what penalties Rosberg got for playing dodgems in Austria and then Germany: 10s for shoving HAM off and then 5 for VER, just a few races later. I definitely think the stewards need to check their consistency and take consequences into account. For example: 5s seconds for colliding and forcing a rival off the track, where no damage is done but it costs said rival positions, 10s for causing damage but they’re able to continue, drive-throughs for causing a retirement and stop-gos (or in really severe cases DSQs/bans) for actions deemed not only reckless but dangerous, like the sort of shenanigans Crashtor pulled of few times, or Seb in Baku last year.

        1. I wouldn’t link a penalty level to the unfortunate consequences of the other driver, @tomd11.
          It should however reflect the recklessness and avoidability (in this cases both were lowish IMO, even lower than the VER/RIC incident in Hungary last year).

      2. This was a first lap incident and honestly, once Vettel had boxed himself in, he didn’t have many options.

        1. or he could use the the Brake pedal thingie down by his feet.

          1. Which is only so good in current aero rules– if your front end is losing grip because the front wing is washing out, that reduces the effectiveness of your brakes as well.

      3. You shouldn’t compare verstappen with vettel incident, in verstappen case vettel left the door open completely as he was just trying to finish ahead of Lewis, verstappen even with all the space still messed up badly, in vettel case he had nowhere to go.. so bottas put himself in that situation because he closed the door too much … Vettel is to blame but bottas has some fault in it… So entirely different situation..

    2. Being consistent with previous penalties doesn’t make it right.

      Yes it does.
      When FIA wants to change penalties for a certain offence, then they will tell teams and drivers BEFORE they do so (and not at a whim because @w-k thinks they are wrong).

      1. If you take out a champ contender being one yourself, cant be treated same as midfield contenders… There is a lot more at stake!

        Schumi had it coming to him before, Ayrton got one too! Why should Vettel be treated differently?

        Mexico last year? Baku was blatant shambles for FIA when they had the opportunity to send FAIR message to all, they chose to BS penalty for show/media and a tap on the wrist…

        I dont know with what kind of FACE they call it FAIR?

        1. Michael Brown (@)
          25th June 2018, 14:33

          @mysticus This is exactly correct. The head steward in Baku last year even said they didn’t “want to influence the championship too much,” so Vettel getting a proper penalty for deliberate contact affected the championship too much. That’s why I don’t trust the stewards to give Hamilton or Vettel proper penalties because they’re contending for the championship.

        2. @mysticus, to me all drivers are ‘championship contenders’ until mathematically out of the race. Thus all equal offences should be penalised equally.

          But having said that, I’m not sure what this has to do with our comments above. We aren’t discussing consistency, but rather severity :-p

          1. To me championship contenders are realistic ones, currently it’s already hamilton vettel; bottas, through no fault of his own, is out, he’s too far behind, he’d need BOTH the current contenders to have very bad luck as the season continues, similar goes for ricciardo and on top of that he has a lacking engine; verstappen and raikkonen, through their already made mistakes and, in raikkonen’s case, his generally poor pace (back to 2017), there’s absolutely no chance.

          2. You make the best argument for not including the term ‘championship contender’ in any penalty evaluation, @esploratore: no clear definition.

    3. Lewis is having a common trait of self-centered person. He would like to pressurize and psychologically break Sebastian since he is his only real rival. That happened last year after Baku and Brit is desparately and unsuccessfully trying to find again a dishonest way to the top of f1 again. It does not matter for him where is Valtteri and how many points he won.

      But, Mr. Whiting careful investigation of the start of the race brought out a justified and rationalized answer. Lewis should leave his cheap tricks for other generations but not for Vettel and Kimi.

      Ferrari team should really take into consideration leaving F1 competition.

      1. digitalrurouni
        25th June 2018, 15:53

        ROFL your post cracked me up. HAHAHAAHAH

      2. @Bebana Wow, I haven’t posted on this site for a long time, but I really had to ask……. ‘what blend are you smoking’?

        1. @stubbornswiss
          That’s actually one of the more coherent ones from Bebana, though certainly not his strangest. He’s been popping up for the last few races, posting some truely weird nonsense, sometimes multiple times in the same comments section. Usually posting stuff that has little to no basis in reality. But never responds to any attempt at raising points with anything he’s said.

          Always defends Vettel and Ferrari -going so far as to pretend they’ve never made mistakes- and always directly attacks Hamilton.

      3. Lewis is just a cry baby, the only reason he wins is because he is with a good team, as soon as Mercedes starts to lose races, he will try his best to switch team. Mclaren should have never invested all that time and money on him.

        1. That is true. Michael Schumacher place was taken away and given to Brit. Niki spent a lot of time convincing him to join and that he will become star and world champion in 2014 if he joins Merz.
          Now he is senzing the smell in Ferrari.
          I would burn all my Ferrari cars if I saw him in Ferrari seat.
          Viva giustizia!

        2. , as soon as Mercedes starts to lose races, he will try his best to switch team

          Which is exactly why there should be a Fangio hate train

    4. Once again, I repeat:
      Athough SV accepted fault on start there in France, start was organized and prepared trick by Merz.
      Number two driver Bottas had role to squeeze SV at any cost. Purpose: help LH to win with deceit.
      These slies ruin motor sport and its future….
      Good luck to honest drivers and FIA for very difficult job…

  2. Beheading was the bare minimum, right?
    I like how Hamilton regains the use of the word only when he finishes first.

    1. I think it is pretty much universally thought that the penalty was a little soft given the affect it had on each driver. Vettel damaged his front wing which was replaced… bottas dammaged the floor of his car which was there for the rest of the race…

      5 seconds seemed a little weak.

    2. There are 101 comments here and counting discussing this “controversy”!

      And Bottas himself never even complained. Only Lewis.

      As has been said (extensively) elsewhere, 5 or 10sec would not have changed outcome.

      Which makes me think this is just mind games. Knowing Lewis, that’s probably all it is. He worked it last year and it came up trumps. Why not now when the advantage is his way and his opponent is down?

      Storm in a tea cup it is. Charlie has obliged by stirring.

  3. Max got 10 seconds last year locking up and hitting RIC

    1. Exactly the incident I was going to bring up. This one happened in 2017 (the year since when FIA decided to be more lenient in stewarding) so it is a fair comparison.
      Ironically, I was going to say that Verstappen deserves a harsher penalty because he did not suffer anything in that incident but Vettel did suffer. But Charlie says not to look at consequences of the incident. Weak justification from him in that case.

      1. digitalrurouni
        25th June 2018, 15:53

        Exactly. Consistency is all that is being asked for. Why would Verstappen get a harsher penalty than Sebastian? Answer cause it’s Ferrari.

        1. Stop the circus, man, it has nothing with Ferrari. What happened to VER last year in Canada, where he wrecked VET front wing and sent him to the back of the grid while VER suffered no damage?!? Nothing!

          Plus, there’re multiple reasons why the stewards watch more carefully the youngsters in general, VER especially.

          1. MG1982…

            Seriously..? Canada was the race Vettel admitted right after the race he did not see Verstappen cause he was fighting Bottas for the first corner. Vettel admitted having overlooked Verstappen and clipped his frontwing on Verstappens rear wheel steering to the right.

            Vettel atually damaged his front wing three times in the first few laps, not only hitting Verstappen, but also two other rivers.

            If Verstappen has any blame in this than Lewis Hamilton was to blame for the Mexico first lap clash with Vettel…ow and Verstappen was..but that’s just default for some

        2. The reason for 10 sec back then and 5 sec here has to be that vettel was little more at fault than bottas, hamilton left him almost no space; verstappen in hungary absolutely made the mistake himself, locked tyres, which sent him into ricciardo, verstappen was a sure mistake, vettel not so clear.

          1. @esploratore
            “hamilton left him almost no space” cracking comment… hamilton a full car length ahead supposed to park on the side and wait for vettel to go through?
            watch the videos available… vettel didnt even touch the apex and took the corner unnecessarily wide, and brake too late, and bottas left him plenty of room in the inside…
            well tiffosos see different things of course

  4. Vettel destroyed his own race and lost the championship lead by quite some margin through that incident, I don’t know why Lewis is so cocky about that penalty. Had Mercedes not messed up Valtteri‘s second pit stop, this could’ve ended quite differently for Vettel as this allowed him to take a free extra pit stop.

    1. I think Bottas was around 20 seconds behind Vettel before he pitted. Not sure the slow pit stop changed anything.

    2. every-time a direct rival of Lewis gets in trouble on in some sort of dubious situation he usually feels the need to talk about, you can check last year’s driver’s meetings for a couple of examples.

      on the other hand, every-time Vettel gets close to put one over a direct rival he usually spoils the opportunity. To each there own.

      1. @johnmilk Because they don’t get punished accordingly, look at Vettel in Mexico 2016 or 2017 in Baku and Malaysia for that matter, no punishment for causing crashing and one time on purpose too. So stop moaning.

        1. Who is asking Hamilton for his opinion?
          It is recommendable to him to be silent since obviously Sebastian is stronger, faster and is going to be f1 2018 champion.

          1. @Bebana Dude. You pollute this whole comment section with your ignorant post. Hamilton was asked that question, you’re just a fake Vettel fan like so many. I bet you can’t even tell why you’re a Vettel fan.

          2. Do you really think he started elaborating about the accident out of the blue? Plus, why in the world wouldn’t journalists ask Lewis and Max their opinion on that?

    3. Because they are inconsistent. Unacceptable since we are not having a fun amateur get together. So review the process, change it or some key people in it if needed.

    4. @wallbreaker Possibly because Vettel ruinedBottas‘s race and if you read carefully – asking for a bit too much good will maybe – Hamilton made the point in relation to the loss of points for Bottas and the Mercedes team.

      He also acknowledged that these incidents happen because the drivers are pushing hard. Though quite why they happen so often to Vettel rather than himself is a valid question. It’s why Vettel really isn’t among the A-list of current drivers, only Hamilton and Alonso at present. Since his debut he’s been flawed at close racing and really doesn’t have the same skill level as these drivers. Apologies in advance for pointing out reality to Vettel fans, sometimes it has to be done.

      1. @david-br I’m absolutely not a vettel fan, in fact I prefer hamilton, but ignoring his flaws and point out vettel’s flaws isn’t fair.

        Vettel, it’s been easy to see even last year, is more often than not at the top of the potential of the car, however he’s more likely to be involved in mistakes.

        Hamilton, on the other hand, hardly ever makes mistakes (unlike in his early mclaren years), however has way too many races and qualifying sessions completely off the pace, that’s as costing as vettel’s mistakes, example: canada vettel won, hamilton 5th, off the pace; this race hamilton won, vettel 5th due to mistake.

        1. @esploratore true but you’re talking about periodic dips in form in Lewis’s case. The thing is Vettel makes these mistakes even when he’s driving well (fast), which suggests it’s a question of either just not having the same level of racing talent, or of consistently losing his judgement (of braking distances etc.) under pressure.

    5. Because Sebastian is handsome but Lewis….?????

  5. Is there a list of the previous incidents?

    the argument of “if someone spoils another driver’s race then he shouldn’t be allow to finish ahead”, is just stupid, those are kindergarten rules, so if someone has or can’t point out a list of previous similar events, and if that list matches what Whiting is saying I see no problem with the penalty.

    There might be a problem however on the severity of the penalties, maybe this sort of incidents should get 10s, but not so long ago people were complaining that penalties were being handed like candy and were too severe. Now that FIA has a systems that focus on letting things be resolved on track they are too lenient

    1. They did nothing to Vettel for intentionally ruining Hamilton’s race in Mexico 2017

      1. Nor did they do anything for using car as a weapon(Baku 2017) or intentionally brake testing during a restart(Baku 2018). Ferrari International Assitance hard at work for their Italian Mafia overloards.

        1. @Chaitanya Hamilton did not brake test in Baku as telemetry has shown, so what you talking about ?

          1. He’s referring to Vettel allegedly brake-testing Hamilton this year. It looked a lot more suspicious than anything Hamilton was (incorrectly) alleged to have done in Baku 2017.

          2. @noname He is referring to Vettel being in the lead at the Baku restart of 2018. Vettel accelerated away like he had restarted the race, but then braked again. Repeating this a couple of times. Clearly against safety car rules:

            from the point at which the lights on the car are turned out drivers must proceed at a pace which involves no erratic acceleration or braking

            Yet bizarrely he received no penalty. Or warning/reprimand.

          3. There was nothing wrong or unusual with SV’s behaviour in Baku 2018. Nothing LH hasn’t done himself. LH at the time decried that SV and the lack of penalty would set a dangerous precedent, which it hasn’t, because SV only did what they all do, and therefore we have seen nothing different since. LH always has the option to not follow so closely, nor follow directly behind, knowing that the bloke in front may try to heat up his brakes, just as they all do. It would have been bizarre to penalize SV for doing something they all do behind the safety car.

          4. @robbie Oh come on. Stop it already with the “he did it too” nonsense.

            They do not warm up their tyres/brakes AFTER the safety car pulls away.

            No one else ever did anything like that at all. Sure they always slow done after the safety car leaves them. That’s it. That is not erratic. They keep a steady pace and then once they (as inb any other driver but Vettel) goes, then they go.

            It was a dirty move and potentially very dangerous to accelerate and then suddenly brake again.

          5. @patrickl Well it would seem only LH had the complaint, and SV did nothing penalty worthy, and there wasn’t the dangerous precedent LH predicted, so it’s a non-story other than by those who are pro-LH and/or anti-SV who would like to somehow tie this in with SV’s mistake on VB in France, and a lack of severe penalty, and therefore there must only be a conspiracy to help SV as the only answer.

          6. @robbie Well Vettel already caused a crash with that behavior so there is that.

          7. And when was that?

          8. @robbie in the same parallel universe where Vettel didn’t get a penalty in baku.

        2. @Chaitanya, @carbron, @patrickl: Stop being ridiculous! VET did nothing wrong at the restart of 2018 Baku. Maybe you should rewatch the restart! With like 1-2sec before the restart, top 3 drivers situation was like this: VET – 2nd, going straight and at constant speed; HAM – 3rd, to the right side of VET, going straight and at constant speed; BOT – 1st and dwelving like hell from one side to another in order to heat up his tyres. I repeat: this was the situation in the last 1-2sec before the restart. So, if there’s somebody doing something wrong here it might be Bottas. Then, HAM had a better restart than VET, on the verge of overtaking VET.

          1. @mg1982 I think you might be confusing restarts. The one being referred to was the one at the end of lap 5, where Vettel was leading, not the one at the end of lap 47 with Bottas leading.

      2. Iskandar Mazlan
        26th June 2018, 1:35

        Correct .. LH repeatedly said he left ample room on the right, in fact he stayed extreme left. Yet SV “pointed his wheel” towards LH as per video clip. SV deliberately hit LH. Not racing incident.

    2. There was a time when I would post a comment like this and actually get the fact that I was searching for.

      Here I am moaning again, oh well

      1. @johnmilk Or perhaps no one takes the time to compile such a list (in public).

        The FIA keeps all steward decisions on their site. You could go through those.

        1. See I didn’t know that @patrickl

          1. @johnmilk Oh ok. Well it can be a bit hard to find. Here is the one for the Paul Ricard race:

            Lots of nice info there.

    3. the argument of “if someone spoils another driver’s race then he shouldn’t be allow to finish ahead”, is just stupid, those are kindergarten rules

      Exactly. What if Bottas had retired. Should Vettel get a black flag because he cannot finish ahead of the drive he hit? Ridiculous.

      1. @paulk Yes, lets come up with a ridiculous extreme to pretend that the general statement is ridiculous.

        It’s clear that it happens quite often that drivers take someone out and actually benefit from this. It’s not just about Vettel, but the penalties in general.

        Most extreme example would be Button who took out both Alonso and Hamilton during Canada 2011 and went on to win the race because of it.

        1. @patrickl I took the concept to the extreme exactly to show how absurd it is. It makes no sense to link the penalty to the relative positions of the 2 drivers involved in an incident and my example demonstrates that very clearly.

          Vettel obviously didn’t benefit from the contact with Bottas so, for me, this discussion is not about drivers benefiting from accidents they caused but about penalty harshness.

          Now, if you think penalties for first corner collisions (or collision in general) should be harsher in general, I respect your opinion even though I don’t agree with it. I cannot, however, understand how can it make any sense to give penalties that force a driver responsible for a crash to finish behind whomever they hit.

  6. When Bottas hit Hamilton in Bahrain 2016 he got a drive-through penalty and 2 points on his license. I’m not sure Vettel’s error was quite as sloppy as that, but they’re very similar. The problem with the Vettel penalty is it didn’t really punish him. It didn’t seem to hurt his result more than the collision already had and it still allowed him to comfortably finish ahead of Bottas which doesn’t feel fair.

    1. Request you to not consider pre-2017 incidents for comparison as FIA themselves decided to interfere lesser from 2017 onwards. Below is one source for the same and there are more available on the net.

    2. AntonioCorleone
      25th June 2018, 17:12

      Well it would have punished him more if not for the safety car. And its childish to say that a driver has to be punished by making him finish behind the driver that he hit.
      I think it was the lack of downforce by being behind Lewis that caused the lock-up and Vettel couldn’t break efficiently because of that. But Ferrari would never come with this explanation, but if it happened to Lewis, Mercedes wouldn’t hesitate at all to tell everyone that it was lack of downforce, that he was put in a box by the other drivers.

      1. Vettel is supposed to be an F1 driver and be able to deal with situations like that. He himself gave a whole list of reasons why the corner would be tricky. So what does he do, he brakes very late …. and crashes anyway. Again! Regardless of him knowing up front that it would be tight. That’s not an accident anymore.

  7. The safety car helped Vettel and Bottas. Without it they would have been way further back, as it happened they lined up in sequence at the back of the field and then started their race again. Vettel did a better job through the traffic than Bottas.

    1. Bottas had extensive diffuser damage apparently.

      1. But that was still fair :) considering FIA is always very generously FAIR towards Ferrari drivers…. He took out a guy in the second place, and damaged the car, yet we are talking about fairness… he should have 10 sec min, or drive through… plus points consistent with others… But that would be unfair for Vet, and champ challenge…

        1. Hey, VER destroyed VET wing in 2017 Canada 1st lap, sending VET to the back of the grid… and nothing happened to VER! So, stop this BS with FIA helping Ferrari.

          1. Vettel ran into Verstappen in Canada, he admitted that himself. Get you facts right and stop accusing Verstappen for everything he is part of.

          2. @mg1982 No, Vettel crashed into the rear of Verstappen.

            Pretty much the exact same incident as in France. Vettel brakes too late and crashes into another driver.

      2. fastest lap still…

  8. In some of the cases it would be considered as racing incident. It is true that Vettel collided with Bottas but it is also true that Bottas did not leave enough space throughout the corner bearing in mind that Vettel prior turn 1 was ahead of him. Anyhow biggest penalty for Vettel was actually compromising his race and ultimately losing championship leadership

    1. If you see the action again there is room but he couldn’t turn in (Vettel said thishimself) he was too close behind Lewis losing front downforce like Daniel and Max in Baku so his fronts locked up.

  9. Adam (@rocketpanda)
    25th June 2018, 12:03

    I really don’t get the fuss over this? I can only think it’s because it involved Vettel or was the only interesting thing to happen in the race.

    Firstly it’s the ‘first lap’, and people keep saying that the stewards give a little over that, and if that’s not enough the bloke literally locked up while trying to brake earlier and slid straight into Bottas. I mean he had nowhere else to go? As soon as he locked the brakes he was basically a passenger and it’s not like he “wanted” to lock them is it? Vettel’s error, sure – something he owned up to and an error anyone could have done, but other than teleportation I’m not sure where else he could have gone. The penalty sent him to the back of the grid along with Bottas. Vettel made a better charge back through the field and was arguably saved by Bottas having a slow pit stop or he’d have been overtaken due to how terrible his pace was at that point.

    Can’t agree with Hamilton at all. What if the fabled rain had turned up and mixed the grid up, leading to Vettel miraculously winning? Isn’t that basically what happened to Button in Canada after getting a load of penalties, mixing up the grid by rain and then winning? Saying he destroyed someone’s race and shouldn’t be allowed to finish ahead of him is ridiculous, I mean by that logic anyone that incurs a penalty can’t be allowed to finish ahead of the aggrieved party.

    1. The penalty sent him to the back of the grid along with Bottas

      @rocketpanda That would be his broken front wing. The penalty changed more or less nothing (maybe he’d have tried harder to block RIC but that’d be really unrealistic)

  10. If you look at it as a penalty for the drivers action and not the outcome it seems fair.

    If you are allowed to consider the following in your decision then the penalty doesn’t seem fair.
    1) Bottas had a damaged floor and his pace suffered
    2) Bottas couldn’t get back to the pits as fast as Vettel for repairs

    A penalty based upon the action and not the outcome seems correct but it may not provide justice.

  11. Hamilton is worried with Vettel-Ferrari combo. Without that incident it would be a walk in park domination winning from Vettel.

    1. @papaya At least we can rely on Vettel to screw it up like so many times :D And Hamilton ain’t worried at all.

    2. Without the incident Vettel would have got through the first few corners in third and there is no evidence to suggest he would then have been able to threaten Bottas let alone Hamilton.

      Hamilton comfortably had Verstappen at arm’s distance who in turn had Raikkonen at arm’s distance.

      As soon as Vettel starting threatening Hamilton’s pit window Hamilton set fastest lap after fastest lap. This was one of his and Mercedes untouchable weekends.

      1. Mmm, unfortunately we cannot know that for sure. You’re presuming VET would have had a worse race pace than VER… and we don’t know that for sure, then RAI is not a good comparison point anymore: he qualified almost 0.7sec behind VET.

        1. @mg1982

          You can’t know a lot for sure, including that Vettel would have been any threat and there was nothing in the race to suggest he would have been. It’s pure wishful thinking.

          1. Nah, it’s not realistic vettel would’ve given any challenge to hamilton, however verstappen ended up 7 sec behind, so lost around 130 thousandths per lap on average, now obviously hamilton was managing the pace, but surely he was also doing so in spain, where the gap was MUCH BIGGER than 7 sec, so I think despite the tyres made specifically for mercedes in these 2 races (and silverstone) there wasn’t that much mercedes superiority here, even verstappen said he wasn’t pushing too hard to try and catch hamilton, so it’s fair to say they both were managing the car.

            Having said that, I don’t think there’s supposed to be much between ferrari and red bull in a race like this, sure vettel had quite some margin in qualifying over the red bulls, but they’re much better in race pace than in qualifying, so if anything vettel could’ve some way got past bottas, maybe jump him in the pits or pass him somewhere else on the first lap, but no realistic chance vs hamilton.

    3. Because Brit wants to dance alone but all others and we all here prefer f1 race more than Lewis.
      He likes to quarel only with handsome Seb. Ask Rosberg for the facts…

  12. Was turn 1, lap 1, and also ruined his race, therefore a fair penalty. I could understand if it only ruined Bottas’ race, and Vettel was able to finish 2nd, maybe he’d have deserved more of a penalty, but in these circumstances, 5 seconds is fair. Also, I understand the need for consistent penalties, but every situation is different, so…

    1. Yeah pretty much for me too. I did think initially that that was perhaps a 10 second offence but I do agree with the Sky pundit (can’t remember who said it) who said they (F1) do not want to deter racing either. If they get all draconian with penalties over racing incidents then the drivers will be afraid to race, and we do not need less action in a formula that sees dirty air already such a deterrent to close racing.

      SV was contrite about it and admitted guilt from getting too good a start on the different tires than those around him. It’s not like he did something completely brazen and sloughed off any blame.

  13. Whiting said the stewards do not take the consequences of an incident into consideration

    Of course they do. They don’t try to correct entirely for the consequences perhaps, but the severity of the incident is usually weighed in.

    They adjust the penalty for all sorts of reasons. Just look at the penalty which “Sainz” got for speeding in the pitlane (mitigated by who knows what). Or the lack of penalties for all the cars straight lining turn 1 (mitigated by them avoiding the mayhem Vettel caused).

    Whiting really should not respond to issues like this. He just makes matters worse with these comments that make no sense at all.

    What we miss mostly is that they should ramp up the penalties for drivers who keep causing incidents. Now the drivers only get a tiny few of those silly “points”. Before, drivers would end up with a suspended race ban if they caused a few incidents. At least give them enough points that two or three of these avoidable incidents is at least going to give them some tangible consequence.

    How times have changed. In the past Hamilton got a drive-through penalty for simply locking up going into turn 1. While 90% of the field locked up.

    Nowadays I guess they really try not to penalise drivers at all, but this lenient treatment has given us perpetual “crash kids” like Vettel, Grosjean and Verstappen.

    Although Verstappen seems to have gotten it under control lately. In Canada at least he didn’t go for the crash in turn 1 and fought a fair fight. Vettel and Grosjean just keep ruining other drivers’ races.

  14. Looking at the incident Vettel tried to back out so from my view, this was a racing accident. He tried to avoid the contact but had his nose already to far in there. 5 seconds are enough for a penalty. Could he have avoided it…. sure. But to accuse him of any intent to cause contact…. thats just crazy. Verstappens china crash was very avoidable. Therefore 10 sec was a minimum.

    1. I think he lost downforce by being so close to Hamilton under braking.

    2. As Vettel finished some 23 seconds clear of Magnussen, it really didn’t matter if it were 5 or 10 seconds….

    3. You can be sure that 99% of the contacts they make are not intentional. Nobody wants to crash.

      So i can’t agree with being intentional or not having much weight on the decisions. Contacts are contacts. If Magnussen and Verstappen get, why shouldn’t Vettel, Hamilton or everyone else?

      1. Actually, while I am reading all comments from all others,more experienced in this world of sport, I simply have the feeling that SV should not have got any punishment.
        It is racing as Max said..
        These 5 sec did not mean anything apart from the fact that two cars in the first row dictated the speed of start. They wete slow.
        They should be punish for slow start…

        1. @bebana

          Vettel seemed quicker because of two factors. He was on what was a quicker tyre and he was in Hamilton’s slipstream. In the slipstream = less downforce on the front of the car, rear tyres dig in for more grip (Simplistic explanation to be honest) That’s why he seemed quicker and also why he breaks were less effective.

          Or would you prefer Vettel to simply be declared winner before the race even starts?
          Also, I’ve noticed you’re calling Vettel handsome? (Which is coming across as a little creepy when you’re doing it repeatedly and referring to him as Handsome Seb)) What makes him better looking then Hamilton?

          1. *His brakes were less effective*
            This site needs an edit function sooo badly.

  15. The problem is the stewards do not take into account the outcome of an incident before deciding the penalty. If there was no safety car maybe 5 secs would be enough. vettel would have lost time getting back to the pits while the others were going at full race pace. However with the safety car vettel was able to pit and get back to last but one with all the cars next to each other line astern and had also taken his mandatory pit stop. So if you combine the pit stop he had taken and the fact the others had not stopped then over all time wise he was probably not far off the lead… what maybe would have been more sensible if some one causes an accident that brings a safety car out then they should give the 5 sec penalty then subtract his fastest quali time from the lap time of the safety car and add that to his time penalty, that way he would not get the free pit stop by virtue of the safety car that he caused to be on track. Just a thought but surely the penalty should reflect the outcome of an incident and not just the incident itself.

  16. It is part of Whiting’s job to respond when questioned about such things as penalties doled out.

    Yes times have changed, and with the current cars on the current tires dirty air is a big enemy that has been a real deterrent to close racing at a time when the new regime wants to correct that. So they are not going to do too much to squelch what action we do get.

    ‘Perpetual crash kids’ is an exaggeration, as these drivers have shown they don’t generally do this sort of thing every race, Max’s start to the season being the exception not the norm, and are quite self-policing in that regard (see Max’s more current form). They themselves know when they have done damage to their own cause, their own race or season, and if we take out the times when they were legitimately just racing, as we want these racers to do, and not just being too exuberant, the really bad behaviour is not that frequent, at least not frequent enough for F1 to put up big deterrents to racing.

    1. @robbie Says who?

      Sure he will answer questions during the driver meetings, but this was not that.

      Crash kid does not mean they do it “every” race. Stop making up ridiculous definitions to pretend people say ridiculous things.

      Last Season Vettel rammed into other cars in Canada, Baku, Silverstone, Singapore and Mexico. You cannot seriously claim that that is normal behavior. Nor that at any point Vettel realised that he was causing harm to his own (or other drivers) cause. Well I guess in the end he realized he should have won the title and let it slip away, but at no point of the season did he crash into other cars less than before.

      This season drivers were able to narrowly avoid his reckless assault in Baku and he crashed into two other cars in France. Well on his way to a similar tally of incidents to 2017.

      1. @patrickl
        Who did Vettel ram in Silverstone or Canada last year? Your argument is some desperate stuff.

        Last year Bottas rammed Raikkonen twice at the start (Spain and Baku) and got nothing. Mercedes have zero grounds to complain here. Mercedes love to complain though. They falsely accused Ferrari of cheating with their engine which was also disproved.

        1. @kingshark In Silverstone he was playing bumper cars with Verstappen and in Canada he rammed Verstappen on the rear wheel (pretty much the same situation like with Bottas in France)

          Oh and Vettel rammed into Stroll after the race in I think Malaysia.

          Ferrari was caught cheating last year. So yeah …

          1. Hey, Patriiiiiiiick, in Canada it was VER fault! Repeat after me, Patrick: VER fault! It’s common sense. It’s obvious 3 cars don’t have enough room in a corner, so the one who takes such a risky maneouver has the responsibility too. At least the inside and the middle of the corner were already covered completely by BOT and VET. VET actually was smart there, he left some room to BOT while they were about to enter the corner “just in case”. And it was smart/cautious ’cause that “just in case” happened, more exactly BOT had a snap of understeer OR maybe he did it on purpose in order to scare off VET… who knows for sure, but if VET would have been cms away from VET, BOT would have crashed into VET. So, VET did good to let half a meter between him and BOT – saved them from crash, but it was VER who came like a mad man from behind and decided that if he has greater speed, then the others probably should make room for him. Exaggerating now, it’s like VET should have forced him out between HAM and BOT…. risking a collision, of course… just because he had a better start than both and there were some chances he might have been 1st to the corner. VER is a wild driver, he obviously is the type who plays russian roulette with a real gun.

          2. @mg1982 No it was not. Vettel hit Verstappen in the rear. How on earth can that ever be Verstappen’s fault?

            Try to learn some racing basics before you start shouting on a forum.

            Also, Vettel was “smart” trying to be the one behind where three were going side by side into a hairpin?!?!!? You really need to lookup the definition of the word “smart” too, because that is a recipe for disaster with 100% certainty.

            Maybe you need to refresh your memory:

            Verstappen was clearly well ahead before they turn in and gives Vettel and Bottas all the space he can. Miles away from the apex. Vettel spatial awareness is so bad that he thinks 3 cars will fit. Over and over Vettel makes these rookie mistakes.

  17. Hamilton had results where he achieved better than fair after penalties as well.

  18. Of course he thinks his championship rival should have been given a harsher penalty.
    He’s come away with a more significant points lead than he was expecting and had to to very little to win…why can the bloke not just shut up and take the gift that is given to him…

  19. @patrickl Lol was it not you who used the term ‘perpetual crash kids?’ I only quoted you. How typical. You start with that term and I get blamed for it? Lol, priceless. Just as is your obvious dislike for SV. This is about yesterday’s hit on VB and really the only debate is 5 seconds or should it have been 10. Anything more and we have drivers afraid to race in the pinnacle of racing.

    1. Not sure why that didn’t link directly to your comment above.

      1. The comment box header might say ‘Leave a Reply‘ but then you are replying to the article – new thread.
        You will see a light grey line between the last comment and comment box.

        If you want reply to a comment then you need to tick the relevant ‘REPLY’ box first, which will become a solid colour and the grey line will be gone.
        Beware that when you leave the page, or when posting results in an error, then the reply might still be visible but you are ‘replying to the article’. Before (re)posting you need to click the proper reply button again.

        But I think you knew all that, @robbie.
        Just happy to share my own trial & error experience ;-)

    2. @robbie perpetual means they keep doing it. Not that they do it every race.

      Vettel has been crashing into other drivers since 2009. Or 2008 even.

      1. Hyperbole much?

        1. @robbie Well the sad thing is that I’m not. Vettel DOES cause incidents at a ridiculous high rate.

          Although granted in 2009 two of those were just him crashing into the wall without touching another car. I guess that is fine.

          Still, it’s just disgusting how many races he ruined with his clumsy driving. When he starts from P2 or P3 it’s almost a guarantee that he will hit someone.

          1. Hyperbole much?

      2. @patrickl
        At least Vettel accepts the penalties after his mistakes instead of blaming his skin colour on why the stewards treat him harshly.

        Hamilton’s 2011 remains the most error prone season from any supposed top driver in recent history.

        1. @kingshark Lol with Vettel accepting penalties. Bwahahahahahahahahaha. You were joking right?

          Yes Hamilton was wondering if it was his skin color why he got a ridiculous penalty. So?

          Hamilton was put in the wall by Button on the straight. Not Hamilton’s fault. He had some run-ins with Massa and Maldonado. Which ended when Massa finally got penalised for hitting Hamilton on purpose/

          Still, he had only three races with incidents of which only 2 were his fault. Vettel had 7 races last season where he hit other drivers. Maybe you need to learn how to count.

          1. @patrickl
            Maybe you need to learn how to not be delusional. You would struggle to find even a die-hard Hamilton fan who thinks that Vettel’s 2017 season was more error prone than Hamilton’s 2011.

            Hamilton crashed twice in Monaco, played bumper cars in Canada, crashed in Belgium, crashed in Singapore, hit Massa in Japan.

            Hamilton’s 2011 is the most error prone season in history from any top driver. His 2011 is the reason why he will never be considered in the same elite category level as Senna, Schumacher, Prost.

          2. @kingshark Sure. Keep dreaming. I hope you do realise that 7 races with incidents for Vettel in 2017 is more than the 5 you claim for Hamilton in 2011? Math isn’t that hard really.

            But then two of those incidents were not cause by Hamilton at all so it gets even worse.

            Hamilton didn’t hit Button in Canada. Button put him int the wall on the straight. Button only got away without a penalty because the stewards accepted that Button “hadn’t seen” Hamilton. Still, it was Buttons fault.

            Hamilton didn’t hit Massa in Japan. Massa hit the back of Hamilton’s car. That’s Massa’s fault for trying a failed overtake.

            Spa is marginal too, because that was more Kobayashi’s weird aggression, but I’ll give you that one.

            Vettel had more than those 7 incidents in 2017, but when he wasn’t the one who caused them I obviously didn’t add them.

            So we are left with 3 incident races for Hamilton with 7 race incident filled races for Vettel. With Vettel losing a huge amount more points too and in the end he even lost what should have been an easy WDC.

            I’ll agree that 3 races with incidents is insane for a driver of Hamilton’s caliber, but it’s common practice for Vettel really. Which indeed will be why he never will be considered one of the greats.

            For instance already in 2009 he crashed into Kubica in round 1, crashed out in Malaysia and crashed out in Monaco. 3 major incidents in the first 7 races already (plus more later). Another WDC lost due to his poor race craft.

            Season after season he easily racks up 3 (or more) incidents due to his lack of spatial awareness. Just learn to deal with it, because he is going to crash a lot more. Although you will just put on your blinders and pretend it never happened.

            Good luck with lying to yourself.

          3. @patrickl
            Hamilton spun Webber around in Canada.

            Hamilton hit Massa off the circuit in Japan, he didn’t see Massa coming around his outside and just took the normal racing line. Also, Hamilton’s front tyre hit Massa’s front wing, so how exactly did Massa hit the back of Hamilton’s car?

            What 7 incidents did Vettel have in 2017? Keep lying to yourself. He had three incidents in Baku, Singapore and Mexico. Maybe Canada at a stretch. Silverstone was just hard racing, nothing more, no different to Hamilton pushing Rosberg off the circuit Bahrain 2014.

            Hamilton also played bumpercars in 2008 too. He crashed in Bahrain, crashed in Canada, hit the wall in Monaco, cut the track and got a penalty in France, and ran Raikkonen off the track in Japan. Hamilton’s 2008 is probably the most error prone title in recent memory.

            Hamilton had more accidents in 2008 and 2011 than Vettel has had in any individual season.

          4. @kingshark Fine, 4 races with incidents for Hamilton in 2011. That’s still a “normal” year for Vettel and nothing even close to the huge list of 7 incident races in 2017.

            2008 Hamilton was clearly unjustly penalized by Alan Donely (a Ferrari consultant who got the job of permanent steward). He practically got penalties for “sneezing loudly”.

            Still, even with 2008 and 2011 COMBINED for Hamilton, Vettel still had the same amount of incident filled races in 2017 alone. And Vettel has many incidents every season again.

            Vettel is one of those drivers like Massa. They do perfectly fine in the fastest car when they can lead from pole. Let them start from P2 or P3 with a bit of pressure from other cars and they tend to collide with other cars and move backwards.

            Just like Vettel did in France. Or for instance in 2017 in Canada, Silverstone and Mexico.

          5. @patrickl
            Vettel had three or four incidents in 2017, not seven like you claim. No amount of repeating yourself is going to change that.

            Hamilton had five mistakes in 2008 and another five mistakes in 2011.

            Hamilton’s 2009 was also error prone actually. He spun several times in China, crashed in Monaco, crashed in Monza, ran off the track several times in Silverstone, and lied to the stewards in Australia (if you can consider that a mistake). Another season from Lewis with about 5 mistakes.

            As for Vettel being like Massa, please tell me when Massa ever won in a race in a Toro Rosso. Vettel won a championship by having to overtake from the back of the field twice in the last three races (2012).

          6. @kingshark I mentioned them above already. In 2017 Vettel had 7 races with incidents (sometimes several in a single race).

            Stop counting incidents for Lewis that weren’t caused by him. Otherwise Vettel had 12 incidents in 2017.

            Vettel won that race in a Torro Rosso when they had the same car as Red Bull, with the only difference being that STR had the better Ferrari for that race. 3 of those cars were in the top 4 of qualifying. That race, Vettel was driving the fastest car and won from pole. Massa could ineded have done the same.

          7. @patrickl
            Hamilton had 15 accidents in 2011, I mean if we are just going to make up imaginary numbers then I can do the same.

            No, Toro Rosso was not the fastest car at Monza 2008. McLaren had the fastest car and if Hamilton had qualified where Kovelainen did, he would have won that race. Later that season Vettel overtook Hamilton in the rain in Brazil and nearly cost him the championship, again with an inferior STR. Those are not the feats of a Massa level driver.

          8. @kingshark Yes you are indeed just making stuff up.

            Indeed Hamilton almost won that race coming all the way from the back, but he was unlucky by about 4 laps that his fuel ran out and he had to change tyres just before the weather changed.

            Still, with Hamilton and Raikkonen caught out by the rain, Torro Rosso had the fastest car for THAT RACE and also best suited for the rain. With 3 out of the first 4 places filled on the grid and the only two contenders all the way at the back of the grid.

            The only reason Vettel overtook Hamilton in Brazil was because Kubica pushed Hamilton off. Kubica had just had a pitstop and on fresh tyres he was a lot faster yes.

            What with all the nonsensical examples? Seriously yes, stop making stuff up. It’s embarassing.

            Besides, yet again Vettel messed up …

          9. @patrickl
            McLaren was the fastest car at Monza 2008. A completely ordinary driver like Kovalainen who spend the last few years of his career in Caterham before being fired qualified only 0.076s behind Vettel and finished only 6 seconds behind him in the race. Hamilton underdelivered on Saturday, that is why he failed to win.

            As for Hamilton being caught out in the rain, Hamilton struggled and was slower than Kovalainen throughout the entire qualifying session. He was 2 seconds slower than Kimi on similar track conditions at the end of Q2. Lewis himself admitted after qualifying that he could not find his braking points.

            The only reason Vettel overtook Hamilton in Brazil was because Kubica pushed Hamilton off. Kubica had just had a pitstop and on fresh tyres he was a lot faster yes.

            Kubica did not push Hamilton off. Kubica didn’t even touch Hamilton. Hamilton got scared and drove wide himself after Kubica made a perfectly legitimate overtook. Also, Hamilton and Vettel were both on intermediate tyres of the same age.

            Why do you lie so much?

            Besides, yet again Vettel messed up …

            And then schooled Hamilton in the race. Overtook him with 11 lap older tyres.

          10. @kingshark So the conclusion is that Vettel was marginally better than Kovalainen. great.

          11. So the conclusion is that Vettel was marginally better than Kovalainen. great.

            A Kovalainen driving a significantly better car @patrickl

          12. @simracer No he wasn’t. Again, there were 3 Red Bull cars in the top 4 of quali. And Vettel was driving the one best suited for Monza since it had the Ferrari engine.

            Clearly Red Bull had the best car for Monza in those conditions.

          13. @patrickl
            Kovalainen was half a second and 8 tenths quicker than those on the second row. The other Red Bull cars finished nowhere in the race. The other Toro Rosso had nowhere near the race pace of Vettel, and the best RBR ended up in 8th.

            So with a clearly unrepresentative time in quali from Mclaren’s lead driver (2s slower than 14th in Q2), I think it’s fair to say Mclaren were the fastest car. Heck, even Ferrari weren’t that bad, but Massa did nothing to improve from a decent grid slot.

          14. @simracer In the wet that car was far ahead of everyone. That why I specfically type: Vettel was driving the best car at that track IN THOSE CONDITIONS.

            3 places in the top 4 were Red Bull cars and Vettel was driving the best one for that race with the Ferrari engine. How difficult of a concept is that to grasp?

            Bourdais was a horrible failure and he had to start from the pits and therefore was driving all the way at the back of the field. Of course that makes him slower. So what?

            Point is, even he got P4 with that car in quali. So you are really only proving my point.

          15. @patrickl
            In THOSE CONDITIONS a Mclaren was still on the front row and a tenth from pole. A good half second quicker than anyone other than Vettel.

            In the race, the next best Red Bull car was half a minute behind in eighth, and Bourdais’ lap times even when in clear air suggested he would have been further behind than that.

          16. @simracer Exactly, so at best all we can conclude is that Vettel was perhaps slightly better than Kovalainen. Well done, you finally got there.

            That Webbers races was (as usual) messed up by Red Bull or that Bourdais was an incredibly poor fir for F1 really are irrelevant. Again, even that incredibly poor driver got that same car to P4. That just shows how good that car really was.

  20. Think A driver like MAG would Like an explanation from FIA..

  21. Multiple world champions who are championship contenders have genrally always got off lightly or got off completely. Thought we were used to this.

  22. The reason Vettel ended in front is that nearly all the people he overtook waved him past. The Haas and saubers: sad Ferrari’s.. the others need to go back to racing school.

    I remember a whole topic on Ocon waving Hamilton through, well Vettel got a special overtaking lane assigned it seems..

    1. He is a hero! No jealosy, please.
      Ferrari is Ferrari.
      Only one.

      1. You misspelled zero …

        1. Which word are you going to spell when Sebastian starts singing first German and then Italian National Anthem?

          1. At this rate he won’t soon so …

    2. I mentioned the exact same explanation when Ocon let Hamilton past. It was just a matter of time before Ferrari’s B and C team let the Factory Ferrari drivers through with similar ease. I’m surprised that there’s no big rant in the media about how Magnussen and Leclerc just let Vettel by without putting up any fight.

  23. Hamilton got a drive through penalty in 2008, Japan, for impeding Raikkonen on the first lap, he didn’t even hit him!

    Incosistent FIA and often in favour of the red cars. 5 second penalty is woefully inadequate for wrecking Bottas’ race.

  24. Rosberg got the same penalty for that overtake on Verstappen on Hockenheim 2016. They didn’t even made contact.
    This 5 sec penalty was, as Alonso says, A JOKE.

    He wrecked Bottas’s race and the mayhem that suceed was a consequence of his mistake.

    At least a drive through would be much more appropriate. It wouldn’t make any difference on this race as the top 3 were worlds ahead of the rest, but at least he would sweat a little bit more for this 5 th place.

  25. geoffgroom44 (@)
    25th June 2018, 20:04

    There is a certain arrogance, voiced through ‘supporters’ on this board, that somehow Bottas should not have ‘closed the door’ to this prancing horse.Extending that argument to it’s logical conclusion means that everyone should simply get out of the way of an uncontrolled red stallion. F1 is about excellence, it is about the top drivers demonstrating controlled aggression and skill. On both these latter points I’m afraid, much as I actually like him, Seb does not come out of such incidences with the aura of a deserving champion.

    1. Why do we like Seb?

      He is natural, simple man and he is not an actor.

      He is not accusing anybody for the race start but himself. Although he could make up something to prove his innocense.

      Brit would have found 101 excuses to point out somone else’s mistake but not his own.
      That is called arrogance.
      All of us in the word hate arrogance.

      And ask yourselves.
      Why Sebastian was the driver of the day?

      1. Because people are crazy, that’s why.
        Hamilton smashed everyone, but the driver of the day was the guy who actually underperformed.
        Ruined his race by his own fault, and came home behind 3 cars which he should be ahead.

        And about Hamilton finding excuses, he wouldn’t need. You don’t see him screwing up like this anymore.

  26. It may be fair to ask but it is a lot to ask for actual consistency in stewards’ judgments: 1. they are not the same people every race and 2. they don’t have some kind of FIA WestLaw database at their fingertips to find out who got what penalty in a similar situation 2 years ago in a few minutes time. The only way to address this is try to prescribe, narrowly, by rule what penalties go with what violations. But even then, as can be seen here, reasonable people, and unreasonable impassioned fans, will disagree about what is shown on video. Even in association football, is there any consistency in what kinds of dangerous tackles get a card and in what color?

    I think what people are reacting to when they saw the error and the penalty and the outcome was Vettel finishing 5th and well ahead of Bottas. But to me this due to two things. First, the first 6 cars are so much faster than the rest that Vettel could have spent the first few minutes of the race finishing a coffee, hit the loo, and still finished well in the points. Second, Bottas’ car was damaged significantly in the collision. These are not things that the penalty framework or the particular decision here would have taken into account. Thus the heightened sense that the outcome was unfair.

    1. I am finally positively surprised by your holistic approach to the particular situation with such simplicity.

      That must be the result of broad and long evidence-based research in f1 sport with high sophisticated skills for recognition the justice. Thank you for proper expression of fans’ feelings.

  27. I don’t always agree with the FIA and I do not his time but, must say that they are closer to right then to wrong.
    Vettel should NOT have received a penalty as while he caused the contact his was an understandable and thus excusable mistake .
    When he approached turn one he ( I believed ) assumed that the two Mercedes drivers would enter the turn with the same speed which he (Vettel) was carrying and therein was his mistake. Vettel rightfully concluded that the two drivers who had qualified 1 and 2 should have the same skill level that he had and thus would maintain the same pace that he maintained into the turn but, both Hamilton and especially Bottas slowed more than Vettel did because they could not control the pace in the turn as Vettel could .
    Vettel overlooked or simply forgot the fact that Hamilton has done so well principally because he has had the luck to drive the best car that F1 has ever seen and that Bottas was in P2 and has won a few races for the same reason : having a great car and not having great skill.
    So, Vettel plowed into Bottas because he expected Bottas to be going faster that Bottas was going . Therefore ,the touch should have been deemed a driving incident as it was the unexpected slow pace of the Mercedes cars ,notwithstanding their superior PU’s , which caused the contact.

    1. That is why I am telling that both of them, Brit and Bottas deserve punishment. That was team game.
      I am disgusted by these people.

      Sebastian needs protection. He is naive. Too clean, pure and innocent.

      The worst thing when Brit told CRAZY, while watching with Max start record.

      What goes around, comes around.

      1. Sebastian needs protection. He is naive. Too clean, pure and innocent.

        Hahahhahahaha. You’re a funny guy

        What goes around, comes around

        Exactly what I thought after Baku 2017 ;)

        1. @todfod

          I know I dropped a lung too. Bebana must be new to the sport this year to not know about Baku 2017, Singapore 2017, Mexico 2016 (His very non-innocent expletive laden rant over the radio), multi-21 and his habit of blaming evetyone else.

          1. First of all, I would have been reprimanded severely if i had talked very bad things regarding authorities where I live.
            Mr. Whiting cannot bring decision on his own and his decision will never be accepted by all of us.
            If I am new in this sport, I wanted to read polite comments by all who know more than me.But you serve as very example to all of us because you are very ill mannered.
            I just look at SV and compare his childish and sincere gestures with sky looking face of LH who, in my opinion did not deserve to win Baku etc.A lot of injustice. Merz is far behind Ferrari.

            Accept my apologies but my culture, and age is closer to Seb.

  28. The guy who messed up screwed his own race, too. I’d rather see no penalties ever, unless it can be proven an act was deliberate to take a competitor out.

  29. Without saying anything about the rest of the discussion I doubt there’s a problem with VET finishing in front of BOT when VES finished in front of VET in China tbh.

    1. @davidnotcoulthard True, two wrongs always make a right …

      1. @patrickl Not sure what your point is – sarcasm is unfortunately usually a pain in the neck to spot in written form

        1. @davidnotcoulthard Nice try. Perhaps next time try harder to post something sensible instead of needing to pretend afterwards that it was supposed to be “sarcasm”.

          1. @patrickl what is your point though? If a driver causes an incident but has such pace later on that he finishes ahead of the victim anyway even after penalties (VES with those soft tyres, VET with an undamaged chassis, BUT with a very good drive in Canada 2011, etc), then so be it.

  30. It’s easy to overlook that one important consequence of Vettel’s collision with Bottas was Raikkonen overtook Vettel later on in the race, and ended up on the podium while Vettel didn’t. That, surely, is as important as a 5 second penalty.

  31. As a fan of Lewis, my initial reaction was similar to his – how can the person who’s race is damaged through someone elses mistake be behind the person who caused it? (I’m referring to the immediate aftermath, not by the end of the race).

    But in hindsight the consequences of action should no determine the penalty – only the severity of the mistake itself. For example, if that contact had occurred just before pit entry should Vettel get less of a penalty than if it was at turn one? The effect on Bottas would have been less. What if Bottas managed a better recovery drive and ended up second behind his team mate? What if Vettel had additional damage and struggled to make his way through the field and ended up pointless?

    In my view, in the cold light of the morning after the penalty should only be for the severity of the mistake, or level of recklessness, not for the effect it has. The caveat to this is where is where there is significant risk of injury or to life.

    So, considering Vettel just misjudged a corner, 5 seconds isn’t unreasonable (I’d still have given him a 10s penalty just because ;) )

  32. Having had some time to think, honestly, the penalty that Vettel suffered WASN’T the five second time penalty, it was the neccesary recovery drive, the loss of points to Hamilton and the potential excess wear to that engine.

    To have had the pace he did for as long as he did, plus the speed difference, Ferrari could well have let him have a higher engine mode for much of the race, calculating the potential fuel problems at the races end were alliviated by the safety car.

    So, the question is, how much wear could that have put on the engine? Is that going to bite him in a race later in the season and thus be the true penalty?

Comments are closed.