Valtteri Bottas, Mercedes, Hungaroring, 2018

Bottas given 10-second penalty for Ricciardo collision

2018 Hungarian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Valtteri Bottas has been penalised by the stewards for his collision with Daniel Ricciardo during the Hungarian Grand Prix.

The pair collided while disputing fourth place in the closing stages of the race. Ricciardo attempted to pass the Mercedes driver around the outside of turn one. However Bottas, who was struggling for grips on old tyres, slid into the side of him, pushing Ricciardo off the track and damaging his Red Bull.

The stewards held Bottas responsible and gave him a 10-second time penalty plus two penalty points on his licence – his first of the current 12-month period. Bottas keeps his fifth place in the race.

The stewards ruled no investigation was necessary into the earlier collision between Bottas and Sebastian Vettel.

Stewards’ decision

The Stewards reviewed video evidence, heard from the driver of car 77 (Valtteri Bottas), the driver of car three (Daniel Ricciardo) and the team representatives. Bottas had a damaged front wing from an earlier incident.

As the two cars approached turn one, Ricciardo was on the outside of the the turn and gave plenty of room. With the compromised line and less downforce from the front wing Bottas locked up, and collided with Ricciardo forcing Ricciardo off the track and causing damage. Both cars continued.

The stewards ordered a 10-second penalty, which will be applied to the final result, along with two penalty points.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Don't miss anything new from RaceFans

Follow RaceFans on social media:

2018 F1 season

Browse all 2018 F1 season 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.

56 comments on “Bottas given 10-second penalty for Ricciardo collision”

  1. Other incident?

    1. He was cleared of the Vettel incident.

    2. He had a millimetre of front wing alongside Vettel’s rear tyre so was entitled to plow into Vettel (despite being pinned to the dirty side of the track and having no chance of making the apex)….

      Great wingman.

      1. @anon
        which shop are you buying your lemons and sour grapes? please do let us know so Tiffosos know where to buy their joy after a weekend like this…

  2. Neil (@neilosjames)
    29th July 2018, 17:10

    Seems reasonable. Was a silly mistake, nothing malicious.

    1. ColdFly (@)
      29th July 2018, 20:51

      Not malicious, but he knew that on those tyres he could never make that turn (as proven by the incident), @neilosjames.
      I find this collision worse than Verstappen’s who drove into Ricciardo last year. This was not lap 1, and Ricciardo left a lot more room this time. Therefore, it seems a bit lenient that Bottas got the same penalty as Max last year.
      And quietly I hoped it would be a stop & go (or 30s extra time) which would have moved Gasly up ;-)

      1. 1. Ricciardo should’ve been told by his team about Bottas’ car conditions, or they did told him? Shouldn’t take risk overtaking on the outside as he is a sitting duck by the next DRS zone. But Ricciardo is 100% entitled to overtake on the outside. A bit more cautious doesn’t do any harm. It’s not the last lap of the race.

        2. Bottas shouldn’t defend so aggressively. I mean does he really think he can hold on to P4 with a damaged front wing and worn out tyres?

  3. How the heck did he get a penalty and not Vettel?? At least he gave the spot back and ricciardo kept on going! No, this is ridiculous.

    1. What position did he give back? He was defending hard against Ricciardo who still managed to pass Bottas after all.

    2. Neil (@neilosjames)
      29th July 2018, 17:22

      Vettel didn’t deserve a penalty. He was involved in a racing incident (equal-ish blame, I thought), whereas Bottas made a silly mistake and caused a collision with Ricciardo. Totally different things… and Bottas didn’t give the place back, Ricciardo took it.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        29th July 2018, 18:28

        @neilosjames actually it’s the reverse – Bottas’s incident with Ricciardo wasn’t intentional. He flat spotted and didn’t have downforce. Ricciardo could also have steered clear of Bottas there – he misjudged the Mercedes’ grip and assumed he had the same grip that he did but he didn’t budge either.

        Vettel pushed Bottas on the kerb – there was nowhere for Bottas to go and that’s evidenced by the fact that Bottas couldn’t even turn a wheel on the corner and was heading straight. I’ve almost never seen a cut like that and a driver being forced to drive straight and you never will because there’s only one driver who’s would pull such a crazy maneuver… as I’ve said for years now.

        Vettel’s the luckiest driver in the world to score a single point today but he’s practically the luckiest guy to be alive to and not to have killed another driver in his career.

        1. Says the guy who has no clue about this sport but sure likes to talk like he does.

          1. @sjzelli
            says the tiffoso after having their lemons and sour grapes handed to them :)

          2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            29th July 2018, 18:52

            @sjzelli touche – I guess you and Vettel know better:-) Since you obviously know better and we’ve established that, what did you and Vettel expect Bottas to do there?

            Have you ever seen a car be forced to go straight around a tight corner? Surely with your better knowledge of the sport you can point a dozen cases like that.

        2. @freelittlebirds don’t you think Vettel purposely created the crash in order to bring in a SC and potentially catch Ham?

          1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            29th July 2018, 19:00

            @johnmilk I know you’re kidding but if a SC had come out, Vettel would have had the better tyres over Lewis so that would have worked to his advantage and we know Vettel has a hard time keeping it clean when there are cars around and positions in play. His forte is leading from the front and having good starts – when he’s not in front, you could swap him with quite a few drivers in the paddock and you’d be better off.

            When I saw the debris from Bottas’ front wing, I was afraid that they may have brought out a safety car…

            I don’t see Vettel allowing himself to be broadsided though – he’s lucky that Bottas missed him by taking evasive action on the kerb. Vettel is more likely to press the issue where he has more control of the outcome. So this was obviously a mistake and miscalculation by Vettel. If Bottas had stuck his course, he would have given Vettel’s car a spin at the very least or taken him out completely.

          2. Not kidding @freelittlebirds just trying to take a page of your book. Missed just by a little

        3. Stop talking non-sense, please! VET pushed him on the kerb?! Not only that it’s not true, but the kerb is part of the track, nothing wrong. Then, VET was in front, how he managed that?! Also, VET was completely in front, he was entitled to take any line he desired. Exactly, BOT going straight just proves he was on the wrong part of the track AND/OR he braked way too late.

          These are no real excuses and there’s no consistency either: you accuse RIC for not knowing what was going on with BOT’s car, how it handled etc etc… but you don’t accuse BOT for having the same “awareness” in the battle with VET. Come on… It’s not RIC’s problem what’s going on with BOT’s car, but BOT and Mercedes problem. If BOT knew…. and he knew… that the car wasn’t performing anymore, he should have pushed it as far as it permitted. As you know, when a car presents some sort of danger, the driver and the team are obligated to pit or retire the car. Otherwise, they’re blackflagged. So, by giving this extreme example, I’m underlining that the driver and his team are the (only) ones responsable for their car(s). So, there’s nobody at fault but BOT himself for pushing his car beyond it’s capabilities and creating a dangerous situation. Poor RIC had no fault at all that BOT was trying to resist a lost fight by doing the same mistake he did against VET: braking too late. Therefore, the penalty for the 2nd incident is more than deserved as it was no racing incident anymore… but a crashing tradition.

          1. Thomas Bennett (@felipemassadobrasil)
            29th July 2018, 20:16

            I agree with you on Ricciardo. But Vettel was not completely in front. It is called motor ‘racing’ and everybody criticised him for Bahrain when he supposedly didn’t take any risks. Here he is trying to show he is a hard-nosed racing driver and not a pushover like it is thought. But you are right about the Ricciardo incident so I will give you that.

          2. Reading RaceFans go at each other is becoming more fun than watch F1 races…..go figure!!!!!

  4. Well, that’s consistent with their decision for Kimi in Silverstone, seems fair. I don’t really mind that it doesn’t change the result, as he lost positions when his tyres gave up and he fought against that loss of grip a bit more than probably was wise.

  5. The correct decision even though it doesn’t affect his finishing position.

  6. What are you taking about guys? what Vetel did?

  7. Guess they are going for “consistency”.

    Apparently no leniency for “giving” the position back. It’s not even mentioned in the decision.

    1. Ric overtook him. Stop with your nonsense old man.

    2. He definitely didn’t give him the position! Giving the position means moving across on the start finish straight, Ricciardo overtook him fair and square

    3. Giving back the position does not absolve him of the infraction.
      BTW, I see Bottas has pulled out the old ” he shouldn’t have tried to pass me as he knew my car was damaged” bit…

  8. Well done FIA

  9. Vettel in my opinion gave Bottas no room after his overtake and certainly deserves penalty

    1. @mikejtw From all the angles shown Bottas had no business diving down the inside of Vettel at that point. He was too far behind already, certainly not alongside Vettel (I think for it to be fair game the front wheel of the car behind most be at least aligned with the rear wheel of the car in front, as per the rules). I wish they would’ve shown Bottas’s onboard so that we could properly evaluate where he was in relation to Vettel and put this to bed.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        29th July 2018, 18:21

        @toiago say what???:-) that was a ridiculous cut, Vettel was lucky to get away without a penalty but he was extremely lucky that he finished the race and he deserved to come out without any points whatsoever.
        Bottas had to literally go on the kerb and steered straight since Vettel didn’t even let him turn a wheel…

        Another kamikaze divebomb by Vettel going unpenalized… He must love driving for Ferrari cause it’s like playing football without yellow or red cards:-)

        1. Hamilton should of been penalised in Silvestone for cutting him up if Vettel got anything here. This shows how filthy Merc are.

        2. How is it a divebomb foing around the outside of someone? Also you do know the person behind holds the responsibility in an accident including races. Do you guys even have a license? Let alone any racing experience.

      2. It’s telling that they didn’t show the Bottas in car shot…

        1. When Anthony Davidson was reviewing the incident post race he said that they didn’t have a good shot from Bottas OnBoard as at the time it was the rear facing camera that was live.

          I believe FOM are recording footage from all the OnBoard angles on the car now to internal storage but the angles that aren’t live at the time need to be downloaded post race.

    2. There’s was plenty of free space to the right…

  10. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
    29th July 2018, 17:31

    A penalty is right, but 5 seconds longer than Vettel got in France for giving Bottas a puncture and knocking him to the back of the grid? That seems a little strange, but it doesn’t matter as he didn’t loose positions.

    This is thr first time Bottas has got penalty points since Bahrain 2016. So he’s been without any for way over a full year. No other driver that has been in f1 this amount of time in the last few years has avoided getting any in this length of time. So this should’t damage Bottas’s reputation too much. He usually keeps everything very clean. Although not as good as his team mate, his weekend was flawless until he had completed almost all the race. First incident wasn’t really his or Vette’s mistake. I think it was just an incident. The 2nd one may have been a result of his damage, but he maybe shouldn’t have attempted the risk. The Stewards description though is sort of emplying Bottas’s front wing was the cause of his lock up and hitting Ricciardo. Still think it was right to give bottas some sort of penalty, but given he had damage from an incident that they didn’t blame him for, and even mention the damage from this incident as part of the reason for the next one, it seems strange that the time penalty is a big at it is.

    1. So he’s been without any for way over a full year. No other driver that has been in f1 this amount of time in the last few years has avoided getting any in this length of time.

      Ocon – 2 consecutive clean seasons; Ricciardo 4 consecutive clean seasons.

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        29th July 2018, 19:28

        Ocon and Ricciardo didn’t get many (not sure if Ocon ever has) From the comparison i’m making, Ocon joined F1 after Bottas last got any penalty points so he’s out of this comparison anyway even if he hadn’t got any in this time. After Ricciardo got points at the start of this year, Bottas was the one with the largest gap between last getting them at about 2 and a half seasons. But I was incorrect that Ricciardo had done 4 full seasons beforehand without getting any.

        Bottas is yet to be updated for this latest incident though.

        I was indeed incorrect about Ricciardo. He has been without any for at least 3 full seasons.

    2. @thegianthogweed Vettel should have gotten a bigger penalty yes. Wouldn’t have mattered either, but still. Vette; gave a whole list of reasons why this move could end up in tears and yet he went ahead and ignored them all anyway and crashed.

      It was also quite blatant what Bottas did to Ricciardo. It was clear he lost the position and he could never brake as late as Ricciardo. Yet he still did.

      It’s just weird how drivers can have such different opinions about these incidents. Bottas was upset with Vettel in France, so I cannot understand how he would think doing this to Ricciardo was OK.

      There was this video a while back on the F1 feed about Alonso complaining about Ericsson IIRC. “He’s pushing me off”
      “I can’t believe this!”. While Alonso was in an utterly losing position with barely a nose stuck in and then acting surprised the car ahead took the racing line. Like he doesn’t do exactly the same every time.

    3. @ Ben Rowe: yeah, because VET did not crash 2 drivers in 2 laps time. Crashing 1 time might be a mistake indeed, so they’re not that harsh, but crashing 2 times with 2 different drivers within 2 laps is another story. They let him unpunished for the 1st crash, it’s fair given the heat of the moment and the consequences – it was a racing incident -, but creating a 2nd crash it’s too much to go unpunished. 10sec seems fair enough, plus… he kept his place.

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        29th July 2018, 20:59

        You can’t give a harsher penalty for a 2nd incident because a driver has already had one. That is silly. Especially if the first one that driver wasn’t predominantly to blame for. In the first incident, the stewards clearly didn’t blame one more than the other. And it was even said that if Vettel had suffered a puncture, even then, it would still be considered a racing incident.

        The 2nd incident clearly was more Bottas’s fault, but it was also partially a result of an incident that he wan’t fully at fault for. As the damaged wing was a cause of his under steer. But as then noted, he should have been more aware of this. but the fact is, the outcome of this was nothing like as bad for Ricciardo as Vettel’s clash with Bottas in France was for Bottas. So that is why I think the penalty difference is a little strange. 5 seconds to me would have been more realistic but this is fair enough.

  11. Because of the delicate weekend for Ferrari, the spineless stewards are frightened to penalise and upset them any further… everything is the fault of Bottas….obviously he should not have put his car so that when Seb chopped across him, his own front wing would have broken…….Rules for one team!!!

    1. @jop452 Which is exactly why RAI and VET pushing/spinning Mercedes’ at the start weren’t racing incidents.

      1. @davidnotcoulthard
        For a penalty that as lenient as Vettel’s got, i doubt FIA would investigate Vettel at all for this… 5 secs for destroying a front runner’s race? call it MILLLLLDDDDLLLLY driving error/judment…

        You know in history, Ham received a 25 sec penalty for giving the position back spa 2008! Ham received a drive through (which is way more than 10 secs! and a lot more punishing!) for what vettel did to bottas, in 2011 singapore, despite massa’s engineer on the radio was asking massa to destroy hamilton’s race openly!

        Be fair, and notice the history of consistency of FIA’s penalties :)

        1. Hey, BOT wasn’t punished at all for his crash with VET. Not even 5sec. Plus, the stewards said they do not judge the penalty based on the outcome. It was fair not to punish him. So, project your bias towards RIC/RBR, that’s the incident that got him the penalty. Plus, to follow your “morals” (when it comes to VET), what’s the use of this penalty if actually BOT did not lose anything?! I mean, you seem to be upset that 5sec for VET do not fit the “crime”. Probably you’re right, but at least those 5sec had a real and negative impact on his race. Does this 10sec penalty fit the “crime” as long as it doesn’t change the actual outcome for BOT, no negative impact at all?!

          Plus, if we go to some other cases, HAM escaped a justified penalty for pushing RAI off-track in Austria at the start. And RAI was side by side, not behind like BOT. HAM did not leave RAI 1cm of tarmac, he had to go completely off-track. So, stop your rant towards the stewards and FIA, ’cause they let unpunished your beloved HAM too, plenty of times.

  12. Thought it would be 5 instead of 10, no difference to race result though. Good call on the first incident as well definitely a 50-50. Fair play to the stewards this time

  13. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    29th July 2018, 18:17

    That’s absurd – you can’t penalize Bottas without penalizing Vettel who was responsible for the lack of downforce in the corner.

    1. Hmm, that’s a slippy slope to go down @freelittlebirds

      I understand your point but I don’t think the car in front can be seen as the cause of a crash due to lack of downforce caused by them. Bottas knew he had a lack of grip with his tyre wear, he was also trying to slow down off the racing line. Maybe Vettels chop across was a little too aggressive but I didn’t see anything wrong to be honest. I’d put more fast on Bottas but feel a racing incident result was fair.

      1. it would be a lot fairer if Vettel had a slow puncture as a “miracle”… as opposed to what he did to him a few weeks back … a minor judgement/error as he called it… lol when the roles reversed, Ferrari drivers/fans see things in a very evil perspective

  14. In this case, two penalty points is more meaningful punishment. Bottas deserved penalty for the collision but there was no reason to punish him the amount he would have dropped position.

  15. I think the stewards ruling in these 2 cases were correct, but I also think that Vettel should’ve driven a little more safe, when he had passed Bottas – he knows very well that cutting across, lowers the downforce on the frontwing, thus increasing the braking distance. And Vettel didn’t need to cut in front of Bottas that agressive, so he could’ve avoided the collision.

  16. At least we just know who the FIA’s darling driver …i think, FIA always try to create f1 legend in every era…at the past he choose Schummy, and now they just have Lewis and Vettel as best candidates.. so they will never make a negative decision for both.

  17. The feeling is that no penalty was given.

Comments are closed.