Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Red Bull Ring, 2019

Leclerc denied again as Verstappen’s hard racing gives Red Bull home win

2019 Austrian Grand Prix review

Posted on

| Written by

We’ve seen the best and worst of Formula 1 within the space of eight days.

On Sunday the Red Bull Ring served up a spectacle which was the perfect riposte to some of the more hysterical headlines which followed the soporific French Grand Prix.

The Austrian Grand Prix served up 82 minutes of riveting action. Unfortunately it then took the stewards 194 minutes to decide who had won it.

Verstappen blows his start

It was scorching in Styria. The mercury nudged 34C on the grid, where teams erected gazebos to prevent the cars overheating. The track surface baked to well over 50C.

It didn’t look promising for the Ferrari drivers – Charles Leclerc on pole, Sebastian Vettel ninth – who had chosen to start the race on used soft tyres. Surely the likes of Max Verstappen, second on the grid, and the Mercedes pair who occupied row two, would be best-placed on their medium tyres?

Start, Red Bull Ring, 2019
Soft tyres helped Leclerc pull away
But within seconds of the lights going out it seemed Verstappen’s victory chances were over. His Red Bull went into anti-stall, forcing fourth-placed Hamilton and others to swerve around him. Vettel started well and took advantage of Verstappen’s slow getaway. Pierre Gasly then demoted his team mate at turn three.

Leclerc scampered away on his soft tyres, Valtteri Bottas in pursuit, and then a surprise: Lando Norris in the McLaren, who’d used his unobstructed run from the odd-numbered side of the grid to claim third. He had Hamilton on his case, however, and the Mercedes driver’s move at turn four aided Kimi Raikkonen, who got down the inside of turn six and squeezed the McLaren aside.

Raikkonen and Norris’s spell among the front runners was never going to last long once DRS was activated, and sure enough Vettel soon came by both with ease, though he squeezed Norris at turn three as if the world championship was hanging in the balance.

Verstappen, who re-passed Gasly at the end of lap one, made similar gains on the McLaren and Alfa Romeo. By lap nine he’d risen to fifth with Vettel less than four seconds up the road and the other, race-leading Ferrari almost 15 seconds away.

Gasly, not withstanding the fact he was running on softer tyres, was unable to make an impression on the cars ahead. He sat behind Norris as the McLaren driver picked off Raikkonen – the McLaren showing a remarkable turn of pace when Norris was allowed to use ‘scenario six’ – but was unable to make a move of his own.

Once in free air, Vettel and Verstappen were quick enough to close up the top five. But the hitherto all-conquering Mercedes were unable to bring Leclerc within range. The cars were carrying wide apertures as they struggled desperately to keep the car cool in the combination of high temperatures and relatively low air pressure due to altitude.

Nonetheless Mercedes tried to force Ferrari into a strategic compromise. It worked, though ultimately it wasn’t the silver team which was able to capitalise.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Mercedes make their play

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Red Bull Ring, 2019
Hamilton damaged his front wing
On lap 20 the team told Bottas to “do the opposite to Leclerc”. “I can’t see him”, replied Bottas, who was 4.6s behind the Ferrari. Mercedes told him to come in. Ferrari immediately responded by bringing Vettel in, though a radio problem meant his team weren’t ready for him and the extra time lost dropped him behind Raikkonen and Gasly.

Ferrari didn’t waste time bringing Leclerc in, fearful of Bottas’s out-lap pace, but he easily rejoined with three-and-a-half seconds in hand. With hindsight, leaving him out a lap or two longer to have fresher tyres at the end of the race could have made all the difference, but that kind of reckoning is only possible after the fact.

Hamilton now led, and on another day this could have been the world champion’s cue to take control of the race. But the Mercedes was a blunt instrument in Austria, and Hamilton blunted it further on lap 27 when he broke his front wing at turn 10.

On the radio, Hamilton debated with his team whether they could just increase his front wing angle to compensate. Approaching the pits on lap 29 Hamilton was summoned in, but got the message fractionally too late to come in. On the next lap they agreed to replace the wing, a decision which may have been prompted by the realisation that he no longer had enough of a gap over Vettel to emerge ahead of the Ferrari driver.

Verstappen stayed out a lap longer than Hamilton and easily gained the placed from the Mercedes driver who spent 11 seconds stationary having a new nose fitted. The Red Bull driver took it steady to begin with, treating his Pirellis with care before he started to lean on them.

As the race passed half-distance leader Leclerc posted a 1’08.344, edging his lead over Bottas up to four-and-a-half seconds. Vettel was another five seconds back from him but fourth placed Verstappen, three-and-a-half seconds behind the Ferrari, was poised to close in.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Verstappen goes after Leclerc

Charles Leclerc, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Ring, 2019
Charles Leclerc, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Ring, 2019
On lap 39 Verstappen matched the quickest time of the Ferrari drivers. Vettel was pushing too, so that it took eight laps for Verstappen to get within DRS range, but by then the pair had also taken four seconds out of Leclerc.

After three laps of effort, Verstappen punctured Vettel’s defences on lap 49. The Ferrari driver immediately called for a pit stop to fit one of the spare sets of new soft tyres he had left from his truncated qualifying session. Meanwhile Verstappen pressed on.

Bottas didn’t even offer token resistance. The Mercedes drivers were having to lift and coast for around 400 metres per lap of the 4.3-kilometre lap, so he was hardly in a position to fight. By lap 56 Verstappen was up to second, with five seconds separating him from the lead.

Verstappen found up to a second per lap as he chased down Leclerc, though it was usually quite a bit less than that, depending on traffic. The stragglers came at them quickly around the short circuit. By lap 66 they were closing on seventh-placed Gasly, and whatever dismay Red Bull might have felt about his performance was surely offset by the serendipity.

The team played a straight bat on the radio. Gasly was told clearly and well in advance Leclerc was approaching him but the team also made sure he was well aware who was in second and how quickly they were catching the race leader.

Leclerc caught Gasly at the worst point on the track: heading into the sweeping turns six, seven and eight. As they emerged Gasly moved aside but made sure to let Verstappen through too, and now the battle for the lead was really on.

The Red Bull had great pace through turn one, and DRS plus the ever-improving Honda power unit kept Verstappen in the hunt on the climb to turn three. This was where Verstappen began applying severe pressure to his former karting rival.

On lap 68 he dived for the inside, got his nose ahead at the apex, and looked to have the move done. But he left room for Leclerc at the exit and the Ferrari’s excellent traction undid the move, notwithstanding the fact Verstappen had his DRS open.

He changed tack the next time around, aided by Leclerc giving up the entire inside line. Verstappen braked deeper, ran slightly wider of the apex, but turn that to his advantage at the exit. He ran wider and ensured Leclerc could not deploy his superior traction by forcing the Ferrari the track – tough stuff, but legal providing the stewards were satisfied Verstappen had ‘won’ the corner.

It took them a long time to decide he had. Ferrari understandably fumed – for the second time in three races, a victory-deciding stewards’ call had gone against them. But if it was easy to sympathise with their situation, team principal Mattia Binotto’s claim the decision was not consistent with the call which went against Vettel in Canada was patently wrong.

Go ad-free for just £1 per month

>> Find out more and sign up

Norris leads the midfield home

Lando Norris, McLaren, Red Bull Ring, 2019
Norris bagged sixth after two disappointing races
Vettel gave some cheer to Ferrari by relieving Hamilton of fourth place with two laps to go. Bottas backed of considerably after being passed by Verstappen, to the point that Vettel was within DRS range of him at the chequered flag.

Norris impressively saw off Gasly and led the midfielders home, but both might have had a tougher end to the race had Carlos Sainz Jnr not damaged his front wing. The McLaren driver had raced through the field from 19th on the grid and was bearing down on them when he suddenly noticed his aerodynamic balance change.

He fell back into the clutches of the Alfa Romeo drivers. He held back Raikkonen, who in turn had close attention from Antonio Giovinazzi, who collected his first point with 10th place.

Despite the heat, all 20 cars were still running at the end. Sergio Perez couldn’t deprive Giovinazzi of the final point, and behind him the two Renault drivers exchanged places on the final lap, Daniel Ricciardo coming home ahead. Next up were Lance Stroll and Alexander Albon, the latter suffering with a bout of hayfever.

Having shown good pace in qualifying, Haas endured more misery on Sunday. Kevin Magnussen triggered the jump start sensor on the grid and was given a drive-through penalty which dropped him to last. Though he managed to pass Robert Kubica, he ended the race still behind George Russell. The first Williams driver home nearly came out ahead of Daniil Kvyat as well after his pit stop.

It was hard to decide whether Magnussen or Kubica had a worse day. The latter finished the race just a few seconds away from going a lap down to his team mate.

A decisive win

Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Red Bull Ring, 2019
The start of a successful partnership?
Verstappen’s win vindicated Red Bull’s hotly-debated decision to drop Renault power units for Honda’s last year. It also gave the Japanese manufacturer their success at the sport’s top flight for 13 years.

It may also have decided both their futures. Before the race began rumours buzzed that Verstappen could leave Red Bull if he reached the summer break without winning a race, and Honda’s future in the sport beyond 2020 is unclear.

This taste of victory gives every reason to believe Verstappen, Red Bull and Honda could be a potent force in the future, perhaps even the one which finally ends Mercedes’ dominance of F1. After all, Verstappen’s win leaves only the Mercedes drivers ahead of him in the championship.

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.

50 comments on “Leclerc denied again as Verstappen’s hard racing gives Red Bull home win”

  1. It was a stunning race, with the drive by Verstappen summed up nicely by BBC’s Andrew Benson “Any controversy over Verstappen’s win should not detract from the sheer quality of his drive. He is making a speciality of outstanding victories, passing cars along the way, races apparently surrendering to his will, he and the car moving on to what looks like another level, implacable, immovable, irresistible. This was another.”

    1. Great quote. Thanks for posting it.

  2. Imagine how boring F1 would be right now without Max Verstappen

    1. Given his pace (overcoming 15s from LEC on the second stint), the only thing that provided that VER sauce was VER failing to start properly.
      If that pace were present since the start of the race, VER woud pass LEC before/at pitstops.
      After that, he would open +10 sec from the 2nd place – not that dramatic.

      1. If Ferrari had the same tyre strategy as Red Bull (and MB) Leclerc would have won the race no matter how Verstappen started. Leclerc’s older tyres were no match for Max’s fresher tyres over the last ten laps.

        1. What a a nice assumption. Too bad we’ll never know though since Scuderia Ferrari thought it was a great idea to have both cars starting on reds.

        2. But Max was able, and has generally been able to go amongst the longest on his first set, so in the end he may have had fresher tires no matter ‘if’ Ferrari had used the same strategy. ‘If’ being the biggest word in the dictionary.

        3. Well, they didn’t

        4. I don’t agree. According to Leclerc’s post race interview they pitted early to prevent an undercut from Bottas and maintain track position, not because his softs were out of life.
          Imo they lost the race being because they were too defensive in covering Bottas rather than thrusting on their own pace and strategy.

  3. This was by far the best race in years.. three teams fighting for the lead, a very strong midfield fighting for every place.
    The two youngest talents on the podium. Exciting until the end. Not the cars but the drivers making the difference.
    What a relief after the extremely boring french GP.

  4. It was a spectacular showing by Verstappen. But I cannot stop thinking about all the guys at Sakura. After all that happened it must’ve been incredible to follow the race from there. Very well deserved.

    Also, if the rumours are anything to go by, surely Max can’t possibly consider Ferrari as viable option…

  5. I think Max is the one who need’s to worry.

    I was one of the people who kept saying he should calm down and drive like a grown up.
    Well – he has been doing that all season up until now and I am delighted with his solid and consistent performance.
    This man is by far and away the finest racer on the grid these days in my opinion.

    But – LeClerc is like the crazy random modifier that has been thrown in to mess things up.
    I can picture Charles being the thorn in Max’s shoe – the snotty little kid who spoils the game.

    The race this weekend in Austria was one of the best in a long time for me and I am starting to feel positive about the future as regards drivers.

    Max – Charles – Lando – Russell. I can easily imagine any of these people becoming the new “Boring” front runner ;)

    1. @nullapax – very nice point about Charles likely being the foil to Max in the future.

      And yes, whatever might be the problem with F1, the young drivers coming into the sport are definitely not part of that.

  6. Taking 194 minutes to reach a decision is proof positive that the officiating process in F1 is well and truly broken. If the stewards can’t rule that there has or has not been an infraction within 2-1/2 hours, they are not qualified to perform that function, and if the Race Director doesn’t step in LONG before that time and settle the matter, he should be immediately dismissed. If this sort of stuff went on in club racing, we would attribute it the personnel being rank amateurs. In F1 racing, amateurism is unacceptable.

    It doesn’t matter where you stand on Vettel’s penalty or the lack of a Verstappen penalty or on any of a number of other seemingly arbitrary rulings this season. The process is amateurish and broken. We (and the sport of F1) deserve better.

    1. I see how you try to gaslight any readers into accepting your argument, but for balance, let me point out some of the flaws in your argument:

      Time taken to reach a decision is proof of nothing. Maybe Ferrari were asked for their data and that’s how long it took to download it from the servers as their trackside was packed up. Maybe the drivers left and were hard to find they didn’t want to give the decision without talking them through the decision first. Probably neither of these things but importantly, unless you were in that room, you don’t know anything at all about why it took that length of time to reach a decision. So your entire premise is based on flawed logic. As you base everything after on this premise being true, your argument is already null.

      However, let’s continue.

      You say that if this happened in club racing, “we” (whoever that is) would attribute it to the personnel being amateurs… er… firstly, aren’t club racing series amateur series by definition, professional racing being, you know, not the amateur racing. I digress, it’s clear that you are one of those people who use the word “amateur” as an insult. That being the case, who is “we” and why should anyone assume that this “we” is anyone who has earned the right to have their opinion respected? Amateur racer by any chance? Or amateur armchair critics. Interpret ‘amateur’ any which way you want.

      You then go on to proclaim that because “we” whoever that is would say that the same situation in club racing is amateurish, that means that the process is broken, but again, this is flawed logic. Your complaint is the time taken, your assertion that taking too long is the mark of an amateur (read as bad person). I would assert that a decision that decides positions in a race – winning positions at that – should not be rushed. Maybe you, the consummate professional (unpaid) would make decisions more quickly, but then again, maybe you wouldn’t or couldn’t – remember, you don’t know why it took so long to make the decision.

      You’ve just made assumptions

      People who make assumptions then base their opinions on those assumptions…

      Have no place…

      In F1.

      :) have a nice day

      1. Well, since you have gone out of your way to be personally insulting, I hope you do not have a nice day or a nice evening, either. What an arrogant SOB you are.

        If you think that I am the only one who thinks that the race officiating in F1 is sorely lacking, I’d suggest you listen to the many fans who agree with me or the numerous current drivers and past champions who agree with me. Any “professional” sport that does not have professional referees and other officials doesn’t have a leg to stand on when they require 3 hours to make a ruling. Clearly, they don’t know what they are doing. Auto racing is not a sport where you decide who one the race three hours after the podium ceremony.

        Next time, let them delay the podium ceremony until they have declared a winner and see how that works out. If a team (Ferrari in this case) wants to file an appeal after the race that takes time to decide, let them do it. Do not declare a winner, put him on the top step of the podium, and then announce that he is not the victor pending some “investigation.”

        When was the last time you waited 3 hours to find out who had won a football game or a baseball game? It would be simply unthinkable, and the fans would not stand for it. The organizers and sanctioning body would lose all respect and credibility. F1 should be held to the same common sense standard.

        1. Well, since you have gone out of your way to be personally insulting, I hope you do not have a nice day or a nice evening, either. What an arrogant SOB you are.

          @gwbridge got your ass handed to you by Mr Jones, don’t cry.

      2. @Will Jones Agreed.

  7. Electrifying performance.

  8. I decided to stop watching F1 after this amateurish display of stewarding. It took them 3 hours to decide that Verstappen was right banging wheels, shoving his opponent of the track to make sure Leclerc won’t get back at him. Over the years Verstappen has ruined numerous races for his opponents 2 of those for Ricciardo. FIA won’t punish him sufficiently, his team haven’t also. At least RBR paid the price and lost Ric to Gasly. Back in 2016 when he was downright dangerous SPA anyone?, there weren’t the rules to punish him. Now that there are, it is hard racing and within the spirit of the rule, if not the letter.
    The current state of F1 is either we have the utter domination of Mercedes like in Paul Ricard or good races being spoiled by poor stewarding and more often than not that disgrace of a sportsman called Verstappen as the protagonist. Remember the Ocon indident.
    It is a sad affair and even if you won’t miss me, Liberty will.

    1. Maybe you should look at this:
      Good arguments and showing comparing incidents is very tricky.
      And your obvious bias about VER, well you are entitled to have that opinion. But that;s all it is.

      1. Good discussion, thanks for the clip.

    2. We will miss you Kim! Bye!

    3. Peter Waters (@)
      1st July 2019, 21:13

      Goodbye. enjoy your next sport.

    4. @philby Hey of course everyone is free to watch or not watch F1, but what a shame you are hanging your hat on such hate towards Max. Liberty will not miss you, not the you that is being presented here at least.

      1. @Robbie You choose as the sole reason for me quitting F1 as my “hate” for Verstappen when in fact Mercedes domination and poor stewariding -which Verstppen exploits- carry far more weight. Maybe that fills in your narrative.
        I could make a list filled with incidents when Verstappen went unpunished while other aggressive drivers like Magnussen don’t enjoy such leniency.
        I don’t hate Verstappen, how could I? I have never met him! I only hate what he stands for in the modern F1, a place when clumsy driving equals “brave” driving and collisions equal spectacle. I can’t fathom how a carreer littered with incidents and controversy is worth celebrating for when in fact the only thing it does is make an outstanding racer look like a nascar driver. Up to his first attempt against I was savouring the battle – yes I was aware that may favourite team may lose yet again but that hasn’t stopped me before from watching. Ferrari fans have tasted far more bitter defeats than this, defeats that decided championships in the cruelest of ways.
        And yes Liberty will miss me because I am not the only one.

        1. @philby
          “while other aggressive drivers like Magnussen don’t enjoy such leniency.” Hahahaha, tell me again: How many penalties does Magnussen have, and how many times has he been called crazy, dangerous, unsportsmanlike and such by his fellow drivers, by his peers? It’s ok to hate proper racing, it’s ok to be annoyed with the stewards, it’s ok to not like someone, and it’s ok to express your bias on forums like this, but coming here with arguments like that is just utterly stupid.
          And btw, the move Max made was a perfect execution of a perfect overtake, done by a driver who is close to perfection. It’s how they overtook at the romans, it’s how they overtook at the first car race, it’s how they overttook ever since. It’s how overtaken should be, ALWAYS. And coming here with arguments like “I only hate what he stands for in the modern F1, a place when clumsy driving equals “brave” driving and collisions equal spectacle. I can’t fathom how a carreer littered with incidents and controversy is worth celebrating for when in fact the only thing it does is make an outstanding racer look like a nascar driver.” that exposes your complete lack of appreciation for the history, and basically the core, of this sport.” (What was it again the steward said in their judgement: The driver of car 33 was in total control of the car, at anymoment during the overtake”. In total control, like only real drivers can be.)

          It’s a game of chicken in the end: He (or she) who brakes last, OWNS the corner.

          So please stop watching; you don’t understand one bit of this sport.

          1. @philby
            Basically everyone: What a drive, what a drive: the stuff of legends.
            Frustrated clown behind his keyboard: bladiebloediebladiebla…….

        2. @philby Your choice of course. Liberty won’t miss your bitterness.

    5. @philby enjoy Love Island mate, Bye!

    6. @philby Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

  9. I hate the penalties and really wanted Max to win.

    BUT… well… hard for me to accept but he really did force another driver off the track.

    1. @redearedrabbit Refreshingly honest.

      1. I disagree. CL had the option to back off rather than go wide and hit Max trying to come back on. As Horner put it, and as reinforced by the lack of penalty, Max put CL into checkmate. CL had the option to back out sooner and go inside Max and go for the undercut. Instead he chose to stay wide and go off the track.

        1. I also think so. I don’t think it was an overly agressive move, he put himself side by side at corner entry, took the corner first, and closed the door on exit. Charles could have driven smarter because he had already lost that corner. I think it was a great battle on the limit and I hope for more of these. If you can´t bump wheels on slow corners there’s no fun to be had. I was rooting for Leclerc mind you, but Max did nothing wrong.

    2. Nonsense. Leclerc kept it pinned because it was tarmac. If it was gravel he would have backed out. Just because we are butchering tracks to appease MOTOGP it doesn’t mean the fundamentals of racing should change.

      1. CL should maybe learn to defend the inside better. Don’t complain when you’re at the root cause of the overtake, hr messed it up before the corner already. Number 1 rule of racing, make the overtaker go the long route..

        1. I have been wondering why Leclerc didn’t just take the inside line rather than move back left and leave Max the inside. I am not sure but it looks like Leclerc could have maintained the lead even if he had blocked the inside by staying there. Why move left and open it up for Max, who was for sure going to try some pass–maybe he makes it or maybe they crash but there did not seem to be much doubt he was going to try.

  10. How come none of the reports i read so far even mentions how Max all the time ensured to get DRS exiting T3 despite outbraking his opponents into T3 except Vettel? Check the replays and see him (out)braking into T3, but then when approaching the DRS detection line he applies just that little more brake to make sure the other car passes the DRS line first. Then he releases the brake again to make the corner his own. A true masterclass of controlling the brake and getting the most out of the regulations.

    I don’t recall having ever seen anybody else doing that before, but Max comes up with it and executes it perfectly. Ensuring DRS on the second long backstraight was absolutely essential for Max to win. Without DRS he wouldn’t have had a chance against both Ferrari’s exiting T3, let alone the Ferrari’s would have had the DRS. How come nobody is talking about this? It’s just so brilliant!

    1. Brundle was pretty gassed about this in the commentary and it was impressive but not as rare as you think. Saw it numerous times with Lewis vs Nico and even Perez / Ocon and Alonso often used it to good effect. Clever but not an unseen phenomena.

      1. Ok, so i need to pay better attention!

        I haven’t watched the race with english commentary yet, i hope to do so tonight. Thx for the spoiler. :)

  11. It’s simply an embarrassment for the officials of a sporting competition to be incapable of ruling on a possible infraction and declaring a winner for 3 hours after the conclusion of the event. Let them look at the video and make a decision. Ban the use of telemetry. If you need telemetry to determine what happened, it’s a racing incident and not an infraction. Period.

    1. GtisBetter (@)
      2nd July 2019, 6:09

      Not really. They summoned the drivers, let them have their say, discussed a bit and called them back in for the result. They maybe discussed it half an hour, 45 min which seems very reasenable if you decide a winner. Nothing embarrasing at all.

      1. I take it you are disputing the accuracy of the article. If you do the math (such as it is), 194 minutes is 3hr 14m which is way more than the time it took to interview the two drivers. Additionally, if the stewards feel that an infraction was made, let them call it when they see it, and then deal with the consequences of their action post race. Taking over three hours post-race to make a decision simply indicates that they are incompetent and unqualified to be officiating an F1 race. And I am not questioning whether or not Verstappen deserved a penalty or whether the final ruling was correct or incorrect. I am saying that F1 needs to have one set of stewards who rule at every race, and that having different officials for every race based solely upon who happens to be in town at the time is ridiculous and unprofessional. We’d be better off if the Race Director alone personally applied and interpreted the rules at every race. As it stands, the drivers have no way of knowing where the line is, and this decision only makes that more true. In any event, 3hr 14m is too long and reeks of incompetence and indecision.

        1. @gwbridge It’s pretty simple: After the race is done, it takes a lot of time until the drivers are available: interview, podium ceremony, meet the press and press conference. If the stewards need to interview drivers that has been on the podium, they will not be able to start deliberating until a few hours after the end of the race.

          1. “…they will not be able to start deliberating until a few hours after the end of the race.” Proven incorrect by the facts. You don’t crown a victor and go through the podium ceremony when an incident is under investigation. It’s illogical and lacks common sense. It SHOULD be simple, but they make it ridiculously complicated by SIMPLY not making a ruling at the time of the incident. How much influence do you think is exerted on the stewards by the fat that they have already crowned a victor and would look ridiculous if they went back and undid that three hours later. The stewards are inherently BIASED by the fact that there has already been a podium ceremony and the spraying of champagne. They SIMPLY need to view the available video and make a decision on the spot as referees and officials do in every other sport. And I am not weighing in on whether or not the stewards ultimately ruled correctly or incorrectly. They simply need to be allowed to make an immediate decision and should be required to do so. Three hours to make a ruling is SIMPLY ridiculous.

  12. We’ve seen the best and worst of Formula 1 within the space of eight days.

    Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!

    1. +1 mate. +2 actually.

      1. They pulled you back in?

        Max did. ;)

  13. Pjotr (@pietkoster)
    2nd July 2019, 13:08

    I was there. You can impossibly compare watching TV and the atmosphere on the circuit itself. This is what F1 needs. 208.000 fans at Spielberg, great racing and tons and tons of fun and spectacle. Bad loser Leclerc btw forcing a penalty on Ves by pushing his car were it couldn’t go.

Comments are closed.