Charles Leclerc, Ferrari, Suzuka, 2019

McLaren: Ferrari “put everyone at risk” leaving Leclerc out

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: McLaren team principal Andreas Seidl criticised Ferrari for leaving Charles Leclerc on track in a damaged car.

What they say

Seidl said he will “definitely speak to the race director” about the incident after Lando Norris was forced to pit with overheating brakes after collecting debris from Leclerc’s car.

We obviously strongly disagree with competitors living cars out on track with entire front wing end plates hanging down, putting everyone at risk. Unfortunately when this end plate then exploded [Norris was] catching in our front-right brake duct debris from Ferrari.

The brake temperature went through the roof so we had to box him to clean it. And then the race was over. I mean he still tried and did a great drive in terms of pace also to get back but it was not possible.

Quotes: Dieter Rencken

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Did Mercedes blow a clear chance at a one-two finish yesterday?

Mercedes missed an opportunity today for a one-two finish. Why, I don’t know, but they seemed to hard work to avoid it and Hamilton nearly upset the plan by getting so close to Vettel and very nearly getting past him for second.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Magnificent Geoffrey, Pablopete80, Lyn Dromey, Russ Mckennett and Jack Nagle!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

  • Born on this day in 1893: Cooper team founder Charles Cooper

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.

Posted on Categories RaceFans Round-upTags , , ,

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 71 comments on “McLaren: Ferrari “put everyone at risk” leaving Leclerc out”

    1. CotD
      It certainly looked like Hamilton could have gone on to win before they decided to pit him. They had Bottas to cover Vettel. But I think other things needed to be taken into account such as team harmony. Also It showed how much faith they have in Hamilton and their own tactics.

      1. To me, it looked like mercedes was going to do the usual, shaft bottas, but they changed their minds, in the end it cost them.
        The 1 stop was working.
        There was no reason FOR Bottas to pit early and go for a 2 stop, just as in silverstone.
        Ferrari going for a 2 stop should have gifted merc the 1-2.

    2. Stewards in the tank for Ferrari. LEC wrecked his own car while upset about the crappy start the “teammates” had. He wrecked Verstappen, Norris, and Hamilton as well. Stewards instantly say no investigation necessary. Should be re-termed no investigation wanted because it is Ferrari.

      1. It’s not about Ferrari; it’s all about Leclerc being protected by the Todt family business.
        What happened yesterday was a disgrace to the sport and an insult to proper stewarding.
        Jean Todt must step down to return some trust in the stewarding regarding Charles.

        1. What’s this with the Leclerc agenda? Tell me any single person on the grid who has been actively sabotaged and backstabbed by his own team than him. For all the Bottas memes, Leclerc, if given as much preference as Bottas, would have 100 points more than vettel. Of course, you can’t stop blaming him for everything including typhoon.

          He was literally driving there one handed, even at the dangerous turns at 300 km/h. All it needed for Ferrari was to tell him that Stewards instructed him to put because his car contains dangerous debris. No, they won’t. In fact they even told him to stay out, seconds before he was turning into the pit lane in the second lap.

          It’s because of Todt family business Leclerc was backstabbed by his own teammates at every opportunity so that their fat contracted & fan favourite dud vettel, can have preference at the cost of Leclerc and his hardwork, isn’t it? Singapore undercut infers that if Todt has anything it is to revive vettel in order to increase viewership, because who has more blind fanboys than vettel.

          I didn’t see vettel being released from pitlane with extra cold tyres.

          You should understand that in any organization, no decision is taken entirely by a single person. It’s by a committee and in that aspect, the Formula 1 committee can have far more benefit to favour Tifosis and vettelians

    3. Leclerc is a bit to argumentative, he is very good but he has not the experience of Hamilton for instance. Also Ferrari should have made it clear immediately that being asked to pit was not a request, Leclerc got off very lightly considering the potential incidents that accompanied the risks he introduced.

      1. Here’s the FIA video of the huge chunk of wing flying towards Hamilton’s face at high speed.
        Maybe if it had struck Hamilton, they might have given a bigger penalty? Who knows. It’s Ferrari.

        1. F1 Steward Instructions:
          Is the car a Ferrari?
          Yes; No need to investigate.
          No; Look at all video in super slow motion and look at telemetry data.

          1. Is it Charles?
            Jean says it’s ok!

        2. The FIA has never been very intrusive with car damage, nothing specific Ferrari. As for Leclerc… Man, the guy was driving a F1 car full speed and with some damage around a racetrack. How can he assess the situation, apart from giving his opinion on the handling ? At the end of the day, the FIA did give a penalty, sending the right message, I see no room for controversy…

          1. How can he assess the situation, apart from giving his opinion on the handling ?

            That’s why he has to obey a team instruction to pit, which he ignored.
            And that’s why FIA stewards have to issue the warning to the driver themselves, directly, with a flag backed by an order to the team, which they didn’t because Ferrari assured them he’d pit.
            Hamilton was centimetres off a huge accident. Of course it’s controversial.

            1. @david-br He is perfectly correct to disobey the team orders of that Italian mafia, who didn’t even mention the extent of his damage or the steward instruction.

              There are only two who should be punished, the Ferrari and the Stewards (for nothing imposing black and orange flag).

      2. I agree the Ferrari pit wall handled this poorly. That’s not to say Leclerc wasn’t also to blame, but the pit wall has been too deferential to its drivers and the results the last two races have bitten them as a result of not establishing the chain of command as well. I can’t help but think that some of this is also due to Leclerc no longer trusting the Ferrari pit wall after seeing questionable strategy calls from them.

      3. Leclerc like Gorsjean is far too arrogant and incompetant for his and his rivals safety.

      4. Anyone remember that incident where Alonso ran over his own front wing in to T1 at Malaysia because he didn’t pit for a new one? I forget what year. In a Ferrari.

        1. @Initially 2013.

          1. He crashed immediately in couple of corners ending his race and then leading to disgraceful events of Multi-21 and Mercs having teamorders of their own.

            1. Yeah I agree, that was one of the best races ever as a spectator.

      5. Of course, of all the illegal preferences vettel receives due to his fat contracts, shameless cheatings, huge fanbase, Formula one’s desperation to increase viewership, your greatest concern is that rookie is complaining after being backstabbed by his own team for the hundredth time.

      6. This entire thread gets a huge yikes from me, the comments from both sides. Ferrari didn’t tell Leclerc the debris was potentially dangerous, they just told him to pit to fix it, to which he replied saying the car felt fine. Ferrari should have told him what the situation was and why he had to pit, and that’s that. In the end, the stewards made the right call.

        1. Does Ferrari work for leclerc? Or is it the other way around? Ferrari told him to pit, if he can’t see his own wing, what makes him think he knows more about the cars health than the pit wall?

          Hey at least in this post you made, your not needlessly insulting those who disagree with you! That was embarassing!

          We have nobody to blameFor this mess but ourselves. Ferrari should’ve never given the kid the race seat. Too much too young. Verstappen effect in action.

    4. Given that a chunk of that wing took off a wing mirror on the following car, one wonders what it would have done to a visor if it had hit that instead.

      I was pretty amazed that the black and orange flag wasn’t shown immediately. The only thing I can think of is that Leclerc was ordered into the pits by his team and they didn’t expect him to ignore it.

      As far as pitting Hamilton went, I’m pretty sure they were confident he’d pass Vettel pretty easily, but Hamilton really probably just focused on the long game – third is much better than a crash attempting a solid pass. Could he have made it to the end on mediums? Probably, but was it worth the risk given how solidly he has a foot on the WDC.

      1. Agreed.

        I don’t think the commentators spotted that during the live broadcast.

        But Hamilton nearly got wiped out by a sizeable piece of front wing, which could have been a horrible accident, baring in mind previous incidents with bolts and car parts wounding or killing drivers.

        The fact he only lost a wing mirror is pure happenstance.

        Ferrari don’t seem to have had the clearest decision making during race days this season.

        1. @hare Not sure which commentators you meant but Sky’s (Ted Kravitz and Di Resta) is equally baffled as us why Charles is stay outside and the stewards not forcing him to pit. They also pointed out Hamilton loses his mirror because that endplate.

      2. @dbradock, the indication is that Ferrari did in fact send a message to Leclerc telling him to pit, but Leclerc responded by saying that it wasn’t too bad and insisted on staying out.

        Masi does also seem to have implied that is why they did not issue the black and orange flag – because they’d heard Ferrari tell Leclerc to pit, and they weren’t expecting Leclerc to ignore the order. What then happened was that chunk of wing fell off, and at that point both the team and Leclerc decided to stay out on the track – at that point, Masi then seems to have instructed Ferrari to call Leclerc into the pits.

        1. …but Leclerc responded by saying that it wasn’t too bad and insisted on staying out. Masi does also seem to have implied that is why they did not issue the black and orange flag – because they’d heard Ferrari tell Leclerc to pit, and they weren’t expecting Leclerc to ignore the order.

          I think Masi’s excuse is pretty lame. This looks like favouritism to me. Does F1 have to have rules that govern drivers deciding their hazardous car isn’t a hazard? Maybe I’d agree if bits aren’t dragging along the ground, but bits were dragging along the ground, and when they came off they hit other cars. Maybe Leclerc only deserved a 5 second time penalty for crashing into Verstappen, but to not pit and remove the bits putting everyone else at risk deserved something much more severe.

          1. Masi is just a joke You don’t NOT show a penalty flag just because you assume the competitor knows what they need to do. You have to force the issue. Spineless Masi.

            1. Finally someone who understands what’s is exactly happening. It’s the stewards responsibility to ensure the safety. Not someone who is driving at 300 km/h and can’t even see how much is the damage on his car.

              Ferrari could literally see it, yet they didn’t tell Leclerc about the steward instruction for him to pit, instead they told him to stay out when he was just about to enter the pit lane in the second lap.

    5. Leclerc deserved black flag for his action yesterday and he is fast becoming new Gorsjean in terms of endangering his peers.

      1. Grosejan is a bit much don’t you think?

        He is more like Verstappen, he learned so much from him this year. So much that now even Verstappen is saying “Where
        am I suppose to go?” to Leclerc actions on track.

        As for not pitting, well Ferrari were lured by sense of track speed and position. Yes pitting was bad for strategy, but there exist flags for that and orders. I am sure they will have some words with their driver, penalties given were fair, considering no harm came to Hamilton, only his wing mirror got a punch.

        1. Nonono, nothing like Verstappen, there is a huge difference between hard (Verstappen) and disgustinly dirty (Charles ), more like he learned a lot from Schumacher, the dirties driver ever.
          And to say Leclerc learned a lot from Verstappen this year; are you joking?
          They have been racing each other since they were kids and I’m starting to believe Verstappen became the tough cookie he is today because he had to race dirty Charles all those years!
          The guy is a danger to other drivers, a cheat, a whino and he gets away with it all just because his manager is called Todt .

          1. I’m counting the number number of hatred comments you write here against Leclerc.

            1. You’re counting the amount of correct comments regarding Charles, you mean!
              Just check his onboard; the guy is as dirty as Schumi, and then some!
              He was dirty in karting , F3, F2 and now F1.
              23 and counting!

          2. Disgustingly dirt? He made a mistake and even admited it later, something I’ve never heard Verstappen do. You must have forgotten all the dirty things Verstappen has done over the years. At one point they even had to make up a new rule to stop him from ruining other people’s races with his dangerous driving.

            1. Check his onboard. He deliberately
              drove into Verstappen, continuing his dirty driving since their karting days.
              Schumi 2.0

            2. Deliberate huh? So you can read his mind now? From his onboard you can see that he had full steering lock on so it was just understeer.

        2. @jureo, but that then moves into the more dangerous case of penalising the outcome rather than conditioning the teams not to behave in that way in the first place – they wouldn’t take the risk if they knew it would earn them a penalty. You say “well, no harm came to him” – but you’ve no way of knowing that will be the case when that chunk of wing started flying towards him, and you shouldn’t be trusting to luck that it will be OK in the end.

        3. In Monza he was weaving on back straight, and hanging in middle of Curva Grande both of which were left unpunished and are dangerous driving techniques. Compared to those his actions yesterday of disobeying team’s order to pit for repairs twice and the bits falling from his car hit Hamilton and ruined Norris’s race were seriously dangerous in same league as what Grosjean did in Spa 2012. To make matters worse for some reason Ferrari engineers aren’t being affirmative in dealing with their employees and this team has a long history of treating their drivers like garbage that can be tossed out any moment.

          1. *assertive not affirmative.

          2. He can perfectly disobey his team, there is nothing wrong in that. Especially when you consider that his greatest adversaries are his team and their backhanded ‘strategies’.

            If he disobeyed stewards, then only your comment is suitable for this situation. You should remember that the one sitting inside the car cannot know the extent of the damage. Ferrari did tell him to stay out when he was about the turn to pit lane in the second lap. You should watch the events and listen to the radio conversations before making a conclusion.

      2. It’s the stewards who deserve the black flag against themselves. There is no way, a racer can estimate how dangerous his car is to other opponents. Only thing he knows is that his car is sparking and his car will be destroyed sooner.

        1. @dmitri-czubak Leclec ignored his team’s instruction to pit immediately after the incident, then insisted on staying out after the wing flew off. I think, being really honest here, an appropriate penalty would have been a 3-race ban for Leclerc for extremely dangerous and irresponsible action. He was centimetres off causing a huge chunk of wing to fly into Hamilton’s face at high speed – a risk he knowingly and willingly took.

          1. Wrong. AFTER the wing flew, then only he knew the extent of the damage and he wanted to pit but was ordered by his team to stay out just when he was about to turn to the pit lane. Watch the second lap again and listen to the radio conversation.

          2. @david-br
            I forgot to quote you in the reply.

          3. @dmitri-czubak If you’re GOING TO USE BOLD AND ITALICS AT LEAST BE RIGHT ABOUT THE POINT YOU’RE MAKING! As the radio transcripts show, Leclerc stayed out after the team told him to pit, saying he didn’t think the damage was that bad (i.e. he was OK, with no thought about the danger to others of the parts flying off). Then when the wing flew off, narrowly missing Hamilton’s head, then Ferrari told him to stay out.

            1. @david-br

              If you’re not civilized enough to formulate a constructive argument, rather than to criticize the font format, then don’t reply at all. I said watch. Leclerc did move aside so that he could put pit in the second lap. Because, it is only then he knew the race is dangerous enough. But, just as the pit lane was near, Ferrari suddenly turned their mind and in haste imposed many times for him stay out.

              If you’re lazy enough to watch, I’ll give you a clue from the radio transcript itself. See how many times, they repeatedly tell him to stay out. It’s because he was near the pit lane and was about to charge towards the pit lane.

              It’s impossible for him to know the extent of the danger posed by his car. Go and read his statement on why he didn’t put.

              And once again, I repeat, he knew the danger only after the debris flew. But when he was about to pit, Ferrari imposed its decision for him to stay out.

            2. And repeat ad infinitum… My comment that he ‘ignored’ the instruction was to do with lap 1. You decided that’s irrelevant and we have to focus on lap two after the wing flew off, but FIA told Ferrari to pit him before then. I don’t get how you think this works as an argument. I wasn’t ‘wrong’, you’re saying something else, that Ferrari switched from calling him in to telling him to stay out. Perfectly true. But I’m discussing the first lap! I don’t think the big chunky letters are helping, don’t take the font criticism too personally. I’m sure your font use is perfectly adequate most of the time.

            3. @david-br

              First lap is irrelevant when deciding the penalty to be given for Leclerc for dangerous driving.

              From Leclerc’s statement post-race
              “Only the front wing was damaged,” said Leclerc after the race. “Visually, the left parts of the car seemed a bit damaged. From the driver point of view I was losing a little bit more the front but overall I don’t think it was costing too much, mostly because it was giving understeer.”

              The F1 racers on the grid couldn’t know the extent of the damage like the other viewers do. He can have a very clean lap, still a small loosened debris is enough to cause havoc to the following driver. Which is why, the stewards have a separate flag to identify and warn the drivers of the possible damage and to instruct the car having dangerous mechanical failure to pit.

              The stewards instead instructed Ferrari to pit Leclerc’s car. Which is either incompetence or some illegal activity as it has been apparent recently, on how far FIA alters the norm to help Ferrari and increase the viewership.

              Don’t forget that ferrari didn’t inform Leclerc about the steward’s order. In fact, they didn’t even mention a single word about steward’s instruction.

              From the onboard view of Leclerc in Lap 2 (I want to post the link for the video but couldn’t find the onboard replay again)
              Leclerc moved to the right side of the lane and was along the line, so that he can pit. Ferrari, suddenly was on radio and hastily imposed its order for him to stay out, repeatedly. The Ferrari team’s only objective is to spoil Hamilton’s tyres.

            4. @dmitri-czubak I agree with some of what you’re saying. How much Leclerc actually knew he was risking, only he can know, but let’s say we give him the benefit of the doubt as you’re doing: it’s still the case that FIA told Ferrari to pit him, they reassured FIA that they’d told him to, he ignored that instruction (first lap). OK, so Ferrari were very definitely wrong not to say that he had been instructed (by FIA) to pit. Somebody has to take responsibility still for a car driving round with serious wing damage and bits already flying off, in full view of everyone (apart from Leclerc). Who? FIA? Ferrari? They both effectively passed responsibility to Leclerc to follow the team order. So whatever his own awareness of the situation, he should be the one penalized for the safety infringement, and 10 seconds is definitely not enough. Next time the team will make sure he knows he has to come in. As for the rest, I agree, Ferrari (and Leclerc) were happy that Hamilton was being held back by the situation. Mercedes told Hamilton not to take any risks – i.e. don’t overtake until definitely safe. That stopped him passing Leclerc and attacking Vettel in the early laps.

        2. He is going to feel something is off about the car’s balance from damage and he should have obeyed his team when they called him for repairs. Also I dont understand why but this team(leaving aside the chaos in management) this year doesnt sound assertive rather quite passive when issuing orders to their drivers. Its just failure on all levels(Race director, stewards, team and driver) leading to this farce. And whats ironic about this situation is we already had a death of upcoming young talent(ironically close friend of Leclerc) in Spa and complecancy we saw yesterday from FOM is beyond ridiculous.

          1. I repeat again, Ferrari never mentioned the damage in his car. Neither did they said a single word about steward instruction. Read my reply to the comment that precedes yours.

          2. @chaitanya He done excellently disobeying his team orders. The sooner he leave Ferrari, the better.

            Leclerc had unusually tyres being extra cold in the qualifier, Ferrari having sudden super-powered engine that is so powerful that even Hamilton with DRS in fresher tyre can’t overtake, Singapore undercut where his team consisting of 100 persons, all “forgot” to tell him that vettel pitted (they did tell vettel how much distance leclerc is from him, which absolutely unnecessary, unless they had been planning it all since the beginning), vettel always having more information about the car development (as evident by how sad Leclerc was after Japan FP1 while on the other hand, vettel told the press, ‘there is more to come’).

            If you think all of these are simply, leclerc ‘crying’ or conspiracy theories, and has nothing to do with some Italian mafia thing where FIA can have superlative fortune by allowing vettel to win which will increase the viewership like nothing else, you need to think again.

            This is likely the first time in history, where a racer is not punished for momentum start.

          3. @chaitanya

            Listen to the radio conversation in the second lap. They told him to stay out five times when he was about to turn to the pit lane. The team order is not a suggestion but an imposition.

    6. All this hoo-haa about Merc pitting Hamilton….well I guess that what defines us fans eh?

      On a more balanced note. F1 drivers will complain about everything and anything when they aren’t winning, its a fact of life, they are competitive animals who hate to lose. I think all of them share that common trait (ok, some more so than others), but I hope you see my point. Yes it is supposed to be a team sport, but at the sharp end of grid, its only a team sport when it suits certain agendas, this isn’t new, its always been the case.

      It certainly wouldnt be fun if every driver was life Kimi now would it? :)

      1. Though honestly Kimi is quite funny.

        Hamilton really does not like to loose, especially when there is no valid excuse for it. Simply he was slower, it happens sometimes. Bottas is an excellent driver working very hard on his speed and pace. Sometimes he does hook it up and is unbeatable.

        1. Indeed @jureo. That’s why I called Lewis a ‘poor loser’ yesterday (with the expected result from myopic fans).
          This weekend Bottas was faster and deserved to beat Hamilton.
          Luckily Wolff saw that as well, although it seemed he initially wanted to create a different result.

      2. @jaymenon10

        F1 drivers will complain about everything and anything when they aren’t winning, its a fact of life, they are competitive animals who hate to lose.

        I am with you 100% there Jay.
        Unfortunately quite a few of the so called F1 fans are similar in that no matter how good a driver may be they will hate that driver because it isn’t the one that they worship.

        1. @nullapax
          I think this site has some of the best fan fiction on the internet!

    7. I am still baffled by there not being a harsher penalty applied to Leclerc and Ferrari. This situation could easily have been as bad as the Massa accident some years ago, or even worse. The FIA statement itself shows that only luck prevented a bigger accident:

      “the team created an unsafe condition on the circuit which only narrowly avoided being a major incident and also increased the likelihood of additional incidents after the one noted.”

      That they didn’t punish Ferrari more severely, because nothing worse happened is plainly idiotic. Lately, it feels that every other race has brought us closer to a major incident in F1.

      1. That they didn’t punish Ferrari more severely, because nothing worse happened is plainly idiotic. Lately, it feels that every other race has brought us closer to a major incident in F1.

        @meck That’s the Masi principle. If nothing bad happens, then the action must have been OK by definition. If there’s no contact, if a car didn’t pick up damage after being shoved off track, if a lump of wing didn’t fly 10 centimetres to the right (an angle deviation below 2% probably)…

      2. @meck That’s the Masi principle. If nothing bad happens, then the action must have been OK by definition. If there’s no contact, if a car didn’t pick up damage after being shoved off track, if a lump of wing didn’t fly 10 centimetres to the right (an angle deviation below 2% probably)…

    8. Seidl had every right to be annoyed by the Ferrari/Leclerc-tactics since those tactics directly affected one of his drivers, and as a result, unnecessarily hampered his chances in the race. Driving around with the car in an unsafe conditions puts not only other drivers on track at risk, but also spectators, and marshals on trackside. Potentially even people in the pit lane, so a bit too much risk involved for doing that to be worth it. For the same reasons, Bottas should’ve come in at the earliest possible opportunity in Hungary following front-wing damage on lap one, and Alonso in Malaysia in 2013, and Gasly in Abu Dhabi last season after smoke started to appear at the back and oil come out while he was at the penultimate corner of the circuit.

      Looking at the images in the NHK-article feels a bit surreal, to be honest. Postponing QLF to race-day morning (and calling of FP3) was 100% the right thing to do.

      1. Everyone should be annoyed by the amount of leeway Charles is getting, not only Seidl. The stewarding regarding Charles is pathetic and an insult to every fan, team and driver, all because his manager is named Todt.
        Verstappen, Norris and Lewis should take turns crashing into the spoiled little brat and teach him some proper manners!

        1. @oconomo

          Stop with your Leclerc agenda. It’s so petty.

          1. Truth hurts?
            The guy is, and has always been, a disgrace to sportsmanship!

            1. Webster dictionary;
              petty – acting like a Leclerc!

        2. Todt is his manager? :D That explains a bit yes.

          In any case FIA did their job ordering driver to stop. Ferrari failed to emphasize the exact order to happen right away.

    9. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      14th October 2019, 9:21

      I would say Leclerc put everyone at risk ignoring team orders to come in and causing Hamilton to loose his mirror and loads of others to take avoiding action…

      This was not the teams fault. They instructed him to pit on the first lap which was as soon as he could. I understand that he drives for Ferrari so they got a fine, but you can only really blame Leclerc for everything that happened in the first few laps. Although maybe the team should have removed the loose wing mirror on his car as it flew off later and could have caused yet more damage to another car.

    10. Wow. Some people really really REALLY dislike Leclerc. Some of these comments … Wow.

    11. I really enjoyed not having to listen to Martin Brundle rambling on and on and on these last two races.

    12. @us-brian

      Indeed! Now if only we could maybe get rid of Croft too. I’d quite like to see (hear) a three person commentary team of Davidson, Di Resta and Chandock. Not sure who would be the lead commentator tho.

    Comments are closed.