Max Verstappen, Lewis Hamilton, Interlagos, 2021

Mercedes ask FIA to review Hamilton-Verstappen Sao Paulo GP incident

2021 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Mercedes has submitted a request for the FIA to review the incident between Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen on lap 48 of the Sao Paulo Grand Prix.

Verstappen and Hamilton ran wide at Descida do Lago as the Mercedes driver tried to overtake his world championship rival on the outside of the left-hand corner.

The incident was noted by race control at the time. However the stewards decided not to investigate whether either driver had broken the rules.

FIA Formula 1 race director Michael Masi revealed afterwards that the stewards did not have access to forward facing cockpit footage from Verstappen’s car when they decided not to proceed with an investigation. That footage was released by Formula 1 earlier today.

Mercedes indicated they intend to submit the footage as new evidence in order to prompt a review of the incident.

If the stewards were to find Verstappen at fault and penalise him it would likely have a bearing on the championship fight. A five-second time penalty in Sunday’s race would drop him to third position and lose him three points. Alternatively the stewards could impose a grid penalty for the next race as they did to Verstappen following his collision with Hamilton at Monza.

Analysis: Could Mercedes use missing Verstappen video to demand review of Hamilton clash?
On Sunday Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff criticised the stewards’ decision not to investigate the incident, calling it “laughable”.

Masi said the decision not to investigate the incident had been taken in light of the ‘let them race’ principles agreed with teams governing racing incidents. “If you look proximity of the cars heading into the apex, where it is, nature of the corner, the fact both cars went off, neither car lost position, anything like that, that was probably the general view of it,” Masi explained.

However the race director admitted he considered showing Verstappen the black-and-white ‘unsporting conduct’ flag in reaction to the incident. “It certainly came into my mind, and then had sort of looked at it a few more times and it wasn’t far off a black and white flag, to be brutally honest,” he said. Verstappen was shown the flag for another incident later in the race.

Sources at Red Bull indicated they were surprised at Mercedes’ decision to request a review in light of Masi’s comments and having seen the new video from Verstappen’s car.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2021 Sao Paulo Grand Prix

Browse all 2021 Sao Paulo Grand Prix articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

162 comments on “Mercedes ask FIA to review Hamilton-Verstappen Sao Paulo GP incident”

  1. Given the state of the relationship between the teams (or maybe Wolff and Horner) , this request is not really a surprise.

    1. “…the fact both cars went off, neither car lost position, anything like that, that was probably the general view of it,” Masi

      after this statement, i think mercedes should go to court… because one does not understand going off vs being forced off in order to avoid a 100% collision!!!

      Max had every reason to do this disgusting move, forcing a crash maybe to destroy his newly changed engine (a calculated decision even if he is given a penalty other than DSQ from next race, he would be better off with ham changing his engine again and getting another penalty, he wouldnt loose out any points)

      they have to give penalty otherwise we will see another schumi senna like incidents

      1. “…the fact both cars went off, neither car lost position, anything like that, that was probably the general view of it,” Masi

        ham didnt go off track on his own, but forced, he lost position to max as a result max gained a lasting advantage… these are already a fact, not fiction, cant understand the logic of Masi’s reasoning at all…

        max didnt make any effort to turn at all…. hear the engine/gearbox sounds, you can see/hear he didnt even tried to slow down until the apex aka kamikaze dive bomb with which he was able to stay level with ham and kept the position by forcing ham off….

        this is def 5-10 sec penalty if it is not a b/w worthy aka DSQ. if they wont change the result, they have to give 5 place Grid penalty next race? i hope he gets the 5-10 sec penalty

        this gent breaks down the incident with other examples…

        1. Dsq is too little, I think it is definitely worth a nuke!
          I saw by the ruffled grass blades that don’t exist on that run-off that max had a killer instinct.

          1. Lol @peartree, yes that post was just a bit much

    2. To: Velocityboy and Others.
      Frankly, I think it is past time for all other teams, when on track, to pull right over to let Hamilton and Bottas past and go on their way to yet more championships totally unhindered. Then, maybe, Wolf, Hamilton et al will cease the whinging. Also, the championship that Nico Rosberg took in 2016, should be stripped from him and awarded to Hamilton. Such action would put, hopefully, a stop to all of the ‘hard done by’ whinging by MB, LH and all of his doting fans.
      Sorry Nico, but that is how I feel about the current championship and its whinging losers.
      Michael A.

      1. Couldn’t agree more. Mercedes are behaving like they have a god given right to win every year. I guess 7 consecutive drivers and constructors world titles and the most one sided dominance the sport has ever seen are not enough. I wonder if they realize how much their dominance has turned fans away from the sport over the last 8 years. I wonder if Lewis realizes his legacy will be looked at the same way Michaels at Ferrari is looked at. Yes great drivers no doubt, but certainly not on the levels of Clark, Senna, Fangio, as their statistics are muddied slightly by their teams dominance in comparison to their competitors. Its funny, nobody is talking about their illegal car on Friday anymore………. whether it be deliberate or not, its still cheating. Funny that.

        1. you guys are hilarious. you are blaming Mercedes for dominating instead of blaming the others for not upping their game!!!!!!!!!!! RB were using an illegal read wing for the first half of the year and the FIA did nothing. Max pushed Hamilton out and you are against Mercedes asking for their right of review!!!!!!!!!!!! if Hamilton pushed Max in that incident i bet you yourself would be crying and calling the FIA a MaFia! Grow up!

          1. How could everyone up their game, if Mercedes had a 3 year head start in developing these engines compared to everyone else. In fact that’s why they threatened to pull out of the sport in 2012 if the new engine regs weren’t implemented in 2014. Ross Brawn knew this. Lewis knew this (which is why he decided to join Merc in the first place) And due to Merc having the largest budget and R&D program there was no way anyone would be able to keep pace with Mercedes pace and development. It was never a level playing field in the first place. That’s why its taken 8 years for anyone to even get close. There is no doubting Lewis’s place amongst the greats of the sport, but lets not pretend these have been ‘hard fought’ championships.

  2. Nothing will happen IMO just point them to a few joke incidents like this one (not even noted).

    1. @cobray Actually that’s a good one to bring up, because while the stewards initially ruled no penalty, they later admitted that was the wrong decision and Stroll should have been penalised. But regardless of them admitting their error, they said they were not able to alter the results of the grand prix after the fact, and so could not retroactively apply the penalty (can’t remember the exact wording/reasoning but something like that). So even if the stewards admit fault here, I doubt the outcome would be any different. They would just say they can no longer apply penalties for a grand prix for which results have already been confirmed.

      1. geoffgroom44 (@)
        16th November 2021, 19:15

        But maybe they can issue a warning to RB and Max that any further incident of a similar nature will be treated harshly.
        That might well be enough to ensure Max stays within the rules,huh?

        1. Max the fax is a serial offender when it comes to dirty driving.
          He is unlikely to reform.

      2. @keithedin in the case of the Styrian GP, the issue was that it was not until several days after the result had been officially announced and published that the stewards then took a second look at the original data, at which point they then changed their opinion.

        In that case, there was no new data that came to light in the subsequent period that the stewards could not have used at the time to make their decision. In this case, however, we know there are at least two different new pieces of information that were either not available to the stewards, or which were deliberately not looked at by the stewards.

        The first, as mentioned in the article, is the onboard footage from Max’s car, which Masi admits wasn’t available at the time. The second piece would be the telemetry traces from Max’s car, which Masi confirmed the stewards did not look at when they made their decision – they are required to look at the telemetry data if investigating an incident, but not if they only note an incident.

        In this case, even if the FIA does not formally change the result, I suspect this is not just about Mercedes pointing out that there is new data available – I suspect that they are doing this so the stewards also have to explain why they chose to omit data (Max’s telemetry data) when they originally looked at that event.

  3. Hardly surprising. Red Bull would have done exactly the same thing. I have a feeling this is just a kneejerk from Toto, especially after what happened post Silverstone. However, this time it actually is genuine evidence, rather than them manufacturing their own. However I do strongly doubt anything will come from it.

    1. I dont think so. If nothing is said about Brazil T4 then Max if leading points wise in AD has a good reason to punt Hamilton off or drive him off the track to stop Ham taking the lead. With the Max/RB argument being that Brazil set the precedence.
      At least by raising this Masi/Stewards will have to give an opinion on the matter. Even if its nothing to see here.

  4. For me this is all about whether there is a right to review, given there was no official investigation into the incident. If it’s deemed there is, it’s a slam dunk penalty for me, either a time penalty or grid drop.

    My prediction: no right to review, but a clarification on driving standards this weekend, effectively declaring it unacceptable.

    1. yeah, I could see something along that line happening @j4k3

    2. @j4k3

      Why shouldn’t they have a right to review. The decision being reviewed is that of “no investigation necessary”. That was a decision.

      1. @andrewf1 purely on a technicality of there not being an official investigation for them to review. Was mentioned on the article on this topic yesterday. Personally I think they should be able to review it.

      2. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 17:28

        @andrewf1 Jake is correct with his reply before. Almost every appeal in history is against an official decision, for which you can find the official decision documents on the FIA website. Every time they stewards place something under investigation, they end the investigation by writing and publishing these official review documents, whether the outcome is a penalty or no further action.

        However, when the stewards choose not to investigate anything, no official decision is reached. Therefore, in theory, Mercedes don’t have anything official to appeal against. This is something that needs to change in my opinion.

        And @j4k3 I agree with your summary. If Merc have a leg to stand on, I reckon its a stonewall penalty. I think it will be difficult to prove they have a right to review, but not impossible. If they don’t prove they have a right, then it’ll be discussed at length in the drivers briefing and likely lead to this action becoming de facto outlawed.

    3. Yes, that seems the most likely outcome to me @j4k3. A bit of a cop-out to avoid having to make a proper decision – similar to the McLaren appeal of Spa 2008, which was dismissed on the grounds that it was technically an in-race penalty, for which there was no right of appeal.

    4. your prediction declaring it “unacceptable” in the face of Max saying “hi”,

      Red Bull did it with Vettel, they’re doing it worse with Verstappen. Nothing is ever his fault and it’s the reason he’s been allowed to drive dirty.

      I laughed at Hornery Spice saying let them race after declaring Hamilton public enemy number 1 trying to kill Verstappen in Silverstone.

    5. Jay (@slightlycrusty)
      17th November 2021, 7:44

      @j4k3 The weird thing is that they had only just clarified that crowding another car off track would be punished, at the last race in Mexico!

  5. *facedesks repeatedly*

    1. You worried Adam? Thought Verstappen did nothing wrong, so should have nothing to fear…

      I wouldn’t worry, it’ll be the classic RedBull punishment or nothing. Just change it for next race and we’ll look the other way.

    2. For what it’s worth @rocketpanda I don’t think Mercedes should have done this myself, better to just let it lie at this point. I guess if Red Bull did all that shenanigans at Silverstone maybe they see it as balanced, but personally I think they should just leave it. We’ve seen Max can’t race clean, that’s all we need.

    3. Ahaha love it :p

    4. @rocketpanda *perpetually deskfacing*

  6. Do I think it was worthy of a penalty? Yeah, I do think +5 would have been appropriate. The difference is, a +5 during the race wouldn’t have made a difference, since Max would just ensure the gap to Bottas never dipped below 5 seconds. But a +5 penalty now would mean he drops behind Bottas, and a grid penalty would be even worse. Now that they have made the decision, they should just stick with it and move on.

    1. @mashiat
      Exactly. And that is precisely why Mercedes want the review now. Had verstappen finished more than 5 seconds ahead of bottas they wouldn’t have lodged this appeal.

      1. Andy (@andyfromsandy)
        16th November 2021, 18:57

        They might decide 10 seconds then it does make a difference.

    2. Surely RedBull should have guarded against that possibility. I expect nothing will happen tbh, but if it does, I think that argument that RedBull ‘slacked off’ because they didn’t anticipate the penalty won’t help them at all.

      1. It’s not about that. What’s done is done. That onboard footage doesn’t prove anything different from what anybody saw. Whether it was the right call or not, the decision had been made. The stewards and Michael Masi both accepted that Raikkonen should have been penalized or ordered to give the position back to Alonso in Austin. They said Leclerc deserved a penalty for Monza 2019 in hindsight. But what’s done is done. You learn from it and move on. Make sure next time someone does something like this, it gets penalized.

        1. Onboard footage compared to the previous lap will demonstrate if Max went in faster braked later and took less steering lock at the same points in the corner all of which would tent to run wide and push a competitor off track. If however he did none of those things then it’s worn tyres or whatever….

  7. I don’t think there will be a retrospective 5 second penalty. It will be unfair on Max.

    A 2 place or 3 place penalty for next race is fairer.

    1. Isn’t there some rule where the results can’t be changed after a certain period? Or am I just making it up?

      1. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 17:21

        @millionus I’m not sure. Results have been appealed two days after a race before (usually advocating for the overturning of a penalty) so I wouldn’t be surprised if this did effect Brazil instead of Qatar

      2. Yes @millionus, but I believe it is the end of the calendar year in which the race was held. That was the reason, for example, that the FIA were unable to do anything about the result of Singapore 2008, as the full story of Crashgate did not emerge until the following year.

  8. Yeah, makes sense.

    When set against the examples of drivers who were penalised for similar situations on track this year, as well as the explicit mentioning of “crowding” an opponent car (pretty much exactly what Max did here) off track one race ago in Mexico, it is quite surprising that they did not even deem it needed an investigation.

    When they then admit that they never even bothered to even look at all angles – despite Masi mentioning he looked at it from all angles live during the race – I can see a boatload of reasons why Mercedes would request this with the extra material being available.

    Sure, they did not want to interrupt a thrilling battle, and since it looked like Lewis was getting past anyway, they could do so without deciding on the ending of the race. And changing the podium long after the race is never a good option really (although giving a time penalty would only drop Max behind Bottas, so I could see that happening).

    In the end, I really don’t expect Max to get punished now. And I am not at all sure he should have been penalised. But please, FIA finally decide what the standard is.

    If we want to see them race like this, be prepared to get far more of this kind of behaviour. And be prepared to see more moves go wrong and end up with big crashes like we saw in Silverstone where neither backed out or budged (the way Hamilton did to avoid a crash here). Not just in F1, but soon as well in lower categories with less skilled and experienced drivers and less safe equipment.

    1. In the end, I really don’t expect Max to get punished now. And I am not at all sure he should have been penalised. But please, FIA finally decide what the standard is.

      Same here, it’s was wrong not to review (IMO) but too late now.

      The might penalise the stewards though.

    2. Andy (@andyfromsandy)
      16th November 2021, 19:02

      Not just in F1, but soon as well in lower categories with less skilled and experienced drivers and less safe equipment.

      Now that has to be a good defence by MB seeing as juniors and role models was part of the reason Lewis got fined for undoing his seatbelt.

    3. Fergus sings the blues
      17th November 2021, 6:27

      Comment of the day! Especially the last paragraph. Spot on…

  9. Yeah so here is a problem. The stewards not investigating it means that the race then unfolded as it did. To give a retrospective time penalty for an incident now deemed punishable means that you are extrapolating the unknowable, because who knows if Verstappen would have gone quicker to ensure he didn’t get a time penalty (and Bottas vice versa). That’s entirely different from calling for a DSQ. This is a bad precedent.

    1. Agree, grid drop or race ban would be fair.

      He should have been black flagged to be honest. He already had one warning for bad driving. This should have been either a penalty or another warning. Two driving standard flags equal a black flag.

      1. I don’t think anyone watches f1 because they think it’s fair.

      2. Barry, resorting to personal attacks shows when someone has no argument.

        Also, I hate to correct you but I don’t believe grass growing is actually a sport either…

        As for my original comment, two driving standard flags are equal to a black flag. Masi has said that Max was going to be issued with one for the incident but he’d already been given one for dangerous driving. The options are a 5 second penalty or a second warning which would result in disqualification. In this case the 5 second penalty would have been better than the warning because Maxs driving was so bad he’d already had a warning. I do hope that makes sense. Feel free to message back if you still don’t understand.

        1. RandomMallard (@)
          16th November 2021, 17:19

          Ben, I believe Max was actually given his black and white flag after this incident, for weaving on the straight a couple of laps later. At least that’s when it was announced if I remember correctly.

          Also, a black and white flag has been used before to imply a final warning, only for them to do something dodgy again and get away with it. Most notably Lecerc at Monza in 2019, and Grosjean at Silverstone in 2020. Both were given a black and white flag, made another dodgy move and not got a punishment.

          For the record, I feel Max should have been penalised, although I think a DSQ would have been a bit too harsh. There hasn’t been a DSQ for driving standards in many years.

          (Also Barry give it a rest. This is at least the second inappropriate comment I’ve seen from you on this thread)

      3. The black and white flag was shown after this event, so that was his first offence as far as the stewards were concerned – if it was indeed an offence.

    2. I think a grid drop is most likely @hahostolze, we saw that for Bottas for example for something that actually could be argued was more of a mistake than intentional over the line driving like Max went for. I’m sure you’ll disagree with this, but really most people including Max fans have come to their senses judging by most comments out there about the incident.

      Personally I think Merc should let it lie anyway, but let’s see what happens.

  10. Review of an incident which was not even investigated, good luck! XD
    (These days I don’t doubt anything, specially with the notable power of Wolff’s lobby, so…)

  11. I hope F1 realizes it cannot continue like this. Every weekend there’s a problem with people battling on track, and different moves being judged differently.

    How can this be sustained? a terrific championship battle like this one doesn’t deserve to be messed with like this. I’m one that’s also shocked that the incident wasn’t even properly investigated, but I’m equally shocked that we now have the possibility of the championship being decided by people in a room, far away from a race track, mid-week between races.

    What if the incident was investigated, Verstappen penalized during the race, and something happened which gave Max room to recover that penalty like Hamilton at Silverstone?. Deciding on this DAYS after it happened isn’t good at all. It needs to start and finish during the weekend.

    The snowball has rolled so far that it’s now gigantic and needs to be stopped. It’s time they get their act together. Find a solution to track limits, and have the same people as stewards, professional stewards at every single race.

    1. Yup just about to write along the lines of that @fer-no65
      It boggles my mind how sometimes anonymous fans on the internet have better hindsight than the FIA

      1. @fer-no65 and Ipsom I don’t think anything will change from Mercedes asking FIA to investigate. I don’t think there is anything in Max’s in-car footage that says anything differently than that he was defending as hard as he could and didn’t do anything malicious or deliberate beyond that.

        The thing about ‘getting their act together’ regarding track limits is that there are always going to be shades of grey and it often depends on the moment, the circumstances, and the drivers’ intentions. Yes it can be controversial. That’s good for the sport. In this case they are stepping away and not deciding things in the stewards room but rather trying to let us see the drivers settle this in their cars, for the Championship.

        1. The thing about defending as hard as you can, is if you defend harder than the rules allow, then you should be penalised for forcing your competitor into evasive action that prevents them from competing for the position fairly. Whether intentional or otherwise, Verstappen ticked every box available for a penalty we’ve seen several times before (he was behind and on the inside in the braking zone, braked even later than his competitor despite an inferior line, missed the apex by a mile, applied nowhere near full steering lock until he was almost off the circuit, and ended up several metres deep in the run-off area).

          It’s all very well wanting to see drivers settle this in their cars, but if they create penalizable situations, then it is them involving the stewards unnecessarily, not the other way round. If Verstappen wanted the move to be settled on track as the fans so dearly want, he would’ve raced hard but left a car’s width on the outside and fought Hamilton to the next corner. It’s not hard to speculate that the reason why this didn’t happen is because Max almost certainly would’ve lost the drag race to T6, so far better to send it deep to deny Hamilton any chance of sweeping round, hope for a favourable outcome, and pray that Lewis’ advantage fades enough to hold onto P1. For the championship’s sake, it was karma that Hamilton made Verstappen pay and earned the win the hard way, but the least the stewards could’ve done was earmark the incident for investigation after the race instead of dismissing it out of hand for what turned out to be very flimsy reasons indeed.

          Denying an opponent a fair chance at an overtake by driving clean off the circuit doesn’t really fit the narrative of settling things ‘on-track’, so it’s no surprise to me that fans of many different constructors and drivers have accused the FIA of hypocrisy about this incident.

    2. Yes, the FIA has brought this upon themselves by not doing anything at the time, even saying they would investigate after the race once the footage was available would have been better.

      As a Hamilton fan I am happy if there is no penalty as long as they clarify what is and what is not acceptable and assure the drivers there would be penalties for this type of thing in future, if they deem it illegal (which I think it is).

      We cannot have drivers doing this sort of thing on a regular basis, not good for the sport.

      1. @davidjwest +1
        The position that there was nothing to investigate is absurd and unsustainable. Even more so when the same ‘race director’ says he thought about a black-and-white flag for an incident where he also said, essentially, ‘nothing happened.’ Its nonsensical and deeply unprofessional. It isn’t about getting a penalty, it’s about clarification of the racing rules, and FIA specifying that it simply isn’t legitimate to drive a rival off track by sweeping across the track and going 5 car widths off track yourself to do so.

  12. Also, how can drivers know what is and isn’t allowed, when the ruling changes every time. I mean, if nothing comes out of this anyway, what do you do? do a Norris at Austria and get penalized? do a Max at Interlagos and get away with it?

    It really is beyond ridiculous… I don’t blame Merc for this, I’d do the same thing. The teams and drivers aren’t responsible for all this, is F1 itself that needs to be clear…

    1. @fer-no65 I think things are pretty clear and the rules get followed the vast vast majority of the time. It’s just that this is men and machine with a lot at stake and we want to see enthralling action and generally not the drivers having to act like there are walls everywhere and they don’t dare try something a bit different. Stuff happens. That’s what makes it enthralling to watch. I think it would take away from the entity if everything was black and white all the time and the drivers had to act like robots in their cars, afraid to go out on a limb once in a while.

    2. Jay (@slightlycrusty)
      17th November 2021, 7:53

      @fer-no65 Yes, it’s the inconsistency which is the problem. Only the race before they’d issued a ‘clarification’ that crowding off track would be penalised, yet Max does so on the very next race and they don’t even think it warrants properly investigating. All drivers should be racing under the same rules, whether they’re in a Haas or are leading the WDC.

  13. Barry Bens (@barryfromdownunder)
    16th November 2021, 16:33

    Mercedes: “Nobody likes us and that MUST be because people are hating Lewis for what he is”
    Also Mercedes: *does this*

    1. The crowd reaction was the opposite of what you’re saying. It wasn’t Mercedes being boo’d on the podium…

      1. Damn, casual racism today.

      2. Did you really just post that @barryfromdownunder


        1. He’s hurting because VER made a blinding mistake.

        2. His earlier comments now make much more sense. Reported

    2. I agree they shouldn’t have done it actaully, but I can see you’re still raging about something again. Can’t we all just get along?

      1. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 22:44

        @john-h One again, I find myself agreeing with you! Just enjoy a great season people!

  14. The issue here is that extremely poor stewarding has lead to the situation we’re in. Why not leave themselves open and say that it’d be investigated after the race? No one likes post race penalties, but had they said they were waiting for footage that would have been fair and understood by the fans. The FIA then get the best of both worlds, great on track action and the additional time to decide if Max did cross the line. Thy could even interview him and hear his point after the race too. Insead choosing not to even look at it just makes the FIA look stupid. We’ve seen drivers punished for crowding even when both drivers stay on the track/Kerbs! But when two drivers go at least 5m off track it’s not even looked at?

    Personally, I doubt that it’ll change anything. It’s just the usual double standards where a driver will lose a laptime for going 1mm wide on a qualifying lap, yet in the race Max sends Hamilton into another city and they don’t even bother to look at it. Were they even policing track limits in the race?

    1. petebaldwin (@)
      16th November 2021, 17:01

      The review shouldn’t be into this incident – it’s happened, it didn’t make any difference to the final positions and it likely wouldn’t have if the correct penalty was given at the time. Move on.

      The review should be into the stewards and why they are routinely making decisions that seem to follow no logic when compared to decisions they’ve previously made.

      1. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 17:12

        @petebaldwin While I disagree in that I feel, even as someone who has been supporting RB this season, that this should be reviewed and result in a penalty, I wholeheartedly agree with the second half of your comment. The stewards are unbelievably inconsistent, with these type of “pushing people off the track” calls in particular, butalso in general.

        My first proposal is that every time the stewards don’t decide to investigate something, it is also recorded and released as an official decision so in the event of substantial new evidence there is actually something to appeal against.

    2. The FIA then get the best of both worlds, great on track action and the additional time to decide

      Please not.
      Immediate decisions, that’s what I want. Having those post race reviews makes it all worse as the race isn’t over when it’s over.

      Money fines and penalty points they can do afterwards.

  15. Unfortunately, it’s a waste of energy because the stewards and FIA will never ever reconsider their decision. The new evidence will not be considered important or meaningful, and then it’s case closed.

    1. RandomMallard (@)
      16th November 2021, 16:43

      New onboard video footage has before been deemed significant enough new evidence to allow a review. Most notably Hamilton’s penalty in Austria last year. I think the bigger problem here is the potential of what they’re appealing (as no official decision document was released as it was never officially under investigation). I think that will prove the biggest hurdle to Merc.

  16. Giving 5s penalty to Max is nonsense since he would have pushed harder to stay clear of bottas and still finish second…

    1. that’s fine, precedent set in Silverstone is that it’s a 10 second penalty…

    2. @Mathias Perhaps Bottas would’ve got below five seconds anyway, given Max’s tyre state.
      Anyway, irrelevant what would’ve happened if the 5-sec penalty got handed during the race.

      1. It’s not irrelevant because it SHOULD’VE been done during the race, a penalty after is unfair.

  17. FIA should review Hamilton’s DAS from Sao Paulo GP.

      1. @jerejj Find “@ForSpeedz” on Twitter

      2. @jerejj I think some were claiming that Hamilton was moving his wheel backwards/forwards at some points over the Interlagos weekend & that it is proof that Mercedes is still using DAS.

        Mercedes have already refuted it & pointed out that the steering system was homologated pre-season & is therefore not something they could update during the year to re-add DAS or anything like it.

        The clip I saw just seemed to show a small bit of play in the wheel as he was braking for T1, Something that I wouldn’t say was too out of the ordinary.

        1. I honestly see no movement at all. Are we looking for forward or backward motion here? I’ll try it on my HD monitor as I’m only on my phone screen currently.

          With DAS the motion was clearly obvious. That just looks like normal braking G forces.

    1. Das helps to warm the tyres and with the saftey car and the vsc it is obvious it took the merc a while to warm its tyres. Kind of shows there is no das.
      If the fia can spot 0.2mm cap difference in swing I would say they will spot das. Especially as the fia was fully informed and had checked das to make sure it was legal last year.
      I believe the the speed this weekend that the engine is upgraded with some of what was planned for next year. Brought forward because of how close the drivers and constructors championship is

    2. AJ (@asleepatthewheel)
      17th November 2021, 3:39

      @denis1304 isn’t the whole point of DAS to change the toe/camber of the front tires? From the video, it appears that the steering apparently does move a little, something which can be attributed to G-forces under braking. I don’t see how solely moving the steering offers any sort of advantage, mechanical or aero.

  18. I fully saw this coming.

  19. Good – look forward to the outcome.

  20. This right here is further proof of how destructive greed is to our society and ability to get along as people.
    Sports are fun. Outcomes don’t really matter because they are a fun game for entertainment.
    Throw in a prize purse that is far larger than any prize purse for driving in circles should be (I know, economics, this is not the point of this post) and all of a sudden the nastiest parts of human nature are exposed.
    Such a shame. I compete against my friends in various activities, we win, we lose, sometimes it is questionable, but we never whine like little babies. Why? Because we’re not greedy animals desperate to get our hands on a little bit of extra cash that we think is going to make us happier.

    1. RandomMallard (@)
      16th November 2021, 17:07

      While I understand the premise, the money is kind of important to develop the cars. Without enough investment, we’d be left back at go karts…

      But I generally agree. I feel disappointed with both teams at how hostile the narratives have been this season.

    2. Amateur sports are for fun.

      Top level professional sport is big business. Of course people take it way more seriously.

  21. RandomMallard (@)
    16th November 2021, 17:04

    Quite rightly so. I’ve generally been supporting Max and RB this season but that move was just not on. It’s not the worst move I’ve ever seen, but it was a very, very poor piece of driving. 5 or 10 seconds, or 3 or 5 places as a grid penalty for Qatar (maybe 10, though that may be a bit too harsh). Whether it would be 5 or 10 secs wouldn’t make a difference. Both put him behind Bottas and ahead of Perez.

    I’m equally angry at the stewards though. While I understand that no one wanted to wait another 24 hours for a decision (like on Saturday), how they could dismiss such a crucial piece of missing evidence. I am happy it was decided on track though (so we weren’t spoiled of a pretty decent climax with an actual overtake). The best result imo would have been them announcing an investigation post race. At least then there was a possibility that Max wouldn’t be penalised so Lewis still had an incentive to overtake. I understand no one really likes post race penalties, but I’d rather have that than a repeat of Lewis sitting behind Vettel for 20 laps in Canada in 2019, knowing he would inherit the win.

    And they’re also so, so hit and miss with penalties for this offence. Monza 2019 (Leclerc and Hamilton) vs Monza 2021 (Ocon and Vettel). Two similar incidents, different outcomes. Alonso vs both Alfa Romeos in Austin, Perez vs Norris and Leclerc in Austria. That outcome seemed to depend on whether or not there was gravel in the exit. This incident has similarities to Stroll’s move on Ricciardo at Styria in 2020; that was investigated, but the outcome was no penalty (and like this weekend it probably should have been). They need one rule, applied consistently at all tracks to all drivers.

    The problem Merc may have is the opposite of what Red Bull had in Silverstone. There, RB had a decision to appeal but very little (albeit quite comedic) new evidence. Here, Merc have all the content they could realistically want, but don’t have an official decision to appeal against. That’s the real problem with it not being investigated. If Merc can clear that hurdle, I don’t think it’ll be too much of a battle to get a penalty.

    I’m finding both of the teams’ narratives becoming increasingly unbearable. And I do feel sorry for lower level employees of both teams, because I expect that there is a lot less rivalry there than there is higher up in the hierarchy. And if there isnt any less, then I’m sure it can’t be a great working environment.

    I think I’ll try and follow the rest of this season as a neutral in the championship. It’s been a great, entertaining and fiercely competitive battle. But maybe at points a bit too competitive.

    1. Easily COTD @randommallard. I don’t think anyone could put it any better, I agree with everything you’ve written, especially about the engineers being fed up with the behaviour of those at the top. It must be exasperating.
      Don’t worry, the season will be over soon! You can rest then :)

      1. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 21:58

        @john-h +1. Not just the engineers trackside, but also those at the factory (and the PR teams especially must be having a hard time rn!).

        As much as I’ve loved this season and love the sport, I’m looking forward to a bit of a break over the winter that’s for sure!

      2. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 22:27

        Also @john-h thank you for your very valuable comments as well. You extremely professional in writing detailed comments that explain your opinion in a non-confrontational manner. You are excellent at explaining not just how you agree or disagree ,with people, but why you disagree. Plenty of people on both sides of the supporter spectrum, including myself, can learn a lot from you!

    2. Great comment. I would go as far as saying Hamilton and Verstappen would probably be just fine with each other if not for the constant trolling by Wolff, Horner and Marko. Of course the media are lapping it up and enlarge any rivalry too.

  22. I think they need to drop Max five places in the next race. Otherwise, he will just keep doing him and someone will get hurt.

  23. How is t possible to review a decision that wasn’t made?

    1. “Mercedes indicated they intend to submit the footage as new evidence in order to prompt a review of the incident.”

      What decision?

    2. @anunaki I guess we’ll be finding out. So far all Mercedes has done is request a review of the incident, as it is worded above. They aren’t protesting a judgement on the incident, for there wasn’t a judgement. It will be interesting to see if Masi looks more closely at it or if he just tells TW the decision made immediately after the incident stands.

      What I find so interesting is that the stewards could have easily said right off the bat ‘pending investigation’ or something like that. i.e. it is not like they simply forgot that they could get ahold of more footage after the race if they wanted to. Indeed they decided they had seen enough, and I think that is because what they saw was two gladiators duking it out for a Championship and that since they got through the corner unscathed, better to let the fans see them settle this on the track rather than stewards settling the Championship in a room. I’m sure had there been contact they would have had no choice but to investigate further and make a ruling after the race if they couldn’t get all the necessary footage together before the race end.

      1. I don’t like it @robbie but I think you may be spot on here.

    3. Fergus sings the blues
      17th November 2021, 6:49

      That’s the crux of the matter and how it is open to human bias or even corruption. As a steward you shouldn’t have the ability to airbrush any track incident out of existence such that it can’t be reviewable afterwards!

      I think Merc is also protesting to ensure Max doesn’t take Lewis out in any of the next three races as the 14 point difference will be too much to overcome.

    4. F1oSaurus (@)
      17th November 2021, 7:58

      @anunaki They ask for a review of an incident though. Maybe you should try reading the rules because they are quite clear that you can ask for a review

      whether or not the stewards have already given a ruling

      But yeah Vitantonio Liuzzi will obviously not change his mind with this new footage. From the footage available to him and the other stewards, it was already crystal clear that Verstappen should have gotten a penalty.

  24. I think it’s great that Toto is just following through with his word that he will no longer let anything slide due to the .02mm rear wing incident (instigated by Horner/RB?).

  25. It really should’ve been 5 second penalty on the day.

    How would you retrospectively apply it now?

    I doubt anything will come of this and Max will get away with it (again).

    1. driving someone off track deliberatly deserves more than a 5 second penalty. stop and go penalty. retrospectively a 5 or 10 place grid drop.

      1. In that case give it to him during the race, 2nd place still possible, they said it was fine, and now things changed, that’s not fair.

    2. F1oSaurus (@)
      17th November 2021, 8:04

      They can convert a time penalty after the race into a grid drop. Like Bottas got a 5 place grid drop for the next race for braking too late in Hungary and Verstappen a 3 place grid drop for simply driving into Hamilton in Monza.

      5s penalty is converted to a 3 place grid drop and 10s is 5 places.

  26. Gearhead Berger
    16th November 2021, 17:46

    The guy did nothing wrong. What has happened to this sport? That move used to be called racing. A great season but all the whining going on by both teams is really getting annoying.

  27. I can only see a huge bias in FIA’s decisions. Lewis was disqualified because one part of the wing was less than 1mm off the tolerance. Not the whole wing, just one part of it! I’m afraid this season is going to end up like Woman’s Singles US Open 2018. No one will like it, none of the involved nor the viewers watching.

    1. There’s really no grey area or leeway with the technical regs. Breach of the technical regs will always result in a DQ. It’s very difficult to argue otherwise. Yes, there are times when that comes across as very tough, but it’s the technical regs that define exactly what F1 is.

      1. F1oSaurus (@)
        17th November 2021, 8:05

        @scbriml When there is damage to the wing they normally do allow the teams to repair the damage. Then it’s measured again and if in order then they are given a pass. Mercedes was not allowed to repair the wing with a clearly slightly broken DRS system.

        1. But it failed scrutineering after qualifying (of whatever the hell they call that on a sprint weekend). I can’t remember that ever happening, but feel free to give me an example.

    2. Not even 1mm, but try and picture this, 0.2 mm. Less than the width of a human hair, and so very likely within the margin for error of the equipment used to measure that gap. In fact if you’ve seen the video of Verstappen physically tweeking the rear wing on both sides of Hamilton’s car, that 0.2 mm could concievably have been the results of his deft tweeks on the rear wings. Max was apparantly ‘testing’ for any give in those wings.

    3. Jay (@slightlycrusty)
      17th November 2021, 8:11

      It gets worse: if you’re in the UK it’s worth watching the race highlights on Channel 4 (catch-up TV), on the formation lap was the following bonkers exchange between Alex Jacques and David Coulthard (from memory) –

      AJ: David, apparently Toto Wolff is incensed because Red Bull were allowed to change elements on Verstappen’s rear wing overnight, an option which had been denied to Mercedes over Hamilton’s wing. How do explain that?
      DC: it’s just one of those things, sometimes they will penalise a team, sometimes they’ll just turn a blind eye.

      Although I’ve looked elsewhere in the media, I’ve seen no corroboration for this story. But on the face of it, Hamilton was sent to the back of the grid for having a damaged wing, whereas Verstappen’s was allowed to be repaired without penalty! And as Ajaxn says, the Mercedes wing was 0.2mm out of spec ON ONE SIDE ONLY. Clearly that’s down to damage, not a design decision.

  28. The problem here is we already have teams “crying to the ref” when they feel aggrieved. This would open the floodgates going forwards so anyone could ask for a review of any move, no matter how marginal. It would muddy the waters in terms of race results. You might not know the finishing order for weeks!

    F1 needs strong adjudication like rugby. Stewards and Michael Masi should be respected and their decisions final without debate, but in order to achieve that they need to demonstrate a level of fairness and consistency which seems to be missing of late.

    1. Andy (@andyfromsandy)
      16th November 2021, 19:17

      If the decision at the time should be respected then RBR getting Lewis a penalty for ignoring a yellow flag should not of happened.

      Unfortunately it seems for every call for consistency there has already been an incident showing inconsistency.

  29. Thinking about this and it really has opened a can of worms. The FIA now have to accept the new evidence and open an investigation and then decide on the incident.

    In Silverstone RedBull tried to appeal with their own new evidence (Albon) which the FIA rightly declined. All video, telemetry etc was available to the stewards on the day. They could throw that out with the reasoning being it wasn’t valid new evidence of the actual event.

    In this case Masi has openly said the footage from Maxs car wasn’t available at the time. So if decline Mercedes an appeal like they did with RedBull, that effectively means they are saying video evidence isn’t relevant evidence. Which could surely cause problems down the line. It was also valid evidence in Hamilton’s grid drop in Austria too for example.

    What they do or don’t decide to do with the video is then up to them, but surely this has to at least go to an investigation stage, like it should have done on Sunday.

    I doubt the outcome will change anything. Its damage limitation for the FIA than anything else at this point. They need to play this right for the sake of future investigations.

    1. I agree. This is more about the FIA seeming to be fair after a weekend where that really didn’t seem to be the case. Hamilton DSQ from quali for .2mm while Red Bull change wing parts under parc ferme for the third weekend in a row and then that spectacular piece of cheating to try and hold a place, followed by weaving and a black and white flag – but crucially no sanctions yet again for Max.

      They need to resolve this is a way that seems fair and even handed to those that love the sport.

    2. So if decline Mercedes an appeal like they did with RedBull, that effectively means they are saying video evidence isn’t relevant evidence.

      But precedent has already been set there by, ironically, Red Bull. Video footage that wasn’t available at the time was used to penalise Hamilton who wasn’t originally penalised.

      1. That’s what I’m saying Steve. They can’t say The video evidence isn’t enough to open an investigation as they’ve used video evidence to open an investigation against Hamilton in the past.

        If they refuse to open an investigation then it’ll look very bias towards RedBull and go against previous precedent.

      2. RandomMallard (@)
        16th November 2021, 22:39

        @scbriml I don’t think that’s the main problem Merc are going to have. I would argue that, as an RB fan nonetheless, that this is sufficient evidence to open a review. The problem Merc are going to have, potentially, is proving what they’re appealing is valid. As there was no official investigation, there is no official decision or decision document to appeal against. I think every appeal I can remember has been against a decision document, so Merc may have an uphill struggle to prove they have a right to appeal. I’m not saying that’s how it should be (it’s something that definitely needs a change imo) I’m saying that’s how it is. That said, I don’t think it will be an impossible hurdle for Merc, and imo the right decision would a 5 or 10 second penalty for Verstappen, or 3 or 5 grid places at Qatar.

  30. I hope it’s thrown out too!

    Hamilton is known to be a huge fan of Senna and Max did nothing more than Senna would have done!

    There is far too much political intervention in this season.

    1. So you think if Max is going into AD with a lead he can do exactly the same thing to prevent Ham from passing as this incident sets precedence? Or putting aside any punishment for this incident; which I don’t think should be applied retrospectively, their should be a ruling on whether this sort of behaviour will be tolerated in the future?

  31. Formula 1 is Motorsports at its highest level so I enjoy the competition between LH & MV a lot. All the fuss about Silverstone and Brazil seems against auto racing at the highest level… Yes Lewis wants to be WDC so does Max. Let them race and not throw a non existing rule at them every time they pass each other.

    1. geoffgroom44 (@)
      16th November 2021, 19:20

      “…non existing rule…”
      your suggestion is fine, as long as rules do not exist to the contrary.
      Howver, it is my understand that such rules do exist.

    2. Let them race … should not mean let the championship leader drive into and take out the faster car.

      1. geoffgroom44 (@)
        17th November 2021, 8:21


  32. Silverstone was a hard-racing incident to me, Interlagos was a hard-racing incident too. The outcome doesn’t matter. I disagree with Silverstone’s post-race mayhem, I disagree with this one now too.
    Everybody knows who is Max and who’s Lewis. And they know themselves too. Let them race. Let them fight hard. If Lewis wants the 8th, he must confront Max’s opportunity for his first. It just can’t go down to the book to solve this.

    1. geoffgroom44 (@)
      17th November 2021, 8:20

      I am all for hard racing,it’s great to watch these professionals fighting over 0.1 of a second.
      So I think the hard racers should be able to fix a snow plough to the front and we can really go all ‘Mad Max’ Doof Wagon with F1.
      However, until the apocalypse happens maybe staying within the rules would be a good idea,huh?

    2. I really wish for a repeat of Silverstone with max taking the 26 points this time. Then I want to see if Lewis fanatics will be saying “hard racing” or will do all those mental gymnastics to differentiate the incidents.

      Silverstone was despicable in my book, 2 people crashed even if the blame was 50-50 it tainted the championship since one guy got 26 free points. I would say the same no matter the drivers involved. End of my case.

      And the stewarding is being sad for a long time is the main problem we have, that includes brazil’s incident.

      1. Again, Silverstone happened because Lewis didn’t yield. The fact that it went 26-0 was pure Hamilton’s luck. But if Max wanted to avoid a 0-point race, he could have. He just always makes a desperate dive into the corner and throws the glove on the other driver. If that is his driving style, some DNFs will always be involved.

    3. And Monza too because it was a bizarre crash, yes.

  33. Jay (@slightlycrusty)
    16th November 2021, 20:24

    Well done Mercedes. It’s never nice to have to get the authorities involved, but Verstappen has been flouted the sporting regs all season with the FIA’s blessing. F1 has rules, it ought to apply them fairly to every driver on the grid.

    Verstappen has the talent to beat Hamilton fairly, but instead he’s chosen the Rosberg route to victory. Sure, it’s easier, but to be blunt it’s cheating. If the FIA allows this sort of behaviour it will become the norm.

    1. Rosberg route to victory […] it’s cheating

      And where exactly did Rosberg cheat?
      And surely Jenson Button, who outscored the EWE by about 48 points in 2011, was cheating all the time


      1. Everyone that beat Lewis is cheating, everyone knows that :p
        Yes, i’m sarcastic.

      2. I seem to remember Rosberg parking his car at 2014 Monaco Q3 to prevent Hamilton from taking pole, running Hamilton off the road at the 2016 Spanish GP, Rosberg trying to run Hamilton off the road at the last lap of the 2016 Austrian GP and destroying his car….

        1. 2016 Spanish GP was a clear racing incident to this day.

  34. I agree with the review provided the final result is banning the driver from car 44 from all motorsport competition for the next 50 years plus the removal of all their previous results since Hungaroring 2007 (included)

    1. I honestly can’t tell if you’re being serious anymore.

      1. Seriousness is grossly overrated

    2. Also known as Trolling

  35. Everything but the kitchen sink despite having a rocket for 8 straight years. And just to battle one car. Imagine a season with a more equal playing field. Toto would have to be hospitalised.

    1. Mayrton, do you actually have anything constructive to say or is it always Mercedes bashing? It’s always the same comment!

      1. Bit like the whining of Mercedes all year?

    2. Would removing Toto’s tongue with hot pincers be deemed cruel and unusual? One wonders…

  36. neither car lost position, anything like that

    Possibly one of the dumbest comments I’ve ever heard from someone representing FIA. Maybe Formula 1 should have a race director who actually has some basic idea of Formula 1 racing? Hamilton was unable to gain a position because he was blocked from making a pass by his rival forcing him off track, going several metres off track himself to do so.

    1. geoffgroom44 (@)
      17th November 2021, 8:13

      exactly.In fact, he had ‘gained’ by being ahead into the corner had he not?

  37. FIA I demand you delete both drivers 48th lap…

  38. SLAM DUNK penalty, id say 5 or 10 place grid drop, verstappen hardly tried to turn the steering wheel, the most obvious disgusting push off the road in years in f1.

    1. But if they had given a penalty during the race (as it should’ve been done) it probably would’ve been less, where is fairness?

      1. geoffgroom44 (@)
        17th November 2021, 8:11

        respectfully I would say, fairness is a very very slim thing in F1, like 0.2 mm slim !
        This weekend has been a victory for Mercedes…and a big defeat for the integrity of F1.

  39. Of course they’ll ask for a review – that’s the nature of F1 teams and politics and we’re in a rare year where every single little thing counts.
    Will it make any difference – I doubt it because the FIA is never wrong (just ask them)

    It will however be having the owners hands rubbing with glee – more “drama” to generate interest and add to DTS.

    I think the FIA really needs to set a strong precedent (they won’t) here though because IF next year drivers are actually able to race each other more closely, there’s a much higher likelihood of similar incidents occurring unless it is made clear that pushing an opponent off track, even accidentally, will be looked at every time.

  40. Legally they can’t do nothing about it because they never investigated it or intended to investigate the maneuver after the race. So they can’t give any penalty to Max. Only thing they can do is a reprimand or fine. And I remember how Hamilton has used the same tactics , running other cars off track , it was always the other car/driver who took evading action otherwise they would have crashed. Hamilton did this to Rosberg many times, but so please don’t hypocrites

    1. Andy (@andyfromsandy)
      17th November 2021, 9:28

      Using a previous wrong to mitigate another is how the FIA has got itself in such a stupid mess.

      Also similar incidents have been penalised. A further inconsistency.

  41. Mercedes 1 – 0 RBR.
    Masi & stewtards LibFlix fixers.
    All just part of the act to “dramatise” F1.
    To appeal to the me, me, me; gib, gib, gib, generations pc nonsense.

    1. is there a reference here that i’m not getting?

  42. Rick (@wickedwicktheweird)
    17th November 2021, 9:33

    I think it’s funny that the people who are adamant that Verstappen deserves a penalty are the same people that say that Lewis did nothing wrong in Silverstone. You can’t have it both ways!

    1. i think both incidents are different. i am neither adamant that Verstappen deserves a penalty nor that Lewis did nothing wrong in Silverstone.

      but at least they did review the Silverstone incident. they could have reviewed this one, it’s really bizarre that they didn’t.

      as a Hamilton fan i may be slightly biased but i think that’s a fair assessment; they should have reviewed it at least even if they had to postpone the decision until after the race was over

      1. Rick (@wickedwicktheweird)
        17th November 2021, 12:03

        I agree that a review would have been fair enough but I don’t think that a penalty should be applied at this stadium. Firstly because no harm was done and it didn’t affect the outcome of the race. Secondly, the stewards had the possibility to decide that the incident was going to be investigated at after the race. If they had made that decision Red Bull possibly could have covered a 5 second penalty, just to be sure. At this stage a penalty would have a much more severe effect on the outcome of the race because you deny Red Bull the change to react to it. Thirdly I think this is not in the interest of the sport at all. Nobody (except the most diehard LH fans maybe) wants to see the title decided on the stewards table, especially for an incident that didn’t change the outcome of the race and in which no harm was done.

  43. Maybe it’s time RBR to ask FIA to review Silverstone and Hungaroring.

Comments are closed.