Daniel Ricciardo, McLaren, Yas Marina, 2021

Ricciardo prepared for 14-day isolation to spend off-season with family

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Daniel Ricciardo says he is prepared to put up with a 14 day isolation period in Australia to spend the off-season with loved ones.

Join RaceFans on Facebook

Don't miss anything from RaceFans - join us on Facebook here to see whenever a new article has been added:

In brief

Ricciardo to spend Christmas in quarantine

Daniel Ricciardo says he will be prepared to spend two weeks in mandatory quarantine in Australia after the end of the F1 season so he can spend with with friends and family.

The state government of Western Australia, Ricciardo’s home state, enforce a mandatory 14-day hotel quarantine period for all passengers arriving from direct overseas flights.

Despite the mandated isolation period, Ricciardo says he is prepared to comply with it so he can enjoy time with friends and family.

“I’m going to go home. I need to. I need to get home,” said Ricciardo. “It is difficult to get back. Unfortunately, they’re not making it easy, but it is what it is.

“I need to get home, see family, friends. Once I get out of the four walls, I should still get hopefully three or four weeks with friends and family. And it’s summer, so something to look forward to.”

Free-to-air finale a “great gift” for fans – Hamilton

With the announcement that Channel 4 has struck a one-off deal with Sky Sports to broadcast live coverage of the championship-deciding Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Lewis Hamilton says the news is “amazing” for British fans.

“I grew up in an era when it was free and I would remember to turn on many years ago,” said Hamilton.

“I know that’s the way the world has gone, obviously with pay TV. But I think that’s amazing, particularly in a time that we’re living in right now, where people have been affected so heavily by Covid. People have lost jobs, businesses. So I think that’s great. It’s a great gift, I think, at this point of the year for people to be able to watch a sport not have to worry how and where they’re going to be able to watch it.”

Norris inspired by fans to speak out about mental health

Lando Norris has credited his fans on social media for inspiring him to speak publicly about his mental health and do more to raise awareness around mental health in society.

Norris has previously shared how he struggled with anxiety and low moods during his rookie season in F1 in 2019 and says the response from his fans has encouraged him to use his platform to support those facing similar struggles.

“I’m very happy and proud to be part of that group of people who have accepted it and are happy and confident to speak out on it,” said Norris.

“I think one of the biggest things which allowed me or made me think it’s a very good thing to speak out on is my fans – my followers. Especially when I kind of would hint at it the first few times, before I was even speaking about it publicly. A few of them saying how much it was helping them and the impact it can have on them. And, over time, realising that the impact I can have on those hundreds of people or thousands of people or whatever, is huge.”

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

After Michael Masi reminded all teams and drivers that stewards have the power to deduct championship points for ‘unethical’ sporting conduct ahead of this weekend’s championship decider, @jackysteeg feels the warning should have come sooner in the season…

Good on him for saying this, although the tone should really have been set a long while ago. The prospect of a title deciding crash was raised months ago, and we’ve seen countless clashes since the first real “big one” at Silverstone. Many opportunities to send a message of zero-tolerance through action, and yet the biggest penalty applied so far has been 10 seconds added on. I fear this stance is too little, too late.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to French Steve!

On this day in motorsport

  • On this day in 2006 Jonny Reid won both A1 Grand Prix races for the New Zealand team at the Sentul circuit in Indonesia, his first victories in the series


Get the best of our motorsport coverage after every F1 race in your inbox – sign up for the free RaceFans email Newsletter:

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

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

28 comments on “Ricciardo prepared for 14-day isolation to spend off-season with family”

  1. MB (@muralibhats)
    10th December 2021, 3:20

    Who wouldn’t be prepared to do anything to meet their family?

  2. Hakkinen highlights the issue perfectly in that article, on one hand he says Verstappen deserved to be penalised for his driving. On the other hand he doesn’t want to see the championship decided by a penalty. It’s a pretty universal opinion from analysts.

    Why are penalties so hated? They only punish the person not following the rules. If there are no penalties it only benefits those who race unfairly.

    F1 has painted itself into a corner where for its entire history the penalties have been so arbitrary and the inconsistency of application so great, that when a penalty is awarded an argument can be made for why it should be harsher, weaker or even not applied at all. It’s not helped by the FIA’s stubborn stance to never admit making a wrong call.

    Hence why nobody likes them and they bring the sport into conflict. I’ve had a conspiratorial tone regarding the penalty decision making but ultimately the framework is lacking. Masi can say all he wants that it’s up to the drivers to avoid penalties, but when the drivers don’t really know exactly what attracts a penalty and what is just “hard racing” it makes it hard for everybody.

    Hopefully in the future we see some change. Maybe this year will be the catalyst.

    1. @skipgamer there seems to be a narrative being built towards bending the rules to avoid imposing a penalty if it is “for the benefit of the show”, or if the popularity of the driver means that there would be a big backlash from the fans if they were penalised. They’re hated because people are being told to hate them, even though it should be the case that the rules are upheld for all evenly.

    2. F1’s penalties are inconsistent largely because of the drivers and teams.
      For as long as I can remember, F1 has been negotiating and changing what constitutes a penalty or not with the drivers directly on a per-event basis rather than simply applying the rules as they are written.

      The drivers could meet with Masi (and other FIA representatives) and say “we want the rules to be the same everywhere, all the time” – but they never have, and likely never will.
      Until this happens, we are stuck with F1’s (in)famous consistent inconsistency.

  3. Why is Alonso’s face on Ricciardo’s arm?

    1. Secret Santa 😱

    2. @paulk It was Alonso’s Christmas gift to Daniel.

  4. As both a mental health professsional, and someone with prior firsthand experience of low moods and anxiety. a huge tip’o-the-hat to Norris for being open about issues that, at some time over the life span, will affect 10-15 per cent of us.

    I generally root for another driver, but I think I may have to root just a little bit for Norris too…

  5. You may need to do a little bit of fact checking (along with a lot of spell checking). Presumably you are referring to the Howard Springs quarantine facility?

    1. Every statement you made in that comment is false, and the Australian government has long since been aware of the falseness of the notions you commented. That is why they are still enforcing them.

      I am surprised you were not aware of this when you posted.

  6. There’s a lot going on with this comment!
    Conflation, misinformation, propaganda, conspiracy, straw man. Bingo! It’s got it all.

    In breaking news, most governments, like race stewards, are imperfect, and sometimes rules, even if applied with good intent, are dumb or a bit extreme.

    As an Australian (albeit from the opposite side of the country to the state whose rules will require DR3 to quarantine for 14 days) I’m more in favour of a set of rules that will protect the collective rather than champion the ‘rights’ (an abused term if ever there’s been one) of the individual to be selfish.

    Now I must head out and see if any of my fellow citizens are being frog marched to concentration camps based on their vaccination status. Oh wait, no they’re not.

    1. Potato, patata.

    2. Well done!

      You just argued in my favour.

      It’s not a matter of rights, or individuals vs collectives.

      The governments are too corrupt and/or dumb and even if (and that’s a big if) their intentions were sane, politicians don’t have to take the brunt of their decisions. Only the populace.

      Read my response above and see how they’re protecting the health of no one.

      1. Your comment above was entirely false, so that’s not going to help advance your position in any way.

      2. I know. It’s sad, isn’t?

        And they call themselves “progressives” ha!.

        If it were up to them they would “progress” us all to oblivion.

        But no, this is for those that are on the fence or have some suppressed intuition and succumb to peer pressure, to actually stop suppressing themselves and go do their own research.


  7. The choice of CotD illustrates the bias of this site yet again. We’ve already had a title deciding crash in the sense that Max would quite likely be the champion already if Lewis hadn’t crashed him out at Silverstone. Let alone if you also count Bottas’ poor driving which crashed out Max at Hungary (which he almost repeated at Jeddah).

    But apparently it doesn’t count if Max is the victim, but only if Lewis is.

    1. @aapje I notice you’ve missed 1 completed and 1 attempted deliberate crash by Max against Lewis, plus 3 occasions where Red Bull should have been disqualified for a rule-breaching wing (instead of being allowed to change it in a way Mercedes was not the one time they were in a similar situation).

      Apparently in your eyes it doesn’t count if Lewis is the victim, but only if Max is.

      1. @alianora-la-canta

        None of that is true.

        I’m not going to bother addressing a post that is one lie after another.

        1. @aapje I am simply correcting the falsehoods you made, and your response indicates you know your statements were false.

          1. @alianora-la-canta

            You are literally insane if you take that away from my post.

      2. @alianora-la-canta. True, Max is no saint. But the fact is Mercedes crashed into Red Bulls on two occasions and it paid of in big points. Monza was 50/50, both could have prevented a crash but didn’t want to give in

        So, CotD and @aapje is right. Why a 10 second penalty half way the season and points deducted at the end. It’s proof the deck is stacked against Max.

        1. @marcusaurelius Mercedes crashed into Red Bull once in a way that paid off in terms of points). It is quite likely Lewis would have won Britain regardless of the crash – in fact, he may well have won it more convincingly given Red Bull’s tyre troubles (because had Lewis not hit Max, he would have missed out on the subsequent penalty). As it happens, that’s not the only mistake the FIA have made against Max this year – I would argue the plea-bargaining incident contravenes Article 47 of the Sporting Regulations and, since the FIA failed to correct it themselves and Red Bull took it in good faith, the entire penalty there should have been invalidated (don’t ask me how one goes about invalidating a two-place grid penalty…)

          Points deductions are less than the DSQ-from-season that was already in the rules, so if you think Max is more likely to get a penalty than Max, then what the FIA actually did was stack the deck in Max’s favour (albeit not by itself enough to make much difference – you cannot convince me that Max actually thinks about losing points or championships when he selects his on-track position, for tactics in that sort of situation* are generally done with a shorter time horizon (the next few corners) in mind.

          * – Drivers are typically juggling several layers of tactics, as well as at least one strategy layer (the whole-race one), when they race. Most of the rules against particular types of driving are about moves done about some specific on-track position that usually isn’t expected to last very long, as distinct from plans for the next few laps or the next race segment. Only at strategy level does thinking about points or championships generally get involved.

          While the FIA have been far from equal-opportunities in their regulation-breaching injustices, it has affected both drivers’ campaigns enough that I feel the title is invalid regardless of who is stated as winning it tomorrow. This is exactly what I meant by “apparently in your eyes it doesn’t count if Lewis is the victim, but only if Max is” – the FIA has messed both around to an unacceptable degree, but by refusing to acknowledge one side of the FIA’s rule-breaking, you end up missing the bigger problem. After all, if the bias was one-sided, one could simply tally up the lost points and declare a moral champion ;)

          1. Trying again with the first part of paragraph 2: Points deductions are less than the DSQ-from-season that was already in the rules, so if you think Max is more likely to get a penalty than Lewis, then what the FIA actually did was stack the deck in Max’s favour (albeit not by itself enough to make much difference…)

          2. (I’m also going to say that as far as I can see, Monza was nowhere near 50/50, and Max was lucky to get so little penalty – probably relying on, among other things, the Silverstone judgment to get away so lightly. Both could, after all, have prevented Silverstone, as Lewis correctly noted after the race…)

    2. The comment actually was pretty objective and made no reference to either driver. Sounds more like a personal bias in your interpretation than anything else.

      1. @tommy-c

        What the comment implies is anything but objective.

  8. It won’t happen because your allegation is false.

  9. Surprise surprise!

    Censored by the truth police!

    For what reason this time?

    It was pretty much on-topic, so?

Comments are closed.