Russell ‘didn’t see Verstappen and wasn’t fighting him’ in clash

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by and

George Russell accepted his penalty for colliding with Max Verstappen during the Las Vegas Grand Prix, saying he did not realise his rival was trying to pass him.

The pair made contact at turn 12 as Verstappen tried to pass the Mercedes driver on the inside. Russell admitted he “just totally didn’t see him in the blind spot” as he turned in.

Russell said he didn’t even intend to put up a fight against Verstappen, as he was unlikely to keep the Red Bull behind, and he was focused on beating other drivers.

“I wasn’t expecting the overtake,” he said. “I wasn’t even really fighting him because we knew that Max wasn’t our race, we just had to keep our tyres alive.”

Although Russell only sustained light damage in the incident, the Safety Car was deployed due to the debris on the circuit, which compromised his race.

Poll: Vote for your 2023 Las Vegas Grand Prix Driver of the Weekend
“The only piece of damage was the wheel cover, which if anything probably would have helped the graining by having that extra bit of cooling,” he said. “So if it wasn’t for the Safety Car I would have continued and would have gone onto the podium.

“So I don’t really know what to say really. Just really frustrated with today, with the season as a whole. Can’t really catch a break.”

He was given a five-second time penalty for the incident, which dropped him from fourth place to eighth in the final results. The stewards also gave him two penalty points on his licence, which puts him on a total of four.

“It was a comfortable podium just thrown away, once again,” said Russell. “So it’s, as a season, really disappointing. Very frustrating. And now heading into Abu Dhabi only a few points between us and Ferrari.”

Poll: Rate the Race – 2023 Las Vegas Grand Prix
The pair clashed earlier this year at the sprint race in the Azerbaijan Grand Prix, where Verstappen strongly criticised his rival’s driving. But despite suffering front wing damage in the incident, Verstappen accepted his rival hadn’t intended to turn in on him.

“He didn’t do that on purpose,” said the Red Bull driver. “I think he just didn’t expect me to to pass him into that corner because that’s how it felt.

“I put it on on the inside and he just turned in like there was no one there. So I guess he just didn’t didn’t see me.”

Bringing the F1 news from the source

RaceFans strives to bring its readers news directly from the key players in Formula 1. We are able to do this thanks in part to the generous backing of our RaceFans Supporters.

By contributing £1 per month or £12 per year (or the equivalent in other currencies) you can help cover the costs involved in producing original journalism: Travelling, writing, creating, hosting, contacting and developing.

We have been proudly supported by our readers for over 10 years. If you enjoy our independent coverage, please consider becoming a RaceFans Supporter today. As a bonus, all our Supporters can also browse the site ad-free. Sign up or find out more via the links below:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2023 Las Vegas Grand Prix

Browse all 2023 Las Vegas 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...
Claire Cottingham
Claire has worked in motorsport for much of her career, covering a broad mix of championships including Formula One, Formula E, the BTCC, British...

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

45 comments on “Russell ‘didn’t see Verstappen and wasn’t fighting him’ in clash”

  1. Costly mistake. He needs to up his game. Cant do this on this level.

    1. I like George, but he is no LH or MV when it comes to avoiding the small mistakes that cost points.

      1. I agree. He is an asset but needs to get rid of these small mistakes.

    2. The stewards are clowns – that was a divebomb.

      1. Not at all. George was allowed plenty of space. If they collided it was George’s mistake. It is plain to see and not only the stewards say it, George himself freely admits it.
        But why bother? Whatever you say.

        1. https://youtu.be/Q9qSwDxF6YI?si=FZEV2qEV5lbLM8mn&t=207

          Impossible to go side-by-side – worse than Maldonado for sure. Max Maldonado is a more fitting name.

        2. Check out the link I sent you – it’s impossible to go side-by-side there. He’s soooooooooooooooooooooooo far behind, it’s not even funny.

          1. 1. I saw at least 5 overtakes there, so side by side seems very much possible; 2. Max did make the corner so a dive-bomb? No; 3. George owned up to the mistake.

          2. @freelittlebirds you’re litterally showing a link where it’s clear that Max wasn’t divebombing but was alongside at just slightly faster speed, and was getting the apex just fine. If as a driver you cannot go side by side, then you take a wider line on entry as George should have done once he was clearly beaten to the apex.

            If you want to see a divebomb, watch Hamilton on Raikkonen in Monza 2007. THAT’s a divebomb.

          3. @mattds I did watch the Monza 2007 again – Hamilton had cleared Raikonnen. I don’t think many of you understand the semantics of being in front and behind.

          4. Here’s an overtake by Leclerc on Perez on the last lap

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9qSwDxF6YI

            You clear the other car before you get to the corner. You don’t make the entire car’s width on the corner itself as the other driver is turning… aka a divebomb or the Verstappen Special as they call it in F1.

          5. oops, width as in length.

          6. @freelittlebirds oh sure he had “cleared” Raikkonen, by virtue of going so hot that he didn’t even make the lefthander, going fully to the left of the white line.

            No, you don’t “clear the other care before you get to the corner”. That is not how it works. You get in there, and if you corner and make the apex you are doing absolutely fine. Said it elsewhere: Max was at least partly alongside Rusell for all of 4 seconds, made the apex and corner fine, and as per FIA driving standards was entitled to being granted space by Russell.

            Directly quoting those FIA directives:

            1. Guidelines for overtaking on the inside of a corner:
            “In order for a car being overtaken to be required to give sufficient room to an overtaking car, the overtaking car needs to have a significant portion of the car alongside the car being overtaken and the overtaking manoeuvre must be done in a safe and controlled manner, while enabling the car to clearly remain within the limits of the track.
            When considering what is a ‘significant portion’ for an overtaking on the inside of a corner, among the various factors that will be looked at by the stewards when exercising their discretion, the stewards will consider if the overtaking car’s front tires are alongside the other car by no later than the apex of the corner.”

            Not even Russell agrees with you. Think about that.

          7. Not even Russell agrees with you. Think about that.

            First of all, accepting blame is not something drivers do. Russell is responding to Hamilton’s lead who’s been accepting blame recently which is really nice of him.

            Verstappen has never accepted blame for any of his mistakes so how is accepting blame relevant? What were the nicknames? Crashstappen and Maxcrash or Madmax? He’s earned them by driving recklessly.

            At 3:25 you can see Russell’s rear wheels. At 3:27, he’s trying to make a full car’s length into the corner. They collide at 3:27. So it’s not 4 seconds, it’s 1 second where Verstappen makes a lunge and tries to outbrake Russell into the corner leaving him no space to turn. It’s perfect definition of a divebomb.

            Get your facts straight.

            And Silverstone 2021 is clearly not an incident and needs to be corrected because Lewis could have overtaken on the corner by doing the same dive and perhaps sent Max to his rightful death but he backed out.

            In fact, almost all incidents should be reviewed with the new 2023 Verstappen rule interpretation applied. Many victories should be taken away retroactively because the penalties should have not been given and the other driver should have been penalized.

          8. Apparently using any words that involve a collision and the name of the WDC driver lead to modification (similar word that requires a person to review the content)….

      2. Do you even know what a dive bomb means? Friendly tip: it is a totally legit move.
        Moreover, come the apex, Max’s front axle was in front of George’s rear axle and had the inside line, so by the rules, Max had the corner.
        Also, George and Toto both admited fault. Talk about arguing over a losing point.

        1. @Dantera87 2,000 children in India said it was Max’s fault, 3,000 said it was Alonso’s and 5,000 Dutch people said it was George’s. I guess it was 50% George’s, 30% Alonso’s and 20% Max’s based on the demographic polls!

          But it does explain George’s strange comment. Clearly George didn’t watch the video to see how Max crept up on him and as a driver he should. I did for him and there was no way George was making that corner.

          I guess that’s what happens when 2 bad wheel-to-wheel drivers go racing… Neither of them has any clue what’s going on.

  2. What podium does he mean? Even without a SC, Perez had already some 15 sec gap to him, so he would always catch him after his stop. Leclerc and Verstappen were in their own race. Podium was never on.

    Once again, Mercedes were miles off the two teams and Ferrari will jump them to the second (if they really want that second spot I mean).

    1. What podium does he mean?

      Agreed. 4th was it, with no expectations to improve. And without Carlos’ undeserved 10P penalty and then spin at the start it would have been 5th

  3. BLS (@brightlampshade)
    19th November 2023, 11:48

    It’s been a clumsy season for Russel after a strong showing last season. Hamiltons now guaranteed 3rd whilst I think Russel is 8th?

    he’s had some bad luck but he’s had more self induced problems than luck.

  4. How dare he try and race during an important tyre preservation session? Who does he think he is, the world champion?

  5. That was really clumsy from Russell. He was in for a podium. Just like at Singapore. Those points are costing Mercedes a lot.

    1. He said he didn’t expect Max to take the corner like that because he could have passed him back, going to the next corner, but Max made sure that didn’t happen. It’s Russell’s fault for not anticipating the lunge I suppose, but in my book, if you are going to make a pass, you are responsible for making sure it’s clean. end of.

      1. It doesn’t work like that. George was responsible and penalized for it.

        1. No, that was a dive and all on Max. Russell had to completely yield there to allow Max to squeeze through…

          Another ultra-ridiculous call by the stewards this weekend. 4 for 4.

          Bad call for Sainz.
          Bad call for Verstappen impeding Ocon in qualifying
          Bad call on Turn 1 with Verstappen
          Bad call on divebomb with Verstappen on Russell

          3 free passes for Max…

          I feel Maldonado deserves an apology from the FIA, Racefans, and the entire racing community. If Max is allowed to drive that way, the guy was the best racer and cleanest driver and way ahead of his time.

          1. Let the hate flow through you. Feel it pulling you towards the dark side.
            Verstappen lives rent-free in your head.

          2. There’s no room enough for Max in a mosquito’s head

          3. @nvherman it belittles the driver when he should be doing drive through penalty after drive through penalty like real champions did.

          4. @freelittlebirds

            Bad call for Sainz.

            Agree.

            Bad call for Verstappen impeding Ocon in qualifying

            No. There can be no question of impeding when both are starting a hot lap. Racing each other during qualifying is not disallowed. There was nothing to decide on or even investigate. You have to brush up on your knowledge of the rules.

            Bad call on Turn 1 with Verstappen

            Disagree again here: the stewards cannot impose anything else. Suggestion can be given to give back the place, but that is not a “punishment” that is taken up in the rules, only a suggestion. If the driver does not comply to that or the suggestion is never given in the first place, then a 5 second penalty is standard.

            Again, these are the rules.

            Bad call on divebomb with Verstappen on Russell

            Also disagree. Not a divebomb (see above), Russell fully at fault, as per FIA driving standards.

  6. That looked like a dive to me… I’ve seen people penalized for much less.

    1. @freelittlebirds and if Hamilton had done it, you’d be the first to applaud an opportunistic overtaking manoevre. But it’s Verstappen and your bias is showing as usual

      1. you would be the one to call it a divebomb in this case. dont blame others for your bias

      2. @nvherman I think we’ve immortalized Maldonado here. That was a crazy divebomb.

        Everybody makes mistakes – Max is >50% when it comes to tight racing and they can be life-threatening. He just cannot race with anyone wheel-to-wheel when it matters. He just gets mentally blocked. I’ve never seen such bad driving in my life.

        1. @freelittlebirds the hyperbole and drama in your posts is incredible. As I’ve indicated above, if you want to see a crazy divebomb, you can take a look at Hamilton/Raikkonen in Monza 2007.

          Max’s move doesn’t come close to that. He was at least partially alongside for 4 seconds, showing that the speed differential and the distance he came from was never big to begin with. He did not overshoot the apex, which is another characteristic of a divebomb. Unusual for that corner, maybe, but he set it up well in advance and he was more than enough alongside to be given room by Russell, who turned in like nobody was there .

          1. @mattds here’s a clip of Hamilton/Raikonnen in Monza 2007.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzFDvZhntvQ
            That’s an overtake, not a divebomb.

            I’ve shared the clip where Verstappen is clearly a mile behind Russell and Russell can’t make the corner. If you think Hamilton was wrong at Silverstone, then Verstappen is 200% wrong here.

            I rest my case.

          2. @freelittlebirds you can rest your case all you want, that doesn’t make it one that holds any water. Your hyperbole isn’t helping you out. Verstappen is partially alongside for seconds (as opposed to Hamilton), with a speed slightly higher than Russell (as opposed to Hamilton), and is making the apex and that corner combination in full control (as opposed to Hamilton).

            Look, dropping the definition discussion: I don’t actually care what you do or don’t label as a divebomb, because the racing rules do not describe divebombs or account for them when assessing what the respective responsibilities of the drivers are. In the end the situation is clear in that Max, as per FIA racing standards, had a right to be given space, and Russell admitted as such. “The incident with Max was totally my fault.”
            Maybe you should tell Russell how he’s wrong.

            The comparison with Silverstone goes awry on a few points. One being that Russell on the outside turns to the apex and Max hits the apex, failing his responsibility to leave space on the inside for Max, where Max in Silverstone left more than a car’s width of space for Lewis, fulfilling his responsibility to leave space on the inside for Lewis, who in turn didn’t get close to the apex.
            This is why Lewis and Russell where punished in both cases – because it is not a valid comparison and because who fulfilled or failed his responsibility differs.

      3. Don’t know why you try with these posters.

        MadMax is basically half blind and Michael is still clutching his straws on how the hype has sent him into permanent misery.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          20th November 2023, 2:21

          If you don’t think that’s a dive, then I don’t know what to say – so there are no dives in F1 in overtakes. You can just come from 3 miles from behind and stop the other car from turning which by the way makes Silverstone 2021 completely legal from Lewis’ perspective. That requires an apology from the FIA, Max, Horner, and every single Vestappen fan who should be applauding Lewis for that maneuver regardless of outcome.

          Like I said we need to bring Pastor Maldonado back and perhaps give him Max’s car – he deserves it, right?

          1. You can just come from 3 miles from behind

            Which he didn’t, so all is good, right?

  7. @mattds watch the video again and look at Verstappen trying to make the overtake as they are heading into the corner – there’s no angle where Verstappen can turn and Russell can also make it, unless Russell slows down massively and does a wide slow turn to allow Max through.

    He’s trying to come next to Russell and he’s so far behind his front wheels still.

    It’s a divebomb and any classification other than that is just poor judgment and bias from the other person. The previous overtake was awesome but this is Monza 2021 or pick another of Max’s desperate overtakes where he completely loses track of the fact that 2 drivers are there.

    1. @mattds watch the video again and look at Verstappen trying to make the overtake as they are heading into the corner – there’s no angle where Verstappen can turn and Russell can also make it, unless Russell slows down massively and does a wide slow turn to allow Max through.

      True. And your issue with this is what exactly? If Russell wants to prevent that happening, it’s on him to cover the inside and not leave the door open.

      He’s trying to come next to Russell and he’s so far behind his front wheels still.

      This is wrong. He has more than half a car next to Russell pre turn-in. Furthermore, he’s been partially alongide for a few seconds (negating the idea that this would be a “divebomb”), meaning Russell could absolutely know he was there. Lastly, having more than half a car next to Russell even pre turn-in means he has a right to be given space as the FIA guidelines for this are having as little as just the front wheels alongside as late as the actual apex.

      Max was comfortably in line with those requirements.

      It’s a divebomb and any classification other than that is just poor judgment and bias from the other person.

      This bears zero value. “Hamilton in Monza 2007 was a divebomb and any classification other than that is just poor judgement and bias from the other person.” See how saying things is easy? Do you now agree with Monza being a divebomb or does the other person saying it in this case is somehow not enough for you to accept it?

      The previous overtake was awesome but this is Monza 2021 or pick another of Max’s desperate overtakes where he completely loses track of the fact that 2 drivers are there.

      Opportunistic, maybe, but no idea why this would be “desperate”. Quit the hyperbole.

  8. I have answered it and here are the comments by Verstappen

    “I put it on on the inside and he just turned in like there was no one there. So I guess he just didn’t didn’t see me”

    Guess where that happened and Verstappen didn’t get a penalty but Hamilton did. It starts with Silver and rhymes with Stone.

    Here’s what Russell said:

    I wasn’t expecting the overtake,I wasn’t even really fighting him because we knew that Max wasn’t our race, we just had to keep our tyres alive.”

    just totally didn’t see him in the blind spot

    Please tell me, where did Russell accept blame?

    He said he didn’t see him because Verstappen lunged as Russell was about to turn. No one sees another driver dive-bombing in a F1 car. If they did, they’d probably avoid contact, right?

    You said to me

    Quit the hyperbole

    You have been found to lie probably as much as Christian Horner claiming 4 seconds of Verstappen being side-by-side when he can clearly see Russell’s rear wheel 2 seconds before impact.

    You also seem to have liberally interpreted Russell’s comments as accepting blame.

    You also claimed that Hamilton’s overtake on Raikonnen was a divebomb when it was clearly an overtake that Raikonnen expected. Not saying that Hamilton hasn’t divebombed unsuccessfully before – all drivers have.

    What would be fair and appropriate for me to say to you “Please quit the lies and disinformation and stick to facts”. It doesn’t feel like something I would say but it does feel appropriate.

    1. Please tell me, where did Russell accept blame?

      Here, for one.

      1. Thank you that does state that he accepted blame for it.

        When the stewards made their judgment Russell had not accepted blame. They only thing that was available was Max’s claim that George hadn’t seen him which would have happened in a divebomb.

        So Russell’s claim and the stewards are dependent on each other as Russell had already been given a penalty. Arguing with the stewards post-fact would only make things worse for him and gain him nothing.

        And what does acceptance of blame have to do with anything? Did Verstappen accept blame for any of his incidents? At Silverstone, he didn’t see Lewis, right? Had Lewis claimed that he didn’t see me, would that have made Max automatically at fault? It seems it would have if we apply Las Vegas F1 rules.

        What about Monza? He claimed Lewis was at fault but he got the penalty so clearly driver assignment of blame is not really relevant and happens post fact.

  9. In this case Russell’s acceptance means that you’re trying to defend a point of view not even shared by the person affected most by the collision and the penalty.

    In fact, you’re neatly aligning with Max: sticking to your point of view while the stewards decided otherwise. What that means? Don’t know, maybe you can tell me.

Comments are closed.