Kevin Magnussen, Haas, Monaco, 2024

Did any driver deserve a penalty for race-stopping Monaco GP crash?

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Whenever two drivers collide it’s not unusual for each to express anger at the other’s role in the crash.

But following yesterday’s collision which caused the Monaco Grand Prix to be suspended for almost three-quarters of an hour, Sergio Perez’s main complaint was that the incident hadn’t even been investigated.

Should it have been – and should either he or rival Kevin Magnussen been held responsible for their destructive shunt?


The collision happened on the first lap as cars tackled the uphill run from the first ‘true’ corner, Sainte Devote, to the second, Massenet. At this point the track winds left and right and the ordinary racing line plots a reasonably straight course between the barriers.

However at the start of a race drivers often climb the hill side-by-side with their rivals and have to give them more room. As Magnussen moved to the right-hand of Perez heading up the hill, the pair made contact, triggering a huge crash.

At the moment of contact, Perez was steering slightly to the left
At the moment of contact, Perez was steering slightly to the right
Magnussen began to draw alongside Perez as they accelerated up the hill
Magnussen began to draw alongside Perez as they accelerated up the hill
At the moment of contact, Magnussen was slightly further alongside
At the moment of contact, Magnussen was slightly further alongside

Hulkenberg's view of the pair as they collided
Hulkenberg’s view of the pair as they collided

What they said

Sergio Perez, Red Bull, Monaco, 2024
Perez and the Haas drivers retired due to huge crash
Perez said Magnussen should have realised he wasn’t far enough alongside the Red Bull to pass and backed out:

It’s lap one, it’s just important if you’re not in the right position, automatically you’re going to end up losing.

I was getting out of the corner. If you see my onboard, there’s no point where you see Kevin. I was just pretty surprised that he kept it flat at that point because it was just very unnecessary.
Sergio Perez

Magnussen believes he was far enough alongside Perez to be left space:

From my point of view I had a good part of my front along Perez’s rear. When he went to the wall, I just got pushed into the wall and made contact with him.

I trusted that he was going to leave a space for me since I was there. It’s not a corner that you’re braking into. It’s just like a little bend on the straight so you have to have a car width otherwise you leave the guy no option.
Kevin Magnussen

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Magnussen’s team mate Nico Hulkenberg, who was also eliminated in the same collision, described it as follows:

I think it’s somewhat a racing incident. It looked maybe a bit optimistic from Kevin, but I don’t know, Checo could have also maybe seen him and left room. So unfortunate, obviously, the outcome.
Nico Hulkenberg

The incident in video

This angle captured the moment the crash began:

The official verdict

The stewards did not investigate the incident.

The stewards have previously taken a more lenient stance on collisions which happen on the first lap of the race. However they did penalise Esteban Ocon for a collision with Pierre Gasly on the first lap of yesterday’s race.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Your verdict

Who do you think was responsible for the collision? Should the stewards issue a penalty? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

Should any driver have been penalised for the first-lap crash in Monaco?

  • No opinion (5%)
  • No driver should have been penalised (25%)
  • Perez should have been penalised (20%)
  • Magnussen should have been penalised (51%)

Total Voters: 110

Loading ... Loading ...

A RaceFans account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed instead of the voting form.

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

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.

66 comments on “Did any driver deserve a penalty for race-stopping Monaco GP crash?”

  1. ”Magnussen should’ve been penalised” was an easy choice.

    1. I also went for that, but surprisingly, while it’s still the most voted choice, the sum of people who thought it was a racing incident or that it was perez’s fault, is higher than the ones who think it’s magnussen’s fault, so perez is overall not considered innocent.

    2. Why? Perez should and could have easily given Magnussen more room – and Magnussen could of course not have attempted to overtake.. but that is kind of the purpose of racing. So I think both are a bit at fault and none deserve a penalty.

      1. José Lopes da Silva
        27th May 2024, 19:50

        If they are side by side, what rule gives Perez the right to turn as if no one is there?
        In Macao there is the the fixed yellow flag at Melco Hairpin forbidding overtaking. No such thing at the Montée du Beau Rivage.

  2. Magnussen and Perez both deserved a penalty. It was a silly and entirely pointless incident.

  3. Both to blame but Checo should be smarter than to pinch KMag when there is no run off area. I’d say I blame Checo more because he could see him and had plenty of room to his left.

  4. They both got what they deserved. Poor driving from both so I’m ok with no penalties. Shame for Hülkenberg through…

    1. In such cases I’d like a different approach by the stewards: we have 2 guilty drivers who ruined a 3rd driver’s race, so the sentence imo should be allowing hulkenberg to take the restart and not magnussen nor perez.

      Because otherwise, no matter the penalty you give to magnussen and perez, hulkenberg’s race is still ruined.

      1. The Dolphins
        27th May 2024, 19:04

        so the sentence imo should be allowing hulkenberg to take the restart and not magnussen nor perez

        @esploratore1 was restarting even an option for Nico? I believe the damage he suffered took him out of the race.

  5. I still mantain Magnussen is the one to blame. He was the one that poked his nose into a disappearing gap. There are battles that you should just avoid and he was the one a better view of the situation.

    Overly aggressive and unnecesary.

    1. An Sionnach
      27th May 2024, 17:40

      Yes. What was he even doing there in the first place?

      1. Davethechicken
        27th May 2024, 18:57

        Erm Magnusson was overtaking on a straight????
        If you look at the fan footage from above and behind the accident Perez was much further to the right at the point of collision than the cars ahead went. He had loads of room to his left about 2 car widths but squeezed Magnusson instead who had a better exit from turn 1 and more momentum

        1. Take a look at that fan footage again! They were side by side when magnussens rear right touched the wall, he lost his car and bang! 100% magnussens fault.

          1. Davethechicken
            27th May 2024, 21:23

            When I look again I see Perez is further right than the cars ahead and has 2 car widths to his left. From onboard he saw Mag.
            Like it or not Mag was attempting an overtake after a better exit from T1 and to just drive someone off the track is not allowed.
            Stroll passed Sargent with a better exit from T1 totally cleanly later in the race so there is no argument to say one cannot pass there.

          2. I looked again and I’ve changed my mind. You are right that Magnussen hit the wall with his right rear then panicked and moved toward Pérez probably trying to keep his nose from pivoting into the wall. The latter maybe was in the process of a nasty move to squeeze him but Pérez didn’t cause the collision. Ironically maybe if Magnussen didn’t hit the wall he would have been further alongside and then Pérez would have been in the clear wrong.

    2. Magnussen got a better traction and therefore was faster than Checo at that moment. He saw a gap and went for it as most drivers would do.
      Perez looked in his right mirror 3 times so must have known that Magnussen was there.
      The gap disapeared because Checo decided to go slightly tot the right instead of leaving space for the car that had already his front weel a little bit further than the back wheel of his car.

      Race incident? Yes, but is there is need to blame someone it’s Checo.

      And no, not an Magnussen fan. But therefore it’s no reason tot blame him for everything when things go wrong.

      1. He saw a gap that was always going to close. He was faster but just being faster out of the previous corner doesn’t entitle you to track position, you’ve got to make it stick. And that was never going to happen up there. Reckless from Magnussen.

        1. ElectronTom
          28th May 2024, 9:13

          He saw a gap that was not necessarily going to close, if Checo had just followed the rest of the pack. Checo decided while checking his mirrors 3 times, that he would try to squeeze Kmag out of the gap. Clearly Checo should have left room to race.

      2. Perez was judging the gap of his front right to the barrier, I doubt he was looking behind to see the approaching magnussen, its not like that’s normal and therefore he had to watch out for that. If you look at the car ahead, Perez was taking the racing line and very likely more concerned with the other car behind him to his left. Magnussen should have backed out.

        1. C’mon, if Perez has to look sideways to know how far he is from the barrier then he’s doing something totally wrong. You can just estimate that without twisting your head. You can clearly see that in the other onboard cams of the other pilots as well. No one of them turned his head to the right to as far as Checo did to check the distance between their cars and the barrier.

          And if he was more concerned about the car behind him he would have turned his head to the left at least once to look in the mirror. He didn’t do that at all. And even if he was concerned about the car behind him then he would have stayed a bit more to the left than going to the right.

  6. When I first saw the incident, or rather the first couple of replays of it, I put all the blame fully on Magnussen. That was a recklessly optimistic move. However, after seeing Ant and Buttons closer look at the “skypad”, I was as surprised as Button to see Perez clearly turn his head to the right-hand mirror going up the hill. He almost certainly knew another car was that far alongside him and therefor should have left more room. Why would he be so stupid to gamble on the other car simply giving up? He (Perez) surely would have had him in the next corner anyway.
    I think the incident should have been investigated though. But I also think the verdict would have been that they where both to blame, so no penalty would have been handed out as per the current rules.
    I think my consensus is that I would have penalized both Peres and Magnussen for taking out Hulkenberg. But that’s not how it works.

    1. I think the incident should have been investigated though. But I also think the verdict would have been that they where both to blame, so no penalty would have been handed out as per the current rules.

      That was pretty much my view. I think it would have been difficult to find either drive ‘wholly to blame which appears to be the criteria for penalties.

      But the non-investigation was a definite kop-out and avoidance of the issue. If they investigated and came to what I believe the right conclusion (no penalty), then it would have created a new political problem given how close KM is to a ban and that he was the driver behind!

      1. @chimaera2003 I believe the wording is “wholly or predominantly to blame”, so if it was say 60/40 then you could still penalise the driver 60% to blame. Agree that the real issue is not even investigating it, especially when it ruined the race of another completely innocent driver.

        1. Is 60% predominant? Is 51% predominant? Where do you set the threshold? 3-sigma?

  7. Neil (@neilosjames)
    27th May 2024, 17:25

    I went for ‘no opinion’, as it’s a difficult one. I don’t think either driver was entirely to blame, and I think both did things that were a bit unwise, but I’m finding myself agreeing with the stewards that it wasn’t worth investigating.

    Magnussen probably did the least intelligent thing (I wouldn’t stick my nose where he did even if I was playing an F1 game with flashbacks turned on), but it was still a move he was entitled to make on a straight. I think sticking your nose into an obviously closing wedge like that in a corner would have made it his fault and probably a penalty, but then it’s not really a corner.

    Perez wasn’t smart either – he would have been aware he’d got a slow exit from T1 and should have been more mindful that someone might be attempting to pass – he should have seen Magnussen and left a car width, as is required on a straight when someone’s alongside. So if it had happened on a normal straight, I’d have thought Perez deserved a penalty.

    But the bit of track it happened on is a strange hybrid between a corner and a straight. I think for that reason they’re probably both a little bit wrong, and also both a little bit right… so no investigation, no penalty is probably the right call, but I can’t fully make my mind up.

  8. Genuine question, if the exact crash happened on lap 25 would there have been penalties?

    If it would on lap 25 then it should on lap 1.

    1. It looks like the opinion is quite divided on who was to blame, therefore if the stewards reached the same conclusion it’d be called a racing incident even midrace, I guess.

      1. Pretty much. Both drivers could have made smarter decisions.

  9. I don’t think either driver should be penalised.

    I’d argue Perez is predominantly to blame, he’s slower off the previous corner and once Magnussen is between the axles the only way to avoid a crash is for Perez to veer left. Sergio checks the mirror twice and is clearly cautious through one and is aware Kevin is a) there and b) Kevin.

    That said, if I was KMag, and I was 3 points away from a race ban starting on the back row, I would have backed out. There was nothing to gain from passing a Red Bull for 18th.

    Similar to Ocon’s crash, it’s totally pointless and high risk given that these drivers – and I could include Perez in this list – are marketing their experience as a reason to keep them on the grid. All three should have known better on lap one in Monaco.

    1. I’d argue Perez is predominantly to blame, he’s slower off the previous corner and once Magnussen is between the axles the only way to avoid a crash is for Perez to veer left. Sergio checks the mirror twice and is clearly cautious through one and is aware Kevin is a) there and b) Kevin.

      Slightly different phraseology for what I voiced elsewhere, we’re thinking alike.

      KMag said he trusted Perez to leave the space once he was partly into it – foolish. Perez has history of not doing that. In this instance he does a slight move right and exacerbates the situation.
      Perez said he thought KMag would back off – foolish. KMag has lots of history of not backing off.
      Maybe it was a co-ordinated effort to get at least on Haas past (left or right)?

      The stewards declined to investigate – common sense. Deciding which one was in possession of any working braincells could have had them fully occupied through to the other side of the Canadian GP.

      One can only extend commiserations to Hulkenberg as the innocent victim.

  10. I feel the people blaming Kmag are taking his past history into account, which is something the stewards cannot do. Kmag went for a gap that *may* have caused a crash, but Perez turned his wheel right into Kmag, which made a crash inevitable.

    1. I tend towards the opposite view – people blaming Perez are doing so because they dislike him, and/or due to exasperation that he was even racing a Haas in the first place.

      Perez could have done more to avoid the collision but that doesn’t make the incident his fault. He was entitled to take the line he did. Magnussen had no right to space where he was, and should have backed out once it became clear that the door was closing.

      1. I’m no fan of Magnussen, even more a RBR Checo fan. But i do hope you realize that at such speeds en that situation backing out is not so simple. At the moment that Checo came up tot the same speed as Magnussen he also moved slightly to the right and the contact was made. Even if Kevin wanted to he just had no time to back out.

  11. They should penalise both for ruining Hulk’s race.

  12. I don’t understand how you can blame Perez for this. Maybe he could have left more space but he is not obliged to leave space. Because of the bent it was a closing gap and Magnussen should have backed out. No penalty is fine but should have been the same for Occon. I guess the teams are penalized enough with the damage and will discuss this internally.

    1. It’s pretty simple: Perez looked, knew (or should have known) it would be a crash if he continued right… And he still did.

      Don’t get me wrong, KMag was also a being (very) stupid, but they share the blame.

  13. due to Ocon’s newest crash with a team mate i went to Youtube to watch all his incidents with Perez back in 2018.

    There’s one in Spa in which a similar thing happens, Perez squeezes Ocon to the wall and they touch. And Perez says “i knew he was there, but i have to protect my line”, or something like that, so i believe he had the same line of thought yesterday with Magnussen, as it can clearly be seen that he was looking at Mag on his right rearview mirror all the way up the hill, but the outcome was much more severe.

    I hardly judge Perez innocent this time.

  14. It almost seems that ever since Magnussen got to the brink of a race ban, the stewards are now penalty shy. Magnussen deserves a race ban!

  15. Stewards need to investigate it and announce “no penalty,” not neglect their responsibilities.

  16. Why did you not offer “both drivers should have been penalised”?
    That gets my vote.

  17. Davethechicken
    27th May 2024, 19:07

    I would put more blame on Perez than Magnusson. I think Perez deserved a penalty.

    Perez clearly saw him and squeezed him knowing what could happen.
    Magnusson had every right to attempt to overtake, it is a flat out straight. Checo could have left room but chose not to. He had plenty of room to his left. Magnusson had a better exit from T1 and had momentum.
    To those that say you are not allowed or can’t overtake there, why not? It is Monaco, and as overtaking possibilities go it is as good as it gets. Indeed we saw Stroll overtake Sargent in that exact place!!!
    Do note the onboard position on the track when Stroll passed Sargent, Logan did not squeeze him.

  18. Perez squeezed him like he did with Ocon back at Spa when they raced with Force India – twice, but mainly on that second one we see the similarities. As Perez said back then, many drivers protect the line and there were no room for him to go. Should Magnussen have backed off, very much so, but it also shows two pressured drivers who are looking for something that might not be there. Perez knew he squeezed him, but would most likely still have held the position into the tight corners. Magnussen trying to overtake there was overly optimistic. So as Hulkenberg stated it – so unnecessary.

  19. Not even investigating it tells you all you need to know. They don’t want to hand out penalty points which will cause a driver ban, as they’ve avoided doing so on several occasions now, but they wouldn’t necessarily want to give an official justification to clear Magnussen of any wrongdoing in case it sets precedent for future incidents where they would want to penalise the same manoeuvre.

    If they thought it was Perez’s fault, I’m sure he would have been penalised and handed penalty points.

    1. All of this!! Much better wording than what I wrote above.

  20. Voted neither driver as it was a first lap racing incident, but someone might want to ask Steiner what he thinks. I do think something is wrong, very wrong with MAG. Not sure what it is but I think his bad luck this season is for the most part, his own fault. It will be fun to see how many crashes he can get away with before he gets a race ban.

  21. Richard Ashby
    27th May 2024, 22:44

    I believe Magnussen should have seen it coming and backed out but I do believe it was Perez who caused the collision. From the aerial shot none of the two to three cars in front of Perez were that far right even further up the straight while following the racing line than Perez was. Perez looked to his mirror and squeezed Magnussen thinking a sane man would back out but we all know that Magnussen isn’t sane and was going to continue on believing that Perez would follow the actual rules and leave a cars width which he didn’t do. None of this you have to be more than 50% of the way there nonsense especially on a straight, I get it when the cars are going for an apex but on a straight? That has been a theme all season long even in supporting races of the Stewards not enforcing leaving a cars width especially in races where there is runoff room. I believe it was Miami in both the F1 Academy and F1 race where a car in complete control alongside another car and in no danger of not being able to make the corner was run off the track by the inside car and even blamed for the incident.

  22. There’s no way Perez should have been penalised. Whether Magnusses should be or not depends on whether that section of the corner is defined as a straight or a corner ultimately.

    If it’s defined as a corner Magnussen had no right to be there, if it’s defined as a straight Perez had no right to move over like that once MAG was alongside.

    Either was first lap with Hulkenberg looking up the inside, no penalty is a just outcome.

    1. There’s no way Perez should have been penalised.

      if it’s defined as a straight Perez had no right to move over like that once MAG was alongside

      So in that case Perez should have been penalised?
      It’s definitely not a corner. A bendy bit of circuit with walls either side? I think Perez was obliged to leave room. But as both were clumsy, racing incident. I can imagine two better drivers negotiating that section without contact.

    2. Going up the hill after turn one, there is a right-left-right kink in the road, where the turns become increasingly tighter as you go through them. Some circuit maps shows the corner number for turn two at the second of those slight turns. But out of all the maps I have looked through, the more detailed ones (and the one shown on all official F1 graphics on the website and broadcasts) has the number two at the last of those kinks. The initial contact between Perez and Magnussen happen at the entry of the first of those kinks.
      I’m not saying Perez definately should have been penalized, but to me it all looks very much like the incident happen before turn two. So he could have been.

  23. Maybe they should actually applaud KMag for having a crack at overtaking – at least someone did.

    Instead of penalising either of them, they should penalise all the teams and strategists for setting F2 times as the target lap times for their drivers.

  24. It’s pretty difficulty to imagine a scenario where Magnussen driving between Perez and that stretch of wall doesn’t end in contact at some point. So he takes some blame. But it just baffles me that Perez looks 2 or 3 times and still decides to drift right. Why?? Perez caused the actual incident to happen no matter how over-ambitious, nonsensical or ill-advised Magnussen’s move was.
    Racing incident, being generous, or penalize both for taking out Hulkenburg, probably the better decision.

    1. It’s not that difficult to imagine. I’m doing it now…. there you go, Perez is leaving a little more room and… yep there is no contact.

  25. Perez could have moved over then what? There is no way to go through massanet side by side. That was a doomed move such as it was. Once you are over the camber on the outside it’s a guaranteed garage sale.

    That’s not an absolute basis for a penalty since a lot of things could have happened before the corner, in theory. Perez’ car could have entered a wormhole or something. But it means Magnussens move was extremely ill advised.

  26. Could Perez have left more room? Sure, but he shouldn’t have to because there was no way in hell Magnussen was ever going to make a pass around the outside of Perez there.

    1. Davethechicken
      28th May 2024, 7:04

      You can’t squeeze a driver on the straight. End of story for me. Perez should take the blame.
      You can argue that KMag would or wouldn’t have got passed, but Perez had absolutely no right to take him and Hulk out by pushing KMag into a barrier.

      Lance passed Logan later in the race at that exact part of the track in a very similar move.
      He got a better exit than Sargent from T1 too.

  27. What I think this analysis is missing is everyone thinks this is some weird scenario, and it isn’t, it should be treated like a normal corner. Consider the below driver standard guideline:

    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

    So the only question here is, was Magnussen far enough along the inside of Perez by the time they reached the corner (in this case the corner is just a kink, but should not be treated any less differently). In my opinion Magnussen wasn’t far enough on the inside by the time they got to the critical part of the turn in point for the corner, i.e. where the track narrowed and Perez took the normal racing line. Kevin wasn’t far enough along side and as such it should be a penalty for causing a collision.

  28. I see it similar to Sargeant-Magnussen accident in Miami

    Most people agreed it was Magnussen’s fault there. In Monaco he also clip the wall before making contact with Perez, making him to turn left into Perez to correct the car direction.

  29. It was the most interesting thing that happened all race, so they should both get a medal :)
    On the serious side, Perez was aware that KMag was there, and still pushed him, or should i say, he was confident that KMag would back off as the gap narrowed. But it all happens so fast, that noone could have reacted early enlugh to avoid the crash, because Perez insisted to keep that line up the hill. Had he leaved some space, he could have kept both Haas drivers behind him, as the next turn is going left anyways.
    Racing incidident imo. When i watched it live, i blamed KMag, even though i’m from Denmark, But watching the slowmo aferwards, changed my opinion.

    1. +1 for racing incident. Anything can happen in F1 and usually does.

      We can watch slow motion clips and be armchair expert all we want. But these guys have to take their decisions in hundredths of a second with zero option of replaying or changing their split second decision at the time it happens. I agree with you – KMag probably thought he saw a gap and he went for it, that’s what a racing driver does. And Perez probably thought KMag would back off.

      Yes, it was a pity that Hulkenberg got caught up in it through no fault of his own. Same could be said for Marcus Ericsson at the Indy 500 – I guess Indycar could penalize Blomquist for spinning right in front of ME and taking out Pietro Fittipaldi as well, but what good would it do?

      Race is run, penalty has already been issued in the form of zero points, move on.

      1. Should probably add that it was the contact between the cars of Callum Ilott and Pietro Fittipaldi that resulted in the PF retirement. It was a chain reaction – same for Hulkenberg in Monaco.

  30. It would be best for both of them to be punished for being involved in an accident that could have easily been avoided. These are milion dolar F1 drivers, even casual drivers can guess what can happen if you put your nose between a car and a narrowing track or what happens to if you squeeze your opponent on the narrowing track wich covered with barries.

    Another point both were behaving weird in recent races, one of them became addicted to accidents, the other got used to making uncanny movements at the race starts.

  31. Ugh! What a pathetic bunch of comments. The continued bigotry towards Perez is sickening!
    When did Magnussen get along side Perez? Never. (His front left might have gotten a couple of inches ahead of P’s right rear.) The track line turns right. They were not beside each other. That is not an overtake, that is harassment, and Magnussen needs to lose his license for his dangerous driving.
    Since when is the car in front responsible? Only if your Spanish, according to Alonso, and he may be right!
    What would you all be saying if people behind the fence had been killed?
    The fact that the stewards ignore this outrageous first lap hooliganism has now become a damning and serious safety problem!

    1. Captain_Slow
      29th May 2024, 12:46

      So the logic is:
      When Magnussen is in front of Albon and takes the racing line touching Albons tip of his front wing, because of Albon not pulling out at Jedah – Magnussen is predominantly to blame and given penalty points.
      When Perez is in front of Magnussen and takes the racing line with Magnussen at least having his front wheels ahead of Perez’ rear wheels and gets squeezed against the wall – Magnussen is predominantly to blame and given penalty points.

      Sorry, but that’s a pathetic comment – and logic….

  32. I believe Magnussen was predominantly to blame, with Perez not exactly blameless either. Since “predominantly” is the threshold for a penalty, I think Magnussen should have been penalised.

  33. Racing incident for me. It’s Magnussen’s fault they crashed because he stuck his car somewhere where a crash was always going to happen but he was fighting and he’s entitled to do that – stupid as it is. You can say “Perez should have given him space” but I doubt he knew Magnussen was still there and he just took the racing line.

    Looking at the screenshot above where Magnussen doesn’t even have his rear tyre level with Perez, you can already see what’s going to happen. Then he pulls further alongside and Perez takes the racing line as he was 100% obviously always going to do. Even if Perez had left him space, what happens then? There’s no way he’s going to overtake him around the outside at Massenet. It’s a huge risk to take for very little chance of any reward.

    1. Captain_Slow
      29th May 2024, 13:09

      Fully agree Magnussen wasn’t far enough alongside to call it side-by-side racing. The situation is Perez gets poor tracktion out of turn 1, Magnussen sees it and puts his car to the inside hoping the poor traction from Perez will open a gap – it doesn’t, but at the time he sees the opening, there is no way of knowing how Perez will come put of the corner.
      Magnussen’s fault is that he pursues the opportunity even after it’s not here. On the other hand Perez is to the far left (outside) of turn 1 and is the only car to come across the track so early on the climb (while having poor traction). There is no reason for Perez to cross the white (painted) line as early as he does. Perez was well aware that Magnussen was there – in fact that was why he drove the line he did to cut Magnussen off.
      Perez sends Magnussen into the wall before the bend on the straight, where it would have been natural for Magnussen to pull out – which I don’t think he would have, so result is the same, but to say it is Magnussen fault that Perez deliberately squeezes him against the wall by driving a line no other driver did, is stretching it.

Comments are closed.