Former Formula 1 driver Johnny Herbert, one of the stewards during last weekend’s Austrian Grand Prix, says there was no harsher penalty they could have given over the collision between the race leaders.
They issued Max Verstappen a 10-second time penalty and two endorsement points on his licence for causing a collision with Lando Norris while they were fighting over the lead.Herbert was present as the drivers’ advisor as part of the four-person stewarding team, alongside Felix Holter, Matthew Selley and Wilhelm Singer. He said there was no doubt among them who was to blame for the incident on lap 64.
“When we were watching it, it immediately came down to whose fault was it,” he said in comments reported by the Daily Express. “And it was Max’s.”
The stewards stated Verstappen’s penalty was applied “in line with precedents” and Herbert said there was no stricter penalty available.
“That is the hardest one that can be applied under FIA guidelines that we operate under as stewards,” said Herbert, a three-times grand prix winner. “McLaren have said it should have been harsher, but that is the game all teams play.
“If someone had flipped over or been barrel-rolling down the track I don’t know if that would have changed things. Forcing a driver off the circuit or causing an incident is what it came under. That was the maximum sanction we could have taken.”
Only one driver has been given a more severe penalty than Verstappen’s for an on-track incident this year. Fernando Alonso was given a drive-through penalty, applied after the race, for “potentially dangerous” driving when he slowed abruptly in front of George Russell at the Australian Grand Prix. Herbert was one of the stewards who handed down this decision on what was considered an unusual case.
However the stewards have issued more than two penalty points to drivers who have caused collisions this year. Alonso was given three penalty points for a collision with Carlos Sainz Jnr during the sprint race in China, where Herbert was not on the stewarding panel.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
2024 Austrian Grand Prix
- Austrian GP clash will have taught Norris how to race Verstappen – Ricciardo
- Verstappen was “lucky” tyre damage didn’t force him to retire like Norris
- Pirelli introducing new C6 tyre to improve racing on street tracks next year
- Norris admits ‘overreacting’ but queries why Verstappen avoided track limits penalty
- Norris and Verstappen’s Austrian GP collision “blown out of proportion” – rivals
Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
2nd July 2024, 17:31
“That is the hardest one that can be applied under FIA guidelines that we operate under as stewards,”
While I haven’t seen one for a while, is it really the case that a drive through penalty and a 10 second stop and go no longer “can be applied” no matter what happens?
This was a long time ago, but it is a good one to compare it to. In Bahrain 2016, Bottas got a drive through for a first corner incident, which even back then usually are treated in a more lenient manner than later on in the race. He misjudged his breaking distance and contacted Hamilton which gave him a bit of damage and made him lose 8 places. Bottas also damaged his own front wing.
This got Bottas a drive through penalty, which is basically nearly 3 times as much time lost as a 10 second penalty.
I would say what Verstappen did was pretty much as bad as this. So from Herbert’s wording, is it actually true that penalties such as a drive through and a stop and go no longer exist?
All this said, I think a 10 second time penalty was the correct decision for Verstappen, and previous incidents such as the example above were far too harsh.
Red Andy (@red-andy)
2nd July 2024, 18:54
Drive through and stop/go penalties still exist, but according to Herbert can’t be given for causing a collision, for which the maximum penalty is 10s. Which is strange since, this season, 10s has become the “standard” penalty for a variety of infractions, so it appears that there is nowhere higher for the stewards to go if there are aggravating factors (for example, a collision caused deliberately or in retaliation for a previous incident).
Some other offences still attract the more severe penalties – for example entering a closed pit lane will get you a stop/go penalty. As the article notes, Alonso also got a stop/go penalty in Australia (albeit converted to a time penalty) when Russell crashed.
Nick T.
2nd July 2024, 20:16
Herbert gave Alonso a 20 second penalty for not even touching Russell though. Herbert being allowed to be a steward is a joke. Not just cause of his feud with Alonso, but because he’s also made a lot of comments about some other current drivers that bring his neutrality into question.
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
3rd July 2024, 7:33
Well but now it is Lando time!” were
the last words of his article (not the Daily Mail) it may be the DM was using his quotes from the cryptogambling place .
He later before moved on to his thoughts about Silverstone and Goodwood
Crawliin-from-the-wreckage- Special Unhinged Edition (@davedai)
3rd July 2024, 7:44
Should have read ” later moved on”
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
2nd July 2024, 19:02
You are mistaken on the time lost for a drive through: it’s twice a 10-second time penalty, not 3x, 3x is the stop and go.
Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
2nd July 2024, 21:18
@esploratore1
I agree I misunderstood a little there. However, what is the time that is actually lost in the pit lane itself plus the slowing down and having to speed up in the entry and exit? Surely it can’t always be 20 seconds. I could be wrong but, does it not usually take additional extra time in these areas? Happy to be corrected.
Red Andy (@red-andy)
3rd July 2024, 6:43
It’s normally around 20 seconds, but depends on the track. At Silverstone, for example, it’s much less, as the pit lane cuts out a bigger than usual section of the circuit.
Jeanrien (@jeanrien)
3rd July 2024, 10:00
@thegianthogweed The time loss is actually what you mention minus the time it takes a car on track to drive from start of deceleration to end of acceleration as Andy hints to above.
So it varies a bit depending on pit and track layouts.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
2nd July 2024, 19:03
And as for past examples, we have vettel and hamilton at baku 2017: vettel purposely hit hamilton at very low speed in SC regime and was given a stop and go penalty.
Nikos (@exeviolthor)
3rd July 2024, 8:00
Yes, but Vettel clearly did this on purpose as retaliation to Hamilton supposedly break testing him. What he did was similar to a road rage. Being behind the safety car made the offence an even more serious one as they are supposed to go slowly and safely to make sure that on-track personnel are not endangered.
I was actually surprised that Vettel was not black flagged at the time.
bernasaurus (@bernasaurus)
3rd July 2024, 13:40
I like the phrase ‘safety car regime’ I wish it was used more often in F1 when speaking English. It differentiates from just ‘Safety Car’ and describes it better than ‘Safety Car Period’ or ‘Under the Safety Car’.
I’m not in charge of language however, so asking that we switch terminology isn’t going to happen. And now I’ve imagined Crofty saying ‘safety car regime’ I’ve gone off the idea. I still like it in written form though.
SteveP
2nd July 2024, 19:10
54.3 c and d
c) A drive-through penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane and re-join the sprint session or the race without stopping.
d) A ten second stop-and-go time penalty. The driver must enter the pit lane, stop in his pit stop position for at least ten seconds and then re-join the sprint session or the race.
MichaelN
2nd July 2024, 19:52
We have to see these guidelines to know, but it seems the FIA has stealth-scrapped a big part of the stewards’ toolkit by replacing the public sporting regulations with a secretive guideline paper.
I’m really curious what a driver would have to do to get a stop and go, or even a disqualification.
Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
2nd July 2024, 21:20
I think Vettel got a 10 second stop and go in Baku the year than he crashed into hamilton during the safety car twice.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 7:45
That was a bit different as that was not racing but roadrage.
MichaelN
2nd July 2024, 18:44
Can these guidelines be incorporated in the rules? Or binned?
The stewards are not meant to be bound or limited in their application of the rules.
MichaelN
2nd July 2024, 22:30
Just had a look at the Sporting Regulations for F1, and there is zero reference to any “Guideline”.
Indeed, the chapter on Incidents notes that it is at ‘at the discretion of the stewards to decide if any driver involved in an Incident should be penalised’ (54.2) and that ‘The stewards may impose any one of the penalties below on any driver involved in an Incident’ (54.3).
Herbert is saying that this is not true, and that they have to follow a “Guideline” and are limited in what they can and cannot do.
One wonders what the justification for this is? And why there are secret rules in addition to the official Sporting Regulations. What else are they keeping under wraps?
Tristan
2nd July 2024, 23:10
The guideline is as follows: If the drivers name is Verstappen, you must apply the lightest possible penalty.
w0o0dy
3rd July 2024, 5:37
You speller Hamilton incorrectly there…
Elvira
3rd July 2024, 11:43
I thought it was: If you don’t plan to leave the Redbull Ring by helicopter then apply the lightest possible penalty.
S
3rd July 2024, 3:04
Don’t confuse rules with internal guidelines.
Every organisation has unwritten/privately agreed precedents, interpretations and guidelines operating within the actual published regulations. Race Director’s notes and Technical Directives are just two of the several ways they get around having to rigidly apply what’s actually written in the official regs. Not all of them are published or made transparent to outsiders, because they simply don’t need to be.
All penalties, including the larger ones, still exist for certain types of incidents – but for this type of thing, they’ve decided on a limited range of them based on the severity of this action in context with other potential actions.
And this is not a ‘Herbert’ thing, this is an ‘F1’ thing and the FIA have always acted (or been pressured to operate) in this manner – the rules themselves are used only as guidelines, and are all open to discretionary application.
Herbert just says a bit more than other stewards and FIA staff do in public about what’s actually going on all the time.
MichaelN
3rd July 2024, 9:41
Guidelines on how the rules are applied are needed when there are so many different stewards. But guidelines that prevent the rules from being applied are quite something else, and that’s what Herbert is alleging.
S
3rd July 2024, 11:23
He really isn’t.
No rules are being prevented from being applied by such (official or unofficial) guidelines.
Major penalties are simply more difficult to apply for minor actions – and that’s exactly what such internal guidelines are all about, regardless of stewards being fixed or in rotation. These guidelines have always been there and always will be.
The application of F1’s rules will always be somewhat organic, changing as the cars and social/commercial environment adapt to the world around them, and these guidelines can change much faster than the published regs ever can or would want to.
Imagine the reaction if this particular incident was awarded with a 10sec stop/go penalty, or even a DSQ or race ban….
F1 is simply covering themselves from the teams and the commercial side getting upset again about penalties being too harsh.
Sham (@sham)
2nd July 2024, 19:01
Feisty driving doesn’t have to include not leaving racing room – as Herbert said, it was immediately clear who’s fault it was.
Literally all Max had to do was to leave him another metre of space and the feisty fight could have continued.
The part that REALLY bothers me is the Schumacher style forcing him off the track AGAIN with a damaged car. That was absolutely moronic.
grapmg
2nd July 2024, 19:07
A lot of focus on this penalty because it’s a collision between the leaders in the race. But why is this different than any other incident down the field. for example Alonso colliding with Zhou, Hulkenbeg – Alonso in sprint. All 10s penalty’s. I don’t understand the hype
SteveP
2nd July 2024, 19:21
In race, that’s where the cameras were.
Off track, at a guess, ALO shrugged and then grabbed another sandwich from the buffet and Zhou nodded about the penalty.
Meanwhile, along the pit lane, CH, HM and MV were whining about how unfair it was that he was penalised just like ALO was penalised.
PlosslF1
2nd July 2024, 19:23
I think the attention is because Lando could become a threat to Max and Max is already reverting to type, slightest bit of pressure and he starts to crack, can you imagine what it’ll be like if Lando goes into the last 5 races with a chance of the WDC. As for the other infractions who really cares about the ‘Also-rans’… :-)
Nick T.
2nd July 2024, 20:30
I have no opinion on severity or lack thereof in this incident, but I think the entire idea of the penalty having no relation to the outcome or circumstance to the outcome is just as ridiculous as them pretending they don’t penalize incidents based on the outcome. It should and they do. Accidental contact in an incident that doesn’t cost the innocent party points should be treated possibly than say intentional contact at high speed in an incident that could decide a WDC.
Tristan 2
5th July 2024, 15:59
Totaal agree with you.
Mayrton
2nd July 2024, 19:46
This bias is getting out of hand and discredits the entire sport. One should question the qualifications of Herbert. “He [Max] does place the car very well, but he has that tendency to put everyone else in a position which goes beyond the drivers’ unwritten code. That is what we saw in Austria”. “But I sometimes don’t like it when he (Max) gets to the point that you are actually forcing a car off the circuit”. Well, it really doesn’t matter what Johnny thinks or feels. It is not about Johnny, it is about enforcement of the rulebook. As a reminder:
Max made one defensive move going off the racing line towards the right (to cover the inside of the corner). Then he moved back to the racing line (his move towards the left) and left a car’s width. Seems correct to me if you look at the rulebook.
This bias and unprofessional behaviour will need to be addressed at some point in time if F1 really wants to be a global sport.
PlosslF1
2nd July 2024, 20:07
Well it was kinda 3 things he did, first he moved in the braking zone (A rule they brought in because of Max I believe) , second was not leaving a cars width and thirdly he crowded Lando of the track. Its a slam dunk Jordan would be proud of :-)
w0o0dy
3rd July 2024, 5:46
People say he moved under braking but McLaren raised that with the stewards during the race and no penalty so I would say they had proof he didn’t move under braking so they couldn’t punish Max.
Elvira
3rd July 2024, 11:53
The onboard slowmo of Lando’s first attempt that I watched had him downshifting 7th or 6th when Max began closing the door – Max was at least 15m up the road and wasn’t executing a very late brake – just shy of lockup – overtake.
I don’t know if stewards have easy access to traces during the race – I’d certainly like to see them.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 7:56
Max don’t (and in the past he never moves in the breakzone as they really checked that multiple times) moves in the breaking zone as you can’t steer when your are braking…
So he moves before that then brakes that McLaren has twice the breaking zone as the Red Bull that is on Lando or McLaren (Maybe that was the problem with Riccardo breaking)
And I have to agree racing get klinish as almost nothing is allowed almost it’s forbidden to prevent overtaking. That why I like Max that isn’t a option he always defends..
This generation are yelling if even the cars come next to each other and this is from someone who saw his first GP in 1963
I think Johnny Herbert isn’t a good steward as his decissions are not straight enough all the time his opinion changes to much.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
2nd July 2024, 20:37
I agree with almost all your interpretation of what Verstappen: He went off-line to defend, moved back towards the racing line and was supposed to leave a car’s width.
The last part is where I differ: I don’t agree he left a car’s width. Norris’ left-hand wheels were on the white line marking the edge of the track when they made contact. Unless that McLaren is more than two metres wide, Verstappen did not leave Norris a car’s width.
Patrick (@anunaki)
2nd July 2024, 22:01
That’s what’s wrong with F1 nowadays imho. There is space on the kerbs so it could be avoided easily. I just watched a clip of the 2002 German GP where Montoya and Kimi had an epic fight while pushing eachother on the kerbs several times. It was considered great racing.
MadMax (@madmax)
2nd July 2024, 23:15
Thats whats wrong with your bias. Leaving a cars width does not include space beyond the track. Making up your own rules is not how rules work.
Patrick (@anunaki)
3rd July 2024, 7:10
This has nothing to do with bias. I just don’t like these rules if the result is punishing what used to be considered great racing.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 8:00
I have to agree with you as people forget the white line is part of the circuit and if there is asfalt beyond that it counts too. (This doesn’t count when there is gras or gravel on the outside)
Your opinion isn’t Bias but just common sense….
Mayrton
2nd July 2024, 22:07
I agree it was close and maybe I wrongfully tend to count at least a part of the kerb as part of the track as well (they use them to their advantage when they deem it convenient). There was definitely little space when discounting the kerb, but sufficient to not touch each other. And the difference between your observation and mine was certainly marginally enough to not intervene as race control. I mean we are here to see racing.
anonymous
3rd July 2024, 0:01
But isn’t the outside edge of the white line the edge of the track? Norris’ wheel could be half-way on the white line, and still be half a line-width away from the edge of the track. So, your observation about the line and the wheel at the point of contact could be correct and yet that would not imply that Verstappen left less than a car’s width?
Or, in other words, if the white line is 20 cm wide, and a car is 200 cm wide, Verstappen should leave 200 cm between his car and the outside of the white line, so only 180 cm between his car and the inside of the white line. Correct or not?
I’ve always thought it is the outside of the white line that matters. Don’t know if that’s actually somewhere in the regulations?
w0o0dy
3rd July 2024, 5:43
I think you are right with that one.. he misjudged it by a couple of cm so a penalty seems logical. The fact that Norris goes unpunished for crowding Max twice is a matter of concern though. Why is that not looked at?
David
3rd July 2024, 8:02
BUT? a car is outside the track only when the RIGHT wheels are over the white line (on a right hander) not the Left wheels as you say so technically there was loads of space and for sure most laps ,most drivers were using track outside of the white line on that turn with part of their car so on that basis there was space aplenty.
Coventry Climax
4th July 2024, 12:41
That’s double standards, @Keith.
When they run a corner and manage to just keep one wheel inside, that’s deemed to not be a track limits offense.
But when there’s two cars alongside, a car’s width of space is suddenly measured as for all four wheels inside the line?
The fact there’s room for interpretation, whether there’s grass, a gravel trap or tarmac, shouldn’t make a difference.
That’s one to blame the FiA’s rules-writing for.
Turn Herbert’s words around, and he’s saying they can also give the most lenient of penalties. (Which they frequently do: ‘No further action’.)
So Herbert here actually confirms the stewards base their penalties on personal preference, instead of what’s written in the rulebook. Essentially, that’s another one to blame the FiA’s rules-writing for.
I’m not interested in discussions of the Yes/No type. The FiA should sort this out and make it clear which penalty stands for which transgression exactly.
Tristan
2nd July 2024, 23:12
I agree, whenever Herbert was talking on Sky he was always arguing passionately in the “let them race, do whatever they want” camp. This is back when Verstappen was severely changing directions under braking. It does not appear he’s capable of pushing aside that bias.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 8:02
Tristan Max NEVERS change UNDER breaking ……….. Please take a cursus racing or watch racing drivers explain to you ….
MadMax (@madmax)
3rd July 2024, 15:05
Max from the beginning moved under braking. Its because of him that there is a rule. And he did the same last weekend. Maybe learn to accept facts.
FlyingLap (@flyinglapp)
2nd July 2024, 19:55
Verstappen has a large points lead over Norris. Every race that Verstappen can prevent Norris from winning is a step closer to the championship. Unless he is properly penalized he will attempt to crash Norris out of every close race this year.
Icarus
2nd July 2024, 21:57
Hypothetical situations like that are why the penalty points system was introduced. To discourage drivers from REPEATED misbehaviors over the course of a season. So yes, he could continue to wreck into Lando as a way to guarantee he beats him in the championship, but at the risk of accumulating enough points to be banned for a race (if anyone believes the driver will ever be issued that 12th point, recent examples to the contrary).
Of course, if a driver were observed taking such deliberate actions over more than a race or two, they could be banned from racing even without accumulating points. They don’t have to let a driver deliberately risking other drivers’ safety to continue racing.
MadMax (@madmax)
2nd July 2024, 23:17
He deliberatly crashed and crowded Ham off track in 2021, without appropriate penalties. Rules would only work if they are executed correctly.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 8:04
That was after a certain incident on a track in Great Britain … before that he never crashed into Lewis or forced him of the track.
Drg
3rd July 2024, 11:59
Your kidding?
He was doing that in the same race from the start!
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
3rd July 2024, 9:58
I’d heard Michael Schumacher ran Damon Hill off the track so he could win a World Drivers’ Championship. I don’t know if that is true, but it seems to me there isn’t any incentive for Max to not crash into anyone threatening his lead in the World Drivers’ Championship. Currently, if he breaks the rules and happens to collide into anyone threatening his lead then he still retains his lead. If, on the other hand, the Stewards deducted more World Drivers’ Championship points from him than what he would have lost by abiding by the rules then maybe he’d be better behaved on the race track.
Hoosier Daddy
2nd July 2024, 19:57
So, just to clarify, they can and do give drive thru penalties for “potentially” dangerous driving, but only milder penalties for actually punting a rival off the track. Have I got that right?
Rick (@wickedwicktheweird)
2nd July 2024, 20:28
“If someone had flipped over or been barrel-rolling down the track I don’t know if that would have changed things.
Probably not because it’s the same penalty you get for doing this in a high speed corner (like copse).
Icarus
2nd July 2024, 22:05
That’s a perfect example of WHY they choose not to take the outcome of a collision into consideration for penalties. How many times have two drivers touched wheels, tire sidewall to tire sidewall for instance, just this season? Dozens, easily. Most of the time they simply bump and keep driving. Sometimes they bump HARD, enough to throw a driver off their line, and yet there’s no big damage. But once in a while, even a light bump or a touch against the wing leads to a puncture for one or both drivers. But that’s not something the drivers can accurately predict will happen. It’s too random. The mistake that one or both drivers made was the same, regardless of the consequences. They drove too close to another and touched. They shouldn’t be punished extra because THIS TIME it led to a puncture, when the last seven times it was scuffed paint.
BasCB (@bascb)
2nd July 2024, 20:45
The stewards also didn’t even look at the move pushing Norris off track right after that one (on the straight) when Max knew he had a puncture already.
As well as failing to punish Max for going off track and maintain the place he should have lost to Norris a lap earlier.
Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
2nd July 2024, 21:28
@bascb
I think many people didn’t really think about what Verstappen was clearly doing here. Verstappen did indeed already know he had a puncture – so when he rejoined the track, he (correctly) went instantly off the racing line as there were other drivers behind them that literally were racing. I personally think Norris was extremelly opptomistic (and a bit stupid) here attempting to pass a car that was clearly damaged and will have had very little control that was clearly just driving out the way. If Norris thought his car was still capable to race, he should have just passed on the other side of Verstappen. Norris just drove way too fast given he himself also had a puncture. He may not have known right away, but you can see by the way his steering was twitching that he had an issue and for the next few corners he still drove at far too higher speed and then wrecked his car.
Verstappen doing what he did after the incident was the correct thing to do, and he managed to continue.
All this said does not excuse what verstappen did initially, and he probably should have had an additional penalty for moving under breaking.
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 8:11
Yes you’re correct I didn’t understood why Lando tried to over take on the right while he knows Max had a punture (his rear was gone) and moving from the racing line.
Or Lando saw red or he wasn’t thinking straight.
Moving under breaking isn’t a rule anymore as they removed the Verstappen rule (Who only Vettel was punished BTW) a few years ago.
Elvira
3rd July 2024, 11:58
Perhaps by then he knew he also had a flat and didn’t want to follow Max into the pits and replay the last 4 laps.
Tristan
2nd July 2024, 23:15
So he’s saying they’d have applied a tougher penalty if a car has flipped…
Why wait until a car flips to outlaw the behaviour? How about some proactive rule setting?
It’s not just about F1, every Sunday racer is watching to know what defines good racing from the best in the World. This ain’t it.
S
3rd July 2024, 4:00
It is just about F1, because each series has its own unique set of rules and applications.
The way they drive and race in F1 is not applicable to any other series.
Tristan
3rd July 2024, 20:56
It’s the FIA’s centrepiece which affiliates with motorsport bodies around the world and even trains them on stewarding. How stewarding is handled and sporting matters judged is entirely relevant to any series FIA sanctioned.
Yes (@come-on-kubica)
2nd July 2024, 23:47
I hate 5s and 10s penalties – absolutely ruined the sport. Bring back drive through for incidents. That will put people off punting other drivers out.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
3rd July 2024, 3:30
+100 This exactly.
Mayrton
3rd July 2024, 7:50
While I like the idea I think the FIA has disqualified themselves to such extent that their consistency in applying the rules will need to be addressed firstly.
grapmg
3rd July 2024, 9:31
That is why I don’t like the 5s and 10s penalty’s the stewards hand them out almost randomly without any consistency. Also adding time to the end rusult makes it even more redicoulous because you don’t have to fight again for position like you would after a drive through. Stop with time penalty’s for minor incidents and let them race. Force drivers to give back position instead of time penalty’s and hand out drive through for real incidents.
Johnny
3rd July 2024, 1:46
How about overtaking while off track and not giving the position back which then led to Max stepping it off even further by causing a collision?
Stewarding in FA is a Joke and there is a different rulebook apparently for Verstappen and there has been for years now. Which is precisely why he continues to do what he does.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
3rd July 2024, 3:29
I admire what Johnny Herbert did behind the wheel. I honestly think that he had real world champion potential before his horror-crash. I would like to think that there are lawyer types working beside him as he stewards, and that he is there to give a drivers perspective. I imagine he will be mulling this last race over more than all of us combined. He obviously means well, but the sport is kind of in a mess at the moment. My take is that he was hamstrung.
ferrox glideh (@ferrox-glideh)
3rd July 2024, 3:36
(I did not mean for that to sound gruesome there at the end!)
MacLeod (@macleod)
3rd July 2024, 8:14
Johnny was a bit as Max very talented and really fast but the accident ruined his future as racing driver.
Rolfski (@rolfski)
3rd July 2024, 7:35
If you openly take the driver’s personality into account in you’re judgement instead of focussing on the incident itself then you’re basically admitting that you’re biased. Not exactly what is to be expected of a steward.
PlosslF1 (@f1-ploss)
3rd July 2024, 13:59
People do realise that there are also 3 other stewards with Herbert that make the decisions?.. Yet Herbert is the one getting it in the neck over a penalty that had zero consequence over the result.
No, ‘yeah Max was in the wrong a little bit’ or ‘Max could of played that differently’ its all ‘Herbert this’ and ‘Herbert that’. Its the latter half of 21 all over again… And I for one cant wait for FP1 on Friday, popcorn in hand, waiting for the meltdown part 2 to continue… :)
Tristan
3rd July 2024, 20:58
It was his choice to talk about it… I don’t buy him playing it odd as if the stewards hands are tied… Although if they are I guess is greater cause for concern.
In which case by who, and how high does it go?
gogathejedi
3rd July 2024, 18:06
Watta bout incident of intentionally forcing other driver off track, while driving a three-wheeled car?