Max Verstappen embarked upon the 2025 Formula 1 world championship with eight penalty points on his licence, already putting him two-thirds of the way towards an automatic race ban.
“He’s now on eight so we need to start being careful,” Red Bull motorsport consultant Helmut Marko acknowledged before the season began.However Verstappen was untroubled by the possibility of reaching 12 points and triggering an automatic ban. “I won’t change my driving style because of that,” he said. “I know when I’ve gone too far.”
He stayed true to that over the first third of the season. But his bizarre manoeuvre on the 64th lap of the Spanish Grand Prix has left him on the brink of a ban. The stewards handed him three penalty points for colliding with George Russell, shortly after Verstappen had backed off to allow the Mercedes driver to overtake, on the advice of his team.
What exactly was Verstappen thinking? He was caught on the horns of a dilemma: He had stayed ahead of Russell by leaving the track at turn one three laps earlier, and his team felt he was at risk of a penalty if he didn’t give the place back. He was torn between following their advice and losing a place, or staying ahead and risking a penalty.
He chose to allow Russell alongside him at turn five, drove into the Mercedes, stayed ahead of him until turn 12, then let him past again. What was the goal behind this course of action?
Was Verstappen’s plan to damage Russell’s car, let him overtake, then take advantage of his loss of performance to re-pass him? That might be considered a cynical interpretation, but then it was a cynical move.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The FIA stewards did not call it that, but they did call attention to the strangeness of Verstappen’s manoeuvre in their explanation for his penalty. “After car 63 [Russell] got ahead of car one [Verstappen] at the entry of turn five, car one suddenly accelerated and collided with car 63,” they noted, adding: “the collision was undoubtedly caused by the actions of car one.”
The stewards rushed to issue a decision in the aftermath of the race. Verstappen’s 10-second time penalty was announced while their cars were on their in-laps, mere minutes after contact was made. In their haste to announce a decision, the stewards did a half-job.
The most important question left unanswered was whether Verstappen deliberately collided with Russell. Many argued that Verstappen should be penalised more severely for causing deliberate contact.
“It felt very deliberate,” said Russell afterwards. “It is something I have seen numerous times in simracing and go-karts. I have never seen it in a Formula 1 race.” Did Verstappen deserve disqualification for the contact? “If it was truly deliberate then absolutely. Because you cannot deliberately crash into another driver. We are putting our lives on the line. We are fortunate the cars are as safe as they are these days but we shouldn’t take it for granted.”
The implications of contact between two F1 cars can be unpredictable. While the impact occured at relatively low speeds, Russell had no way of knowing what effect it could have had on his car.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Verstappen hit the front-left wheel of Russell’s W16. This is the corner which sustains the highest loads around a lap of the Circuit de Catalunya, particularly at the high-speed turns three (taken at 215kph), nine (250kph) and 14 (265kph). Had the contact led to a failure at any of those corners, Russell could have suffered a heavy impact with a barrier.
Serious crashes can occur in motor racing when the drivers are competing in good faith and not seeking to cause contact. This is what makes deliberate contact entirely unacceptable and why Verstappen’s driving last weekend prompted such a strong reaction from so many.
Deliberate crashes are rare in F1, especially outside maximum-stakes occasions such as championship deciding races. The few occasions they have been prosecuted inevitably generated huge controversy, such as with Michael Schumacher in 1997 and again in 2006 (though more a ‘stoppage’ than a ‘crash’) and Nelson Piquet Jnr in 2008.
F1 stewards and even rival drivers and teams are understandably reluctant to accuse drivers of something so potentially serious. When Verstappen crashed heavily at Silverstone in 2021 following contact with Lewis Hamilton, Red Bull did not claim he deliberately hit their car.
However this is not the first time Verstappen has provoked or risked a collision with a rival and got off lightly. A similar situation occured at Jeddah in 2021, when Verstappen had been told to let his championship rival Lewis Hamilton past, and in the process of doing so brake-tested him. On that occasion he also received a 10-second time penalty.
That collision occured at the penultimate round of the championship, and ahead of the finale the race director took the rare step of reminding the competitors they could face points deductions for any “attempt to influence the result of a competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics.” The implication was clear: Neither driver should think they could win the title by taking their rival out.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
But this must not be an issue the stewards only take seriously when there’s a championship on the line. Distinguishing between ‘good faith’ and ‘bad faith’ collisions is seldom going to be easy and likely always going to prove contentious. But the risk of shying away from confronting these cases is encouraging more of them, not only at F1, but in all other echelons of motor racing.
Asked after Sunday’s race whether he intentionally hit Russell’s car, Verstappen replied: “Does it matter?” The FIA’s actions must leave him and everyone else in no doubt there is only one answer: “Yes.”
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
Comment
- Bearman is right: Formula 1 should let Monaco be Monaco
- Clean air is still king. Stewards must wise up and Jeddah needs a track limits fix
- Doohan’s crash is on him, but benching him for first practice made no sense
- Horner said Lawson would thrive “on tracks he knows”. So why drop him now?
- 11th team in, Fastest lap point out: Keep those U-turns coming, F1
Derek Edwards
3rd June 2025, 13:58
Intent definitely matters, not just in motor racing but also in law, and Verstappen’s “Does it matter?” answer says is telling, mainly because his answer to the question was a deflection, and not the word “No”.
JackL
3rd June 2025, 17:59
Agree. And this is something thats easy to check. Look at his steering wheel inputs, and the rest of the telemetry from the car (not just throttle and brake). The FIA and Stewards have access to it. That should eliminate all doubt, and allow this to be settled properly.
Ferdi
4th June 2025, 7:07
I think it is all a bit over the top. Was it a correct move? Certainly not. Was much going on? Hardly. The touch was no bigger or smaller than the one George made turn 1. What we see here is a classic witch hunt from some press outlets again. Yes, he handed you the stick. Now, the challenge, as an adult, is to not let emotions determine your reaction. The same amount of articles could have easily been written on Lewis back in ’21 at Silverstone. The same intent or not (same questionability) was displayed there. Yet that was downplayed, while this is treated differently.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
4th June 2025, 8:17
I disagree entirely.
Hamilton and Verstappen were trying to pass each other for corner after corner before they reached Copse. As they approached it, Hamilton drew fully alongside Verstappen. He therefore had the legitimate right to try to pass him on the inside. By the time they made contact, Hamilton had fallen further back relative to Verstappen, which was inevitable given they were on different lines. They were racing, each was trying to get or stay ahead of the other and neither was prepared to back down. As noted in the article, even Red Bull didn’t try to make the case that Hamilton deliberately hit Verstappen. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to argue both drivers were too uncompromising or say that one or the other should have backed off more or left the other more room. But I see no reason at all to believe the contact was intentional.
In Sunday’s case, Verstappen was ahead of Russell, then his team told him to let him through so he slowed down, then once Russell was moving ahead of him he deliberately accelerated in order to hit the Mercedes, as the stewards noted. I can’t see how that was anything other than intentional.
Ferdi
4th June 2025, 13:30
Well, there is always the option Max reluctantly let George pass and then immediately went for an overtake the next corner – which he executed in similar clumsy and optimistic way as George did on Max turn 1. We could all just leave it at that, but somehow that isn’t possible when Max is involved.
And on Lewis we will never agree. To me that was intentionally as footage of the exact same move with Leclerc, later on in that race, clearly demonstrated in terms of positioning of the car by Lewis. Strengthened by a number of similar moves Lewis made on Albon and others. It is kind of his signature move to hit a car on the rear tire. Furthermore the Sprint race clearly indicated to Lewis that he didn’t have the race pace to keep up with Max and Copse was his last and only chance to attack Max. Hadn’t he punted him off, Max would have disappeared into the distance and gotten an easy win that day. Lewis was very aware of that.
Good thing is that at least in this case Race Control was consistent and handed both a 10sec penalty.
Valias (@valias)
4th June 2025, 18:02
Ι’m sorry. Are you saying Lewis hit Max intentionally at 280-290 km/h while they were both preparing to turn at Copse? That would effectively make him a deliberate killer. Are you claiming that Hamilton acted with that intent?
P.S. Have you ever raced in anything? Go karts or ohter form of motorsport?
Bojangles
4th June 2025, 20:40
@Valias
Not a deliberate killer. But Lewis took a deliberate risk of causing a heavy crash, which he did..
N
4th June 2025, 20:54
“Lewis took a deliberate risk of causing a heavy crash, which he did..”
No, he attempted to make a legitimate pass, and Verstappen attempted to defend it, that’s called motor racing. If Lewis wanted to actually crash, he had clear opportunity to do so before Copse corner. This has nothing to do with what happened Spain where Verstappen slowed down to let a competitor get ahead of so he could ram into them. What part of this don’t you people seem to understand?
Bojangles
4th June 2025, 21:34
@N
“Verstappen attempted to defend it”.
No, no defence was needed. Max was clearly in front and on the racing line. Lewis carried too much speed into the corner (the deliberate risk), couldn’t hold the inside line and punted Max off.
Ferdi
5th June 2025, 7:10
@valias intentionally as in a desperate attempt in the heat of the moment. Not as in ‘I have thought about it before the race or during the race, ramping up to the corner and this was the plan’.
BenHur
15th June 2025, 22:00
Well, Valias, of course.
Le Jimster (@lejimster82)
4th June 2025, 15:28
Exactly, both incidents aren’t comparable. One was hot racing the other was Max getting frustrated and deliberately hitting his rival because he felt like Russell was to blame for the earlier incident.
You can be a Max fan and realise he made a mistake here. No need to defend him especially when he’s admitted publicly he made a mistake.
DAH
4th June 2025, 9:01
It is absolutely over the top Ferdi. The press social or TV are on a complete witchhunt! After Hamilton nearly killed Max and then celebrated like he had just won a WDC while Max was off to hospital, the British press said nothing! Its no wonder most of us rational people have no time for Hamilton or his fanboys!
David West
4th June 2025, 10:54
Did Hamilton do it intentionally?
BenHur
15th June 2025, 22:02
No doubt, it’s the only thing #44 is good at. Signature move.
Ferdi
4th June 2025, 13:33
It is also quite funny to see Sky Sports bringing in the ‘children are watching’ narrative while sending a merry X-Mas postcard displaying Max getting 51G into the barriers. Talking about bad journalism.. Let me be clear I agree it wasn’t one of his finer moves on George, but the circus some make of it just confirms we can’t take some press seriously.
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 11:57
“Wasn’t one of his finer moves”
You are a master of understatement when it comes to Verstappen, while at the same time “being adult” and accusing Hamilton of deliberately crashing into Verstappen at Silverstone in 2021. Maybe it’s time to grow up and move on?
Bojangles
5th June 2025, 18:32
The move Hamilton did on Verstappen in 2021 was very dangerous. They were driving at full speed. He knew he took the risk of causing a mayor crash. What Verstappen did to Russell in Spain was an act of frustration but not dangerous (low speed corner). So totally uncomparable incidents. The first one is way more severe (risk of causing serious physical harm to your opponent) and should have been at least a black flag.
isthatglock21
3rd June 2025, 14:01
The things Max has done on track over the years would literally get you chucked out of a weekend stag do go-karting event at any casual facility in the world. Basic rules even casuals understand. He gets away with murder. We’ve seen his antics influence the amaterur/pro karting scene in recent years by making young kids think it’s ok. Funny thing is Max races in e-sim which frankly has a far higher standard or rules/enforcement so he’s more than capable of fair racing. He just chooses not to in the most high profile sport cause he as a Redbull employee the culture is just ‘play the victim, go on the offence’.
Martin (@f1hornet)
3rd June 2025, 14:09
I also independently mentioned stag do karting, which makes me think there is a plague of reckless stag do racing going on! Maybe Sky Sports should start televising that instead of the Monaco Grand Prix?
Bill Niehoff (@justafan)
3rd June 2025, 19:22
100%
bernasaurus (@bernasaurus)
3rd June 2025, 21:30
Typically Max would be a safe bet at a stag do karting race. So often he’s left the window of scepticism open enough for it to be very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. *He’d probably make a very good criminal.
Weirdly, him losing his cool I think is one of his strengths as a racer, he’s good at smudging the lines, and I imagine on the run down to turn one at any race, Oscar and Lando are less concerned by whats next to them, but rather ‘where’s Max?’.
This time though, he got it wrong, and it was obvious.
I think he’s brilliant, but like most who are, very flawed.
David West
4th June 2025, 10:58
Well, most of the time;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCUSNRkwzkk
bernasaurus (@bernasaurus)
4th June 2025, 14:54
Wow, I hadn’t seen that before. Yeah, that might be beyond reasonable doubt. No lawyer is going to get him off on that. Thanks for sharing.
matt90
3rd June 2025, 14:03
That he wasn’t immediately black flagged and didn’t get at least 6 penalty points completely undermines the stewarding of F1. Russell got a worse penalty for cutting a corner. Not only absurd, but disgraceful to effectively pronounce that intentionally ramming competitors is just slightly naughty.
ADUB SMALLBLOCK (@waptraveler)
3rd June 2025, 14:26
Max brake checking Lewis in Saudi Arabia, 2021. Later, even Adrian Newey acknowledged that Max had done it intentionally .
Jere (@jerejj)
3rd June 2025, 17:16
matt90 @waptraveler
Spot-on. FIA should’ve had the guts to hand him at least 4 penalty points & a 20-second time penalty, given Russell received a drive-through for merely cutting a chicane without even hitting anyone in the process.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:32
By FIA logic, George should have just hit Sainz in Monaco. That would have netted him just a 10 second penalty.
Martin (@f1hornet)
3rd June 2025, 14:05
Deliberately crashing into a driver (or indeed into the wall in order to impact the race, in the instance of Piquet Jr at Singapore or potentially to cause a red flag in qualifying) should be a black flag and/or a race ban.
It is different to causing a collision through an overly aggressive move or an overly strong defence. In those situations, the goal of the driver is to gain/keep their position and they would hope the collision doesn’t happen, but they’re driving in such a way to risk it happening. When deliberately driving into another car, the intention is to hit them, possibly hard enough to cause race-ending damage (see Schumacher at Jerez).
Max acted like a bloke in a hire kart at a stag do. A lad in a hire kart gets black flagged for that. An F1 driver should too.
Bobby (@shakenbake)
3rd June 2025, 14:15
I like Max. I think he’s good for the sport. He’s especially good for the entertainment of watching F1. Would I put him up there with the greats of Clarke, Senna, Schumacher, (and I think I include Hamilton in that list)… absolutely. He is without doubt a generational talent. However the way he conducts himself in wheel to wheel racing is increasingly against the spirit of good sportsmanship. And this is just the latest episode in that increasing list of questionable moves (extremely questionable in this case) that will no doubt taint his legacy when he one day decides to retire. If he wants to protect that legacy, no matter how many more World titles he goes on to win, he will have to review and change the way he goes wheel to wheel.
bernasaurus (@bernasaurus)
3rd June 2025, 14:39
I think Max is brilliant and F1 is better for him being in it. But his temper does leave him inexcusable at times. Nobody is great always, Lewis and all the other multiple world champions danced around the right / wrong. But Max would’ve scored more points if he’d had a better temperament on Sunday. I don’t think he’s necessarily ‘dangerous’, but he needs to get a handle on it. For himself, the sport and those who go racing with him.
Trust is important, and can’t be bought with Championships.
N
3rd June 2025, 15:52
“I don’t think he’s necessarily ‘dangerous’”
I disagree with this. If wasn’t for the Halo device, he could have ended Hamilton’s career or life for his deliberate crash in Monza ’21, and to make it worse, he didn’t even care, he just walked away like a psychopath.
Coventry Climax
3rd June 2025, 16:32
If it wasn’t for the traffic light, I could have been hit by a car from left or right.
The point is, that halo was there, and you can’t think it away.
I disagree with you on the Monza incident: Verstappen took the outside line, made the corner no problem, was ahead for the next but Hamilton either didn’t like that an shut the door, or he ‘miscalculated’ his grip on new tyres, in the attempt to get ahead. I’m convinced that had it been the other way, this brit-site had condemned Verstappen as well, just like in the Silverstone incident.
That said, his most recent behaviour is completely unacceptable.
N
3rd June 2025, 16:51
Verstappen was in no position to make that pass in Monza, he came off the brakes (surprise surprise) so he could wedge his car between Hamilton and the curb, with his usual ‘move or we’re going to crash’ attitude, no doubt spurred on by his incorrect belief that Hamilton purposely caused the collision in Silverstone.
His most recent behaviour is very typical of what we saw of him throughout 2021 (Imola, Spain, Silverstone (turn 6 before their eventual crash) Brazil, Saudi). We just didn’t see it for the next 2 years in ’22/’23 because his car was in another realm. We did see it’s ugly head reappear again though in 2024 (notably Mexico) when he was being challenged by Norris.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd June 2025, 18:30
Neither can you assume that the halo is anywhere near a 100% guarantee of safety if a F1 car crashes into it from above.
osnola
3rd June 2025, 20:46
Well do not agree with you there.. no surprise of course.
But Hamilton was the one with dangerous behavior trying to drive awau while a driver walked on the track. The collision itself was unintentional and nothing happened.
Very different was the silverstone attack by Hamilton with his by then signature move. taking out your competitor in that corner was criminal and that should have been a black flag.
But opinions differ..
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 21:13
I disagree with your interpretation of the situation, but there is also the issue that you missed out a relevant word anyway. The phrase you should have written is
Hamilton was the one with dangerous behaviour, trying to drive away while a driver walked on the LIVE track.
Which is against the rules, but since he’d already broken a collection of other rules, I suppose trying for the full set was an option.
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:04
“attack” – careful, your undeniable bias is showing.
MacLeod (@macleod)
4th June 2025, 8:15
Lol that wasn’t Max bringing the car on Lewis car that was the sausage curb.
N
4th June 2025, 10:24
Erm, my response was to the claim that Verstappen isn’t necessarily dangerous, i think the opposite, if you’re willing to crash on purpose, you’re inherently dangerous. The fact that he happened to bounce and land on Hamilton’s head from such slow speeds perfectly illustrates that point, it shows it doesn’t matter how you crash, it can be fatal.
j3d89
5th June 2025, 1:21
hamilton did that to himself by pushing max completely to the sausages…funny how you guys talk about that but fail to mention hamilton accelerating the car while beached with max walking near the car
An Sionnach
3rd June 2025, 17:48
I like Max, too. Great driver. I don’t think he can claim a place alongside the likes of Fangio, Clark, Lauda, Prost or Schumacher yet as he hasn’t achieved enough.
I think he can be compared to Senna and Schumacher in a way, though. I disagree with many here about where the line has been crossed by Max and would suggest that much comment is sour grapes(!), but when the line has been clearly crossed, the rules need to deal with it. People can change themselves through strength of character, admitting their mistake and apologising, but whether they’re sorry or not the punishment should be the same. Unfortunately, for Senna, he was bigger than F1 and was not reigned in. 1997 was one of the most extraordinary seasons by any driver, but Schumacher threw it all away and was punished accordingly. In this case, whatever Max does, a disqualification and a race ban should be the outcome. I would suggest two races.
I’d also argue that even where intent cannot be determined, some driving is so dangerous that disqualifications and race bans are merited anyway. The two recent examples were Tsunoda on Ricciardo last year (after the race) and Max on Lando in Mexico (the bizarre lunge move). Depending on the data, a ten second stop-go could be used as the most lenient penalty in these examples.
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 21:18
A bit heavy-handed, especially if you don’t include any anger-management counselling/training.
An Sionnach
4th June 2025, 3:55
I think a firm penalty is better than any of this “anger management” nonsense.
Yes, it seemed that a lot of unfair things happened to him after driving a Schumacher grade multi-stop race in qualifying mode, but no driver can ever deliberately drive into another or drive with such recklessness that it endangers life.
I think Senna deserved a life ban for his premeditated and potentially fatal attack on Prost in 1990.
Hamilton deserved a much stiffer penalty (stop-go or black flag and potential race ban) for Silverstone 2021.
This sort of driving just isn’t on. It’s not the marginal stuff that’s so often under the microscope and difficult to judge.
MurasamaRA300 (@murasamara300)
4th June 2025, 14:59
A life time ban for Japan 1990 would have saved Senna’s life.
I think Jackie Stewart was right to call it out at the time.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:28
If I think about schumacher’s 1997 season I think about a great performance, his move didn’t even cost him the title, because for whatever reason, perhaps a tyre problems with the last stint, he couldn’t keep villeneuve behind, nothing was thrown away in my mind.
An Sionnach
4th June 2025, 3:47
I find it personally disappointing. Ultimately, things like Coulthard’s stupid driving at Spa made the difference, but I think Schumacher let himself down in the end.
I was about to say something similar about Senna in Suzuka 1989, but I think his behaviour wasn’t punctuated by moments of madness – they were regular occurrences!
An Sionnach
4th June 2025, 4:36
I’m mixing my 1998 and 1997 Spa up!
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:26
Senna and schumacher had their own controversies, they became part of their legacy, why not verstappen? I always thought he was schumacher’s successor and I see that as a good thing, he’s different from the typical driver nowadays.
An Sionnach
4th June 2025, 3:43
I don’t think Senna or Schumacher would have done this. Senna would constantly brake test those behind him, do almost anything to keep them behind, torpedo someone if he was behind, but this was pointless. I think Schumacher was far more disciplined and didn’t crack so easily. I would have said that Max was far more disciplined than Senna. This seems like a moment of madness. I don’t think it’s correct to recharacterise everything Max has done using this as the lens of truth. It goes back to what Newey said about demonising him. Those who enthusiastically pile on show themselves up, but they were gleefully swept out into the sea of partisanship long ago.
Nulla Pax (@nullapax)
3rd June 2025, 14:25
There was no “Plan”.
This was the spontaneous, and unreasoning action, of a petulant child who has been raised not to care about anyone other than himself.
Sonny Crockett (@sonnycrockett)
3rd June 2025, 14:40
I must admit, I’ve avoided mentioning Jos in my posts but you’re 100% right.
Jos’ negativity towards Red Bull actually surprises me as they’re the perfect team for him and his family.
osnola
3rd June 2025, 20:47
My Max Bingo card is almost full. Keith still has about four articles and at least one will be about max upbringing..
Kind of rinse and repeat here ;)
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:06
Somethhing, something apple and tree.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:35
The “plan” offered by this article makes sense only if Max believed that his car was invincible and could just tank any damage. As you’ve said, there was no plan. He lost his mind. Had Russell been someone else that Max actually respects, like Leclerc, there would have been no deliberate crash (probably). George and Hamilton bring out the worst in Max. Sad to witness.
Sonny Crockett (@sonnycrockett)
3rd June 2025, 14:38
It’s been said before that when you go wheel to wheel with Max it’s a case of yield or crash.
In this instance, he took matters one step further by deliberately ‘crashing’, albeit in a semi-controlled manner.
This. Cannot. Happen.
Max should’ve been disqualified and given sufficient penalty points to trigger a ban. He should also then have spoken to the press and given a clear, unequivocal apology in which he acknowledged his actions and how wrong they were.
Yes, that would affect his Championship chances but so what. The stewards had the chance to draw a line in the sand but chickened out.
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 15:40
+1000
-100 for using a white TestaRossa
Coventry Climax
3rd June 2025, 16:34
Probably a TestaBianco then.
Sonny Crockett (@sonnycrockett)
3rd June 2025, 18:40
Only from season 3 onwards! ;)
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 19:10
You know that Daytona was actually a rebodied Corvette?
Sonny Crockett (@sonnycrockett)
3rd June 2025, 19:13
That’s right.
Apparently Ferrari filed a lawsuit for IP infringement!
BasCB (@bascb)
3rd June 2025, 14:38
Yeah, surely nothing will make Verstappen take control of his emotions unless he really feels the pain of a penalty. Sitting out a few races would be an apt punishment. We’ve seen it with some situations last year where he went purposely agressive on Norris (Mexico, I would also include Austria, where it looked like he did that on purpose), off course the way he went at Hamilton in Jeddah in ’21 was also in the same style and i would say that hitting Ocon in Brazil earlier after the incident was another incident.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:40
Some people are motivated to change by conscience. Others require harsh deterrence. Max is never wrong in his own mind, so he will not change without very harsh punishment. It’s funny to read people debate the harshness of even suggesting a DQ, when in my estimation, a one year ban is lenient for a multiple offender who displays no contrition. Even Schumacher hitting JV in Jerez can somewhat he argued as an extremely ruthless racing tactic. What Max did was absolutely unprecedented for the modern era except by one man. His name? Pastor Maldonado in Spa against Hamilton. What Seb did in Baku was a love tap compared to this.
Jason
3rd June 2025, 14:44
It was an act of malice. He is a 4x world champion. But because MBS and all of the media want access to Max, the first response was far too charitable.
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 18:43
3x plus an illegal gift from a friendly RD, but yes, your point stands he should behave better.
The problem is if you are trained from birth by what some call a psychopath, others say a sociopath, it’s hard to clean the grit and grime from your mind even when you try hard.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:31
This belief that hamilton deserved the 2021 title because of masi’s mistake makes me think about another title that coincidentally hamilton himself would lose if we also cancelled a race where cheating (as in an unfair action, just like a mistake by a RD could be) happened: singapore 2008, and massa becomes a 1-time champion, which is probably fair based on his 2008 performance.
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:08
Wow, there’s desperation, then there’s this.
Hotbottoms (@hotbottoms)
3rd June 2025, 14:56
I agree that Verstappen deserved a harsher penalty, but I have to point out what seems like a double standard in how the incidents involving Russell in Monaco and Verstappen in Spain were treated here.
Both cases were, as the race director put it in 2021, deliberate “attempts to influence the result of a competition in a way that is contrary to sporting ethics.” Yet Russell was judged based on whether cutting the corner gave him an advantage despite the penalty, while Verstappen is (rightly) criticized for unsportsmanlike behavior.
I think the argument that Verstappen hitting Russell was dangerous is rather weak considering how safe modern F1 cars are. Yes, Verstappen deserved a harsher penalty, but that should be because he tried to influence the outcome through unsportsmanlike conduct—not because of any superficial danger.
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 16:07
So it only matters if Max actually hurt George. Some rationalisation that.
Edvaldo
3rd June 2025, 16:40
It’s not about hurting, it’s about deliberately causing contact.
Max was punished for causing contact, but these things can happen in racing, and that’s why there’s a penalty for it.
It can’t be judged the same as an unintentional contact as it was, though. He looked at the mirrors, waited for George to get by and then pressed the gas to hit him without attempting to take the corner.
He’s not taking the risks to maybe cause a contact if the other guys don’t back off, he went 100% committed to crash.
cdavman (@cdavman)
3rd June 2025, 18:35
You say, “I think the argument that Verstappen hitting Russell was dangerous is rather weak considering how safe modern F1 cars are.”
This is absolutely incorrect. Motorsport is dangerous. Heck it even says it on the ticket when you attend a race event.
This is why outside of banger racing, contact is frowned upon and (normally) drivers actively avoid contact.
Two cars coming together and you have the potential for debris to hit a spectator or trackside marshall – even if the driver is, as you put it, “safe” inside his safety cell.
If Max hits Russell slightly differently, then you’ve got a wheel over wheel situation, and they tend to send cars airborne.
So, yes, deliberately driving into another car is dangerous. No matter how “safe” it looks… And it should be penalised very harshly.
black (@black)
3rd June 2025, 15:07
The stewards unfortunately always play favourites with championship contenders. Whether it’s them not wanting to ‘interfere’ too much with a close championship fight by issuing race bans, or not wanting to alienate large fanbases, or sponsors, they always view crashes between leading cars more leniently compared to backmakers.
Back in Spa 2012, Grosjean triggered a multi car crash at the start and they gave him a race ban (as they should). Their official reasoning was “because he was responsible AND because he took out the main championship contenders”… as if the lives of Hamilton and Alonso were worth more than Perez’s and Kobayashi’s that day.
Same reason they can be more strict when it’s not ‘important’ drivers, as they handed a race ban to Magnussen last year, but when it comes to contenders (Verstappen Jeddah 2021, Barcelona 2025), you can send the other guy to the hospital and you’d still get at worst, an even more lenient penalty than cutting a corner.
I like Verstappen, he’s a straightforward character (most of the times), great racer, but there is no denying, this was a slam dunk DSQ on Sudnay and at least 5-6pts in his licence which would trigger a race ban. Instead the stewards rushed to make a decision (as if, if they waited for after the race it would cause more harm) and gave Verstappen the second most lenient penalty they could… hell, call it a racing incident, not to upset Max too much next time. (Russell got a drive though for cutting a corner, Alonso got the same amount of points in his licence because he created an imaginary ‘force field’ or something and caused Russell’s crash last year).
Grow a spine and enforce the rules!
If you can’t, resign and let some competent people handle it!
us-brian (@us-brian)
3rd June 2025, 15:09
Duh…..
Missing breaking point and slightly touching car ahead = unintentional
Accelerating after already having slowed and running into car = intentional
Colliding with car ahead because your car oversteered or understeered = unintentional
Turning into car (especially if opposite direction than the corner)that is next to you and visible to you= intentional
Should have been more than 3 Points. But since it’s a Big name, they are to afraid. Magnussen, Grosjean…. Those are easy to Penalize or Ban. Big names….. they don’t have the guts to do it.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:43
I’m surprised that KMag wasn’t penalized on Sunday for that ‘incident.”
Red Andy (@red-andy)
3rd June 2025, 15:17
And yet Mercedes reacted with fury even to the implication that the collision was intentional, when Red Bull used their right of review. I think that episode illustrates how difficult these conversations will be if we expect stewards to start labelling certain actions as deliberate, even when it appears clear-cut to outside observers (most people seem to accept there was a degree of intent involved on that occasion, even if it’s often phrased as “Lewis had to show Max that he wasn’t going to back out every time”).
That’s not to say that the FIA shouldn’t ascribe intent and act accordingly – I happen to think they should. But it will probably result in their decision-making becoming more controversial, not less.
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 15:39
not backing out is still not the same as aiming your car at someone !!
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 18:58
@red-andy It’s not a “start labelling certain actions as deliberate”. It’s been part of the duty of stewards ever since “accidental” and “deliberate” got written as distinguishing factors in the International Sporting Code, in the early 1980s. Stewards were still doing this last year.
It’s the people who want the stewards to stop calling moves deliberate who need to a) justify it and b) propose rewrites of the dozen or so regulations which turn on the distinction that affect F1.
Edvaldo
3rd June 2025, 15:36
He did it in anger, because of a mere 4th place.
2022 and 2023 were uneventful seasons in which he barely had to sweat, but then the competition caught them and his old habits returned. He’s the same guy he ever was.
Russell got damage but not enough to take him out of impact on his performance, but would it have made a difference in the penalty had Russell DNFed because of this? I think it should, i don’t think they have the guts to be harsher than they were because more than that means a race ban.
Keith Campbell (@keithedin)
3rd June 2025, 16:35
I have little doubt that if Russell had sustained terminal damage in the collision or enough to noticeably affect his performance and cause him to lose positions, then Max would have received a harsher penalty. That puts paid to the notion that consequences are not taken into account in the penalties awarded, which has always been illogical to me. The ‘consequences’ are part of the incident itself, so should be taken into account.
However, in the rare occurrence like this where it is obvious enough that the collision was deliberate, I don’t think the consequences matter. It’s the mindset that causes this behavior which is worrying. If a driver suffers road rage to the point where his judgement is impaired, then that is safety risk to other drivers, marshals etc. On this occasion it was low speed, but if the driver cannot control his emotions then it could just as easily occur at high speed and be more of a serious safety risk.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 18:59
@keithedin I wish I had your confidence. The penalty issued was already lower than the penalty for cutting a chicane, and that appears to have been in order to avoid an automatic ban.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:34
If consequences are kept into account, they’re not doing that consistently or fairly: how is silverstone 2021, a really dangerous crash for verstappen and a 32-points swing mistake by hamilton, only a 10 sec penalty that we could see even during the race most likely wouldn’t have made any difference to the points he got that race?
As an example, raikkonen spun hamilton in 2018 always at silverstone, and also got a 10 sec penalty, for a way less dangerous incident that also had a lower points-damage to the victim.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:35
To be clear, I’d consider the 2018 penalty fair, 2021 should’ve been a 30 sec penalty (a stop and go basically), something impactful, and even in that case it’s still points for hamilton, so he’d still benefit from taking out verstappen.
An Sionnach
4th June 2025, 4:05
Hamilton in Silverstone 2021 was an example of extremely dangerous driving that deserved a black flag regardless of intent. Sky’s “Christmas card” with Max in the wall should have resulted in them losing the rights to broadcast F1.
osnola
3rd June 2025, 20:51
His anger was caused by a intentional hit by LEC and an very intentional hit by george.. Worse the order to give back the place.. his reaction: bad choice and it should not have happened. But he is human and full of adrenaline..
Bad choices are part of the sport..
He received a hefty penalty in that part of the race..
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 21:29
Your view differs greatly from the view of the stewards.
They work with access to the car telemetry, so I’m going to assume they know way more than you about the situations.
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 15:38
You weaponise your vehicle on the road or on a track and the punishment should be huge. On the road that means jail, on the track that means a substantial ban. 3 points is laughable. If i got 3 points for driving my car at someone what signal does that send out?
I am staggered that 1. more isnt being made of this and 2. some people are ACTUALLY defending it
MichaelN
3rd June 2025, 15:44
Of course it matters. But it must be established beyond reasonable doubt. That is very hard, and only a tiny number of incidents would pass that test. Vettel at Baku in 2017 does. Schumacher at Jérez 1997 does. Senna at Suzuka 1990 does.
Others are merely suspicious. Maldonado on Hamilton at Spa in 2011 for example. In other cases both drivers seem utterly disinterested in avoiding a collision, like with Hamilton and Verstappen in Brazil 2022. Was it a deliberate collision? Probably not, rather it was a calculated – and accepted – risk. Montoya said he did that often as it made people second guess themselves and thus made his life easier when overtaking. It’s part of the game, but by their very nature these moves don’t always go right.
How many times have people shoved others off, counting on them to take the escape road. Had their opponents turned in, as Russell did in Spain, it would have been a collision. Did Verstappen deliberately cut T1 in Saudi Arabia or did he avoid a collision with Piastri? Did Piastri deliberately tried to ram Verstappen, or did he merely exploit the lax enforcement of the Code that says it is strictly forbidden to crowd others off? It’s very, very rarely black and white.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd June 2025, 18:47
I think it’s reasonable to presume intent: telemetry available to FIA shows he slowed to let Russell past, then ‘changed his mind’ and accelerated. We can debate why he changed his mind but he made a conscious (intentional) decision to slow and then accelerate and thereby – beyond reasonable doubt – knowingly cause a crash. Unless FIA think he’s incapable of calculating the consequences of that decision to accelerate, which would be bizarre.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:01
@david-br And would itself warrant temporary revocation of the licence pending medical investigation of why Max had a sudden incapacity to do necessary trackside reasoning of the level expected of every racer everywhere.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:48
James Hunt broke down exactly why Senna’s move was no deliberate. Might want to check it out.
MurasamaRA300 (@murasamara300)
5th June 2025, 10:51
Jackie Stewart on the other hand claimed that Senna had admitted intent – albeit one and a half years afterwards.
Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h3XFYXnCr8
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
5th June 2025, 11:06
He’s right about Senna.
Davethechicken
4th June 2025, 9:04
“reasonable doubt” is the standard for a criminal conviction.
It would be ridiculous to consider that in a sporting environment unless someone is being charged with a crime, so if the police were to charge Max (which obviously they won’t) with assault with a deadly weapon, they would have to prove it to the “beyond reasonable doubt” level..
Sports decisions are on the “balance of probability”.
Do rugby players or footballers need that level of proof before they get a red card? It takes months and years of evidence gathering and analysis and legal arguments to prove to the standard you suggest!!!
Jere (@jerejj)
3rd June 2025, 17:18
My immediate response to that rhetoric response was ‘yes, it does’ when I first read it in the race aftermath.
Intention definitely always matters in any case.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
3rd June 2025, 17:55
Clearly Max never gave a damn about the rules and he has made a mockery of the sport. If I were racing, I’d have a wing designed to cut tyres and I’d be hitting everyone left and right.
I’d probably let them lap me and surgically take out their tyres. And when there’s a safety car, I’d take out half the grid. Even with 5 drive through penalties, as long as I was the only one on the track that’s a win!
And if the stewards said anything, I’d invoke my Max Verstappen rights and claim immunity from a race ban. It’s not as they can take away the result and be fair regardless of what I did on track.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
3rd June 2025, 17:56
Oh and I would tell the stewards off during the entire race. How can these people be stewards? There’s still two of us in the race!!!
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
3rd June 2025, 22:38
Now, that’s a clever innovation! If you can puncture your opponents’ tyres and make it look like an incident you’re set, drivers can lose 30 sec-1 min with a puncture.
George (@george)
3rd June 2025, 17:58
My initial reaction was that it should have been a drive-through penalty, if it had caused more damage to Russell then maybe a black flag instead. Three penalty points seems pretty lenient too, I don’t think many people would complain if he’d accumulated enough points to warrant a race ban (as opposed to a straight race ban/dsq).
barnibbles
3rd June 2025, 18:22
I’ll preface this by saying that I’m not a Max fan, but…
I read Max’s comments far less as a deflection of his own actions, and far more as a comment on others’. Max had just had contact with Leclerc and Russel. He thought both were not his fault, and the second was resulting in him giving away a position.
In the moment, I read his comments more as a retort implying that Leclerc drove into him unfairly and that George deliberately forced him off track by making contact. So does it matter if he did?
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:03
Verstappen changed his mind on the Leclerc accident when he was in the stewards’ office, which casts doubt on how solidly he held the belief beforehand, and how much was simply attempting to get a penalty against his rival (as so many drivers do nowadays, including Max on previous occasions).
osnola
3rd June 2025, 20:53
Nuance here… that not allowed prepare for lynching..
PT (@pt)
3rd June 2025, 18:28
I fully agree that what Max did can never be condoned. But I also want people to look at the circumstances before painting Max as a villain. I found it hilarious to read in Autosport that Max apologized to his team! Why should Max apologize to Red Bull Racing? Red Bull Racing should apologize to Max for its amateurish dealing of the safety car situation and its incompetent understanding of the rulebook. All this added to the frustration of Max who, in the heat of the moment, did what he shouldn’t have done. Also, angel-faced Russell should also have been handed a penalty for his banzai move that forced Max off track! Where is the justice here? I hope Max leaves Red Bull soon. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has already secretly approved a pre-agreement with Aston Martin!
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:04
@pt Max’s misconduct cost Red Bull a lot of points. Of course he should apologise to his team. I’m happy he did so.
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
3rd June 2025, 19:15
Russells move was a good one. If you dont like banzai moves then maybe watch trains. Just because Max cried doesnt make it over the mark but then some guys just love a bit of whataboutery. There is NO justfication for aiming your car at an opponent and there is no mitigation. If someone winds me up and i swing a baseball bat at them, i will be punished. Its not illegal to wind someone up
osnola
3rd June 2025, 20:54
No it was not and it triggered the situation.
Not to defend maxs move but George was the trigger here..
Tony Mansell (@tonymansell)
4th June 2025, 11:52
Horses wear more open blinkers than you. tbh its not worth conversing with someone so far from reality. Enjoy the racing and if someone rams Max, i look forward to your explanation as to why it was ok
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
4th June 2025, 19:17
osnola, the stewards made it clear Russell was permitted to do what he did, and it is part of the standard racing regulations that ambiguously-caused accidents don’t get penalties. As such, it cannot be described as a valid incitement for Verstappen’s response.
The Dolphins
5th June 2025, 3:24
@pt
You and me both, maybe he will take up dodgems.
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:46
Russell did to Verstappen what Verstappen has done to countless others.
A small snap of understeer mid corner caused minor contact. Without having the time to review it, Red Bull did the sensible thing and advised Verstappen to give the place back. In hindsight, Verstappen wouldn’t have been penalised for going off and “gaining an advantage”.
None of which excuses Verstappen’s subsequent actions.
Neil (@neilosjames)
3rd June 2025, 18:30
Deliberately crashing into someone should be a straight black flag/disqualification and a ban from at the very least the next race. Doesn’t matter who does it, or if it’s determined mid-race or afterwards.
I’m still hoping there’s a line in the rules somewhere that would allow a larger penalty to later be added to the pathetic one the stewards (mystifyingly) rushed to give him before the end of the race.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:05
@neilosjames It’s not that mystifying, and the agenda here is too obvious for the fact that there already is a line in the rules that allows larger penalties to be issued if further evidence is uncovered, to be of any help for anyone wanting Max’s penalty to increase.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:50
Literally any other driver does what Max did, and he would be banned. It’s that simple. The only question is for how long.
Sonny Crockett (@sonnycrockett)
3rd June 2025, 18:37
In law, the difference between Murder and Manslaughter is…
…Intent.
That’s how significant meaning to do something is.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd June 2025, 18:42
@sonnycrockett He knows, he’s just laughing at FIA and saying ‘prove it’.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:07
@david-br To which the FIA is silently thinking it could do so quite easily if it suited its interests.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd June 2025, 18:41
“Does it matter?”
Translated: if he (Verstappen) doesn’t admit to crashing on purpose, FIA won’t presume intent and therefore factually it doesn’t matter (in terms of FIA’s response). Kind of Senna-ish in the belligerent and cynical attitude, only Senna was ‘paying back’ Prost for losing a championship the season before, totally unjustly he felt. Verstappen? He was at risk of losing one position in one race and not even for a podium. I try to see his side but really, this kind of remark makes him seem entirely self-centred, entitled, arrogant and enabled by his team and FIA. With the latter it’s always the same, playing catch up on another instance of Verstappen going to far. As the article points out, his driving at Jeddah 2021 was appalling, FIA’s response? A lenient penalty when he should have been disqualified during the race and a ‘reminder’ for the final race.
And why? Because it’s a year where he hasn’t got the dominant car. So back to the car tantrums.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:09
@david-br The FIA can and has presumed intent in the past. It’s also, on one notable occasion, elected to treat a collision as accidental even after the perpetrator flat admitted it (and was recorded as doing so by the stewards).
So, from a pragmatic stance, it doesn’t matter – but not for the reasons Max supposes. What matters is what is in the FIA’s interests to promulgate, not what actually happened. Max was done a favour here, I don’t think he realises it, and he should hope the FIA never chooses to collect on the favour.
David BR (@david-br)
4th June 2025, 23:21
@alianora-la-canta I agree, that’s why I wrote that ‘FIA won’t presume intent’, not that they can’t. They could easily take Verstappen’s comment as sufficient proof (and provocation) to presume intent. But like you say, that seems to be a commercial and political calculation, not a sporting one.
Jim Clark's Bootlaces
3rd June 2025, 18:51
No need to respond to the rhetorical question in your headline. There’s only one answer to it, as you say.
But after nearly thirty years, we finally have an answer to whether the FIA’s pathetic “punishment” of Schumacher for Jerez 1997 really mattered, as Mosley insisted it did at the time. Those of us who are long enough in the tooth will remember his farcical explanation that to have banned Schumacher from all or part of the following season’s championship would have been no deterrent to other drivers seeking to ram their opponent in the same way, because they could obtain their objective by such means in one season and then view a ban for the next season as a price worth paying. So therefore, according to Mad Max (the original Mad Max, that is, not the current one), it was much more of a deterrent to punish Schumacher by stripping him of the just-ended season’s second place that had meant so much to him that he had barged his opponent in order to avoid ending up with it. Did that matter to Schumacher? Did that matter to those who have followed in his dirty wheeltracks, like Verstappen? There is only one answer to those questions, as well. From one Max being pathetic after a race in Spain in 1997 to another Max being pathetic during a race in Spain in 2025, plus ça change.
David BR (@david-br)
4th June 2025, 23:23
Neither of them fit to tie Jim Clark’s bootlaces, indeed.
johnt1788 (@johnt1788)
3rd June 2025, 19:01
Referring to precedent – while the incidents are hardly carbon copies of each other, there are some parallels here. The case of Stefan Mucke and Richard Westbrook in FIA GT Silverstone 2011.
Initially Westbrook caused a clumsy incident that resulted in Mucke being spun around. Mucke, in rage then charged down Westbrook, sideswiping him before both cars ended up in the wall. Worse incident with more likelihood of injury and far more damage caused.
Penalties were initially dished out with Westbrook given a 3 place grid drop suspended for 3 races while Mucke took a 5 place grid penalty for second incident – causing a collision.
In the aftermath however, it was deemed that Mucke deliberately caused second the crash as revenge for the first incident Mucke’s 5 place penalty was increased to a 10 place penalty because of the deliberate nature of the incident. In addition because of the deliberate actions, the FIA stewards at the time contacted DMSB to recommend the removal of Mucke’s race licence because of the aggressive, deliberate action. (Mucke always denied a deliberate crash, stating it was a misjudgment and the intention was just to “drive at” Westbrook – this did not sway the penalty).
While I am not trying to state that the FIA should recommend that Max’s license is taken away, precedent does exist for deliberate actions being considered more severe. Yes, it matters.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd June 2025, 19:28
Another example from a different series – in TUSCC (an American sportscar series) Virginia 2014, for reasons nobody ever clearly established, Giancarlo Fisichella and Earl Bamber had a post-race collision in the pit lane. The stewards judged this to be an unjustifiable action (TUSCC’s term for deliberate) on Fisichella’s part and issued him with a two-race probation. Multiple accidental crashes occurred that race with either no penalty, or a relatively modest time-based one. (As far as I know, Fisichella never formally commented on the incident or its interpretation).
This shows that even if there was some bizarre reason that actually justified not giving Max a penalty in the moment, the stewards should have had other tools to convey that this was more serious than cutting a chicane, rather than less. It also reinforces that deliberation matters.
Anon A. Mouse
4th June 2025, 23:15
Now that’s a name I’ve not heard in a looong time… a long time.
PeteB (@peteb)
3rd June 2025, 19:44
In any other sport, you’d be disqualified and banned. In football for example, if you make a bad tackle, you will get one level of punishment however if you walk up to a player an punch them, you’ll be dealt with much more harshly.
This wasn’t a mistake or a case of Max being over-aggressive. It had nothing to do with motorsport because this wasn’t racing. It was just an act of pure aggression and they should have thrown the book at him for doing so.
The FIA let themselves down just as badly as Max did.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:56
Thank you for making this analogy. Too many people don’t understand the difference between overly aggressive racing and what Max did. Your analogy perfectly sums it up.
It’s open season now in F1 because the FIA doesn’t view deliberately hitting another car in non racing scenarios as deserving only minor penalties.
Biggsy
3rd June 2025, 19:52
Seems FIA doesn’t have a good grasp on law in general.
First, intent matters, and there are various classifications of various offenses, depending on the intent, premeditation etc.
In the real world, if you accidentally hit someone with your car, you probably won’t lose your license.
But if you floor it, and intentionally ram another car, you can bet that police and the judge aren’t going to let you off just with a fine.
Second, and even more important (one that FIA somehow prides itself in not adhering to), is the consequences.
Saying that consequences of a foul should not be taken into account when determining the severity of a penalty, goes against every law I’ve ever studied.
If you accidentally shoot someone with a gun, and they get a minor flesh wound in their forearm, for example, the you probably won’t be in much trouble, especially if they don’t sue you.
Now, if you accidentally shoot someone, for example in the head or chest, and they die as a result, you can bet that you are going to jail for a long time.
Applebook
3rd June 2025, 20:59
I agree with punishing FURTHER if the outcome is especially bad for the victim, but I have to say that the punishment should not be LESS just because the victim went unscathed. If Russell had been seriously hurt, then ban Max for life. Given what actually transpired, then a long suspension for Max suffices, provided he shows remorse.
Charles
3rd June 2025, 21:49
Question, someone hits you with a car, this person could do that deliberately or by accident, what would you prefer? On both situations you end up in hospital.. I’ll answer for you, it does not matter. The law is meant for groups, not for a single humanbeing. And I would prefer to be hit by someone who did it on purpose and made sure i wasn’t hurt and that person succeeded, then hit by a clown by accident who says sorry and i I can never walk again. Fact is Max is that good, the rest of the field cannot match or redo what he does with a car. They get too aggressive, he got rammed 2 times (before his stupid action).. one while driving full speed and then the other who couldn’t control his car but tried so hard.. If you cannot overtake someone without a big chance you gonna hit the other, then please just don’t do it, it’s not save.. Max is not getting out of the way, the rest does because sadly they are inferior drivers..
MichaelN
3rd June 2025, 22:37
I thought it was quite amusing that they noted in their decision on Car 1 (Verstappen) leaving the track in Turn One that “the driver of Car 63 (Russell) momentarily lost control of the car and collided with Car 1, forcing it wide and into the escape road” and therefore no penalty needed to be given to Verstappen.
So given this, one assumes they investigated Russell for 1) losing control of his car and 2) causing a collision? But it doesn’t seem like they did anything of the sort. Quite odd, given that Russell was thus in violation of 2 out of 3 points in one of the few articles on overtaking in the Code on driver conduct. It states that ‘causing a collision, repetition of serious mistakes or the appearance of a lack of control over the car will be reported to the Stewards’. Was it? Did the stewards decide to ignore it? Then a few moments later, we have another bungled overtake and suddenly everyone, including the stewards, are up in arms. It’s quite the spectacle to see.
Anyway, as noted before, it’s great that Russell turned in when he did. We need to see more of this so the FIA will be forced to finally get rid of these gimmicky ‘overtaking guidelines’ that aren’t even in any of the rules. Hopefully all drivers take some inspiration from Russell, note that Verstappen was penalized, and no longer accept being forced off or take evasive actions.
Applebook
5th June 2025, 0:08
You would feel the same way about someone who intentionally punches you in the face, as you would an old lady who accidentally swings around a cane and hits you in the face? I can’t help but laugh at this. Also, the law is applied individually and takes into account the human being and each situation uniquely. If not, we wouldn’t need judges or juries. Just let AI decide.
According to THE LAW, the lady wouldn’t do time like the intentional attacker.
It’s hilarious to see people like you try to claim that Max is so good that it’s OTHER drivers who have to be dirty against HIM when the guy is the dirtiest driver of all time.
Charles
5th June 2025, 10:25
Why would you bring up the law? And what do you mean with punching in the face and an old lady? When you got hit by both, they both are similar risks for your health, there is no difference. You would have emotions and see differences, that’s fine. The law would see a diference, thats fine. There is no strict law in f1 and there are no old ladies or gentlemen either and your emotions (and the outcome you want based on these feelings) do not matter within f1 regulations.. But it absolutely fine to have them and good you express them too..
Robbie1
3rd June 2025, 20:15
Luckily for Max there is now clear evidence available that there was no deliberate intent whatsoever so the two faced phonies with their fake outrage can focus on something else.
On a sidenote: Anyone who watches a sport that visits countries run by murderous regimes, is owned by murderous regimes and scrupulous companies, hates the planet and only cares about money is disqualified from moral judgement!
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 22:06
Quick, rush the evidence to the FIA, it could rewrite history.
PS. Don’t forget to clean up the dodgy crayon alterations.
Witan
3rd June 2025, 22:32
The data makes it clear Verstappen slowed then speeded up to hit Russell.
MichaelN
3rd June 2025, 22:44
That last bit is just interpretation. Having let Russell by, Verstappen saw a chance to overtake. Had Russell taken evasive action, as indeed Verstappen himself did just a few corners before when Russell hit him, it would have worked too as Russell’s line into the corner was quite lazy and he didn’t defend at all. Given that it was late in the race, Verstappen was on poor tyres, and yes, he was angered – it was a pretty understandable move to make. Desperate, sure, but also the only chance he had to take that place back. It didn’t work. That happens.
While it was Red Bull’s own choice to order Verstappen to give a place up to Russell (which the FIA later said wasn’t needed), it’s still a good time for the FIA to make some actual rules about giving back places. Does the driver need to stay behind into the next corner? That would be quite sensible and avoid all these shenanigans. They’ve had a long time to solve this, as it’s been a problem multiple times before.
SteveP
3rd June 2025, 23:39
Maybe if we give the full description of the situation:
Verstappen slowed, then speeded up when Russell was in his “line of fire” and a collision occurred.
Was that deliberate?
George (@george)
4th June 2025, 0:45
Yes, the precedent for this was made with the Hamilton v Raikkonen Spa incident and has been followed ever since, that argument doesn’t hold water.
David BR (@david-br)
4th June 2025, 23:19
So your only defence is complete gibberish: what ‘clear evidence’?
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:50
Is this “clear evidence” in the room with us right now?
Win7Golf (@win7golf)
3rd June 2025, 20:16
Yes, it matters!
This guy is a disgrace to Formula 1.
JJ (@jjfrazz)
3rd June 2025, 21:32
Keith, how can you be so sure? You are showing your bias like a real “toady”! You just automatically blame Verstappen. You did it from the get go. You never listened to Wolf right after the race, and never ever considered that Verstappen and Russell both hesitated, and that was all that happened! Was Max angry? Of course. Wouldn’t you be?
After 20 years of following your site I am super duper disappointed.
DAH
4th June 2025, 8:12
But we all know that this is a Hamilton site hosted by one of his greatest worshipers along with the sky team!
Craig
4th June 2025, 8:18
It was clearly Verstappen’s fault, is that really such a difficult notion to accept or do you have a few more excuses?
DAH
4th June 2025, 9:19
You said it so it must be right. LOL.
Charles
4th June 2025, 9:37
Like it was clearly Rus fault when he hit Verstappen in turn 1.. Like it was clear Lec deliberately moved towards the racing line and hit Max.. So the main question is, is the driver who is forced to leave their line or get squeezed obliged to evade contact. Rus should have too then, where is the line exactly. This rule is not very solid to say the least. And when you hit someone, by accident, it’s all ok, just give back position and try again! And let your own team send you the message, because FIA needs at least 10 laps to come up with a random verdict, why risk the 50 50 chance of a 10s penalty.. It’s a broken system and interferes with the focus/concentration a driver needs during the race. It’s a patronizing sight when a team demands Lec (race before in monza) or this last race Max to give back the position, they just cannot refuse they clearly losing spirit and dignity..
RomTrain (@romtrain)
3rd June 2025, 22:41
Some ppl still try to claim VER didnt intentionally crashed into RUS, while everybody knows what happened.
DSQ and a race ban is the minimum penalty for such an action. Lets see if F1 finds some common sense.
The fact that it became known it was a deliberate crash (by comments and social media posts) could be used as new info, to review the already applied penalty. Or the severness of the case, which brings the sports into disrespute.
The ways to deal with it accordingly should be there. Or we see just another clown show like in the last races of 2021.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:44
It’s been a clown show since 2021. It’s the only definition – even Drive to Survive is becoming unwatchable. The best episode was about the drivers’ friendship and being part of a team that doesn’t win.
BlahBlahF1
3rd June 2025, 23:49
Senna crashed into Prost costing him a chance at the championship and I don’t see anyone questioning his legacy! Is it ok to crash on purpose no! Does it happen yes! So penalty given let’s not make this bigger than it needs to be, considering there have been much more consequential deliberate crashes and those drivers are still considered legends.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:46
Senna also stopped in races and made sure the drivers was ok. And his crashes were not childish. Many feel he was on the right side of justice.
rsp123 (@rsp123)
4th June 2025, 0:02
“Does it matter” if a driver deliberately crashes in any scenario – perhaps even when he’s on his own? I would say that unless a crash is intended to save life or limb, then yes, of course it matters.
Therefore it must matter even more if a driver crashes into someone else. Best case, it’s a kind of double cheat – an attempt to nobble the other driver, as well as to profit from their damage. Needless to say, it’s also extremely dangerous.
But there is a worse possibility: rage. Of all the reasons why a driver may want to slam into a rival, anger is perhaps the worst. Because while the cheat must at least have an excuse for their dangerous maneuver, the driver who falls prey to the red mist cares little or nothing for the extra risk. Having such people in charge of 1000 horse-power racing cars is not exactly a great idea.
praxis (@praxis)
4th June 2025, 3:48
Not really, the sport and its fans seem to celebrate winners and success, above all else.
Sportsmanship is probably only important for dying sports like test cricket(even that one had/has a lot of issues).
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:50
@praxis who celebrates Max and Red Bull besides Horner, Marko, and some Dutch fans? I suppose there are Voldemort fans out there too.
Red Bull fans watching Harry Potter: Oh no, Harry Potter survived!!! This is the worst ending to the book I could ever imagine. At least Dumbledore and Snape died.
Witan
4th June 2025, 9:26
It is a real pleasure to read a journalist who is not dancing around the Verstappen dangerous behaviour.
The trace shows it was an intentional move, Verstappen is experienced enough to know it could have been very dangerous but still did it, attacking a rival with a deadly weapon and, as another poster pointed out, on the road the move would warrant a jail sentence.
There could have been damage to Russel’s car which led to a serious crash later with the driver injured let alone the costly car being written off. If that happened would these wet as water “journalists”still be saying it is the penalty Max got is enough because “Max didn’t mean to have that result”?
What are they afraid of?
Elvira
4th June 2025, 10:54
For mine he was rightly miffed by
GP for not stopping him stopping for hards
then
himself for overcooking the last corner
then
Chuck for not being squeezed onto the marbles
then
George for a slightly imperfect dive-bomb
then
GP (and probs the pitwall, RD, stewards and FIA) for the re-pass advice
and then
Sorted all that by clouting George’s car or perhaps by making an unlikely & amateurish attempt to compromise George’s post re-pass velocity differential.
No wonder he didn’t take the time to criticise in the post race interview – he’d have missed his flight.
Bojangles
4th June 2025, 11:08
The responses here on the site are mainly gravely exaggerated and biased. I was just missing a comment stating that Max should be banned for life and put in jail for trying to kill someone. Now what did really happen?
After the safety car Max was sent out on hard tires resulting in low grip. This error became clear at the ultimate turn before start-finish, when cars were running at full speed again and Max almost lost it. Miraculously he was able to save the car and continue on the straight. Max drove on the racing line and Charles, who carried more speed, came alongside. Then Charles, when trying to claim the racing line as well, hit Max at high speed. A very dangerous move and logically Max was furious about it and demanded the place to be given back. However nothing happened and strangely enough the stewards did not issue a penalty to Charles. Then in corner one George made an opportunistic move that would have resulted in punting of Max, had Max not evaded the collision to use the runoff. There was contact anyhow, and this clearly should have been a penalty for George, but the stewards kept silent again. Obviously Max was even more angry now, but he kept position. But then his team ordered him to give the position back to George (wrong call) and that made Max´s mood go through the roof.
When letting George by, he moved up towards the Mercedes and hit it wheel to wheel, a bit like Vettel once did to Hamilton in Baku. Although this was in a corner and at moderate speed it was far from being “extremely dangerous” as some here have claimed. Max knew what he was doing and hit George on the tire briefly in a relatively slow corner, and that was it. The 10 second time penalty was correct, however the 3 penalty points on his licence way to stringent (at the time Vettel did not get any penalty points on his licence).
So a lot of fuss about nothing big really. The fact that neither Charles nor George were penalized for their actions says it all. Especially Charles´action was way more dangerous than what Max did. Let´s also remember what Lewis did to Max at Silverstone in 2021, that was really dangerous and on purpose. No harsh comments nor severe punishments then.
Concluding it can be stated that Max was seriously disadvantaged by the stewards´ decisions, for there (licence) penalties towards him, and their lack of issuing penalties to Charles and George.
David West
4th June 2025, 11:13
The FIA doesn’t care about rules, only “the show” – that’s why they gaver the minimum penalty possible so Max still has some kind of chance of making the season interesting.
They did the same in 2008 when they gave Hamilton a 25 second penalty for cutting a corner at Spa, costing Lewis a win and almost the title, it brought Massa back into the fight.
They did the same at AD21 when they made up some new rules in the last few laps of the season.
It’s all about the show, there is no other logical explanation.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:38
Yeah but in Max’s case, the verdicts always benefit him. In Spa 2008, the verdict was massive against Hamilton and the circumstances made it even worse.
PlosslF1 (@f1-ploss)
4th June 2025, 19:25
Sad but true…
Steve Rogers (@beeflin)
4th June 2025, 11:26
Yes, Verstappen is a generational talent. As were Schumacher and Senna. But like them he’s not above intimidation and cheating. A great driver cannot be above the rules or the sport degenerates from competition to hero-worship.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:41
@beeflin yeah but Senna was a huge victim of FIA verdicts. Schumacher was also on the receiving end of serious verdicts.
The term drive through applies to Hamilton more than any other driver in the history of the sport.
Max is the champion of FIA pardons. If he came into the pits and killed the entire Mercedes team, we all know he would be pardoned by the FIA and wouldn’t get a single ban race. And we all that to be the case by now, Max included.
BenjaminS (@benihana)
4th June 2025, 12:12
Yes Max it matters as from the look of the size and amount of comments on two stories here on this one website it is good for the “show” called F1 and the ratings are going to go higher making Liberty Media very rich indeed.
Jim from US (@jimfromus)
4th June 2025, 12:58
Lovely discussion. It was intentional due to the fact that it was in no way a racing move. Even when VER parked his car on HAM’s head a few years ago, it wasn’t intentional. It was the result of an aggressive racing maneuver. At Silverstone, same, they were racing. Even brake testing is a form of racing. The closest to this was in Brazil a few years ago when VER went unpenalized for driving off the track by a lot, intentionally, and HAM had to evade contact by driving way off track. VER was not racing in that corner in Brazil and he wasn’t racing in the corner with RUS last weekend.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 14:43
I think the Monza crash was intentional – the only way it would not have been a crash is if Lewis had somehow avoided Max which makes it intentional.
David BR (@david-br)
4th June 2025, 23:10
+1 @freelittlebirds
However hard you look at the Monza incident and try to imagine Verstappen imagining he could get past Hamilton at that corner, it’s impossible. There’s no way he thought it was possible. So it was deliberate and he should have been DSQd (same applying to the brake testing at Jeddah). That’s ignoring the outcome of the crash – parking his car on top of Hamilton’s head.
James
4th June 2025, 15:22
When you have a driver, any driver, deliberately causing an accident, it brings the sport into disrepute, aside from the dangers of doing so. Unlike Piquet Jr in Singapore, this wasn’t premeditated, so a lifetime ban from the sport would be disproportionate, but disqualification from this race (at least) should be the starting point. It could be argued that this action should disqualify him from the entire season.
If anyone thinks I’m being melodramatic, consider the implications of drivers deliberately crashing, either alone or into others. It impacts sponsors, betting, the teams, and fans. Add Verstappen’s comments post-race about “bringing tissues next time”, etc, only adds to the damage being done to the sport. It can’t be seen to be tolerated in any way, regardless of who did it.
BenjaminS (@benihana)
4th June 2025, 21:52
There is no such thing as bad press. In any story you need a bad guy and I believe Max plays it well. I can just see what it would of been like had the internet existed when many other bad guys if F1 existed.
us-brian (@us-brian)
4th June 2025, 15:32
I also just thought about something. If you do deliberately crash into something, it should be dealt as “intent to injure” and should carry automatic race bans.
1st occurrence = 1 race ban and 6 Points on license (if the 6 points get you to 12, then you have 2 race ban).
2nd occurrence = 3 race ban and same Point penalty as above
3rd occurrence = revocation of super license / possible lifetime ban
S
4th June 2025, 15:40
If “Does it matter?” was a question posed prior to deciding on the penalty, then yes, of course it does. As Russell perfectly exemplified at Monaco.
But when asked afterwards by anyone not deciding penalties – then no, it really doesn’t. The matter has been officially put to bed already.
We’d all like to think that sports competitors always engage with complete honesty and integrity, but in reality very few truly do so. That’s just the nature of the type of competition this is, and the humanity behind it.
Casanova (@casanova)
4th June 2025, 17:34
I tried and failed to explain to my wife (a casual observer of F1) why plank wear merits instant disqualification, yet deliberately ramming an opponent in a fit of rage only incurs a 10-second penalty. I shudder to think what the Spanish GP stewards’ threshold for a black flag must be.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
4th June 2025, 18:22
@casanova lol
It probably involves drones and warfare :-)
PlosslF1 (@f1-ploss)
4th June 2025, 19:35
Ive sat back and read many comments and articles fighting both sides…
But, and I mean this seriously are we at a point in Motorsport where ramming another Driver is acceptable?…
Any other driving series it would lead to the full force of the regulations including an instant black flag and if too late in the race a retrospective heavy punishment..
But this is F1, a sport I’ve loved all my life, now relegated to a TikTok, Youtube meme just for the clicks and likes…
To quote the adults during my childhood… ” Its all fun an games until someone looses an Eye “
Bojangles
4th June 2025, 20:58
Hitting another driver is not acceptable and therefore a penalty is issued. It happened many times in F1 through the years, also on purpose, but (almost) never resulted in an instant black flag.
Most comments here with regards to the penalty Max should have received are extremely exaggerated…
David BR (@david-br)
4th June 2025, 23:17
But you get that causing a collision on purpose is qualitatively different? Verstappen wasn’t trying to defend or attack (race). The F!TV commentators said it instantly: they’d never seen anything like it in Formula 1. Slowing to let someone past and then accelerating and colliding? OK so we can think back to some vaguely comparable examples, but none of them are good for Verstappen. It’s almost like the FIA stewards were unable to process what happened at the time – despite the incident being in plain sight. Retrospectively penalizing him (a bit) more heavily is virtually an admission that they didn’t respond adequately during the race.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
5th June 2025, 4:04
If you think about it, there’s been a previous incident of this type for verstappen: saudi 2021 in the championship fight with hamilton, he had to let hamilton past for some reason and they collided, hamilton accused him of brake testing and verstappen got a 10 sec penalty even then, which didn’t make a difference to the ending position.
JMDan (@danmar)
5th June 2025, 9:53
Max seems to be afflicted with a new global phenomenon: inexplicable aggressive behaviour. I keep seeing stories of people going off the rails for what seems like no good reason.
Steve (@scbriml)
5th June 2025, 12:55
In order for folks to “go off the rails”, they have to have been on them at some point.
Mayrton
7th June 2025, 10:50
Why are we not addressing the Charles move on the straight? It seems way more important than the shenanigans between Max and George. It almost looks like there is some partiality at work here. I feel Race control needs to be seriously evaluated and these stewards should not be allowed to ever govern a race.