Voice of the #F1 fans: An Alternative Analysis of ROS/HAM

Brought to you by TheJudge13 Contributor Nigel

Editors Note: With the fallout form yesterday’s Belgian Grand Prix and the subsequent analysis of the Hamilton/Rosberg incident, one of TJ13 readers believe we got it wrong with our analysis and submitted his own analysis.  As it is a well reasoned argument we decided to publish it for the TJ13 community. While I appreciate emotions are still high from yesterday I urge everyone to debate in a clean and proper manner.


I decided to write this article when I thought that the video evidence was ignored in the article published yesterday.

Allow me to expand a little.

In the article it appears that two different sets of guidance on defending was conflated.

The first one is the March 2012 guidance, ahead of the season:

A driver can make one move only to defend a position but when that driver then moves back onto the racing line to take a corner it can be construed as a second move, which is not allowed. It is a matter of deciding to what degree resuming the original line is acceptable.

We don’t want to get into silly arguments about centimetres so we have decided the defending driver must leave at least one car width on the racing line otherwise he will be judged to have made a second move and penalised accordingly. We need to have drivers giving each other space on the track otherwise we risk dangerous collisions.

The second one is the July 2012 memo, ironically issued in response to Rosberg’s “very marginal” sweeps across the track in Bahrain

Any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area may use the full width of the track during his first move provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.

For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.

What (as far as I’m aware) has never been made explicit, is whether the test applied to defending on the straight, “any part of the front wing…alongside the rear wheel“, also applies to defending a corner ?

In any event, even if we are to accept that defending drivers have to be aware of a couple of inches overlap going in to a corner, and compromise their line accordingly – something that simply does not happen at the moment – Hamilton left a huge amount of room around the first turn Rosberg that was alongside.

The collision took place it the middle of the track just before the turn reversed.

Take a look at this angle from the Sky coverage, and watch frame by frame:

https://thejudge13.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/hamilton_rosberg-incident.gif

From http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=20001&start=555

Rosberg entered the corner about a third of the way alongside Hamilton, and gradually fell back throughout the corner to the point of the collision where the overlap was a matter of inches.

From the beginning of the overtake, up until the moment Rosberg hit Hamilton, there was at least a car width outside not only Hamilton’s car, but also outside of Rosberg’s. At this point Rosberg had both the room and the ability to avoid collision, while Hamilton would have required ESP to do so.

Had Rosberg “held his line“, as Toto Wolff later put it, on the edge of the track, then I would agree with your interpretation of the strict rules. As he held his line in the middle of the track, I cannot see how he is not to blame for the collision.

IMO, both the strict Whiting guidance you claim (however ridiculous it might be, and however often in practice the stewards choose to ignore it), and common racing practice – let alone Rosberg’s own words on the matter – make it clear who was responsible.

Nico felt he needed to hold his line,” said Wolff. “He needed to make a point. He didn’t give in. He thought it was for Lewis to leave him space and that Lewis didn’t leave him space.“(BBC)

But on the evidence, Hamilton had left Rosberg space, up until the point of the collision – when there was still a car’s width outside of Rosberg’s car, let alone outside of Hamilton’s.

If Rosberg was trying to prove a point, he chose a very strange way to do so. What is the message ? If you go into a corner with me behind you, I reserve the right to clip your rear tyre ?

Had Rosberg held his position further alongside Hamilton into the next turn, then it is conceivable that Hamilton might have been guilty of edging him off the track, or responsible for a collision. Though at that point, Rosberg would have been on the inside of the next turn.

That, however, is not what happened. From the video is seems either he was backing out of the manoeuvre, or that Hamilton was pulling away from him.

Advertisements

110 responses to “Voice of the #F1 fans: An Alternative Analysis of ROS/HAM

  1. Well reasoned. I would add that if it were one of the top drivers in Rosberg’s position there probably wouldn’t have been a collision. Nico is relatively clumsy when it comes to overtaking, just look at the lock up trying to take Vettel.

    • Indeed.. thus, despite setting the fastest lap since 1996 (Schumi Barcelona, +2.2sec to next car), he was unable to take the win..

    • Just remember Hamilton collided with 2-3 other cars during his drive through the field in Hungary… Was lucky serious damage didn’t occur…

      • Who were the 2-3 cars he collided with in Hungary judge? Sure you’re not talking about Germany? Kimi, Sutil and Button.

        Also, did any of those collisions resulted in those drivers not scoring points?

        • Plus didn’t Button make a move which Hamilton took to be letting him pass? But it was Button having no grip left. So not entirely Hamilton’s fault.

          • Plus, apart from Button, Hamilton didn’t hit anyone’s rear wheel…and in the aftermath said hitting Button was “my bad”.

          • To which Lewis publicly owned up to and apologised for it. Button wasn’t too happy after, but later tweeted he understood why Lewis went for the move and accepted his apology and moved on.

            However based on what I’ve been reading, they had a meeting on Thursday with relation to what happened in Hungary and he was still seething because the outcome of the meeting was not what he expected.

            Now this is another area where I think the management really messed up. That should’ve been put to bed before they went on the 3 week break, the driver shouldn’t have had this meeting a day before the GP event, so clearly there would still be bad blood between both of them.

          • What???…. Who did I attack? I merely replied to the judges comment about his mistake with collision in Hungary. My comment was nothing more than sarcacism.

      • By that reasoning: Hamilton got tangled with people as he tried to overtake them. How can that justify Rosbergs actions at Spa? Rosberg overtaking Hamilton was already off the table before they collided. Rosberg had no shot at passing Hamilton at the left hander as he was nowhere near being alongside him.

        You could compare this to what Hamilton did to Massa at Singapore 2011. Now that was clumsy driving on Hamiltons end as there was no way he would have passed Massa and therefor should have backed out earlier.

      • All drivers have collided with other cars during a race. What I said is that Nico is relatively clumsy when it comes to overtaking. How long and how did he get past JEV in Hungary?
        I think that after the Mercedes internal meeting following the antics at Hungary Nico felt he had a point to prove. Mercedes probably agreed that Lewis wasn’t going to be told to simply let Nico pass – he’d have to challenge him to force any kind of decision from the team.
        IMO Nico is quick so long as he doesn’t have to overtake or defend, he’s proved that by the amount of poles he has this season. I just don’t think he has the confidence, or level of racecraft, to overtake someone with a competitive car. He’s not like the Kimis and Alonsos of this world.

    • RE: Rosbergs lock-up.

      I rewatched that particular onboard this morning and it did look so clumsy. It seemed like he thought Vettel would roll over and die by not covering the inside line.

      Better yet, you should listen to the onboard sounds. You could not even see Rosberg downshifting from 4th to 2nd as he did it so fast. You could only hear the engine over-revving massively, I was surprised his gearbox didnt blow up right then and there. It seemed like he was panicking to me.

  2. Nigel… the more I watch it, I have to say I am coming around to this point of view on Rosberg’s move. At the time, I thought he was just trying to tuck back in behind, for the left hander, and simply misjudged it. Or even, that he just wanted to brush wheels square on, to make his point and then continue….

    We’ve seen from Schumi that you can get it right (94) and wrong (97).. so which one this is (and thus Monaco again) will probably be debated to the end of time… but the amount of incidents Rosberg is getting involved in are starting to mount up… including the original clarification of the rules as you pointed out.

    What we really need to see now again is the onboard footage. But I’m starting to think that it’s notable how usually Rosberg’s errors compromise Hamilton in some way, even if just mentally, while Hamilton’s usually only hurt himself.

      • Well in my experience, the inside curb of that left hander is pretty big, slippery and steep so in my opinion Rosberg wanted to avoid driving over it completely.

        I cant even remember drivers ever driving right over that particular curb when they make a mistake so in my opinion most drivers either decide to cut the corner completely or lose alot of time and take the corner properly. Rosberg chose the 2nd option to leave it up to Hamilton if they were going to collide.

        • Yes, I’ve hit that kerb too many times myself in iRacing, it’s a real menace.. that’s why I knew the onboard would give a different perspective to the TV angle.

  3. I’m bound to say this…but this is a good analysis. There was plenty of room for Rosberg, or he could have braked!

    Also, I do think it’s important to recall that at the start in Canada, Hamilton backed out in the first corner, to his disadvantage.

    Also, when he clipped Button he said it was his fault.

    Also, as I have said, if Rosberg feels he needs to show he can’t be pushed around fine, but Canada showed that. What he’s shown is he’s prepared to go far enough to hit his team mate. And, his team mate can’t trust him in a close battle.

      • The worst part of Senna – and Schumacher and Prost; all of whom won championships by cheating, IMO.
        All were great drivers, but despite such behaviour, not because of it.

        I don’t think Rosberg belongs in such company. Certainly not on his achievements to date.

        • I don’t think Rosberg is Senna either! Senna’s takeout of Prost might have been internally logically, but it was selfish cynicism (as Ron Dennis was happy to admit). Senna’s reputation was tarnished by this.

          I would not say Rosberg has been THAT cynical, but to me Rosberg has broken an unwritten rule, that the best drivers don’t break. That if you are trying to overtake, if the car in front gives you the choice of backing off or crashing, you don’t crash (in essence, this is “having the corner/line”). Hamilton failed to do this in 2011…and really pushed the limits with the jerk to the right in Bahrain…but has not hit Rosberg this year (mainly Canada), yet Rosberg has hit Hamilton.

          My point then, is that in a close fight Hamilton now has a dangerous doubt “will Rosberg just hit me, because if we both crash out it is good for him”. And, I think this is what so annoys Merc – that they clearly have told them to fight, but not crash. And, Rosberg in that split second didn’t do everything in his power to avoid the contact (as Vettel did).

          Finally, I could be wrong of course, but I am now 100% sure Rosberg’s other mistake at Monaco was as cycnial as it seemed at the time.

          • Peter Windsor in his half season report, said categorically that engineers within the Mercedes team have confirmed that what he did in Monaco was deliberate.

    • @mattpt55

      You have to be joking! Biased evidence, perverting the course of justice.

      • Well, I couldn’t link to the Davidson SKY analysis which provides much more context, due to my inability to view their videos on my computer, but Rosberg’s steering input to my mind nullifies the hypothesis that Hamilton failed to leave room.

        As far as intent, you can take Nico’s words for what they are without believing he intentionally drove the car into Lewis, but he clearly bears responsibility for the incident (and I have no issue with it being ruled a racing incident) as far as the team is concerned.

    • Ok. I’m not going to defend rosberg, as I believe he is guilty. But this can be torque and corrective steering. When kimi did it on raidillon the colmentators went crazy but it doesn’t only happen there. This picture is taken out of context.

      • As I stated above, I see it as nullifying the failed to leave room argument, not confirming the Nico hit him on purpose argument.

  4. Very well structured. Ill copy my post from the daily news thread here as might be more relevant here

    I must confess that I am a Hamilton fan. I read the site daily though rarely comment. I work nights so missed the race as was in bed. When I got up and checked autosport it said the Mercs had collided. I had visions of a Senna/Prost style plane crash style accident heading up to Eau Rouge. When I actually looked at it I was almost disappointed to see all the fuss for what little contact there was. I am amazed that it has taken this long for them to hit each other.
    My biggest concern is that having been watching F1 for over 20 years the stewards are deciding races, maybe even championships. On Autosport Alonso has said that he didnt think it was a big thing with Magnussun. 20 second penalty later. The cars will be close, sometime will touch. As far as I go unless someone DELIBERATELY drives into someone else or does something completely reckless just leave them to it.
    Accidents happen, just leave it at that. For anyone who hasn’t seen it check the clip of the GP3 accident for an example of what can go wrong without cars even touching!

    • And sadly it’ll probably take a few more of those Liuzzi Monza type crashes before the FIA even does something about those sausage kerbs..

      • PS. That was the Russian’s first time in the car… shows how well Lotterer did! If only he drove the 2003 Jaguar…

  5. Look on from minute 1:08, there was 2 very distinct move of the steering wheel by Nico, the first being a move to the left and the 2nd to the right which caused the collision.

    Also another point of note, on his initial turn in, the trajectory of his car had he continues on that line, he would’ve driven right into the sidepod of Lewis’s car.

    What I found profound and was dumb struck by, was his comments, that Toto later relayed to the media.

    The fact that he said he could’ve avoid contact, but chose not, so as to prove a point, is just plain (spell check working now hippo😄) raises the question again as to whether or not what happened in Monaco was not indeed deliberate.

    • Rosberg correcting his steering makes sense when he is coming off a straight at 330 km/h and brakes at the latest possible moment. He simply took a lot of speed going into the corner.

      Rosberg aiming for Hamiltons sidepod is out of the question.

    • As I said above (copy, paste)Ok. I’m not going to defend rosberg, as I believe he is guilty. But this can be torque and corrective steering. When kimi did it on raidillon the comentators went crazy but it doesn’t only happen there.

  6. I doubt Rosberg was ‘making a point’ I think he was just stupid and tried to make something from it in the debrief to destabilise Hamilton – failed on track, succeeeded afterwards.

      • I didn’t say he said it to the public….

        “What I found profound and was dumb struck by, was his comments, that Toto later relayed to the media.”…… That’s what I said.

        • Yep, as James Allen has reported, the issue is not if Rosberg said he was “proving a point” both Hamilton and Wolff said he said that. The difference is Hamilton interpreted this as meaning “he hit me to prove a point” and Wolff said “would not pull back from the pass” to prove a point.

          I’m inclined to think Wolff is more right than Hamilton, but even this is not a good impression from Rosberg; he risked hitting his teammate to prove a childish point. This is IMHO what has so annoyed Wolff and Lauda.

          • So what was the point he was trying prove?

            Apparently he was still seething because of what happened in Bahrain and Hungary.

            Also, didn’t he take of Schummi’s front wing at that very same corner in 2010, when Schummi tried to overtake him with the very same move he attempted yesterday?

            Going to try and find the video.

          • I’m inclined to think they amount to the same thing.
            On the evidence of the video, I can’t see what Hamilton could have been expected to do to avoid the collision, other than giving Rosberg an entirely free pass.
            From his mirrors he would have thought Rosberg was backing out of the move.

  7. Nigel, I think your analysis is well reasoned and presented and I totally agree with all you say. It is possible to see Rosberg turn into Hamilton, making a quite deliberate adjustment to the steering. I wonder what the reaction of the team would have been if he had taken them both out at that corner. What penalties could they give him? None!
    One thing I wondered about is why Rosberg would have a quicker car than Hamilton, which is one of the reasons Rosberg gave for attempting the pass. Or was it sour grapes for being left standing at the start?

    • why Rosberg would have a quicker car than Hamilton, which is one of the reasons Rosberg gave…
      There’s no real evidence he had a quicker car – just that he was quicker on a particular part of the track. Maybe he turned the engine setting up; maybe Hamilton had used more of his energy reserve at the start; maybe all sorts of things.
      FWIW, the evidence from practice is that Hamilton was more than competitive on race pace.
      I note Rosberg also said there was no risk involved in the attempted pass. How did that work out … ?

      • Also, can someone help me with something else.

        Some arguments…that I started to accept until reading Nigel’s analysis, say Hamilton should have given room. Given room where?! DO people mean turn to the right, to give Rosberg even more space? But, if he did that, would the angle of his rear wheel not have still hit Rosberg at the point of impact?

        The only room I can think Hamilton could have given was to take the initial turn much more to the inside, off the racing line, but what did Rosberg do that would justify Hamilton being so compliant? Going by the camera angle posted here, if Hamilton did that he’d have only just left enough room for himself, yet Rosberg would have been in the middle of the track, with a car width all for himself. All earned by getting his nose next to Hamilton’s rear tyre.

        I’m sorry, I think Rosberg was clumsy because he was pathetically angry at some perceived inferiority from Bahrain/Hungary, and simply showed his cack-handed overtaking. Pathetic.

        • Sorry, Nigel said this as well before me, so my comment was a bit pointless. I as just looking at the very start of the move as well and wondering where Hamilton was to go and why he would have needed to think that he had to give way.

        • Hah. The opening request almost had me Gonch. I was about to answer your queries in good faith…

          Then I read the final part of your post… You’re clearly not interested in any answer. You have it sorted, and are sticking to it.

          I’m happy I skipped this trap. My follow up question is, why ask, then follow with the diatribe after? Is it like a preachers rhetorical call for help?

          Actually, it’s ok. Don’t answer.

      • “I note Rosberg also said there was no risk involved in the attempted pass. How did that work out … ?”

        BTW Davidson in the video below clearly invalidates this point of view, showing how Rosberg had no way to mount a genuine passing move at the critical moment inside the corner..

  8. Thankfully an article that is indeed alternative and looks at things from a non pro-Rosberg angle.

  9. @follow the evidence

    The on-board shot clearly shows Nico making a sharp left turn to avoid hitting Lewis, who was slower into the corner. The right turn of the wheel is to take the corner line without bouncing over the kerb, and then almost certainly causing a crash. Lewis DIDN’T HAVE TO move from the normal line to give Nico any room. But he COULD have stayed out further to the middle of the track, and then there would be almost zero chance of a clash. This action wouldn’t have disadvantaged him because the next corner is a slow left into a faster right hander and the normal approach line, is to the middle of the track, especially if you are defending. People should also keep in mind that the Mercedes W05 has amazing corner entry speed. I would love to see a comparison of Lewis vs Nico for their approach speed into that corner. Nico appeared to be faster into corners than other car including Lewis’s. Driving or braking style, who knows. For me it was a racing incident, and Lewis should remember how many similar incidents he has had in the past.

    • All good points, but you’re missing the fact that Rosberg had dropped so far back that Lewis would’ve expected him to slot behind, not leave his wing hanging there, as he would’ve were it Vettel or Alonso etc… were it Maldonado perhaps Hamilton would have been more careful but then Rosberg is no Maldonado.

      Given the fact that Merc were fairly insistent that the toys not be broken, he would have no reason to believe Nico would be there. I agree it was a racing incident, but internally at Merc is a different story.

      Much of what makes for all the exciting wheel to wheel racing is that the driver’s can expect and anticipate what each other will do. Watching Vettel and Alonso or that multi car battle with Button et al is like listening to a string quartet that has played together for many years. IT’s amazing what they can do because they know each other’s tendencies.

    • Nico had a tow from Lewis as they came along the Kemmel Straight, hence why he had more speed on coming into the corner, but once on the brakes he realised he had no way to pass and just didn’t appear to quite brake enough to be able to slot in behind Lewis before clattering over the curbs.
      At no time do I think Nico caused the contact maliciously, he was just p—ed off for losing the lead so easily and made a mistake while under the influence of the ‘red mist’

  10. As far as I am aware nobody has picked up on this point – the fact that rosberg even feels the need to ‘prove a point’ to lewis is quite a revelation. It suggests that he knows he has come short of lewis in his racecraft and therefore is out to try and prove himself to lewis… quite a startling revelation when you think about it and he is effectively displaying a big weakness. Furthermore, lewis commented that during one of their team meetings rosberg was still aggrieved about the situation that occured 3 weeks earlier in hungary, (lewis not waving him bye into the sunset), and was still hung up on it. But anyway, it’s hamilton who’s mentally weak. Right?

    • Well, Rosberg will know better than anyone that he usually comes up short of Lewis by a tenth or so over a season at their respective peaks – this has been re-enforced over their entire career together. So, he knows he has to take him down ‘off the track’ to be able to win on it.

    • I saw an interview with Lewis at the Goodwood Festival of Speed and he was asked if he had be surprised by Nico this year, Lewis’s reply in very telling, he says Nico was never that strong in carting and Lewis was surprised he had made it to f1 a year earlier than him and that he had managed to stay there and improve. As if to say, I whipped him in carts and I’m gonna whip him now too.

  11. Here’s Anthony Davidson’s analysis of the incident – and a very good one I must say. This was Rosberg’s error entirely and Hamilton followed the rules to the letter, giving Rosberg enough room on track at every moment.

      • See here you go again. Not everyone. But you just remember those who are against you. And in every racing incident there are 2 sides. Just like here.

    • From Davidson’s slow-mo it seems more and more and more like a calculated risk by Rosberg. One correction to the left, and then instead of backing off properly, one steering correction to the right for a surgically placed friendly puncture. Of course this might have been simply normal steering corrections, but in light of Monaco maybe not.

      As a note, Davidson strangely describes the incident under July 2012 memo (“significant portion of the car”), even though his video snapshot has the cars quite in the middle of Turn 5 (as per the memo, “Any driver defending his position *on a straight* and *before* any braking area [..]”). I wonder if the stewards are also conflating this, nevermind the senile Charlie Brown..

    • Saw this interesting comment via Guardian’s coverage:

      25 Aug 2014 00:09

      http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/39868318

      Of Roseberg’s[sic] possibly premeditated slashing of Hamilton’s car, the writer Richards opines that “the move was at best clumsy and at worse impetuous and ill-thought out”. I am not certain Richards had a better vantage point of the accident than I or anyone at F1 land, because most of us saw and concluded, after more evidence emerged post-race, that it was an act of deliberate sabotage by a driver, who has demonstrated at Spa his mean streak and penchant for vengeance that exacted with disproportionate blow.

      I think it is important to note Hamilton’s observation that Roseberg[sic] had bottled up his anger during the break and carried that with him to the meeting and then the racetrack. This is not the behavior of a reasonable, sensible and professional driver. This is one of a quietly petulant, vindictive and professionally cruel driver, who is demonstrably willing to deliberately risk the hard work of his employer, damage Mercedes assets, undermine their racing goals, endanger the life of his opponent and teammate and childhood friend.

      It is time the world saw Nico Roseberg[sic] for what he is. For the sake of safety of F1 drivers, FIA ought to investigate this “little incident” that “is serious”. If they determine that Nico Roseberg[sic] was indeed deliberate in his actions, then they should retroactively overturn their decision and exact on the culprit the most severe punishment allowed under the rule book. Else, it will be open season for vindictive drivers.

      Ouch!

      • Clearly the comment of an ill educated F1 observer….

        The odds were against Rosberg benefitting from this…. more often than not these incidents result in the front wing damage compromising the chasing driver more than their prey….

        • I just thought it was funny that he went on a multi-paragraph rant but couldn’t even spell Rosberg’s last name correctly!

          I don’t think NR intended to cause the damage he did, but if it was a mistake, he should’ve just admitted it and moved on.

          One thing I think we can ALL agree on is that the Court’s ruling upon Brawn’s departure that Toto, Lauda (& then PL) wouldn’t be able to manage the team effectively was spot-on.

        • @TJ13
          “The odds were against Rosberg benefitting from this…. ”

          Mayhaps.. But that’s what we mean by “calculated risk”. The odds of *shallow damage* were against Nico (he was more likely to get front wing damage, but nothing race ending), but the odds of *severe damage*, however low, were against Lewis (he was more likely to get a race-ending puncture). In other words worst-case scenario was worse for his teammate than for himself.

          I reckon that like in Monaco, some subconscious (or conscious) cost-benefit analysis along these lines must have happened in Nico’s head..

  12. With the risk of stating the obvious, the July 2012 memo does NOT apply to defending a corner: “Any driver defending his position on a straight and before any braking area [..]” This may seem clear to me, but who knows what Charlie says..

    So this leaves us only with the March 2012 guidance. I may be lost into the FIA legalese, but it seems to me that this one relates to the case when a driver leaves the racing line to defend, and then returns to the racing line. Upon returning he is deemed to leave a car’s width. (Someone more proficient in FIAese, please confirm.)

    It is conceivable to view the ROS/HAM incident under this light. Now, here it gets tricky. First, did HAM leave the racing line prior to approaching Turn 5, and did he make a move to return to the racing line? That HAM left a car’s width on the approach to Turn 5, at the start of the braking zone, cannot be in doubt. But was HAM always on the racing line approaching the Turn 5 braking zone? If so, then the March 2012 guidance would not apply. It looks to me that HAM doesn’t make any significant move either to leave or to return to the racing line, which would render this guidance NOT applicable in this case.

    So what are we left with? Racing norms. And racing norms seem to dictate that the driver in front and on the inside has the prerogative to the racing line inside the corner. That’s why Vettel backed off earlier when trying to overtake HAM, and why Alonso backed off (several times?) when trying to overtake our shielded Magnussen. The racing norms also dictate that drivers should take action to avoid avoidable accidents, something that ROS seems to be in breach of.

    So in light of the above, let me give the mike back to you, Judge:
    Why did you suggest yesterday that the stewards deemed HAM in breach of rules on defensive driving (and that the stewards imposed no penalty because HAM’s race was already ruined)? Based on what?

  13. So judge, you last sat in a race car 3days ago, and have regular contact with the f1 teams, so you must be racing in the support races, and perhaps you seem to have a closer relationship with Mercedes. perhaps someone with more knowledge than me can figure out who you are. 🙂

  14. This talk of extra width to the left of Nico’s car is irrelevant, because there’s also extra width to the right of Lewis’s car. Of course Lewis knew Nico was still somewhere to his left hand side. Lewis needed to accept that Nico was still alongside, even if it was just Nico’s front wing, and drive smartly. Instead he just sweeps across as if Nico is not there at all. Is Nico supposed to just meekly hand the race win to Lewis?

    • Rubbish! There was more room for Rosberg to escape, he’d made the move and not got close. Hamilton hardly ‘sweeps across’ but stays on line and doesn’t veer. Are you really trying to say that Hamilton should have moved off the racing line to his right, to allow for Rosebrg to come onto the racing line. Really!? Rosberg hits the back edge of Hamilton’s tyre. That’s hardly alongside.

      The fundamental flaw in your point is that it is pushing the limits to claim Rosberg was ‘alongside’.

      • “Are you really trying to say that Hamilton should have moved off the racing line to his right, to allow for Rosebrg to come onto the racing line. Really!?”

        No. I’m saying that Hamilton should have moved off the racing line to his right, to allow for Rosberg’s front wing. Then as the corner continues Hamilton would have moved onto the racing line once he could see Rosberg in his mirror. Simple racing sense – don’t cut across when you don’t know where the other guy is. Rosberg was alongside enough – as the outcome shows.

    • Sweeps across?!? Does anyone have any onboard footage from Hamilton’s car, for this? Hamilton was tucked in to the line on the right-hand side as they took that corner, and then as he was ahead he took to the racing line. Hamilton by entering from the inside has compromised his corner entrance, but he still manages to be in front of Nico in the corner. So then you’re saying he must also compromise his corner exit and stay off the racing line? Nico has the room to bail out of it, and as the car behind has the better view as to what’s required to avoid a collision. He could’ve tucked in behind Lewis and would’ve lost minimal time. Somehow I think even if Lewis hugged that right-hand line all the way through the corner, that Rosberg would’ve found a way to make contact.

      • “So then you’re saying he must also compromise his corner exit and stay off the racing line?”

        Since the corner exit is corner entry as well, and since Nico is still alongside Lewis, then: yes. It’s because Lewis has less vision that means he should have been more careful – he can’t just assume that Nico has jumped out of his way.

        • Oh and by the way…. This article is an eloquent rebuttal of a TJ13 post…. and we were more than happy for it to be published…. Please all lay off the bias comments… It winds me up… I get emotional… Then I get angry…. “And you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry” to coin a phrase…

          This was not directed at Mark Jones…. A General observation 🙂

          Live long and prosper ….

          • I must admit, you have seemed a little grumpy of late. Perhaps all the name calling and bickering will stop now you have banged the gavel. 🙂

    • So even after watching the video, well I hope you did, you’re still of the opinion that Lewis chopped across the nose of Nico’s car?

      Disclaimer: just asking a question and it’s not meant to offend or antagonise anyone.

  15. The video from Sky is great. I suppose that everybody has already made up his mind and nobody contemplates the possibility that Nico just wanted to (or doubted if he should) back but misjudged by 10cm / 4 inches and, since nobody would ever believe that, he just got that “I want to prove a point” message which at least presents him as a machiavelic driver and not just a bad driver.

    I still think Rosberg is at fault in this action, but I am not 100% sure it is deliberate.

  16. I cannot believe this is anything more than a “racing incident,” the kind of thing that happens all the time and goes without such a brouhaha. Anyone who thinks Rosberg has such precision that he could intentionally knock out Hamilton’s tire and ruined Hamilton’s race without mucking up his own car, has more confidence in Rosberg’s driving ability than is realistic and I’m certain more confidence than even he has. Was it a bit bone-headed, but that is racing. Not the end of the world and certainly no reason for booing.

  17. With the evidence presented, which is ample, with the knowledge that Rosberg has been roundly castigated by ALL television media in the past for his ill-conceived on-track “moves,” and with Hamilton’s 15 years of dominance versus Rosberg ( and, again, with Rosberg admitting as much after China) as the context which completes the picture, it is appalling that anyone can still extend the bounds of reason and justify mustering a defense of Nico Rosberg’s Spa gaffe (let alone at Canada, or at Monaco).

    • Not to cause (too much) trouble, but I could have sworn I saw this guy say he was leaving (with much educated and pious indignation I might add) in a comment yesterday.

      In addition I could have sworn Hippo’s “don’t let the door hit…” follow up made me giggle. I could be wrong, I suppose.

      Like Yoda said, “do, or do not. there is no try.”

  18. Commentators in USA – David Hobbes, Machette and Diffey –while watching the race reviewed the incident several times. They all concluded “racing incident” and moved on. And they are all Hamilton fan boys. They were astounded and perplexed at the booing afterwards. It has been blown way out of proportion.

    • HA! They are three of the worst, least-talented, least-credible F1 presenters ever! In fact, they’re so bad, I prefer to watch SKY’s coverage via a bootleg feed online, than NBCSports’ full-1080 HD on 60-inch plasma in my living room.

      Please.

      • Yeah, exact same feelings wrt the presenters on the French feed. Absolute worse ever! Nationalistic, untalented and simply useless. Their favorite hobby is who speaks louder during broadcast radio transmissions, to the point of not realizing that a transmission was there in the first place. If only they provided a big red button to switch off the commentary, but keep on the car screeches..

        As for the Russian feed, it is fine if you are not keen in getting any useful explanations about the race itself. Obvious amateurs..

        So as criticized as they are in these quarters, for me Sky’s English feed is the golden standard of professional reporting during races.

        • So as criticized as they are in these quarters, for me Sky’s English feed is the golden standard of professional reporting during races.

          Yeah, no doubt. Sky’s pretty amazing, i imagine more so if you have actual sky box access w/ all the supplementary pit lane and in-car footage, but even the main telecast is better to watch online or even download in HD than some of the national broadcasters. At least ONE in Australia is smart, they use, iirc, SKY race feed and then have two guys sitting in studio back home to talk about stuff not directly related to calling the play by play.

          I wish NBC could work out a deal w/ SKY where they attached Will Buxton to the team and we got SKY’s main race coverage but w/ Will’s work included somehow. Done!

  19. A very experienced racer once said ” I no longer see Formula 1 as a sport”, It’s taken me quite a while to reach the point where i share his very wise opinion. For me it was earlier this year at Monaco where Nico escaped sanction for his Q3 off. But “The Show” must go on and it certainly does and i continue to allow myself to be entertained.

    TJ13 has become a daily read for me over the past 18 month’s or so, and the past two days have been positively scintillating. In my view the collision (caused by Nico Rosberg) on lap 2 is a clear (textbook) case of ‘causing an avoidable accident’ or whatever the rule states this week.

    Anyway I want to thank everyone for their contribution to the site.

      • “{First let me say how refreshing it is to see drivers duke it out on twitter, rather than chucking their HANs devices at each other on track after an incident! I’m glad F1 lacks that nonsense nowadays.

        I really hate to see this drama, especially between two guys who are so talented and have a good personal history. But I have to blame Nico in this soap opera. Hamilton should be fuming. He goes too far most of the time, but this time he has been quite restrained. He got taken out by his teammate in a clumsy move and the teammate refused to own up to it. Nico should just admit he messed up and move on. Seriously, it’s not like he just totally locked up and rammed a guy—this is just one of those small errors that all drivers make. Just admit it.

        I’m sure the suits in Stuttgart, having seen their cars take each other out of the first two spots, are not even trying to hear about what Nico “really meant.” I tend to think that one result of of Nico being stiff-necked about this will be the unfortunate appearance of strict team orders at Mercedes. I think the races between them will now be over as of the first pit stop window.’

        • “He goes too far most of the time, but this time he has been quite restrained.”

          Well, I don’t think he was restrained when, after the Mercedes meeting, he announced to the press that Nico had admitted to hitting him deliberately. That was pretty bad.

          However for F1 in general, all this drama is brilliant. People will be talking about the 2014 title chase for years. I know I’m certainly planning on buying the 14/15 Autocourse.

        • I think the races between them will now be over as of the first pit stop window

          This one was over some time before that…

          I’m not sure team orders will help Mrecedes much. They’ve had great PR up unti now by allowing their drivers to race. Curtailing that is likely to be unpopular.

        • oops just to be clear this is another comment from…Guardian, I think. Some of the formatting got cut off so the source link isn’t there, but I broadly agree with the sentiments, hence why I shared it.

          Yeah though, what happens if the team issues real, proper orders, and those two mustangs don’t heed ’em??

          doh.

          • “if the team issues real, proper orders”

            That’s the question, really. 🙂 Who will enforce them? Paddy the Enforcer?

            Now the drivers are at a point where all that counts is WDC imperatives, and team orders are merely an afterthought. I suspect that by the end of teh seasons the Wolff and the Leprechaun will get more egg on their faces than Horner himself got after “Multi 21”.

  20. It seems clear from the video that Nico had lost the extra momentum he had after the 1st apex the pass, then coming into the second apex of the chicane Rosberg had clearly already decided that it was advantage Lewis and made a real mess of slotting back in behind. There is no point to prove as at no time did Lewis chop across the front of him.

    100% at Rosberg’s door IMO and I’m no ‘Ham-fosi’

Leave a Reply