Yep, but the rule makers never really envisaged the situation where a steward would go back half a kilometre when defining a who is the overtaker. So we ended up with a situation where the car that is ahead as they approach the corner is the overtaker, and the one behind as the one that is in the lead resulting in a mad dash for the apex. I’m not sure even kimi or Seb could predict that loophole.
It would be something like this: * - Kimi, who deserves a penalty here? - I dont know! I was taking a shit! * Seb could do it, but Kimi... he would hate such job (and I'm a fan of Kimi since 2003 till this day!).
As a Paraguayan, it'd be a pretty great thing to have soon-to-be 11 world championships here. For now, Dursken is doing a great job in F2 (first Paraguayan ever to run in F2)
But they are consistent lol Part 1, max is ahead but given leniency for lap 1 turn 1 Part 2, George wasn’t ahead at the apex so it’s a penalty for running bottas off Part 3 max is ahead at the apex, and gets a track limits warning for going off the track, lando gets a penalty for passing off the track
@iVerstappen I just don't understand how getting to the apex first by not even making the exit gives max the right to force lando off without a penalty, lando passed off the track so don't disagree with his penalty but he wasn't there by choice, he was forced there
For the people saying graveltraps are needed, no, thats not the problem. The problem is the rules are flawed, and drivers like Max make full use of it. The wheel to wheel rules basically allows the car on the inside to do whatever they want aslong as they're ahead into the apex which is why Max was according to the rulebook innocent, and the others werent. It's simply a flawed rulebook which goes against wheel to wheel racing in itself. The rulebook is exactly why Max has never changed his style in wheel to wheel because well, it is allowed
That's why it's called wheel to wheel racing, even more regulations on top of an already over regulated series isn't the answer, sooner or later any aggressive wheel to wheel racing will be gone and a part of the past, and this is why Formula 1 has become so tame, F1 doesn't need more sissy gentlemen drivers, non stop wheel to wheel racing could save this sport from itself, between politics, rules and regulations they have turned F1 into golf or bowling, its just nowhere as exciting anymore, we need more aggression not less
Shout out to Soup Emporium as well for this. He had to address in his Simpsons Hit and Run video for Raid Shadow Legends to stop contacting him. It’s absurd.
Yeah I mean, still promoting VPN's reading their BS scripts. "Protects you from hackers" blablabla. No they don't. It just mask your IP. That's it. If you get infected, your IP does not matter. A vpn does not make you safer in any way. At best it will allow you to view restricted websites in your country and some minor stuff. That's about it. Just saying.
Why can't we just go back to the previous rules for this stuff? If your car is alongside at the corner (none of the apex determination bs), you're entitled to room. Inside car 'gets' the corner, but must leave a cars width on the outside for the other car. Seems pretty simple to me. And the stewards really need to tone down the whole lap 1 thing, rules are rules, and especially when its a pure 1 on 1 incident, with no other cars involved, why on earth does it matter if its lap 1 or 50?
Or maybe let’s just use common sense. The track is wide enough for two, so there shouldn’t be none of this forcing people off nonsense. It literally benefits one guy
I guess they are saying on lap 1 you have colder tires and more fuel and overall harder car to drive but yeah when it's 1 on 1 you gotta police it. I think everyone understands incidents with multiple cars, but lap 1 just means you away with anything now days
Because racing fans always complain about “biased stewarding”. They did the same in 2021, saying the rules were too vague and inconsistent. The current rules are a result of people bitching about stewarding, funny isn’t it? It would likely result in the same thing as well. Drivers lunging to be “alongside” then running slightly wide and complaining about being pushed off. No matter what, the drivers are going to try to exploit the rules in any way possible for their benefit.
@@joshuafleckenstein351that shouldn’t even happen in the first place. There was a clear line drawn before 2016 that any type of pushing a driver off the track results in a penalty. The rights to the corner are determined by how much the outside or inside car is alongside, not by the apex bullshit that’s been made for Verstappen’s benefits. There was no reason for the FIA to made that part of the rules more vague than before.
Hard racing is giving the opponent the least amount of space on track (but still a car's width) to make the opponent commit a mistake or have a worse line, not driving people off track when you are gonna be overtaken. Even worse when you yourself also go off track
@@GaadhiMahendratf does the world have to do with the rules and regulations of a sport. That literally what defines sport, fair chance to prove why ur the best. Or we too slow to understand that too?
Now make hard racing not only a cars width, but also a cars length, and that is it. Sticking a nose in, isn't passing, its crashing. Ahead by a car or the corner is not yours. The end.
As Jimmy Broadbent has said we shouldn't be allowing drivers to just run drivers out of road/off track, Making it a penalty offence would probably help a lot with this, especially with the "significantly alongside" stuff.
@@jameskerrigan8491 In other series it doesn't matter, if you're going into a corner significantly alongside you need to leave space or else you're forcing a driver and you're at fault that's what everyone's problem
A Problem (not the only one) with the stewards is they are always changing, meaning rules can be interruputed differently by each steward. So there is a human factor which means lack of consistent stewarding.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious. "Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car. This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner. Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track. Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty. I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
I’m a bit of a casual racing fan but most other sports the referee has his name, face and reputation on the line out there. In football, even the 4th official is under this pressure. In MMA/boxing/combat sports, this applies to both the referee and the judges. Meanwhile every time I see a race, it’s just “race stewards” making a decision. Maybe having them be less anonymous would make them more careful/consistent in their decisions.
I don't necessarily mind penalizing Norris for an off-track overtake, the thing that really bugged me about that one was that Max himself went off track, too. To me, it feels like it's either fair game, they're just racing and both these instances just cancel each other out, or it's a 5 second penalty for Max just ushering Norris off to the netherworlds and back in trying to defend his corner. I get it: it's tough to be a referee for literally any sport, and motorsport is no exception. The maddening inconsistency of it all is just what gets under my skin. Also, just to get my priors, I may be incredibly biased because I'm a huge McLaren fan and Norris fan, too
It seems the most logical move for Lando if he knows Max is going to lift to get ahead at the apex is to lift himself. Sure he'd go off, but so has Max, and therefore Max can't overtake him.
What you said is what would happen if F1 had better rules. In other motorsports, what Max did was illegal because he was side by side with another car and forced them off track. It would have been illegal even if Max stayed on track himself, which is good. However, the other motorsports I am referring likely wouldn't penalize Max because Lando still made the pass without any contact. They would let them keep race, Lando keeps the position, and Max is given a warning to not do that again. It is very simple, if F1 just fixes their stupid rule.
Yeah I think giving both a 5 second would be the move for sure. I honestly think people want to see what the in-race consequences are and so do the stewards. If they thought penalising both would amount to nothing then that's tough luck. The rules should be applied regardless of the outcome in the race. If Lando stays ahead in position over Max post penalty then so be it! You can't control the outcome as the stewards currently want to do (seemingly), but you can control how you apply the rules. The rules shouldn't be applied in such a way where they 'care' about who finishes where.
I am not a Lando fan, but if Lando deserved a penalty, so did Max for leaving the track regardless of what Lando did!! Why is the any question about that??
I think most people agree with you. Max does this a lot because he knows exactly how to get away with it. When discussing today's race in Mexico, this was said: "Max never yields, and always either forces the other driver to yield, go off the track or crash" There's only a few drivers Max _doesn't_ squeeze like he constantly does Lando, and Sainz is one of them. I think that's because he knows that Sainz is just as aggressive as him, and will _never_ yield, which would inevitably result in a crash.
What would be complicated to have 2 conditions true to be a valid overtake? 1 Be ahead at the apex (many series define "ahead" as having half the car in front, not just the nose) WHILE 2 Being sure to make the corner (stay on track until the end of the corner) Many series apply those 2 rules at the same time.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious. "Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car. This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner. Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track. Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty. I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
@@singular9 an entire car length is a bit much and very rare. That would limit the opportunities a lot and the only overtakes would be in straight line with DRS. But your principle is correct. In Carrerra Cup, you have to be ahead at the apex by half a car’s length. This way you can push, but if you’re not ahead enough, you have to back either leave room on the outside, or back off if you’re on the outside. In the case of Verstappen and Norris, for Verstappen to have half a car in front at the apex, he would have had to dive on the inside much quicker and would never have stayed on track, invalidating the overtake.
Indeed, when its so obviously dirty driving for tactical reasons and not a genuine cold tyres with heavy car or 3:1 doesn't go moment it should be investigated. More lenient perhaps on the first lap as it is often more difficult...
No, they don’t ignore lap one incident. They are less strict with incidents that happened during lap 1 but that doesn’t mean they are ignoring it. They still look into it but won’t penalised anyone unless the driver is very obviously at fault.
To quote the spotters on Door Bumper Clear, A track with track limits related penalties is a poorly designed track. If it’s paved, it’s going to get used.
There really is a simple solution to this: You must always leave a space. When another car is significantly alongside, does not matter how they got there, you need to leave cars width to them. What is significantly alongside? All of the front tire is ahead of the rear tire. It really is that simple. The whole "first at apex" is continuation from the Max vs Leclerc in Red Bull Ring in.. i think 2018. Max clearly pushed Charles wide. Stewards didn't penalize Max. Instead FIA made a rule clarification that suit THAT particular incident and made it the new rule. Ever since that day drivers have been allowed to push other drivers off the track. We had very brief period when that was penalized again, but it was so inconsistent that no one knew where the lines of what is acceptable were. First at apex is stupid rule, it always was. In 2021 Max pushed Lewis wide on every occasion he could and never got a single reprimand. Other drivers do get punished.. And i don't think it is a conspiracy, Max just is so good at installing rules along with the loopholes to his spine that he doesn't need to think how to exploit them. At the moment you can drive off the track while defending, that is what Max did. it is not compatible with the racing code, at all but.. FIA are filled with the most brilliant stupid people on the planet.
What annoys me is Max’s defense caused him to miss the corner twice and wasn’t punished either time Defending is all well and good as long as you can keep the car on the track, and he didn’t manage that
I´m not even sure "defense" is the correct word in this situation. Everybody talking about "him defending well" and stuff but last time i checked Lando was ahead into the corner soooo... isn´t he technically the attacking car?
@@cameronmackenzie5356 See, i don´t think that is actually correct because when George overtook Valtteri it´s the exact same situation and nobody in his right mind would argue that George was "defending" there just because he was ahead (or at least side by side) with Valtteri at the apex. So it´s not about being ahead at the apex but more about declaring somebody "attacking" or "defending" into every corner since that obviously makes a whole lot of difference when it comes to rules and penalties.
Gravel would have made this situation worse. Instead of Max exploiting a rule and giving Lando a penalty, Lando would have been beached or turned into Max and probably ending both of their races. The problem is a stupid rule that doesn't take context into account.
Turn 1 leniency shouldn’t apply to what is clearly premeditated rule breaking. With Verstappen they should just specifically never give him benefit of the doubt if they ever hope to rein him in
The FIA is inconsistant as ever. But the thing is thats why I'll never see Lando as a world champion. He always falls for Max' tricks. Verstappen has nothing to lose if they crash and is known for battling hard. The guys who can keep up with him are Fernando, Lewis and Charles. Lando is still missing that mental thing against Max. Max is in his head. Like Mika was in Michael's head in 1998 or Michael himself was in Damon's head. I think Max is a lot like Michael Schumacher, especially mid 90s Michael. Scary fast but also rough and won't hold back, testing the limits of the track, rules and his opponent every race. Thats one way how you become a world champion. Another way is to be calm and dont fall for that like Mika Häkkinen against Michael or Alain Prost against Senna. And I see the later more in Charles than in Lando
Sooo grass and gravel would have been a perfect solution.. however.. in the case of the Max Lando incident i have a hot take: "Being forced off by a driver that himself just about didn't make the corner doesn't give you the right to use half a football field worth of run off to complete an overtake." Wasn't Bottas the one defending? Russell was the one attacking? Max on the inside was the defender.. making indeed Lando using the OFF track to complete An overtake. Even though he got forced off. If this is allowed.. oh boy be ready to see Max getting creative with that one."
Exactly! You could argue max diserves a penalty, but you cant really argue that Norris overtook him off track. Both of those things can be true at the same time.
@@Niegezien @randar1969 i fully agree with you guys. I have had discussions with friends, and we all would agree that a warning for both would have been best. Or make them both tell the story from their perspectives after the race.
max did the same thing in austria when norris overtook him fair and square in one of the t3 incodents, he went off full speed on the runoff to keep the position and still no penalty then so no penalty should be now
The electronic devide idea is actually brilliant. any car that goes over the white line automatically gets a 3 second slowdown, if a car goes off because another pushed them wide, then both get the 3 second slow down, that way they are still together and the racing can pick up right where it left off.
Perfect timing Josh. Saw this vid yesterday and just a few hours later we saw more unsporting conduct. Pushing drivers off the track, leaving the track and gaining an advantage, ... It's clear the FIA needs to penalize this behavior more often or heavier.
Why is the rule different for being on the inside or the outside of the corner? Any driver can send another driver to purgatory or Paraguay regardless of having the inside or outside line, when one driver has carte blanche to driver as they please to maintain position. 100% the gravel traps are needed, and if Austria can do it to appease multiple disciplines, so can everyone, but the rules need equal emphasis on both drivers to give space and not compromise the other while attacking or defending.
Here me out you can overtake off the track but you only get three limits per race and before you overtake you have to say over the radio "if you no longer go for gap that exsits you no longer racing driver" whilst at the same time flipping off the driver your passing think that would work
The outside of the track isn't supposed to be a faster line than the inside. Either the racing line is in the wrong spot, or there isn't enough on the outside of the track to slow you down effectively. Cheers!
I'm from Paraguay. I hope Lewis and Max got here legally, unlike Ronaldinho, who arrived here on a dodgy Paraguayan passport and went to prison, where he proceeded to play soccer with the inmates. The outcome of the match dictated who got to eat a pig. An entire pig. I am not making this up.
It feels like they want one rule for all situations and as someone who deals with traffic data and infrastructure specifically... and how engineers like to experiment on infrastructure... having 1 rule for all forms of traffic is nonsense... you need to have contingency upon contingency until it's more like you are playing jazz in so much as it's the rules you don't follow and when to not follow them that becomes more important than those you do... and with drivers and penalties, I think this is the more apt approach vs looking into the book of rules and saying *this* is the "most" correct for this situation when it could be multiple rules that need to be implemented *except* this one or two.
The only thing that really gets me, is that max had all four wheels off of the track. If he was in control the whole time he should/would have stayed on the track.
I was thinking similarly but I haven't really seen anyone talk about control. Was Max in control of the car? Yes = He deliberately drove off the circuit. No = He barrelled into the corner with no hope of making it. Neither is acceptable 🤷
Max just takes the piss, when he came onto the grid I initially saw him as the successor to Lewis and wished him well, I would even have followed him after Lewis retired, but he's just a petulant spoilt child living out his fathers vicarious dreams , this is why he, RB and the horn dog are so well suited
The issue isn’t the details of the rules, it’s the application of them, specifically around determining who is the defending driver and who is the attacking driver. If Lando was the attacking driver, he deserves the 5s penalty. If Max was the attacking driver he deserves a penalty / to lose track position. Is Lando the attacking driver because he was behind at the apex? Is Max the attacking driver because Lando was a car lengths ahead before the breaking zone? It’s unclear to me how they determine this.
easiest wait to fix this problem and several others is to make the cars considerably narrower and slightly shorter so that way there's actual space to race on the track.
@@nickb2049 that doesn't solve the pushing problem though , anyone on the outside would get pushed in the gravel and possibly get stuck there. in this case both of them
Yeah, I can understand the Lando penalty. But, not giving max any sort of penalty really broke my brain considering he broke several rules with that terribly desperate defensive move. Idgaf about who ahead at the apex anymore. In your passing or defending, you gotta stay on track.
What penalty should he have gotten?? he was ahead at the apex and then went off other then a track limits violation their is nothing to give max .. Lando chose to go around him on the outside he could of backed out, he could of given the place back,, but he didn’t he hung his car in their drive wayyyyy outside and overtook Max… by the Definitions of the rules the stewards got it right
@@Jrh-rp7np he didn't just "go off" he forced another driver off track (like Russel on Bottas), so please explain why you think what Max is doing is fair?
@@Bobby09LFCit’s not about being fair, fair doesn’t exist in racing. It’s about being within the rules, and the rules state the driver who’s ahead at the apex is given the corner. In other words, you can’t be ahead at the apex and force a driver off. George wasn’t ahead at the apex, and pushed Bottas off, so he got the penalty for running Valterri wide when it wasn’t his corner. According to the rules, Max didn’t deserve a penalty as he only went over track limits for a third time. Don’t point your irritation toward Max, he’s exploiting the rule book to perfection. Point your frustration to the FIA and their dogshit rule book.
@@joshuafleckenstein351 fairness is literally the point of implementing penalties. if someone takes advantage of the rules language then that language should be amended for the sake of fair competition. imo they both deserve penalties. max for making a dumb divebomb and forcing norris and himself off, and norris for overtaking off the track and not giving the position back
The mantra of "ahead at the apex, do as you please" is an absolute scourge on F1. Max's tactic of just deciding not to finish the corner when someone's on his outside is such a dirty, classless way to race, though I can't blame him for knowing he can usually get away with it (I am writing this after Mexico so it's not totally foolproof). That section of the rulebook needs a complete teardown and rewrite. Comparing the yearly turn 1 shenanigans to NASCAR is a pretty interesting comparison though. Tanky cars and a more hands-off approach to driving standards keeps a lot of arguments like this from happening in NASCAR since contact is fair game and the drivers know if they start a pissing match someone else will finish it. Yeah it can cause a lot of drama when two guys start having at each other, but the rulebook doesn't come out unless things get really stupid. F1 is not the place for a vehicular boxing match, but it is kinda surprising no one says "screw it" and stands their ground so the guy doing the forcing wipes themself out. Maybe Kmag can make use of those reset penalty points before the season's over.
As much as I would hate complicating rules, maybe we need a sort of two points system. Instead of just measuring just the apex, find two or even three points that you have to have a certain relative position at.
For me this incident killed f1 for me, even when playing f1 games it’s instinct to leave a fair amount of room for the car on the outside, pushing a car off the road is rude at the best of times and dangerous at the worst of times and it’s just not fun to watch. Max wouldn’t make the same move if he wasn’t leading in the drivers championship.
I mean, the regs are working, in that Max was rewarded for being smart in the moment, and Lando punished for calculating incorrectly. That's testing world-class drivers and race teams on their skills, since it's still a bit tough to get a comprehensive legal opinion mid-corner. Regardless, I still like the gravel pit solutions at Red Bull Ring the best to force racers back into the racing lines; just please don't mandate them, since tracks are spending so much on upgrades already.
This is where technology will begin to play a bigger role IMO - cars have so many transponders and locators that, at some point, it will be trivial to determine position relative to a given point on the racetrack. Once that happens, you can automatically flag a driver who crosses the white line with a message in their car and even the previous Delta to the car in front and require them to "not gain an advantage" by maintaining the Delta through the next corner, or to determine who had the "right" to the corner based on position. Hawk-Eye and similar companies would likely be able to come up with something similar that can be shown to viewers and teams
It should've either been a racing incident or a penalty to both of them. Though I will say that Max does this a lot because he knows exactly how to get away with squeezing other drivers like that. Max never yields. He either forces the other driver to yield, go off the track or they crash. Often times he should've been to the one to yield, but it never has any consequences. There's only a few drivers Max _doesn't_ squeeze like he constantly does Lando, and Sainz is one of them. I think that's because he knows that Sainz is also an aggressive driver who never yields, which would inevitably result in a crash between them. I'm not against defensive or offensive driving, I just think pulling shady moves instead of proving that you're actually better by giving space and still besting them isn't as fun to watch. Lately Max has had total tunnel vision, where he focuses more on not letting Lando get ahead than actually racing the others, only to inadvertently (or maybe deliberately) let Ferrari get past them both. Maybe he's playing the long game, trying to make Ferrari and McLaren fight each other for points, so neither team or driver can win..?
A slow-down penalty for leaving the track like it exists in sim-racing isn't the worst idea, but gravel traps, that can be removed easily after the event like in Austria are the way to go imo. Combined with the rule, that you always have to leave a car's width in wheel to wheel combat would solve the most pressing issues in F1: Track limits and absurd wheel to wheel racing situations.
I say if you are defending someone and you both go off track and the offender goes ahead, no penalty. This may not sound logical, but it's the defenders fault to begin with for forcing them off, so to me the 2 wrongs have made a right
The problem is the way the FIA keeps complicating the rules. Everytime they complicate the rules, this also adds more opportunities to find loopholes. For example: Under no circumstances is it allowed to overtake of track. Or: Under no circumstances is it allowed to force another driver of the track.
If you can't put gravel down everywhere, replicate the effects of it via the rules. If anyone goes off track without a valid reason (i.e. avoiding a spinning car), they get a strike. Three strikes, you're black flagged. It'll be carnage to begin with, but the drivers will quickly learn. The defending drivers will be less aggressive and the attacking drivers will just relent if they're being forced wide.
The sticky strips that slow cars down should be on the outside of the corners. If you run wide to take an advantage, then your slowdown negates your advantage. And if a car forces another off-track, then it's immediately obvious. And the rule should stand whether it's the first lap or the last lap. This also wouldn't destroy track day cars or bikes
@@nickb2049Yes it will. Drivers will still force each other off track unless they make it illegal and penalize it, like every other world motorsport already has. F1 is way behind on that department, so I glad this is finally being talked about.
have the ecu cut out the electric motors for a set amount of time if you go off the track. If you pass off the track then the other car is likely to just drive back past. It would need to be faster and the sensors would need to be more reliable... but it would discourage off track adventures while keeping things safe still
The problem with the Max - Lando incident is that Max didn't even bother sticking his cars within the white lines. It's one thing to miss your braking point and run wide, it's another to run outside the lines on purpose. Part of the flemish F1 broadcasting team is an active GT driver. On the monday after the race they allways record a podcast and in that podcast he said that yes, Lando deserved a penalty because he gained an advantage leaving the track, but equally Max should have gotten a penalty because Max pushed Lando of the track. His reasoning behind the penalty for Max is that while withing the rules, it is against the spirit of the sport. Racing can only be called racing when overtaking and finishing the move within the white lines, something max didn't do, twice. Honestly, I'm inclined to follow that reasoning. At the beginning of the staright, max was the defender and Lando the attacker, but before the corner, Lando was fully ahead of Max, therefor, Lando became the defender and Max the attacker. Max did get ahead at the apex, but was never able to keep his car between the lines, leaving Lando no room on track. If the attacking driver is allowed within the rules to finish an overtake outside of the track, then what chance does a defending driver have? Again, what Lando did was wrong, but Max was equally wrong here. Either give both a penalty, or don't give either of them the penalty. Otherwise it's not racing, it's just 2 people driving fast. On top of it all, there have been multiple instances this year of the stewards deciding about penalties for less controversial incidents after the race was finished. But suddenly now the FIA can get make a fast decision? The FIA is flip-flopping in the worst way possible. Taking way to long to resolve easy incidents at the start of the year to now rushing decisions that can decide the drivers championship. If any race incident would have warranted the FIA taking their time and make a decision post race, it's this one. A post-race decision wouldn't have affected how both Max and Lando drove, we heard on the radio that red bull told Max to push to keep it within 5 seconds. In the spirit of Guenter Steiner, the FIA are a bunch of wankers, not even understanding when it's appropriate to take their time for a decision.
@3:05, "...A law written as a result of Max himself, when he escorted Lewis into Paraguay, in 2021, at Interlagos..." Now that's damned good writing and funny to boot.
Everyone seems to forget that other moves exist. Switchback was brought up in this clip which would've been a solid answer for Norris. I don't like how Max handled Mexico but both COTA and Austria were the same move at the same corner because Norris couldn't make it happen anywhere else in his head (not sure on full validity of statement). He has to know by now that Max will toe the rules with some toes over but still expects 100% clean racing. Rubbing is Nascar's thing, but a little bit of rule defining racing is what we need in a sport that wishes to regulate everything for some reason
I’d love if they’d use the “go around the bollards (or through a chicane), but don’t be a bell end” system on more corners. It’ll stop questions like this (and make giving the position back much more costly. If you can’t make the corner then why should the other driver suffer (wether attacking or defending)?
The funniest thing is that Max was the overtaking car, not Lando, despite the stewards saying that Lando was the overtaking car. If you watch the replay, Lando was ahead by a full car length on the entry of the corner. Max then sent it, forced Lando wide and thus broke the rules. McLaren even appealed the penalty for that reason, but it was rejected, because the FIA said that proving the mistake of stewards by proving that the stewards made a mistake is not enough to get a penalty overturned. Funnily enough, Red Bull said exactly that prior to the FIA overturning the appeal.
You forgot to mention Max vs. Sainz, lap 1, turn 12. Max keeps his defensive line on the outside, Carlos dives on the inside, gets the "right" to the corner, overtakes him momentarily, both go outside the white lines but Max comes back ahead. It was not even put into investigation.
I would have been fine with the all thing if Max had been able to stay on track. But because he ran off, to me it's the proof that he was no longer in control of the car and that's why he should also have been penalized. Puting yourself at the mercy of understeer to defend shouldn't be a defense.
You are quite right when you say Max is the master at going to the absolute limit of the rulebook. But, as we saw in Mexico, that even includes professional fouls (or calculated penalties). He pretty quickly knew he only had the pace for 4th on Sunday, so by letting Norris past, that would give him an incredible opportunity to win the race and claw back 13 points. However, by running Norris of the track in T8, even with those two 10 second penalties, he was able to finish 6th (and without tyre management issues that could have been 4th), while ensuring Norris wouldn't win, resulting in a net 10 point loss, instead of 13. What he did is no different than what Magnussen did in the first half of the season. While it may not be seen as very sportsmanlike, exploiting the rules to this extent is genius. And the 'best' thing is, he now has 6 penalty points, with 2 to expire at the Las Vegas GP, meaning he has at least 6 more penalty points to play with, so he can 'safely' push Norris off the track or leave the track and gain an advantage on Norris without having to worry about a race ban. Verstappen's impact on the sport will be lasting, from the moving under braking rules, to driving standards during overtaking or defending and soon also the penalty points system (though he had some help from Magnussen with that one).
About the Lando overtake on Max. I understand that the first corner of COTA is very hard to navigate but I think that all this confusion could be evaded by shortening the scape path and puting grass or a gravel trap on the outside of the corner forcing drivers to be more conservative. If there was grass or gravel on that outside, Lando wouldn't had done that overtake there and would have tried doing it somewhere else.
Rulings on this for years have been inconsistent, and that's the problem. The rules say you have to leave room if your opponent is significantly alongside, and Lando definitely was that both times. The question shouldn't be, "Would he have completed the overtake on the corner?" but rather, "Did Max leave him room?", and he didn't. In the second example Max shoved him so wide that they both went off, and that sets a precedent for defending by leaving the track is okay if you can force your opponent to do the same.
Look, here's my suggestion based on the bomb idea, just have all cars have weapons systems that get activated when running over pads on the track for a one time use. I call this concept Wipeout and it'll be great. Trust me, especially once we get anti-gravity technology. Completely original concept, don't steal.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious. "Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car. This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner. Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track. Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty. I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
I think the solution is very simple. You should only have a right to your position if you stay on track. If you force an overtaking car wide, no matter where they were at the apex, and you yourself also exit the track limits, your position should be fair game. It's an obscure reference perhaps - I think a precedent got set at the 2020 Styrian grand Prix. In the last lap, stroll, norris and Ricciardo were in a battle for 6th, when stroll did exactly this to Ricciardo. The last lap was really chaotic and it got marked as a racing incident. I remember Ricciardo saying he thought it was bizarre that stroll didn't get a penalty and I still agree. In 2021, max took that precedent to a completely unsustainable level on multiple occasions. I think the apex rule works for all intents and purposes. If max had stayed within track limits, even when braking late, I doubt this would be much of a discussion. The fact that he exits the track should be evidence enough that he never intended to make that corner.
The “ahead at the apex” law needs changed because it promotes what max did- send it down the inside without braking to reach apex first. Change the law to: “ahead at the braking point”. In this case max was slightly behind when lando braked, so there’s no advantage to just sending it
The rule that being ahead the apex just automatically makes it your corner is so insane, as we saw Max exploited it which is fine but did they not think this through. Also I swear Lando did the same thing in Austria and Max overtook him off the track but didnt get a penalty, they collided on the next lap but still.
I maintain that if norris had rejoined behind verstappen, max would have gotten a penalty. But early in the move norris committed to driving off track and overtaking. He made very little effort to try keep it on track (e.g. go for an undercut). If he hadn't overtaken, penalty for max everyday. But he DID overtake off track and gain an advantage
I actually thought they would both receive a penalty, Max for not leaving space (going over the line means no space) and Lando for keeping his foot in off the track, you can clearly see him accelerate past Max and make the overtake outside of track limits.
Before I start, I want to make it clear that I am completely neutral and couldn't care less who wins a race or a corner. Any named driver below is neither being lauded nor whined about. As I have been saying for years: local stewards are no help whatsoever. They never have been because consistency, no matter how hard the FIA tries to insist on it, is a rarity. The FIA should supply 3 professional stewards that attend each race (say have 5 and rotate them. One should attend two in a row minimum to continue any discussions required). They should know the rules better than any racer. Currently Max seems to have the entire set memorised. It won't be long before others join him. Alongside them should be an ex-F1 racer - not currently affiliated with any team but also not so old that they don't understand how modern cars work. Perhaps insist on them taking part in a "filming session" with each team (allow extra mileage to cover it) at the start of the season so they know how this year's cars react. You could have older drivers like Warwick then as he'd understand why a car did something it wouldn't have done when he was racing. Finally, a local expert. Someone who is usually a lower-level racer but who knows the track inside out, and who teaches at the track. That would be more difficult for street circuits, but a local racer (who gets to drive over the roads daily, like any number of ex-F1 drivers in Monaco) could have a bunch of laps with Bernd Mayländer before FP1. They should understand what effect different levels of rain will have on the surface, especially important when it gets resurfaced between F1 weekends; what bumps there are, how rough the kerbs are, etc. Local knowledge. I know the latter two positions are already there to some extent, but I believe the qualifications for the jobs, whether it's voluntary or paid (it used to be voluntary IIRC) should be at higher standards. They'll be there as now to guide the stewards, but would hopefully be taken deadly seriously as opposed to being a nice addition (I've heard stories over the years about how local stewards can be a bit precious, shall I say?). The stewards will be able to take the precise reasons that _they_ made a decision at one race to the rest (undoubtedly a post-race, Zoom or whatever debrief with the 2 on rotation would help keep such things in mind). That way they should be able to make quicker decisions for identical incidents, which would help keep the race flowing and the results only provisional until the cars have gone through parc fermé after the race. No 3 hour meetings arguing over a single corner, as happened between Max & Charles one year! Anyway, that's what I think. Much as I appreciate volunteers - especially the marshalls, gawd bless 'em! - stewarding needs to be seen to be professional. These days there's so much money at stake, I think the teams would appreciate knowing how every rule will be interpreted throughout the season. Just my two pennerth!
We’re having a great championship fight yet every top driver doesn’t seem to want to win. -Verstappen’s pace has fallen off a cliff and the bulls are slow -Norris isn’t capitalizing on opportunities -Leclerc is just too damn inconsistent -Sainz is good but ruled a number 2 by Ferrari -Piastri is extremely competent but faces the same issue as Sainz -Both Mercedes are just not fast enough -Perez is Perezing. Just give the title to Hulkenberg, he’s arguably the most consistent and outperforming of all.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
After Mexico we might need a part 2.
LMAO
Yep. We definitely need a Part 2.
honestly it was just hilarious, rly just comedy and Max taking a piss
we rly need sporting regulations to be revised
The FIA should get guys like Seb and Kimi and have them work on the phrasing of some of these rules and see if they can add some clarity.
Seb, yes. Kimi doesn’t care enough lol
bwoah, take turn well, not that hard.
Yep, but the rule makers never really envisaged the situation where a steward would go back half a kilometre when defining a who is the overtaker. So we ended up with a situation where the car that is ahead as they approach the corner is the overtaker, and the one behind as the one that is in the lead resulting in a mad dash for the apex. I’m not sure even kimi or Seb could predict that loophole.
“So-errrh don’t race like errr maniac off the track and yeah, just drive fairly eheh”-probably kimi
It would be something like this:
*
- Kimi, who deserves a penalty here?
- I dont know! I was taking a shit!
*
Seb could do it, but Kimi... he would hate such job (and I'm a fan of Kimi since 2003 till this day!).
"Max escorted Lewis to Paraguay" great line!
Does that mean that lewis made max reverse all the way to Scotland?
As a Paraguayan, it'd be a pretty great thing to have soon-to-be 11 world championships here. For now, Dursken is doing a great job in F2 (first Paraguayan ever to run in F2)
Worst end to a man
@@thepolishnz Yep, then Max flattened Lewis from Italy to China
FIA:
Consistently Inconsistent
Fiasko International Automobil club.
They aren’t actually even consistent at that
But they are consistent lol
Part 1, max is ahead but given leniency for lap 1 turn 1
Part 2, George wasn’t ahead at the apex so it’s a penalty for running bottas off
Part 3 max is ahead at the apex, and gets a track limits warning for going off the track, lando gets a penalty for passing off the track
@iVerstappen I just don't understand how getting to the apex first by not even making the exit gives max the right to force lando off without a penalty, lando passed off the track so don't disagree with his penalty but he wasn't there by choice, he was forced there
@@bjarulez technically max did get punished but for going off track. If Lando had been ahead, it would be track limits AND +5 seconds
Last time I was this fast, I out qualified Stroll
that is a wide margin tho
Did you hit the accelerator at all?
Nah that’s mad🤣🤣🤣
Last time I was this early a guy named Kimi was driving a red, black and silver car.
You don't need to be fast for that.
For the people saying graveltraps are needed, no, thats not the problem. The problem is the rules are flawed, and drivers like Max make full use of it. The wheel to wheel rules basically allows the car on the inside to do whatever they want aslong as they're ahead into the apex which is why Max was according to the rulebook innocent, and the others werent. It's simply a flawed rulebook which goes against wheel to wheel racing in itself. The rulebook is exactly why Max has never changed his style in wheel to wheel because well, it is allowed
I actually think that the huge run off areas do make it too easy to use that space. I think gravel traps and walls make everything more obvious
@@KosmicHRTRacingTeam You're not addressing the OP's point
Max breaks the rules and gets away with it. The end
That's why it's called wheel to wheel racing, even more regulations on top of an already over regulated series isn't the answer, sooner or later any aggressive wheel to wheel racing will be gone and a part of the past, and this is why Formula 1 has become so tame, F1 doesn't need more sissy gentlemen drivers, non stop wheel to wheel racing could save this sport from itself, between politics, rules and regulations they have turned F1 into golf or bowling, its just nowhere as exciting anymore, we need more aggression not less
@johannesberglund2070 no rule was broken, which is why McLarena apoeal was denied
That start of the video was amazing. Good on you for NOT getting that deal.
Did I miss some kind of drama about RSL ?
😂😂😂 excellent 👌👌👌👌
No sell out ❤❤❤❤❤
Shout out to Soup Emporium as well for this. He had to address in his Simpsons Hit and Run video for Raid Shadow Legends to stop contacting him. It’s absurd.
Yeah I mean, still promoting VPN's reading their BS scripts. "Protects you from hackers" blablabla. No they don't. It just mask your IP. That's it. If you get infected, your IP does not matter.
A vpn does not make you safer in any way. At best it will allow you to view restricted websites in your country and some minor stuff. That's about it.
Just saying.
Shoutout to Piet Paulisma
Who's watching this after mexico lmao
wait, I clicked on this video thinking it was made AFTER the Mexico GP. 😆
Why can't we just go back to the previous rules for this stuff? If your car is alongside at the corner (none of the apex determination bs), you're entitled to room. Inside car 'gets' the corner, but must leave a cars width on the outside for the other car. Seems pretty simple to me. And the stewards really need to tone down the whole lap 1 thing, rules are rules, and especially when its a pure 1 on 1 incident, with no other cars involved, why on earth does it matter if its lap 1 or 50?
Or maybe let’s just use common sense. The track is wide enough for two, so there shouldn’t be none of this forcing people off nonsense. It literally benefits one guy
I guess they are saying on lap 1 you have colder tires and more fuel and overall harder car to drive but yeah when it's 1 on 1 you gotta police it. I think everyone understands incidents with multiple cars, but lap 1 just means you away with anything now days
Because racing fans always complain about “biased stewarding”. They did the same in 2021, saying the rules were too vague and inconsistent. The current rules are a result of people bitching about stewarding, funny isn’t it?
It would likely result in the same thing as well. Drivers lunging to be “alongside” then running slightly wide and complaining about being pushed off. No matter what, the drivers are going to try to exploit the rules in any way possible for their benefit.
@@sunnycombo5275Which I find bs, these are the best drivers on the world, they should be able to handle more fuel and cold tyres.
@@joshuafleckenstein351that shouldn’t even happen in the first place. There was a clear line drawn before 2016 that any type of pushing a driver off the track results in a penalty. The rights to the corner are determined by how much the outside or inside car is alongside, not by the apex bullshit that’s been made for Verstappen’s benefits. There was no reason for the FIA to made that part of the rules more vague than before.
Hard racing is giving the opponent the least amount of space on track (but still a car's width) to make the opponent commit a mistake or have a worse line, not driving people off track when you are gonna be overtaken. Even worse when you yourself also go off track
This should be the racing bible. At the start of all Grand Prix. Like a Star Wars opening cut.
You expect the world to be fair is seems
That's not what the current rules say. Sure, they need fixing. But until they are, don't hate the player, hate the game.
@@GaadhiMahendratf does the world have to do with the rules and regulations of a sport. That literally what defines sport, fair chance to prove why ur the best. Or we too slow to understand that too?
Now make hard racing not only a cars width, but also a cars length, and that is it. Sticking a nose in, isn't passing, its crashing. Ahead by a car or the corner is not yours. The end.
As Jimmy Broadbent has said we shouldn't be allowing drivers to just run drivers out of road/off track, Making it a penalty offence would probably help a lot with this, especially with the "significantly alongside" stuff.
yeah, especially if the defending driver breaks on purpose too late to even get a chance at taking the corner, just to be on front at the apex
@@Cancoillotteman Verstappen made the corner
@@jameskerrigan8491 are you blind?
@jameskerrigan8491 No, he didnt.didn't. The picture at 1:11 proves it. The white line is to the left of verstappens car...
@@jameskerrigan8491 In other series it doesn't matter, if you're going into a corner significantly alongside you need to leave space or else you're forcing a driver and you're at fault that's what everyone's problem
A Problem (not the only one) with the stewards is they are always changing, meaning rules can be interruputed differently by each steward. So there is a human factor which means lack of consistent stewarding.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious.
"Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car.
This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner.
Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track.
Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty.
I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
I’m a bit of a casual racing fan but most other sports the referee has his name, face and reputation on the line out there. In football, even the 4th official is under this pressure. In MMA/boxing/combat sports, this applies to both the referee and the judges.
Meanwhile every time I see a race, it’s just “race stewards” making a decision. Maybe having them be less anonymous would make them more careful/consistent in their decisions.
I don't necessarily mind penalizing Norris for an off-track overtake, the thing that really bugged me about that one was that Max himself went off track, too. To me, it feels like it's either fair game, they're just racing and both these instances just cancel each other out, or it's a 5 second penalty for Max just ushering Norris off to the netherworlds and back in trying to defend his corner. I get it: it's tough to be a referee for literally any sport, and motorsport is no exception. The maddening inconsistency of it all is just what gets under my skin.
Also, just to get my priors, I may be incredibly biased because I'm a huge McLaren fan and Norris fan, too
It seems the most logical move for Lando if he knows Max is going to lift to get ahead at the apex is to lift himself. Sure he'd go off, but so has Max, and therefore Max can't overtake him.
What you said is what would happen if F1 had better rules. In other motorsports, what Max did was illegal because he was side by side with another car and forced them off track. It would have been illegal even if Max stayed on track himself, which is good.
However, the other motorsports I am referring likely wouldn't penalize Max because Lando still made the pass without any contact. They would let them keep race, Lando keeps the position, and Max is given a warning to not do that again. It is very simple, if F1 just fixes their stupid rule.
Yeah I think giving both a 5 second would be the move for sure. I honestly think people want to see what the in-race consequences are and so do the stewards. If they thought penalising both would amount to nothing then that's tough luck. The rules should be applied regardless of the outcome in the race. If Lando stays ahead in position over Max post penalty then so be it! You can't control the outcome as the stewards currently want to do (seemingly), but you can control how you apply the rules. The rules shouldn't be applied in such a way where they 'care' about who finishes where.
I am not a Lando fan, but if Lando deserved a penalty, so did Max for leaving the track regardless of what Lando did!! Why is the any question about that??
I think most people agree with you.
Max does this a lot because he knows exactly how to get away with it.
When discussing today's race in Mexico, this was said: "Max never yields, and always either forces the other driver to yield, go off the track or crash"
There's only a few drivers Max _doesn't_ squeeze like he constantly does Lando, and Sainz is one of them.
I think that's because he knows that Sainz is just as aggressive as him, and will _never_ yield, which would inevitably result in a crash.
Love the intro I remember a 3-4 month stretch where every channel under the sun was sponsored by raid
I think you mean 3-4 year stretch
...maybe even longer
This comment is brought to you by Raid Shadow Legends.
what changed ?
@@Cancoillottemangood question, been wondering that myself
It is in fact, your boy, raid shadow legends
Sauber doing 60 MPH? What, off a cliff?
Saw a video of Kubica and Massa fighting hard in torrential rain before this video, those guys would be skinned alive by todays FIA
2007 Fuji
@@ic3manyeah
The thing is, either you let drivers fight or you don't. Trying to turn a race track into a sterile environment will result in things like these
What would be complicated to have 2 conditions true to be a valid overtake?
1 Be ahead at the apex (many series define "ahead" as having half the car in front, not just the nose) WHILE
2 Being sure to make the corner (stay on track until the end of the corner)
Many series apply those 2 rules at the same time.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious.
"Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car.
This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner.
Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track.
Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty.
I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
@@singular9 an entire car length is a bit much and very rare. That would limit the opportunities a lot and the only overtakes would be in straight line with DRS.
But your principle is correct.
In Carrerra Cup, you have to be ahead at the apex by half a car’s length.
This way you can push, but if you’re not ahead enough, you have to back either leave room on the outside, or back off if you’re on the outside.
In the case of Verstappen and Norris, for Verstappen to have half a car in front at the apex, he would have had to dive on the inside much quicker and would never have stayed on track, invalidating the overtake.
This didn't age well
Ignoring incidents from lap one is total BS. Carlos with Max had 1:1 same experience on t11 on the first lap and it wasn't even investigated.
Indeed, when its so obviously dirty driving for tactical reasons and not a genuine cold tyres with heavy car or 3:1 doesn't go moment it should be investigated. More lenient perhaps on the first lap as it is often more difficult...
No, they don’t ignore lap one incident.
They are less strict with incidents that happened during lap 1 but that doesn’t mean they are ignoring it.
They still look into it but won’t penalised anyone unless the driver is very obviously at fault.
You are simply lying. This is a big part of this whole discourse. People are incredibly dishonest
t12 but max was ahead at the apex and was the defending driver so it isn't the same
To quote the spotters on Door Bumper Clear, A track with track limits related penalties is a poorly designed track. If it’s paved, it’s going to get used.
And it happened again today
'You always have to leave the space' - Fernando Alonso
There really is a simple solution to this: You must always leave a space. When another car is significantly alongside, does not matter how they got there, you need to leave cars width to them. What is significantly alongside? All of the front tire is ahead of the rear tire. It really is that simple. The whole "first at apex" is continuation from the Max vs Leclerc in Red Bull Ring in.. i think 2018. Max clearly pushed Charles wide. Stewards didn't penalize Max. Instead FIA made a rule clarification that suit THAT particular incident and made it the new rule. Ever since that day drivers have been allowed to push other drivers off the track. We had very brief period when that was penalized again, but it was so inconsistent that no one knew where the lines of what is acceptable were.
First at apex is stupid rule, it always was. In 2021 Max pushed Lewis wide on every occasion he could and never got a single reprimand. Other drivers do get punished.. And i don't think it is a conspiracy, Max just is so good at installing rules along with the loopholes to his spine that he doesn't need to think how to exploit them. At the moment you can drive off the track while defending, that is what Max did. it is not compatible with the racing code, at all but.. FIA are filled with the most brilliant stupid people on the planet.
I like it. Let's do it.
Yeah, F1 should literally copy-paste Indycar's rules and officiating regarding overtaking. They never have a problem like this.
Boy, this video's going to need a follow up after Mexico GP
What annoys me is Max’s defense caused him to miss the corner twice and wasn’t punished either time
Defending is all well and good as long as you can keep the car on the track, and he didn’t manage that
I´m not even sure "defense" is the correct word in this situation. Everybody talking about "him defending well" and stuff but last time i checked Lando was ahead into the corner soooo... isn´t he technically the attacking car?
@@incLe84 attack is the best defense?
@@tropfen Well when you put it like that, you´ve got a point i guess.
@@incLe84 but that's where most of the debate comes from, into the corner isn't relevant it is all entirely to do with the apex for some reason
@@cameronmackenzie5356 See, i don´t think that is actually correct because when George overtook Valtteri it´s the exact same situation and nobody in his right mind would argue that George was "defending" there just because he was ahead (or at least side by side) with Valtteri at the apex.
So it´s not about being ahead at the apex but more about declaring somebody "attacking" or "defending" into every corner since that obviously makes a whole lot of difference when it comes to rules and penalties.
I was surprised by the calmness with which Max said, “Overtook me off the track.” Bro knew he had gamed the rule to perfection. Thug life
Dirtiest driver since Schumacher
0:54 don't worry about it. Even I thought Haas was an American team by name only.
Gravel would have made this situation worse. Instead of Max exploiting a rule and giving Lando a penalty, Lando would have been beached or turned into Max and probably ending both of their races. The problem is a stupid rule that doesn't take context into account.
Turn 1 leniency shouldn’t apply to what is clearly premeditated rule breaking.
With Verstappen they should just specifically never give him benefit of the doubt if they ever hope to rein him in
The FIA is inconsistant as ever. But the thing is thats why I'll never see Lando as a world champion. He always falls for Max' tricks. Verstappen has nothing to lose if they crash and is known for battling hard. The guys who can keep up with him are Fernando, Lewis and Charles.
Lando is still missing that mental thing against Max. Max is in his head. Like Mika was in Michael's head in 1998 or Michael himself was in Damon's head. I think Max is a lot like Michael Schumacher, especially mid 90s Michael. Scary fast but also rough and won't hold back, testing the limits of the track, rules and his opponent every race. Thats one way how you become a world champion. Another way is to be calm and dont fall for that like Mika Häkkinen against Michael or Alain Prost against Senna. And I see the later more in Charles than in Lando
Sooo grass and gravel would have been a perfect solution.. however.. in the case of the Max Lando incident i have a hot take: "Being forced off by a driver that himself just about didn't make the corner doesn't give you the right to use half a football field worth of run off to complete an overtake." Wasn't Bottas the one defending? Russell was the one attacking? Max on the inside was the defender.. making indeed Lando using the OFF track to complete An overtake. Even though he got forced off. If this is allowed.. oh boy be ready to see Max getting creative with that one."
Exactly right no matter the rule if it can be exploited by Max it will...
Exactly! You could argue max diserves a penalty, but you cant really argue that Norris overtook him off track. Both of those things can be true at the same time.
@@NiegezienHow can it be an overtake off track if they both weren’t on the track?
@@Niegezien @randar1969 i fully agree with you guys. I have had discussions with friends, and we all would agree that a warning for both would have been best. Or make them both tell the story from their perspectives after the race.
I think once you’re as far ahead as Lando was on the outside before Max let off the brakes, Max should be considered the one ‘overtaking’
max did the same thing in austria when norris overtook him fair and square in one of the t3 incodents, he went off full speed on the runoff to keep the position and still no penalty then so no penalty should be now
He's getting a bit of a habit
Learned it from Hamilton.
"Being in front of the apex" and "stay inside the white lines" rules has done so much damage to F1 battles.
The electronic devide idea is actually brilliant. any car that goes over the white line automatically gets a 3 second slowdown, if a car goes off because another pushed them wide, then both get the 3 second slow down, that way they are still together and the racing can pick up right where it left off.
Perfect timing Josh. Saw this vid yesterday and just a few hours later we saw more unsporting conduct. Pushing drivers off the track, leaving the track and gaining an advantage, ... It's clear the FIA needs to penalize this behavior more often or heavier.
Why is the rule different for being on the inside or the outside of the corner? Any driver can send another driver to purgatory or Paraguay regardless of having the inside or outside line, when one driver has carte blanche to driver as they please to maintain position. 100% the gravel traps are needed, and if Austria can do it to appease multiple disciplines, so can everyone, but the rules need equal emphasis on both drivers to give space and not compromise the other while attacking or defending.
This video is now more relevant than ever after Mexico
Here me out you can overtake off the track but you only get three limits per race and before you overtake you have to say over the radio "if you no longer go for gap that exsits you no longer racing driver" whilst at the same time flipping off the driver your passing think that would work
The outside of the track isn't supposed to be a faster line than the inside. Either the racing line is in the wrong spot, or there isn't enough on the outside of the track to slow you down effectively. Cheers!
The only thing I know for sure is that at this point (thanks to our friend's mathematics) Max Verstappen Is a 4 time world champion
I'm from Paraguay. I hope Lewis and Max got here legally, unlike Ronaldinho, who arrived here on a dodgy Paraguayan passport and went to prison, where he proceeded to play soccer with the inmates. The outcome of the match dictated who got to eat a pig. An entire pig.
I am not making this up.
It feels like they want one rule for all situations and as someone who deals with traffic data and infrastructure specifically... and how engineers like to experiment on infrastructure... having 1 rule for all forms of traffic is nonsense... you need to have contingency upon contingency until it's more like you are playing jazz in so much as it's the rules you don't follow and when to not follow them that becomes more important than those you do... and with drivers and penalties, I think this is the more apt approach vs looking into the book of rules and saying *this* is the "most" correct for this situation when it could be multiple rules that need to be implemented *except* this one or two.
The only thing that really gets me, is that max had all four wheels off of the track. If he was in control the whole time he should/would have stayed on the track.
I was thinking similarly but I haven't really seen anyone talk about control. Was Max in control of the car?
Yes = He deliberately drove off the circuit.
No = He barrelled into the corner with no hope of making it.
Neither is acceptable 🤷
I’m confused, how come Max going outside the track to defend his position means nothing during that incident?
Especially when the braking telemetry shows Max lifting to ensure he was ahead at the apex rather than braking for the corner.
8:29 “they inherited so hard for” 😂😂
20 seconds of penalties in Mexico might be a statement on the FIA's stand on things.
Max just takes the piss, when he came onto the grid I initially saw him as the successor to Lewis and wished him well, I would even have followed him after Lewis retired, but he's just a petulant spoilt child living out his fathers vicarious dreams , this is why he, RB and the horn dog are so well suited
You know it's a funny josh revell video when he does an intro like that
The only solution is NASCAR rules.
"If it's paved, it's track."
This aged well.
The issue isn’t the details of the rules, it’s the application of them, specifically around determining who is the defending driver and who is the attacking driver.
If Lando was the attacking driver, he deserves the 5s penalty.
If Max was the attacking driver he deserves a penalty / to lose track position.
Is Lando the attacking driver because he was behind at the apex?
Is Max the attacking driver because Lando was a car lengths ahead before the breaking zone?
It’s unclear to me how they determine this.
easiest wait to fix this problem and several others is to make the cars considerably narrower and slightly shorter so that way there's actual space to race on the track.
Or at least not make these cars go round a corner that's clearly too tight, these things are super clunky at low speeds
just put gravel traps there and it won't be a problem
@@nickb2049 that doesn't solve the pushing problem though , anyone on the outside would get pushed in the gravel and possibly get stuck there. in this case both of them
Yeah, I can understand the Lando penalty. But, not giving max any sort of penalty really broke my brain considering he broke several rules with that terribly desperate defensive move. Idgaf about who ahead at the apex anymore. In your passing or defending, you gotta stay on track.
What penalty should he have gotten?? he was ahead at the apex and then went off other then a track limits violation their is nothing to give max .. Lando chose to go around him on the outside he could of backed out, he could of given the place back,, but he didn’t he hung his car in their drive wayyyyy outside and overtook Max… by the Definitions of the rules the stewards got it right
@@Jrh-rp7np he didn't just "go off" he forced another driver off track (like Russel on Bottas), so please explain why you think what Max is doing is fair?
@@Bobby09LFCit’s not about being fair, fair doesn’t exist in racing. It’s about being within the rules, and the rules state the driver who’s ahead at the apex is given the corner. In other words, you can’t be ahead at the apex and force a driver off. George wasn’t ahead at the apex, and pushed Bottas off, so he got the penalty for running Valterri wide when it wasn’t his corner.
According to the rules, Max didn’t deserve a penalty as he only went over track limits for a third time. Don’t point your irritation toward Max, he’s exploiting the rule book to perfection. Point your frustration to the FIA and their dogshit rule book.
@@joshuafleckenstein351 Yes, its never Max's fault is it. Like Brazil 21......
@@joshuafleckenstein351 fairness is literally the point of implementing penalties. if someone takes advantage of the rules language then that language should be amended for the sake of fair competition. imo they both deserve penalties. max for making a dumb divebomb and forcing norris and himself off, and norris for overtaking off the track and not giving the position back
I was hoping the one with Sainz & Verstappen at turn 12 on lap 1 would be included in this conversation
The mantra of "ahead at the apex, do as you please" is an absolute scourge on F1. Max's tactic of just deciding not to finish the corner when someone's on his outside is such a dirty, classless way to race, though I can't blame him for knowing he can usually get away with it (I am writing this after Mexico so it's not totally foolproof). That section of the rulebook needs a complete teardown and rewrite.
Comparing the yearly turn 1 shenanigans to NASCAR is a pretty interesting comparison though. Tanky cars and a more hands-off approach to driving standards keeps a lot of arguments like this from happening in NASCAR since contact is fair game and the drivers know if they start a pissing match someone else will finish it. Yeah it can cause a lot of drama when two guys start having at each other, but the rulebook doesn't come out unless things get really stupid. F1 is not the place for a vehicular boxing match, but it is kinda surprising no one says "screw it" and stands their ground so the guy doing the forcing wipes themself out. Maybe Kmag can make use of those reset penalty points before the season's over.
As much as I would hate complicating rules, maybe we need a sort of two points system. Instead of just measuring just the apex, find two or even three points that you have to have a certain relative position at.
For me this incident killed f1 for me, even when playing f1 games it’s instinct to leave a fair amount of room for the car on the outside, pushing a car off the road is rude at the best of times and dangerous at the worst of times and it’s just not fun to watch.
Max wouldn’t make the same move if he wasn’t leading in the drivers championship.
I mean, the regs are working, in that Max was rewarded for being smart in the moment, and Lando punished for calculating incorrectly. That's testing world-class drivers and race teams on their skills, since it's still a bit tough to get a comprehensive legal opinion mid-corner. Regardless, I still like the gravel pit solutions at Red Bull Ring the best to force racers back into the racing lines; just please don't mandate them, since tracks are spending so much on upgrades already.
This is where technology will begin to play a bigger role IMO - cars have so many transponders and locators that, at some point, it will be trivial to determine position relative to a given point on the racetrack.
Once that happens, you can automatically flag a driver who crosses the white line with a message in their car and even the previous Delta to the car in front and require them to "not gain an advantage" by maintaining the Delta through the next corner, or to determine who had the "right" to the corner based on position.
Hawk-Eye and similar companies would likely be able to come up with something similar that can be shown to viewers and teams
9:16 suddenly Hockenheim
It should've either been a racing incident or a penalty to both of them.
Though I will say that Max does this a lot because he knows exactly how to get away with squeezing other drivers like that.
Max never yields. He either forces the other driver to yield, go off the track or they crash. Often times he should've been to the one to yield, but it never has any consequences.
There's only a few drivers Max _doesn't_ squeeze like he constantly does Lando, and Sainz is one of them.
I think that's because he knows that Sainz is also an aggressive driver who never yields, which would inevitably result in a crash between them.
I'm not against defensive or offensive driving, I just think pulling shady moves instead of proving that you're actually better by giving space and still besting them isn't as fun to watch.
Lately Max has had total tunnel vision, where he focuses more on not letting Lando get ahead than actually racing the others, only to inadvertently (or maybe deliberately) let Ferrari get past them both.
Maybe he's playing the long game, trying to make Ferrari and McLaren fight each other for points, so neither team or driver can win..?
A slow-down penalty for leaving the track like it exists in sim-racing isn't the worst idea, but gravel traps, that can be removed easily after the event like in Austria are the way to go imo. Combined with the rule, that you always have to leave a car's width in wheel to wheel combat would solve the most pressing issues in F1: Track limits and absurd wheel to wheel racing situations.
I say if you are defending someone and you both go off track and the offender goes ahead, no penalty. This may not sound logical, but it's the defenders fault to begin with for forcing them off, so to me the 2 wrongs have made a right
The problem is the way the FIA keeps complicating the rules. Everytime they complicate the rules, this also adds more opportunities to find loopholes. For example: Under no circumstances is it allowed to overtake of track. Or: Under no circumstances is it allowed to force another driver of the track.
I look forward to the hasty re-edit to include the mexican shenanigans
The “Donkey” caught me completely off guard 🤣🤣
If you can't put gravel down everywhere, replicate the effects of it via the rules. If anyone goes off track without a valid reason (i.e. avoiding a spinning car), they get a strike. Three strikes, you're black flagged.
It'll be carnage to begin with, but the drivers will quickly learn. The defending drivers will be less aggressive and the attacking drivers will just relent if they're being forced wide.
The sticky strips that slow cars down should be on the outside of the corners. If you run wide to take an advantage, then your slowdown negates your advantage. And if a car forces another off-track, then it's immediately obvious. And the rule should stand whether it's the first lap or the last lap. This also wouldn't destroy track day cars or bikes
just put gravel traps there and it won't be a problem
@@nickb2049Yes it will. Drivers will still force each other off track unless they make it illegal and penalize it, like every other world motorsport already has. F1 is way behind on that department, so I glad this is finally being talked about.
have the ecu cut out the electric motors for a set amount of time if you go off the track. If you pass off the track then the other car is likely to just drive back past. It would need to be faster and the sensors would need to be more reliable... but it would discourage off track adventures while keeping things safe still
"charles is a born again jacques villeneuve". Don't do charles this dirty, he's a nice guy! lol!
The problem with the Max - Lando incident is that Max didn't even bother sticking his cars within the white lines. It's one thing to miss your braking point and run wide, it's another to run outside the lines on purpose.
Part of the flemish F1 broadcasting team is an active GT driver. On the monday after the race they allways record a podcast and in that podcast he said that yes, Lando deserved a penalty because he gained an advantage leaving the track, but equally Max should have gotten a penalty because Max pushed Lando of the track.
His reasoning behind the penalty for Max is that while withing the rules, it is against the spirit of the sport. Racing can only be called racing when overtaking and finishing the move within the white lines, something max didn't do, twice.
Honestly, I'm inclined to follow that reasoning. At the beginning of the staright, max was the defender and Lando the attacker, but before the corner, Lando was fully ahead of Max, therefor, Lando became the defender and Max the attacker. Max did get ahead at the apex, but was never able to keep his car between the lines, leaving Lando no room on track.
If the attacking driver is allowed within the rules to finish an overtake outside of the track, then what chance does a defending driver have? Again, what Lando did was wrong, but Max was equally wrong here. Either give both a penalty, or don't give either of them the penalty. Otherwise it's not racing, it's just 2 people driving fast.
On top of it all, there have been multiple instances this year of the stewards deciding about penalties for less controversial incidents after the race was finished. But suddenly now the FIA can get make a fast decision? The FIA is flip-flopping in the worst way possible. Taking way to long to resolve easy incidents at the start of the year to now rushing decisions that can decide the drivers championship. If any race incident would have warranted the FIA taking their time and make a decision post race, it's this one. A post-race decision wouldn't have affected how both Max and Lando drove, we heard on the radio that red bull told Max to push to keep it within 5 seconds.
In the spirit of Guenter Steiner, the FIA are a bunch of wankers, not even understanding when it's appropriate to take their time for a decision.
Let them race like NASCAR. Wall to grass. Fight it out
just put gravel traps there and it won't be a problem
Nah, you can go all the way catch fence to catch fence. The grass is legal in NASCAR too, if you're brave enough to try it.
Part 2 after Mexico lol
@3:05, "...A law written as a result of Max himself, when he escorted Lewis into Paraguay, in 2021, at Interlagos..." Now that's damned good writing and funny to boot.
Everyone seems to forget that other moves exist. Switchback was brought up in this clip which would've been a solid answer for Norris. I don't like how Max handled Mexico but both COTA and Austria were the same move at the same corner because Norris couldn't make it happen anywhere else in his head (not sure on full validity of statement). He has to know by now that Max will toe the rules with some toes over but still expects 100% clean racing. Rubbing is Nascar's thing, but a little bit of rule defining racing is what we need in a sport that wishes to regulate everything for some reason
8:49 love the way you pronounce Pierre’s name 😂😂
Piere GASlyyyyy
I’d love if they’d use the “go around the bollards (or through a chicane), but don’t be a bell end” system on more corners. It’ll stop questions like this (and make giving the position back much more costly. If you can’t make the corner then why should the other driver suffer (wether attacking or defending)?
The funniest thing is that Max was the overtaking car, not Lando, despite the stewards saying that Lando was the overtaking car. If you watch the replay, Lando was ahead by a full car length on the entry of the corner. Max then sent it, forced Lando wide and thus broke the rules. McLaren even appealed the penalty for that reason, but it was rejected, because the FIA said that proving the mistake of stewards by proving that the stewards made a mistake is not enough to get a penalty overturned. Funnily enough, Red Bull said exactly that prior to the FIA overturning the appeal.
Sensors on car. Driver goes over white line? 10 second fuel cut of some percentage or removal of battery assist.
It's always been crazy to me that drivers get so much leeway so often to drive another off the track
You forgot to mention Max vs. Sainz, lap 1, turn 12. Max keeps his defensive line on the outside, Carlos dives on the inside, gets the "right" to the corner, overtakes him momentarily, both go outside the white lines but Max comes back ahead. It was not even put into investigation.
I would have been fine with the all thing if Max had been able to stay on track. But because he ran off, to me it's the proof that he was no longer in control of the car and that's why he should also have been penalized. Puting yourself at the mercy of understeer to defend shouldn't be a defense.
You are quite right when you say Max is the master at going to the absolute limit of the rulebook. But, as we saw in Mexico, that even includes professional fouls (or calculated penalties). He pretty quickly knew he only had the pace for 4th on Sunday, so by letting Norris past, that would give him an incredible opportunity to win the race and claw back 13 points. However, by running Norris of the track in T8, even with those two 10 second penalties, he was able to finish 6th (and without tyre management issues that could have been 4th), while ensuring Norris wouldn't win, resulting in a net 10 point loss, instead of 13. What he did is no different than what Magnussen did in the first half of the season. While it may not be seen as very sportsmanlike, exploiting the rules to this extent is genius. And the 'best' thing is, he now has 6 penalty points, with 2 to expire at the Las Vegas GP, meaning he has at least 6 more penalty points to play with, so he can 'safely' push Norris off the track or leave the track and gain an advantage on Norris without having to worry about a race ban. Verstappen's impact on the sport will be lasting, from the moving under braking rules, to driving standards during overtaking or defending and soon also the penalty points system (though he had some help from Magnussen with that one).
9:18 This is why Josh should be in charge of F1.
About the Lando overtake on Max. I understand that the first corner of COTA is very hard to navigate but I think that all this confusion could be evaded by shortening the scape path and puting grass or a gravel trap on the outside of the corner forcing drivers to be more conservative. If there was grass or gravel on that outside, Lando wouldn't had done that overtake there and would have tried doing it somewhere else.
It gets annoying to clean up for MotoGP
Rulings on this for years have been inconsistent, and that's the problem. The rules say you have to leave room if your opponent is significantly alongside, and Lando definitely was that both times. The question shouldn't be, "Would he have completed the overtake on the corner?" but rather, "Did Max leave him room?", and he didn't. In the second example Max shoved him so wide that they both went off, and that sets a precedent for defending by leaving the track is okay if you can force your opponent to do the same.
yes lando overtook off the track, but max was off the track too so surely thats fair
Heres an idea: have reusable removable concrete sections on every track (where applicable) that can be filled in with gravel on grand prix weekends.
Look, here's my suggestion based on the bomb idea, just have all cars have weapons systems that get activated when running over pads on the track for a one time use. I call this concept Wipeout and it'll be great. Trust me, especially once we get anti-gravity technology. Completely original concept, don't steal.
I am not very well versed in all this racing mumbo jumbo but at least as an average oblivious spectator, the problem is obvious.
"Ahead at the apex" should be more specific. You need to be ahead at the apex by a FULL CAR. If you entire car isn't ahead by the apex, sorry, that is considered an unsafe dive bomb down the inside. Simple. That way, if the inside car wants to overtake, they need to essentially leave enough room for the car on the outside to do a switchback into the inside of the passing car.
This leaves everyone space, disincentivizes people like max from getting "a nose in" the inside when they know they can't make the corner, and levels the playing field so that drivers can keep going at it corner after corner.
Then add an amendment, that if the overtaking car forces the other car off track, the car forced off the track cannot be panelized for an overtake off track.
Then add another amendment, that if the car pushed off track does not return to the track "as soon as physically possible" then it will get a penalty.
I don't see how I, me, myself, a person who knowns nothing about F1 can come up with such a clearly written and well defined, and fair, rule.
I think the solution is very simple. You should only have a right to your position if you stay on track. If you force an overtaking car wide, no matter where they were at the apex, and you yourself also exit the track limits, your position should be fair game.
It's an obscure reference perhaps - I think a precedent got set at the 2020 Styrian grand Prix. In the last lap, stroll, norris and Ricciardo were in a battle for 6th, when stroll did exactly this to Ricciardo. The last lap was really chaotic and it got marked as a racing incident. I remember Ricciardo saying he thought it was bizarre that stroll didn't get a penalty and I still agree. In 2021, max took that precedent to a completely unsustainable level on multiple occasions.
I think the apex rule works for all intents and purposes. If max had stayed within track limits, even when braking late, I doubt this would be much of a discussion. The fact that he exits the track should be evidence enough that he never intended to make that corner.
The first two seconds like a Manus towards people who make ads for that product.
First Michael Bay now Sauber somebody's grumpy from not getting their fix of the "Goodnight Kiwi" aren't they!
The “ahead at the apex” law needs changed because it promotes what max did- send it down the inside without braking to reach apex first.
Change the law to: “ahead at the braking point”. In this case max was slightly behind when lando braked, so there’s no advantage to just sending it
The rule that being ahead the apex just automatically makes it your corner is so insane, as we saw Max exploited it which is fine but did they not think this through. Also I swear Lando did the same thing in Austria and Max overtook him off the track but didnt get a penalty, they collided on the next lap but still.
I maintain that if norris had rejoined behind verstappen, max would have gotten a penalty. But early in the move norris committed to driving off track and overtaking. He made very little effort to try keep it on track (e.g. go for an undercut). If he hadn't overtaken, penalty for max everyday. But he DID overtake off track and gain an advantage
I actually thought they would both receive a penalty, Max for not leaving space (going over the line means no space) and Lando for keeping his foot in off the track, you can clearly see him accelerate past Max and make the overtake outside of track limits.
First video I watch from you, subscribed after the first 5 seconds. Love your content and will be staying subscribed.
Before I start, I want to make it clear that I am completely neutral and couldn't care less who wins a race or a corner. Any named driver below is neither being lauded nor whined about.
As I have been saying for years: local stewards are no help whatsoever. They never have been because consistency, no matter how hard the FIA tries to insist on it, is a rarity.
The FIA should supply 3 professional stewards that attend each race (say have 5 and rotate them. One should attend two in a row minimum to continue any discussions required). They should know the rules better than any racer. Currently Max seems to have the entire set memorised. It won't be long before others join him.
Alongside them should be an ex-F1 racer - not currently affiliated with any team but also not so old that they don't understand how modern cars work. Perhaps insist on them taking part in a "filming session" with each team (allow extra mileage to cover it) at the start of the season so they know how this year's cars react. You could have older drivers like Warwick then as he'd understand why a car did something it wouldn't have done when he was racing.
Finally, a local expert. Someone who is usually a lower-level racer but who knows the track inside out, and who teaches at the track. That would be more difficult for street circuits, but a local racer (who gets to drive over the roads daily, like any number of ex-F1 drivers in Monaco) could have a bunch of laps with Bernd Mayländer before FP1. They should understand what effect different levels of rain will have on the surface, especially important when it gets resurfaced between F1 weekends; what bumps there are, how rough the kerbs are, etc. Local knowledge.
I know the latter two positions are already there to some extent, but I believe the qualifications for the jobs, whether it's voluntary or paid (it used to be voluntary IIRC) should be at higher standards. They'll be there as now to guide the stewards, but would hopefully be taken deadly seriously as opposed to being a nice addition (I've heard stories over the years about how local stewards can be a bit precious, shall I say?). The stewards will be able to take the precise reasons that _they_ made a decision at one race to the rest (undoubtedly a post-race, Zoom or whatever debrief with the 2 on rotation would help keep such things in mind). That way they should be able to make quicker decisions for identical incidents, which would help keep the race flowing and the results only provisional until the cars have gone through parc fermé after the race. No 3 hour meetings arguing over a single corner, as happened between Max & Charles one year!
Anyway, that's what I think. Much as I appreciate volunteers - especially the marshalls, gawd bless 'em! - stewarding needs to be seen to be professional. These days there's so much money at stake, I think the teams would appreciate knowing how every rule will be interpreted throughout the season. Just my two pennerth!
We’re having a great championship fight yet every top driver doesn’t seem to want to win.
-Verstappen’s pace has fallen off a cliff and the bulls are slow
-Norris isn’t capitalizing on opportunities
-Leclerc is just too damn inconsistent
-Sainz is good but ruled a number 2 by Ferrari
-Piastri is extremely competent but faces the same issue as Sainz
-Both Mercedes are just not fast enough
-Perez is Perezing.
Just give the title to Hulkenberg, he’s arguably the most consistent and outperforming of all.