Felipe Nasr, Sauber, Circuit de Catalunya, 2016

Sauber ‘isn’t the only team in trouble’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Sauber team principal Monisha Kaltenborn says other teams are also facing “difficult conditions”.

Indianapolis 500 qualifying

Scott Dixon, Ganassi, Indianapolis 500, 2015
Indy 500 qualifying starts today
I’m very proud to be part of BT Sport’s coverage team for its first ever live broadcast of qualifying for the Indianapolis 500 this weekend.

Join me and Tom Gaymor for live coverage on BT Sport ESPN on Saturday and Sunday between 9pm and 11pm to see the 33-car grid decided for the 100th running of the great race. We will be supplementing the commentary from the host broadcasters in the USA by providing continuity during their advert breaks.

F1 Fanatic Live will also be running live during the sessions as well as for the two Formula V8 3.5 races, one on each day, and Formula E from Berlin on Saturday.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Circuit de Catalunya, 2016
Will Raikkonen go around one more time?
Kimi Raikkonen has made his way up to second in the championship – can we therefore bank on seeing him in Ferrari colours again next year?

Ferrari can see for themselves there is little to choose between Bottas and Massa, the man they dropped three years ago.

Raikkonen is doing a better job than Vettel so far this season, his best since he returned to Ferrari by far. If he wants to stay next season, I think Ferrari would be happy to sign another extension.

If he decides not to, then Grosjean is probably a candidate, maybe Button if he leaves McLaren and as an outsider Sainz if he continues to impress.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Gv27, Kanyima, Thersqaured and Olivia Stephanie Ault!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ferrari started its first world championship race – the second round of the world championship – on this day in 1950 in Monaco. Alberto Ascari brought the team’s leading car home in second place behind Juan Manuel Fangio’s Maserati.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 107 comments on “Sauber ‘isn’t the only team in trouble’”

    1. ”F1 legend Jacques Villeneuve”

      Hahaha, very funny joke Daily Mail.

      1. @ultimateuzair Joke’s on you, the Mail didn’t say that.

        1. Daily Mirror, same thing. :P

          1. No, not even slightly.

      2. Of course Nico is 100% to blame. The stewards questionable decision of saying Hamilton having his tyres on the grass and loosing control then took out his team mate makes absolutely no sense being that they obviously failed to ask how Hamilton’s tyre got on the grass in the first place.
        I find it very entertaining that the thought occured to them even of punishing Lewis.
        The question is, being objective, how many moves are legally accepted for defence and how many moves did Nico Rosberg make while defending his position last Sunday?
        Nico’s overtake on Lewis earlier on is quite similar to Hamilton’s on Nico with the difference being that Lewis fairly knew when not to move any more.
        Hamilton defended his position by moving to the right of the track but Nico swung to the left with massive speed and flew past with Lewis choosing to let him go.
        Now, watching the video as they approached the next corner, Nico closes the inside of the corner but Lewis coming with excess speed sees a big opening on the outside/left of the corner to which he plants his car. Nico seeing that, veers to the left, with an ailing car, to ward him off and then erratically plants his car sort of in the left side middle of the track.
        As soon as that happens and both men have cleared the corner, HamIlton who is massively faster sees the only other opening on the right and quite rightly makes a go for it. Nico Rosberg moves yet again with a car very slow at that moment towards that side of the track and being fully aware of all the goings-on within his cockpit and without, as he has acknowledged, he plants a car that in every sense was a stumbling block in the way of his much faster team mate.
        Nico Rosberg’s fans here and elsewhere have blamed Hamilton saying he went for a space that was not there, glaringly ignoring the fact that dude had tried overtaking him on the outside of the turn prior to the crash but Nico cut across to block him from the inside. Some have said he should have slowed down and I say the guy’s momentum was so much that there is no slowing down at that moment to avoid contact especially when your team mate is determined to run you off track all the while being fully aware that he does not have the speed at that moment to stop you from overtaking moreover the stuff happened so fast even for my own eyes that I remember shouting ‘Hamilton’s fault’ until I saw the video.
        To think that Nico has carried out similar maneuvers in the past which prompted rule changes and clarification and one of such incidents where Fernando Alonso lamented on the radio that Nico must leave space, I have come to beleive that, Nico is indeed a very dangerous driver and is fully, 100%, to blame for the crash in Spain.

        1. Exactly that.
          Nico should have left 1 car width space instead of forcing Lewis off the circuit. The racing line for the approaching right hand corner was well to the left. Nico blatantly & intentionally ran Lewis of the circuit. He said himself in the following interview that he intended to make clear he was going to move right across leaving no space on track, despite his car bring slower and despite Lewis being along side. He made a decision at the start of his manoeuvre that was going to result in Lewis crashing into him on circuit, Lewis backing off or Lewis being forced off track. Obviously Lewis did not know Nico’s intentions and hoped his team mate would leave space, as per their agreement to the team to race fair and not take each other out. When you watch the video you will note that the collision occurs after Lewis is forced off track, looses control, the car comes back on track sideways and Nico is braking for the corner.
          Nico had already blocked the raceing line and had no reason to pull that far over other than to cause an accident to his team mate.

          1. ColdFly F1 (@)
            21st May 2016, 8:33

            Nico had already blocked the raceing line and had no reason to pull that far over other than to cause an accident to his team mate.

            Probably the most ignorant comment I’ve ever read on this site. @9chris9
            Hint: what would you do if you want to stop a faster car from overtaking? Stay on the racing line, or move to the side where the other car wants to overtake. (Hint 2: answer 1 is incorrect)

            1. @coldfly
              No part of my comment is ignorant. Your the ignorant one if you don’t understand what I wrote.
              If every car being overtaken forced their rival off the circuit races wouldn’t last long. There are rules against forcing cars off the track. Its unsporting and dangerous. Hard and harsh but fair is fine, proper and what is expected of an F1 driver, pushing a driver off the track is cowardly and desperate.
              The idea is to defend the raceing line as by definition it’s the fastest way around the circuit. He had already defended it, he should have accepted his engine mode mistake put his lead at risk and left a 1 car gap.
              if you think F1 is about forcing a faster car off the track, you are clearly the ignorant one here.
              Maybe you should watch banger raceing instead?

            2. Yet, other drivers manage to do this without causing a collision. Rosberg almost certainly realized he had the engine in the wrong strat mode, and that his superb pass on turn one was about to be undone, and he had a momentary lapse of reason.

              The racing line that everyone else was following would have allowed Nico to run to the inside of the racing line by a fair margin, and still leave enough room for two F1 cars to pass. Moving that far inside was, as David Hobbs is fond of pointing out, slamming the barn door when the horse is already halfway through.

          2. well, LH used to force NR out of the track last year, forcing him to back off and lose positions
            i do not see big differences, really

            1. Huge difference, Lewis is firm defending his line coming out of corners, this is veering across the track on the straight.

            2. Michael Brown (@)
              21st May 2016, 17:48

              Defending by forcing Rosberg off the track? The only difference here is that you’re allowed to run another car off the track when exiting a turn.

            3. Lewis didn’t shove Nico into the grass or gravel at Suzuka or Austin– just runoff. Nico, by contrast, tries to shove people into the grass / gravel / sand whenever possible (Bahrain 2012 springs to mind).

        2. +1 that says it all, Nico Roseberg alongside Carlos Sainz are indeed dangerous drivers, you get the feeling that they drive and look so much in their mirrors more than they look at the track, the problem with Nico that he get away with it so far !
          PS (i’m not a Hamilton fan)

        3. Your very long analysis loses credibility right at the start, when you compare it to earlier pass by Nico. There is one crucial difference, namely timing of actions. Rosberg move to the right not _after_ Hamilton made his move. This is nicely seen from Hamiton’s onboard, so he is indeed trying to get into a gap that has been already disappearing. Of course, we can only see it in slow motion, the two actions (Rosberg’s move to the right, Hamilton’s attempt to pass) came, in real time, as close as to be considered simultaneous. In other words, any statement about “Hamilton tied to pass on the right and Rosberg cut him off” is definitely false.

          Another mistake in your analysis is the claim that Rosbergs move to the left of the track was his first defensive move. Actually, exiting corners ont he outside is the standard procedure in F1, and indeed, the video clearly shows drivers that follow the leading pair ending up in the same part of the track as Rosberg at the exit. It was not a defensive move, but the ormal procedure. Those who follow F1 for some time know that typical path through a turn is to go to follow inside on entry and outside on exit.

          To sum it up, your analysis is faulty. This does not clear Rosberg of blame, but it shows that if you do want to put the blame on his shoulders, you have to come up with some other arguments, preferably valid.

          1. The timing doesn’t matter, but if you actually do look at the footage you can see Hamilton moving for the huge gap to the right of Nico while Nico is still fiddling with the buttons on his steering wheel.

          2. Rosberg move to the right not _after_ Hamilton made his move. This is nicely seen from Hamilton’s onboard, so he is indeed trying to get into a gap that has been already disappearing. Of course, we can only see it in slow motion, the two actions (Rosberg’s move to the right, Hamilton’s attempt to pass) came, in real time, as close as to be considered simultaneous. In other words, any statement about “Hamilton tied to pass on the right and Rosberg cut him off” is definitely false.

            If you watch the helicopter footage @ph


            especially if you slow it down with Settings, Speed, .25, you can see clearly that Rosberg’s move comes AFTER Hamilton’s. Rosberg takes position 1/3 from the left edge of the track (which is NOT the racing line as we see with Ricciardo following), ready to block either side. Then when Hamilton starts to move right, Rosberg follows. Quickly it’s true, but he’s following.

            So on this basis I agree with JV. It seems clear to me if Lewis had gone left Nico would have taken him off that side too. Also that Rosberg knew he’d lost so much speed it was risky. And that what Rosberg said about always intending to cover the inside was untrue.

            1. @lockup But these drivers do not have the helicopter view while racing, nor the luxury to slow things down to .25. Both drivers actions just happen too quickly to each other’s and hence the ruling that the stewards made and the team has accepted.

            2. The helicopter footage says Rosberg reacted to Hamilton’s move @robbie, that is the point. We can see that he could have moved to cover the inside earlier, but didn’t. He positioned himself to cover either side, then moved after Hamilton.

              Knowing that Hamilton would be carrying a lot more speed he closed off the whole track, put his teammate on the grass, then braked for the corner so he got collected.

              There’s more to being a wdc than being ‘aggressive’.

              I’m not out of sympathy with the stewards, and as for the team, who knows what they’re thinking. “Let’s not sign him just yet” would be my guess :))

            3. I’ll go with the stewards decision of racing incident. I’m quite confident that if the drivers were reversed in this situation you’d be railing about NR’s lack of racecraft and a clumsy move that was never going to work and that took LH out, while all LH was doing was being a WDC level driver making his car as wide as possible. Go ahead, tell me you’d be just as vocal against LH if their positions were reversed.

            4. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              21st May 2016, 15:03

              @Robbie Do you think LH would have pushed Nico out like that on a straight with a wall next to him? Why would Lewis do that? He literally surrendered the lead to Nico on T1 without a single defensive move other than to protect both cars. Your comment is illogical because taking out the other driver prevents Lewis from racing with the driver.

            5. Well you can always ignore the evidence @robbie and try to make out that it doesn’t exist because supposedly I’m more biased than you. This is a temptation you occasionally fail to resist dude. The evidence is not me or anything about me.

              I wouldn’t be in the reverse position because Hamilton doesn’t do moves like that. Nor does Alonso or pretty much anyone, except maybe young Sainz as has been suggested. When someone has a pass set up they let it happen, because it’s F1 not GP3. It was fair enough for NR to move, but not right to the edge of the track. Or to move to the edge of the track but earlier.

              I can understand the stewards not feeling it’s bad enough to deserve a penalty, that’s not the same as it being okay. He had a duty to his team to keep the level of risk lower than that. Yes so did Lewis, but it would have been a safe pass if Nico had accepted that he’d made a mistake and was being attacked by a MUCH FASTER car that he couldn’t reasonably block all across the track. ‘He shall not pass’ was not a valid attitude, that’s what JV is saying.

              I suspect the team will come to feel this way too, but let’s see. It’s seems clear they can have Alonso if they prefer, or Pascal of course whose delta they have just gone out of their way to update.

            6. I can’t believe that people are going out of their wayntomtry and defend Hamilton and lay the full blame on Rosberg. Rosberg was defending his line, pure and simple and at as he wasn’t in the Braking zone for the next corner is allowed to use the full extremes of the circuit in a single blocking manoeuvre as per sporting regs…

              Since by the time Hamilton was alongside Rosberg, he was also off the circuit (2 wheels over the line and on the grass, their are plenty of clips around that support this), then the manoeuvre carried out by Rosberg is fully acceptable as per the sporting regs.

              The only thing I will say about the manoeuvre that Rosberg made, is that it was extremely aggressive, but, then so was Hamilton’s. As such the stewards were correct in their decision of calling it a racing incident.

              With regard to JV saying this would never have happened in the 80’s then he is out of touch and needs to review some of the accidents that occurred (the best known of which involving Senna and Prost).

            7. @lockup I think I’m the one staying with the evidence, which exonerates both drivers, whereas you and your ilk blame Nico entirely which flies in the face of the stewards decision. At least I’m willing to agree with it being a racing incident ie. no blame, and have said that if pushed I would lay it slightly more on LH but that’s it. You’ve got a soap opera made up of Nico now being drummed out of Merc in favour of FA or PW for doing a move that IF LH did, you’d be defending him like crazy for his WDC level prowess.

            8. IF LH did, you’d be defending him like crazy for his WDC level prowess

              No @robbie if Lewis ran his teammate onto the grass in a wild GP3 move to avoid the natural consequence of his own obvious settings error, then braked for a corner on the same side so he got collected too, leaving both cars out on Lap1, then lied about only defending the inside, while he was trying to negotiate a new contract with the team, after he’d been warned about driver relations, after being fined for taking out his teammate, while Fernando Alonso was available, as well as a favoured young German driver, I’d be thinking “why tf am I supporting this idiot?” :)

              Anyway I’ll read your reply then let us move on :)

      3. Talking about crashes, here is to wishing a speedy recovery to F3 driver Peter Li Zhi Cong.
        That was a very very horrible accident to witness.
        Whoever talks about gravel traps and other kinds of traps ‘to punish drivers’ needs to have his/her head checked.
        I think all tracks with gravel around them need to be banned for now until they are tarred over. Those things tend to lift cars into the air in an uncontrollable fashion.

      4. F1 champion + Indy 500 winner = Legend

      5. hahahah, i thought the same thing:)

    2. In response to Rio’s comments: Aren’t the GP2 tyres exactly the same as the F1 tyres?!?!?

      1. This is the problem I have with f1 at the moment. Haryanto’s biggest challenge should be the fact that he’s had to train massively over winter to be fit enough to drive an f1 car, or getting used to the oodles of extra power, downforce, g-force, set-up options and data available to the driver, yet none of that is a challenge anymore it seems. Currently, someone can jump up multiple categories and drive an f1 car as if they’ve just turned on their playstation and the only thing they have to get used to is driving around slowly enough so as not to kill the tyres.

        1. Or drivers are just so much fitter and more professional through many categories than they used to be. In Russia drivers were resting their heads in turn 3. Today’s car pull more g force and travel faster than any f1 car Senna drove so they are very hard to drive.

    3. Paul (@frankjaeger)
      21st May 2016, 0:07

      Well done on the commentary spot, Keith!

      I’d love to tune in but don’t have that channel. Maybe I can work something out ;)

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        21st May 2016, 8:42

        @frankjaeger – I assume you’re talking about @keithcollantine‘s podcast
        It’s also on Soundcloud – try this link (or get the app first – SoundCloud is worth a try)

        1. I think he means BT sport? @coldfly

          1. Paul (@frankjaeger)
            22nd May 2016, 0:27

            @coldfly Thanks both for your replies. I meant the BT Sport but I didn’t know about the podcast. Cheers

    4. Ugh, can’t someone find Jacques a new hobby? I’m literally getting sick of this grumpy old nagging hypocrite.

      It’s actually very simple: if it’s something new, different or anything other than he’s used to, he complains about it in a disrespectful way.

      1. And you’re complaining about HIM being disrespectful?

        1. How am I being disrespectful? I’m just stating the facts, am I not?

          He is grumpy, because he is always complaining and being negative instead looking at the positive side of it. Ok, maybe the old part is disrespectful from me. He is always nagging, going on about his previous (mostly negative) statements. And a hypocrite because (for example) last year he said Verstappen would not be up to the task, too young and too early for him, and now he’s saying he never said such things and on the other hand he says F1 cars are too easy to drive, again taking Verstappen as his example.

          1. JV’s concern was that F1 showing itself to be something that a 17 year old could jump in and do was not good for F1 as it makes it look too easy and takes away from F1’s mystique. He didn’t say Max wasn’t up to it but that there was a risk that if he wasn’t ready his career could be ruined before he’d have a fair chance. Ie. What’s the rush.

            And he has been supported in his opinion in a few ways. They immediately changed the rule so that you now have to be 18 and with more experience than Max had. He has been supported in his opinion about the cars being too easy to drive with the changes that are coming to make the cars harder to drive. The current drivers want that too. JV is spot on with both opinions. You are just too biased to think through what he is saying and would rather just see the initials JV and immediately jump all over him. Look more closely and you’ll find the last thing he is is a hypocrite.

          2. You’re not stating the facts – you’re stating an opinion.

      2. @addvariety literally getting sick? Are writing this from the toilet then?

        1. @addvariety Regarding the topic JV was quoted on, I take it you disagree with it and think NR’s move was fine. I actually do too. I am a huge JV fan and have rarely disagreed with his opinions. On this one I do disagree but I also see where he is coming from.

          While he is right that the 80’s cars would have been extremely dangerous for pulling these kinds of moves, these are not 80’s cars. But he lost his Dad in one so he certainly knows from where he is speaking.

          The other thing is JV lived through the MS/Ferrari era where MS made the chop a signature move and initially it was very disconcerting to the other drivers and teams and it was hard to stomach and accept these abrupt moves, but they were deemed legal. Only after the teams grilled the FIA over it though. That didn’t mean everyone did them though, and certainly nowhere near like MS. So from that aspect I can see where JV is sensitive to this kind of tactic.

          But I have defended NR on this, agree that it was a racing incident, and if pushed to lay blame I would put it slightly on LH, just because the rearward driver has more control over these situations because they can see a lot more, and because Nico’s move across the track should not have instilled LH with any confidence an opening would remain to the right, as Nico was moving right too, quite rapidly.

      3. I don´t think it´s his hobby. It´s his job. He gets paid for overexaggerated, polarizing commentary and quotes about F1. Nobody would continue to pay for interviews with him (or at least not as much and as frequently) if he didn´t produce such quotes, articles and thus attention regularly. He knows that.

      4. @addvariety I think after his antics at Radillon in 1999 he’s not really in a position to lecture drivers about taking unnecessary risks because of how safe the cars have become.

        But he’s a world champion and an Indianapolis 500 winner and if he feels Rosberg was entirely to blame then I respect his opinion. I don’t agree with it though.

        1. My thoughts exactly!

        2. Maybe those who make the mistakes, their opinion carries the most weight, since they have the most to reflect on.

        3. You need to look at the video a few times Keith and even pause it. You didn’t analyze it enough. Rosberg was hanging around the middle waiting for Hamilton to choose a side and run him out of space because he knew Hamilton was coming after he lost power being that wrong mode. He fixed the mode and looked at his mirrors for Hamilton while staying around the middle as to turn at ether side instead of choosing to cover the inside before Hamilton chose a line.
          Villeneuve was right on this.

          Hamilton was coming with so much speed that there was no way he wouldn’t pick a line to pass, but because Rosberg acted the second Hamilton chose a line and there was much difference in speed Hamilton could not change line like we see sometimes driver do by going for one side and then the other. If he did he would have crashed at the back of Rosberg’s car. So he could only keep going put his car in the empty space and hope Rosberg would not completely throw him out of the track.

          Rosberg created that accident. He himself admitted he was fully focused on Hamilton and watching him all the while he was trying to stop him. So if he was fully focused on him then why did he continue driving him off even when he put enough of his car in the gap to be allowed a cars space? He admitted by himself he knew what he was doing.

          1. At least when Button drove him into the wall in Canada in 2011 he said he didn’t see him not saying he was focused on him and still driving him into the wall. Go look at the Barichello and Schumacher incident that Michael was so heavily criticized for. He moved the same way Rosberg did but at least he backed off before completely throwing him on the wall unlike Rosberg.

      5. The guy is a world champion himself that was raised in the paddock of F1 and son of the legendary Gilles, he is well qualified to give his opinion even if we don’t agree with it. BTW JV is commenting live F1 race sessions (race+qualy+practice) on Canal+ in French and at the same time doing analysis pre and post race sessions in Sky Sport F1 in italian. So he is not that bad as you claim

    5. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      21st May 2016, 1:12

      Carmen Jorda. 9th place in an amateur series? *Slow clap*

      1. It might have been her first time in the car, and we’ve seen plenty of F1 drivers struggle in DTM. But fair enough.

        1. @wushumr2 It was her second race weekend in this category.

      2. Amateur racing 45s off pace in 16 laps… But she is gorgeus… The Kardashian of racing.

        1. Wait. You think Kim is gorgeous? …

      3. Well she raced, didn’t she? I think that’s great, not a reason to sneer. She wanted to be around F1, that’s great, and she made it happen, that’s great too afaic.

      4. The slow clap I hope is aimed at Lotus. You can’t blame her for taking a chance of being around F1.

    6. There’s an air of change, apart from the aforementioned problems of the Kvyat/Verstappen swap, Max’s career thus far, really seems to have put faith in the younger drivers, Wehrlein and Vandoorne seem to be eager to get some time on the spotlight, it’s unlike f1 for drivers to publicly express their yearn for their employers to fire the number 2 drivers.
      I’ve enjoyed channel 4’s coverage, as stated in the article last weekend’s Spanish GP wasn’t without it’s hiccups but overall their team has been livening F1, in a way it’s sad that F1 is definitely going to leave free-to-air, on the other side, channel 4 hasn’t got that pressure to make f1 work, maybe it was already in their dna maybe it’s the fact that no matter how good of a job they make f1 is going to sky.

    7. Don’t agree with a lot of what JV says going back years now, but I do agree with him here. It’s quite obvious that Rosberg blocked Hamilton on the outside, then blocked him off the track on the inside, while going 17kph slower. It’s the only way he could keep Hamilton behind him.

      I’m saying this as someone who is not a supporter of Rosberg or Hamilton. Not even a supporter of JV either. It is what it is.

      1. I wondered last Sunday, when the decision came out, why the stewards chose not to penalise the movements of Nico and I came to the conclusion that either Mercedes lobbied them or they must be the most biased or incompetent bunch of individuals ever.

        1. In nearly every poll I have seen on non-UK websites the results show quite an equal outcome in who is to blame. Obviously the international opinion is widely spread. And still you think the decision is made by biased or incompetent people? I guess you are slightly biased yourself than…

          1. Because most people responded without looking back at the pictures and/or knowing the actual rules.

            It happens fast and seen from the front it wasn;t directly apparent that Hamiltonw as in fact alongside and Nico had to leave space.

            People just make up rules. Some still say “Nico moved already before the crash” (or they even make up that Nico moved before Hamilton) when the rules say nothing about when the move was initiated. Just that space needs to be left. Or “Hamilton did the same to Rosberg”, when he really didn’t. defending the race line is governement by completely different rules than pushing a driver off on the straight and on the other side of the track from the race line.

            Most fans know nothing and just vent their opinions based on their likes or dislikes for certain drivers.

            The stewards are supposed to actually know and the rules and use the information available. Instead they make up their own rules by including that Hamilton was only alongside Nico for a short while. Nothing in the rules says anything about how long the cars need to be alongside. Just that when the front wing is alongside the overtaking driver needs to be given space to remain on track.

            1. @patrickl No there are the rules and then the interpretation of the rules. What if everyone then just started overcooking it at unreasonable speed just to get the smallest bit of wing beside someone’s rear tire, with banzai moves that are never going to stick, just to force someone to leave a space? You don’t think they need to interpret when a rearward driver’s action was reasonable or not, especially when an accident results?

              Nico was always moving to the right quite quickly and LH should not have expected a gap to be there. He made a risky move that Nico could not have reacted to having already committed to his legal one move across the track. Hence no penalties – a racing incident.

            2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
              21st May 2016, 14:51


              No excuse for a compromised car to try and push out another car. Period! Like I said, if this were to be used as a precedent, any compromised car whether they have a tyre puncture, a broken wing, a GP2 engine, a gear issue can push the other car onto the grass/wall/stands as they try to pass. The stewards can’t really give a penalty to any driver who pushes out another car. It is acceptable and 1 car’s width is a rule that needs to be taken out of the regularions or a clause has to be added that Rosberg is excluded and can push anyone on account of his daddy knowing all the stewards (aka the Daddy clause)

            3. Michael Brown (@)
              21st May 2016, 18:15

              As far as I can remember, there is no rule prohibiting “compromised” cars from defending their position. I’m not saying that Ricciardo has the right to swerve across the track because of his puncture, but Rosberg’s car was nowhere near as crippled as Ricciardo’s.

            4. @freelittlebirds He was ahead when he was making his one move, so he didn’t push anyone out. LH voluntarily put himself where he thought a hole would be that was never assured to remain. Period. Ask yourself why this was deemed a racing incident by the stewards. Obviously Nico did nothing penalty worthy.

        2. @tata Or you are simply wrong.

        3. @ Tata – HOW did you come to the conclusion in your statement?
          You said “..I came to the conclusion that either Mercedes lobbied them or they must be the most biased or incompetent bunch of individuals ever.” Just wondering what logic you are using.

          2016 may well be known as the year Hamilton didn’t win a race.

      2. Actually, he did not. There was no block on the outside, he simply followed the standard path through the turn, drivers (almost) always move to the outside on the exit. After all, the drivers after them went to the outside as well, which can be nicely seen tfrom the videos. So what you call “obvious” is actually not obvious at all, in fact it is very non-obvious.
        When you disregard this hypothetical “first move”, you get a very different picture: Rosberg made only one defensive move, it was to the right, and this move started before Hamilton appeared on his right. There is still ample wiggle room to assign blame in this situation, but it is a different situation from the one you tried to put forward, which ma explain the official verdict.

        1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
          21st May 2016, 14:46

          @ph the stewards didn’t want to add extra punishment on Mercedes – they’d lost 2 cars already in a 1-2 – they figured Nico would get reprimanded to death for an obvious error by the team. Unfortunately Niki Lauda came out with a silly statement – strange coming from a guy who thought the conditions were too dangerous and proved to be right costing him nearly his life and a championship. This was a killer move, period! So was Bahrain 2012. If Lauda disagrees, I think he might want to step away from F1. It seems that age and reason don’t necessarily go hand in hand always.

          1. Bull. If they could justify it they would give both 5 place penalties for next race.

            But stewards have an obligation not to be biased. Unlike us fans.

        2. I agree with your assessment pH.
          Nico made only one move, the move to the right and under the sporting regulation 27.6 he was not required to leave a car width for Lewis.
          27.6 More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, **having earlier defended his position off-line**, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner.
          I don’t see where Nico had earlier defended his position off-line, so in my humble opinion was not required to fulfill regulation 27.6.
          Regarding 27.7:
          27.7 Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason.
          For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’.
          I haven’t seen a helicopter overhead shot of the incident but it looked to me that Lewis’ front wing came level with Nico’s rear wheel at the time Lewis’ front wheel was on the grass, not on the racing track. I stand corrected on that one as usual.

          1. Michael Brown (@)
            21st May 2016, 18:21

            @glennb From what I saw from Hamilton’s onboard, he was indeed alongside with his front wing, as the rules stipulate. However, he was only alongside for a very small amount of time before going on the grass, 0.2s at most.

            I think the “significant portion” rule is not perfect. With it, a driver could be alongside for just a single frame, and the blame would be placed on the other driver for not leaving the space.

            It’s my opinion that the incident happened so fast that neither Rosberg nor Hamilton could react to the danger they put both their cars in.

          2. That was my point at the time, but hey ho racing incident. It doesn’t really matter anyway anymore. I just think if you write a rule like that it should be applied, but obviously that’s not the case here.

        3. It didn’t started before Hamilton moved to his right. It started the moment Hamilton initiated a move to the right. Before that he was hanging a little in the middle waiting for Hamilton to initiate a move left or right.
          Go watch the video from the top and normal view in very slow motion and frame by frame and you will see this.

          It’s right there in the video. Anyone who denies it after analyzing the video is simply is biased.

      3. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        21st May 2016, 14:41

        It’s a killer move by Nico – JV is right. I’ve said the same and the last time we saw a move like that Senna got a 6 month ban. Lewis was lucky his car didn’t hit the wall. With the momentum him, anything could have happened…

        I don’t how Nico is allowed to drive at Monaco and other races. This can turn into a death very soon with Nico’s moves.

        1. Really? A 6 month ban, really?

          I suggest you look at depth at the surrounding politics of Sennas 6 month ban that was unjustly issued to him (and supported by a number of drivers at the time as being unjust).

          All he was doing was defending his race position with a single move (look at the cockpit view of the steering wheel) and read the sporting regs!

    8. So what is going on now, 2017 Nico to Ferrari, Alonso to Mercedes, Vandoorne to McLaren is this gonna happen or what?

      Kimi to motocross.

      There is some serius pressure building in top teams. Where will Riciardo go, if his shine gets shadowed by Max?

      1. There was a rumor about Mercedes thinking seriously about replacing Lewis Hamilton by Wehrlein for the Monaco GP, Lewis has refused to participate in the F1 test and instead went to the festival of Cannes, In the night between Monday and Tuesday Lewis went to a party and something happened. Mercedes were furious with his behaviour.
        For me i cannot imagine that Mercedes was seriously thinking about replacing Hamilton for the Monaco GP unless they want to suicide as a team but maybe they’ve threatened him.
        Hamilton has replied i think yesterday saying that he is not interested in driving for Ferrari in the future and he want to be associated with Mercedes after his retirement.
        Sources :

        1. Only just noticed your post @tifoso1989. That would be a sensation for sure. Hope we get some more information, cos on the face of it it sounds extremely unlikely that Merc would make a fuss about Lewis choosing to do a prestigious media event instead of hanging around the garage at Barca.

          The mind boggles what he could have done at a party to make Merc want to replace him. And no other media picked it up. How credible is Autosprint?

          1. @lockup
            Being a constant reader of Autosprint i can ensure to you that it’s a credible Magazine, anyway Hamilton’s last post in Facebook where he post his photo and the hashtag #No1Team confirms that something happened.

            1. Must admit I don’t see it @tifoso1989. If I’m translating/understanding correctly it’s saying that tensions have eased? He’s done some appearance for Petronas and hashtagged his helmet supplier? My Italian is shaky tho. I’m assuming they mean tensions after Barca. Now he is all set for Monaco. I haven’t read about anything untoward in the L’Oreal party, though showbiz isn’t my normal thing.

        2. Thats utter nonsense, Lewis always avoids those in-season tests, its well documented, this is nothing new.

          As if Merc would boot Hamilton, their 3x champ and someone who brings so much focus to their brand, out for some young unknown, and at Monaco of all races.

          It’s nothing but tripe thats printed before the ‘biggest’ race of the year.

      2. -..2017 Nico to Ferrari

        I don’t see that happening but if it does happen, all I can say to Seb is keep your driving data as far away from Nico as possible.
        According to a post on Scuderia Forum titled An Evening with Jock Clear, Clear who is a former Mercedes Engineer said among other things that for 3 years while he was at Merc, he would observe Nico focus on studying Micheal’s driving data. (I would have posted the link here but I am not sure it would be allowed)
        I am reminded again of Lewis’s pace and ability to extract so much out of the Merc that he would leave Nico far behind by the end of the race in early 2014. And then there were reports of Mercedes data sharing and what have you in a bid to even out the teammates.
        Being already a fast driver, the added advantage of studying team mate’s data makes him difficult to beat over time. Over time it begins to feel like one is driving against oneself hence Micheal found it difficult to beat Nico.
        Jock Clear also said he is not sure Nico can be a world Champion. He may be proven wrong on that assumption as the championship currently stands.
        So if Nico goes to Ferrari, Seb should keep his driving data away from him.

        As for Vandoorne, if there is any time Mclaren should promote him, it certainly has to be 2017 with new rules coming in and new car. I don’t know who has to leave the team but Vandoorne needs to get in there asap to take advantage of ’17 rules and get used to the car going forward. Unless he suffers the Magnussen effect ie a flourishing young driver being brought into an established team at the cusp of a new engine partnership with massive unknowns.

        1. Nico studying a 7 time WDC’s data? And able to excel by doing so? Sounds smart to me. Sounds like two drivers pushing each other to advance the team. Sounds like Nico has great talent to be able to translate his studying into success on the track. I’m sure most drivers have studied the icons of F1, probably well before they themselves got to F1.

        2. Is that criticism, Nico studying Michael and Lewis data, regarded as best drivers of their generation…

          He is a poor student. Took him 3 seasons to do a Schumacher move. But in Spain he graduated.

          1. ALL drivers at ALL teams study each others data, it doesn’t just happen at Mercedes !! Lewis used to study Jenson’s data hence Twittergate the same as Jenson studied Lewis’. Stop making an issue of it. Personally i think it’s a good strategy as shows where your better and where you can improve your lap or car set up.

    9. Yes, F1 has changed since the eighties, just like the rest of the world. I guess you do not refuse to use smartphones or computers just because they make your life easier and let you do things in a different way. The world has moved on, deal with it.

    10. @Deej92 I need some help on how Kimi is doing better than Vettel?

      1. He got more points, the only thing that matters. The same way that Kvyat did better than Ricciardo and Ricciardo did better than Vettel in Red Bull.

      2. Kimi is now as good as Kimi gets. He needs the car to be perfect, then he drives perfectly. Not one bit faster.

        Also Vettel is doing a great job crashing in to Russian torpedo.

      3. @xtwl Perhaps I went a bit far, there isn’t much to choose between them so far. Raikkonen has closed the gap in performance to Vettel this season and doing a good job, staying out of controversies. I don’t think Ferrari would replace him if he didn’t want to leave.

    11. I’d still vote for 3 car teams if it was an option. More young talent in fast cars, yes please. Get rid of these languishing back markers that do nothing but complain yet add little to the spectacle.

      1. – Besides provide traffic that just ruins the racing for everyone I might add.

      2. 3 car teams would be awful because your guaranteeing more team orders & given how most the teams are struggling to field 2 cars all adding a 3rd is likely to do is ensure more pay drivers who are able to pay for that 3rd car.

        Plus your basically going to kill off all mid-field teams because if you have 3 mercedes, ferrari’s & red bull’s taking up 9 of the 10 points positions your pushing the likes of williams, force india, haas & str further down the field with less chance of scoring points, no chance of grabbing the odd podium & that is going to put them in more financial peril.

        I’d rather see more teams than less running more cars with all the negatives that come with it.

        1. I disagree, with more cars racing closer together, there would be more racing incidents due to the close racing allowing those midfield teams to still gain the occasional points… Most teams are not struggling to field 2 cars at all, it’s only these teams reliant on the traditional private team + sponsor funding.

          It could also allow for a more NASCAR style team management, with individual drivers bringing their own sponsors and having more autonomy between the garages to prevent crazy amounts of team orders.

          Your pushing the likes of williams, force india, haas & str further down the field. I disagree with that also, the current midfield aren’t going to magically get slower and “pushed down” all of a sudden, they’re not going to be anywhere near as slow as the current backmarkers which are literally just taking track space, essentially moving obstacles, and ruining the racing.

          1. @tristan Ofc. the midfield is going to get pushed down if you replace the backmarkers with more cars from the topteams.

    12. “Most teams are not struggling to field 2 cars at all”

      Struggling to field 2 cars would be an overstatement, However more than half of the current grid are currently in no way financially secure & realistically there are only 4 teams (Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull & McLaren) that could really afford to run a 3rd car & 1 of those teams (McLaren) wouldn’t exactly be totally secure doing so as they have nowhere near the budget they once did.
      Williams, Force India, STR, Sauber, Manor & even Haas & Renault would not be able to fund a 3rd car as they simply don’t have the sort of budgets that would be required & if they did manage to enter a 3rd car I doubt it would be at the same level as the other 2 in terms of the latest components.

      “It could also allow for a more NASCAR style team management, with individual drivers bringing their own sponsors and having more autonomy between the garages to prevent crazy amounts of team orders.”

      That would never happen, Even with 3 or more cars per-team the teams would continue to be run as they are now. All cars within the team would run the same livery with the same sponsors & they would continue to be run as 1 team with no more or less autonomy between the garages.

      “I disagree with that also, the current midfield aren’t going to magically get slower and “pushed down” all of a sudden”

      There not going to get slower, But if the current top 3 teams maintain the performance advantage over the rest that they currently have then the other teams are going to be pushed further down the order. Right now you tend to see Williams running around 5th/6th, Add a 3rd car & there going to slip back to fighting over 9th/10th.

      Also consider that the additional cost of adding a 3rd car is going to see them have far less to spend of things like development, Something that won’t affect the top 3-4 teams. That will also see them falling back down the order as they simply won’t have the budgets to develop at the rate required.

      Finally I’d point out that teams running 3+ cars in other categories works because those categories tend to be spec series or something very close to been a spec series (Which is what Nascar basically is), As such its much cheaper to run the cars & because your basically buying your cars from a 3rd party (Dallara in F3 for example) its much easier to run those cars & ensure there all at the same level.

      3rd cars have been discussed in F1 a dozen times over the past decade or so & every time its an idea that the teams themselves shoot down because they see & understand the problems that fans do not.

      1. That was supposed to be a reply to the comment above from Tristan.

    13. If you look at Villeneuve’s rather incorrect comment, F1 drivers in the 80’s would probably have hurt themselves, but they wouldn’t have been killed doing what Rosberg did in defending the lead from Hamilton. In the 60’s and before, when F1 cars and circuits of the day that had little to no safety like the Lotus 49 and the Nordschleife, that was much more likely to be the case. Drivers in the 80’s used to do something similar to what Rosberg did right before Turn 4 at Catalunya. Whilst defending their on track position from a challenging driver, the challengee would go off the racing line (the inside of the track) in order to force the challenger to go the long way around while being on the racing line. That is what Hamilton should have done.

    14. Killer move, says the guy who bumps other drivers out of the track in NASCAR

    15. A closing speed of 17 kph is nothing and LH could have merely lifted a bit and redirected his overtake to the left but he appears to have fixated on the bold move down the inside in his panic to recover his position.

      1. 17kph is nothing? Re-watch the footage, the closing speed is obvious.

        ‘could have merely lifted a bit’ lmao, he went for a huge space on the inside and in the blink of an eye hes forced onto the grass and facing sideways. Again, re-watch the footage, in real-time.

        1. Yeah, Nico closed that door legally. Hamilton lost control of his car. That’s what I see.

    16. “as we are not the only one”.

      I don’t care this. Under the control of Monisha this team set off down the slope. I don’t want to see this anymore. They have to change the currently Sauber boss Monisha.

      This team deserves better things!

    17. Re “Sauber not only team facing ‘difficult conditions”
      I wanted to watch the entire Spanish GP, but I had missed it, and I missed the 24 hour window my legal on line video supplier gives me … so I had to pay to watch a 25 minute package of the race. This got me into thinking about why F1 looses fans, and surely one is the lack of repeating of an entire race, especially on Free to Air TV, but also on things like F1’s own website. They do this on other sporting codes, so why doesn’t F1 do it too? Why can’t fans watch an “on demand” video of a race from the F1 website?
      Sadly, lack of tv coverage equates to lowering of the price teams can charge for advertising, which means teams like Sauber suffer.

    18. I respect Lewis Hamilton, he is obviously a very talented driver. The blind faith of some of his fans tend to make me enjoy seeing him fail though. If anyone makes a comment on the Rosberg/Hamilton crash in the media it ignites a flury of posts on how evil Rosberg is and Hamilton is not at blame at all. It does not matter what anyone says or thinks, it is over. The stewards, and the FIA for that matter, dealt with the two at the track. Penalties were handed out accordingly. It’s over. Done. End. Reality is not going to change.

    Comments are closed.