The claims of Mercedes: Mercedes claimed that Car 33 overtook Car 44 during the Safety Car period at 1832hrs, in breach of Article 48.8 of the 2021 Formula One Sporting Regulations. Red Bull’s arguments in defence: Red Bull argued that Car 44 was not “overtaken” by Car 33, that both cars were “on and off the throttle” and that there were “a million precedents” under Safety Car where cars had pulled alongside then moved back behind the Car that was in front. Conclusions of the Stewards : The Stewards consider that the protest is admissible. Having considered the various statements made by the parties. The Stewards determine that although Car 33 did at one stage, for a very short period of time, move slightly in front of Car 44, at a time when both cars where accelerating and braking, it moved back behind Car 44 and it was not in front when the Safety Car period ended (i.e. at the line). Accordingly, the Protest is dismissed and the Protest Deposit is not refunded. Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits.
I think this is just based on them cheering the first rejection. Although I don’t expect a decision to be overturned tonight. This is heading to the courts for sure as there’s no way the FIA rescinds a championship it awarded less than two hours ago.
yeah - if they’ve dismissed this one there’s no chance of the other one. This one was the FIA’s get out - they could have upheld that and given a time penalty handing it back to Hamilton without having to question their own balls up.
Was always the weakest appeal. But rules should be rules for me, regardless of who is involved. You could easily argue that Max benefits from running so close to Hamilton in the approach to the restart, but having that strategy runs the risk of him poking in front and being penalised.
You d still risk it for the sake of 1 lap . Who knows , Hamilton could have had a brake magic moment , RB 1st and 2 nd and they take the constructors . Conspiracy theory hat on here but did RB deliberately pull Perez as a deal to sacrifice the constructors but in return they got the last lap ? It was only the last race Masi was cutting deals with the teams .
They were. Even Horner was gracious enough to admit that during the race when he said something like max will race as good as he can but the mercedes is just too quick for us today and it will take a miracle. The annoying thing (well one of many) is that mercedes performed excellently today. Lewis drove exceptionally. Max did everything he possibly could. Perez put in an amazing performance. Every one of them performed admirably and whichever driver won it was fair and right. And then Masi did...
That's what annoys me with F1. Rules SHOULD be rules but even the rules don't say what the penalty is even if found guilty. It's anything from a reprimand to disqualification with no clarity on when each is applied and then you have the countless examples of cars going level and ever so slightly ahead like max did and it's all a shitshow of opinions which it just shouldn't be.
A bizarre take if ever there was one. He was 12 seconds ahead and cruising to the title until the safety car. He'd overtaken Verstappen at the start, despite the latter being on the faster tyres. Even after Perez did his best to be a moving obstacle, reeling Lewis back into Max's grasp, Hamilton still drove off into the distance. Hamilton 'hands down' out-performed Verstappen. Whatever the result, I recognise Hamilton as the winner. You cannot change the rules of a sport on the final lap of the final race of a season, which immediately disadvantages the driver who is deservedly winning the race hands down. I can't believe it's even being debated.
I think they may well dismiss the second one to save face...then it will end in Court. I've no preference over whether Hamilton/Verstappen or Mercedes/Red Bull wins, but rules are rules.
you're picking me up on semantics. I'm doing the same. my point was around the inevitability of some kind of protest from the losing team, on the basis that this has been consistent all season, from both sides. I called it before the race started. my point was not related in any way, to an opinion on whether the outcome of the race was fair or not.
And that's the problem. There is no rule on what to do here. Neither party has broken any rules, the referee has made a balls up and given a goal that went wide in the 3rd minute of injury time. The games finished and the losing side has (rightfully) complained but what can they do?
I think this is pretty much it. It’s a clearly incorrect decision that’s cost someone - but it’s like a penalty being given that shouldn’t - its just a just a balls up.
They’ve just said on sky sports the race director has a degree of discretion with regards to the safety car and lapped cars etc, so I think the result won’t be affected. Go Max well done lad.
I think you might have lost your way a bit on your point to be honest. Hence the other replies. In tennis terms…….