Johnny Dee
+12Laatste reacties
Popular on GPBlog
1
Alonso on Verstappen threatening his seat at Aston Martin: 'Welcome to the team'
1137 times read
2
Russell sends subtle dig to Norris: "McLaren, in the hands of the right driver, does the job"
825 times read
3
Piastri calls on McLaren not to interfere in title battle: 'This year is very different'
698 times read
4
Verstappen and Horner clearly not in agreement on the real problem at Red Bull Racing
679 times read
+0
Johnny Dee
Move along Mazepin. You're a spoiled little brat who thinks the fact that you should be able to drive with your father's dirty money is more important than the lives of innocent people and CHILDREN who are attacked in their own homes. Good riddance.09-03-2022 17:45
+0
Johnny Dee
What would the point be? It would simply be embargoed.09-03-2022 17:47
+0
Johnny Dee
Lots of opinion here. Where are the facts? Simple: 1) Verstappen was always in front. That this can be denied shows nothing other than bias. Watch the videos. Remember: Hamilton's FRONT wheel hit Verstappen's REAR wheel. 2) BECAUSE Verstappen was Always in front, Hamilton needed to be the aggressor. Verstappen drove through Copse as any other driver would, hitting the apex at the correct point. This can only mean that Hamilton had NO WAY of making that corner without punting someone off. In fact, had the coming together happened any further along, the consequences would have been so much more severe. Max is very lucky to have no "serious" injuries (although that really has yet to be determined). By the way, this move is known as the Marq Marquez. A true Motorsport fan would recognize this in an instant. 3) Besides Hamilton's 2018, well spoken comments - essentially that a driver should never benefit from an accident he has been determined to cause, let me take you back to Renault and Bruno Senna/Flavio Briatore. Now the punishment there; THAT was fitting and in spite of the dissimilarity, the bottom line is the same. So 10 seconds is just? Nope. Not the FIA nor even Hamilton can history agree that was sufficient. 4) Comparison of great adjudication: when Schumacher hit Villeneuve in 1997, although the point seemed mute, as Villeneuve went on to win the championship (and the race), the fact was, that Schumacher lost ALL his points for not just the race, but the SEASON. THAT vs a 10 second time penalty. 5) As Toto had admitted, had it Not been for the red flag, caused by a situation from the legal perpetrator of the incident, Hamilton would not have finished the race. This fact means that Hamilton's 10 second penalty was the absolute, most lenient penalty he could have possibly received; one that erased his own consequences from his own responsibility. Wow. 6) Regret: there was none. At least Schumacher owned up in 1997; for an incident which essentially parallels this one - with the HIGHLY NOTABLE EXCEPTION, that it happened at 10's of kms per hour, not near 300 of them. However, Lewis was more concerned about blame, stating, "He turned into me!" (He did not, in fact video shows Verstappen taking evasive action), and also stated that he was "in front", (at no time and no angle was Hamilton EVER in front or even Alongside Verstappen, not to mention that he did not ask at all about Max's situation until Well After the incident; likely realizing he had neglected to seem concerned. Mercedes then also played it down and seemed afraid to confront Lewis with the truth, which they must've known fully well given that they had seen the replays, that Verstappen NEVER turned in (quite the opposite), and that Hamilton was Never in front. Later, after the race, Hamilton seemed to decide he would not even address it, which underscores the next point. 7) Unsportsmanship. For whatever reason, England is on a Bender, whether it was Brexit, the world's put down of Astra Zeneca, their loss at the Euro Cup after their ugly win over Denmark, or a culmination of all of the above and then some: the world has the evidence in hand to conclude that the English appear to be sore losers. In fact, this neglect of whatever driving code may exist, seems borne out of Hamilton's refusal to quit. Although he Was Behind going into Copse and No Other Reasonable outcome could possibly exist other than Max being punted off, he ignored the consequences and went for the kill. Let me say this, if Jenson Button, a Brit who worships at the feet of Hamilton was the first to publicly, however reluctantly, suggest that Lewis was at fault and should not have been where he was (a phrase echoed by many professionals who know far better than you or I, then how can any reasonable and thinking human suggest they know better? Who - what true fan of the sport, would CHEER after being punted off the track, as evidenced in a number of videos that have surfaced of the incident? Those are not fans. They are people afraid of losing AGAIN. THESE ARE FACTS. Maybe painted slightly, but facts nonetheless. There is no fact, not a one, that absolves or favors Hamilton or Mercedes of not just the responsibility of the incident, but only suggests the Rhetoric that they choose to use reveals "alternate facts", ones that Brundle, Croft and Chandhok dallied in during the broadcast. Not fact based, but for the Queen!. Not with facts and science, but like most of this blog - opinion.20-07-2021 02:49