F1 2021 Season

First topic message reminder :

Jeff Navarro wrote:I’ve watched f1, and motorsports in general, for many years and I’ve never seen the bartering of penalties.

Beyond a joke.

Just Gareth wrote:

Jeff Navarro wrote:German media reporting Mercedes will buy out Ocon deal from Renault if Hamilton retires...

I think he’ll retire. Think he’s had enough of this circus now, and the cars are going to be less exciting, slower and heavier to drive. He’s achieved everything

Tbh I want to see Hamilton in these new cars - just as I want to see Fernando and Vettel.
Wound be sad if he left.

Be amazed if he retired. He does this every winter

I don't think Hamilton will retire, especially after that farcical loss. That was the greatest sporting robbery since Lewis didn't get the decision over Holyfield.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

GSC wrote:You can't run your race for fear for a SC outside of like Monaco and Singapore. It was the right strategy call and had the SC come out 2 laps earlier they would've boxed him again and won. They were in no man's land as to whether the race would restart and they lost the 50:50 call

Tend to agree with this. It's a bit strange though that the driver in the lead is essentially boxed in like this by incidents outside his control, which I guess comes back to Duty's point. Although I'm not sure I see an alternative. Maybe we simply shouldn't allow pitting under SC/VSC? But then of course the driver in the lead could still lose out, e.g. if they've built up a lead of more than a pit stop but are on used tyres they'll drop right back down after pitting.

Could you have some kind of staggered start instead, holding the gaps?

Well thats what the VSC is supposed to be for, where they have to maintain their gap to the car in front and reduce their speed to 40% normal race speed. If pitting wasn't allowed under the VSC the lead driver would be able to retain their advantage.

Since cars tend to bunch up under Safety Cars, they lose their advantage anyway, so banning pit stops might not have any effect.


I suspect a lot of these rules were drawn up to try and make races more interesting, to shift the advantage back and forth, as F1 had become pretty boring.

It would be nice if they could be scrapped after next season, if the new cars allow closer racing, as promised. Though saying that, if closer racing and more overtaking is possible, then the time penalties incurred for pitting may not be such a big deal?

All other things aside farewell Kimi Räikkönen. Maranello royalty and our last world champion. Deadpan and out school. But one of the greats. I’ll miss the Flying Finn. Go well Kimi.

Duty281 wrote:I don't think Hamilton will retire, especially after that farcical loss. That was the greatest sporting robbery since Lewis didn't get the decision over Holyfield.

I really hope he doesn't.

This defeat will rankle him, I'm sure. So I think he's going to be back next season to avenge it. I also find it hard to believe he won't want to see how the new cars drive (in anger).

I think he really still wants that 8th title, to complete his record breaking achievements.

If next season's car isn't competitive, I could see him retiring, but he will surely want to give it at least one more season.


While I don't think Lewis was robbed today, strictly speaking (the Turn 1 incident) the way Race Control and the stewards handled this race was farcical and the manner of Max's win will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many fans.

I wish we could resurrect Charlie Whiting - he'd never have allowed the sort of crap that Masi has.

Whiting presided over Vettel at Canada weeks before the 7 hour inquest of Max Vs LeClerc, this review of stewarding has been years in the making.

I don't think the result was unfair. Extremely unlucky, and a controversial process for sure. But what should've happened, ultimately did happen.

Also credit to Max, even with the tyre advantage he had one chance at that on probably cold tyres. And it was every bit as brutal and on the edge as it has to be.

Lewis I think probably was hoping he would go off track or run deep so he could get the better run onto the straight, but it was absolutely perfect.

Bottas managed to go from 4th to 6th on that last lap somehow, a sad end to his Mercedes career.

Anyway, regs shakeup next year, it's Lando2022SZN

Mercedes have lodged two appeals

Don't think they're getting anywhere with overtaking under the safety car.

The rules appear to state that: "Once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pit at the end of the following lap."

And: "any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car."

Given only a few cars were allowed to pass the leader, coincidentally the few that Verstappen needed out of the way to win and no one else, this appears to be a clear breach of the rules. Also didn't the safety car retire straight away after those few cars had passed, rather than 'returning at the end of the following lap'?

The decision taken ensured a Verstappen victory and the race officials would have known that.

Surely Mercedes have legitimate grounds for appeal?

I think this a little bit of grasping at straws to be honest, but it underlines how farcical the stewarding was. The lapped cars should've been out of the way well in advance

Jeff Navarro wrote:Mercedes have lodged two appeals

what for?

Max going side by side before the safety car ended and the regs call for a lap between letting lapped cars go.

Max and Lewis being dragged into the stewards after that race is something

GSC wrote:Max going side by side before the safety car ended and the regs call for a lap between letting lapped cars go.

This one appears to be unarguable. It should have been a safety car finish. Not ideal, far from ideal, but better than the cheap manufactured drama conjured up by the race officials contrary to their own rules.

The FIA have never ruled against themselves - Masi would get fired immediately and FIA has backed Masi relentlessly.

I mean it would somehow be appropriate if the title ended up being decided by Race Control getting a straightforward rule wrong. I don't have the regs to hand, so can't really say either way, and I suspect the FIA will be... reluctant to overturn a race result in that manner, so I wouldn't get my hopes up TBH. Surely there's a "Race Control's decision is final" clause in there somewhere?

Pretty much spot on MfC, race director is somewhat protected

It's equally sad and fitting that this season ends up in the stewards picking through the wording of rules F1 has never bothered to enforce properly. Dunno what the outcome would be if Mercedes won, they'd obviously need a 1 lap countback, but I don't think there's any precedence for that. I suspect this ends up as the race director judged that it was safe for the race to resume with the lapped cars out of the way

The season to end on that makes it all feel like a farce and unsatisfactory.  However I guess you have to remember everything that happened throughout the season because it all counted, but at the moment I have difficulty getting my head around it.

ps: it seems regulations were not followed by Michael Massi.

It is however abundantly clear F1 needs to find a way to make these decisions as black and white as possible. The tradition of leaving it as grey as possible has been exposed time and time again this season.

Also ditch the in race audio of teams talking to the stewards. It's great for #bantz but it detracts from the product.

So we have:

1) Not all lapped cars passed the safety car before the safety car retired. Only a few were permitted to pass. Clear breach of the rules. Unarguable.

2) The safety car retired immediately, rather than waiting until the end of the following lap. Clear breach of the rules. Unarguable. It should have been a safety car finish, and it would have been if the title had already been decided or if this was race seven of the season.

3) Verstappen overtook Hamilton during the safety car period. Clear breach of the rules. Five second penalty.

If the result isn't overturned, Mercedes need to take it to the CAS in Switzerland. Hamilton is a legitimate World Champion who is being twisted out of a deserved win.

I'm guessing Mercedes will argue the SC should still have been out as cars hadn't unlapped themselves, therefore race completed behind SC, so positions at end of penultimate lap stand. RB could argue that in that situation Hamilton could have crashed on his own behind SC of course, unlikely as that would be.

Anyway, as I said, I don't expect it to come to much, albeit I'm not sure I blame Mercedes for trying.

The problem with the countback method is while it may work here, if someone successfully appeals a lap 2 ruling next time do we countback and invalidate the race due to lack of laps completed. So I think you'd have to be asking for the result to be vacated.

So we have Michael Masi breaching the FIA regulations?

It's pretty clear that the regulations were not followed and the only reason the FIA have for rejecting either appeal is face saving. Hamilton has been screwed plain and simple.

Over the past few races Hamilton had been faultless while Verstappen had been making errors.  In this race weekend Verstappen flat spotted his mediums in Q2, while in the race Hamilton made the perfect start on "slower tyres" and on the dirtier side of the track.  Without the Latifi incident Hamilton would have won easily and then we have the bad taste in the mouth with the farce of the decision making of Michael Masi.

ps: if this result is to stand then I guess we have to rationalize it - one race out of many across the season.

GSC wrote:The problem with the countback method is while it may work here, if someone successfully appeals a lap 2 ruling next time do we countback and invalidate the race due to lack of laps completed. So I think you'd have to be asking for the result to be vacated.

Hmm I can see that. But I also see merit in Duty's point that the championship and race situation seemed to make them desperate to re-start the race, which sort of led to the mess in the first place...

It's a complete farce. But the lapped cars should've already been gone. They compounded one stupid ruling with another.

In 2007 Hamilton was tremendously unlucky not to win the drivers championship.  In 2008 he was easily going to win the championship and then rain came towards the end of the last race in Brazil - but he ended up winning that one.   In 2016 there were issues with his motivation and he was not nailing his starts, but he would have still won that championship if his engine didn't fail while leading in Malaysia.  Now in 2021 after albeit misfortune for Verstappen at Silverstone and Hungary, Hamilton remained close to perfection towards the latter part of the season with the pressure seemingly getting to Verstappen - but then it ended under somewhat farcical circumstances with Michael Masi breaking the FIA regulations in order to get some "racing" on the last lap.

I get emotions are running high, but "misfortune at Silverstone and Hungary" is a bit one eyed my guy.

GSC wrote:I get emotions are running high, but "misfortune at Silverstone and Hungary" is a bit one eyed my guy.

I thought I was cutting out the emotion.   Let's not reopen a can of worms.   My criticism is with Michael Masi and his decision making.  However I guess "for the good of the sport" everybody is going to have to accept the decision.  It seems Hamilton has accepted it while Toto Wolff is currently in the red zone.

Bottas jumping in the pool after finishing 6th and his team protests the classification is everything I needed

If they insist on racing to a finish and not letting freak accidents determine the outcome then surely with all the technology you have you can have the cars all go into the pit lane while the crash is cleared.

All cars can put 2 or 3 laps of extra fuel in if that’s a problem but they can’t go changing tyres. They can keep them warm though.

Then when the crash is cleared up, each car can be released to drive to the spot they were when the crash happened then the race restarts with one sort of formation lap where you drive round at 80% speed to get the cars running again then when the leader gets to the point where the race restarts everyone can crack on racing again?

It almost makes it like the crash didn’t happen.

Hamilton was basically winning 10-0 in the 90th minute and they said next goal wins while Verstappen was on a counter attack

Biggest farce I’ve ever seen. Tainted is an understatement.

Final Standings (Driver)
01) Verstappen.(10) 395.5
02) Hamilton.....(08) 387.5
03) Bottas.......(01) 226
04) Perez........(01) 190
05) Sainz Jr......(00) 164.5
06) Norris........(00) 160
07) Leclerc......(00) 159
08) Ricciardo....(01) 115
09) Gasly.........(00) 110
10) Alonso.......(00).. 81

I bet Hamilton is embarrassed by Toto at the moment.

Likelihood of Max keeping his championship? Much higher than Masi keeping his job for next season. He's been atrocious.

Final Standings (Constructors)
01) Mercedes.......... (09)...... 613.5
02) Red Bull............ (11)...... 585.5
03) Ferrari.............. (00)...... 323.5
04) McLaren........... (01)....... 275
05) Alpine............... (01)...... 155
06) AlphaTauri......... (00)...... 142
07) Aston Martin...... (00)....... 77
08) Williams............ (00)........ 23
09) Alfa Romeo........ (00)........ 13
10) Haas................ (00)........ 00

No name Bertie wrote:Final Standings (Driver)
01) Verstappen.(10) 395.5
02) Hamilton.....(08) 387.5
03) Bottas.......(01) 226
04) Perez........(01) 190
05) Sainz Jr......(00) 164.5
06) Norris........(00) 160
07) Leclerc......(00) 159
08) Ricciardo....(01) 115
09) Gasly.........(00) 110
10) Alonso.......(00).. 81

Final pending appeal, of course.

GSC wrote:It's a complete farce. But the lapped cars should've already been gone. They compounded one stupid ruling with another.

I think what happened is this. It wasn't safe to let cars unlap themselves until track was clear, but they didn't want the race and championship to end under the safety car. So original decision: no unlapping, SC in, one lap to go.

Obviously this didn't suit Max (albeit it probably suited him more than the race ending under the SC ). I think at that point he would have had four or five cars to lap before he could get to Lewis, pretty much impossible. So RB understandably unhappy.

At this point I don't think there's any other explanation than that Race Control panicked. Waved the cars through, but only those between Max and Lewis - something there seems no provision in the rulebook for in the first place. And then re-started the race straight away, again in apparent contravention of the regulations. So yeah, a mess. And I can't help feeling there would have been less controversy had they simply ran behind the SC to the end. Lest we forget, Max picked up half a win from running behind a SC for two laps in an earlier race...

Anyway, as I said, I don't expect anything to come from it, but there needs to be change. I don't even think the process* is that controversial, it just wasn't followed properly here. Damon Hill with a decent quote there on Race Control: "It's been a bit too "guess what I'm going to do now" I think".

*Talking about the whole SC thing. Obviously there are issues with what is considered acceptable racing or not, although I'm not sure there are any easy answers there.

Carlos Sainz beat Charles LeClerc - no mean feat.
Sebastian Vettel beat Lance Stroll - Lawrence Stroll cherrypicked Vettel to make his son look good. Didn’t work out all too well.
Lando Norris beat Daniel Ricciardo - massively disappointing season for Ricciardo aside from winning at Monza. Needs to buck up his ideas as Gasly is waiting in the wings.

Mad for Chelsea wrote: .... I don't think there's any other explanation than that Race Control panicked .....  I can't help feeling there would have been less controversy had they simply ran behind the SC to the end. Lest we forget, Max picked up half a win from running behind a SC for two laps in an earlier race...

Agree entirely.  Excellent point.  ps: Max got half points but it counted as a "full win" for the records.

Mercedes have taken a barrister with them to a meeting with the race director. They know they've been swindled.

Just to clarify - I agree entirely with Mad For Chelsea - the FIA regulations would have had this race finish under safety car conditions for which there are plenty of precedents. Whether the race directors decisions trumps the regulations I don't know.

OK, last post for now, and I'll attempt to play devil's advocate a little.

We have had an incredibly dramatic season, I think everyone will agree on that. Two drivers driving for the most part superbly, duking it out, miles ahead of the rest of the field. Some great battles, and some controversy/flashpoints. It comes down to the last race of the season, winner takes all. Just as it looks like the race is petering out into a comfortable win, a SC. Late drama!

You couldn't script it, etc. But then it appears that there won't actually be time to re-start the race properly, and instead it'll just be a dull procession behind a SC. All this, 21 races, for a complete damp squib? So the race director tries everything to re-start the race, and ultimately who cares if the process isn't quite followed? (rhetorical question, obviously)

That's what I can imagine the thought process could have been. Is it right? Probably not. Is it understandable? Maybe.

Duty281 wrote:Mercedes have taken a barrister with them to a meeting with the race director. They know they've been swindled.

Mercedes came with a lawyer in the event car #33 and car #44 got wiped out. It’s not uncommon for the team trailing(driver in this case) to have a lawyer.
Ferrari had one in 2012 at São Paulo. Red Bull didn’t.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:OK, last post for now, and I'll attempt to play devil's advocate a little.

We have had an incredibly dramatic season, I think everyone will agree on that. Two drivers driving for the most part superbly, duking it out, miles ahead of the rest of the field. Some great battles, and some controversy/flashpoints. It comes down to the last race of the season, winner takes all. Just as it looks like the race is petering out into a comfortable win, a SC. Late drama!

You couldn't script it, etc. But then it appears that there won't actually be time to re-start the race properly, and instead it'll just be a dull procession behind a SC. All this, 21 races, for a complete damp squib? So the race director tries everything to re-start the race, and ultimately who cares if the process isn't quite followed? (rhetorical question, obviously)

That's what I can imagine the thought process could have been. Is it right? Probably not. Is it understandable? Maybe.

I'm not so sure it is understandable. There was no drama on that final lap for my reckoning - Verstappen on fresh soft tyres v Hamilton on knackered hard tyres for a lap, only going to be one winner.

Your devil's advocate post highlights exactly the reason why this Verstappen 'win' needs to be overturned: because otherwise it creates a precedent where future race directors can tear up the rule book whenever they like for the guise of 'entertainment'. Then it's not F1, it's scripted WWE nonsense, and it can't be allowed to stand.

This isn't just about Hamilton getting the title he deserves - the entire future of F1 is at stake.

You've lost me at the point when the lawyers arrive to decide a world champion. Wake me up when someone makes a decision

This is going to last days, weeks, if not, months. This is going to CAS. Mercedes have more than enough to appeal this absolute shambolic result.