Will it also cease to be Alfa? Is the driver a part of the Alfa branding deal?
For Kimi or Gio though? You'd imagine it's Finn for Finn but from next season Alfa are no longer required to take on a Ferrari driver.
Alfa Romeo and Bottas have opened talks about a drive next season, according to numerous reputable F1 sources.
Exactly well said. The only way Hamilton could beat Max was to put Max into the wall. Disgraceful driving.
Did someone make Hamilton out to be the victim? Where did that happen?
Beat him on track? They've been beating him on track week in and week out, right up to the point where he punted them into the wall and put Max in the hospital. It's amazing the kind of twisted logic some people use to try and make the victim out to be the one who did wrong.
Yep his average qualy gap to his teammate is 0.482s, which is the largest gap on the grid, just ahead of Gasly and Verstappen, while "Mr Saturday" George Russell for example has an average gap of 0.377s - the difference is that the Williams is fast enough for that to be worth a bunch of positions but the Haas is only ever good enough for 19th. Mazepin is hardly a benchmark of a teammate of course, but he's hardly worse than Latifi.
It will be interesting to see how Mick does in a somewhat competitive car in future.
If its true its just the usual story of stirring up additional trouble in the hope that it will influence the FIA to comedown harder on Hamilton if the opportunity arrives again.
I really doubt any lawyer could have any affect on the result of the race or even paying for damages to Max's car.
Excellent 🤣
He watches Dave during the day.
Have you been in an accident that wasn't your fault. You are due compensation, We offer a no win no fee so call now.
Poor Marko being sucked in at his old age.
I think this is more of am aim at Merc for RB. If RB and Max can keep their advantage and build up a points lead again, and Hamilton does another first lap dive that results in a DNF or accident, the press would then be to apply a sterner punishment.
That is what i am reading from this anyway.
I’d say it’s quite a normal behind the scenes process that a lot of teams do as the bill for damage can be quite high and it’s just a case of crossing t’s and dotting i’s. It’s just a news site looking for clicks and making a story of it because of the spotlight the crash received!
Every F1 team has a team of lawyers on retainer no doubt!
Red Bull opening a massive can of worms there. What’s the point of this other than putting all the attention on them?
If (when) Checo inevitably punts someone off this is the type of thing that bites them in the arse.
Its done. Beat him on the track.
Mind games if anything I would say. This would put more eyes on any driver if there was a potential flare up in the future.
Marko claims RB have hired a lawyer to look into the accident at silverstone.
I don't know any of the reputable racing news sites but it's mentioned here
I put it here instead of the race thread because if is true it could have an impact outside of that incident.
I am tempted to fly down to Austin for one.
It's looking increasingly likely there will be no race in Japan this year, I'd imagine they are waiting until the olympics finish until they make a decision. Joe Saward reported some rumours of them planning 2 races in Texas and 2 in Mexico over the space of 5 weeks to fill the slot left by Japan and Singapore. I fully expect at least one more round at Bahrain where Australia was and the inevitable cancellation of the race in Brazil. It's bizarre to think that there is only one race on the calendar for November and we are still going until mid December.
Fu-ckin glorious sight.
Simple enough answer for the red flag thing; anyone who makes a change (including tyres) goes to the back of the grid. That way if everyone needs wet tyres they can get them and the field will end up the same. If there's a safety issue it's on the team to make the decision to effect repairs.
Mick Schumacher behind the wheel of the Jordan 191:
I was referencing the general rule that if a driver inadvertently benefits from causing a red flag, like Leclerc did at Monaco this year, that rule has glaring gap in it for how a car/driver can benefit.
As some have said, it should be that you restart from the pitlane etc.
Also worth noting that when Hamilton repaired during the red flag he had not been adjudged as the guilty party for the incident.
At that point for stewards Max may have been decided on as the cause of the accident so then Hamilton gets penalised with no repair for an accident he arguably didn't cause.
I suppose it makes a case for stewards making decisions quicker but when I saw the collision originally I said to myself I would not want to be a steward because I couldn't call if it was a racing incident or if a driver was to blame
This simple solution is to mandate that cars that undergo repairs must re-start from the pitlane.
As galling as it is to see Lewis luck into yet another pain-free repair, you just can't send a broken and unsafe car out to restart. If red flag repairs were banned, you're going to see drivers with broken cars go back out there to salvage points rather than call it a day, and we'll all be back here complaining if someone was sent out with a hairline fracture in their suspension that becomes a full-on disintegration, especially at a high-speed corner like 130R or Eau Rouge which would pitch someone into the barrier at 300km/h+. Even if you tried coming up with some constraints like "you can only repair parts critical to car control", you'll have teams arguing that the loss of downforce from losing an endplate or bit of floor (especially from next year onwards) is just as critical as the suspension.
For clarity that's not all I compared it to and not for the reason you suggested ie Hamilton deliberately causing the incident, not once since Sunday have I expressed that view or liked posts expressing it.
The potential to gain from an incident you created is surely a loophole and there's no valid reason not to do something about it right?
Calling it a loophole and comparing it to a coordinated spin in Q3 is suggesting that Hamilton deliberately caused the red flag, in the knowledge that he could repair any damage. Not a safety car, VSC or double waved yellows - but specifically a red flag - all while battling wheel to wheel at 180 mph.
It's a clear loophole that needs to be closed. Just like bendy wings, controlled oil leaks and performing a precisely controlled crash in Q3 while you are pole to red flag the session but not screw your gear box as was suggested by other on the forum and team bosses when it happened to Leclerc
Its the same for everyone though, except every time Hamilton benefits from the rules, there is an overwhelming commentary on here to change them. Perez has forced drivers off the track 3 times in the last two races, two of which he got penalised for, and the penalty didn't affect his final position.
Mick is currently driving a ball of shite for atleast this season and probably next, hard to "forge a career" in a team that's essentially a meme at the moment.
He will probably get a better drive because of the simple fact he his Michael Schumachers son so he's going to probably play on that fact for some time.
I disagree that rule has to change. A 10s penalty matters much more to some drivers in some cars than other drivers in other cars. Hamilton has a great car and can make up at 10s penalty, bit others can't. That fact shouldn't impact the severity of the penalty. The penalty should reflect the crime, not the difficulty in overcoming the penalty, or the consequence of the infringement.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/282101dc2976956f9dfc87f7a2ef2413.svg)
