Head To Head Nico Rosberg vs Lewis Hamilton

[Chad Stewarthill]

The standard in F1 has always been that if a driver has his wheels alongside the driver in front's rear wheels, then they should give them space. (I.e. An overlap)

Rosberg didn't have an overlap, he was behind. Just having your front wing endplate nudging the rear tyre of the car in front is not sufficient to call it an overlap.
When pretty much all the commentators and even Rosberg's own bosses agree that it was a clumsy move that he should have pulled out of, why are some so determined to find fault with the victim?

 

[Road of Bones]

I think that the whole "making a point" thing was Nico on the defensive after a mauling by the crowd and the press immediately post-race, and was:
a) an extraordinarily injudicious comment to make
b) pretty bloody foolish, given Lewis' legendary indiscretion when he feels hard-done-by.

This was clearly the fault of Mercedes' management, who should probably have allowed the dust to settle, before insisting on a "clear the air" session. It was all too raw and heated right after the race.

 

[KekeTheKing]

It was all too raw and heated right after the race.

And apparently it was all too necessary. The thought of a teammate using his car to emphatically make the point that he will not make any more compromises must be horrifying to the Mercedes Board.

 

[The Artist.....]

Rosberg didn't have an overlap, he was behind. Just having your front wing endplate nudging the rear tyre of the car in front is not sufficient to call it an overlap.
When pretty much all the commentators and even Rosberg's own bosses agree that it was a clumsy move that he should have pulled out of, why are some so determined to find fault with the victim?

If you are on the motorway, and a driver in the middle lane pulls into the left hand lane so he can go up the slip road, and clips the front of your car (which was in the left hand lane, and also intending using the slip road) what would you say? Would it your fault for not getting out of the way? Certainly, there would be a certain amount of fault on your shoulders for not slowing down and letting the other car in, but there would also be fault on the other driver for assuming that your car wouldn't be in the way. (I realise this is not a perfect example)...

 

[Il_leone]

Its always the driver behind who takes responsibility to take avoiding action. Especially when he was not even alongside the other car

 

[FB]

Probably the worst example I can think of The Artist.....

Nico could have got out of the situation as Lewis was following the racing line. From how I see it he had three options:

1. Take to the escape road and possibly lose a place
2. Stamp on the brakes and possibly lose a place
3. Carry on as he was and, in fact, carry on turning in and hit his teammate.

Unfortunately, for moderators on F1 discussion boards everywhere, he took option 3.

 

[Bill Boddy]

For once I agree with Eddie Jordan (and Alan McNish). The Mercedes team knew that the rivalry between the two drivers was getting out of hand. They should have sat the two of them down and laid down the law that they should not be racing each other until such time as the race has settled down and they had a clear lead.

Lauda was a success at Jaguar as well, wasn't he?

 

[F1Yorkshire]

I wouldn't say creating discussion points is a bad thing for internet forums. I've noticed a lot more activity on here since the race so controversy is good for the boards! But then again not so good for the poor guys who are trying to keep arguments at a reasonable level!

 

[Brogan]

If you are on the motorway, and a driver in the middle lane pulls into the left hand lane so he can go up the slip road, and clips the front of your car (which was in the left hand lane, and also intending using the slip road) what would you say?

Once again, Hamilton did not change direction, nor move to a different line.
He remained on the racing line on the approach to and through the corner.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

The Artist..... Too right that's not a perfect example, it's an utterly ridiculous one and demonstrates someone clutching at non-existent straws.

When you go into a chicane behind another car, you know that they will take the racing line into the second part; it's what happens. By leaving just enough of your nose in there, you accept that contact will, or is extremely likely to, occur. Therefore, if you don't want to have an accident, it's up to you to pull out.
Vettel managed it a lap earlier, several others managed to do the same thing in the same race, Hamilton managed it at Canada. He even managed it in a very similar incident against another driver at a different chicane at Spa six years earlier (yet he still managed to get a penalty for that one, by virtue of a retrospective rule change).

 

[Sakari]

I must say, deciding to not avoid a collision is just as bad as causing the collision, and I think Nico's comments back up about how he didn't just back off, it's just as dangerous and should be penalised.
EDIT: Actually, I've changed my mind, failing to avoid a collision basically is causing a collision

I do agree, but then I do like Nico's honesty because he could have been lying about the truth.

 

[The Pits]

my two pence, fwiw.

Lewis could have avoided the collision, but was under no obligation or expectation to do so.

Nico could have avoided th collision, and was under obligation to do so, but chose not to.

cause and effect. between two drivers both racing for a very real goal. i can blame neither driver for wanting to show the other who is boss, but this is .ot the way to do it. i also cannot help but think that the festering boil has been allowed to go septic, and is now in danger of allowing someone to sneak up on the inside.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Anyway, assuming that it's an all-Mercedes front row at Monza, what are the chances of everyone making it round the first chicane in one piece, and who will be the first to blink?

 

[RasputinLives]

I think if they did it again a week later then Toto Wolff might just blow a gasket.

They'll wait until at least the last 2 races before taking each other off again.

 

[KekeTheKing]

Pits - How on Earth can you appoint equal responsibility to the car that was clearly in front? The trailing car has everything in front of him, he can actually see what is about to transpire. Requiring the car that is in front to take evasive maneuvers from the driver behind is nonsensical, and completely goes against the grain of long standing racing etiquette.

 

[Galahad]

It's hard to see what Toto can do, realistically, except dangle the threat of having 2015 contracts cancelled. Which might work, or might not; a championship is a championship and the drivers might struggle to care about much beyond Abu Dhabi.

 

[F1Yorkshire]

Exactly Galahad, I don't believe team orders will have any effect on how the drivers behave once they are out on track. The only way to regain control of the situation is by a team imposed suspension for Rosberg. If he knows that he can lose this title by being reckless and not playing the way the team wants to then he has to toe the line.

The constructors title is pretty much in the bag, Mercedes could fire one of their drivers tomorrow and replace them with Karthikeyan and still win the title. The drivers need to realise that they are not as important as they think they are.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Especially Galahad if Hamilton is off to Mcaren Honda next year as some people think (though I'm not convinced).

 

[The Pits]

KekeTheKing

please, read the post before leaping in.

 

[KekeTheKing]

I did. Rosberg deserves the lion's share of the blame. You seem to think that neither driver should be held to account.