pauldyson1uk
Full Member
I agree the longer they pressed him about it, the more he sounded less convinced to what he is sayingHorner doesn’t sound convincing, I think he knows it’s mostly on Max.
I agree the longer they pressed him about it, the more he sounded less convinced to what he is sayingHorner doesn’t sound convincing, I think he knows it’s mostly on Max.
the difference here is Leclerc is already ahead on the outside. He's claimed the corner so Norris needs to give more room.They go trough one at a time apart of Norris who bumps tyres.
the difference here is Leclerc is already ahead on the outside. He's claimed the corner so Norris needs to give more room.Look at the screenshot I posted earlier in the thread and watch the video in the tweet from Sky Sports of Norris and LeClerc.
I can’t be arsed arguing this anymore, I don’t even like Max
Max should've yielded. Problem is that he never does and never has. Incidents like this are littered across his short career.As a Lewis fan it is so frustrating to have seen that happen . In hindsight Lewis had more to lose and should have yielded. He had the faster car and could have caught him later . Verstappen was very frustrated with his stop and also knew that he would struggle to catch Hamilton if he got away so he was never going to hold back . This worked out much better for him
Likewise I don’t think its blatant. But, my point is there is NO difference to this and the lap one incident in Silverstone. Once Lewis was given a penalty there, I strongly feel it is only fair to give Max a penalty here. What’s your take on the Silverstone point?
I actually agree with you - I think the lap one incident here, at Silverstone and this crash, were all racing incidents. But once a penalty was given to Lewis in Silverstone I feel it must be given to Max here because otherwise it’s inconsistent. If I had it my way none of them would be penalties.
If I’ve seen that silverstone incident I don’t remember it
Use the run off like Hamilton did in this very same race against the very same driver in turn 4 earlier on.This thread
For what? I'd love to know what people expected Max to do? He didn't have the space which resulted in him hitting the curb. He didn't try to hit Hamilton or anything, was bounced into him.
feck sakes, go back to the NFL thread!
He's definitely struggled this year and he admits that. Today he was good though.After all the noise about Riccardo not settling in quickly....
If it was any other rider Max would've ceded his positioning imo, but he's not giving up anything to Hamilton. I think it's his fault but not that egregious either.
Feck Verstappen though. He's such a baby a lot of times (tbf so is Lewis but I like him a bit more).
Hamilton in shock U-Turn - what a prick.
Ok mateI see the UK cry babies are still here!
Totally agree.I think it’s a racing incident too. But I also thought Silverstone was. So if you give a penalty for Lewis there, you have to, IMO, give Max a penalty here.
OH Behave , no cry babies in here today, the discussion has been pretty decent, well it wasI see the UK cry babies are still here!
Yep, if you're not sure about something before it's implemented, then you must continue to be against it even after it's demonstrated to be a good thing. Because if there is one thing we don't have enough of in this world, it's people doubling down on wrong opinions.This is a very level-headed way to react to a driver changing their mind about something after it saves lives.
Surely it's a good thing he changed his mind after seeing it work? Or should he continue to think its bad?
There you go. Spells it out clearly.
I don't think the Norris / Le Clerc incident is the same. Don't think you can apply normal corner rules to a chicane either. Don't care too much because I'm not a big fan of either driver but I do reckon Verstappen is more to blame here.
You ok mate? finally accepting Max is a wreckless driver?I see the UK cry babies are still here!
That was funny.Loved that bit where Toto celebrates Bottas overtaking then realises he didn’t make it stick.
Damon Hill, former world championWhat's his name saying Max may of done it on purpose.
Same. I'd say today was 60-40 Max's fault.I had Silverstone as 60-40 Lewis deserved penalty.
plenty were against it at first, including Max and Seb all changed their minds, are they all pricks also !Hamilton in shock U-Turn - what a prick.
His Belgian connection + the fact that most F1 fans I know are tired of Lewis winning means that they want Max to win yeah. I don't particularly dislike him or anything but it's true that such incidents aren't isolated cases throughout his career, he needs to be a better decision-maker at times and realize that he's not racing alone, no one is gonna give him anything and that he might be playing with his opponent's safety sometims. Not saying Lewis is exempt from those things, but imo it seems like Max is more involved in stuff like that and that's just a pity.I thought every Belgium and Holland rally behind Max.
You ok mate? finally accepting Max is a wreckless driver?
Correct.I think if max was going into anyone else he would have bailed but he benefited from taking out Lewis
reckless? i wouldn’t call landing your car on someone’s head, then trying to accelerate off their head, then getting out of the car without even checking on that person’s head, reckless.
So you suggest he thought his car was levitating?Did he know though? Its not like the cars have rear camera or big mirrors to see where his rear end hit Hamilton car.
of course he knew, what did he think his car was resting on so far up , his ego !Did he know though? Its not like the cars have rear camera or big mirrors to see where his rear end hit Hamilton car.
OH Behave , no cry babies in here today, the discussion has been pretty decent, well it was
Who said that?People were saying Max tried to kill Hamilton. That’s not a decent discussion.
I was working only thing I have seen is just reply of the crash.... I'm not suggesting anything, just asking a simple question.So you suggest he thought his car was levitating?