I'm a fan of the Thai driver but he shouldn't have blown his wad on the corner, on fresh tires he had the pace to take Lewis on the straights and potentially pass Bottas for the win.
A long interesting look at the rules as applied this weekend to LH in different incidents - https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/10396/the-rules-anomaly-that-saved-hamilton-from-harsher-punishment ewis Hamilton has driven almost faultlessly over the past three seasons, winning 31 races, smashing Ayrton Senna's pole position record and racking up a hat-trick of world championship titles, but his performance in last weekend's Austrian Grand Prix was out of sorts and below the high standards we've come to expect. And he was fortunate things didn't turn out even worse. Having peerlessly topped all three practice sessions at the Red Bull Ring, Hamilton made three significant errors of judgement in the crucial moments of the weekend: exceeding track limits at the final corner on his first run in Q3; failing to slow for a stationary yellow flag/light after Mercedes team-mate Valtteri Bottas went off on the exit of Turn 4 during their final Q3 runs; then tapping Alexander Albon's Red Bull-Honda into a spin at the same corner late in the race while trying to defend second place. The first offence was innocuous enough - many other drivers (including this writer!) have transgressed track limits at that tricky final turn of the Red Bull Ring and paid the price: automatic deletion of your laptime, as clearly defined in the FIA's rules. The second offence was more serious, and although the FIA initially accepted Hamilton's argument that he'd seen mixed yellow and green signals at Turn 5 (effectively the curved exit of Turn 4), a subsequent appeal by Red Bull drew attention to onboard video footage that clearly showed Hamilton passing a yellow signal without slowing. The stewards reversed their original decision and handed Hamilton an automatic three-place grid penalty for breaching the FIA's International Sporting Code (ISC), which governs safe driver conduct. The third offence is debatable, but still probably the correct call. Toto Wolff argued it was a racing incident, but Hamilton seemed to be squeezing Albon to the edge of the circuit and clearly tagged the Red Bull's right-rear wheel with the Mercedes' left-front. The fact Charles Leclerc and Lando Norris navigated a similar situation at the same turn without contact - and with Norris locked up and out of control on the inside line while being overtaken, in a way Hamilton was not - weakens the argument for leniency. A five-second time penalty was justified (the incident ruined Albon's race completely); Hamilton cost himself a podium finish with a clumsy defensive move; let's chalk this catalogue of errors up to a rare and uncharacteristic set of misjudgements from F1's premier performer of the moment. But I want to go back to that second incident on Saturday, because something just doesn't sit right with me in how that ultimately played out. Analysing Hamilton's rules transgressions in Q3, it's clear he exceeded track limits on his first run at Turn 10, thus his 'banker' lap time was deleted automatically as per the rules. Fine, nothing to dispute there (whether track limits should apply at all is an entirely different debate I don't want to get into here!). Hamilton was subsequently found to have failed to slow properly for the single yellows triggered by Bottas going off at the exit of Turn 4/entry of Turn 5. Drivers are supposed to demonstrably slow down under such conditions, which incidentally Carlos Sainz Jr and Daniel Ricciardo, running behind Hamilton on the road in Q3, both did - they didn't lap faster than they had earlier in Q3. Of course, you could argue Hamilton effectively had no reference because his earlier lap was struck off, but nevertheless he set his fastest laptime of the entire weekend under yellow flag conditions in Q3, in clear breach of the regulations. The International Sporting Code stipulates an automatic three-place grid drop in such circumstances (five if the transgression is under double-waved yellows), which of course Hamilton received after Red Bull's successful appeal using footage distributed on social media by FOM on Sunday morning before the race. But what I don't understand is why the 'illegal' laptime he set at the end of Q3 is still allowed to count under the rules (the FIA did not respond to this writer's request for clarification). There are two relevant recent precedents here: the first is from Mexico 2019, where Max Verstappen was penalised three places on the grid for failing to slow sufficiently for a single yellow flag at the end of Q3 on the lap with which he set pole position. This was a silly mistake on Verstappen's part, because he'd already set a 'legal' time good enough for pole on his first run. Thus, he called for the stewards to simply delete the offending lap if they didn't like his driving. The only lap that counted for Hamilton in Q3 was the one he set under single waved yellows. And this was permitted to stand despite the fact it was demonstrated clearly that he hadn't slowed down for the yellow flag As it was, Verstappen was shown to have clearly improved his final sector time while passing Bottas' crashed Mercedes, so officials handed Verstappen a grid penalty, as per the articles laid out in the ISC. In Verstappen's case, deleting his final Q3 time would have been irrelevant, because he did two laps good enough for pole, so the grid penalty obviously made the only significant material alteration to his qualifying result. He simply should have slowed down and avoided sanction altogether because he still would have been on pole had he done so. After qualifying for the 2016 Hungarian GP, where Nico Rosberg set pole, Hamilton asked the FIA directly whether Rosberg's time should stand, because Hamilton's bitter rival for the championship had set his quickest second sector time while double waved yellow flags were flying to warn drivers of Fernando Alonso's spun McLaren-Honda. Hamilton slowed dramatically after going quickest of all in sector one and subsequently missed out on pole by 0.143 seconds; Rosberg successfully demonstrated to the FIA he'd slowed significantly enough for the yellow flags, despite also improving his sector time, so kept his overall laptime. Adverse weather conditions complicated matters in terms of drivers finding time on an improving circuit through the various stages of that particular session, so this is not directly analogous to what happened subsequently in Mexico and Austria, but is significant for the fact the FIA clarified the rules after Hungary 2016 to make it clear drivers should abandon laps completely if they pass double waved yellows in qualifying. Crucially, it seems this clarification did not apply to laptimes set while passing single yellow flags, which is how Hamilton could set a quick time in Austria last weekend despite passing a clear flagged hazard on track. Again, this doesn't sit right with me. In Hamilton's case, the only lap that counted for him in Q3 was the one he set under single waved yellows. And this was permitted to stand despite the fact it was demonstrated clearly that he hadn't slowed down for the yellow flag. Had this 'illegal' lap been scrubbed too, Hamilton would have ended up 10th in Q3, having set no time. He would then also have taken an automatic grid drop for disobeying the ISC rules relating to yellow flags, meaning he would have started 13th rather than fifth. It seems to me there is an anomaly within the current rules that potentially incentivises drivers to lap too quickly under single yellow flags, because an automatic grid drop under circumstances where the lap time still counts is clearly less severe as a punishment than also having your lap time deleted when you have no 'banker' to fall back on, as was the case for Hamilton. OK, the Mercedes W11 was miles ahead of the competition on this occasion, but in tighter circumstances - such as F1 hopes to achieve from 2022 onwards, or in the current midfield - backing off by even a tenth or two to comply with single yellow flags, as Ricciardo and Sainz did, can sometimes make a serious material difference to your qualifying result, perhaps more than three places... In this case, Hamilton could easily have given up two or three tenths, complied with the yellow flag and still qualified second, so that's on him, but I find it strange he should be allowed to keep a quicker laptime that was set while failing to follow rules that are designed specifically to stop cars going quickly and safeguard participants through hazards. If the rules were to stipulate faster laps set after passing single yellows are automatically deleted, as is the case with track limits offences, or should be abandoned, as is now the case with double waved yellows, there would be absolutely no incentive to chance your luck with yellow flags, because you would know you potentially face a much harsher penalty if you break the rules. Image Unavailable, Please Login Of course, this also potentially opens a can of worms relating to drivers deliberately going off to guarantee a result by causing yellow flags that ruin rivals' laps - as was unsuccessfully alleged of Rosberg in Monaco in 2014 - but that doesn't change the fact Hamilton lapped below 63s at the Red Bull Ring while passing a yellow flag. That simply shouldn't be allowed to stand - unless Hamilton clearly backed off through the yellow flagged section (which he didn't) and yet somehow miraculously made up for lost time elsewhere on the circuit (which he didn't/couldn't). When faced with hazards on track, keeping your foot buried on the throttle shouldn't be a potentially better option than complying fully with the regulations As it happens, Hamilton would still have ended up better off if he'd just slowed down (second on the grid at worst probably), but this sort of risk simply shouldn't be an option. Safety is paramount for the FIA, so the rules must surely strike the right balance between risk and reward in instances such as these. When faced with hazards on track, keeping your foot buried on the throttle shouldn't be a potentially better option than complying fully with the regulations. I accept in this instance Hamilton would still have been better off had he obeyed the yellow flag, but that won't always necessarily be the case. The penalty for driving unsafely should always make the risk of doing so not worth taking at all. The rules as they currently stand meant Hamilton could dangerously ignore a yellow flag, then set the second fastest time of the session regardless (only 0.012s off pole), and count that time towards the final classification. That simply isn't acceptable to me. He should have been credited with no time, classified 10th, then relegated to 13th. Hamilton endured a bad weekend by his own high standards in Austria, but by rights it should have been even worse. Is it time for the rules to change again?
I'm not an F1 driver or strategist, but pretty sure hanging around behind #2 for several laps until he's ready to let you by without a fight isn't how you win races in F1. The job is to get thyself to #1 as quickly as you can so you don't overheat or ruin your tires by running behind someone for too long.
No, I expected 5 seconds, and that's what he got. Since it could have been construed as merely a "racing incident", anything more would have been too harsh. As is, it cost him two places and a podium.
Nope, I expected 5 seconds at the worst, "no action taken" was my guess. Both drivers could have made different decisions, and HAM could have avoided if he wanted to.
Too heavy. Albon forced a move that Hamilton abandoned on lap 1 but expected a WDC to move aside under late-race circumstances. Had Albon not dropped to the back, I think it would have just been a racing incident
