2023 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Nov 24 - 26

[organic]

Not covered on broadcast afaik

[Matt2725]

He wasn't the only one. A number of ex-drivers were calling it a racing incident or at the very least leaning that way.

The 10 second penalty was whatever, it didn't ruin the result so it matters not. The only reason they took action was because of who it was, not what happened. Anyone with a few brain cells saw that crash coming from T2 onwards on that lap.
I know a lot of people clamour for 2021 to return, but it got far too ugly for my liking.

If anyone could see the crash coming from miles away, then it wasn't a racing incident. That's a clear sign of two drivers driving recklessly.

I agree. They were both driving recklessly and ultimately one of them ended up in the wall in a nasty incident.
But because they were both pushing the boundaries, that is why I've always fallen on the side of racing incident. Either way of them could have come unstuck up that point.
As it is, it makes no difference and to my mind, the "right" driver won the WDC anyway.

[TFSA]

I agree. They were both driving recklessly and ultimately one of them ended up in the wall in a nasty incident.
But because they were both pushing the boundaries, that is why I've always fallen on the side of racing incident. Either way of them could have come unstuck up that point.
As it is, it makes no difference and to my mind, the "right" driver won the WDC anyway.

Doesn't really work that way. You have to look an incidents in isolation. You can't just excuse Driver A for causing an incident, because Driver B at some other arbitrary point in the race (including the previous corner if necessary) was pushing the boundaries.

If both drivers do stuff against the rules, then they both need to be penalized. Otherwise you're cheating out the other 18 drivers on the grid who are also fighting for points. Letting them off because they've decided to race each other beyond reasonable limits just encourages more nasty racecraft.

[AR3-GP]

Not covered on broadcast afaik

Alpine sporting director needs to be sacked. Gasly was hit twice on that day and no penalties.

[Juzh]

Not covered on broadcast afaik

Alpine sporting director needs to be sacked. Gasly was hit twice on that day and no penalties.

but perez +5 ahahahahah, meanwhile classic hamilton low-key ruins gasly's race by killing his diffuser and not a word. and people say verstappen is immune to penalties

[ME4ME]

Alpine sporting director needs to be sacked.

He was. Alpine is way ahead of you

[Mogster]

If Gasly had taken the corner normally and Hamilton had given him the chrome horn… in NASCAR parlance… then I’m sure Hamilton would have been given a penalty.

However, Gasly locked up and in recovering slowed in an unpredictable manner. That caused Hamilton to run into him. Both cars took damage. Racing incident.

[Juzh]

If Gasly had taken the corner normally and Hamilton had given him the chrome horn… in NASCAR parlance… then I’m sure Hamilton would have been given a penalty.

However, Gasly locked up and in recovering slowed in an unpredictable manner. That caused Hamilton to run into him. Both cars took damage. Racing incident.

At no point is gasly anywhere else other than apex of the corner and just becuase he's talking it a bit slower (and we're talking very minor difference) than usual doesnt excuse hamilton running into him. Hamilton basically predicted gasly will not be able to stop the car and went for a divebomb, but because gasly recovered the car nicely and doesnt actually have to run wide at all hamilton is steaming in too fast and hits him. So it was a clear mistake by hamilton that ruined a competitiors race while he got off scot free. By now we've seen numerous times that in ground effect era any damage, no matter how slight it is, related to the underfloor and/or diffuser area will have a big consequence and in many cases will destroy your race. Meanwhile damage to front wings seem to have almost negligible effect on cars performance nowadays.

[DGP123]

Gasly locked up and in recovering slowed in an unpredictable manner. That caused Hamilton to run into him. Both cars took damage. Racing incident.

Agree, and, more importantly, so did the stewards. Just the anti-Ham’s of the world still sadly bringing this up over a week later. As for the incident on lap 1, there was barely any contact.

[TFSA]

If Gasly had taken the corner normally and Hamilton had given him the chrome horn… in NASCAR parlance… then I’m sure Hamilton would have been given a penalty.

However, Gasly locked up and in recovering slowed in an unpredictable manner. That caused Hamilton to run into him. Both cars took damage. Racing incident.

I never really dived into the incident, because i assumed it was a racing incident with Gasly locking up.

However, upon rewatching, I'll have to agree with Juzh. Even with the lockup, this was the result of Hamilton going for a gap that was never there in the first place.

A lockup does not cause a driver to brake faster. Rather the opposite. As such, Hamilton had all the time in the world to brake himself, or drive around Gasly on the outside.
Instead, he decides to steer for the inside for a gap that was never there in the first place. And since he directly hit him from behind (which is rare - like 95% of all collisions the cars are alongside each other in some capacity unless it's a chain-crash), i can't come to any other conclusion than it is the car rear-ending the other that is at fault.

I mean, how would you expect to overtake on the inside when you're directly behind? This is a picture just before, and Lewis went for the inside here. Lockup or no lockup from Gasly, he was never gonna make that on the inside.



Also to note: That both cars took damage has zero influence on whether or not something is a racing incident. It's about who is either predominantly or fully at fault for the collisions itself - not who came out worse for the wear.

Agree, and, more importantly, so did the stewards. Just the anti-Ham’s of the world still sadly bringing this up over a week later. As for the incident on lap 1, there was barely any contact.

Can we please stop the whole bias accusation thing, and instead be allowed to analyze incidents on their own merit?

It's perfectly reasonable to discuss racing incidents (not just when they happen, but also later when things have had time to calm down) because it's important for understanding the racing rules.

And it's also perfectly reasonable to disagree with the Stewards. Stewards also didn't even investigate Sargeant completely rear-ending De Vries on the Australia restart at lap 57. But if people say that was completely wrong, are they then also part of the anti-Sargeant brigade - or how does this logic work again?