Belgian Grand Prix 2014, Spa-Francorchamps - Race 12/19

Straight from the horse's mouth:

Toto Wolff said:
"Nico felt he needed to hold his line,” Wolff said. “He needed to make a point"

...

"We had a collision that could have been avoided, a second-lap collision, it was Nico who attacked and he shouldn't have done it. It was also to show he was not prepared to give in. With hindsight, if he could turn back time, Nico would probably not do it again in the way he did."
Click to expand...

Seems like the two drivers didn't agree about the reason for the crash (...shocking), but that Nico did hold his line, risking a collision, in order to "make a point". Hope that clears up some of the confusion.

link.
 
drunkenmaster said:
What, I've never seen team managers respond well to team mate collisions, ever, their responses were professional. They didn't call out Rosberg totally nor scold him, they said it was unacceptable, it was unacceptable. Pretending it didn't happen would have been unprofessional.

Rosberg is cheating when he gets put under pressure, he is acting irresponsibly and very unprofessionally.

Something people are forgetting is that if he meant to hit him, had the contact gone much worse it could have taken both cars out, and other cars ploughing in behind them without much warning, people could have been hurt. Intentionally causing contact on another car is an incredibly bad thing to do. It doesn't really matter how minor the contact is, or the outcome, the chance of a serious outcome from potentially causing a multi car crash is something you just do not do.

The FIA should whack him hard, but I'm not sure they will.
Click to expand...
And this is why the FIA cannot ignore the fact Rosberg hit him intentionally (if true). They cannot be seen to turn a blind eye, especially as it was his own teammate. What will other teams and drivers be thinking, he can hit his own teammate so why would he care a second thought to doing the same to us? They won't be thrilled, I'm sure.

ThestigGT999 said:
if mercedes favour rosberg then why are they saying what hamilton said is accurate?
Click to expand...
How can they say otherwise? If they are approached by the FIA for the truth of what was said and they lie, and that lie gets out, then they are boned.

drunkenmaster said:
Yup, Rosberg wins because an unknown fault(not the choice of material it's now been proven) that Hamilton couldn't have possibly known about causes a brake failure and Rosberg gets more points.... intelligence, Rosberg cheats at Monaco, intelligence, Rosberg hits Hamilton on purpose, intelligence.

Everyone else, Rosberg gets spanked race after race... panics and cheats, gets away with it, Rosberg gets beaten by a guy who started in the pit lane again because of a failure that was completely not his fault... in the next race he gets beaten off the line, Rosberg panics, deliberately causes contact. Intelligence isn't responsible for his getting more points.

Hamilton having failures and Rosberg being so scared of losing in a fair fight again that he cheats is not a sign of intelligence but a driver who is going outside the rules to extremes to win because he knows Hamilton would beat him in a straight up fight.
Click to expand...
Exactly!


How ever much I am disliking Rosberg more and more, I'm not convinced he may have hit Hamilton on purpose but he sure didn't care if he did by accident. It's clear he has no respect for his teammate in any situation, something which you cannot say the same about Hamilton.
 
Skeeter said:
Source? Try everywhere. It's all over all F1 sites.

Hamilton has said Rosberg claimed he did it deliberately.
Mercedes confirmed Hamilton's account of the meeting was correct.
And Toto has clarified that Rosberg deliberately didn't yeild rather than deliberately crashed into him.

However you look at it, the collision that caused Hamilton to ultimately retire was caused through a conscious decision from Rosberg.
Click to expand...

What tosh, doesn't make it fact at all, yes Rosberg did yield but not enough. Obviously you have full access to the same telemetry the stewards have? The thing is you are claiming that Rosberg knew he'd puncture hamilton's rear tyre when in reality no-one could predict the outcome...
 
Last edited:
Pretty much a textbook case for a "causing a collision" penalty, but as far as I know it wasn't even investigated?

But given the 30 minutes it took to produce the totally bizarre Alonso penalty, God knows what they would have done had they investigated it? A £5 fine and an ice bucket challenge, probably.
 
Duff-Man said:
Straight from the horse's mouth:



Seems like the two drivers didn't agree about the reason for the crash (...shocking), but that Nico did hold his line, risking a collision, in order to "make a point". Hope that clears up some of the confusion.

link.
Click to expand...

Well that's not the same as saying he wanted to hit him. It's just saying the intent to hold his ground was deliberate.
 
chriscatt said:
What tosh, doesn't make it fact at all, yes Rosberg did yield but not enough. Obviously you have full access to the same telemetry the stewards have?
Click to expand...

Do you want to try again, but instead direct your butthurt aggression at Hamilton, Mercedes and Toto, rather than the guy just repeating what they have said?
 
I think we can all safely say Nico felt the need to prove himself up against Hamilton today and it backfired. He's constantly told he's not his equal, he's not as fast and he can't hold his own against Hamilton so in a perverse way the Hamilton supporters need to take the blame for this, they pushed him in to a corner and made him do this. I hope you're all happy! :mad:
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
I think we can all safely say Nico felt the need to prove himself up against Hamilton today and it backfired. He's constantly told he's not his equal, he's not as fast and he can't hold his own against Hamilton so in a perverse way the Hamilton supporters need to take the blame for this, they pushed him in to a corner and made him do this. I hope you're all happy! :mad:
Click to expand...

Lol!

I like this theory.

Next up, Aliens.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
I think we can all safely say Nico felt the need to prove himself up against Hamilton today and it backfired. He's constantly told he's not his equal, he's not as fast and he can't hold his own against Hamilton so in a perverse way the Hamilton supporters need to take the blame for this, they pushed him in to a corner and made him do this. I hope you're all happy! :mad:
Click to expand...
Very funny, now back to reality :)
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
I think we can all safely say Nico felt the need to prove himself up against Hamilton today and it backfired. He's constantly told he's not his equal, he's not as fast and he can't hold his own against Hamilton so in a perverse way the Hamilton supporters need to take the blame for this, they pushed him in to a corner and made him do this. I hope you're all happy! :mad:
Click to expand...

lol, almost as bad as Brundle but he wasn't being sarcastic. He's saying Hamilton left him so much room and was driving so fairly that it encouraged Rosberg to do something stupid, he said along the lines of, Hamilton should have let the back end slide out a bit to scare Rosberg into backing off... which maybe he should have. But being fair doesn't leave the room open for someone to purposefully hit you.

It's also VERY clear from replays of Rosberg's action that Toto is trying to downplay it now because he very clearly backed off then chose to turn back in on him "to make a point". he didn't hold his line at all, and that is a soft way of putting it. If someone drives into the back of another car because he doesn't brake, "I just held my line" isn't a defence. holding your line is not a defence if there is someone else on that line and you hit them.

Rosberg meant to hit him, he'd admitted it, and Toto seems to maybe be fearing FIA repercussions for Rosberg(and thus team losing points) by trying to phrase it slightly differently but it's again patently clear from the replay that Rosberg actively turned in to him, not just refused to move over.

The stuff about Rosberg being angry after a month over the last race even though literally everyone agreed it would be mental for Hamilton to have slowed 2 seconds to let him by, literally no one is on Rosberg's side in the letting him pass situation including everyone in his team, no one anywhere thinks Hamilton should have let him pass and by the sounds of it Hamilton on the radio wouldn't have defended against him IF he caught up, he just didn't want to drop back to let him by. But somehow Rosberg is not only oblivious to every person on earth thinking Hamilton was in the right, he's still angry about it weeks later... it's mental and shows his state of mind.
 
Last edited:
Been out since 9am at a local air show enjoying the 2 Lancasters paying a visit and the Vulcan even appeared at one point. :D

Was worth missing the race for. :D

Still know what happened though, will be watching it later on.
 
Hamilton equally should have left enough room for Rosberg, but then Hamilton has a reputation for trying to drive through his team mates as he attempted to do on Button in Canada. Rosberg has only admitted what Hamilton claims he has admitted, nothing more, and as far as the stewards go, and they have access to the telemetry, agree that there is no case to answer. Rosberg did not drive into the back of him, he did quite clearly try to back out of the overtake when Hamilton closed the door on him. Why can't anyone accept it?

Wolfe actually stated this: "
"Nico felt he needed to hold his line [in the corner]," Wolff said. "He needed to make a point, and for Lewis, it was clearly not him who needed to be aware of Nico. He [Rosberg] didn't give in. He thought it was for Lewis to leave him space, and that Lewis didn't leave him space.

"So they agreed to disagree in a very heated discussion amongst ourselves, but it wasn't deliberately crashing. That is nonsense. It was deliberately taking into account that if Lewis moves or would open then it could end up in a crash."

Personally I think Rosberg drove a very good race and limited the damage caused by a racing incident...
 
Last edited:
chriscatt said:
Hamilton equally should have left enough room for Rosberg, but then Hamilton has a reputation
Click to expand...

Oh FFS grow up and watch the video. This section is getting worse with children posting crap.

Now Ferrari have next years line up in place, who is going to McLaren?
 
chriscatt said:
Hamilton equally should have left enough room for Rosberg, but then Hamilton has a reputation for trying to drive through his team mates as he attempted to do on Button in Canada. Rosberg has only admitted what Hamilton claims he has admitted, nothing more, and as far as the stewards go, and they have access to the telemetry, agree that there is no case to answer. Rosberg did not drive into the back of him, he did quite clearly try to back out of the overtake when Hamilton closed the door on him. Why can't anyone accept it?
Click to expand...

Because you're making stupid arguments that don't prove what you think they do.

Telemetry can't prove that turning the steering wheel is intentionally driving into a car or accidentally clipping a car while trying to turn in behind him. But Rosberg has said, as confirmed by Toto Wolff, that he did it on purpose to "prove a point". Telemetry and stewards don't prove intentions, ever, they can't, Rosberg however did when he said he did it. The action is identical, only the intention differs and it would never show up in telemetry, one intention would draw a severe penalty, the other is called a racing incident.

Using telemetry or lack of penalty in part of your argument shows you lack understanding of what telemetry can show and what stewards can use as proof of something. It hurts your argument because it's not proving what you think it does, it's simply showing your lack of understanding.

AS for closing the door on him, the second both turned into the corner there was 0% chance of Rosberg overtaking, none at all, Hamilton went into the corner first, Rosberg had further to go and as they started to leave the corner Rosberg was significantly further back, he had literally no chance at all of completing the move.

He turned away from Hamilton THEN HE TURNED BACK IN TO HIM and made contact, you can clearly see this and post race Rosberg has said he did that on purpose to prove some mental point he's come up with.
 
The over analysis of the incident is entertaining, take this image from reddit I found just now for example - http://imgur.com/szh0JAy

It was just a racing mistake by Rosberg, he drove into an area which was always going to disappear.
 
Umm, he's admitted to causing the accident. At the extreme least, he knew exactly where Lewis was in relation to his car!.
 
Duke said:
The over analysis of the incident is entertaining, take this image from reddit I found just now for example - http://imgur.com/szh0JAy

It was just a racing mistake by Rosberg, he drove into an area which was always going to disappear.
Click to expand...

Not to belabour it, but he's in a meeting stated he did it on purpose. On video we see him turn away from Hamilton then turn back in to him, it is after he turns back in to him that contact happened. He has stated he did this, Hamilton told us and Toto has said the same words but tried to put a sanction saving spin on it but considering the same words are used and the only possibility(factoring in the video of him turning in to him) then Toto's extra little spin is clearly just that.

Toto effectively tried to make it "he turned back into him to make a point" to "he held his line to prove a point", but we can visibly see that he turned in to him... to make his point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom