Red Bull boss Christian Horner has questioned the lack of consistency in Formula 1 stewards’ decisions after Oscar Piastri was handed a 10-second time penalty at the British Grand Prix.
The Australian, who was leading the race, suddenly braked upon the end of a Safety Car period, which caused Max Verstappen to swerve and momentarily overtake.
Piastri was swiftly penalised for erratic driving, ultimately costing him the race win.
Whilst Horner felt the penalty was deserved, he suggested that there appears to be lack of equilibrium in some decisions that are made, citing the similar incident involving George Russell in Canada.
The Mercedes driver braked hard during a Safety Car period, with Verstappen having to take the same avoiding action, and after taking the win, Red Bull submitted a formal protest, which was subsequently thrown out.
“I wasn’t surprised to see him [Piastri] get a penalty,” said Horner to media including Motorsport Week after the race.
“That was what you would expect. It was probably more surprising that George didn’t get one in Montreal, to be honest with you.
“But yeah, that’s it. Unfortunately, our race unfolded from that point.”
Horner also discussed the disintegration of Verstappen’s race, the Dutchman having started from pole after a blistering lap, aided by a gamble to fit a skinnier rear wing.
He believed Verstappen would have been in contention for the win with the wing, had the race been a dry one, saying “he was one of the fastest cars on the track” when the track began to dry out, adding: “So that low downforce was a gamble.
“It paid off yesterday. And as I say, had it not been for good old Blighty weather, we’d have been all right.”
Verstappen ‘would have been hard to get near’ on another day
Horner explained that the decision to fit the skinny rear wing was to enable Verstappen to grab pole, giving him a buffer for the race in which the team felt a win was possible.
He went on to outline that the downforce the car was producing was matching what you would see on much faster circuits.
“We trimmed out the car basically to Monza levels of downforce and were able to get a balance that enabled Max to get a fantastic pole position that matched Sebastian Vettel’s record,” Horner said.
“That was based on the forecast that we had, that there might be a 20% chance of rain on Sunday morning but thereafter dry conditions.
“I don’t think any forecast that we certainly saw showed any chance that the rain was going to be that heavy and that late.
“So, lining up on the grid in the conditions it was, I thought Max had a super start, was able to feel his way around those first few laps.
“But it was clear very early on that Oscar had quite an advantage pace-wise.”
Horner went on to add that he felt Verstappen was still in a good position to challenge when the weather did come, but any momentum was lost upon the contentious restart.
“I felt we got the crossover time right, waiting for that rain. We were able to jump back past in the pits, past Lando, which then got Max back out into position, and then thereafter, the safety car came out. And yeah, that’s where the race started to unfold for us, unfortunately.
“Where Oscar did what he did on the brakes on the run-up to Stowe. First of all, it caught Max out as you’re preparing to take the restart. Caught him out, completely unaware as to what was going on.
“So all your preparation, your switches, everything, you don’t manage to get in the right place. Oscar’s then gone, Max trying to go with him, and obviously he’s had a half-spin out of Stowe. I thought it was a very good catch from him but slotted back effectively in 10th place behind Carlos.”
READ MORE – Why Max Verstappen thought Oscar Piastri’s F1 British GP penalty was ‘strange’
… big problem in organized motor sport, race bosses muscling in with their personal biases, arbitrarily determining race outcomes –
Been wondering to myself what F1 stewards have, against Oscar Piastri? Apparently, they seem to like Russell, a whole lot more.
No. The culprit is, Verstappen. It’s troublemaker Verstappen who influenced stewards, to penalize Piastry. A far more convincing flop Verstappen did at Silverstone than he did, Canada, were it not for Verstappen, lying in wait, timing it to perfection, accelerating just the precise moment Piastri sought to bring his brakes up to temp, never would Piastri have been penalized, in the first place.
Salazar taking out Piquet at Hochenheim, Romain Grosean incident at Spa, Jos Verstappen taking out Montoya in Brazil, Antonelli taking out Max in Austria, rear-enders, fault is always (ALWAYS) attributed, to the driver in back. It was Max Verstappen who had last clear chance to avoid conflict. Any insurance investigator in western civilization would concur, fault lies with Verstappen, that it’s Max Verstappen’s responsibility to apportion distance, factoring the driver in ahead.
Always with the little games, Max Verstappen doing up the head games, baiting F1 stewards into making bad decisions. Max Verstappen isn’t at war with fellow competitors. He’s at war, with F1 stewards! He is playing them like a fiddle! But, they’re so stupid, they’re blind to it.
This Verstappen guy’s a clever, devious fellow. If you were Max Verstappen, facing a one race ban, on account of dirty driving? Rationalizing away your misdeeds convoluting the rules, exposing gray areas, putting F1 stewards in a tough spot, is the subtle sort of retaliation you might think to do.
Verstappen set Piastri up. He set Piastri up, like tried to do, Russell.
Principle difference between the Russell-Canada incident V. the Piastri incident at Silverstone: the would famous Verstappen flop! Welcome to the Max Verstappen head games era of F1! Were it not for the Verstappen flop, never would Piastri have been penalized.
0b1lvr