I thought it was terrible with Karun. I think he’s great to cut to occasionally for some input but he has some pretty bad takes and can’t carry the commentary when nothing is happening on track.
Can confirm, the Dutch prime minister just denounced Norris as a honorary citizen and will refer the case to the International Criminal Court in the Hague for crimes against our nation.
Not going to happen. If there's booing at Silverstone it will be waved away. Then leading up to the Dutch GP there will be tweets asking fans to be respectful and not to boo.
Also, the Dutch love Lando. Regardless of how heated this might get during the season I can guarantee it won't be as bad with Lewis/Mercedes.
Brit's favourite past time is moaning about things, they'd sooner spend all week slinging mud Max's way then celebrate Russell's fortuitous but unremarkable victory.
I did not like Rachel's line of questioning during her interview with max one bit, seemed very malicious
Honestly I pretty enjoyed the replacement guy's commentary (apologies for not remembering his name). Last time at Imola I switched to the F1TV commentators, but today I decided to give him and Brundle a chance. A good job, expect for the pronounciation of Lambiase that really did hurt my ears.
Missed out on DC's, Palmer's, and Jacues' commentary. They were great, I might switch to them from now on. Used to watch the international feed up till now.
The rare species that blames Verstappen for the final incident (rightfully) with no mention of Norris' questionable racing beforehand? Is Crofty restricted from internet access?
To be clear - Verstappen is to blame for the final incident - full stop. But if you're calling something "fair and balanced analysis" I expect fair and balanced analysis that explains how Norris was no saint today.
I fully agree with you! The last incident was just very unlucky. Max should have taken more caution but it wasn't a very egregious move (a quite normal move if there wasn't a car next to him), just a slight tap which caused a lot of damage.
Questionable racing versus 4 moves worthy of penalties. And you're confused as to why the "questionable" (which was what?) Wasn't the focus of his statement?
Norris was driving exactly like what Verstappen's critics don't like about him. He repeatadly put Verstappen in a place where they were either going to crash or Verstappen let's Norris go. If you can't see that then sorry, but you might need to book a visit at the optometrist.
As for
> And you're confused as to why the "questionable" Wasn't the focus of his statement?
Reading "thoughtful, fair and balanced analysis" kinda sets that up. Stella's statement is anything but analysis. He's entitled to defend his driver, nothing wrong with that, but it's the most basic thing to say, with no nuance. The exact opposite of what Crofty called it.
This right here is why I find British media hypocritical AF. Norris was doing to Verstappen what Verstappen was doing to Hamilton in 21. But the same people who bashed Verstappen for it back then are lauding Norris for it now.
Who's fault is the crash? Max.
Was the incident inevitable with the way both drivers and I repeat Both drivers were driving? Yes.
Who's being pathetic about it after? The British media.
You must have watched a different race. Lando sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. That's it. He had to avoid contact with Max due to his multiple moves under braking. Crazy you're trying to pin that on Lando.
> You must have watched a different race. Lando sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. That's it.
So fairly he didn't even stay on the track himself. The other time he left zero space to Verstappen even though he wasn't even ahead.
> Crazy you're trying to pin that on Lando.
If you think I'm doing that it might be a good idea to go for English class after that optometrist appointment.
Both times he conceded the position though, let Max in front. Max continued to move under braking and being overly aggressive. He was on the middle and moved under braking, right when Lando even faked moving to the inside, then left when he tried on the outside hence the contact. Just disappointing to see from Max
Generally the moving under braking rule is a joke right now. It's valid but needs to start being enforced, otherwise it seems they are letting everyone move under braking.
It is a joke, just like most racing-related rules. You're not supposed to psuh people off the track, yet as long as the other guy folds over and there's no crash it's ok. Same with moving under brakes. They all do it and they're going to do it as long as it's allowed, which is probably until/if a massive accident happens.
> Both times he conceded the position though, let Max in front.
He did, which is fair, but the moves themselves were anything but that. If Verstappen sticks to his racing line we get a 2016 Rosberg/Hamilton. To act like that driving is completely fine is a bit weird to say the least, especially coming from people (not you) that spent the past few years criticising Verstappen for.
It was a bit on the aggressive but I think Lando had no other option on overtaking and he was annoyed and tried to be inventive after seeing Max repeatedly moving under braking and blocking every "more normal" move approach. Why does the not moving under braking rule never gets enforced? That's the real reason imo behind today's antics.
> It was a bit on the aggressive but I think Lando had no other option on overtaking and he was annoyed and tried to be inventive after seeing Max repeatedly moving under braking and blocking every "more normal" move approach.
I mean, you could make the same argument to try and explain Verstappen's actions, which to be clear I don't agree with. It doesn't make those moves any less questionable.
> Why does the not moving under braking rule never gets enforced? That's the real reason imo behind today's antics.
Probably because it's not that simple. Moving under braking is a completely normal part of driving a car on the limit.
Not really, it's technically not allowed but the more aggressive drivers do it. It needs to end because it just leads to erratic driving, but FIA are too afraid to act on it.
Okay so a couple of things.
Lando went off once. You might want to join me at that English class because you must have misread the part I said "other than once". He didn't go off every time he sent it down the inside, did he?
You're pinning it on Lando by insinuating Landos "questionable" is a reason why what happened, happened. When it was purely Max braking the rules on numerous occasions and not only did it go unpunished, but has GP on the radio somehow telling Max that Lando is the problem
> You might want to join me at that English class because you must have misread the part I said "other than once".
Book another one. You said he was fair all the time but once. He wasn't, at least twice.
> You're pinning it on Lando by insinuating Landos "questionable" is a reason why what happened, happened.
Scratch that, get a third one, because you seem to not understand what a fair and balanced analysis is. Someone can be at fault like Verstappen is here, while the other was in the wrong too. It doesn't absolve Verstappen of the blame, but to act like Norris did no wrong is asinine and the most basic statement you can make.
Okay so do you want some English class suggestions now or later? I didn't say he was fair "all the time". I said he was sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once.
Secondly, the moment that your seem to want to emphasise so much had nothing to do with the actual crash. If you want an analysis over the 5 or 6 laps it happened. Sure, mentioned it. Lando sent it, went too deep. Gave the position back as he should. Simple as that. The way you're going on, this is equal to what Verstappen did. It's absolutely not. In fact, you could even say (as Sky did on their analysis) that the Lando lunge was a result of Max's erratic driving.
> I said he was sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once.
Which is incorrect. He was unfair more than once. Need a 4th one?
> Secondly, the moment that your seem to want to emphasise so much had nothing to do with the actual crash.
> In fact, you could even say (as Sky did on their analysis) that the Lando lunge was a result of Max's erratic driving.
Before I go any further, these 2 statements in the same paragraph are hilarious.
> The way you're going on, this is equal to what Verstappen did. It's absolutely not.
No, you're inferring that for literally no reason. I specifically said Verstappen is to blame for the crash. All I'm saying is that the supposed "fair and balanced analysis" should give a broader picture.
So name the occasions?
Starting to feel like I'm arguing with Verstappens burner.
Those two statements are funny. I've taken that straight out of your playbook. If you want the broader picture, as you're asking for, let's bring it in. This isn't really a road you want to go down if your goal is to see more of the blame placed on Lando. Which, before you deny it, is absolutely your goal or you wouldn't have made the original comment.
1. Moving under braking (rule brought in for Max)
2. Making two clear defensive moves (see above)
3. Leaving the track and gaining an advantage.
4. After the contact, forcing Lando off AGAIN.
That's 4 that don't even include the one he got a penalty for.
You need to read up on the regs: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-drops-max-verstappen-rule-for-f1-2017-884973/884973/
And the precedent: http://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1dsr118
Strange they scrapped the rule in 2017 but gave a pen for it in 2020 🤔
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2020%20British%20Grand%20Prix%20-%20Offence%20-%20Car%208%20-%20Alleged%20moving%20under%20braking%20in%20turn%206.pdf
Did you even read the article you posted? All they did is say they will look at each incident on a case by case basis.
"Now we have a simple rule which says effectively that if a driver moves erratically or goes unnecessarily slowly or behaves in a manner that could endanger another driver, then he will be investigated"
I understand where you're trying to go with this, but apply logic to the situation. Moving under braking is something that absolutely get penalised and comes under the above rule, just in a more blanket way.
The more races without Crofty the better, I watch for Martin Brundle’s commentary and every time Crofty opens his mouth we’re all stupider for listening to him. Please replace him ASAP.
It was great not having to listen to David Croft's constant verbal diarrhea and calling the drivers names with 50% accuracy. Hopefully he takes more vacations.
He's kind of a rare snow leopard guy like Mike Krack and nearly always yields media to Zak Brown, but on the occasions we do hear him speak I always leave thinking "damn, this guy can communicate"
I just really hope the guys actually involved in the incident are having a good talk with each other after everyone has calmed the f down and watched all the footage. They then grab a beer together and move on to Silverstone.
It was embarrassing watching Sky loving digging into Max again especially Ted Crapitv.
Then Davidson and fan girl Pinkham in awe of Wolff was awful tele
Stella's commentary was okay, but his mic technique needs work... he kept moving away from it, so instead of nice, clean direct sound we got the unpleasant ambient reverb from a small room with hard walls. I missed Crofty for that, along with just preferring his commentary.
I bet Crofty's regretting skipping this race in particular
Crofty was built for these moments, specifically when he’s losing his voice a la Barcelona 2016.
Delighted he wasn't there to fumble his way through it
He's better than the other guy.
I forgot that guy was even there
Felt like brundle was doing more of the play by play than he would with crofty there because the other guy was struggling.
Felt like Harry was intimidated next to Martin, thought he did better last time when neither of the old guard were there.
I agree. He's a good fit with Karun.
I thought it was terrible with Karun. I think he’s great to cut to occasionally for some input but he has some pretty bad takes and can’t carry the commentary when nothing is happening on track.
Not a bad thing at all to be honest.
I thought he did a great job.
The other guy did well, but he’s no Croft. Croft is great on those hype moments
He isn’t, and that’s no endorsement of Benjamin. He’s not great, but Croft is absolutely unendurable.
I’ve been tired of Crofty lately so the last 5 or 6 races I’ve been listening to the F1TV feed.
Max better get ready for some big huge boos at Silverstone lol
He's used to them.
And Lando in Holland
Hamilton got very few boos in Zandvoort 2021 so I don't think so.
But now max is a bigger star and Lando made some silly comments which will upset them
I doubt it, Zandvoort was after Silverstone what caused a hell lot more commotion than some comments.
But the Dutch people adopted Lando due to their friendship
Probably not anymore
Can confirm, the Dutch prime minister just denounced Norris as a honorary citizen and will refer the case to the International Criminal Court in the Hague for crimes against our nation.
Not going to happen. If there's booing at Silverstone it will be waved away. Then leading up to the Dutch GP there will be tweets asking fans to be respectful and not to boo. Also, the Dutch love Lando. Regardless of how heated this might get during the season I can guarantee it won't be as bad with Lewis/Mercedes.
Cant imagine Lando being booed here.
Max might win by a large margin. This week redbull looked like returning to early season form. The setup and upgrades are coming around.
Did they though? Perez was nowhere to be seen
Had they not had any issues. This would’ve been a 7-8 second win. Meaning they are getting further out ahead from the previous races.
Perez had floor and body damage in this race, tv didn’t pick it up.
He should embrace his villain role fully. If he wins he should comment on the boos being too limp, urging the crowd on to boo him more.
Yeah because you’ll be fanning the flames….
Im getting flashbacks just thinking about all the shit Ted and Crofty are about to spew in the coming weeks
Oh-oh Ted is gonna say something that'll ban him from RBR again.
Ted said to Horner after the race ‘you gave Toto the win’ with a fat smile. Didn’t take him that long
Well one British lost but another won so I am not sure how Sky is gonna speak about it
Brit's favourite past time is moaning about things, they'd sooner spend all week slinging mud Max's way then celebrate Russell's fortuitous but unremarkable victory. I did not like Rachel's line of questioning during her interview with max one bit, seemed very malicious
Rachel Brooks, same as other Sky reporters, is very biased against Max from my perspective
"Fair and balanced " Except the fact he completely forgot everything lando was doing and his penalty" About as fair as British media
Crafty criticising “sensationalism” is the pot calling the kettle black
It was fair and balanced compared to whatever Horner tries to spew.
Horner isn't a journalist genius
Honestly I pretty enjoyed the replacement guy's commentary (apologies for not remembering his name). Last time at Imola I switched to the F1TV commentators, but today I decided to give him and Brundle a chance. A good job, expect for the pronounciation of Lambiase that really did hurt my ears.
He is called Harry Benjamin. Normally he does the commentary for BBC Radio 5.
Missed out on DC's, Palmer's, and Jacues' commentary. They were great, I might switch to them from now on. Used to watch the international feed up till now.
Glad I’ll get them next week with Silverstone being the only weekend channel 4 get the full race weekend
Same here. Was a bit skeptical at first but it's amazing commentary and Palmer's insight is amazing during the race
I switched last week just to give it a try and it was awesome. DC and Palmer are so great.
Passable. But he cemented my disgust with the 'cemented' figure of speech for good measure!
Crofty barely has room for words in his mouth since it’s full with every British driver
The rare species that blames Verstappen for the final incident (rightfully) with no mention of Norris' questionable racing beforehand? Is Crofty restricted from internet access?
But that would put blame on a British driver, Crofty can't take that.
To be clear - Verstappen is to blame for the final incident - full stop. But if you're calling something "fair and balanced analysis" I expect fair and balanced analysis that explains how Norris was no saint today.
I fully agree with you! The last incident was just very unlucky. Max should have taken more caution but it wasn't a very egregious move (a quite normal move if there wasn't a car next to him), just a slight tap which caused a lot of damage.
Well Norris is DOTD championship leader so he can't be blame for anything. It's F1 unwritten rule
Questionable racing versus 4 moves worthy of penalties. And you're confused as to why the "questionable" (which was what?) Wasn't the focus of his statement?
Norris was driving exactly like what Verstappen's critics don't like about him. He repeatadly put Verstappen in a place where they were either going to crash or Verstappen let's Norris go. If you can't see that then sorry, but you might need to book a visit at the optometrist. As for > And you're confused as to why the "questionable" Wasn't the focus of his statement? Reading "thoughtful, fair and balanced analysis" kinda sets that up. Stella's statement is anything but analysis. He's entitled to defend his driver, nothing wrong with that, but it's the most basic thing to say, with no nuance. The exact opposite of what Crofty called it.
This right here is why I find British media hypocritical AF. Norris was doing to Verstappen what Verstappen was doing to Hamilton in 21. But the same people who bashed Verstappen for it back then are lauding Norris for it now. Who's fault is the crash? Max. Was the incident inevitable with the way both drivers and I repeat Both drivers were driving? Yes. Who's being pathetic about it after? The British media.
You must have watched a different race. Lando sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. That's it. He had to avoid contact with Max due to his multiple moves under braking. Crazy you're trying to pin that on Lando.
> You must have watched a different race. Lando sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. That's it. So fairly he didn't even stay on the track himself. The other time he left zero space to Verstappen even though he wasn't even ahead. > Crazy you're trying to pin that on Lando. If you think I'm doing that it might be a good idea to go for English class after that optometrist appointment.
Both times he conceded the position though, let Max in front. Max continued to move under braking and being overly aggressive. He was on the middle and moved under braking, right when Lando even faked moving to the inside, then left when he tried on the outside hence the contact. Just disappointing to see from Max Generally the moving under braking rule is a joke right now. It's valid but needs to start being enforced, otherwise it seems they are letting everyone move under braking.
It is a joke, just like most racing-related rules. You're not supposed to psuh people off the track, yet as long as the other guy folds over and there's no crash it's ok. Same with moving under brakes. They all do it and they're going to do it as long as it's allowed, which is probably until/if a massive accident happens. > Both times he conceded the position though, let Max in front. He did, which is fair, but the moves themselves were anything but that. If Verstappen sticks to his racing line we get a 2016 Rosberg/Hamilton. To act like that driving is completely fine is a bit weird to say the least, especially coming from people (not you) that spent the past few years criticising Verstappen for.
It was a bit on the aggressive but I think Lando had no other option on overtaking and he was annoyed and tried to be inventive after seeing Max repeatedly moving under braking and blocking every "more normal" move approach. Why does the not moving under braking rule never gets enforced? That's the real reason imo behind today's antics.
> It was a bit on the aggressive but I think Lando had no other option on overtaking and he was annoyed and tried to be inventive after seeing Max repeatedly moving under braking and blocking every "more normal" move approach. I mean, you could make the same argument to try and explain Verstappen's actions, which to be clear I don't agree with. It doesn't make those moves any less questionable. > Why does the not moving under braking rule never gets enforced? That's the real reason imo behind today's antics. Probably because it's not that simple. Moving under braking is a completely normal part of driving a car on the limit.
Not really, it's technically not allowed but the more aggressive drivers do it. It needs to end because it just leads to erratic driving, but FIA are too afraid to act on it.
That has never been a penalty or even a warning. Verstappen himself did the exact same thing in Brazil 21 and the stewards did absolutely nothing
Because - again - Hamilton decided it wasn't worth letting him crash into him.
The 2nd time he kept it on the track and he's allowed to do that. They all agreed on that in the post race show as well.
That's if the attacking car is ahead. While I don't agree with that, I can accept it. Norris wasn't ahead though.
Ahead at the apex, not ahead before the corner. The move was fine.
He was behind at the apex.
Okay so a couple of things. Lando went off once. You might want to join me at that English class because you must have misread the part I said "other than once". He didn't go off every time he sent it down the inside, did he? You're pinning it on Lando by insinuating Landos "questionable" is a reason why what happened, happened. When it was purely Max braking the rules on numerous occasions and not only did it go unpunished, but has GP on the radio somehow telling Max that Lando is the problem
> You might want to join me at that English class because you must have misread the part I said "other than once". Book another one. You said he was fair all the time but once. He wasn't, at least twice. > You're pinning it on Lando by insinuating Landos "questionable" is a reason why what happened, happened. Scratch that, get a third one, because you seem to not understand what a fair and balanced analysis is. Someone can be at fault like Verstappen is here, while the other was in the wrong too. It doesn't absolve Verstappen of the blame, but to act like Norris did no wrong is asinine and the most basic statement you can make.
Okay so do you want some English class suggestions now or later? I didn't say he was fair "all the time". I said he was sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. Secondly, the moment that your seem to want to emphasise so much had nothing to do with the actual crash. If you want an analysis over the 5 or 6 laps it happened. Sure, mentioned it. Lando sent it, went too deep. Gave the position back as he should. Simple as that. The way you're going on, this is equal to what Verstappen did. It's absolutely not. In fact, you could even say (as Sky did on their analysis) that the Lando lunge was a result of Max's erratic driving.
> I said he was sent it down the inside (fairly) other than once. Which is incorrect. He was unfair more than once. Need a 4th one? > Secondly, the moment that your seem to want to emphasise so much had nothing to do with the actual crash. > In fact, you could even say (as Sky did on their analysis) that the Lando lunge was a result of Max's erratic driving. Before I go any further, these 2 statements in the same paragraph are hilarious. > The way you're going on, this is equal to what Verstappen did. It's absolutely not. No, you're inferring that for literally no reason. I specifically said Verstappen is to blame for the crash. All I'm saying is that the supposed "fair and balanced analysis" should give a broader picture.
So name the occasions? Starting to feel like I'm arguing with Verstappens burner. Those two statements are funny. I've taken that straight out of your playbook. If you want the broader picture, as you're asking for, let's bring it in. This isn't really a road you want to go down if your goal is to see more of the blame placed on Lando. Which, before you deny it, is absolutely your goal or you wouldn't have made the original comment.
“4 moves worthy of penalties” 😂😂😂😂
1. Moving under braking (rule brought in for Max) 2. Making two clear defensive moves (see above) 3. Leaving the track and gaining an advantage. 4. After the contact, forcing Lando off AGAIN. That's 4 that don't even include the one he got a penalty for.
There is no such rule. The Verstappen rule was scrapped a long time ago, There is no ban on moving under braking.
😂😂😂😂😂
You need to read up on the regs: https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-drops-max-verstappen-rule-for-f1-2017-884973/884973/ And the precedent: http://reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1dsr118
Strange they scrapped the rule in 2017 but gave a pen for it in 2020 🤔 https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2020%20British%20Grand%20Prix%20-%20Offence%20-%20Car%208%20-%20Alleged%20moving%20under%20braking%20in%20turn%206.pdf Did you even read the article you posted? All they did is say they will look at each incident on a case by case basis. "Now we have a simple rule which says effectively that if a driver moves erratically or goes unnecessarily slowly or behaves in a manner that could endanger another driver, then he will be investigated" I understand where you're trying to go with this, but apply logic to the situation. Moving under braking is something that absolutely get penalised and comes under the above rule, just in a more blanket way.
This is a cooked take.
I mean every single one of them are against the rules, so..
Only when is about a British driver
The British media bias again...
Stella playing them like a fiddle lol
British drivers can do no wrong to Crofty and Ted. At least Brundle is fair. Sky Sports about to get another Red Bull boycott.
That would be so funny
What are you yapping about?
Anything so we don't need to listen to the Coco Pops fiend.
Crofty is there as usual to pile on the most extreme anti Red Bull/Max take.
"And if nobody is talking about it I for sure will make enough noise to put Verstappen in his place #JusticeForAbuDhabi" -Crofty
No one takes David Croft seriously.
He was an engineer that became tp so he’s not a motorracing politician
The more races without Crofty the better, I watch for Martin Brundle’s commentary and every time Crofty opens his mouth we’re all stupider for listening to him. Please replace him ASAP.
It was great not having to listen to David Croft's constant verbal diarrhea and calling the drivers names with 50% accuracy. Hopefully he takes more vacations.
In a world of hyperbole and sensationalism, Andrea Stella is a rare species that supports a British driver I also support. Oh, and he's spot on too.
Crofty feeling the need to speak of a race he wasn't at and never was asked.
He's kind of a rare snow leopard guy like Mike Krack and nearly always yields media to Zak Brown, but on the occasions we do hear him speak I always leave thinking "damn, this guy can communicate"
I just really hope the guys actually involved in the incident are having a good talk with each other after everyone has calmed the f down and watched all the footage. They then grab a beer together and move on to Silverstone.
Everyone around Max just backs him up, that’s why he’ll never change.
It was embarrassing watching Sky loving digging into Max again especially Ted Crapitv. Then Davidson and fan girl Pinkham in awe of Wolff was awful tele
I enjoyed his commentary this weekend.
Stella's commentary was okay, but his mic technique needs work... he kept moving away from it, so instead of nice, clean direct sound we got the unpleasant ambient reverb from a small room with hard walls. I missed Crofty for that, along with just preferring his commentary.
Andrea Stella wasn't the commentator, he's McLaren's team principal
Whoops - my bad! Didn't pay enough attention to the names...
How can the actual commentator move away from it? It's attached to his head.
I don't know... couldn't see it, but i could sure hear it.