Familiar flaws undermine Vettel's driving once again as controversial incident triggers division in opinion, and a plot that ends in an all to familiar fashion for Hamilton
Callum Alexander | Callum on Cars | Formula 1
If Formula 1 2019 was becoming too predictable, then the Canadian Grand Prix certainly injected some divisive controversy to spice things up a bit.
Sebastian Vettel may have crossed the line first, but Lewis Hamilton wrenched victory from his grasp; the German was handed a five second time penalty for dangerous driving, in which Hamilton was on the receiving end of. It was the Britons fifth win in seven races in 2019, his 78th in total and seventh victory overall around the Gilles Villeneuve circuit.
The result also continued Mercedes’ unbeaten start to the season - they have won all seven races - further compounding the superiority that the Silver Arrows are inflicting on the F1 pecking order.
But how did Vettel blow his chance of claiming Ferrari’s first victory of the season? Is the penalty justifiable? Did he impede Hamilton unfairly? Or what is just merely a racing incident? Regardless of what trench you fling your arguments from about this contentious incident, it has surfaced curious questions about racing conduct, professionalism and limits of racing.
The foundation for Vettel’s fall from grace in the race was set up by Ferrari’s searing pace in qualifying on Saturday. The Scuderia arrived in Montreal with relative assurance that their package would be comparable in performance to Mercedes - the SF90’s engine packs plenty of power – that makes the Ferrari fastest in a straight line, one of the few assets superior to the Mercedes’ W10. And so, it proved a too much for Mercedes to topple.
Vettel took pole position, just Ferrari’s second of the year, with Hamilton preventing a front row lockout to line up second, that relegated Leclerc to third.
But Ferrari’s performance advantage did not correspond into the race. The top three all maintained position as the lights went out on the starting grid, and it soon became apparent that Hamilton’s Mercedes had stronger race pace.
The incident that sparked an emotional reaction based on feelings and made blood boil in legions of Ferrari and Vettel fans - as well as many pundits from the media - occurred at turn 3 on lap 48.
After the round of pitstops had taken place, Hamilton began piling the pressure on Vettel, who had whittled down a five second gap to less than a second. The championship leader was wedged behind Vettel for nine laps, his Mercedes unable to match the superior straight-line speed of the Ferrari to execute an overtake. This shielded Vettel and protected his lead.
That was until Vettel dropped the ball. The Four Time Champion entered turn 3 with too much speed, the rear stepped out from loss of traction; steering into the slide Vettel’s correction forced him off track as he trundled over the grass. Hamilton made the corner at race pace and was bound to capitalise as he drove the familiar racing line.
Vettel desperate not to relinquish the lead scrambled back onto the track and appeared to squeeze Hamilton, pushing him close to the wall. Vettel’s robust manoeuvre forced Hamilton who had half his car alongside the Ferrari, to brake and avoid contact - had the Briton not done so, there would have been a crash. Vettel did enough to retain the lead.
But, a few laps later, the incident was under investigation by race stewards until lap 58 when the 31-year old was handed a five second time penalty for ‘an unsafe re-entry and forcing another driver off the track.’
And with that outcome, the intensity of the fight for victory had evaporated.
The controversial decision was greeted with simmering resentment from Vettel who publicly displayed his opposing opinion by refusing to cooperate with post-race protocol. He first parked his car in parc ferme with the gaggle of grid cars that finished off the podium and not in the predetermined podium parc ferme; he then stormed off through the garage, into the paddock to Ferrari’s hospitality and refused to come to the podium.
Only when he was collected by officials did he emerge begrudgingly, with obvious discontent. To top it all off, the German cut off a podium interview midway through. It’s no secret how Vettel felt, here is his take on the consequence of his mistake.
“I think it is pretty clear I was on the limit. I was pushing very hard throughout the entire race.”
"Obviously, I was going through the grass and I think it’s quite commonly known that the grass isn’t very grippy. So - you agree? - and then I was coming back on track and just trying to, y’know, make sure I have the car under control,” stressed Vettel.
“Once I regained control, made sure it was sort-of alright, I looked in the mirrors, and saw Lewis right behind me. As you said, yesterday we had the euphoria and the enthusiasm of a great day. I feel, in a way, the same today. I think we had a great race; the team did fantastic.”
The Ferrari driver admitted that he did not think he had done anything wrong to earn the penalty.
“Obviously I’m not happy with the decision the stewards took. I think you can understand. It feels a bit weird to sit here, not having won the race even though you crossed the line first. And as I said, I don’t think I have done anything wrong; I don’t feel I could have done anything different. I don’t know, actually, what the problem was.”
Vettel feels an injustice about the steward’s decision - rightly or wrongly - that it was nothing more than hard racing, pushing to the limits of wheel-to-wheel combat. But the stewards have a list of rules stipulating the extremities of racing, in order to restrain reckless driving that could risk the lives of drivers and to maintain fairness. In Vettel’s venture at turn 3, he breached a rule for safe and fair racing.
Vettel also said how his off-track excursion had been scrutinised and penalised reflected the sport that used to much corporate jargon to describe racing.
“I really love that but I just wish I was maybe as good, doing what I do, but being in their time rather than today. I think it’s not just about that decision today, there’s other decisions. Just hear the wording when people come on the radio, that we have now.”
“I don’t like it; we all sound a bit like lawyers and using the official language. I think it just gives no edge to people and no edge to the sport. Ultimately, it’s not the sport that I fell in love with when I was watching.”
With this point, Vettel is perhaps mistaken here: Formula 1 has become more technical, complex and advanced, therefore to adapt, a professional vocabulary has been adopted to describe detailed feedback to make the best, objective decisions.
Hamilton’s opinion of Vettel’s frantic antics to maintain his position was understandably of a different perspective.
“I came through the corner; I was quicker at that point and I was really just trying to apply pressure to Seb. One, to try and get close enough, but two to push him into an error.”
“It’s not too often you’re able to push a four-time World Champion into making an error but it came and at the time I was like ‘OK, great, this is my opportunity.’ So, I continued the corner as normal.”
"Came around, and was on the line. The gap just closed, it looked like we were going to crash so I just had to brake and come off the gas to avoid a collision. Fortunately, we did avoid it.”
“But obviously that was one kind-of window. And then the gap opened up because I did brake to avoid it.”
The incident that sanctioned the decision to penalise Vettel was met with stinging criticism from pundits, former drivers and fans on social media who savagely ravaged its credibility.
Jenson Button, part of Sky’s punditry team said: “For me, it's a racing incident. Yes, Seb made a mistake - but you've got to realise he's doing over 100mph here. You can't just stop the car and stay off the circuit.”
“It doesn't deserve a penalty, I don't think. From a racer's point of view - he had nowhere to go.”
His colleague, Martin Brundle concurred: “For me that was absolutely the wrong decision. If I'd have been in the Stewards' office, I'd have let that one go.”
In a season that has so far been consumed by Mercedes’ dominant superiority, Vettel fumbled and blundered Ferrari’s second chance of beating the Silver Arrows – who have been in imperious form in 2019.
When all the fluster and bluster from the emotional reaction has settled, and rationality and logic is applied, it is true to conclude that the cause of the incident is as a result of Vettel’s apparent Achilles heel: making mistakes. The snap of oversteer into turn 3 is another example to add to the list – it is the fundamental issue that gave race stewards the opportunity to investigate.
No matter how hard Vettel protests his innocence and cries wolf of injustice, no amount of denial will hide the fact that he makes too many mistakes. In a race against the calibre of driver like Hamilton, the endurance threshold and ability to perform under pressure is a psychological element highlighting Vettel’s vulnerability to pressure.
Vettel was forced into another mistake by Hamilton as a result of intense pressure – a factor that contributed to 2017 and 2018 seasons title challenges imploding – and he was punished for this latest driving error. And not for the first time, it has ended up costing Vettel and Ferrari victory.
For Hamilton, he will privately recognise this as a weakness to exploit. As examples of Vettel’s mistakes are ubiquitously attainable from recent seasons, the Ferrari driver cannot deflect the blame for his errors forever.
By blaming race stewards for his mistake, Vettel is preventing himself from self-improvement, and is delusional about reality to accept responsibility for the source of the issue – he failed to beat Hamilton again – the incident should act as a catalyst for change, but the petulance that followed reeks of sour grapes and denial.
If Vettel isn’t honest with himself, then he will never learn from his mistakes; the pattern is likely to repeat itself and he will continue to crack under the pressure of Hamilton.
Callum Alexander | Callum on Cars | Formula 1
Photos: RaceFans.net
Comments